http://www.tc.indymedia.org/2009/jul/false-reporting-law-entraps-woman-rapist-officers-barnes-gillies-go-free#comment-4810What if you were raped and no one believed you? Now--what if you were raped by the police? What if their superiors failed to investigate the crime? What if instead of punishing the rapists, they charged you with the crime of lying about police "misconduct"?
This is what happened to Camille Williams, a black Twin Cities woman.** Raped by Minneapolis Police Officers Paul Gillies and Miquel Barnes almost two years ago, Williams was subsequently charged with the crime of falsely reporting police misconduct--a charge levied so that, audio recordings tell, the MPD could avoid a civil lawsuit. After a two and a half week trial, Williams was found guilty by a 6-person Hennepin County jury on Monday, despite allegations of jury misconduct (including one juror sleeping during the trial). On Tuesday, when Williams was scheduled to be sentenced, the defense successfully argued for a postponement until August 14 based on several pending motions aimed at overturning the decision.
"I didn't lie about a damn thing and here I am, accused of a crime!" Williams says. Gillies and Barnes, meanwhile, continue to walk the beat.
**Although the rape survivor's name has been reported by corporate media outlets, we are changing it here, even though the callous disregard for survivors of sexual assault (whether proven in the courts of the perpetrator or not) by uncritical pro-police media has already resulted in harm. Also: Note that the article below may trigger strong and difficult emotions/memories, especially for survivors and others affected by sexual assault and police brutality.
he prosecution's case - and the coverage from major media like the Star Tribune and KSTP - hinged on a squad car GPS device which purportedly showed Gillies' and Barnes' car away from what Williams identified as the crime scene. The GPS system is sold to police departments under the premise that it can help to avoid civil suits. That seems to be what it was used for here, though not necessarily because it uncovered the facts, say victim advocates.
Testimony during the trial showed how the device can be tampered with. A squad driver pushing the "ARRIVE" button on the dash, indicating he has arrived at the location to which he was dispatched, can stop the recording of GPS data until the car moves 100 feet or more. At that point, an officer could disable the transmitter by blocking the antenna or disconnecting a wire. The officer can then drive wherever he wants without being recorded by the GPS; after driving back to within 100 feet of the original point, he can reconnect the wire, and no record will have been made of his movements.
An MPD operational expert testified that disconnecting the GPS transmitter wire could easily be done with no technical expertise required, and that he's seen the wires disconnected in the past. Furthermore, even if no tampering was done by an officer at the scene, changing the log files at a central computer would not be a difficult operation. Because the defendant Williams was presumed innocent until proven guilty, the burden was on the prosecution to prove that the report of rape was false beyond a reasonable doubt. The ability to tamper with the device, especially combined with the MPD's propensity for evidence tampering, easily creates a reasonable doubt in regard to the GPS, says the defense.
Officer Gillies himself was in the courtroom Tuesday, prepared to give a statement at the sentencing before Hennepin County Judge Tanya Bransford. But defense attorney Jill Clark, known for taking on police brutality cases that have also made herself a target of police and right-wing harassment, put a halt to what was to be the subsequent police-led media spectacle.
Among the motions filed by the defense were motions for acquittal, for a new trial, and for a Schwartz hearing: a special hearing regarding juror conduct and misconduct. Williams could not have received a fair trial, Clark said, in particular due to one juror she referred to as "Juror G" who did not listen attentively during the case. After speaking with courtwatchers and being approached by a different juror regarding Juror G's conduct, Clark filed an affidavit about his behavior, "including, but not limited to, sleeping during trial." Juror G, she said, appeared to have made up his mind on the 3rd day of the case, before defense arguments could be made; after the 3rd day, his behavior included dramatic gestures that appeared to be aimed at discrediting defense arguments in the eyes of other jurors. He then "forcefully lobbied the jury" for a guilty verdict.
Although the defense raised the issue during trial, it was only after consulting with community members watching the case that the full extent of Juror G's behavior became known. In addition, Clark was told that two jurors entered one morning during the trial to learn that a foreperson had been elected in their absence. The jury was made up of five men and one woman; Assistant Minneapolis City Attorney Judd Gushwa had used most of his peremptory strikes to eliminate potential women jurors. Additionally, the jury was all white except for one black man; the alternate juror was a black woman.
After a trial that lasted over two weeks, the jury deliberated for about 2 hours before announcing the verdict after the end of the workday on Monday. According to one courtwatcher, the black juror was nearly in tears after the verdict. As the judge asked jurors to confirm their decision, his response was barely audible. A person from the gallery who spoke with that juror afterwards reported that it appeared extremely likely he did not believe Williams was guilty, but that he caved under intense pressure to return such a verdict.
Bransford ordered that pending further action in the case, neither the prosecution, nor defense, nor their representatives are to have any contact with the jurors.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
