A scene that is becoming all too common in these United States is that of a police officer writing an arrest report only to have a video tape later released that contradicts it in a undeniable fashion. Such is the case in a story from Philadelphia of a young woman who was arrested and spent a night in jail for allegedly assaulting a police officer. That allegation came from the arresting officer, Albert Lopez Sr. Lopez claimed, and filed in his report, that upon arriving at the store at which the incident took place he ordered the four suspects to the ground. Three complied with his order but the fourth, Agnes Lawless, did not. It was only in reaction to her noncompliance that Lopez was then forced to physically restrain Lawless. However, a security video (embedded below) shows a different reality from Lopez’s sworn testimony. The tape shows Lopez entering the store and seconds later grabbing Lawless from behind while apparently sticking a gun to her neck.
That discrepancy is only one of MANY in Lopez’s sworn testimony as described in an excellent article by Philadelphia Daily News writer Dave Davies. The article is well worth the read. In it, Davies recounts several of these obvious lies, which include the reason Lawless and her friends were considered suspects at all. It seems the reason for Lopez tracking down Lawless was a report filed by Lopez’s own son, Albert Lopez Jr. What Junior told Dad had happened is unclear, but what in fact happened was that Jr. had rear ended the car Lawless was a passenger in some time shortly before the incident at the convenient store. Why a person who was rear-ended needs to be arrested isn’t evident, but it is worth noting that after the incident at the store the clerk told investigators that he overheard Sr. telling Jr. to tell the police one of Lawless’s friends was brandishing a gun at the time of the accident. This appears to be another lie in a string of many. After all, if the officer had suspected that one of the suspects had a gun, why did he bring his own son in the store to witness the arrest? An act that seems to be the only thing Lopez believes he shouldn’t have done. As he said when questioned about it from an internal investigation, “I didn’t even think about it. It happened so fast. It was bad judgment.”
Bad judgment only begins to describe Lopez’s actions that day. I’d like to suggest Lopez’s actions were criminal in nature, but it appears that the District Attorney in Philadelphia disagrees as his office reviewed the case last year and to date, no charges have been filed. In fact Lopez is still an active duty, weapon wielding, police officer in the city of Philadelphia. A toothless internal investigation is pending, but it looks like Lopez will not face jail time for offences that would certainly net him at least an indictment if he did not wear a uniform. Charges like assault and perjury seem justifiable.
But possibly the most disturbing part of this story lies in the actions of Lopez’s fellow officers. The clerk, the same one who claimed Lopez Sr. had instructed Lopez Jr. to lie about a gun, also told investigators that Lopez had asked him about the security tape that eventually cleared Lawless of any charges. According to the clerk Lopez told him to “do himself a favor and get rid of the camera tapes.” An apparent threat of physical violence or maybe a promise the police would harass his business if he didn’t destroy evidence in a pending investigation. If this threat wasn’t bad enough, the clerk also claims that *other* officers visited his store twice the next day to also try to convince him to erase the tape adding he should, “help the cop out and testify for the cop.” These repeated attempts at evidence destruction and witness intimidation show that the cops KNEW the evidence was not favorable to Lopez, and actively conspired to cover up the facts on his behalf. All illegal acts that the district attorney also refused to prosecute, and even the department’s Internal Investigation cleared the fellow officers of any wrongdoing.
As cases of police officers being caught in lies by cameras become more and more frequent, we must demand several things from our government. First, that cops who lie blatantly on their police reports be prosecuted criminally, not administratively. I’m not talking about minor variances like maybe a discrepancy of what time an incident took place by a few minutes or being off a few miles per hour on a speeding ticket. But if an officer is caught undeniably in a lie where the officer initiated physical force, certainly prosecuting attorneys must react and press charges. To ignore these cases damage the public’s trust of police departments in general, and de-legitimizes the violence that officers are privileged with the authority to yield. Secondly, all citizens must fight against the push to criminalize photography and video taping of police officers. If police officers are doing nothing wrong, they have nothing to hide.
WOW. That seems like just a wheeeee bit of an over reaction!! Scary.
Police are nothing but nerds with a gun a badge. They think the gun will add inches to their manhood.
Great post, Scott, and you picked a terrific example of a lying cop. This entire story, from beginning to end, is outrageous. To think that you could be in a store, having broken no law, and have a cop put his gun to your neck is unfathomable. This guy, Lopez, is dangerous, and the other cops who attempted to pressure the store clerk to erase evidence of police misconduct are also dangerous. And, to KNOW that the police department doesn’t give a whit about the truth is downright sickening.
Stupid question – Over at Carlosmiller.com the last picture of his post concerning this shows what appears to be his son grabbing the girl by the neck. If Lopez Jr. isn’t a police officer, isn’t that assault with intent for great bodily harm?
Just asking – If that is the case, she has one heck of a payday coming her way.
Also – If Lopez Jr. gave false information to daddy about the incident that lead up to this, isn’t that a crime in itself?
Just asking.
You can see the individual frame here – http://carlosmiller.com/2009/07/20/surveillance-video-once-again-shines-light-on-philadelphia-pd-corruption/
Not a stupid question at all Dusty. It is a perplexing one though as the district attorney had reviewed the case and claims there was no crime committed. Of course it’s clear there was, and yes most likely a settlement will be reached. Only problem is, that settlement will be on the taxpayer’s bill rather than the men who actually committed the crimes.
Seriously, why does the DA get to decide not to prosecute? Isn’t there a state attorney general who should step in to prosecute? What happened to private prosecution, which they have in England?
As far as I can tell, the DA is guilty of conspiracy to obstruct justice, along wih Lopez Sr., Lopez Jr., and the other cops who attempted to pressure the clerk.
The one thing I’ll say is that “cameras everywhere” has turned out to be an unexpected blessing for civil liberties. Who guessed?
The short answer to why the DA gets to decide is that because nobody else is stepping in. There is a movement that exists to have citizens (i.e. non-lawyers/officials) to bring criminal charges against bureaucrats that don’t do their jobs, or act in negligent or even harmful fashion. This movement has not yet seen much in the way of results though as it’s kind of an experiment as you go approach.
And yes, despite the fears of the 1984 generation, technology has gone to further freedom rather than diminish it. Both the internet and cameras have made abuse by the State much more visual to the average person. And given people like us a way to communicate and organize to sustain efforts to fight corruption.
The DA is the cop’s best buddy. They work together. Cops apprehend criminals, DAs prosecute.
So when a cop, and in this case the cop’s son, commit assault and battery -live on video, no less!- it’s clear why the DA declines to prosecute.
The story isn’t over yet: citizens have the right to file charges against other citizens. If you’re ever in a similar situation, and the police abuse you, file charges. Do so with the aid of an attorney, and then carry a camcorder 24/7, because you *know* the affected PD will be all over you from that day forward.
If you or I did this to some stupid cops kid you can bet we’d be rotting in jail. But if they do it you, it’s somehow o.k.? Btw good article Scott.
Just like the cop in Denver that pulled his gun and pointed it at the people that worked at the McDonalds drive thru because the cops (two of them) were inpatient and them taking so long on their order. Like that was the first time they did that, yeah right. When civilians do it, its a felony. When cops do it they try to lie but the camera catches them sometimes (rarely on the whole of how many times it happens). And asking to erase the video is obstruction of justice and tampering with evidence and witness/victim intimidation. But that’s only if a civilian does it.
I am glad we have Cameras to catch the bad guys and the ones pretenting to be cops.
also click on my NAME and see my Webpage.
Thank you for this amazing post. I’m doing a paper in highschool that explains that cops are violent and abuse the power they’re given, this helps to prove what cops can do to cover up their overreactions.