Quote:
Originally Posted by smacc25
Hi SGT RJ. It was colborn that called in the plates.
But 1 Q I have for you is this, why is a officer of that rank doing patrol work?
And then calling-in by using his phone, I wonder if this phone was police issue or his personal phone.
Depending on the department, a sergeant could be the shift supervisor for a patrol shift. Meaning he'd be responsible for all officers/deputies on patrol at that time. Or it could just be a pay bump/prestige thing but still be a patrol officer. Depends on the department, a police sergeant can run the gamet from a patrol cop to probably some type of senior investigator.
As for the phone don't see that's a big deal either way, if it's an official phone this was official business (plate check), if personal maybe this county doesn't have work phones and he thought phone would be quicker.
You could theorize the phone is more private as well, if he really was looking at the car, he wouldn't want everyone on the radio to know he had found it if there was already some sort of conspiracy cooking.
Him doing an illegal search of the Avery lot and finding it would fit everything. Especially since you never know who is listening in on radio dispatch communications, some civilians like to monitor emergency dispatch frequencies.
I mean I'm not sold that SA is innocent - I think someone in the family did it for sure, and there's little to exclude him as the murderer, unlike his multiple alibis from his rape case, but I think the cops/prosecution in this case behaved in an unethical fashion and a conviction on BD is a travesty, and pretty damn weak on SA.
Also having a jury from that county with that pretrial coverage is laughable. That level and type of pretrial coverage at all is laughable. Judges ruling not to allow evidence that someone accessed her phone after her death is laughable. Using DNA with a negative reference test is laughable. Citing three tested swabs and concluding they yield the same results as untested swabs is laughable.
What's sad is that he actually seemed to have really good defense attorneys, but they were trying to paddle against a monsoon.
It's similar (to me) as the Serial case - even if you happened to get the guilty party, you shouldn't be allowed to convict with such aggregious problems with the police work and evidence. Our system is supposed to be predicated on a presumption of innocence, but cases like this demonstrate that's clearly not the case.