FOUR TASER PROBES WERE FIRED DURING THE MARCH 15, 2008 INCIDENT FROM TWO SEPARATE TASER GUNS FIRINGS. THE SECOND TASER GUN FIRING FROM OFFICER TEMORES' TASER GUN IS NOT RECORDED ON ON HIS MAV VIDEO, HIS TASER VIDEO OR HIS TASER GUN DATA PORT BECAUSE THE PALO ALTO POLICE REMOVED THAT INFORMATION TO CONCEAL THE FACT THAT TEMOERES FIRED TASER PROBES FROM HIS TASER GUN. THE PAPD HAD TO DESTROY TEMORES' TASER PROBES, CARTRIDGE, WIRES AND AFIDS IN ORDER TO CONCEAL THE FACT THAT THE AUDIO/VIDEO FOOTAGE OF THE SECOND TASER GUN FIRING HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM BOTH TEMORES' TASER VIDEO AND TEMORES' MAV VIDEO.
|
The Taser Probe along with a 4th taser probe and a taser cartridge, blast doors and AFIDS were destroyed.
|
Officers Temores and Powers violated Department Policy by failing to secure Temores' taser cartridge and taser probes and AFIDS into evidence.
Police Chief Dennis Burns violated Department Policy by allowing Temores' taser probes and taser cartridge to be destroyed without documenting them into evidence.
By destroying Temores' taser probes, cartridge, wires and AFIDS, Chief Dennis Burns has admitted that he has violated California Penal Code 135. Additionally, photographs taken of the crime scene and other evidence verify that Chief Dennis Burns has conspired with his subordinate officers to violate PC 141(b) as well.
Police Chief Dennis Burns violated Department Policy by allowing Temores' taser probes and taser cartridge to be destroyed without documenting them into evidence.
By destroying Temores' taser probes, cartridge, wires and AFIDS, Chief Dennis Burns has admitted that he has violated California Penal Code 135. Additionally, photographs taken of the crime scene and other evidence verify that Chief Dennis Burns has conspired with his subordinate officers to violate PC 141(b) as well.
|
29 Factual Pieces of Evidence: Fact One: Palo Alto Police Officer Manuel Temores testified during a December 2008 Pre-Trial Hearing under penalty of perjury that he did not fire taser probes from his taser gun, that he dropped the taser cartridge containing the taser probes to the ground and that the taser cartridge broke. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135.html Fact Two: Ofc. Temores testified that he did not recall whether he turned the broken taser cartridge over to “property” or not. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135.html Fact Three: Ofc. Temores testified that he did not handle the evidence and does not know what happened to his broken taser cartridge. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135.html Fact Four: Ofc. Temores violated PAPD policies 308.99 and 610 by not securing his cartridge into evidence and initiating an accurate chain of possession. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135.html Fact Five: Sgt Powers directed a fellow officer to take photographs of the entire crime scene and all of the evidence. Photographs were taken of Ofc. Temores’ taser gun and taser camera but no photograph to Ofc. Temores’ broken taser cartridge. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135.html Fact Six: Photographs were taken of Ofc. Burger’s broken sun glasses and an alleged broken bicycle helmet, yet no photograph was taken of Ofc. Temores’ broken taser cartridge. Photographs were taken of Ofc. Burger’s alleged taser probes, taser wires, AFIDS and taser cartridge yet no photograph was taken of Ofc. Temores’ broken taser cartridge. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135.html Conclusion: Sgt. Powers deliberately avoided documenting the appearance of Ofc. Temores’ broken taser cartridge by way of photograph in the manner she documented all of the other evidence. This act of choosing not to document the taser cartridge in the same manner as all of the other evidence proves that Sgt. Powers knowingly and willingly concealed the evidence of Ofc. Temoers' taser cartridge and that this act is supported by Chief Burns. Fact Seven: Sgt. Powers never documented Ofc. Temores’ broken taser cartridge in her report. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135.html Fact Eight: Sgt. Powers never secured Ofc. Temores’ broken taser cartridge into property a violation of Department polices 308.99 and 610. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135.html Fact Nine: In an official report submitted to the City Council of Palo Alto on June 2, 2008 then Asst. Police Chief and now the Police Chief Dennis Burns falsely stated to the City Council that only one taser gun was used during the incident. On that very same day, then Police Chief Lynne Johnson stated to members of the public that two taser guns were used during the incident. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/exhibit-4.html Fact Ten: Members of the Palo Alto Police department, Palo Alto City Attorney’s office and the Santa Clara District Attorney’s office took deliberate actions to suppress the taser gun activation data in violation of the Penal Code 1054.1 and the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, Brady v. Maryland, which requires the production of all evidence. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/exhibit-2.html Fact Eleven: When questioned by the media as to why the Palo Alto Police were refusing to provide the taser gun activation data, Chief Dennis Burns stated that perhaps the data was still awaiting transfer, yet Chief Burns’ own department policy states that the taser data is to be provided with the original police report which would have been 4 months earlier in this case. Chief Burns was knowingly violating his own department policy for four months by refusing to provide the taser data when he misled the media with a lie as to why the data had not been turned over. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/exhibit-2.html Fact Twelve: Pursuant to a Discovery Request in Civil Case: C5:09-cv-02655 Chief Burns stated that Ofc. Temores’ broken taser cartridge was never booked/secured into evidence and summarily destroyed which is a violation of Chief Burns’ own Palo Alto Police Department Polices 308.99, 610.1, 610.2, 610.2.1, and 610.7. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135.html California PC 135 states: “Every person who, knowing that any book, paper, record, instrument in writing, or other matter or thing, is about to be produced in evidence upon any trial, inquiry, or investigation whatever, authorized by law, willfully destroys or conceals the same, with intent thereby to prevent it from being produced, is guilty of a misdemeanor.” Ofc. Temores’ broken taser cartridge is a thing or matter that was about to be produced for the investigation of the March 15, 2008 incident as well as the Pre-Trial Hearing regarding the prosecution of the same incident as well as civil case C5:09-cv-02655 regarding the same incident. Due to his supervisory role regarding this incident, Palo Alto Police Chief Dennis Burns condoned and authorized the destruction of Ofc. Temores’ broken taser cartridge. At a very minimum Officers Manuel Temores, Sgt. Natasha Powers and Chief Dennis Burns are guilty of violating PC 135 and PC 182 (a)(1), Conspiracy to commit a crime. There is no doubt to the guilt, as Chief Dennis Burns admitted to destroying the evidence, thus chief Burns has admitted to violating California PC 135 and PC 1054.1(c), and Government Codes 34090 (d), 34090.6. (a). Motive for Destroying the Broken Taser Cartridge, to Conceal the Missing Video Footage of Ofc. Temores Firing Taser Probes Which has been Removed from his Taser Camera Recording and MAV Recording: Fact Thirteen: In official reports, court testimony and court ordered discovery requests Sgt. Powers, Ofc. Burger, Ofc. Temores and Chief Burns have all asserted that Ofc. Burger was the only officer at the scene of the incident to discharge taser probes. Fact Fourteen: Officer Kelly Burger is heard on his own MAV recording minutes after the incident happened verifying with Sgt. Powers at the scene that there were two separate taser gun firings in which taser probes were discharged, one from his taser gun and one from Ofc. Temores' taser gun. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135--141-b.html Fact Fifteen: Officer Kelly Burger is heard on his own MAV recording minutes after the incident verifying with the medics at the scene of the incident that FOUR TASER PROBES WERE FIRED FROM TWO SEPARATE TASER GUN FIRINGS and that Ciampi was struck by two taser probes, one in the forearm and one in the buttocks. Given that one of the taser probes had lodged into the fence it could not have struck Ciampi in the buttocks or the arm. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135--141-b.html Fact Sixteen: At the direction of Officer Burger, Officer Temores is seen removing evidence from the crime scene, ostensibly his expended taser cartridge or a taser probe. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135--141-b.html Fact Seventeen: Officer Burger is seen retrieving a third taser probe from Officer Temores' patrol car. This taser probe is never secured into evidence and it is not photographed as all of the other evidence had been. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135--141-b.html Fact Eighteen: Palo Alto Police Department Sgt. Natasha Powers documents taking into evidence two taser probes that have the wires still attached to them. The two taser probes that were analyzed during an inspection 7 months after the incident did not have taser wires attached. Taser wires are appx. 25ft. long. One of the taser probes in evidence had a wire still attached that was about three inches long, The second taser probe did not have any wire attached to it. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/pc-135--141-b.html Conclusion: The two taser probes that were found in custody/property are not the two taser probes that Sgt. Natasha Powers documented in her report. Corroborating Evidence: Fact Nineteen: Taser International Technical Services Expert Andrew Hinz stated in a declaration to a federal court that no electricity was dischareged into the wires of Officer Burger's taser gun. Officer Burger is heard on his own MAV recording at the scene of the incident that he felt electricity from his own taser gun's wires. Burger also testified under oath during a court hearing that Ciampi was affected by electricity moving through Burger's taser gun's wires. Conclusion: Either Andrew Hinz lied in his report, or the taser wires he inspected did not belong to Officer Burger's taser gun but to Officer Temores' taser gun. Click Here: http://sccrimelab.weebly.com/twelve.html Fact Twenty: Officer Temores testified under penalty of perjury that he discharged electricity from his taser gun two separate times, yet his taser gun activation data states that he only discharged electricy one time. Conclusion: Either Officer Temores committed perjury for no gainful reason or the taser gun activation data has been tampered with. Fact Twenty-One: It has been proven that the taser gun activation data memory devices have been tampered with and that Chief Dennis Burns submitted falsified taser gun activation reports to a federal court and then in an attempt to cover up the falsified taser gun activation data he gets caught again submitting a third set of falsified data. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/exhibit-6.html Fact Twenty-Two: Forensic Expert Gregg Stutchman verified that both taser camera recordings had been edited, altered having content removed. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/uploads/3/8/5/2/3852497/_stutchmans_report_https___ecf.cand.uscourts.gov_cgi-bin_show_temp.pl_file7384829-0--29335.pdf Fact Twenty-Three: Santa Clara County Crime Lab Analyst Christopher Corpora verified that audio/video footage is missing from Officer Temores' taser camera. Click Here: http://sccrimelab.weebly.com/eight.html Fact Twenty-Four: Officer Kelly Burger testified under penalty of perjury that he placed his taser gun back in his holster and drew it a second time in an attempt to give an account to the missing video footage. However his own taser camera records the scenery continously during the time he claims to have placed his taser gun back in his holster. Click Here: http://sccrimelab.weebly.com/seven.html Fact Twenty-Five: The taser cameras that recorded the incident ended up at Taser International and were destroyed. Andrew Hinz of Taser International stated in a declaration to federal court that Taser Camera V07-065373 was first sent to the Palo Alto Police on November 26, 2008. However Taser Camera V07-065373 was downloaded by the Palo Alto Police on January 9, 2008 TEN months previous. MR. Hinz and the PAPD lied about the date in which the PAPD came into possession of taser camera V07-065373. Click Here: http://chiefburns.weebly.com/exhibit-7.html Fact Twenty-Six: Someone in the Palo Alto Police attempted and did remove a portion of the serial number of Taser Camera V07-065373 over the course of two months while the Taser Camera was secured in evidence/property. Click Here: http://specialprosecutor.weebly.com/v07-serial-number.html Fact Twenty-Seven: The audio dialog, "You're not making it easy," has been edited out of Officer Burger's MAV recording verifying that both Burger's and Ofc. Temores' MAV recordings have been tampered with. Click Here: http://sccrimelab.weebly.com/one.html Fact Twenty-Eight: Three scenes captured on the Taser Cameras were not captured on Ofc. Temores' MAV recording verifying that Temores' MAV recording has been edited. Click Here: http://sccrimelab.weebly.com/five.html Fact Twenty-Nine: Police Chief Dennis Burns has no idea which taser camera recorded what and keeps changing his response as to which taser camera actually recorded the incident. Click Here: http://specialprosecutor.weebly.com/v07-traveling.html ------------------ Conclusion and Findings of the Facts and Law Itemized Above: CLICK HERE: http://specialprosecutor.weebly.com/findings.html |
It should be noted that the image below is how the video depicts when how Burger fired his taser gun, yet this is not when or how Burger fired his taser gun. The image is used to prove that even with the edited video falsely portraying the taser gun firing the taser probe in the fence could not have come from Officer Burger.
EXTRAS
|
|
|