Jump to content
Zebulon

[STATE] The People V. Kevin Taylor [08/06]

Recommended Posts

" your honor if that police sergeant don't have enough knowledge of medical field, how did he decide that my client was in fact neglecting his duty ? based on your statement your honor that I think we can take as fact, I think it is safe to assume that  the officer and the prosecution for that matter is not competent enough as you described to charge members of emergency services with negligence of duty.  that is why such charge in the history of this court have NEVER been used even once the way it was in this case, but rather was handled by Internal Affairs of the respected department accordingly.

 

to summarize your honor, the same argument the prosecution is using to stop the witness from answering my question can be used to deny that same officer from deciding if my client is guilty of negligence of duty or not.

 

Anyway moving on, sergeant duffy, you stated in your narrative and I quote "Battalion Chief Kevin Taylor responded on radio and said that he was responding" which indicates that my client responded over the radio and said that he was responding to the call for dps and claimed the duty of care over the LSPD situation. However according to the department radio logs it clearly shows that my client never responded to any call. so my question is how exactly did battalion chief kevin taylor respond ? "

 

(( @Alfa1561 @Zebulon @Norm @bartman ))

Edited by doo2doo2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, doo2doo2 said:

" your honor if that police sergeant don't have enough knowledge of medical field, how did he decide that my client was in fact neglecting his duty ? based on your statement your honor that I think we can take as fact, I think it is safe to assume that  the officer is not competent enough as you described him to charge members of emergency services with negligence of duty.  that is why such charge in the history of this court have NEVER been used even once the way it was in this case, but rather was handled by Internal Affairs of the respected department accordingly.

 

"Mr. Miller, did you perhaps learn at some point in your alleged tenure at a law school that the District Attorney, aka the Prosecution, is the one who decides what charges are filed in court, not the arresting officer who isn't expected to know every intricacy of law?"
 

(( @Zebulon @Norm ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, bartman said:

"Mr. Miller, did you perhaps learn at some point in your alleged tenure at a law school that the District Attorney, aka the Prosecution, is the one who decides what charges are filed in court, not the arresting officer who isn't expected to know every intricacy of law?"
 

(( @Zebulon @Norm ))


" Your Honor if you heard me closely, I was referring to the initial arrest reason, the officer arrested my client for negligence of duty, so yes he decided the initial arrest reason and filed the arrest warrant not the DA. whether it is taken to court or not is decided by the DA obviously. Your Honor I am respectfully requesting that you to be more accommodating of the defense, it is rather uncomfortable and unusual that I have to explain that I know perfectly well how procedures and laws work and in the same time defend my client."

 

25 minutes ago, Zebulon said:

"The Prosecution asks that the Defense restate their question to the witness as it came after a flurry of other unrelated words."

 

(( @bartman @doo2doo2))

" the question is clearly distinguished."

 

((remember we are supposedly talking not writing so the question would be clear obviously as I said before it "so my question is" ))

Edited by doo2doo2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" you mentioned in the narrative sergeant that battalion chief kevin taylor responded to LSPD request for dps and then never went there. How exactly did he respond to LSPD request for dps ? "

 

(( @Alfa1561 @Zebulon @Norm @bartman ))

Edited by doo2doo2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I was actually mistaken. When I wrote the narrative for the other officers arrest report, I did not have access to radio recordings. I had confused the radio transmission from an SEMC employee and Mister Taylor's radio transmission about needing help, leading me to making a mistake in my report. I hope you'll understand, it was a stressful situation what with a shooter and someone bleeding out and all. The only radio calls Mister Taylor made to the LSPD were to report his vehicle being stolen and a call for help. We did directly request for him to return to the scene after he radioed to us, but he did not respond to those calls. 

Does that answer the question?"

(( @bartman @Zebulon @doo2doo2 ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" yes indeed, so my client never responded and never claimed he was going to respond as the narrative says, thus didnt have duty of care to the police situation. based on the previous witness statement your honor we can conclude that the main piece of evidence here which is the investigating officer's narrative have false information due to a mistake done by the LSPD. the defense motion to dismiss the case your honor. "

 

 

(( @Alfa1561 @Zebulon @Norm @bartman ))

Edited by doo2doo2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"With due regard, it is not the main evidence, you've ignored my dashcam footage from the incident..." *Michael quietly states, rolling his eyes.*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

** looks at duffy as he speaks with a hard tone ***

 

"Sergeant your narrative contains false information which decieved the honorable judge into thinking that my client responded to the radio requests for dps. it contains lies whether on purpose or not, it is disappointing that you as a LSPD sergeant donot feel shameful for lying whether on purpose or not about an innocent man in an official narrative attached to a case."

Edited by doo2doo2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"With all due respect, you cannot accuse me of lying, sir. To lie is to make an intentionally false statement, as any dictionary will tell you. I apologise for having made the mistake, but until you've been in a situation where a civilian is bleeding to death and an ambulance just drives on past, I will disregard any sentiment that I should feel shame for what I've done. The dispatch recordings were provided by myself, the narrative was written while I was on a leave of absence. I did not lie. If I was lying, I wouldn't have provided evidence to the contrary. I specifically provided those recordings to the DA so that the record would be corrected."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Objection Your Honor,

 

The Defense is badgering the witness, and is being irreverently inflammatory. Motion to suppress all of the witness statements and the motion to Dismiss."

 

(( @bartman @doo2doo2 )) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" The witness voluntarily initiated this discussion by commenting on my statement to you your honor. "

Edited by doo2doo2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Your Honour,

 

The DA's office has found Mister Taylor to be in violation of his bail and therefore in contempt of court. This notice from Officer Duffy of the LSPD should serve as due evidence."

 

Spoiler

3e6d1964bdc164c172ca1eda37e9259a.png
 

 

 

(( @bartman @doo2doo2 ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(( this case have been around for 48 days now, you cant expect him to donot drive his vehicle for eternity just because the courts case is taking forever ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"With respect to the witness, the claim of badgering is sustained. While the remark of "...Taylor called enroute" will be stripped from the record of the Officer Testimony, the official LSPD narrative to my knowledge was not under oath. Even if it was, the Defendant would need to prove that the witness is intentionally deceitful for the narrative that the witness is intentionally misleading the court to hold water.


The motion to dismiss is denied as other substantial evidence still exists. Mr Taylor still bypassed a scene in a marked ambulance to pursue his own volition, "On break" or not."

(( I clearly stated drivers license with regard to my original post. I apologize that it is taking a while, works' been badgering me though, so I won't pursue that further than the LSPD already has. ))

 

(( @Zebulon @doo2doo2 @Norm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*nods to the justice as he continues*

 

" Sergeant duffy, did kevin Taylor attempt to stop the fleeing tow truck ? "

 

 

(( @Alfa1561@Zebulon ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Mister Taylor did not make any manoeuvres that seemed to indicate he was trying to force the vehicle off the road or physically stop the tow truck, he only pursued the tow truck utilising the ambulances emergency lights and sirens."

 

(( @doo2doo2 @Zebulon @bartman ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*nods as he continues*

 

" Did the LSPD respond  to his report of an active crime ? "

 

 

(( @Alfa1561@Zebulon ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"No, the LSPD did not respond as we prioritised the shooter and shot civilian first, and did not have available resources for his call."

 

(( @Zebulon @doo2doo2 ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and follow our Guidelines.