Bogus “Resisting Arrest” Charge at Walmart

Submitted by Tyler Volkey
The following video documents my encounter with the Lake Delton Police Department in Wisconsin. I was walking out of Walmart and happened to see two officers running towards me in the reflection of a window. I stopped to ask if there was a problem. The officer proceeded on with, “Hi, my name is Officer Posewitz,” and threw me to the ground and placed me under arrest for resisting arrest. I’m still fighting the charges in court and I would like to file suit against the department but don’t really know how to go about it.

I want everyone to know how the cops of a very well-known tourist town really are. I am local and they pester me constantly. I only just recently learned I am allowed to record my encounters. I would appreciate any feedback anyone may have – mind you this video is mostly audio as I was being detained

EPN

CopBlock

When you see “CopBlock” as the author it means it was submitted via our submission tab – you can share your story too. If you enjoy this content and/or believe “Badges Don’t Grant Extra Rights” get yourself some CopBlock Gear from our store or donate just $1/month to the CopBlock Network.

  • MAK

    Any follow up on this?

  • molly

    Who was “the other Guy” and why were you filming?

  • t.

    Why did you suddenly start your recording…of your frequent encounters with the police…BEFORE you knew you were going to have an encounter inside a Walmart…and you did it while intentionally concealing yourself behind a partition?

    Smells like criminal activity in your part and you knew you were going to likely have a police encounter because of that criminal activity.

    Sounds like they treated you pretty gently.

  • Caleb

    It seems that you may wish to reduce your contacts with the police by not drawing so much attention to yourself. You seem to be a frequent flyer with them including multiple convictions: http://wcca.wicourts.gov/pager.do;jsessionid=8F9AAE3BD8231D087C880AE1AB62E152.render6?cacheId=62CD8C14C5DFAADD2FE56D9275D706B1&offset=0&sortColumn=0&sortDirection=DESC

  • Common Sense

    More than likely they were trying to rip off the store and he tried to leave.

    Post the police report.

  • Adam Miller

    Hilarious!! Some dumb cunt was more than likely trying to shop lift or something a long those lines and he got busted. That fucking idiot knew he was caught so he tries to sneak around and the police nab him. Funny how he managed to edit out why he was being arrested. Funny how this dipshit thinks he will get the charges dropped and then sue. What a fucking moron. You obviously have been busted before. What a stupid cunt.

  • Danny “Frost”

    Why doesn’t this douche also mention he as arrested for theft, resisting, and bail jumping at the same time? Or wouldn’t that look good in his favor?

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    This kid has a record of resisting and chances are (due to his frequent encounters with the police & the tiny size of Lake Delton, WI) the officers knew this him very well. His records don’t show any shoplifting charges but there’s a DC charge riding with the resisting. Without reading the narrative of the police report I can only surmise he was creating a scene in the store prompting the police to be called.

    I’d like to know, Tyler, what you were doing on the property (inside or outside the store) that prompted the police presence?

  • RadicalDude

    @Tyler:
    I’m likely to get flamed for this, so first let me start by addressing the previous comments. First off, ThirtyOneBravo and t. are known to be cops, and 31B has aggressively trolled/flamed me on other threads, and, to a lesser extent, so has t. Also, I believe Common Sense is probably some sort of cop as well. And Adam Miller is an out and out pure troll character. Like I said, I’m likely gonna get flamed/trolled so let me give you my email:
    Radicalawesomedude@gmail.com
    in case you want to ask me anything. In case this thread turns into a trolling circus or flame war, because I prefer not to participate in such shenanigans.

    I have been through the process of successfully suing the cops in federal court without representation from a lawyer so I can tell you from experience about how to sue the cops, however, I am not a lawyer, and it is not legal advise(but rather an opinion given for informational/educational/entertainment purposes) and using any info I give does not create an attorney/client or other agent/ principal relationship.

    Can you provide more info?
    Why were you rolling video to begin with, and can you walk us through the series of events leading up to the incident? Maybe starting from before you even arrived at Wal Mart? Can you provide more info, like a police report? Can you address the questions of the previous commenters?

  • Sorry to burst your bubble (Bill Maher reference intended) but what happened to this young man happens to innocent people across America daily. I know because I hear their stories, I research them, and I find the truth. What we have in America is known as the “Blue Code” of cops where when they have it out for someone they tag them for life with a false arrest of “DC/RA” which stands for Disorderly Conduct / Resisting Arrest. Once that is on your record other cops are alerted to the fact that you are their target, you become unemployable, and your life is ruined forever. How you came to be targeted varies. This young person was smart to have turned on his cell phone to record his own activity at all times and I would assume from talking with other victims of police and local authority’s harassment over the years that he had good reason to make this a practice. The victim whose story I am currently following made this a practice after the Markovtsevs set up a false arrest with the Wheeling, IL police and the resulting footage is now being used to prosecute child pedophile Charles Vallas. I encourage this young man to pursue getting the charges dismissed and keeping his record clean with all the determination necessary to prevail. My fear is that he will wind up with his life forever ruined by the bully thug with a badge I saw and heard on this video if people like the others commenting on this blog have their way and that will be a waste to society and a setback for all of our Human and Civil Rights.

  • RadicalDude

    Strategically, this is my opinion of what you should do if you intend to sue them, however, without knowing more, it is hard to say if it would really be appropriate. I am presuming you have a legit case as far as this comment goes, but without more details, it is hard to say how strong your case might actually be. If you threatened someone or committed some crime, then this might not really apply. I am presuming you innocent and them guilty as far as the contents of this comment.

    You have two separate but intertwined legal issues, first is the violation of your rights, but also there is the issue of the “resisting arrest” charge, and/or other charge(s). So I’ll separate the two.

    CIVIL RIGHTS CASE
    1.File a restraining order for battery.
    2.File a complaint w/ police department.
    3.File an administrative claim w/ the municipality of Lake Delton.
    4.File a civil rights claim pursuant to 42 USC § 1983 in
    West District of Wisconsin United States District court
    @
    Clerk of Court, 120 North Henry Street, Room 320, Madison, WI 53703.

    http://www.wiwd.uscourts.gov/proceeding-without-attorney

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983

    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&sqi=2&ved=0CDcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.constitution.org%2Fbrief%2Fforsythe_42-1983.htm&ei=OlvHUfzhGaOTyQHoxIHQBA&usg=AFQjCNFLFKwxszT1XcY6dBQkiRSX5TXxRg&sig2=kS1C0JVY3RrQH5W8rVMoQQ&bvm=bv.48293060,d.aWc

    CRIMINAL CASE
    1.File discovery requests
    2.File motion to dismiss
    3.File a pitchess motion
    4.File a brady request
    5.Subpoena evidence such as Wal Mart security video

    I don’t know if you might have a case vs. WalMart. Please give more info.

  • Donald

    Their pulling the same stuff here in Burlington WI. as for the YAHOOS COP LOVES saying they were shop lifting, if you would have listened to the tape Common sense would have told you through the language of the land it was disorderly and resisting arrest when you clearly see he was doing NONE OF THAT.

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    @RD

    It was only one thread where I flamed you – and rightfully so.

    @Tyler

    Don’t take legal advice from RD. He may some some decent suggestions to spring board off of, but that’s a fairly rare occurrence. Yes. I’m a cop – but that doesn’t mean I’m some big meany as RD might imply. But if you expect any real solid advice, I strongly suggest you contact an attorney and not rely on armchair lawyers.

    I suppose I can just look at the case itself as I live in Wisconsin and have a couple good friends on the LDPD.
    But like RD, it would be helpful to know what transpired from the moment you entered Walmart’s property or store to the point you began recording. It seems highly unlikely that you would be taken down for no reason at all as someone had to have reported something. Police don’t just troll around and go “Ooh! There’s Volkey! Lets give him a hard time!”

  • Michael

    Why are these previous commenters asking why you were recording. Isn’t it obvious? He suspected some kind of BS from the police and he was recording to document these clowns and expose them.

    Why didn’t the police tell the man why he was being arrested. Why did they feel it necessary to slam him to the ground? Couldn’t they have just as easily said place your hands behind your back?

    The simple truth remains, the cops wanted to express their dominance and control. They wanted to slam him to the ground. They wanted him to fight back. They wanted to hurt him. Plain and simple. Otherwise, there is no need for someone to be slammed to the ground. Cops just love to throw people in jail for anything. They couldn’t pin a crime on him so they had to use the old “resisting” charge. Which brings up the question, if he was resisting, then what crime was he suspected of committing? How can resisting in and of itself be a crime? He would need to be under arrest prior to the resisting.

  • t.

    Dude: :( Yet again with advice when you know so little info. Look at my comment and 31’s as well then watch the video and see how what we pointed out makes sense. Now if this guys was legally arrested…and I’d certainly bet he was…and he sues the officers falsely…he opens himself up to a countersuit that will most likely be extremely easily won by the officers (just filing a false suit…no testimony necessary). That suit can lead to a lean against him for a considerable part if his life. That is simply just bad advice.

    BTW…I did laugh at your disclaimer. At least you learned something.

  • RadicalDude

    Okay, in fairness, it was one thread that 31B was flaming me in, though not rightly so. Don’t really want to get off-topic here, though.

    @Michael: You are stating your opinion, which may be based on reasonable assumptions, however I think the specific facts are more relvant than your assumptive opinions(even if they are correct). I agree it does look like an egregious use of force. But it’s really still based on assumptions.

    @t.:
    Like I said, for purposes of my above comment I’m ASSUMING Tyler is innocent, and the cop is guilty. I don’t know that, though. I’m taking the known facts/evidence, and Tyler’s allegations and applying them in the most favorable light to Tyler. More info would be necessary to determine what legal action, if any, would really be appropriate.

  • Just-a-bitmore

    @Tyler, the idiot. So you start recording while you are in a privately owned stored. Second, the cops show up shortly after you start recording, Why? Where they called there by the store or by you? Your arrest record speaks for itself. Everything from trespass, bail-jumping, theft, obstruction, failure to pay support for family, poss. of weed, sending threatening messages (pussy, do it in person), so the way it seems you have quite the record of fighting with cops. You’re a fucktard and you set this whole thing up so that you could try and get cops on video and you lost.

  • Adam Miller

    Radical dude – you are a fcuking no mind. The guy has a long police record. You would stand up for a criminal since you are one as well. Your bullshit advice comes straight from cartoon land. You fucking cunt.

  • RadicalDude

    “t. says: At least you learned something.”

    Yes, I’ve actually learned a lot from talking with you on here, so thanks for that.

  • RadicalDude

    Also, if you file a complaint w/ the department, don’t reference the video recording in the complaint. I generally do not think it is good to hold back info, in these kinds of matters. I think it is usually better to lay the cards on the table, but in this specific kind of issue, I think it is better to withhold the evidence, and to speak w/ the IA officer, and only disclose it to him personally. That way, you give the cop a chance to perjure himself and get a chance to impeach him w/ the video. But, since its on the net the cat’s likely out of the bag on that anyway. So this is kind of academic at this point(because it is on the net already).

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    @t

    Yeah, the disclaimer made me chuckle. But getting to frivolous or unfounded lawsuits in Wisconsin. With a recent budget vote (I forget when) a law was also passed entitling a peace officer & game warden treble damages when a baseless lawsuit is brought. So, as I said before, Mr. Volkey really should consult an attorney before treading into that area.

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    @RD

    ” I think it is better to withhold the evidence, and to speak w/ the IA officer, and only disclose it to him personally.”

    DANGER WILL ROBINSON! DANGER DANGER!

    Really? Why would you encourage him to withhold evidence? That’s not very wise if you’re also encouraging him (based on this complaint as we see it) to file Federal complaints.

  • t.

    Dude: You didn’t watch the video.

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    Well, I found out what the stink was. Seems Mr. Volkey was upset because Walmart couldn’t find record of a purchase he supposedly made. When they couldn’t find the receipt record and refused the return of an item, he got loud and disorderly prompting the police presence.

    When Mr. Volkey encountered the police, the officer, after introducing himself, tried to initiate procedure to detain Mr. Volkey and he got froggy and resisted which caused the police to escalate their efforts to secure him.

    Sorry Mr. Volkey, you’re not going to see much out of this one but some fines and perhaps a few days in the Graybar Hotel.

  • Tim Osmond

    ThirtyoneBravo, do you go by William or Bill?

  • YankeeFan

    31B

    I actually like laws to prevent baseless lawsuits period. Unfortunately there are no laws that allow citizens to directly sue cops when the commit blatant violations of the rights of citizens. Such as the Ibarra bros who received 1.8 mil in a settlement for simple filming and taking pics of police from their own property. There was a raid on some neighbor and they documented it and were arrested, threatened with being shot and charged. the jury would have slammed the county for a lot more but it was heavily speculated that the reason the settlement was reached was because the Sheriff would have to take the stand and either support the highly unconstitutional behaviour of his deputies or toss them under the bus and thereby violating that cardinal unspoken rule that is rumoured to exist…never rat on a cop. Go, look it up and tell me what if each of those 4 had to split the 1.8 mil? Think cops might get the hint in the future? Or the Simon Glik arrest. Imagine if those 3 Boston Pd each had to split the 170grand for arresting him for supposedly violating the wiretapping law when in fact one of the first things said, according to the 1st circuit in their opinion, was I think you have taken enough pictures. It was clear why he was arrested and it was for filming.

    I am not saying every arrest where charges are not filed or those that end in acquittals but there are some that are so damn obvious that even the corrupt Chief Wiggum would say is bad juju. The 2 cases above are such cases IMO!!

  • Tim Osmond

    The reason I ask, I knew someone from Wisconsin who was a former 31B and cop, his name is Bill.

  • RadicalDude

    “YankeeFan says:
    there are no laws that allow citizens to directly sue cops when the commit blatant violations of the rights of citizens.”

    You actually can sue a cop directly in their private capacity when they commit “blatant violations” of rights. Why do you think otherwise, because of “qualified immunity”? Qualified immunity is probably not as effective a defense as you might think in most cases.

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    @Yank,

    There are some states that are protecting citizenry from the abuses of the police with laws aimed directly at us. These laws are slow to come on board but they are happening. I couldn’t directly quote which states have these laws and I believe Wisconsin is one of them.

    I actually enjoy that the citizens have that option when necessary. So for those who have won, good on ’em. It gives you ammo against us when we really do screw up royally. I’m all for it.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I have a nearly spotless hard file because I treat people as I wish to be treated. I treat them with respect. Not because I’m afraid of what a citizen may say or to to retaliate against me because I ruined their day, but because they’re people too.

    @Tim Osmond,

    No, Sorry. That’s not me.

  • RadicalDude

    In the lawsuit I’m about to file vs. the Border agents I will probably be suing them in their personal capacities, in what is called a”bivens action”.
    Based on the court precedents I have researched, I think that’s probably the way I have to do it. I have been contemplating naming the customs/ border patrol as a defendant though not for the conduct of the individual agents who are prospective defendants, but for negligent training/supervision, not sure though, as the court precedent is kind of vague, and I don’t know if they could successfully raise a challenge that the federal tort claim would bar the bivens claim. Don’t really want to take this too far off topic, though.

  • RadicalDude

    “YankeeFan says:
    June 23, 2013 at 7:49 pm
    Go, look it up and tell me what if each of those 4 had to split the 1.8 mil? Think cops might get the hint in the future? Or the Simon Glik arrest. Imagine if those 3 Boston Pd each had to split the 170grand”

    Yes there are ways to go after their wages/property, Glik could do just what you say, go after the individual officers for the judgment, however, it would likely be more difficult to collect compared to collecting from a municipal corp.

  • t.

    When the lawsuit about the parking tickets?

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    I’m gonna have to start digging through PACER to find these cases, if they indeed exist.

  • Gerbil Jammer Cunt Troll

    @Adam Miller!

    You still havent replied to my last post!

    Have at you bitch!

  • RadicalDude

    “t. says:
    June 23, 2013 at 8:52 pm

    When the lawsuit about the parking tickets?”

    I don’t want to hijack this thread by taking it too far off topic, but the short answer is I don’t know when or if I’m gonna do a formal lawsuit as such on that, but if I do, it would likely be later in this year or early next year. Why, do you want to bet on the outcome if I decide to do it? I know you think I have no case on that, if I decide to do it, would you put 100 bucks on it even money bet? Good chance I won’t even bother with it though, actually. Doing two lawsuits at the same time might just be too much.

  • YankeeFan

    31B

    I was in no way trying to start a fight. I am glad you show respect in the same manner it is returned. The cases I named do exist. The Glik is the now famous or infamous case out of the 1st in which Simon Glik was arrested and charged with wiretapping for filming The Boston PD arrest someone in the Boston Commons. The first question the 1st Circuit had to answer was does the first have in it the right to film police in public as that was a claim laid out by the Police. That it is not spelled out and the1st said oh yes it does.

    The Ibarra Bros you can google and see what happened. Here is something that somewhat explains what happened. The interesting part was the jury was asked their thoughts after it was settled and all but 1 that spoke stated that they were well on their way to winning a lot more than the 1.8 mil they get to keep. Lawyer fees added on top.

    Houston, TX: (Mar-03-08) Two brothers, Erik and Sean Ibarra, brought charges against Harris County, alleging that their civil rights were violated. The suit claimed that the brothers were wrongly arrested in 2002 for video taping a sheriff’s department drug raid at a neighbor’s home. The suit named Harris County Sheriff Tommy Thomas and four deputies. Erik and Sean Ibarra stated that their civil rights were violated when deputies stormed their northeast Houston home and destroyed the film in their camera. The incident led to the filing of the lawsuit, which sought $5 million in compensation. The two claimed that the manner in which they were treated when they were trying to defend themselves was unacceptable and illegal.

    Sources stated that the Ibarra lawsuit led to the discovery of racial and sexually explicit e-mails on District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal’s county computer. Rosenthal went on record later, testifying that Ibarra’s arrest might have been unwarranted. As part of a settlement reached in the case, Harris County Commissioners approved a $1.7 million lawsuit settlement, resolving litigation. In addition to the settlement, the judge in the case will decide how much the county will have to pay in attorney fees and court costs. [KHOU NEWS: WRONGFUL ARREST]

  • Mike Rios

    It is a very clear policy with Wal-Mart that you are not allowed to record on their property. If you do and are caught you are legally trespassing.

    Secondly, I’m a little suspicious about the statement that the cops are constantly harassing me. Back in the day when the cops were constantly harassing me I was usually up to no good. I also heard the policeman say something about a problem at customer service. You didn’t record that part.

    This video ruins the purpose of this web sight. Too many questionable things with this story.

  • RadicalDude

    “ThirtyOneBravo says:
    June 23, 2013 at 7:12 pm

    @RD

    DANGER WILL ROBINSON! DANGER DANGER!

    Really? Why would you encourage him to withhold evidence? That’s not very wise if you’re also encouraging him (based on this complaint as we see it) to file Federal complaints.”

    I don’t think there’s enough to say that he should or shouldn’t file a federal complaint. In his post, Tyler said,
    “I would like to file suit against the department but don’t really know how to go about it.”

    So, I’m just giving info on how one would do it, I’m not saying he should or shouldn’t do it.

    To further clarify what I meant:
    When I say withhold the video, I mean when he initially makes a complaint w/ the police department. The lawsuit, if there were one, would be later, after the criminal case and IA investigation were wrapped up, and by that point the video would have been disclosed.

    Have you watched the video of the Pastor Anderson trial?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8ihGI22HgQ

    In the video, Anderson’s lawyer presents evidence, which had been withheld from the prosecutor up until then. Even though the other side objects, initially, it is allowed to be introduced because it is mainly being used for impeachment purposes. Sometimes, it is allowable to withhold evidence. In the Anderson case, it may be what kept Anderson from being convicted, since it showed the witness to be less than credible.

    In general, in these situations, if someone is gonna file an IA complaint, I believe it best to wait a few weeks to tell IA about the video(if it is unknown to the cops), wait till when the IA detective interviews the complaining party, which would preferably be after he interviews the cop. That way, the cop has an extra opportunity to jam himself up by lying. If he knows about the video, that is much less likely, imo.

    Generally, other than this specific kind of situation, I believe it is best to be upfront about every piece of evidence.

  • RadicalDude

    In the Ibarra case cited by YankeeFan and the Silva case in Bakersfield, we can see another reason to initially withhold video(at least for a short while): The cops may try to tamper with the video evidence, which they can’t if they don’t know about it.

  • YankeeFan

    RD,

    In my initial statement, I did not word it best as I was in a rush. It is very rare to see someone actually sue and win a personal settlement against a police officer. I know qualified immunity is not all that solid as the Glik ruling was specifically that. An appeal to the 1st, by the Boston PD, after being denied at the state court level!

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    @Yank,

    I meant no disrespect nor did I mean to imply that the cases don’t exist. I respect your opinion so I really didn’t need to verify what you said. I was just echoing the fact that I never agree with overzealous cops. They make my job that much harder to do.

    @RD

    Withholding evidence in Wisconsin is never a great idea. Judges don’t like that sort of tomfoolery and it would be tossed out handily. Lets not mention there could be sanctions for the shenanigans. I’ve witnessed it personally and I guarantee you, it only leads to trouble. This is one of the reasons why I explicitly told Mr. Volkey to consult an attorney and avoid the advice of an armchair lawyer.

  • YankeeFan

    31B

    I think we understood each other. I do not want to come across as a cop basher as there are some citizens who place themselves in the spots they wind up in by being stupid. Sometimes though, the police are their own worst enemy and it reflects badly on all cops which sucks but is the truth.

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    @Yank

    Absolutely.

  • t.

    Dude: Have you ever litigated a case? Or did some city / town just settle with you for some nominal amount as it was far cheaper than putting their attorneys on it? An accounting decision is far different than really winning a trial.

  • RadicalDude

    Yes it was settled, but prior to that there was lots of litigation, it was about as litigious a court process as there is without a trial, there was deposition, discovery, several motions and counter motions, they literally filed motions on me for 5 years, and I responded to them all and shot down like half of them, so they ran out of lawyer tricks and it was obvious they were gonna lose, so they settled. Now, I wish I would have just taken it to trial. Looking back, there’s soooo much I could have done better, but I did learn a lot, though. The court process does force both sides to settle though with its own coercive devices that are built into the court system, would you agree?

  • RadicalDude

    So, what about in the civil cases you were involved in; was there a trial, or did you win by default somehow?

  • RadicalDude

    “ThirtyOneBravo says:
    June 24, 2013 at 12:29 am
    @RD

    Withholding evidence in Wisconsin is never a great idea.”
    Very good point, as far as court. Give the other side notice and a copy if you want to use it in court. I would still say it would generally be better to not include a mention of it in the complaint w/ the police department until you can talk to IA directly, as it is too likely to leak to the cop. I’m talking in situations, he doesn’t know he’s on video doing something illegal, I still am just talking generally. Not saying this cop acted outside his department policy, I don’t know either way.
    So, in other words, get the complaint in to the department asap. Still talking general strategy. The cop in the video probably knows and is reading this right now, haha, so it’s all academic at this point.
    But look at the Bakersfield sherriffs situation, the witness reported the video immediately, and the cops seized the device, now there is a discrepancy on the evidence, and an appearance of impropriety, and likely evidence tampering.
    If the witness would have withheld it for a week or two, made copies, etc the whole mess would be avoided.

  • just an american

    To the author of this-if you really want help contact the Rutherford institute. (434) 978-3888

  • just an american

    also to the author of this instead of recording with your phone-get a pair of google glasses.

  • t.

    Dude:

    First: Both cases where I sued it was private persons / parties that I sued. In both of those cases they made false complainants against me to my department (1 each to each to the 2.departments I’ve worked at). Both were serious accusations of excessive use of force.
    The first one there was a pretty violent arrest, 1 v 1 in the middle of a busy street. There in laythe problem for the complainant. LLots and lots of witnesses. I didn’t get a whole lot from him as he didn’t have much, but a message got clearly sent to him and his whole “crowd” about his actions. (My department strongly discouraged me from suing…asking me to just let it be as the complaint was “unsubstantiated” by IA)

    The second was a little funnier in the end. That guy also made up a complaint about extremely excessive force, claiming that I did all kinds of things. Unfortunately for me…the arrest (which happened without any more force than him submitting to getting handcufffed) took place inside a building…away from the camera in my car. Fortunately…there was video of the entire arrest, including an angle of him walking out to my car and another officers arrival as he sat calmly on the curb waiting. Again, my department didn’t want me to sue and to let it drop. I instead chose to take almost everything he had and made him pay for many, many years.

    I know of several other officers that have successfully sued as I have. I know of many more that have filed countersuit when sued individually or as part of a larger suit. Each one that I know has been against the wishes of their departments. Most officers that sue have a pretty easy time of it as IA has already assembled of of the pertentent documents / videos / witnesses.

    Now I certainly haven’t sued each person that ever filed a complaint against me. Although, that could be a profitable side business. Only the couple that were the most aggregious liars.

    Now the next guy I’m gonna sue us far different. He is a “man of means”. His lies and behavior is so aggregious that even my PD agrees with my pending suit. I’m just waiting on a few criminal things to sort themselves out (yes, criminal actions due to his “free speech”) before I go forward. This guy has a lot. And he will lose everything but his house. I’ll probably not take his business (I don’t want it) but put a make him pay off the judgment for years.

    Now I’ve never had someone file a frivolous suit against me of the kind you usually recommend. Currently in my state it is not illegal / criminal to file such a suit…although it most likely will be as the legislature has discussed it. But the reason I say that its such a bad idea is that filing the suit…laying out in court documents (and heaven forbid actual testimony) about things that aren’t factual….like in the cases I sued….makes it really easy for a countersuit.

    The only reasons myself and most officers don’t sue about these false complaints more often is A) CALEA standards about anonymous complaints makes it more difficult to get a false complainant on “record”, B) most of the liar complainants have nothing to get, and C) Legal representation can be expensive. In both of my previous cases I used an attorney from an organization that I am a member of. This next ones is a far different animal and I retained an attorney on my on to prepare it. Its ready to go, just waiting for the last 2 peices to fall. Heck, I bet that guys wife leaves him.

    Those are my 2 stories. Its hopeful also a good illustration of why your advice is bad. Especially in a case like is shown on this video. This guy clearly appears to have been in the wrong. And there isn’t any excessive force. It sounds like the police had RS to stop him which can be elevated to PC to arrest him simply based on his actions towards the police. You are advocating not only filing a false complaint and lawsuit…but then withholding evidence while doing it. (BTW…his is an excellent example of why phones should be seized and placed into evidence. They frequently contain evidence of the crime which the suspect is accused….seize it, put it in evidence and get a search warrant. Pretty simple stuff).

    Again, even with your disclaimer in place, you are giving bad advice. You are armed with almost no information, and the the information you have is clearly biased and presented to make you think a particular way. You blindly suggesting the actions that you do just sets these people up for a world of financial pain. And possible further criminal charges.

    The better advice would be to request a copy of the police report (or get it during discovery in court) and see what it contains. If there are glaring inconsistencies (true inconsistencies, not just something that YOU think did / didn’t happen. (FYI…I good police report is detailed but not overly so. Most things are discussed in broader terms. The things that required extensive detail will of course be very detailed. But most things, like this incident, probably won’t have all that much about this…well pretty much non-incident). If there is a legitimate concern…like you really didn’t do anything and were stopped without any RS, make a copy of everything you have and file a complaint with the PD. Lying and withholding the truth is always a bad plan.

  • shawn

    @31B
    @RD

    Withholding evidence in Wisconsin is never a great
    idea. Judges don’t like that sort of tomfoolery”

    Let’s ask the prosecutor in the Duke Lacross case how that went.

    This isn’t Matlock, where you can just bring in the magic witness or shirt button and suddenly win.

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    @Shawn

    That trial happened in North Carolina. Not Wisconsin. You’re right, this isn’t “Matlock”. This is basic reasoning and 3rd grade US Geography.

    Further, it’s one thing to superstitiously record someone to purger him/herself and then share it with the opposing party as soon as prudent. It’s completely another to spring it on the court & and opposing party at the last moment in a heave of showmanship. Courtroom proceedings are a serious matter and rules have to be followed if one wants to be successful.

    This isn’t Perry Mason.

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    @RD

    I agree. If one is going to retain evidence to preserve or duplicate it then disseminate it to the parties involved, then I’m all for it. It’s the whole last moment courtroom showmanship thing that would have me worried.

  • RadicalDude

    “t. says:
    June 24, 2013 at 10:46 am

    Now I’ve never had someone file a frivolous suit against me of the kind you usually recommend. ”

    I WOULD NEVER RECOMMEND FILING A FRIVOLOUS LAWSUIT. IT IS A BAD IDEA, EVEN IF YOU DON’T GET COUNTER-SUED, IF YOU HAVE A LEGIT CASE LATER, YOU IT CAN BE USED TO DISCREDIT YOU.

    “Especially in a case like is shown on this video. This guy clearly appears to have been in the wrong.”

    I don’t think the video proves much either way as far as that goes.

    “And there isn’t any excessive force. It sounds like the police had RS to stop him which can be elevated to PC to arrest him simply based on his actions towards the police. You are advocating not only filing a false complaint and lawsuit…but then withholding evidence while doing it”

    Again, I have said this before, but to clarify, I’m not telling him to file a complaint or a lawsuit. I’m saying IF WE ASSUME tyler has a case, that is how I think would be the way to do it. I’m not saying to do it or not to do it. There isn’t enough info to go off in this post to say one way or the other.

    “Again, even with your disclaimer in place, you are giving bad advice. You are armed with almost no information, and the the information you have is clearly biased and presented to make you think a particular way. You blindly suggesting the actions that you do just sets these people up for a world of financial pain. And possible further criminal charges.”

    He said he wanted to sue but didn’t know how. I’m just putting up the HOW. There would be a lot more info to say if it was appropriate or not.
    I’m just putting it out there for information purposes, not just for tyler, but for anyone else who might read the blog.

    “The better advice would be to request a copy of the police report (or get it during discovery in court) and see what it contains.”

    Absolutely, this would be something he should be doing regardless.

    “Lying and withholding the truth is always a bad plan.”

    I would never say to lie or to file a false allegation, again my post was based on ASSUMPTIONS that this post, frankly, does not support to a preponderance of the evidence standard, without more information/evidence.
    I am not saying to sue the cops or to file a complaint. I’m talking about HOW one could go about it if one were to do so, but there simply is not enough info to say if he should or not. I believe it is generally better to be upfront but in the specific instance of filing a complaint, I believe it is better to not mention the video in the written complaint, but to give it to an IA cop DIRECTLY. Not to bury it or cover it up.

  • steve

    t, i firmly believe if they lied sue them and thats coming from a cop hater. but if your doing your job correctly a respecting the constitution your doing your job.i hate to hear false charges made on anybody and one of the biggest ones seems to be the old resisting arrest. along with this i think something stinks with mr. volkeys complaint. i think i’m gonna dig a little.stop resisting.

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    Steve,

    The thing about Mr. Volkey is that he’s resisted before and Lake Delton is a very small village. He’s well known to the police as a trouble maker and one who disrespects authority. That said, the officer who took him down did so with all that in mind. And once Mr. Volkey resisted in the slightest, he hit the ground.

    I’ve read the complaint and charges against him. I can’t share them as the cases are open but for what it’s worth, Mr. Volkey brought this on himself.

  • Ha. I look forward to seeing the report and the epic tossing from court.

  • t.

    Bradley: It’ll never get that far.