01/03/2012
The Utica Phoenix, a local weekly newspaper has posted on its website what appears to be an incriminating video, one minute and 40 seconds in length, featuring Utica Police Officers placing baggies, possibly filled with drugs, in the vehicle of a person they pulled over for running a stop sign.
The 1:40 portion of the video being shown on social media sites on the internet shows a Utica Police officer taking a baggie from his pocket and putting it, apparently, on the seat of the vehicle he’d just pulled over. Earlier in the video, in a portion not shown on all the social media sites, the officer’s empty hand can be seen going in the driver’s jacket pocket, pulling out a baggie. Utica Police Chief Mark Williams says the matter was thoroughly investigated.
“He’s going into the car with it and that’s what he’s doing, it’s cold out and he’s basically separating the drugs from both defendants,” says Chief Williams.
Utica Phoenix Publisher and community activist Cassandra Harris-Lockwood put that 1:40 long snippet of video on the paper’s website. It got so many hits-around 64 thousand in less than 24 hours-that it crashed the site. Lockwood has questions about the behavior of Utica Police during the traffic stop.
“Did they follow procedures? If you take something from a suspect, do you put in back in your own pocket?”,,,you’ve got a crime scene, don’t you protect your crime scene? What do you mean, you stick it in your pocket? That doesn’t sound like proper police procedure to me. Stick it in your pocket? I don’t think so,” says Lockwood.
UPD Spokesperson Sgt. Steve Hauck says, yes, you put it in your pocket. Sgt. Hauck says the first rule for police is keep your hands free in case you have to defend yourself. He says the officers didn’t violate protocol or procedure by storing evidence during a outdoor traffic stop in freezing cold temperatures in their pockets for a few seconds.
Chief Williams questions why the officers would plant evidence knowing they were being recorded on video.
“It’s his car. He’s the one that’s turned that camera on. He should be fully aware that the camera is likely going to catch anything that’s going on in front of him,” says Williams.
The chief says he would be the last one defending officers who would plant drugs.
“Obviously it’s a personal opinion someone has, maybe an agenda. All I can tell you is this; if I have an officer that I feel is planting drugs, he’s not going to have a job with the Utica Police Department. It’s not in my bests interests to keep someone like that around,” says Williams.
Officials with the local NAACP chapter brought the video to the attention of police, who were already aware of it. The police chief says he’s reached out to Venice Ervin of the NAACP regarding the outcome of the internal investigation and is waiting to hear back from him. Utica Police say they met with the FBI about the case this morning and were asked to keep them updated on the investigation and official outcome.
———————————————————————————————————————————
The Utica Phoenix is in possession of a Utica Police Department video recording of a traffic stop which occurred on February 11, 2011. In this silent video, an African-American couple have been pulled over in their SUV at the corner of Clinton Place and Oneida Streets. It is clear the officers are not aware that the video tape feed was rolling. The policemen in the video are said to be officer Paladino and partner.
The occupants, a woman and a man, are out of the car when frisked by the officers. It appears that a plastic bag is removed from the handcuffed male occupant while he is being frisked. The woman, who is clearly distraught and pleading, is also frisked by the male officer, at one point exposing her underwear and bare backside to the camera.
Initially her hands are free, but after the search, whereupon the officer seems to find something folded in what appears to be a piece of paper, she too is hand cuffed behind her back. She then remains standing behind the vehicle.
The SUV continues being searched by the one or other of the officers and at one point one of the officers, gestures for the woman to be taken from view of the other officer. She is lead away from view.
This same officer who motioned to have the woman removed from view, returns to the passenger side of the car and is clearly seen reaching for and then removing a pouched plastic bag from his back pocket, its contents are not clear. It seems he then drops the bag, bends down to retrieve it, then returns with it to the interior of the car.
After a few seconds, this officer then exits the car again, this time with a another plastic bag, fuller and larger, that he holds out as evidence as he walks to the driver side of the car.
It has been reported to the Utica Phoenix that the chairman of the Legal Redress Committee of the NAACP, Venice Ervin, brought this video to the attention of Utica Police Chief Williams. When asked a series of questions regarding this video, Chief Williams responded, “We have an on-going internal affairs investigation regarding this matter, therefore I am not able to speak about it.
“I’ve already met with Venice Ervin of the NAACP on this complaint. When this matter has been thoroughly investigated, I plan on meeting with Mr. Ervin first to discuss the results of the investigation.”
It was also learned by the Phoenix, that a copy of this video was recently delivered to the FBI for review.
It is said that this video has been widely distributed through the Black community, being shown in barbershops, and other public places. Its viewing has fueled the renewal of complaints long charged against the Utica Police of the planting of evidence and other abuses by the local force.
A recent Phoenix interview of a Black female resident of Utica charges that police kicked in the front door of her home without a warrant. Inside, the woman’s 83 year old handicapped mother was subject to police swarming through her house while they, ‘waited for a warrant.’
The interviewed subject went on to explain that though she was allowed to enter when she returned home, to care for her terrified mother, police entered with a drug sniffing dog, once they were issued the warrant.
The dog was taken throughout the house and found no drugs. The dog was verbally abused, cursed and yanked around, finally to be returned to the car. Police continued their search and somehow, achieved what the trained nose of the police dog could not do. The officers ‘found’ drugs.
The resultant drug charges caused the resident and her then fiancé to both be arrested. Spending the night in jail, the woman was subjected to sleep on a cold hard slab of a bed with no blanket, a filthy toilet and the humiliation of being brought into court in shackles and hand cuffs the next morning. Her inability to return to work and the subsequent posting of her face and her fiancé’s face on Facebook, caused both she and her fiancé to lose their respective jobs.
Neither the NAACP nor the UPD would comment on other cases with similar disturbing circumstances currently in various stages of litigation. But at the start of 2012 there appears to be cause for great concern over apparent patterns of abuse of power by the UPD and a culture of predation upon African-Americans in the City of Utica.
———————————————————————————————————————————
The full, roughly 30 minute dashcam video from Utica Police of a traffic stop on Oneida Street and Clinton Place in the City of Utica on on February 11, 2011.
A roughly 1 minute, 40 second portion of the video was distributed by the Utica Phoenix newspaper on their website, and quickly made its way through social media, alleging the planting of drugs by Utica Police.
Authorities say they believe viewing the full video shows what happened prior to the clip that has made its way around the internet, including \what they say is the officers pulling those drugs from the vehicle’s occupants before going back to the car.
———————————————————————————————————————————
01/05/2012
Originally posted by the Utica Phoenix as “UPD Caught On Tape,” this local Police Department dash cam video has gone viral. It has been reposted on Youtube.com under several titles, including those that speak directly to planting of evidence.
The Oneida County branch of NAACP continues to draw attention to segments of the recording that put into question the policies and procedures of the Utica Police Department in their treatment and handling of evidence and their treatment and searching of female suspects by male officers.
Police Chief Mark Williams continues to insist that the questionable 1:40 minute segment posted by the Phoenix depicts the normal operations of his command though, “There might be a better way of handling evidence, so it doesn’t look so bad in the eyes of the public.”
Chief Williams says it is a “rush to judgment’ unless the entire video is viewed.
Ameya Hunt is the 38 year-old woman seen in the above-mentioned UPD video dash cam. Hunt has 4 children ages 4, 8, 6, and 20. Two weeks after incident (where she was arrested for drug possession and an open container), she received a letter from Section 8 advising her that due to her arrest, and assumed involvement in criminal activity, they could no longer give her assistance.
She could no longer afford the rent for her Lincoln Ave. apartment, where she and her family have lived for the previous 7 years.
Shortly after the arrest, Hunt, who has just earned her certification as a Home Health Aid, received word that her employer had been issued a Cease and Desist order from New York State regarding her employment. Hunt was said not to be trusted around patients, their drugs, or their money. She not only lost her job but was unable to acquire Unemployment Insurance.
Ameya Hunt and her family are now homeless as she is unable to find work. They now sleep on the floor of a family member.
Some Discrepancies
Chief Mark Williams, in his Observer-Dispatch interview, states that the search of Ameya Hunt was not recorded on film. Perhaps not on film, it is a video recording and the following are problematic points of interest in her treatment by the officer.
12:30 — Ameya is taken from the vehicle and the search of her jacket pockets begins
13:25 — Hunt is handcuffed behind her back.
13:48 — Officer’s hand goes down front of her shirt
14:00 — Officer’s hand goes into the front of Hunt’s pants
14:28 — Money is taken out of Hunt’s pants
14:50 — Officer’s hand is back in Hunt’s pants
15:15 — Officer’s hand in Hunt’s back pockets.
15:33 Hunt is told to lift up her jacket. She complies.
“I asked him when he started searching me if he was supposed to do that,” Hunt said. “I couldn’t believe he put his hand inside my shirt and my pants. I asked him to stop. You can’t believe how nasty his language was to me. There was no reason for him to talk to me and treat me that way. How could the Police Chief say he didn’t search me? Its right there on the video. You just can’t hear how foul his language was.”
Grady Jones, 51, the male subject arrested in the now infamous UPD dash cam video, insist that neither he nor Hunt was originally charged with possession of a controlled substance in the 7th degree, as court papers indicate. And he had his court appointed attorney, JoAnna Corso, file motions demanding evidence in support of the charge.
The UPD Appearance Ticket obtained from Mr. Jones dated February 11 2011, indicates the alleged commission of offense of “C/P Marijuana – 5th:25 Grams.” The signing officer is Paul Paladino.
Jones asserts, “If cocaine was found in my car that night, I wouldn’t have gone home. I would have spent the night in jail. There was no cocaine in that car. I admitted to the marijuana. I never denied it. That’s why I was smiling in the video. It was just marijuana.
“Besides,” he continued, “I would have seen it. They would have shown it to us. And now I read in the paper the Chief says they found a blunt-cigarette. Where is it? When did they find that? If they found it, there would be my DNA on it? They’re just trying to justify all of this.
“They wanted me to allocate the drugs to Ameya. I wouldn’t do it. I fully admit to all of it. She didn’t have any drugs. I didn’t have anything but the marijuana. There was no cocaine. I stated in Court when I pled to the marijuana that I was the one in possession of the marijuana and that I was not pleading on any other drug charges.”
Mr. Jones provided the Utica Phoenix with all initial documentation he received on the evening of 2.11.11. (The night of the traffic stop). They include three uniform traffic tickets from the UPD citing violations, including: Failure to Stop, Unlicensed Operator, and Aggravated Unlicensed Operator.
Ameya Hunt, is said to have been just a passenger in Jones’ car. The two claim to have no intimate relationship. She got a ride from Jones to her sister’s house to play cards that evening when the stop occurred.
“The police said Grady ran the stop sign at Clinton Place and Oneida Street. They stopped us at Clinton and Kemble,” said Hunt. “He didn’t run that stop sign. They later said something about the car and him fitting a description.”
Jones says he handed over his license and that of Hunt’s to the officer who ran it through the system and found him in driving violation for lapse of insurance. They immediately put Jones in handcuffs. Jones suggested that Hunt’s license was clean and she could drive to avoid towing what was his mother’s vehicle.
Instead, Hunt was asked by Officer Paladino if she had any drugs or weapons. She admitted to a very small amount of marijuana, so little that the officer left it in the car.
“It was not taken into evidence. It was still in the car when they retrieved it from impounding. I also had a can of beer with me. It was bagged in double plastic with a tissue in the top so it wouldn’t spill out. That was the open container. They didn’t take that into evidence either.
“That was the difference between the charges against Grady Jones and me. He had the license charges and I had the drinking in a motor vehicle violation. We both had the marijuana charges.
“I thought I was being arrested for marijuana because of the pot that Mr. Jones had and we were in the car together. That was on Friday. Neither one of us knew anything about cocaine charges until Sunday when we saw it in the paper and on television.
Confused Charges
“As soon as I heard about the additional charges I called the Police Station right away. I spoke to a female sergeant who couldn’t find any paper- work for charges against either one of us anywhere. I have some friends with some legal knowledge who advised me to start submitting certain motions, which I did, asking questions that have yet to be answered. Like, where did that cocaine come from ‘cause I never saw it in evidence. And if it had been found there that night, I would have gone to jail, I wouldn’t have gotten an appearance ticket.”
“One of the supporting depositions from the motions filed talks about the there being cocaine. There is no mention of any weight, just a white chunky substance. Then at another point there is reference to residue. Which is it? And where is it? Because I never saw it,” said Jones.
Hunt states that, “I was told by my attorney, Mr. Ricardo Mauro, Court Appointed attorney to take the deal. That it was a good deal. He said it more than once. ‘They’re getting rid of the cocaine charge,’ he said.
“Then I found out, it doesn’t mean its dismissed. They’re just calling it something else. I was not going to admit to the cocaine charge. I didn’t care what they called it. Mauro said, ‘It’s just like a traffic ticket. It won’t be on your record. It won’t hurt your ability to work. You ought to take just it.’ So I did. I called him right back after I talked to Grady and thought about it.
“Grady asked, ‘Why would you go ahead and accept those charges when I’ve taken responsibility for the marijuana?’ I called my Court Appointed Attorney, Ricardo Mauro back and told him I didn’t want to take the plea. He dropped me as a client.”
“They kept on trying to get us to turn on each other the whole time. At one point Mauro was conspiring with the DA. They didn’t know we were on the other side of the door. The DA said, ‘We gotta get somebody to take something.’ Mauro said, “I can sell him anything.” He came back in the room and was shocked when he saw us sitting there. He knew we heard everything. He kind of walked around then came back and said, “I’ve got another deal for you.” I told him, “You can’t sell me anything.”
“The Public Defenders kept trying to get me to agree to accept charges that I didn’t want to admit to. I’m glad that I got some good advice and followed up on it.”
Conclusions
As stated on page 2 of this publication, the Utica Phoenix admits, and was quick to admit as soon as it became evident, that neither Officer Holt or Officer Padulla was an arresting officer at the scene. As soon as this information was brought to our attention, it was quickly corrected in our on-line story entitled “UPD Caught On Tape.” A correction has been included in this edition as well.
Much weight has been given to the fact that the Utica Phoenix got the above details wrong, and for that we apologize. Utica Phoenix staff reviewed the video in its entirety before posting our story. However, in the viral explosion this video has caused in on-line and social media and the fallout that has hit the City of Utica in the aftermath continue to raise serious questions. In the almost 30 minute video the actions by these officers remain troubling and unanswered.
The Utica Phoenix has never alleged that either of these officers “planted drugs” but questions of policy and procedure, why the Mr. Jones and Mrs. Hunt were not made fully aware of all initial charges and who polices the police remain. Chief Williams states that a better process is needed that there should be a better way of handling evidence. We agree. The impression given by the video of the UPD appears suspicious, “in the eyes of the public.”
The NAACP continues to claim injustice.
Policy and procedure, training of officers and their accountability is vital to a safe and secure society. So is vigilance by the independent press.
