Knowingly Filing of a False Report by a Police Officer

[Fellomyst]

So basically you are saying that a police officer may say whatever they wish in their report regardless of the facts surrounding the report. So I can say whatever I want regardless of the truthfulness of my statement unless? I guess I don't understand how the report goes from report to complaint at what point is the truth relevant?

[RJR]

They can write anything they wish, whether it is a deliberate falsehood or his accounting of the facts as he perceives them, is legally different, yes. Facts and witness testimony, etc., can be disputed by others.

Police officer in report "Joe pulled a gun on me and pointed it at me". Cell phone video by bystander's clearly shows that is a lie, no room for interpretation, and is Falsification or Obstructing official business or such.

[cdwjava]

There is a difference between an intentional falsehood (a lie) and an error. Even an egregious error. Along the same vein, the law does not generally mandate that a competent investigation be done even if one is mandated to be completed under the law. While it's possible that the officer fudged things in favor of the other party because they were acquainted, it is also possible they were simply lazy and/or incompetent. Neither is good, to be certain, but your recourse is limited. It seems you have already complained to the agency and failed to get any satisfaction, and your insurance company has already taken steps to receive compensation from the other party.

I'm sorry you have to go through all of this.

[Taxing Matters]

So basically you are saying that a police officer may say whatever they wish in their report regardless of the facts surrounding the report.

No. But what I am saying is that the police report isn't evidence in court and isn't proof of anything other than the officer's own take on what he/she did during that call. People put way too much emphasis on what cops put in their reports, especially when the cop did not see the incident in question and simply arrived on the scene after. The cop's report of his/her investigation of what happened is not entitled to any special deference and is not given any special weight in the law.

[Fellomyst]

That's what I am saying 3 of the four people involved all say they never even talked to the officer let alone say the things he claims were said. The bible only requires 2 witnesses to put a man to death surely 3 are good enough to establish truth. If an officer cannot remain unbiased in his dealing with the public then they have no business in that job.

[Mark47n]

That's what I am saying 3 of the four people involved all say they never even talked to the officer let alone say the things he claims were said. The bible only requires 2 witnesses to put a man to death surely 3 are good enough to establish truth. If an officer cannot remain unbiased in his dealing with the public then they have no business in that job.

The bible is not the basis for our laws. Here and now it takes 12 people to agree that someone is guilty, not 2 or 3. It certainly takes more then 2 to sentence someone to death.

There is no requirement for cops to be unbiased and they are not the final arbiter.

It would appear that you weren't present at the accident so it's reasonable to say that you don't actually know what happened, you only know what your son told you. Perhaps you're showing your own bias, eh?

[Fellomyst]

Spoken like a true lawyer. But first of all bias is favoritism and only a fool believes favoritism isn't bigotry and secondly our justice system is based on the bible and I do not believe it currently even condones the death penalty as per the revision. I was poor most of my life and disabled for decades before I could prove it The V A has not always been good to vets. I have spent more time dealing with the law because I could not hold down a job everyone suffered. Expired plates, insurance, inspections, suspended licence no moving violations , but enough to look at jail time for habitual traffic offender. This has given me an insight to the workings of the system without even so much as a misdemeanor. Not that they didn't try their best. I understand the report those men write whether or not they are entitled or given special weight that is an ideal that is seldom practiced. Because we should all know to get a statement asap because as time passes so does the detail it is important to be accurate and unbiased. While civilians place great faith in their supposed diligence and considerable harm can and does come based soley on the content of that report. This I know first hand and only my truck was involved but because of that report I had to prove the accident could not have happened the way it was reported in fact it was shown to be the other driver. Fraudulence comes in when he says he was pulling in when in fact he was in reverse and could not have possibly believed otherwise. That being factual why is he not on the hook for interference at least? My private detective has already filed a FOIA with the city asking for everything, notes, cams, as well as conducting interviews with the witnesses that were dismissed without statement by the reporting officer. Lawyers tell me I will never get what I want, but they do not know what I want. When two men look one another in the eye those two men both know who is wicked and when the righteous shows he knows the other is guilty it is cathartic and I can release the burden without I would carry to the grave money be damned. If it helps to make a better police force then I am happy.

How can you possibly believe there is no moral responsibility to be unbiased. I started with faith with what my son told me ,and experience taught me that he was likely being blamed a collision forensics expert, a private investigator and plenty of photographic evidence that with, only someone with no concept of physics, like how a teeter tooter works, could possibly believe the collision happened the way it was reported. That police officer had two eyes and while stupid is not an idiot. Well that did the rest so while I may be biased I left it where it belongs.

[Mark47n]

Spoken like a true lawyer. But first of all bias is favoritism and only a fool believes favoritism isn't bigotry and secondly our justice system is based on the bible and I do not believe it currently even condones the death penalty as per the revision. I was poor most of my life and disabled for decades before I could prove it The V A has not always been good to vets. I have spent more time dealing with the law because I could not hold down a job everyone suffered. Expired plates, insurance, inspections, suspended licence no moving violations , but enough to look at jail time for habitual traffic offender. This has given me an insight to the workings of the system without even so much as a misdemeanor. Not that they didn't try their best. I understand the report those men write whether or not they are entitled or given special weight that is an ideal that is seldom practiced. Because we should all know to get a statement asap because as time passes so does the detail it is important to be accurate and unbiased. While civilians place great faith in their supposed diligence and considerable harm can and does come based soley on the content of that report. This I know first hand and only my truck was involved but because of that report I had to prove the accident could not have happened the way it was reported in fact it was shown to be the other driver. Fraudulence comes in when he says he was pulling in when in fact he was in reverse and could not have possibly believed otherwise. That being factual why is he not on the hook for interference at least? My private detective has already filed a FOIA with the city asking for everything, notes, cams, as well as conducting interviews with the witnesses that were dismissed without statement by the reporting officer. Lawyers tell me I will never get what I want, but they do not know what I want. When two men look one another in the eye those two men both know who is wicked and when the righteous shows he knows the other is guilty it is cathartic and I can release the burden without I would carry to the grave money be damned. If it helps to make a better police force then I am happy.

How can you possibly believe there is no moral responsibility to be unbiased. I started with faith with what my son told me ,and experience taught me that he was likely being blamed a collision forensics expert, a private investigator and plenty of photographic evidence that with, only someone with no concept of physics, like how a teeter tooter works, could possibly believe the collision happened the way it was reported. That police officer had two eyes and while stupid is not an idiot. Well that did the rest so while I may be biased I left it where it belongs.

I don't know where to begin so let's start with this: I'm not an attorney. I just happen to be an educated and literate person who deals with legal issues on a regular basis as a part of my job.

Bias is not necessarily favoritism and it's not always conscious. Furthermore to make the leaps that you between bias and bigotry is ridiculous.

Our legal system is NOT based on the bible and I have no idea where that's even coming from. Since you don't believe in proper sentence structure or paragraphs I can only assume that you're saying that the bible no longer condones the death penalty. Well that would certainly prove the fallibility of the bible since the Old Testament is certainly a big proponent of the death penalty. All, since it's men writing the bible that would ben that it's the words of men and not God.

There's a whole lot of bollocks here in the middle...........

Who said anything about moral responsibility? Everyone is biased, especially towards their family. Faith is unreliable as it pertains to people.

So, really, what I take from your posts, you're just another old crank who believes that his children would never shape the facts. I don't know what you think you're going to achieve other than wearing your opponent out. Perhaps that's your aim, but without filing a lawsuit or something I can only assume that you're going to use the wad of paper your generating to shim up the dinner table.

[Fellomyst]

I see you are a manipulator although not a master when you run out of facts or truth you go for the insult. I may let grammar slide, but at least I am not ignorant. The Tora condones an eye for an eye, but the Bible in the amended Tora or the New Testament forgiveness is the rule not vengeance. " I give to you a new commandment to Love one another as I have loved you. I can forgive you easily because my grammar made it difficult to differentiate between the different beliefs. As far as you not being a lawyer I never said you were one I said you spoke like one. Working with them that makes sense, too bad you dont have the education it requires maybe you could make better sense of legal situations.
I stand with the conviction that as far as opinions go the opinion of this states best collision expert and the evidence found by the private detective were not shaped by my son the witness to the incident her testimony is what she says it is not what my son says. I am not concerned about winning just about presenting the truth and that will be done in my time not yours. You are right about one thing, I am old and I have nothing better to do than stand up to bullies no matter who they are.

[Mark47n]

I see you are a manipulator although not a master when you run out of facts or truth you go for the insult. I may let grammar slide, but at least I am not ignorant. The Tora condones an eye for an eye, but the Bible in the amended Tora or the New Testament forgiveness is the rule not vengeance. " I give to you a new commandment to Love one another as I have loved you. I can forgive you easily because my grammar made it difficult to differentiate between the different beliefs. As far as you not being a lawyer I never said you were one I said you spoke like one. Working with them that makes sense, too bad you dont have the education it requires maybe you could make better sense of legal situations.
I stand with the conviction that as far as opinions go the opinion of this states best collision expert and the evidence found by the private detective were not shaped by my son the witness to the incident her testimony is what she says it is not what my son says. I am not concerned about winning just about presenting the truth and that will be done in my time not yours. You are right about one thing, I am old and I have nothing better to do than stand up to bullies no matter who they are.

I know what the Torah condones and I'm more than passingly familiar with it, I'm a Jew.

I'm not manipulating anything.

The Torah has not been amended in more that 3300 year. That's older than Christianity by a fair piece. I also state that the Bible and the Torah approve of execution and it's applicable for numerous offenses.

Again, the modern justice system is not predicated on the bible, Torah, Quran or any other religious text or doctrine.

Your lack of grammar and paragraphs make understanding you very difficult and muddies what you are trying to convey.

The law, morality and justice vary from culture to culture and are not always compatible.

I was raised by two attorneys and learned that words have power and how you use them and shape them can influence opinions. It has aided me in contracts and in other didactic situations more than I can express. As to my success, I'm more successful than not in my wrangling in legal matters than not.

If this is your hobby then more power to you. That said, it doesn't change the LEGAL aspect of your OP and it won't likely change the outcome.