Philadelphia Police officers weren’t cohesive in their testimony about the plaintiff’s demeanor during arrest.
—
Three police officers and one detective today in federal court offered contradictory testimony about a December 28th, 2010 incident where use of force was used in a North Philadelphia neighborhood against two gay men involved in a domestic disturbance, though only one of the arrestees, Mr. Luis Berrios, is named in the civil suit against the City of Philadelphia, which resumes tomorrow at 9:30am with the jury expected to deliver their verdict by close of business.
The defense this afternoon rested the case which has a relatively low-profile but contains all the twists, turns and expletives that make television dramas about government corruption a success.
The plaintiff, Mr. Luis Berrios, claims, in addition to be subjected to racial and homophobic slurs, that while on the scene to intervene in a lover’s quarrel, several Philadelphia police officers beat Mr. Jason Mendez, his partner at the time, with batons and another handcuffed him tightly for attempting to interrupt the arrest of Mr. Mendez, who all the officers – and even Mr. Berrios – agree was irrational and troublesome due to him consuming a large amount of alcohol in a relatively short period of time.
The erratic manner of Mr. Mendez and the fact that the grounds were icy and snow covered were about the only things that drew a consensus among plaintiff and defendants, all other happenings on the day in question were refuted by one party or another, with Mr. Berrios, who spoke exclusively to Techbook Online after day two of trial, saying all the officers’ stories were lies.
The most egregious of contradictions exist in the officers’ explanations of Mr. Berrios’ demeanor on the night in question and who transported him back to District headquarters.
Mr. Robert Tavarez and Mr. Michael Gentile, partners in the 25th Police District who were the first to respond to a call about a man with a weapon, both claim Mr. Berrios – the man with the weapon: an iron used to defend himself from Mr. Mendez’s abuse – was, for the most part, calm and not resisting arrest, with Officer Tavarez, during his cross-examination, describing the plaintiff’s attitude as “passive resistance,” which means “the lowest force (on the force continuum) should have been used.”
In contrast, Officer Eric Anders, a nearly twenty year vet with the force who initially told the Internal Affairs Division that he transported Mr. Berrios then today said Officers Tavarez and Gentile “handled the job from start to finish,” testified that the plaintiff was “actively resisting” and that he had to use force – control holds –“several” times.
The other contradiction is related to how Mr. Berrios exited the duplex: through a door in his bathroom in which he’d be required to jump off a balcony onto a bard-wired fence and climb down to the icy ground, or by walking out the front door following Mr. Mendez’s arrest.
Officer Tavarez, who’s also nearing twenty years on the force, claims the former, and Officer Anders, who actually handcuffed Mr. Berrios while he was up against a wall, cites the latter.
Mr. Berrios’ fiery attorney, Ms. Rania Major, scrutinized Officer Tavarez – who described the plaintiff’s bathroom: small, with a tub, toilet and door to the outside – after saying he allowed Mr. Berrios to go the bathroom but after three minutes, went to check on him and saw that he had jumped off the balcony and was running around the corner to, again, try and mitigate the arrest of Mr. Mendez, who’s unable to be at trial because of an illness.
“Would it surprise you if there was no tub?,” asked Ms. Major.
“Yes it would,” replied Officer Tavarez, who claims he took a picture of the bathroom and sent to one of his attorneys, though the attorney he referred to was shaking his head in an apparent denial of that assertion.
Ms. Major asked to see the photo, it was never produced.
“There was no tub, only a stand up shower,” Mr. Berrios told me.
“Philly police officers are walking contradictions,” said Black Lives Matter activist Mr. Asa Khalif, who heads up the Pennsylvania chapter of the grassroots movement and who has attended both days of trial and is expected to appear as Mr. Berrios’ moral support tomorrow when the all-white jury renders their verdict.
“What the Officers did was wrong and unjust; I’m just glad I got a chance to tell my story, all I ever wanted was to be heard,” said Mr. Berrios, who added “this case has made me an activist.”
“Tomorrow can go either way,” said Mr. Khalif, who was very impressed by Ms. Major, who’s nicknamed ‘The Pitbull.’ “Whatever the jury decides… even if he loses on paper, he already won. He took on the establishment and stood up to several police officers that abused him and his former partner. Anyone that takes on the system with that type of courage has already won the battle.”
* Tune into 900amWURD or 900amWURD.com every Friday evening at 6:30pm to hear me relive #TheWeekThatWas*
Thanks for reading. Until next time, I’m Flood the Drummer® & I’m Drumming for JUSTICE!™
—
Photo: Surrounded by friends and allies, Mr. Luis Berrios stands outside the James A. Bryne U.S Courthouse before day one of trial./C. Norris – ©2015
What’s your game here Chris? You write stuff, toss it out but never ever come back for a debate of any sort. That is not a good man but a political man. If this is deleted them I know that it is true. I think you’re very bright but you Definately have an agenda that prizes divisiveness not a coming together. Based on results. You have points but don’t really have the courage to face differing viewpoints and either learn or convince. I’m not here to criticize you as a person by any means. But I do question your overall… Read more »