Jefferson Tap beating trial: Police sergeant to testify in own ...

There are 19 comments on the Mar 30, 2009, Chicago Tribune story titled Jefferson Tap beating trial: Police sergeant to testify in own .... In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

A Chicago police sergeant accused of beating two brothers at a West Loop bar is expected to take the witness stand Tuesday at the bench trial for him and two other off-duty officers.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
rebel music

United States

#23 Mar 31, 2009
Grace wrote:
<quoted text>
Did I miss something? Where has it been confirmed that the police officers were drunk? And without audio from the bar, how do you know that there was "no provocation?" Again, I am not trying to defend these officers, but your remarks are specious, at best.
I guess being at a bar at 3:30 in the morning doesn't mean that they were drunk (rolling eyes), your right. Now, for your sake let's assume that the grieving officer and his buddies were drinking coffee after a long shift, ok. How do explain the actions of the working officers who responded to a 911 call? or the actions of the cop who threw the guy into the wall outside as he was trying to place a call? If you want to use the 'no audio' as a defense for provocation, how do you explain the video showing the cops confronting the man at the pool table after removing his buddy's handgun? As I wrote in a previous post, it's not about the fight or the lawyers, it's about the response (or lack thereof)of the patrolmen that arrived after the brawl started? Unacceptable by any standard. But as we've all seen over the years from the CPD, there are no standards.
Chicago

United States

#24 Mar 31, 2009
This entire case should be in misdemeanor court for battery. There are NO circumstances that make this battery aggravated, NONE. Bartender pointed out the WRONG guy. Nobody's story adds up. There is video evidence of a fight. Charge the cops with simple battery. End of story.

Since: Feb 09

United States

#25 Mar 31, 2009
JAMc wrote:
<quoted text>
So, thanks for your synopsis, but I guess my next question is: how is what you've said relevant? If it's a criminal prosecution, then the STATE has brought the charges and, at least for now, the victims aren't seeking any money from anyone.
The "victims" have a pending civil suit against the City of Chicago and a guilty verdict here would greatly enhance their chance at a payday on the civil. Capice?
mikea

Westmont, IL

#26 Mar 31, 2009
Right cahrge the cops with simle battery and they got off and go abck to assaulting other citizens. Slap them on the wrist and they will do it again and again. How many times have cops assaulated citizens and not be charged due to citizens fears or the prosecutors not getting enough coopertion to charge the cops. This time they did and you want them let off with a snmall fine and slap on the wrist. Chicago justice let the cops do whatever they want. They the police ar esupposed to a example to rest of us instead of using the law for themselves. If they dont like their job quit, there are many others that will gladly take it. Until the bad cops are put off the streets the [police department will never get cleaned up
mikea

Westmont, IL

#27 Mar 31, 2009
I cannot believe how many people on this board are sding with those corrupt cops. How many Chicago cops have to be charged before the department starts cleaning itself up and becoming a example of whart police officers should be. If they want to attack people join the military and go fight in a war.
rebel music

United States

#28 Mar 31, 2009
Chicago wrote:
This entire case should be in misdemeanor court for battery. There are NO circumstances that make this battery aggravated, NONE. Bartender pointed out the WRONG guy. Nobody's story adds up. There is video evidence of a fight. Charge the cops with simple battery. End of story.
It's kind of funny that battery TO a police officer is considered aggravated battery but battery BY a police officer is considered, well, the Chicago way.
Grace

Chicago, IL

#29 Mar 31, 2009
rebel music wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess being at a bar at 3:30 in the morning doesn't mean that they were drunk (rolling eyes), your right. Now, for your sake let's assume that the grieving officer and his buddies were drinking coffee after a long shift, ok. How do explain the actions of the working officers who responded to a 911 call? or the actions of the cop who threw the guy into the wall outside as he was trying to place a call? If you want to use the 'no audio' as a defense for provocation, how do you explain the video showing the cops confronting the man at the pool table after removing his buddy's handgun? As I wrote in a previous post, it's not about the fight or the lawyers, it's about the response (or lack thereof)of the patrolmen that arrived after the brawl started? Unacceptable by any standard. But as we've all seen over the years from the CPD, there are no standards.
As I wrote earlier, I am by no means trying to defend these officers, or the officers who should have responded to the 911 call and didn't (I don't think anyone can argue that those officers were wrong, but they are not on trial)- they may well be guilty. But your comments demonstrate your bias, and you are making many assumptions based on few facts.
rebel music

United States

#30 Mar 31, 2009
Grace wrote:
<quoted text>
As I wrote earlier, I am by no means trying to defend these officers, or the officers who should have responded to the 911 call and didn't (I don't think anyone can argue that those officers were wrong, but they are not on trial)- they may well be guilty. But your comments demonstrate your bias, and you are making many assumptions based on few facts.
My bias is not based on assumptions. Remove all possible assumptions (drunk/not drunk or provoked/not provoked they had it coming, whatever). My bias/anger is based on the fact that a civilian called 911 for help to a bar fight and the responding officers failed to even attempt an investigation. Plain and simple, they covered for one of their own without even getting out of the car to ask what was really going on. Period. That is not biased, that's the truth. Like I said earlier, I don't care about what happened in the bar or why, or who is suing who. I care about how the responding officers acted because is shows how the 'blue bond' works. Bar fights happen all the time, I'm aware of that, but the turning of the other cheek displayed by those officers that responded is outrageous.

Since: Feb 09

United States

#31 Mar 31, 2009
mikea wrote:
I cannot believe how many people on this board are sding with those corrupt cops. How many Chicago cops have to be charged before the department starts cleaning itself up and becoming a example of whart police officers should be. If they want to attack people join the military and go fight in a war.
Hey Mike - let's get a guilty verdict before you label these 3 cops as "corrupt".

As I think about it, they aren't charged with corruption - like taking bribes to rip up a ticket - but rather getting in a bar fight off-duty.
Savalas

North Aurora, IL

#32 Mar 31, 2009
Based on the tape I've seen the cops are guilty as hell. They shouldn't be on the police force if they can't control their impulses better than that.
mikea

Westmont, IL

#33 Mar 31, 2009
They got into a fight in which the tape shows they started, no matter what was said they started the fight. When someone in the bar called 911 the off duty cops pushed the duty cops away. The duty cops never bothered to ask the victims, the off duty cops are right and everyone else is wrong. That is a corrupt system in which someone at their job on duty does not even bother to investigate, but listens to the word of a off duty cop. There was a problem in that bar and 911 was called why didn't the off duty cops announce they were police, but they did not since they were involved in the fight and the instigators and they should be slapped on the wrist only to do that again and again, until maybe the next time someone is dead like it happened at the wedding in Countryside with Cook County cops a few years ago.

Since: Oct 07

Chicago, IL

#34 Mar 31, 2009
South Side Realist wrote:
<quoted text>
The "victims" have a pending civil suit against the City of Chicago and a guilty verdict here would greatly enhance their chance at a payday on the civil. Capice?
Okay, thanks for the clarity on that one question. How about the other two?

Since: Feb 09

United States

#35 Mar 31, 2009
Savalas wrote:
Based on the tape I've seen the cops are guilty as hell. They shouldn't be on the police force if they can't control their impulses better than that.
A conviction is not based on a tape - its based on a trail; which is not finished.

Innocent until proven guity please. Or is that a selective concept?
Jo Jo

Hammond, IN

#36 Mar 31, 2009
South Side Realist wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Mike - let's get a guilty verdict before you label these 3 cops as "corrupt".
As I think about it, they aren't charged with corruption - like taking bribes to rip up a ticket - but rather getting in a bar fight off-duty.
The corruption part wasn't an issue until the responding officers arrived and their actions (or lack thereof) were caught on tape. What actions are being taken or ongoing investigations are looking into this?

The bar brawl only begins to shed the light on the corruption. I think that is the issue that ticks people off most.
No to Chicago 2016

United States

#37 Mar 31, 2009
EJ from Palatine wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not Perry Mason, I am just following this story daily, the cops show up here and make all sorts of claims about the victims. Here's one for the cops, "It's common knowledge that guilty people don't testify in their own defense."
##########
And what credible source do you quote that common knowledge from?
You need to show up at 26th & California for a day of entertainment in any one of the numerous courtrooms!
EJ from Palatine

Chicago, IL

#38 Mar 31, 2009
- The Trib claims there is NO interaction between the two groups on the tape until the cops start cracking heads. The claim of taunting isn't supported by the evidence. Perhaps the cops were too drunk and thought they sensed a slight.
- I don't claim one has to testify it their trial, the cops do. And now two of the three choose not to....
Its All In The Clout

United States

#39 Mar 31, 2009
Reading the trial coverage of this incident and the depiction by the media it is obvious that these guys have huge city clout.
If you are one of the clout guys the media will shelter you and make your side look good, if not lookout.
Chicago is so corrupt that even the media is in the pols pockets.
Protect Yourselves

United States

#40 Apr 2, 2009
This was a bar fight. Plain and simple. The Crook County State's Attorney's Office made it a felony because cops were involved. The cops are tired and weary from the media bias and a citizenry that harbors so much contempt for them. My advice to all you "know-it-alls" is to take the next police test, strap on a gun and go out there and show the world how to be a police officer. None of you have the slightest idea of what goes on in the streets of Chicago on a daily basis.
Savalas

North Aurora, IL

#41 Apr 2, 2009
"Being a cop is a tough job" boohoo. No one made them become cops and it's not a charitable endeavor on their part. They had the misfortune to have their crime caught on tape and now they can pay the price like any other citizen.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Bluestater 1,220,153
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 43 min Cold Front 69,693
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 2 hr Analog man 5,907
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 3 hr Earthling-1 52,856
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 hr Guru 187,313
Bubba's wife................Piano-Legs. 6 hr Piano-leg murderer 4
Bill Clinton's Wife. 6 hr WHATS-HER-PLAN 5
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]