http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/06/08/BAGAND57N11.DTL
PALO ALTO
D.A. won't retry officers accused of assault -- they'll pay $250 fine
Alan Gathright, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 8, 2005
Convinced that a jury would not convict two Palo Alto police officers accused of beating a black motorist after their first trial ended in a mistrial, prosecutors allowed the men to plead no contest Tuesday to minor charges that carry a $250 fine and no jail time.
A police watchdog group expressed outrage that the Santa Clara County district attorney allowed officers Craig Lee, 42, and Michael Kan, 27, to enter the plea -- which has the same effect as a guilty plea -- to public fighting, an infraction that will allow them to return to work.
"The message of this decision is that there are two types of justice, one for the police and one for the everyday person," said Richard Konda of the Coalition for Justice and Accountability, noting that the trial jury deadlocked 8-4 in favor of conviction. "If Kan and Lee had not been police officers, surely the district attorney would have retried the case and would not have plea-bargained the felony charges down to an infraction.''
Santa Clara County Deputy District Attorney Peter Waite said that, after considering a retrial for more than a month, he and top officials in the district attorney's office decided they could not win a conviction on the original charges of felony police brutality and misdemeanor battery.
"I think that justice was served,'' Waite said after the hearing before Judge Andrea Bryan. "We did our best to hold the police accountable and get a fair result for the community.''
Waite said the plea deal and the vigorous prosecution show that police misconduct would not be tolerated. He noted that the Palo Alto Police Department will install video cameras in police cars, and has begun training officers to avoid similar clashes in the future.
Lee and Kan, both Asian American, were accused of clubbing and pepper- spraying Albert Hopkins, 59, on July 13, 2003, after they encountered him sitting in his parked car. Officers had received two reports of suspicious behavior by a man in a parked car.
When the officers asked Hopkins for identification, he angrily refused, cursing police and accusing them of harassing him.
During the trial, the prosecutor described the officers as incompetent rookies who didn't realize they had no authority to question or detain Hopkins because they had no indication he'd done anything illegal. Defense attorneys countered that Kan and Lee were dutifully investigating a series of burglaries and clubbed and sprayed Hopkins only after he ignored their commands and nearly hit Lee with his car door.
Hopkins, a longtime Palo Alto resident who required surgery on his knee after the clash, did not respond to a request for comment.
His brother and attorney, Joe Hopkins, accused prosecutors of going easy on the officers because Assistant District Attorney Karyn Sinunu is running for district attorney next year and doesn't want to alienate police unions.
"I think police officers can take this as a signal that you can do whatever the hell you want with impunity,'' said Joe Hopkins, who won his brother a $250,000 civil settlement from the city.
Sinunu replied that the district attorney's office has earned a reputation for vigorously prosecuting police misconduct. "This decision had to do with the fact that there was a deadlocked jury and we really believed that there would be a second hang (if the case were retried).''
Kan's attorney, Harry Stern, said his client was relieved to have the case settled. Lee's attorney, Craig Brown, called the settlement a fair resolution. A former prosecutor, Brown scoffed at criticism that the district attorney was lenient, saying Santa Clara County has the toughest stand on police misconduct in the Bay Area.
"If there is a double standard, I have always felt it's to subject cops to a higher standard," he said. "They do their damndest to do the right thing in terms of not turning a blind eye to misdeeds by police officers.''
PALO ALTO
D.A. won't retry officers accused of assault -- they'll pay $250 fine
Alan Gathright, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 8, 2005
Convinced that a jury would not convict two Palo Alto police officers accused of beating a black motorist after their first trial ended in a mistrial, prosecutors allowed the men to plead no contest Tuesday to minor charges that carry a $250 fine and no jail time.
A police watchdog group expressed outrage that the Santa Clara County district attorney allowed officers Craig Lee, 42, and Michael Kan, 27, to enter the plea -- which has the same effect as a guilty plea -- to public fighting, an infraction that will allow them to return to work.
"The message of this decision is that there are two types of justice, one for the police and one for the everyday person," said Richard Konda of the Coalition for Justice and Accountability, noting that the trial jury deadlocked 8-4 in favor of conviction. "If Kan and Lee had not been police officers, surely the district attorney would have retried the case and would not have plea-bargained the felony charges down to an infraction.''
Santa Clara County Deputy District Attorney Peter Waite said that, after considering a retrial for more than a month, he and top officials in the district attorney's office decided they could not win a conviction on the original charges of felony police brutality and misdemeanor battery.
"I think that justice was served,'' Waite said after the hearing before Judge Andrea Bryan. "We did our best to hold the police accountable and get a fair result for the community.''
Waite said the plea deal and the vigorous prosecution show that police misconduct would not be tolerated. He noted that the Palo Alto Police Department will install video cameras in police cars, and has begun training officers to avoid similar clashes in the future.
Lee and Kan, both Asian American, were accused of clubbing and pepper- spraying Albert Hopkins, 59, on July 13, 2003, after they encountered him sitting in his parked car. Officers had received two reports of suspicious behavior by a man in a parked car.
When the officers asked Hopkins for identification, he angrily refused, cursing police and accusing them of harassing him.
During the trial, the prosecutor described the officers as incompetent rookies who didn't realize they had no authority to question or detain Hopkins because they had no indication he'd done anything illegal. Defense attorneys countered that Kan and Lee were dutifully investigating a series of burglaries and clubbed and sprayed Hopkins only after he ignored their commands and nearly hit Lee with his car door.
Hopkins, a longtime Palo Alto resident who required surgery on his knee after the clash, did not respond to a request for comment.
His brother and attorney, Joe Hopkins, accused prosecutors of going easy on the officers because Assistant District Attorney Karyn Sinunu is running for district attorney next year and doesn't want to alienate police unions.
"I think police officers can take this as a signal that you can do whatever the hell you want with impunity,'' said Joe Hopkins, who won his brother a $250,000 civil settlement from the city.
Sinunu replied that the district attorney's office has earned a reputation for vigorously prosecuting police misconduct. "This decision had to do with the fact that there was a deadlocked jury and we really believed that there would be a second hang (if the case were retried).''
Kan's attorney, Harry Stern, said his client was relieved to have the case settled. Lee's attorney, Craig Brown, called the settlement a fair resolution. A former prosecutor, Brown scoffed at criticism that the district attorney was lenient, saying Santa Clara County has the toughest stand on police misconduct in the Bay Area.
"If there is a double standard, I have always felt it's to subject cops to a higher standard," he said. "They do their damndest to do the right thing in terms of not turning a blind eye to misdeeds by police officers.''
