McCoy's nightclub fight and the ongoing investigation

[Go Kiko go]

 

Can anyone explain the bolded comments above, that they'll "have their attorneys file a private criminal complaint"? I have never heard of that; what does that mean?

 

It's essentially the same technique that was tossed around in connection with the shooting of Tamir Rice in Ohio when it appeared that local prosecutors were inclined to not pursue charges against the officer who shot him. Some states allow private individuals to file a criminal complaint (instead of the local prosecutors). But, at least in PA, the complaint must nonetheless be submitted to the local prosecutors (or other government attorney) for review, who get to decide whether or not to approve the complaint. If they reject it, you do have the ability to petition a state trial court to review that decision, but the courts give a fair amount of deference to the prosecutors' decisions.

 

The procedures are set forth in Rules 504 and 506 of PA's rules of criminal procedure. Here's what one looks like: http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/setting-911/file-78.pdf

 

There's actually a rather interesting bit of history behind the procedure if you're interested:

 

 

"In colonial Pennsylvania, crimes were viewed “as an offense against the individual victim[,]” and private prosecutions were the most common mode by which the criminal justice system functioned in the colonial era. This was consonant with the English common law principle that the Crown did not supply a public prosecutor to handle routine felonies. The victim or his family was therefore required to hire counsel to bring the guilty party into the criminal justice system. In fact, the victim served a multifunction role, in which he apprehended, prosecuted, and sometimes even jailed the accused.

 

In the post-Revolutionary era, the state, as the representative for society as a whole, began to be seen as the injured party in criminal matters, and the role of the government in prosecuting criminal matters began to grow; ultimately, the Pennsylvania Legislature established the office of district attorney in 1850. Yet, with this shift in how crimes were generally prosecuted, a citizen's right to pursue his victimizer in criminal courts via a private criminal complaint was never abolished in this Commonwealth. Rather, the Legislature enshrined it in statutory enactments, and later, this [C]ourt provided an avenue via the predecessor to Rule [506]."

 

From the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the case of In Re Wilson, in 2005.

 

 

Edited February 19, 2016 by Go Kiko go

[reddogblitz]

ridiculous.

 

Sounds likely that McCoy is gonna walk away from this with a slap on the wrist, and probably a couple games still from the NFL.

 

Dodged a bullet.

 

You're not trying to jinx Shady are you?

[3rdand12]

 

""We'll look to go to the attorney general," McNesby said, "if McCoy is not charged. Well also have our attorneys file a private criminal complaint and well move in that direction."

 

"Listen, all my time as a Philadelphia police officer I was involved in over 4,500 felony arrests," McNesby told Angelo Cataldi and the 94WIP Morning Show on Friday. "I've never waited this long, ever, to see somebody arrested. So, it doesnt pass the smell test. Somethings funny going on. I know that they have more discovery on this case then they had in the O.J. Simpson case. I mean its taken up rooms. So I mean, how much more do you need? All you have to do is clearly look at that video."

 

Discovery that has taken up rooms? From a complaint where there was no crime scene to meaningfully investigate because the complaint wasn't filed until 30 hrs after the fact, 3 days in one case? Is he on drugs? I can see maybe a stack of paper, a small one that doesn't tip over readily. As for that video, you can look clearly at it on TMZ and CrossingBroad, but do they know the source and was a proper forensic data collection performed on the cell phone that collected it, before it was deleted? Because if there's any flaw to be found in the chain of possession there, it's never coming in the courtroom with a top-notch defense attorney objecting.

 

I kind of agree with McNesby that "it doesn't pass the smell test" but I think he might be sniffing the wrong places, so to speak.

 

Can anyone explain the bolded comments above, that they'll "have their attorneys file a private criminal complaint"? I have never heard of that; what does that mean?

Nesby has fallen of the deep end.

and is using a shovel now.

idiot.

poor Philly.

maybe he should come to Buffalo and act like a fool.

[reddogblitz]

If one of the drunk cops even touched Shady, I'm going with the Barkley rule: "Anytime a fan touches you, you have the right to beat the hell out of him." Case closed.

[3rdand12]

 

That Philly DA's office is prety independent and well-respected. They are not going to get pushed over by the cops. I expect if they have a crappy case, they will drop it.

 

By the way, I love the FOP prez going to the AG's office for this. The AG is too busy trying to figure out how not to get impeached:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/11/us/pennsylvania-to-start-impeachment-proceedings-for-attorney-general.html?_r=0

LOLd

Bizarre . . . .

weirderer and weirderer

 

It's essentially the same technique that was tossed around in connection with the shooting of Tamir Rice in Ohio when it appeared that local prosecutors were inclined to not pursue charges against the officer who shot him. Some states allow private individuals to file a criminal complaint (instead of the local prosecutors). But, at least in PA, the complaint must nonetheless be submitted to the local prosecutors (or other government attorney) for review, who get to decide whether or not to approve the complaint. If they reject it, you do have the ability to petition a state trial court to review that decision, but the courts give a fair amount of deference to the prosecutors' decisions.

 

The procedures are set forth in Rules 504 and 506 of PA's rules of criminal procedure. Here's what one looks like: http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/setting-911/file-78.pdf

 

There's actually a rather interesting bit of history behind the procedure if you're interested:

 

 

"In colonial Pennsylvania, crimes were viewed “as an offense against the individual victim[,]” and private prosecutions were the most common mode by which the criminal justice system functioned in the colonial era. This was consonant with the English common law principle that the Crown did not supply a public prosecutor to handle routine felonies. The victim or his family was therefore required to hire counsel to bring the guilty party into the criminal justice system. In fact, the victim served a multifunction role, in which he apprehended, prosecuted, and sometimes even jailed the accused.

 

In the post-Revolutionary era, the state, as the representative for society as a whole, began to be seen as the injured party in criminal matters, and the role of the government in prosecuting criminal matters began to grow; ultimately, the Pennsylvania Legislature established the office of district attorney in 1850. Yet, with this shift in how crimes were generally prosecuted, a citizen's right to pursue his victimizer in criminal courts via a private criminal complaint was never abolished in this Commonwealth. Rather, the Legislature enshrined it in statutory enactments, and later, this [C]ourt provided an avenue via the predecessor to Rule [506]."

 

From the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the case of In Re Wilson, in 2005.

 

 

Thank you for your insightful insight.

I truly enjoy what you have brought to this discussion.

Penna is a rather historical state. Philly is at the heart of that.

I hope the DA holds himself true to his oath.

i am developing a bit of respect for him.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

It's essentially the same technique that was tossed around in connection with the shooting of Tamir Rice in Ohio when it appeared that local prosecutors were inclined to not pursue charges against the officer who shot him. Some states allow private individuals to file a criminal complaint (instead of the local prosecutors). But, at least in PA, the complaint must nonetheless be submitted to the local prosecutors (or other government attorney) for review, who get to decide whether or not to approve the complaint. If they reject it, you do have the ability to petition a state trial court to review that decision, but the courts give a fair amount of deference to the prosecutors' decisions.

 

The procedures are set forth in Rules 504 and 506 of PA's rules of criminal procedure. Here's what one looks like: http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/setting-911/file-78.pdf

 

There's actually a rather interesting bit of history behind the procedure if you're interested:

 

 

"In colonial Pennsylvania, crimes were viewed “as an offense against the individual victim[,]” and private prosecutions were the most common mode by which the criminal justice system functioned in the colonial era. This was consonant with the English common law principle that the Crown did not supply a public prosecutor to handle routine felonies. The victim or his family was therefore required to hire counsel to bring the guilty party into the criminal justice system. In fact, the victim served a multifunction role, in which he apprehended, prosecuted, and sometimes even jailed the accused.

 

In the post-Revolutionary era, the state, as the representative for society as a whole, began to be seen as the injured party in criminal matters, and the role of the government in prosecuting criminal matters began to grow; ultimately, the Pennsylvania Legislature established the office of district attorney in 1850. Yet, with this shift in how crimes were generally prosecuted, a citizen's right to pursue his victimizer in criminal courts via a private criminal complaint was never abolished in this Commonwealth. Rather, the Legislature enshrined it in statutory enactments, and later, this [C]ourt provided an avenue via the predecessor to Rule [506]."

 

From the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the case of In Re Wilson, in 2005.

 

 

 

Thanks GKG! Was hoping you'd weigh in on this. Could they avoid the local prosecutor and the district courts in favor of going directly to a state court somehow? If they have to go through the local prosecutor anyway, I don't see what McNesby thinks they accomplish by this, except to piss off the DA's office by forcing their hand.

 

I get it's his job to advocate for his officers, but perhaps he needs to review his biology, specifically the difference between a symbiotic and a parasitic relationship.

 

As for their going to the Penn. attorney general, hmmm, it seems as though she has other things on her mind perhaps.

Edited February 19, 2016 by Hopeful

[26CornerBlitz]

@mikerodak

Philly DA Seth Williams: “… on too many TV shows, they arrest the wrong three people first.” http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:14807387

[3rdand12]

 

@mikerodak

Philly DA Seth Williams: “… on too many TV shows, they arrest the wrong three people first.” http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:14807387

 

coincidence? 3 people? not the four in Shadies crew?

 

uh oh.

 

someone is going to owe me a beer. a lot of folks possibly. I like cheese steak too. grilled roll, lightly toasted peppers & onions and real cheddar. My way.

But Rog will still suspend McCoy 4.

and Mc Nesby is going to be looking for work.

all still conjecture of course

LOL

[JohnC]

coincidence? 3 people? not the four in Shadies crew?

 

uh oh.

 

someone is going to owe me a beer. a lot of folks possibly. I like cheese steak too. grilled roll, lightly toasted peppers & onions and real cheddar. My way.

But Rog will still suspend McCoy 4.

and Mc Nesby is going to be looking for work.

all still conjecture of course

LOL

I'm going to put my prediction on record. I'm believe that the McCoy crew is going to be charged by the DA office. Probably aggravated assault with the willingness to bargain down to a simple assault and some sort of restitution for medical expenses. These type of cases he said/she said. are usually not clear cut but I think the DA will reluctantly indict knowing that although this case is flawed the tapes are enough of a factor to make them take action.

 

Whether the DA decides to charge or not and whether McCoy beats it in court his combative evening out is going to prove costly because Roger is lurking and ready to pounce.(As you noted.) A two to four game suspension with his legal costs added on could mean that he ended up paying $500,000 to $1 M or more for a night out with the boys.

 

Both sides in this fracas have some degree of responsibility in how this played out. But there was one participant on the cop side who tried to break up the conflict. He ended up getting clocked and injured. We'll just see how this turns out.

 

Anyone's guess/opinion is as good as mine.

Edited February 19, 2016 by JohnC

[Go Kiko go]

 

Thanks GKG! Was hoping you'd weigh in on this. Could they avoid the local prosecutor and the district courts in favor of going directly to a state court somehow? If they have to go through the local prosecutor anyway, I don't see what McNesby thinks they accomplish by this, except to piss off the DA's office by forcing their hand.

 

I get it's his job to advocate for his officers, but perhaps he needs to review his biology, specifically the difference between a symbiotic and a parasitic relationship.

 

As for their going to the Penn. attorney general, hmmm, it seems as though she has other things on her mind perhaps.

 

The way the process is works is that the private individual drafts the complaint, but then the complaint has to be submitted "to an attorney for the Commonwealth" for review, who then gets to decide whether or not to approve the complaint. So in other words, you can't go straight to a court--you have get the approval of a government attorney before you get to proceed.

 

Now it's not clear from the rule whether you have to ask a particular government attorney; it would seem that, in theory, if you wanted to bypass the City's DA office, you could present the complaint to the state attorney general's office instead. But, the state AG could simply refer the matter back to the City DA's office for review.

 

If the government attorney who reviews the complaint rejects it, you do get the ability to "appeal" that decision to a state trial court, which then takes a look at the complaint to determine whether the government attorney had a valid reason for rejecting the complaint. So, even if the local DA turns down their private complaint, they would then have the opportunity to challenge that decision before a state trial judge. But, as I mentioned in my other post, the courts tend to give pretty substantial deference to the government attorney's view on whether or not to approve the complaint, so if your private complaint gets turned down, it's a bit of a long shot to proceed.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

The way the process is works is that the private individual drafts the complaint, but then the complaint has to be submitted "to an attorney for the Commonwealth" for review, who then gets to decide whether or not to approve the complaint. So in other words, you can't go straight to a court--you have get the approval of a government attorney before you get to proceed.

 

Now it's not clear from the rule whether you have to ask a particular government attorney; it would seem that, in theory, if you wanted to bypass the City's DA office, you could present the complaint to the state attorney general's office instead. But, the state AG could simply refer the matter back to the City DA's office for review.

 

If the government attorney who reviews the complaint rejects it, you do get the ability to "appeal" that decision to a state trial court, which then takes a look at the complaint to determine whether the government attorney had a valid reason for rejecting the complaint. So, even if the local DA turns down their private complaint, they would then have the opportunity to challenge that decision before a state trial judge. But, as I mentioned in my other post, the courts tend to give pretty substantial deference to the government attorney's view on whether or not to approve the complaint, so if your private complaint gets turned down, it's a bit of a long shot to proceed.

 

Thanks again, GKG! As posted elsewhere, I somehow think the state's AG has other stuff on her mind - just a guess, heh heh.

 

So from what you've written above, is this all pretty much "sabre rattling" by McNesby to try to pressure the DA into proceeding with charges?

 

I had predicted to a friend outside TBD that the next step would be a witness or witnesses coming forward to claim that McCoy started it - and ba-da-bing! this morning, here it comes, although more anonymously and less informatively than I'd thought. I noticed that in his diatribe, McNesby picked up on the "McCoy sucker punched him" claim of the unnamed, anonymous witness cited by "Tank".

 

I do wonder how many of McNesby's 4,500 felony arrests featured the officers who directly observed the felony failing to report it immediately or take any other action before leaving the scene of the alleged felony. It seems pretty likely that if the officers involved had called 911 and reported it as an "assault in progress, officers down" (during) or as "an assault just took place, officers injured (after)", McCoy and his friends could have been arrested that very night on probable cause with no need to wait on a DA to issue warrants so if he wants to know who to blame for the wait, he could start with 3 mirrors and his 3 officers. Does he just get to emerge and pontificate, or does he take questions from the press and no one has balls to ask him that?

[3rdand12]

I'm going to put my prediction on record. I'm believe that the McCoy crew is going to be charged by the DA office. Probably aggravated assault with the willingness to bargain down to a simple assault and some sort of restitution for medical expenses. These type of cases he said/she said. are usually not clear cut but I think the DA will reluctantly indict knowing that although this case is flawed the tapes are enough of a factor to make them take action.

 

Whether the DA decides to charge or not and whether McCoy beats it in court his combative evening out is going to prove costly because Roger is lurking and ready to pounce.(As you noted.) A two to four game suspension with his legal costs added on could mean that he ended up paying $500,000 to $1 M or more for a night out with the boys.

 

Both sides in this fracas have some degree of responsibility in how this played out. But there was one participant on the cop side who tried to break up the conflict. He ended up getting clocked and injured. We'll just see how this turns out.

 

Anyone's guess/opinion is as good as mine.

I think it's fair bet at this point.

But consider that Shady good name will be denigrated. I dont think a fellow like him, nor his lawyer wants to lose this.

Alpha males and all that.

 

I think this gets turned upside down and charges will be filed against Philly in a civil suit. Maybe the FOP for calling this a beat down.

 

I find this to be an intriguing social experiment. not just within our forum but in the public arena.

I have much paid attention to such matters , but this one has kept my attention.

we shall see John, we shall see..

[Jauronimo]

I bet he gets charged with Manslaughter but is acquitted after his defense proves that the champagne bottle does not fit in his hand.

[3rdand12]

 

Thanks again, GKG! As posted elsewhere, I somehow think the state's AG has other stuff on her mind - just a guess, heh heh.

 

So from what you've written above, is this all pretty much "sabre rattling" by McNesby to try to pressure the DA into proceeding with charges?

 

I had predicted to a friend outside TBD that the next step would be a witness or witnesses coming forward to claim that McCoy started it - and ba-da-bing! this morning, here it comes, although more anonymously and less informatively than I'd thought. I noticed that in his diatribe, McNesby picked up on the "McCoy sucker punched him" claim of the unnamed, anonymous witness cited by "Tank".

 

I do wonder how many of McNesby's 4,500 felony arrests featured the officers who directly observed the felony failing to report it immediately or take any other action before leaving the scene of the alleged felony. It seems pretty likely that if the officers involved had called 911 and reported it as an "assault in progress, officers down" (during) or as "an assault just took place, officers injured (after)", McCoy and his friends could have been arrested that very night on probable cause with no need to wait on a DA to issue warrants so if he wants to know who to blame for the wait, he could start with 3 mirrors and his 3 officers. Does he just get to emerge and pontificate, or does he take questions from the press and no one has balls to ask him that?

Geez Hopeful, i gotta wonder if this guy is strapped too tight and turned a blind eye towards his " guys".

sound like the same guy who would jump in when his buddy is in a bar fight? hmmm.

 

some folks waay back said that is what they would do too.

But i hope they have rethought this.

times have changed and everyone has cell phones.

if we had no video of this where would this potential case be right now I wonder?

I bet he gets charged with Manslaughter but is acquitted after his defense proves that the champagne bottle does not fit in his hand.

what kind of champagne are we betting. because i cannot afford what cops drink.

 

oh yes i did say that

Edited February 19, 2016 by 3rdand12

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

1.This is a guy with a bit of an ego. The theme of this statement could be summarized "my way or the highway"

2.Interesting that his response to the FOP Pres. implication that he's frightened to prosecute this case is to say "to say I'm unwilling to prosecute difficult cases is misinformed...I'm the guy who has prosecuted police...lawmakers caught on tape taking money for political favors"

 

I'm sensing that the usual symbiotic police-prosecutor relationship may not have been too healthy here long before Shady walked into the Recess club

 

3. He brings up the option of no charges 3x: "what I will or will not do" in the 1st para, "nothing more and nothing less" in the 3rd para, and "decision to charge or not charge" at the end.

 

Police usually know the personalities of their DAs pretty well...this doesn't read like a guy who is going to let himself get pushed into action by McNesby, but rather a guy who's more likely to stick his heels down and refuse to budge, so what does McNesby think he's accomplishing with his talk of "frightened" and "something smelly" and private prosecution?

[DC Tom]

 

1.This is a guy with a bit of an ego. The theme of this statement could be summarized "my way or the highway"

 

Or he just knows the responsibility of the office, and won't compromise on them.

[eball]

 

Or he just knows the responsibility of the office, and won't compromise on them.

 

Agreed. I really wouldn't want my DA to say anything else. The position requires that he not be susceptible to undue influence, coming from any source.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

Or he just knows the responsibility of the office, and won't compromise on them.

 

Oh, that too, but the exact choice of words and usage reeks of ego IMHO. A year or so ago St Louis was reading statements from our county prosecutor about a delay in a high-profile case, a man who also knows the responsibilities of the office and won't compromise on them, and the tone and word choice were very different.

 

I'm not saying that's a bad thing BTW; McNesby obviously has a healthy and flourishing ego of his own. But it is a thing that will fuel a confrontational atmosphere.

 

 

 

Agreed. I really wouldn't want my DA to say anything else. The position requires that he not be susceptible to undue influence, coming from any source.

 

Did you read the entire statement? You wouldn't want your DA to do anything else, or to convey a different meaning, but he could say it differently. It's a very reactive statement, with a lot of "I" in it and a lot of firing back at McNesby.

Edited February 20, 2016 by Hopeful

[Nanker]

I bet he gets charged with Manslaughter but is acquitted after his defense proves that the champagne bottle does not fit in his hand.

"If the bottle don't fit, ya ain't got s hit."

[hondo in seattle]

 

It's essentially the same technique that was tossed around in connection with the shooting of Tamir Rice in Ohio when it appeared that local prosecutors were inclined to not pursue charges against the officer who shot him. Some states allow private individuals to file a criminal complaint (instead of the local prosecutors). But, at least in PA, the complaint must nonetheless be submitted to the local prosecutors (or other government attorney) for review, who get to decide whether or not to approve the complaint. If they reject it, you do have the ability to petition a state trial court to review that decision, but the courts give a fair amount of deference to the prosecutors' decisions.

 

The procedures are set forth in Rules 504 and 506 of PA's rules of criminal procedure. Here's what one looks like: http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/setting-911/file-78.pdf

 

There's actually a rather interesting bit of history behind the procedure if you're interested:

 

 

"In colonial Pennsylvania, crimes were viewed “as an offense against the individual victim[,]” and private prosecutions were the most common mode by which the criminal justice system functioned in the colonial era. This was consonant with the English common law principle that the Crown did not supply a public prosecutor to handle routine felonies. The victim or his family was therefore required to hire counsel to bring the guilty party into the criminal justice system. In fact, the victim served a multifunction role, in which he apprehended, prosecuted, and sometimes even jailed the accused.

 

In the post-Revolutionary era, the state, as the representative for society as a whole, began to be seen as the injured party in criminal matters, and the role of the government in prosecuting criminal matters began to grow; ultimately, the Pennsylvania Legislature established the office of district attorney in 1850. Yet, with this shift in how crimes were generally prosecuted, a citizen's right to pursue his victimizer in criminal courts via a private criminal complaint was never abolished in this Commonwealth. Rather, the Legislature enshrined it in statutory enactments, and later, this [C]ourt provided an avenue via the predecessor to Rule [506]."

 

From the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the case of In Re Wilson, in 2005.

 

 

 

Good stuff, GKG