Citizen Recording Of Police Proves Officer Lied About Arrest

from the who-watches-the-watchers dept

Tue, Sep 20th 2011 12:58pm — Zachary Knight

Reason.com alerts us to an LA Times article covering a recent trial in which a private citizen's cellphone video proved officers lied about an arrest, resulting in the acquittal of a young man accused of carrying a concealed firearm.

According to police reports after the arrest:

Deputy Levi Belville testified that he saw Gipson in the side yard run and toss a loaded revolver onto the roof of a detached garage. The deputy said he ordered Gipson to stop and that the suspect walked back to Belville, who then detained him.

However, the cellphone video depicted a very different chain of events:

The footage did not show Gipson running, tossing a gun or walking back to the deputies to be detained. Instead, the grainy video showed deputies arriving and walking past Gipson, who was standing against a wall of the house near the rear of the yard. One of the deputies, Raul Ibarra, returned to Gipson and escorted him to the back of the yard.

This new footage led to a change in the way the officers describe the events. This inconsistency in the officer's testimony led jurors to acquit Gipson of the charges.

Jurors said they did not find Belville's trial testimony credible and believed he changed his account of the arrest after being confronted with the video. They also questioned why a deputy with more than 10 years' experience would walk past a man who had just thrown a gun without immediately detaining him or warning colleagues.

Even as police and governments around the country are fighting the practice of the public recording the actions of the police, stories like this show the power that such recordings have in administering a fair justice system. Without this video, the trial would have been based entirely on the officer's testimony of events rather than on hard evidence.

I will close with a few words from Gipson himself in response to these events, "I never thought an officer would lie."

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: police, recording

69 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Skeptical Cynic (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 12:23pm

Police are there to protect us, HA!
So why should any law be made or be allowed to be made that makes it illegal to video them in any situation doing their duty?

We are recorded all the time just living our normal lives. I can share over 10,000 links to police stopping people from video recording their actions in what should be a 100% (no grey area) legal situation.

Even at the height of the communist regime in Russia they didn't arrest people most times. They just took the video recording device.

Why are we letting our country become a police state?

Just one example
http://www.teaparty.org/article.php?id=1247

Police should not feel any threat to being videoed nor should they be allowed to do anything they don't want recorded.

The video from OccupyWallSt.org at http://youtu.be/jYaA-34c-vI just shows my point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- MrWilson, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:37pm
  
  Re: Police are there to protect us, HA!
  Any law against filming police or with the effect of making it illegal to film police should be considered a violation of the right to a fair trial. Everyone can potentially be charged with a crime, so having the ability to film what transpires when interacting with the police ensures that the truth can be preserved. Or do the law enforcement officers and their advocates publicly support the destruction of evidence?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Skeptical Cynic (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:42pm
    
    Re: Re: Police are there to protect us, HA!
    Of course they don't. As long as they are not found at fault.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - S, 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:47pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Police are there to protect us, HA!
      Does smoking the evidence count as destroying it?
      
      Anyone with some street knowledge knows that drugs seized are invariably used by the cops themselves with two exceptions: first, they keep just enough as evidence to ensure the highest-possible-degree conviction; second, when the seizure is too high-profile for them to get away with it.
      
      I suppose a potential third exception is the apocryphal "honest cop", but those are quickly identified and marginalized by their peers -- the guy sitting there directing traffic or "overseeing" a road-closed blockade is usually some honest schmuck the corrupt cops want out of their way while they terrorize and exploit the general populace.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - tc, 21 Sep 2011 @ 7:59am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Police are there to protect us, HA!
        Wow. Are you seriously implying that all cops use the drugs seized in drug arrests?
        
        RIP reason.
        
        The 'net derp is strong in you.
        
        For the record, I do believe that it's wrong for any law to criminalize recordings of police officers as they perform their duties and tasks. They are public officials, paid by public taxes performing their job in public.
        
        I also believe that the US is becoming a police state because people are allowing it in the name of safety, children, fighting terrorism or whatever.
        
        However, the sort of idiocy you are spouting does not help anyone. In fact it makes it easier to shake off valid criticism of law enforcement because it gets drowned out by the moronic "all cops are corrupt" screaming.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- A Dan (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:39pm
  
  Re: Police are there to protect us, HA!
  "The video from OccupyWallSt.org"
  
  Just make sure you don't try to email that to anyone.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - PlagueSD (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:21pm
    
    Re: Re: Police are there to protect us, HA!
    He's fine as long as he doen't include the http:// part.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Bergman (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 5:57pm
  
  Re: Police are there to protect us, HA!
  Simple. Because any time someone suggests we might be heading that way, there's always a crowd of people, falsely invoking Godwin's Law (without even knowing what the Law states) or otherwise shouting down the person suggesting it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:01pm

filming policemen are what the terrorists want

you're not a terrorist, are you zach?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- TheStupidOne, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:06pm
  
  Re:
  The terrorists want citizens to hold the police accountable for their actions? well color me a terrorist
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:09pm
    
    Re: Re:
    it's a trick question, everyone on techdirt is a commy or a terrorist
    
    ask their spokesman mike "HUSSEIN" masnick.
    
    the truth is: we need to be constantly watched, but only if those eyes belong to the good men of law enforcement and homeland security.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Grae (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:27pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Where's your birth certificate, huh Masnick? Where is it?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Hussein Coward, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:55pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "everyone on techdirt is a commy or a terrorist"
      
      I feel insulted. A commy OR a terrorist? Why can't I be both?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - S, 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:49pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        And some of us are just plain Irish.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        The eejit (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 11:16pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I'm only part Irish - does that make me:
        
        a) a Traveler;
        b) a terrorist; or
        c) Irish?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 21 Sep 2011 @ 1:49am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You could be all 3! Back before the US got attacked, some Americans were quite happy to fund the IRA simply because they had some Irish blood from 4 generations back...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Skeptical Cynic (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:12pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Me too. No matter whether I agree with your position. In my country you will always be able to express it in any way that is non-violent. Yell, scream, talk through a bull-horn. I don't care because that is your RIGHT as a citizen of the US.
    
    Freedom of speech was such an important tenet of the idea in the creation of America they made it the first right!!!!!
    
    First Amendment � Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly; right to petition
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - btr1701 (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 10:15pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      > Freedom of speech was such an important
      > tenet of the idea in the creation of America
      > they made it the first right!!!!!
      
      The Bill of Rights is not listed in order of importance. The Founders made that clear in their writings and the courts have reinforced it for 200+ years.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Skeptical Cynic (profile), 22 Sep 2011 @ 1:35pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Yes but they thought to put it first. All rights are equal with none superseded any other. But they listed it first.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Skeptical Cynic (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:07pm
  
  Re:
  Honestly, how could it ever be a terrorist act in a free country to film the acts of those the seek to enforce that freedom?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ANoiXioNA (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:26pm
  
  Re:
  filming policemen are what the terrorists want
  
  you're not a terrorist, are you zach?
  
  Troll ....
  The "" Hard sell "" tactic you use , in an attempt to dictate , the win of an argument..... is so transparently propaganda motivated or just plain ....TROLL
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:03pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I thought he was being ironic. Or facetious. Or something.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- E. Zachary Knight (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:04pm
  
  Re:
  If you ask Jack Thompson, then yes I am.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:09pm

"I will close with a few words from Gipson himself in response to these events, "I never thought an officer would lie.""

This guy needs to be forced to sit through a 24 hr. marathon of The Shield. Problem solved....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- blaktron (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:15pm
  
  Re:
  Or to plain live in the world... police have been lying forever, and won't stop... know why? Because they are PEOPLE like anyone else!! WOW! And because their office is so sacred to society, we should record them always so we know our trust is well placed and that they only lie to their wives, not to the court.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Skeptical Cynic (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:17pm
  
  Re:
  So you support torture? You commy! ;-)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:23pm
    
    Re: Re:
    you DON'T support torture? you terrorist!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Skeptical Cynic (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:27pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Actually, I would beat your A$$ if I think it could save 100 lives. But only if I knew before that you had info and could back that assumption up with hard info.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - HothMonster, 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:15pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "But only if I knew before that you had info and could back that assumption up with hard info."
        
        well the best way to get that hard info is to waterboard him a little bit
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        S, 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:50pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Who's going to waterboard you to ensure that your assertion is correct?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Prisoner 201, 20 Sep 2011 @ 3:26pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Oh dear, we will have to waterboard everyone.
        
        This will be a logistical nightmare.
        
        We can probably finance it with a "Innocence certificate fee" but blimey, how are we going to handle the logistics?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2011 @ 3:32pm
        
        Virtual Water-board
        Someone needs to develop a method to 'virtually water-board' someone. It appears that prior art might be limited, and the water might harm the trolls computers.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- HothMonster, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:25pm
  
  Re:
  "This guy needs to be forced to sit through a 24 hr. marathon of The Shield. Problem solved...."
  
  they said he was innocent why are you trying to punish him?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - ANoiXioNA (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:30pm
    
    Re: Re:
    naive.
    
    Good Christians.
    Honest Police Officers.
    Caring Doctors.
    
    REALITY CHECK.... people are people.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - HothMonster, 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:12pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "REALITY CHECK.... people are people."
      
      except for the robots.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Prisoner 201, 20 Sep 2011 @ 3:27pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I prefer the term "mechanical person", thank you very much.
        
        We do have feelings you know, or at least reasonably accurate aproximations.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        freak (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 5:26pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        If the programming for your feelings is as good as the programming for your spellcheck, I'm going to format your hard drives as a precaution, ok? :p
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lord Binky, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:12pm

Nothing To See Here Folks
The reason we do not believe an officer would lie is exactly because we have not been recording them. It is obvious that the only way to continue from here is to return to not recording them so that they will become trustworthy by all appearances once again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Skeptical Cynic (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:15pm
  
  Re: Nothing To See Here Folks
  Or just accept that we are prisoners of the ruling class. Sorry not trying to use inflammatory language but the ruling class is those that make and enforce the laws.
  
  WE really fight them half as much as we should.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Lord binky, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:25pm
    
    Re: Re: Nothing To See Here Folks
    No no, they told me I'm not a prisoner of a ruling class and they wouldn't lie to me.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:43pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Nothing To See Here Folks
      So says Lord Binky
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Lord Binky, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:56pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Nothing To See Here Folks
        Try and prove I'm not trustworthy without referenceing anything from my past.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        HothMonster, 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:10pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Nothing To See Here Folks
        you have a title, therefore untrustworthy. If you were just Binky I might have bought your bullshit, but I know better than to trust a lord
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Someantimalwareguy (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:52pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Nothing To See Here Folks
        LOL - eat the rich eh?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:16pm

Shit cops lie all the time I know this from experience with a cop in VA Beach who gave me a ticket right after he said he did not know how fast I was going, then testified in court that I was going 20 over the posted limit.

How many other time has this one cop lied?

How has this impacted the people that he lied about?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:52pm
  
  Re:
  It's only a lie until it's told on the stand. Then it becomes Sworn Testimony, and by definition true.
  
  A cop told me this, so it must be fact.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- BeeAitch (profile), 21 Sep 2011 @ 1:37am
  
  Re:
  Shit cops lie, but real ones always tell the truth.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Valkor, 21 Sep 2011 @ 6:25am
    
    Re: Re:
    If that's true, then this fellow was clearly no true cop. (cf. "No True Scotsman")
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
pegr, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:18pm

Thankfully
Thankfully, persons in positions of authority (police, teachers) lied when I was very young. I've known the score for a long time now. Everyone else needs to catch up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:30pm

Can't record video
How is the Police and Goverment supposed to do their job properly if they are being recorded and unable to lie? What a sad state we are going to were people have to start being honest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sehlat (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:31pm

From "Eight Keys to Eden"
The book was written in 1960 by Mark Clifton. Fifty years haven't changed a thing, except now we have a shot at proving the lies.

The case was crumbling, but all was not lost. He still had witnesses. He thought for a minute and began to wonder about those witnesses. Any judge, anybody around the courts, anybody connected with the press, and maybe even some of the public knew that any police officer will swear to any lie to back up another police officer because he might need the favor returned tomorrow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Daniel J. Lavigne, 25 Sep 2011 @ 5:25pm
  
  Re: From "Eight Keys to Eden"
  sehlat offers: " Fifty years haven't changed a thing, except now we have a shot at proving the lies. "
  
  True. But how many of you have spine sufficient to attempt to do so AND persevere until you KNOW that the change that must happen in America is underway?
  
  Hint: How many of you have acted on your LAWFUL DUTY to refuse to support a society that would be party to the use of weapons of mass murder? (Hint: Read "The Nuremberg Principles", to which America is a signatory and has signed a treaty to fully respect those Principles and that all of its citizens are similarly obliged to refuse to support a society that would be party to mass murder.)
  
  Then, access "The Tax Refusal" and learn about your imprescriptible right and duty in such regard and GET BUSY doing what ALL Americans should have done so long ago. Rant over.
  
  Now, have a look at something positive with regard to helping the poor, get involved and maybe, just maybe, win a prize for doing so.
  
  Thank you.
  
  Daniel J. Lavigne, Founder
  MedicAngel�
  http://www.MedicAngel.com
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Skeptical Cynic (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:31pm

Gibson's comment..
"I never thought an officer would lie."

What a naive, dumb f@#k! They will always protect their own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2011 @ 1:40pm

I still hold that a cop-cam would help here too. Require them to record everything from their perspective. It would make lying a bit harder...not impossible...but harder.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- HothMonster, 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:13pm
  
  Re:
  yeah well the cameras they are suppose to have on in their cars all the time are always running out of tape or shorting out at the most inopportune times.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Onnala (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:20pm
  
  Re:
  They already have dashboard cams... and it has been shown that they will deliberately have people walk off camera and then beat the shit out of them and claim that they attacked first.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Robert Doyle (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:01pm

Everyone lies
Everyone. Lies.

You just need to pick a side whose lie you can support.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Daddy Warbucks, 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:56pm
  
  Re: Everyone lies
  Unless there is a video, the point of this post.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:57pm
  
  Re: Everyone lies
  Liar!
  
  Everyone lies, but few lie all the time.
  
  I have a rule about how to tell when someone is trustworthy. Once I have a good idea about what things I can trust a person about and what things I can't, I call them "trustworthy," since nobody is a saint.
  
  With most people, it's doesn't matter much whether I can trust them or not. Cops are different, though, because they have so much power that it's dangerous to trust a cop when the trust is unwarranted. And unless I know the cop pretty well, I cannot trust them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:12pm

Freedom of the press should protect filiming
Isn't filming (in a public place) simply exercise the right to freedom of the press?

I can't imagine these laws against it are constitutional
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Daddy Warbucks, 20 Sep 2011 @ 2:54pm

Police Lie
I was arrested for having a loud stereo, something I though would be a fine for Disturbing the Peace, but I was charged with Disorderly Conduct. The arresting office lied on the police report and made it sound like I was purposely playing the music loud to annoy others. He lied to make his case & I paid the price.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
O. B. Server, 20 Sep 2011 @ 5:59pm

a "throw down gun"
Police often keep an unregistered gun handy. If all else fails, they toss down the gun and then proceed to solemnly "explain" with a big, honest faces and lots of police jargon, that the "weapon" was found near the suspect - proving that the perp tried to draw/reach for it, and of course, deserves his fate. Often applied in situations when the suspect is killed, and goodly officers need a post-hoc excuse to have shot him. So voila! The "throw down gun". Same old.

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22throw+down+gun%22
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
pjcamp (profile), 21 Sep 2011 @ 6:40am

officers lie all the time
I've been the victim of that in more petty ways. They're intent on doing what is necessary to get the conviction. The question is what happens to them as a result? The answer is usually nothing. There are no real consequences for this sort of bad behavior because they are, after all, The Heroes (TM). The sad truth is that often, especially in small towns, the only thing separating police from perpetrators is that they managed to get through police training before being caught.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeff Rivett (profile), 21 Sep 2011 @ 7:00am

Lying is part of every cop's bag of tricks
Anyone who is surprised when a cop lies just hasn't been around cops very much. Cops' lying is a natural reaction to how much lying they face every day from the people they normally deal with. Which is not to excuse it by any means. In fact, I feel that cops should be held to a much higher standard of behaviour than us 'little people' because of their position of trust and the fact that they have so much power over us. If a cop decides they don't like you, they can - quite simply - destroy your life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2011 @ 9:01am

What we need is a department that takes an active role in going after governmental agencies and employees that do something wrong.

We have departments that take an active role in going after citizens. The police department, the FBI, the CIA, etc... all dedicate their resources towards 'going after' and 'serving' citizens. None of them are dedicated to go after misbehaving government officials.

Sure, they can go after them, but that's not their primary focus. Their primary focus is not to protect the citizens from its government.

The courts are designed to do this, but the courts role is passive. They only respond to lawsuits and allegations, they never initiate anything. and citizens often don't have the resources to sue a government official or various government agencies.

We need a governmental agency that takes an active role in going after government crime and prosecuting it. It should ONLY be allowed to go after government officials and various government agencies, it should NEVER be allowed to go after regular citizens, because we have enough agencies that do that already. Allowing it to go after citizens would simply distract it from its primary focus, it should have no such authority to ever go after an ordinary citizen for anything. Only on-duty government officials and various government agencies.

The assumption, one that underlies our system, that an average government employee is somehow less likely to perform a criminal act than an average citizen needs to be scrutinized.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2011 @ 9:03am
  
  Re:
  (and by go after I mean prosecute. Take them to court, sue them, and perhaps implement various damages).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Bill, 21 Sep 2011 @ 3:33pm
  
  Re:
  http://www.gao.gov/about/index.html
  
  These guys are actually not bad at doing what you're describing, but most of the time it's on a fiscal level rather than a legal or moral level.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thomas (profile), 25 Sep 2011 @ 6:34am

It's the way..
it goes. The important thing for most cops is to catch criminals. Cops now tend to perceive all people defined in 3 classes: Cops, Criminals, and People who will become criminals in time.This is a huge change from 50-100 years ago when cops were there to help people.

Don't forget that number of arrests and tickets are the way cops are rated for job performance. Helping people no longer counts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anibal, 23 Jan 2015 @ 12:20pm

I don't believe anyone anymore including this bogus story. Everyone, including the author of this article, has an agenda. Lies, lies, lies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]