Minnesota Troopers Decided Being Sued For Excessive Force Was The Perfect Time To Delete Emails And Text Messages
from the mens-rea-me-this,-motherfuckers dept
Minnesota State Troopers engaged in a massive "purge" of emails and text messages shortly after the agency was accused of using excessive force during the protests and riots over the death of George Floyd last summer, according to court testimony filed late Friday.
That's according to KSTP reporting by Ryan Raiche, which appears to have broken the news about this defensive effort by the MSP. It's not just defensive. It's illegal. The records purge appears to have been triggered by lawsuits filed against the agency alleging excessive force during policing of the George Floyd protests.
This is some serious misconduct. This is the people entrusted with making sure the rest of us abide by laws abandoning their duty to be law-abiding themselves.
The purge of communication means troopers may have destroyed potential evidence that could be used against the agency in multiple pending lawsuits regarding its use of force on protestors and journalists following Floyd's murder.
When this is done in a civil case, it's sanctionable. When it's done in a criminal case, it's called obstruction. Well, it's called that when civilians do it. When cops do it, it's possibly excusable, especially if it doesn't run afoul of any precedent.
The Minnesota State Patrol certainly seems to believe this conveniently timed purge of communications that might be made public during litigation is acceptable. According to testimony by Minnesota State Patrol official Joseph Dwyer, the agency did nothing wrong. Everything that happened was just the following of procedure. Defending these actions in court, Major Dwyer said the purge was "standard practice."
But how standard? Major Dwyer had no (satisfactory) answer for this question.
[T]he supervisor acknowledged that practice typically varies from trooper to trooper and does not follow any sort of set schedule.
Sometimes, the MSP deletes email and other communications after a set period of time. Other times it deletes communications after being informed it's being sued. We don't know what the normal deletion schedule is, but we do know what this deletion was in response to, thanks (once again) to the Major's testimony.
Kevin Riach, the ACLU attorney, repeatedly questioned the supervisor about the deletion of emails and possible evidence.
"You just decided, shortly after the George Floyd protests, this would be a good time to clean out my inbox?" he asked.
"That is correct," Dwyer testified.
Looks pretty open-and-shut, your honor. Sanctions all around! One can only assume the deletion was an effort to keep incriminating communications from being used by litigants suing the agency. This isn't speculation. This is the only logical reason a law enforcement agency would start deleting stuff after being served with a lawsuit. And by "logical," I mean that it's an action that would eliminate inculpatory communications. I don't mean "logical" as in the equivalent to common sense.
If I'm the judge handling these cases, sanctions are just the beginning. Default judgments in favor of the plaintiffs would really drive the message home. This is heinous bullshit. Hopefully, the judges handling these cases will punish the Minnesota State Patrol just as enthusiastically as its officers punished peaceful protesters.
Filed Under: deleting evidence, excessive force, george floyd, minnesota, minnesota state police, police, protests
