CHRISTOPHER KING, J.D.
As to the second prong, the court finds that the Prosecutor's Office has not yet produced specific, reliable evidence that the dash cam video was created as part of a criminal investigation. Again, case law informs this issue. In affirming the "well-considered reasons" of a trial court opinion, the Appellate Division has instructed that not all records created contemporaneously with a criminal investigation constitute criminal investigatory records. [*12] See O'Shea, supra, 410 N.J. Super. at 378 ("Photos of an accident scene may be looked at as part of . . . a criminal investigation. That doesn't mean they're criminal investigatory records.") (citations omitted). Instead, criminal investigatory records encompass "the work product of . . . the people investigating." Ibid.
By analogy, the video here may have documented some aspects of a traffic stop and Tuckerton police officer Cherry's arrest of the woman. Even so, it does not follow that the video necessarily constitutes a criminal investigatory record ipso facto. OPRA's criminal investigatory records exception does not render otherwise public government records confidential because they document some aspect of a crime. The Prosecutor's Office has not produced any specific, reliable evidence that the police dash cam video is the work-product of a criminal investigation of the woman or even any evidence that the video came into existence as a result of a criminal investigation. This record leaves the court to guess as to the circumstances surrounding the woman's arrest. The court finds that the Prosecutor's Office has yet failed to carry its burden of producing specific, reliable evidence from which the court can conclude [*13] that dash cam video is a criminal investigatory record. Courier News, supra, 358 N.J. Super. at 382-83.
1 Sept. 2015 Update:
First of all, should the government defense attorneys in my Free Press First Amendment lawsuit go to gloat on their websites about how they stopped a pesky reporter from running video in "interior offices" or at "employee" cubicles on the King v. McKenna lawsuit I want people to be able to see the Google link to this case as reported: http://courts.delaware.gov/opinions/download.aspx?ID=226120 --- and see the Motion to Recuse and other documentation to know that's all a pack of lies by an oppressive government that takes pride in restricting First Amendment access to anything. Hell one of the Defendants in my case had to sue to obtain First Amendment information and he's a high-powered attorney in the State -- John Paradee. I can't find the case right now but I found it on Lexis, it's in my Memoranda I'll dig it up later today.
Second, there are things about the shooting that I intentionally omitted but which I might as well say now that it is in the general public as seen on Dr. Jahi Issa's FB page: Mr. Fletcher was apparently shot in the side/back, but the gun he allegedly had in his possession was found "in the near vicinity" or words of similar import, meaning it's probably a community gun and he probably didn't have it on his person when he alighted from the porch, which corresponds with witness testimony that Delaware police will try to suppress -- the same way they hid the dash cam of the kicking assault earlier this year, infra.
So now you have a situation with LE shooting an unarmed man in the back. Fleeing or not, without a stated fear or apprehension of safety or bodily harm to others that's when Indictments get served, but probably not in Delaware.... where they just do whatever the hell they want to most of the time.
Third, Dr. Issa informs me that when he was wrongfully arrested before he won his criminal trial three dangerous bald men approached him in jail and threatened him with bodily harm unless he signed a document waiving his right to be on DSU campus. He complained to the FBI, which did nothing.... which is par for the course if you watch the movie and see how Joe Biden and the Feds handled multiple felon Greg Floyd, a white man. These people are sick.
Lastly, it was reported to me that the man in the video who was arrested was arrested after he simply criticized the police for discharging their weapons in a pre-school zone, a valid criticism according to the law I just cited this month in my Free Press case, how about that? Yep, First and Third Circuit case law of Higginbotham v. City of New York 2015 U.S. Dist Lexis 62227 (May 12, 2015) and Montgomery v. Killingsworth, 2015 U.S. Dist Lexis 7152 (January 22, 2015). As seen in the thumbnails below Higginbotham slammed Judge Young's bullshit analysis of one of my important cases (Iacobucci), and Killingsworth noted how it is perfectly legal to observe and to criticize police within reason. From what I heard, this man was not out of line, yet was arrested because Delaware treats its niggers (some of whom are even white) that way, and that is why I will never again set foot in that despicable environment.
31 August Update -- I wrote the global email:
And by the way Detective Hill, while they are thinking about prosecuting me, how about prosecuting Bill Christy for threatening to whip my black ass online (read below) and calling me a motherfucker on my phone?
Or is that just the Delaware Way.
Been waiting 6 years for this day, and y'all played right into it.
The shooting of Terrence Fletcher.
Dover Cop kicks black man in the head.
911 Call on attempted lynching finally released to me.
Motion to Recuse Judge Young in First Amendment case.
Stolen Kent County Register of Deeds Election 1.
Stolen Kent County Register of Deeds Election 2.