What the heck, I’ll honor my word Makarova
Let’s break your question down real quick:
Quote--“You are one of the officers involved in this stop. When you come to work the next day, you supe tells you to call your REP. as you are being brought up on charges, both criminal and civil for civil rights violation by the CHL.”
Well, I cannot speak for this situation as it is vague. If you have a specific charge in mind let’s talk about it. Additionally, the CHL holder would have to file a criminal complaint, the IA department would have to find and justify probable cause. During the interim investigation an officer is likely to be placed on paid leave pending results. Of positive finding the District Attorney would have to be willing to prosecute and bring the case before a grand jury, if “billed” by the grand jury the case and the officer in question would of course go to trial. This is how the system works. It is a serious matter, not handled lightly at any level and the facts of the case would have to carry the same burden of proof that any other criminal case would have to carry. He said she said isn’t enough to establish probable cause. The next thing you would have to find out is if this was a State or Federal prosecution, as a civil rights violation covers 2 jurisdictions. Each has its method of handling formal criminal proceedings though the processes for both are similar.
Upon notice of a civil case the matter is different as the beyond a shadow of a doubt in proof would be reduced to preponderance of evidence, meaning more than 51%. This is typically a jury trial and will generally await the outcome of a criminal trial.
As for coming in to work “the next day” to hear criminal charges and civil, usually the wheels turn slower than that so I would be a tad bit shocked.
Quote—“He is alleging you had no probable cause to search his vehicle nor his consent.”
In this case the police reports, 911 call by the bus driver and all the other documentary evidence would be called into question (dash cam?). The defense will produce witnesses; the prosecution will produce witnesses, you know how it goes. Basically what I explained above only this allegation would have to be proved in criminal court, then proved again in civil court. Only the burden of proof will change.
Quote—“Any idea how how the rep would defend you?”
There are all sorts of legal defense tactics. I am not a lawyer so I won’t speculate too much suffice to say the Departmental SOP and Code of Conduct will be reviewed. All documentary evidence will be combed over, all witness statements gathered, specific information from the prosecution will be “discovered” and I assume the defense counsel will try to poke holes in the accusation.
Quote—“Just curious. Personally I would definitely be looking for representation after the incident was over.”
Looking for representation as a victim or as the cop? In the case of the victim, your representation for criminal charges would be the district attorney who prosecutes the case. Your civil prosecution would be a lawyer you provide. ($$$) Not all lawsuits are winners, but that doesn’t usually excuse the legal bill. Then there is the worry of counter suit, etc. It gets ugly, takes years at times and is immensely expensive, at least to me.
The officer will likely have union or departmental representation unless convicted, and things progress onto the civil suit, but at that point, if convicted he will still likely have appointed attorneys, don’t all convicts?
The answer is vague because the question is vague. But since I believe you were sincere in your question I have taken the time to answer.
Thats the main thing in the story which is off and I would file a complaint agianst him. Arguments happen and going by what you say he had blocked access, which makes it sounds like he was in the wrong and depending on some places actually illegal depending just what part he blocked. So his conduct was uncalled for, he can't go calling dispatchers to call police with baseless reports that the other party is driving while intoxicated.
