Our first story is kind of strange.
Matthew Itkowitz was drinking tequila one fine night in March of 2008. Apparently, Mr. Itkowitz got into an argument with his wife; Mrs. Itkowitz ran up to several people, including a man named Ryan Gonzalez, who were standing nearby, and asked for help.
Mr. Itkowitz claims that Mr. Gonzalez brandished a handgun, threatened to kill him, then punched Mr. Itkowitz and knocked him to the ground. Mr. Itkowitz deployed his own weapon and shot Mr. Gonzalez five times, killing him.
…the Los Angeles district attorney’s office declined to prosecute Itkowitz in 2010, despite concluding that his account of the shooting was “patently inconsistent” with video footage captured by a wall-mounted security camera in the alley.
Mr. Itkowitz has now been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of “deprivation of rights under color of law, using a firearm in relation to a crime of violence and obstruction of justice”.
The video footage in question appears to show Mr. Itkowitz pulling his gun and hiding it behind his right leg as Mr. Gonzalez walks away from him.
Still walking toward the tattoo parlor, Gonzalez turns back toward Itkowitz and motions for him to leave. When he doesn’t, Gonzalez turns and walks several steps back in Itkowitz’s direction. He is about 10 to 12 feet away when Itkowitz raises his gun and fires.
By the way, Mr. Itkowitz is a deputy US marshal.
Meanwhile, the LAPD is investigating five of their officers after a woman died in their custody.
And Lance White had his 2009 conviction for weapons possession overturned by a federal appeals court in Manhattan. Why?
…should have been able to tell the jury that the main witness against him, a New York City police detective, had been found to have testified untruthfully in proceedings involving an unrelated gun case.
Noted:
…the panel’s decision made it “far more likely that future juries will hear that an officer has previously lied or somehow been found untruthful. And it will make prosecutors think twice before they use him in future cases.”
This entry was posted on Friday, August 31st, 2012 at 2:22 pm and is filed under Clippings, Cops, Law. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
I’d go a step farther than that and allow defendants to present evidence that any other officer still employed by the same agency had been found untruthful. Pattern and practice, yanno.