By JOE LAMBE
The Kansas City Star
Kansas City police are not guilty of contempt of court for with holding part of a controversial police video from lawyers in a criminal case, a Jackson County judge ruled today.
Police and prosecutors also said they were changing protocol to prevent such problems from happening again.
In this case, prosecutors did not tell police of a court order to provide the tape of an alleged 2004 car theft arrest. Police also did not tell prosecutors they edited the tape.
The defense lawyer for accused car thief Matthew Butt, 24, again argued Tuesday that charges against his client should be dismissed because he did not get the full tape until last month. He also noted in a new court filing that the full tape includes Butt asking for a lawyer before he was interrogated.
After a brief hearing, Judge John Torrence withdrew his recent order that Police Chief Jim Corwin appear in court to explain why he shouldnt be jailed or fined for contempt.
Torrence said he accepted the explanation that the tape material was withheld because of miscommunication between police and prosecutors.
I find the chief and any subordinate officers have not disobeyed an order of the court because they were not aware of the order of the court, Torrence said.
Corwin later issued a written statement: I would like to thank Judge Torrence for hearing and resolving this matter expeditiously.
The police car video shows the arrest of a Butt for allegedly stealing a pickup truck and then resisting arrest in August 2004 near 19th Street and Chelsea Avenue. Officers used a Taser on him five times, including after he was handcuffed and stopped resisting. The two officers involved later were fired for violating Taser use policy.
Police at first provided lawyers with tape that ended before the fifth Taser hit because that was considered part of a confidential investigation into the police misconduct, they said. They also thought the arrest was over by that time because Butt was in handcuffs.
At the hearing, Judge Torrence said prosecutors in the past have reasonably relied on getting unedited tapes from police and questioned the police decision to edit.
It troubles me anytime a law enforcement agency sees fit to make decisions that put it in the role of judge or jury, he said.
Lisa Morris, police attorney, said her office was creating new protocol that would inform prosecutors if anything on tape is considered confidential. Chief Deputy Prosecutor James Kanatzar said prosecutors would tell police of court orders.
Defense lawyers found out by accident this summer that they and prosecutors had a shortened version of the tape. They saw the long version on television as part of a police discipline hearing.
On Tuesday, defense lawyer Leon Munday filed another motion for the judge to dismiss charges against Butt, which Torrence declined to do that last week.
The defense argues that police were clearly wrong in deciding that the final 5 minutes and 51 seconds were not relevant to the case, and it is not the role of the police department to decide questions of relevancy.
The motion quotes from dialog picked up in those final minutes of tape:
Unidentified officer to Butt: Youll get your opportunity to talk to a judge.
Butt: To a judge? I want to talk to a lawyer before I talk to a judge.
Munday contends police then illegally interrogated Butt without a lawyer present. Kanatzar declined to comment on that issue, and said prosecutors are reviewing the case again and deciding whether to go forward or dismiss it.
Torrence set a Feb.27 trial date on charges of first-degree tampering and felony resisting arrest.
Kansas City Star (http://www.kansascity.com/)