Baton Rouge police officer resigns after sending racist text messages.

capathy21

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 16, 2014
1,365
534
Houston, Texas
http://www.nola.com/crime/baton-rouge/index.ssf/2014/09/baton_rouge_police_officer_res.html



A Baton Rouge police officer resigned Thursday after he allegedly sent racially-charged text messages to another person, Baton Rouge Police Cpl. Don Coppola confirmed Thursday. Michael Elsbury reportedly submitted his letter of resignation Thursday afternoon.

In text messages obtained by WBRZ, Elsbury allegedly sent a message that read: "They are nothing but a bunch of monkeys. The only reason they have this job is the n*****, n***** in them."

Another string of texts Elsbury allegedly sent read: "I wish someone would pull a Ferguson on them and take them out. I hate looking at those African monkeys at work...I enjoy arresting those thugs with their saggy pants."

Coppola said Elsbury has been on the force for nearly 15 years. In his resignation letter, Elsbury did not discuss the ongoing investigation of his text messages.

The text messages were allegedly sent to someone outside of the police department.


----------

This is another example of a racist cop. Is it an isolated attitude? Not from what I can tell.
 

Technarchy

macrumors 604
May 21, 2012
6,747
4,885
Every single person he arrested that is black should hand this over to their defense lawyer.
 
Last edited:

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
go over the people he arrested & see if maybe he planted evidence, that is a start.
He makes a couple racist statements and you want to dive into planted evidence? I can see firing him but there's not one shred of evidence to back up that he has planted any evidence or set anyone up. The first text quoted seems to be about other police.
 

bradl

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2008
4,006
11,823
He makes a couple racist statements and you want to dive into planted evidence? I can see firing him but there's not one shred of evidence to back up that he has planted any evidence or set anyone up. The first text quoted seems to be about other police.
His now exposed racism calls any arrest he made of someone who is of that race under scrutiny, as it impacts their due process of law. That makes a hell of a lot of difference in any case he was involved in. Retrials are the least of the problems; people who actually were arrested by him, who could actually be guilty of the crimes they may have committed could be let out of jail and charges dropped because of this idiot.

I'm surprised that as a LEO you are not seeing the ramifications of this.

BL.
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
His now exposed racism calls any arrest he made of someone who is of that race under scrutiny, as it impacts their due process of law. That makes a hell of a lot of difference in any case he was involved in. Retrials are the least of the problems; people who actually were arrested by him, who could actually be guilty of the crimes they may have committed could be let out of jail and charges dropped because of this idiot.

I'm surprised that as a LEO you are not seeing the ramifications of this.

BL.
They can scrutinize all they want but without evidence that there was wrongdoing it will go nowhere. You don't get released from prison because the cop makes a couple racist statements. It doesn't work that way. Now if you catch him planting evidence regardless of whether it is on a minority or not, you have something.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,996
Criminal Mexi Midget
He makes a couple racist statements and you want to dive into planted evidence? I can see firing him but there's not one shred of evidence to back up that he has planted any evidence or set anyone up. The first text quoted seems to be about other police.
I agree, that is why I said "see IF he planted evidence"
 

bradl

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2008
4,006
11,823
They can scrutinize all they want but without evidence that there was wrongdoing it will go nowhere. You don't get released from prison because the cop makes a couple racist statements. It doesn't work that way. Now if you catch him planting evidence regardless of whether it is on a minority or not, you have something.
I never said anything about supplanting evidence. But you still don't get how that impacts due process. Case in point: NYPD.

http://nypost.com/2012/01/12/nypd-cop-to-plead-guilty-after-allegedly-making-false-arrest-racist-remarks/

Not good enough? Here's one with the LAPD:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/09/opinion/omara-lapd-racist-recording/

If they arrested someone of any race and makes disparaging remarks about their race, that has the potential to impact the suspect's due process of law, because the officer had not arrested him without bigotry, or in full compliance with the law. The officer would not have been impartial and only adhering to the evidence that he has in arresting him. Because of that, the suspect would have the 5th Amendment on his side, let alone the ability to sue the officer, and the police department for misconduct.

Again, there are some HUGE ramifications on this that you are not understanding.

BL.
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
I never said anything about supplanting evidence. But you still don't get how that impacts due process. Case in point: NYPD.

http://nypost.com/2012/01/12/nypd-cop-to-plead-guilty-after-allegedly-making-false-arrest-racist-remarks/

Not good enough? Here's one with the LAPD:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/09/opinion/omara-lapd-racist-recording/

If they arrested someone of any race and makes disparaging remarks about their race, that has the potential to impact the suspect's due process of law, because the officer had not arrested him without bigotry, or in full compliance with the law. The officer would not have been impartial and only adhering to the evidence that he has in arresting him. Because of that, the suspect would have the 5th Amendment on his side, let alone the ability to sue the officer, and the police department for misconduct.

Again, there are some HUGE ramifications on this that you are not understanding.

BL.
In your first link the officer is accused of false arrest, which is a crime. The officer in this case hasn't been accused of any crime. In your second link, I don't see where anyone was released. Did I miss it? Is there a list of people that he arrested that were turned out of prison because he was a racist? Please steer me in that direction, I just don't see it.

This guy resigned. I guess they can go back and retroactively fire him but it doesn't change anything. He's no longer a Baton Rouge Police Officer.
 

Gutwrench

Contributor
Jan 2, 2011
3,914
9,033
Disgusting comments no matter who made them. Reminds me of Powell's MDT communication hours following King's arrest.
 

bradl

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2008
4,006
11,823
In your first link the officer is accused of false arrest, which is a crime. The officer in this case hasn't been accused of any crime. In your second link, I don't see where anyone was released. Did I miss it? Is there a list of people that he arrested that were turned out of prison because he was a racist? Please steer me in that direction, I just don't see it.

This guy resigned. I guess they can go back and retroactively fire him but it doesn't change anything. He's no longer a Baton Rouge Police Officer.
I don't know if you are just trying to be dense here or really just don't get it. But I'll put it into better words.

If he arrested anyone and made such remarks, even after the fact that he was the arresting officer, it can now be found that he may have arrested people with prejudice. That prejudice impacts the suspect's due process of law. Any charge that that suspect may have could be dismissed. Any crime they may have committed or have on their criminal record may be dismissed or wiped from their record.

The police officer has shown prejudice, making any work that he has done come under scrutiny. It doesn't matter if he is a former officer, or that he resigned. His work is still there, and now police must go back through his work to see if there was any prejudice applied to his work. If so, that could mean, just like with evidence tampering or impeding an investigation, the suspect could be released or walk because his prejudice impacted his duty to uphold the law.

Such like the NYPD case. His prejudice impacted that, causing the false arrest, and subsequent events. Just like the LAPD case where the LEO was placed on leave.

Again, you are not understanding the ramifications of this, and it is even more shocking to me that it is a LEO that doesn't understand this.

BL.
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
I don't know if you are just trying to be dense here or really just don't get it. But I'll put it into better words.

If he arrested anyone and made such remarks, even after the fact that he was the arresting officer, it can now be found that he may have arrested people with prejudice. That prejudice impacts the suspect's due process of law. Any charge that that suspect may have could be dismissed. Any crime they may have committed or have on their criminal record may be dismissed or wiped from their record.

The police officer has shown prejudice, making any work that he has done come under scrutiny. It doesn't matter if he is a former officer, or that he resigned. His work is still there, and now police must go back through his work to see if there was any prejudice applied to his work. If so, that could mean, just like with evidence tampering or impeding an investigation, the suspect could be released or walk because his prejudice impacted his duty to uphold the law.

Such like the NYPD case. His prejudice impacted that, causing the false arrest, and subsequent events. Just like the LAPD case where the LEO was placed on leave.

Again, you are not understanding the ramifications of this, and it is even more shocking to me that it is a LEO that doesn't understand this.

BL.
No, it can't. It's real simple. Just because he made racial remarks will not get anyone he arrested out of jail. It would have got him fired, had he already not quit.
 

bradl

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2008
4,006
11,823
Not immediately, and it might not ultimately even lead to anything at all. But it's enough evidence to cast doubt on his previous actions, and get some people stirring some pots.
Exactly. And that is what is not being comprehended.

BL.
 

Renzatic

Suspended
Exactly. And that is what is not being comprehended.
Right. It's not like the state's going to turn around and say "alright, everyone! You're free to go if you're black", because even an unremitting, bald faced racist can have a sense of duty, and manage to do their job well. Just because he's shown to have a bias doesn't mean the courts automatically assume he's acted on it by default.

...but they now have a reason to check and see if everything's he's done has been on the level.
 

thekev

macrumors 604
Aug 5, 2010
6,669
1,745
No, it can't. It's real simple. Just because he made racial remarks will not get anyone he arrested out of jail. It would have got him fired, had he already not quit.
It's not much on its own, but it may contribute to appeals investigations.
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,433
8,605
They can scrutinize all they want but without evidence that there was wrongdoing it will go nowhere. You don't get released from prison because the cop makes a couple racist statements. It doesn't work that way. Now if you catch him planting evidence regardless of whether it is on a minority or not, you have something.
It shows statements given by the officer made in prejudice. Any charges that stuck based on only the cop's word has a good chance of getting reversed or thrown out if still pending.
 

bradl

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2008
4,006
11,823
It shows statements given by the officer made in prejudice. Any charges that stuck based on only the cop's word has a good chance of getting reversed or thrown out if still pending.
Exactly. aforementioned ramifications. a lot of cases could be blown and charges thrown out because of prejudice. That calls this officer's entire career under scrutiny, which could possibly lead to suits against the BRPD, and possibly civil suits against the former officer.

So how is it that we common people understand that, relatives of LEOs understand that, yet the actual LEO doesn't?

BL.
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
It shows statements given by the officer made in prejudice. Any charges that stuck based on only the cop's word has a good chance of getting reversed or thrown out if still pending.
Anyone who was arrested by this guy and went to prison, either pleaded guilty or was found guilty by a jury of his/her peers. I would hope that even in this day and age the officers word is not enough to convince a jury. That might be enough on a speeding ticket but to send someone to prison? I don't thinks so.

Define "good chance" and then we'll watch to see just how many cases are overturned so we can see what good chance in your book means versus the courts.
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,433
8,605
Anyone who was arrested by this guy and went to prison, either pleaded guilty or was found guilty by a jury of his/her peers. I would hope that even in this day and age the officers word is not enough to convince a jury. That might be enough on a speeding ticket but to send someone to prison? I don't thinks so.

Define "good chance" and then we'll watch to see just how many cases are overturned so we can see what good chance in your book means versus the courts.
And most pleas are made according to what their chances are to be found guilty in a trial. Anyone found guilty by a jury in trial, the jury factored in the officer's statement.

So any case that went to trial, and the sole or overwhelming evidence was the officer's statement, has a good chance to be reversed. And anyone who plead guilty can easily say it was due to the officer's statements.