17GEN4 - Homepage 6/5/2021
The reason I put these two stories together (one above, one below) is that the whistleblower cop above is being threatened with evidence tampering for, not tampering with evidence at all, but rather exposing it. Muting the audio is not tampering with the evidence. Deleting it from the recording would have been. This is another example of the office of the prosecutor just making things up without just settling on an actual charge, like misusing government resources for a purpose other than was intended based on the job description of the individuals who have legal access to the database. The people who have complete disregard for the law are often the ones who tasked with upholding the law.
The cop below was charged with 'hacking' which he did not do. He did the same thing the cop above did. He accessed information illegally that he was not privy to. They both committed the same crimes essentially - using government resources to illegally access information.
The cop in the story below should have been charged with that - as that is illegal - for a cop to 'run somebody's license plate number' for profit for a 3rd party. How and why was that not the charge that was imposed?
PICTURED: Armed black man, 32, with long rap sheet - including 20 arrests - who was wanted for violating probation for aggravated robbery before he was shot dead by Minneapolis cops, sparking a night of protests at dismantled George Floyd Square_DAILYMAIL