The Interesting Case Of David Riley; The Arrest – Part (2)
I want to continue from the first segment on the David Riley case. I think it is important to get out as much information as possible on this case, and I think that the public needs to understand that this is not a “private witch hunt”; this is simply an opportunity that I am presenting to the public to be aware of what really happened on the David Riley case.
First I want to present some documents that were forwarded to me by the newspaper reporter that did this story: Private investigator champions an unusual case
The following documents are a press statement issued by the Columbia Police Officer’s Association in an attempt to defend the actions of the Officers involved in the aforementioned incident involving David Riley on my first blog post titled: The Interesting Case Of David Riley; The Arrest – Part (1)
Below are the documents for you to read:
Just Click The Following Link: CPOA Press Release On David Riley Arrest
Now I want to stop here for a second and talk a little about my experiences last night on August 16, 2010 at the Columbia City Hall Meeting. I spoke on this issue concerning David Riley tonight, and I made thumb drives for each of the Columbia City Council Members, with all of my evidence on them. I understand that these thumb drives were distributed to the City Council. There is one thing that I can say about the Columbia City Council, they do give their citizens a voice, and they do patiently listen to what their citizens have to say. And trust me, after some of the speakers I saw speaking last night; this is no small task. We have a very decent and fair City Council here in Columbia, MO.
After I spoke at the Columbia City Council Meeting, I was on my way to exiting the Columbia City Council Chamber, and Mr. Eric Dearmont asked if he could speak with me outside. Mr. Dearmont is the person that put together the press release that you should have just read above, titled “CPOA Press Release On David Riley Arrest”. Mr. Dearmont seemed to be a very pleasant and professional man. And he wanted to ask me if I would retract the Officer’s name from my first blog post. I agreed to do this, I don’t want to cause anyone any undue stress here. I want to make the public aware of what happened here. This Officer also deserves to have a private life, and my intent has never been to cause him stress. I also met the Officer that initially confronted David Riley the night that this incident occurred. The Officer was very calm, not upset, and seemed like a very decent person too. I apologized to this Officer for any stress that my mentioning of his name in my post may have caused him; and I assured him that I would take his name off of the blog as soon as I got home. He thanked me and shook my hand.
Before I go any further, and post more evidence here on this blog, please try to understand something here. This case is like most of these cases are. There really is no “bad people” here in this case; there is a “bad situation”. This Officer should also be recognized for the tough job he does. For risking his safety for us day in and day out, because despite what side of the fence you line up on in this issue, this Officer is still out there doing a job that puts him in service to us. I am here to address this “bad situation”, and hopefully see some good come from this. I am not here to maliciously damage anyone. I also invited Mr. Dearmont and the Officer to post on this blog anytime they want, and guaranteed them that they would not be moderated for posting their side of the story here. I hope that they do know that my invitation was sincere, and they are welcomed here to discuss this issue, if they want to come here and do that.
Now, I want to address Mr. Dearmont’s press release.
First, we start out with this quote: “[e]veryone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” from Mr. Dearmont. Well, facts are a funny thing, because while we all want to believe that they are just exactly what happened, we must realize that one man’s fact may well be another man’s fallacy. We all interpret information differently. The methods in which we use to extrapolate information varies from person to person. And somewhere in the way we interpret information and extrapolate information, there comes variances in what we call “the facts”. Mr. Dearmont’s quote may well apply to him as much as it does me.
Second Mr. Dearmont says: “Unfortunately, in a number of recent communications related to the arrest and subsequent prosecution of David Riley a number of individuals have choosen to present to the public a large amount of false and misleading information”. Did anyone expect to see this press release prefaced with anything different? That is how you start defending your case, isn’t it? By trying to cast some doubt on the other guy’s claims. Well, I have a few simple questions for Mr. Dearmont. (1) Mr. Dearmont, what happened to the audio file from the juvenile’s audio recording device that was given to the Officer the night of the incident with David Riley? (2) You do understand don’t you that this audio file could have very well cleared up the issue as to what David Riley actually said to the Officer that night, don’t you? (3) Naturally you also understand that this casts the Police that were involved in the arrest of David Riley that night in a suspicious light, don’t you?
Third, Mr. Dearmont states: “Both of these minors had clean criminal histories and had never been arrested. Both individuals agreed to assist the Columbia Police Department in its effort to limit the unlawful distribution of alcohol to minors.” I don’t know why this is important, it certainly does not change the substance of the situation that occurred with David Riley on September 29, 2009.
Fourth, Mr. Dearmont states: “Mr. Riley apparently noticed the Officer observing him and initiated a communication in which he demanded that the Officer “give [Riley] his fucking wallet” and stated that the Officer did not “want to fuck with [him].” Riley then began to approach the Officer in an aggressive manner.” I would implore you to all watch the video below. Watch it as many times as you need to. Watch it carefully. Pay attention to what is happening outside of the store when David Riley exits the store.:
Look, the one good thing about this site that Mr. Dearmont has not done is this; I am presenting you the evidence here. Don’t take my word for what happened, don’t take Mr. Dearmont’s word for what happened, be your own Judge. Look at the video yourself. You don’t have to be told what is happening, just look carefully, as many times as you need to look. And then make your own assessment as to what happened. The difference in what Mr. Dearmont wants and what I want here is this; I am not asking you to believe me; Mr. Dearmont is however asking you to believe him. All I am asking you to do is look at and listen to the evidence in this case, and then draw your own conclusion.
You will see that there is no way the Officer could have displayed his badge, but if the video is not enough for you; then listen to the statement of Kendrick Hardrick, the young man in the blue jacket that was seen in the video walking out of the store when this occurred, listen to his audio recorded statement below:
You will see and hear evidence that David Riley did not say “Give me your wallet” to the Officer, instead he said “What in the fuck are you looking at” and “Keep right on walking”. David Riley has maintained that this is what he said, but there is also an independent witness that corroborates this named Desiree Kemp; the lady that was in the Driver’s Seat of the car the night we saw this incident occur with David Riley on the video above.
Listen to Desiree Kemp’s statement below, she clearly says that David said “What the fuck are you looking at”. She clearly states that her and David thought they were being robbed this night, thereby indicating that the Officer did not display his badge that night.
Desiree Kemp Audio Recorded Statement: Desiree Kemp Audio Recorded Interview 10 07 2009
There is clear and compelling evidence that David did not attempt to rob this Officer, as the Officer has stated and maintained since this incident occurred. There is clear and compelling evidence that the Officer did not display his badge or even say he was a Police Officer in the form of two (2) independent witness statements.
Do you believe for a minute that there is some vast criminal conspiracy to cast this Officer in a bad light, perpetrated by David Riley, Desiree Kemp, and Kendrick Hardrick? There is a more simpler, logical, and reasonable explanation; isn’t there?
Fifth, Mr. Dearmont states: “At this time the Officer produced his gun and badge, immediately identifying himself as a police officer and ordering Mr. Riley to the ground. Riley did not immediately comply and only dropped to his knees after being order multiple times to lie completely down. While on his hands and knees, Riley continued acting aggressively and attempted to stand. The Officer, using the bottom of his foot, pushed him back to the ground and told him to remain there.” Again, look at the video, listen to the statements from the witnesses here, look at the totality of the evidence in this case. The totality of the evidence directly contradicts Mr. Dearmont’s account of what happened the night David Riley was arrested. Desiree Kemp states that the Officer never displayed his badge. Kendrick Hardrick states that he never saw the Officer display his badge or identify himself. Are both of these people lying to cover for David Riley? The only one honest here is the Police Officer, and everyone else is lying? Do you really believe that? Does Mr. Dearmont honestly expect you to believe this?
Everything after this last statement I quoted is really not even relevant. There is one thing that did not happen that could have prevented all of this. Instead of kicking David Riley, the Officer could have simply handcuffed David Riley, and then there would have been no need for David Riley to take the beating he took that night. The question begs to be asked, why did the Officer feel it was unsafe to handcuff David Riley, but it was completely safe to provoke David Riley by kicking him? Readers, does that even make sense to you?
And yes, David Riley was mad as hell that night! He had just been beaten, arrested, and taken to the hospital and taunted by the Police (the taunts that David Riley had to listen to will come out in the next segment of this blog). I’d be mad too. I’d be cussing too. I’d be absolutely furious! Who wouldn’t have been after having the Police give them a concussion, a black eye, and a fractured arm, then arresting them on a bogus charge, then having to go to the hospital and be taunted, and then having to go to jail, and then having to spend $5,000.00 of your money on a Bail Bondsman for something that you should have never had to pay for. Of course you’d be mad, and probably cussing too.
Let’s recap real quick.
You have the video above, watch it. Watch it as many times as you need to. Just simply watch it and draw your own conclusion.
You have the audio recorded statement from Desiree Kemp: Desiree Kemp Audio Recorded Interview 10 07 2009 Listen to it as much as you need to!
You have the audio recorded statement from Kendrick Hardrick: Kendrick Hardrick Interview 20091006_194407_192.168.0.14,10058 Listen to it as much as you need to!
All of these pieces of evidence add up to something vastly different than what you are being told. Think for yourself. You don’t have to be told how to look at this. Just carefully examine these first pieces of evidence, and carefully consider what they mean. Then we will move onto even more evidence that supports our position about what happened to David Riley on September 29, 2009.
Until then, stay tuned.