Top DWI Cop Busted for False Arrests

Radley Balko | June 15, 2007

A MADD gold-star winner gets caught cheating:

In one year, Brock arrested 58 people whose blood-alcohol content was below 0.08, the level at which state law presumes a driver is impaired, an internal affairs audit showed.

"I don't prescribe to the theory that somehow you have to be 0.08 to be drunk or impaired, " Brock, 38, told investigators.

A driver may be charged with DUI if the blood-alcohol level is between 0.05 and 0.08 percent, but there must be other evidence of impairment, such as a swerving vehicle.

In 43 of those 58 cases, motorists demonstrated no visible impairment behind the wheel, according to an internal affairs report made public Thursday. In 41 arrests, Brock also failed to make a case with urine samples, the report states.

Repeatedly, investigators found Brock reported failures in field sobriety tests when his patrol car video camera documented the opposite. He wrote, for instance, that a driver on Oct. 25, 2005, lost balance while turning. The video of the encounter showed that wasn't the case. The driver blew a 0.01 in the breath test but was arrested anyway.

He said drivers incorrectly recited the alphabet, used arms for balance and slurred speech - when the video showed correct alphabets, perfect balance and clear speech.

He's also not the sharpest tool in the shed:

He failed to activate his cruiser's audio and video equipment in 40 percent of his stops, instead relying on his "wrought memory" to recall important arrest details, the audit showed.

So what's MADD's reaction?

"We always felt he was a good officer, " said Becky Gage, 55, the victim advocate for Hillsborough's MADD chapter. "As long as officers are within the scope of the law, then we support their efforts to remove impaired drivers."

Not a hint of regret, eh? This is a little odd, too:

He told investigators that given the chance, he would conduct his DUI stops the same way.

Said Brock: "I mean, perfect world, we need more deputies and fewer people."

So what happens to all of those people who now have a record, paid thousands of dollars, sat through tedious alcoholism group sessions, and suffered the personal and professional repercussions of a false DUI arrest? And how many other cops are fudging the numbers due to incentive systems that reward cops who make lots of arrests?

Thanks to Mark Hemingway for the tip.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

biologist|6.15.07 @ 12:20PM|#

more good work, Radley. this guy is a pluperfect asshole. hopefully, he'll be fired, but probably he'll be given a commendation.

|6.15.07 @ 12:22PM|#

One more reason why videotaping of officers of the law doing their jobs should pretty much always be legal.

|6.15.07 @ 12:24PM|#

MADD is one of if not the biggest threats our civil liberties today. They are nothing but a pitchfork wielding lynch mob. What can you say about this crap?

|6.15.07 @ 12:25PM|#

Can I join DAMM? Drivers Against Mad Mothers?

Wow, it'll be interesting to see if this one of the penis thread gets more comments :)

Christopher Monnier|6.15.07 @ 12:32PM|#

"I don't prescribe to the theory that somehow you have to be 0.08 to be drunk or impaired," Brock, 38, told investigators.

It's supposed to be "I don't subscribe to the theory"...

|6.15.07 @ 12:35PM|#

I've said it before, and will repeat: God Bless Balko. This guy is doing the job of the Fourth Estate.

|6.15.07 @ 12:37PM|#

"I don't prescribe to the theory that police should have to tell the truth, like, ever."

He told investigators that given the chance, he would conduct his DUI stops the same way.

Said Brock: "I mean, perfect world, we need more deputies and fewer people."

What the hell does that mean?

It sickens me that Johnny Law here actually thinks the ends justify his means. What a complete and utter lack of integrity on his part. He should be fired and prohibited from working in law enforcement for the remainder of his life.

One more reason why videotaping of officers of the law doing their jobs should pretty much always be legal.

No, it should be mandatory.

Like I said the other day, cops should have to wear audio/video recording equipment whenever they're on duty. Equipment malfunctions should lead to investigations and suspensions.

Said Brock: "I mean, perfect world, we need more deputies and fewer people."

The man is a psychopath.

|6.15.07 @ 12:39PM|#

He failed to activate his cruiser's audio and video equipment in 40 percent of his stops, instead relying on his "wrought memory" to recall important arrest details, the audit showed.

Every single one of those should be thrown out.

|6.15.07 @ 12:42PM|#

He said drivers incorrectly recited the alphabet

Maybe the guy doesn't actually know the alphabet?

So what happens to all of those people who now have a record, paid thousands of dollars, sat through tedious alcoholism group sessions, and suffered the personal and professional repercussions of a false DUI arrest?

Sure sounds like a class action lawsuit against the PD and the City to me.

Said Brock: "I mean, perfect world, we need more deputies and fewer people."

Yes. If we just keep putting people in jail, eventually only the deputies will be left. Then we will have our perfect world.

"I don't prescribe to the theory that somehow you have to be 0.08 to be drunk or impaired," Brock, 38, told investigators.

Bet he never makes the same allowance in the other direction.

|6.15.07 @ 12:45PM|#

When the Second American Revolution finally occurs ( too many years from now, I fear ), Johnny-law types such as these are in for a world of trouble. Every reflexive spasm against government abuse in history has resulted in a thorough revolt against the officers of the "law" . . . yes, they will reap the proverbial whirlwind. I do not take comfort in, nor do I endorse violence against any person, even these revolting, sub-human creatures. However, as in all things, what goes around . . .

|6.15.07 @ 12:46PM|#

I rather think that a perfect world, inhabited by perfect people, would make law enforcement entirely unnecessary.

At least I've been lucky enough not to have been pulled over for driving sober by this guy. Tampa's traffic is enough fun without bogus traffic stops.

|6.15.07 @ 12:49PM|#

And how many other cops are fudging the numbers due to incentive systems that reward cops who make lots of arrests?

I'm going to take a guess at 99% of 'em.

Let's see, give someone extra-citizenry power, then reward them for using it to excess.

No, no one would ever abuse THAT!

|6.15.07 @ 12:57PM|#

A driver may be charged with DUI if the blood-alcohol level is between 0.05 and 0.08 percent, but there must be other evidence of impairment, such as a swerving vehicle.

I'm confused...I thought DUI was not strictly alcohol related. Can't I be charged with DUI on the grounds of impairment, even if my BAC is 0.0?

Of course, there should be solid video evidence of the impairment.

steveintheknow|6.15.07 @ 12:59PM|#

What a D-bag. He should know that the correct equilibrium is "less people" and "more lawyers".

|6.15.07 @ 1:05PM|#

Yes, a DUI can be charged legally under .08

A friend of mine was prosecuted for a DWI because he was sitting in his car with the heater on and a policeman had followed him to his car. He was out drinking, walking between different house parties during the winter, and decided to warm up. They concluded that it was sufficient to show that he was intending to drive, which is apparently the same as driving. The prosecutor asked for the largest fine they could give him, and when he protested that he didn't really think it was appropriate in this case because he didn't actually do anything, she got all mad at him and told him that she does that to try to deter people from doing it again (ignoring the fact that he didn't actually DO anything). What's more, she noted that he was capable of paying a higher fine, so therefore he should.

On a related note, while the policeman was arresting him, somewhere down the road a drunk driver plowed into a few parked cars.

|6.15.07 @ 1:06PM|#

I know Radley would be disappointed if I didn't find something to quibble over in his law-and-disorder posts (which I honestly do appreciate, BTW).

So what happens to all of those people who now have a record, paid thousands of dollars, sat through tedious alcoholism group sessions, and suffered the personal and professional repercussions of a false DUI arrest?

Being falsely arrested would not give you a record or force you into counseling. Being convicted (either after a hearing or because you choose not to contest the charges) is another story, however.

That being said, I've no doubt that this guy was as unscrupulous when testifying (or "testilying," as they say) as he was when making arrests. Plus false arrest, even without conviction, entails major disruption, damage to your reputation, and legal expenses.

Just keeping it real.

|6.15.07 @ 1:13PM|#

death after multiple jailhouse rapes.

nothing worse than a scumbag cop

|6.15.07 @ 1:38PM|#

I saw this on the news this morning (bay news 9). Agreed, this guy is an asshole and should be penalized in the harshest manner possible.

However, I also heard a related story, immediately afterwards, about faulty breathalysers (however, I was not fully paying attention)...any insight into this, Radley??? Anybody????

|6.15.07 @ 1:39PM|#

Where MADD goeth, so goeth the bullshit. So we can take that as a MADD mea culpa then? Because, for "removing impaired drivers" to be done "within the scope of the law", it's sort of important for arresting officers to "prescribe to the theory that somehow (somehow?) you have to be 0.08 to be drunk or impaired."

|6.15.07 @ 1:43PM|#

Being falsely arrested would not give you a record or force you into counseling. Being convicted (either after a hearing or because you choose not to contest the charges) is another story, however.

I'm just taking a guess here, but I would imagine that a DUI is one of the harder crimes to contest, especially if the arresting officer is present and says you were drunk.

Your recollection of the event would be less credible if it is already assumed you are drunk.

|6.15.07 @ 1:48PM|#

yeah just what we need, more Barneys

|6.15.07 @ 2:03PM|#

I'm just taking a guess here, but I would imagine that a DUI is one of the harder crimes to contest, especially if the arresting officer is present and says you were drunk.

That's an interesting issue. I guess it would depend largely on the prosecutor and local practice. A prosector may not bother pursuing a case where the charging officer didn't turn his video on, the BAC is low, and the defendant has no prior DUIs. OTOH, if the prosector is serious, you can never be sure how a trial will turn out, so people often decide to plead guilty if they can get off with counseling and a temporarily suspended license instead of something worse.

(Full disclosure -- criminal law is not my specialty, and I have no first-hand experience in this area. I know only from what friends have gone through.)

|6.15.07 @ 2:34PM|#

Sounds like we should give the police department credit for investigating and exposing a bad cop.

|6.15.07 @ 2:46PM|#

"Sounds like we should give the police department credit for investigating and exposing a bad cop."

Cops should be doing more of this investigating, you speak of, sadly this is the rare exception rather than the rule. That is why it is newsworthy.

Maybe if more high profile people got caught up in these roadside sobriety checkpoints and enhanced enforcement zones (enhanced revenue generation zones) we would see a decrease in their use.

I have seen MADD reps out on some of the checkpoints out here in Colorado. I don't know how that helps to get drunks off the road, but I would imagine the cops feel the need to be especially "vigilent" when the nanny-state overseers are there to make sure that anyone with the hint of alcohol on their breath will get the cops version of the hokey pokey and go to the pokey if they don't pass.

M|6.15.07 @ 4:06PM|#

"Prescribing" to the theory sounds like, alas, exactly what he was doing.

|6.15.07 @ 5:33PM|#

Did any of these bogus arrests lead to guilty pleas or convictions? I know that if this guy had ever arrested me I'd sure be talking to a lawyer right now (much as I hate 'em).

|6.15.07 @ 5:53PM|#

This happens all the time. There was a cop in North Attleborough, MA who won the MADD award every year, and he was a laughing stock at the Attleboro District Court. I don't how many times my dad, a defense attorney, beat that guy. He just had no credibility with any of the judges.

MADD didn't care. They loved him.

|6.15.07 @ 7:12PM|#

Did you all know that in the state of Montana, you can be arrested for DUI if you're in your home drunk with the keys within reach? All the cops need is your record -- for previous DUIs. That's enough to show intent to drive. Fuck MADD, those goddamn losers.

|6.15.07 @ 9:07PM|#

Said Brock: "I mean, perfect world, we need more deputies and fewer people."

Sounds like O'Brien in 1984

|6.16.07 @ 3:24PM|#

"This happens all the time. There was a cop in North Attleborough, MA who won the MADD award every year, and he was a laughing stock at the Attleboro District Court. I don't how many times my dad, a defense attorney, beat that guy. He just had no credibility with any of the judges. MADD didn't care. They loved him." - joe

There are some days when I just wanna hug you, joe. (Ok, not really, but I WOULD buy a beer on those days.) Granted, they are VERY few and far between, but every once in a while you knock one right out the park. I hope you're thoroughly enjoying your weekend!

|6.16.07 @ 4:50PM|#

Heh, a day before I saw this story I received a call from an organization trying to collect money for MADD. I should have known something like this was to follow. I hope they call again. I will draw the call out and waste as much time as I can, with hopes that each minute wasted is a minute less to collect from others.

Allen|6.17.07 @ 5:47PM|#

Another reason why blowing into the PBT should not be admissable as evidence. You have to wonder how many of these people had they had to be brought down to the station to give urine or blood samples would've raised eyebrows with others in the department.

Oh ya... just someone handing out that many DUIs that were below .08 should've been. The real story isn't about this guy it's how this went on for so long!

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements