By Carlos Miller
Two former cops who resigned from the West Palm Beach Police Department last year after a dashboard cam showed them beating a handcuffed suspect were jailed this morning on felony charges stemming from the incident.
Louis Joseph Schwartz, 30, and Kurt John Graham, 24, are facing a minimum of 11 years in prison, according to the Palm Beach Post.
On May 26, 2008, the officers responded to a CVS Pharmacy where they apprehended Pablo Gilberto Valenzuela, who was accused of robbing the pharmacy.
Both men were caught on video kicking the handcuffed Valenzuela in the face as he lay facedown in the parking lot.
A third officer, who ended up punching Valenzuela repeatedly in the face after the suspect tried to break free, was not criminally charged.
Schwartz and Graham would probably not be in jail right now had they not falsified documents to justify kicking the suspect in the face.
In reports filed after the incident, Graham and Schwartz wrote that they kicked Valenzuela in the face because the handcuffed man was trying to bite Graham’s leg. Zangara wrote that he punched Valenzuela after the man tried to spit on him.
Schwartz has been charged with two felony counts of official misconduct, one felony count of conspiracy to commit misconduct and one county misdemeanor battery. He is facing 16 years in prison.
Graham has been charged with one felony count of official misconduct, one felony count of conspiracy to commit official misconduct and a misdemeanor battery charge. He is facing 11 years in prison.
It is rather surprisng the FBI and State Attorney’s Office decided to pursue this case because falsifying police reports is not exactly a rare occurrence.
Check out the dashcam video here.
Popularity: 1% [?]
12 responses so far ↓
1 xdamousex // Jun 11, 2009 at 1:28 PM
Wow what savage brutes. Scary to think people like that have so much authority.
2 Difster // Jun 11, 2009 at 1:59 PM
I wonder what the cop defenders here will say about this? I’m sure somehow they think it was justified and the cops were just scapegoats.
3 sickntired08 // Jun 11, 2009 at 2:27 PM
I tell you most of these cops become cops so they could beat people up legally, also because they can kill as well..
Cops are the new Thugs and Terrorist of the streets…
4 The Dave // Jun 11, 2009 at 3:14 PM
To me, the truly tragic part of this is right at the end, “It is rather surprisng the FBI and State Attorney’s Office decided to pursue this case because falsifying police reports is not exactly a rare occurrence”
From where I’m standing, falsifying a police report should result in the immediate termination of a police officer, forfeiture of all benefits (pension included), with a minimum of 1-2 years in jail, and a sentencing enhancement that doubles the penalty for whatever crime they committed and are now lying about (served concurrently — In other words, double the original offense, with a minimum of 1-2 years)
It’s simply not acceptable for police officers to lie, ever.
5 genewitch // Jun 11, 2009 at 4:38 PM
The Dave:
Ever? Come on. Even i think that police should be allowed to lie, just not on sworn statements, offical documents, stuff of that nature.
Citizens still need to know their rights and contact a lawyer if arrested, because the supreme court has determined that the police can lie during an interview with a suspect – and i really don’t care about that.
On the other hand, what i’d like to see go away is the changing of charges when the case reaches the DA’s office. If the police say they violated statute M and that isn’t in contention, the DA should not be able to upgrade the charges to something that carries a heavier sentence than M.
Furthermore, police should not be able to charge someone with 5 crimes stemming from one incident (as in Carlos’ case) just to hope that one or two stick in the courtroom.
6 The Dave // Jun 11, 2009 at 4:50 PM
genewitch, sorry if I lost some context when I edited, I’m speaking specifically to sworn statements (police reports, court documents, testimony, etc) — Lying in these types of situations is flat out unacceptable and needs to be dealt with harshly.
I don’t have a problem with the police lying in interviews, interrogations, etc.
As far as multiple charges, this can go end up going either way, sometimes they throw a bunch of stuff at you to see what sticks, other times you’re better off with a jury deciding you’re guilty of SOMETHING so they pick a lessor charge rather then a straight across guilty. This is an interesting balancing act, and not a change that should even be considered lightly.
7 Simon Jester // Jun 11, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Where are all the LEO apologists on posts like this?
8 genewitch // Jun 11, 2009 at 7:45 PM
Simon:
They only come out when “all the facts aren’t in” or “there’s more than one side to the story”
When it’s cut and dry, they come and comment saying that Carlos et al are “anti-cop with vendettas against the men and women in blue”
Get it now?
9 Michael Garcia // Jun 11, 2009 at 8:38 PM
Let me try being a cop apologist.
Buh Buh Buh…. these brave officers were just serving their community. If it wasn’t for them. Then this man would be stealing from you and raping your wives or husbands. So what if they get a little rough. And so what if they lied. They have to otherwise they can’t get the work done. You guys are just anti cop. If it wasn’t for the cops then it would be mad max road warriors all over.
10 Kol. Klink // Jun 12, 2009 at 3:55 AM
The guy’s white. He’s got money. And an attorney.
11 Kylie // Jun 12, 2009 at 9:08 AM
@Michael Garcia – that was pretty good, but you forgot one part of it. It goes something like this:
uh uh uh…the video is edited, so you can’t say they weren’t justified. the rest of the video will show that they were completely justified in kicking the sh*t out of him, cuz he was a bad dood that needed to get the sh*t kicked out of him.
12 The Dave // Jun 12, 2009 at 12:59 PM
Even if the guy did deserve to be assaulted, punishment is traditionally for a court to decide, not the police.
Leave a Comment