when i first began to read through this file and did the research i was stunned to realize that this man she found these cases the last time any court talked about bribery was nineteen forty four under chapter thirty eight and then in one nine hundred seventy seven case so we look at the standard of any rational trier to some surrounding are quite different than what you put in my fine and champagne sagen minimal claim count and the reason that's important in our view is that the form of communication we did have a second conversation with the ryan show and ryan show his a stilton police officer slash kaplan public works off not officer but boy and through different time periods through the winter of twenty thirteen and fourteen they interact and there's conversations about a variety of things and one of the things that is brought up in february is i'm sorry just suggesting to ryan show hey there's a driver there goes to the from danville the wild ways do the catlin rode and she might be dui here's her license plate check that out oh and she might have fourteen year old in the back seat which probably isn't a seat belt and she's got a conversation and suing from the conversation that rhymes your bald head had earlier with the stars now as the evidence show the state police and the vehicle code go hand in hand those troopers live for that and thank god they do because what they learn is a sophisticated method of both suppressing traffic violations issuing citations and the ability of stopping vehicles properly meantime there's a lot of drama no question about but the chief of the chilton police department mr steve coronet presented by the state testifies that my question or sending in tips or officer of the month or any all these other things that we considered to be rewards wrong foresman doing a job well rewards for citizens giving information citation whether or not she committed a crime or not it was never said the stops are all based upon observations so i always suggest at one point sir carlson who just came over from champagne at no time during my client's thirteen year career with the state police had he ever been investigated let alone charged with falsifying a report so now we have a better trooper dealing with less trained police officers and somehow a off hand suggestion becomes the basis for conviction for class two found not one but for may sixteenth and ma police suggests let's get eavesdropping about how obtain those devices they're not easy but for some reason they thought they needed to elevate this state bitter rivalry case to the level film sarges now there are some taxes that go back and forth and each side explained those tax differently another issue that obviously could not have been handled fifty years ago in the last bribery cases that have been  so what do we do with texts when they're presented as evidence i mean if it's conversation at least you can see the demeanor of the ups unless you have younger children like i do you need them to show it is done i'm just talking about being unseemly i'm talking about the tanner that you can read into that regardless of the language if you're the recipient of those are you being pressured to do something and if i'm being asked by state trooper issue hard copies isn't that taking away my discretion and my choice to issue a warrant or do whatever to some extent and we get to this area where there's a exchange of cop i told a cop talk might be something else and want to answer your question your honor the idea that i want to hardcopy his the prosecutor is part of the sense of this this is a bad cop but in the end let's proceed to see if we can develop a case to prosecute if it had been four more if it had been more significant if it had been not one instance between may the sixteenth of may the twenty second of a thirteen career year career i said yes but the answer was not that i don't do it he spoke to both of his peers to master se says it's ok if i do this so an extent he's saying ok can i continue to pursue this matter it should balti that comes up with steak dinner language and then all of a sudden this turns into a bribery case that that's beyond the pale particular in two thousand and seventeen when we've got bribery cases which were legitimate priors but we don't know what bribery is now and we do take into account you he chose not to do that he went through other officers who were from a with that area in order to prevent what he deemed to be a potential tragedy the basis of the breakup with mary bailey was her driving the fact that she drove drunk he was concerned about that now he may have may have misspoke or over a long line a little bit but it didn't beyond a reasonable doubt a class two felony how do we get there is assuming for the moment except that it's over charging isn't that what it is over charging which is entirely in the belly with of the state's attorney if they can prove their case and a jury thought the case was proved and a jury two thousand and sixteen two thousand and seven they know how much meals cost it is the minimus in terms of tickets for the world series but it's still a gratuity or beyond a gratuity i mean i don't if the elements of the crime are approved and the jury believes the witnesses are we supposed to criticise the state for going after the case and for charging more th thirteen dollars steak dinner that morphed into a chicken dinner at the possum truck i mean how can that be a class two felony in this day and age i mean what's a seventeen ninety five state dinner at a nice restaurant that happens to be her early bird special so i was seventeen ninety five instead of thirty two granted that part what i'm suggesting is that if your department has a policy that says you can except your two days that is within the realm of acceptable behavior i asked you mr show about administrative or community decision some entity would be giving you that a war and the person who's giving you your war would just be a representative of that in a day and it might be a twenty five dollars gift certificate might be if you were football player to star in your helmet i mean that's different than a police officer which i  if they had done so would not have been not guilty you know more likely to have been given the instructions and the lack of definition perhaps but i'm my point is is that th the legislature need to do something to give some guidance out there because it's not there if the if the if we don't been clear about that somehow there have been some case law it would have been a trial  has just no justice nec pointed out the jury could just simply believe this was a guy trying to harass his exparel for and trying to influence his other fellow officers to make this st that is the purest form of bribery i'm paying you to make a traffic stop to make this specific traffic stop if you make this specific traffic stop of this specific person i will pay i don't think there's even if it's an even if he thinks the guy's a cheap target for making the payment do we know it doesn't matter that this was a case which for other officers to make stuff especially when he's telling him with the respect of the one who's talking to him in the morning saying this car with this license plate will will pop probably i don't know there's anything we could do or purview to decide whether this was appropriate that this is correct exactly right it's the prosecutor's decision whether to bring the charges what charges to bring and the evidence was pursuit of the jury the jury is properly instructed us the elements of her bribery and the jury believed that the defendant was acting improperly because they're not state employees they are employees of the city but i submit that the con that is involved here clearly falls within conduct that was barred by th was acting in good faith to get a drunk driver off the road who was trying to be stay out of self there's absolutely no evidence of that in this trial record there is no evidence the ex pro friends driving history or no evidence that she's known to be a drunk driver the only testimony is that he wins these other officers as a if you stop this car  this is a guy who just take the office of the jerk to clint lou this is a guy who's ticked off his girlfriend once other officers to harass her and is willing to pay them to do this paying someone to influence disturb that determination whether or not the prosecutor should have brought the charges or over charge has not affect the sufficiency or the amount  duties there's the intent to influence them ok to make the stuff ok that's right the fact that he's a chief briber doesn't matter because that the statute does not contain any monetary ok perhaps i missed both the reason i brought up prime stuff is to suggest that it is not ok it's incurred for people with vendettas to contact the police and drop a dime on them obviously painful so it's conduct or unsolicited pay your trenchant to this person because i don't like you consider that ok trooper says that to a small town police officer or a part time police officer that rises to the level of i have limited choices and whatever circumstances where he initiated the contact he made it more of a you know that fuckin pisses me off too what are we going to do kind of this little you know short guy courage and a big bear to get to move further but that certainly can't be part of the crime when you talk about the events of may the sixteenth and may the twenty second i don't know that it's part of the crime has part of contacts well it certainly paints a picture to the springfield knew their course evidence was taken took about a year and subsequently the suit starts this tended his resignation so he was on for thirteen years tendered his resignation by the time trial agreed that probation would be in the offer to a class two found to indicate your question how that happened but i'm i'm suggesting as well that had shouted words or master sergeant thomas said said no you can't involve this in any least from the demeanor that was observed i think by the jury indicated that for him and a lot of police officers do i prosecution and arrest is a is well beyond just part of their job so certainly he showed poor judgment certainly he engaged in behavior that if it was under the light of day certainly would make the only state police look bad but the facts are he testified  this under stress law enforcement just like nurses an e r doctors they say things but they should but they don't really mean because of the stress and because of what they've seen and what their job