The Brady List - Cops who are known to be liars!
The interesting thing about this article is not that Lovelace got a job with the Pinal County Sheriff after doing work to get him re-elected.
Or that Pinal County Sheriff hired a rogue cop who has cost the city of Chandler millions for the 2 people he killed.
The interesting thing is that the police are required to maintain a list of cops who are assumed to be liars due to the 1963 Supreme Court decision Brady v. Maryland. Why arn't thes cops fired? Why are these cops allowed to continue to patrol and arrest people when they are known liars?
"Lovelace is on a list of police officers the Maricopa County Attorney's Office deems to be untruthful, known as the Brady List.Source
Ex-Chandler officer Lovelace hired by Babeu
Gary Grado, Tribune
July 24, 2009 - 6:45PM
Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu hired a former Chandler police officer who was at the center of two wrongful death lawsuits that ended in almost $5 million in settlements.
Dan Lovelace, who was acquitted in July 2004 of homicide and endangerment charges in connection with one of the incidents, was hired in May and graduated from the county's detention officer academy last week.
Babeu said he doesn't believe Lovelace's past will increase his liability.
Babeu, also a former Chandler police officer, said he disagreed with the city when it settled the two lawsuits.
"When a government makes a decision to settle in lieu of long-term defense of their employees and what is right, I believe that sets a bad precedent and quite literally invites further litigation," Babeu said.
Babeu also denied criticism that the hiring smacks of cronyism, a practice he said during his campaign was poisoning the sheriff's office and would end under his administration.
Babeu and Lovelace both served on Chandler's police force, although not at the same time. Babeu used to be president of the Chandler Law Enforcement Association, a union that represents Chandler's officers, including Lovelace.
As a member of CLEA, Lovelace's defense against charges of second-degree murder and endangerment were paid for by the Legal Defense Fund, an organization that defends officers accused of crimes while on duty.
Babeu also frequently attended Lovelace's criminal trial.
Babeu said Lovelace, who campaigned for him during the 2008 election, received no special treatment during the lengthy hiring process. And while Lovelace, 44, did campaign for him, he was not one of his top campaigners, the sheriff said.
A review of campaign finance reports showed that Lovelace did not contribute any money to Babeu's campaign.
Babeu said he considered several factors in hiring his old friend.
Lovelace, who could not be reached for comment, was acquitted by a jury, and the state refused to revoke his police certification. Lovelace also finished at the top of his academy class, won honors for physical fitness and was chosen by his class to speak at the graduation.
"Dan Lovelace is not only all of those things, he is very disciplined, he's fit, he's well-educated, he has a college degree, and he still maintained through all of those trials and tribulations in his life that he held his head high," Babeu said.
The sheriff also is not troubled that Lovelace is on a list of police officers the Maricopa County Attorney's Office deems to be untruthful, known as the Brady List.
The list is named after a 1963 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. Maryland, which requires prosecutors to report any suspected untruthfulness of police officers to the court and criminal defendants.
Supporting documents pertaining to Lovelace's placement on the list were not immediately available from the Maricopa County Attorney's Office.
However, former County Attorney Richard Romley said a week after Lovelace's acquittal that he was considering placing him on the list because there were inconsistencies between Lovelace's trial testimony and statements he gave to internal affairs investigators.
"Clearly, there was an aggressive agenda by the former county attorney on this, so I am not surprised and I have no concern on that," Babeu said.
Lovelace was with Chandler from 1997 until his termination in November 2002, and in that time he was involved in two deadly incidents, with the city paying $4.74 million to settle the lawsuits that arose from them.
The first came on March 13, 2000, when Lovelace was on his way to the station at the end of his shift. He came across a stolen pickup truck that sped away as he whipped a U-turn to follow.
Rosemarie Forker, 38, sped the truck through a residential area before heading north on McQueen Road toward Warner Road, where Bradley Downing was heading west.
She ran red lights at two other intersections as she headed toward Warner Road, where she struck Downing, killing the 19-year-old college freshman instantly. Forker pled guilty to manslaughter and is set to be freed from prison in May 2010.
Lovelace was given a letter of admonishment for not using his siren in the chase, but he was cleared of allegations of two other policy violations.
Downing's divorced parents sued Chandler and each received settlements of $1.4 million.
Downing's father, Dr. Casey Downing, took his case to trial in June 2002 before eventually settling.
At trial, his attorney leveled accusations of negligence toward two other officers involved in the chase and said Lovelace failed to declare a chase, as required by policy, and failed to give crucial information to his supervising sergeant.
That trial ended in a mistrial, and the elder Downing eventually agreed to the settlement in October 2003.
In November 2003, Chandler paid $1.94 million and an insurance company paid an additional, undisclosed sum to settle a lawsuit with the family of Dawn Rae Nelson.
Lovelace and Nelson crossed paths on Oct. 11, 2002, when Nelson, 35, pulled into a Walgreens drive-through with her toddler son in the backseat to fill a fake prescription.
Lovelace was home and about to call in that he was off when he decided to respond to the pharmacy.
He shot and killed Nelson as she sped away, squealing her tires and knocking over his motorcycle.
Lovelace testified at trial that he fired because he believed he would either be crushed against the pharmacy walls or dragged under her tires.
The case represented the first time that four-term Maricopa County Attorney Richard Romley charged a police officer with a crime in connection with an on-duty shooting.
The prosecutor alleged that the shooting was reckless because Lovelace fired from behind Nelson, indicating he wasn't in danger.
A jury acquitted him.
Lovelace fought to get his job back after the trial, but a city panel and the city manager upheld the termination.
The Arizona Peace Officers Standard and Training Board decided against revoking his certification.