Michael Lank - Voir Dire

MR. JACKSON: Thank you. Uh, thank you for joining us late in the afternoon, Sergeant Lank. Um, I'm going to direct your attention to your relationship with the Albert family and some of the members of the Albert family. Do you know who Tim Albert is?

MR. JACKSON: Do you know who Chris Albert is?

MR. JACKSON: You know who Brian—

MR. JACKSON: I'll start over. You know who Tim Albert is?

MR. JACKSON: And do you know who Chris Albert is?

MR. JACKSON: And do you know who Brian Albert is?

MR. JACKSON: How do you know Tim Albert?

MR. JACKSON: How long have you known Tim?

MR. JACKSON: Uh, what about Chris Albert?

MR. JACKSON: How long have you known him?

MR. JACKSON: And how would you describe your relationship with Chris Albert?

MR. JACKSON: When did you last socialize with Chris Albert?

MR. JACKSON: What about Brian Albert? How would you describe your relationship with him?

MR. JACKSON: But you're closer to Chris?

MR. JACKSON: Um, have you ever described yourself as being a longtime, quote unquote, "drinking buddy" with Chris?

MR. JACKSON: Would you describe yourself previously — in years past — as being a drinking buddy of Chris?

MR. JACKSON: Have you ever gone out for drinks with Chris?

MR. JACKSON: So you socialized with them in circumstances in which y'all are drinking and — and [unintelligible]?

MR. JACKSON: Your relationship with Chris certainly goes all the way back to 2002?

MR. JACKSON: Right. Um, back in 2002, in August — while you were off duty — uh, were you out either drinking with Chris, or uh, in some way at a restaurant or a bar with Chris?

MR. JACKSON: Were you close in proximity to Chris when he was out drinking and at a bar?

MR. JACKSON: Was he at a restaurant?

MR. JACKSON: Were you at a bar?

MR. JACKSON: Uh, at some point, did you realize that Chris was getting into some sort of a physical altercation with somebody else in a parking lot?

MR. JACKSON: Did you jump into a fist fight in order to protect Chris Albert?

MR. JACKSON: When you say "your vehicle," your personal vehicle?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. So you were off duty, is that right?

MR. JACKSON: You had been drinking?

MR. JACKSON: Nothing wrong with that — but just — you had been drinking that afternoon?

MR. JACKSON: Um, Tim Albert was with Chris?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Uh, ultimately, when you realized that Chris Albert was in some sort of — some sort of fight or altercation — uh, you activated yourself as

MR. JACKSON: So that would be Mark, correct?

MR. JACKSON: And his brother Alfred —

MR. JACKSON: Alfredo?

MR. JACKSON: You got out of your car and approached the other men?

MR. JACKSON: You also called for Canton police backup?

MR. JACKSON: Canton police did in fact arrive, correct?

MR. JACKSON: Isn't it true that after you got involved and Canton Police arrived, you then instructed some of your colleague police officers to handcuff Alfredo?

MR. JACKSON: Isn't it true that after Alfredo was handcuffed, and for all intents and purposes physically incapacitated, you then approached Mark Lalo?

MR. JACKSON: You got into a fight with Mark Lalo?

MR. JACKSON: You punched him in the face at one point?

MR. JACKSON: So your story is he struck you first, then you punched him?

MR. JACKSON: His story, of course, is you punched him first.

MR. JACKSON: Well, you were sued in federal court and he told you his story in that lawsuit, correct?

MR. JACKSON: I will never ask you what the nature of any settlement in that case was — just the fact that you were sued, which is in a public document, which a federal lawsuit is. You were sued in federal court over this incident that I'm talking about, correct?

MR. JACKSON: And ultimately it was settled?

MR. JACKSON: I'll never ask you what the terms of the settlement were.

MR. JACKSON: You said that the criminal case was adjudicated — we'll get to that in just a second. Did you testify at that criminal case?

MR. JACKSON: All right. I want to sort of tailor this a little bit because we're on a bit of a time crunch and I want to be sensitive to the Court's time and your time. The allegation that Mark Lalo made against you is that you punched him, took him to the ground, continued to beat him, and bit him to the point of drawing blood, correct?

MR. JACKSON: Then he indicated that once the police officers that were there pulled you off of him, you then turned and walked over to Alfredo while he was still incapacitated — meaning physically handcuffed — and spat in his face?

MR. JACKSON: Ultimately, both men after this altercation were allowed to leave the location, correct?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. You're telling me now that Mark Lalo punched you first — a police officer — correct?

MR. JACKSON: And are you aware of any circumstance in which an individual would be able to punch a police officer — on duty or off duty — in the presence of other police officers and just be released? That wouldn't happen, would it?

MR. JACKSON: Did you tell them that you got punched?

MR. JACKSON: They certainly let Mark go, correct?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Alfredo was released? So the next day Mark and Alfredo showed up at Canton PD to file a complaint against you and some of the other police officers that were involved, correct?

MR. JACKSON: You didn't file a report for assault, for battery, or anything like that, correct?

MR. JACKSON: My question is, on that night, did you file a report?

MR. JACKSON: The next day, did you file a report?

MR. JACKSON: It's actually three days later, wasn't it?

MR. JACKSON: Does it sound like it? Is that in the time frame?

MR. JACKSON: And they were told to go away on that day?

MR. JACKSON: By the time they came back to file the complaint, police reports had been written, right?

MR. JACKSON: Once those police reports were written — after they indicated that they wanted to file a complaint — ultimately charges were brought against them, correct?

MR. JACKSON: After charges had been brought and both brothers ended up having to go to court and defend themselves, you ran into both brothers at a Mobil gas station?

MR. JACKSON: You confronted both brothers, correct?

MR. JACKSON: You approached both brothers?

MR. JACKSON: Isn't it true that you walked up and said "How you doing?" to the two guys, and one of them responded, "Not so good — you attacked me and now I've got to go to court"?

MR. JACKSON: Did you say "How are you doing," something to that nature, and did they respond something to the effect of "I'm not doing so good because you attacked me and now I've got to defend myself in court"?

MR. JACKSON: And then based on that interaction, you arrested them for witness intimidation, correct?

MR. JACKSON: So your claim now is that they made threats against you — a police officer at the time, a working police officer?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. And you reported those threats to the DA's office?

MR. JACKSON: And charges were brought against him — I'm sorry — a report was brought against them for that witness intimidation, correct?

MR. JACKSON: Ultimately, with regard to the assault charges for which they were arrested and tried, they were found not guilty in a public criminal adjudication, correct?

MR. JACKSON: And the DA's office threw out the witness intimidation charges because they were meritless, isn't that right?

MR. JACKSON: And all of this history that we've just talked about came on the heels of you assisting Chris and Tim Albert in a fight they said they had been in earlier in the evening, is that right?

MR. JACKSON: You just told us that the reason you got involved in this melee — this fight — to begin with was because Chris Albert approached you and said "I was in a fight with some guys earlier tonight, and here they come."

MR. JACKSON: And you just said that he was with Tim Albert.

MR. JACKSON: My mistake. Let's just leave it at he was with fiancée, okay. So all of this situation emanated from you coming to the aid of Chris Albert — your friend, longtime childhood friend — correct?

MR. JACKSON: Isn't it true that it had everything to do with it being Chris Albert?

MR. JACKSON: So just a regular random guy off the street, you would have conducted yourself the exact same way?

MR. JACKSON: Isn't it true that what you actually did, Sergeant Lank, in that particular circumstance was you came to the aid of a friend and you used your position as a police officer to further that assistance and that protection?

MR. JACKSON: That's all I have, your Honor.

MR. JACKSON: Okay. I have one — one, uh, slight area to cover, with the Court's permission. Okay. Concerning Tim Albert, um, and this issue — or the investigation where charges were brought against Tim Albert — that was a circumstance in which Tim Albert, in broad daylight, slammed into a parked car belonging to a woman and then fled the scene?

MR. JACKSON: Didn't you follow a trail of transmission fluid or something to find where he had gone?

MR. JACKSON: Correct. He didn't live there — he went to his brother's house, Brian?

MR. JACKSON: Yes. Okay, so you follow — follow the trail, uh, of whatever it is — fluid trail — all the way to where Tim Albert had fled to, and you basically had no choice, he had just slammed into the back of a car and then fled the scene, isn't that right?

MR. JACKSON: Correct. So you had said a minute ago that he hit a parked car — that's — that's incorrect?

MR. JACKSON: It was a — a vehicle that was — I believe it was stopped at a light. It wasn't a parked car, it was a vehicle that was stopped.

MR. JACKSON: Irrespective of whether the engine was running or parked or not, he hit a car, yes, with a woman in it, fled the scene — then you find him trying to hide out at 34 Fairview?

MR. JACKSON: And you didn't have much choice — I mean, there you have it, the evidence is right in front of you, you can't really cover that one up, right?

MR. JACKSON: Okay. Did you engage in any kind of a DUI investigation?

MR. JACKSON: Did you give him FSTs?

MR. JACKSON: Did you give him a breathalyzer?

MR. JACKSON: Did you ask him for a blood test?

MR. JACKSON: So no DUI investigation was really undertaken?

MR. YANNETTI: But you didn't do it — you didn't do what I just suggested, a full-blown DUI investigation — even though he hit another car and then fled the scene?

MR. YANNETTI: And that explanation, coming from Tim Albert, was "I'm really sorry, I panicked," right? It was something to that nature. And he turned around — well, I'll just cut to the chase. You all ended up charging him with a misdemeanor?

MR. YANNETTI: And he was given diversion?

MR. YANNETTI: And his record was wiped clean?

MR. YANNETTI: That's all I have.

MR. JACKSON: Thank you, your Honor. Um, I'll be very brief. I spoke about the Agar case a couple of days ago, and I think it's still attendant to our conversation today — or discussion today. Uh, that case stands for the proposition that it — it doesn't matter if the evidence reveals something other than something otherwise inadmissible, as long as the material — as long as the material elaborates on or establishes that there could be some sort of bias or prejudice. There doesn't have to be a bias or prejudice. I don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt or to clear and convincing evidence that there's a bias or prejudice, but if the evidence suggests that there could be bias or prejudice, that is proper fodder for the jury to consider. And that's what we're asking.

MR. JACKSON: Um, in this case, Sergeant Lank's willingness to activate himself as an officer, get involved with Chris Albert — although it was in 2002, and I know that that's something that Mr. Lally is going to say, and he's going to harp on this — was so long ago, that actually cuts against the Commonwealth's case. That shows how long these folks have been involved with each other and how deep their relationships run. For him to sort of deputize himself in that situation, uh, in order to help out his longtime friend whom he socializes with, drinks with, grew up with — um, establishes a bias and a prejudice in this case against Miss Read and in favor of the Alberts. And it's not like he had a tangential part to play in this — a role to play in this investigation.

MR. JACKSON: He was the very first officer to walk in that front door. He absolutely knew what he was going to find when he walked in the front door, which was the homeowners and possibly other witnesses. He engaged in an interview or a series of interviews that were not recorded. I have no idea what was said. The jurors are never going to find out exactly what was said, other than to take his word for it. The jurors have to be able to weigh and balance his credibility against an officer that — for instance, like even like Sergeant Goode, for instance — who seems to come across far, far more unbiased, just sort of a straight shooter. Sergeant Lank is not that person. He never should have walked in that front door. He should have said to his supervisors, "I have a relationship with the Albert family.

MR. JACKSON: I've known these folks for too long. I grew up with his brother or brothers. I've known them my whole life. I'm probably not the right person to make the decisions about this investigation." And unless and until the jurors know that and can weigh and balance it — they can toss it out if they want to, or they can adopt it if they want to — they need to be able to hear the evidence.

MR. JACKSON: So the Lalo brothers — I — I think I know, but that — that's — so far removed? No, I disagree. I think they're the ones that are closest to the situation. So we would ask — who's better to tell the jurors that they walked in? I — I can get the police report. That's it. I can tell the Court what — what it's dated. It's dated September 2nd or September 3rd. And the Lalos walked in on August 31st to make the complaint.

MR. JACKSON: I would probably seek to do it, with the Court's permission, through two pieces of evidence. One would be Mark or Alfredo, and I don't think I would use both of them.

MR. JACKSON: I would. Okay, fair enough. I would seek to ask Mark to join us. He would testify to the altercation, he would testify to the complaint, and then I would seek to either get a stipulation to the date of the police reports — I don't even need the police reports in — if I can't get a stipulation, then I probably would just ask the Court uh to be able to establish that the police report is a business record.

MR. JACKSON: If I — if I have them, we'd have to get them, right?

MR. JACKSON: I will, I will do my best to get them to the Court. I can't get them to the Court tonight.

MR. JACKSON: No, your Honor.