[Music] [Music] Calvin Riley is innocent you have every reason to question every single thing these officers testified about they are not credible officer Oliver lied to you on under oath and she lied over and over from the second she pulled Mr clamator and misstatement of the law damn they didn't even get home girl a chance to speak over and over from the second she pulled Mr Riley over until the second she got off that witness stand officer M lied to you about what she placed Mr Riley under arrest for and she lied to her s Sergeant about what she found in the car these officers are making things up these officers are laughing these officers are asking each other if their cameras are on these officers are turning F and that is one thing they were laughing too and that's I was like man like I don't see anything funny all about any of this situation so like they're handling somebody's life and they're just G to laugh and joke about it like that's some type of joke I a want that as officer their cameras these officers are taking an oath to to swear to tell the truth and then these officers are lying they did it right there in front of you when you apply the law judge Jones instructs you on with the conflicts and the evidence and the complete lack of evidence you have seen over these two days it is clear Calvin Riley is not guilty officer Oliver opened a bottle of vodka a bottle that had never been opened before you hear her break the seal pour it out and then put it back in the car then she used that evidence against him she and officer MTH told their Sergeant they found a bunch of alcohol stashed in his car and that the bottle was open this is simply not true there is nothing in that cup which if you watch the video closely has a lid on it and and the vodka bottle that was opened by Oliver members of the jury these officers want you to believe that they only turned off their cameras because they weren't investigating anymore yes they were the sergeant on scene asks if they're live officer M asks if they're live Oliver shakes her head no Sergeant turns his off and mose turns hers off they they are all still investigating your jury instructions tell you that you were all to get you all get to decide what is reliable nothing that these officers testify to is reliable let's start from the very beginning Oliver and moose are at a completely different traffic stop Oliver says she notices Mr Riley's car going by without headlights and at a high rate of speed she doesn't have a radar gun that's just her word which we know is not believable she tells you that he was swerving none of that is captured on her camera there is no camera footage of it it's just her word which we knew is not believable she tells you that she noticed his eyes were glossy through his glasses and on Friday for the first time she adds that they're bloodshot she's been under oath twice before as well as written a statement that was also under oath and none of those three times did she ever say there were bloodshot the first time was on Friday members of the jury you can see Mr Riley's Eyes on Camera at one point he leans into officer M's body camera his eyes are not glossy his eyes are not bloodshot again her word is not believable she tells you that she smelled an odor alcohol but in her camera footage the first thing she tells officer moose is that she can't really smell anything she tells you that she smell marijuana and that's one thing I definitely wanted to even point out too cuz at first she said they a't smell anything but for them to get out the car they say oh yeah we smell you know marijuana cuz they just use that t especially they ain't got a search they just say that just to search the car and that's where the problems start to come in and that's where they be like oh well you know we found this and that and you know in this case the liquor ball that was closed and well was closed until she opened it poured it out and you know on top of that I really don't believe that they should even cut their body cams off like that it just stay on from what they put the suit on to where they take it off like for them to be able to turn it off should be really illegal or they should just not be able to because yeah they were still investigating after you know they turn their body cameras off again after telling M that she can't really smell anything and there is no marijuana paraphernalia or anything regarding it nothing found in the car and let me take a moment to point to something out here because the state is making a huge deal about Mr Riley yelling the officers call him belligerent and I rate members of the jury he's completely cooperative and polite up until she says she smells marijuana that's when it all changes at that point he knows exactly what they're trying to do and yes he's absolutely upset and he was very right to be he's being falsely accused for something and he is mad about it he's completely justified in acting the way he did and also remember how he interacts with MTH at first Cooperative with turning off the car Cooperative with taking the keys out Cooperative with getting out of the car remember how he interacts with Sergeant Smith completely cooperative and respectful it is only when officer Oliver says that she smells marijuana either saying she couldn't smell anything that he gets upset and it is completely understandable so now Mo gets on scene Oliver asks her to verify Mr Riley's address as 429 West forvard Street but when asked Mr Riley said it was a family house he never said that that was his residence that was something the officer M just assumed and remember at this point it's two officers there with Mr Riley Oliver wants Mo to see if she thinks this is a DUI and is excited to watch her conduct an investigation officer Oliver promises that she'll do the next one the state wants you to believe that the evidence tampering and the lying about it doesn't matter because he was already under arrest for DUI but that is not true when they order him out of the car which he does cooperative they arrest him handcuff him and tell him it's because his license is suspended and again when they're searching his car they indicate that they're going to charge him with driving while license suspended they say dwlsr which means driving while license suspended or revoked they are telling him that he was only under arrest for a suspended driver's license but now they want to believe they want you to believe that he was under arrest for DUI their testimony was that he should have inferred that he was under arrest for DUI but members of the jury the law does not allow you to make inferences that is reasonable doubt the very first time that anyone tells him that he is under arrest for DUI is when they're taking him to jail that is the first time they tell him that and and that is after they've already searched his car and used that bottle of alcohol as evidence against him and this is also very important distinction members of the jury remember at this point all the police need is probable cause to arrest someone that's a very low standard versus what you must today here in the trial when a man's Liberty is at stake the law is clear the state must convince you of every El Beyond and to the exclusion of every single Reasonable Doubt and there is overwhelming doubt in this case now Mr Riley is in the back of the police car he is under arrests and again at this point he is justifiably and understandably upset but members of the jury listen to him listen to a spe in his articulation and his communication with the officers he is not slurred he is not confused he is just mad that he is being falsely accused and now we get to the search and I would encourage you to watch the search from both of the officer angles both officer M and officer Oliver who both had volor cameras on the first thing they notice is the air freshener or maybe it's colog they think but according to them it is very strong and they immediately assume he must have sprayed it right before they came up to his window but they absolutely have no evidence of this then Oliver finds the bottle of vodka and M immediately assumes that's what's in the cup members of the jury this is a never Bend open completely sealed closed bottle of AA but it doesn't matter because m just knows based on her training and experience that it must have been what was in the empty cup that empty cup that she later tells Sergeant Smith has a mixed drink in it again with no evidence of either of those things she is assuming things again and the law does not allow you to assume the jury instructions do not allow you to assume and here please play pay P close attention to what they say and how they say it they are laughing they are laughing members of the jury and they are using those magic words that officers they use it's based on my training and experience and it's because they know that with those words they can do whatever they want think about this too let's talk about the smell you have so many inconsistent statements about the smell which is a factor that judge Jones tells you you should consider in weighing credibility at first Oliver can't smell anything at all then moose says there's an odor of alcohol then when they get him out of the car Oliver say she smells marijuana which M testified that she didn't smell at all and that's what they use to come get you especially ain't got no search do hey I smell this I smell that get you and do all that that's what this lore is trying to you know convince the jury to let them know like they're really leaving out the part of where they was like lying and backtracking a lot of stuff you know the the state or the da or whoever was a representing the state that blonde lady she was really trying to make it seem you know he was leaving the bar he was drunk and you know trying to convince them one side but let's forget about what the cops and officers did uh prior to this let's just forget about that but also Oliver says he reeks of alcohol then when they go back to search the car using the smell of marijuana to do that again which moose did not smell they immediately smell air freshener then say Oh it must be cologne and it's a very strong odor of cologne so which one is it you have to have questions about all of that and that is a reasonable doubt and I know it was frustrating I'm sorry that we had to get up and down and in and out during the testimonies but it's because every time the officers were confronted with their own inconsistencies they wanted to fight it remember the jury instruction when the W was the witness honest and straightforward in answering the attorney's questions no they weren't remember M's words to you according to her when people give inconsistent statements it means they're impaired under that logic every time that these offers ser had given inconsistent statements under oath they must be impaired now Baka please do not believe that this is a simple mistake do not believe that this is not a big deal it is not just that Oliver did what she did but it's that she lied about it under oath in a pre-trial hearing the bottle was had never been opened before you hear the SE will break when she twists it off and throws it back in the car on scene all the officers continuously refer to it as open Sergeant Smith specifically asks if the bottle was opened moose says yes and he shrugs in agreement because they all know an open bottle is a huge piece of evidence for DUI investigation and also remember they're all asking if they're live if their cameras are on and right after that they all turned them off and today again M wanted to deny that she used the ball of vaka as evidence even though again under oath at a pre-trial hearing she said that she did use it as evidence members of the jury is it not against the law to drink and drive but the state has to prove to you beyond and to the exclusion of every single Reasonable Doubt is that Mr Riley was under the fluence of alcohol to the extent that his normal faculties were impaired they weren't they just weren't he thought his headlights came on automatically which is reasonable there is no evidence of his speeding his eyes are not bloodshot or watery that's all the evidence that they've brought you and because there wasn't any other evidence the police manufactured their own on page two of your jury instructions you'll see the definition for normal faculties Sergeant Smith today testified that Mr Riley was able to walk from one car to another that he didn't trip stumble or fall he testified that Mr Riley was able to make a call dialing the number even with his hands handcuffed behind his back gratefully thankfully there was body warn camera footage that night because without it everything Mr Riley was worried about would be true that these three officers would make up a story and evidence against him that these three officers would make up a story and evidence against him and it would just be his word against theirs but thankfully there was footage at least there was footage some of the time as their cameras were off some of it too what else did we get to see in that footage we got to see Mr Riley a 56-year-old man born and raised in Tallahasse Florida a barber who had employees that work with him at his shop a man who had to endure this awful horrible night with three police officers surrounding his car arresting him and making up evidence against him judge Jones read you the instruction to Reasonable Doubt A Reasonable Doubt is not a mere possible doubt a speculative imaginary or Force doubt such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt on the other hand if after carefully considering comparing and weighing all of the evidence there is not an abiding conviction of guilt or if having a conviction it is is one which is not stable but one which waivers and vacillates then the charge is not proved Beyond every Reasonable Doubt and you must find Mr Riley not guilty because the doubt is reasonable if you have questions those are doubts if you think Mr Riley didn't look impaired that's a reasonable doubt if you question whether just two beers make someone impaired that is a reasonable doubt if you question all the different smells and odors that these officers claim to have smelled that is a reasonable doubt if you question officer Oliver's actions which you absolutely should that's a reasonable doubt if you question officer M's actions which you again you absolutely should that is a reasonable doubt when you use judge Jones instructions and questions whether these Witnesses have given testimony today that is different with previous testimony which they have that is a reasonable doubt when you know for certain that they only told Mr Riley he was under arrest for driving on a suspended license and it wasn't until after they searched his car and planted evidence that they then charged with the UI that is a reasonable doubt now members of the jury I'm about to end my argument and the state is going to come up here and have the last word these officers get to arrest Mr Riley lie about the evidence they found and then the state gets to have the last word in trying to convince you to disregard all of that please don't do that remember all of these reasonable doubts but most important use your common sense use your your own review of these officers and this footage see the truth understand why Mr Riley was so upset because he was being falsely accused falsely arrested and evidence was falsely manufactured here they get to have the last word up here but you get to have the last word back there this case is full of Reasonable Doubt and when you follow the law in this case you your last words have to be not guilty please find Mr Riley not guilty