CLEVELAND, OH – New York District Attorney Cyrus Vance’s decision to criminally charge ex-Franklin Templeton investment firm manager Amy Cooper for making a false call of a crime against Harvard-degreed audubon enthusiast and former Marvel cartoonist Christian Cooper is the right and expected use of an existing New York law that has its counterpart in Ohio.
Amy Cooper has been issued a desk appearance ticket for an arraignment scheduled for October 14, 2020. At least one of the charges will be a Class A misdemeanor under New York state’s Penal Code section 240.50. The sentence carries jail time of anywhere from 15 days up to 364 days or less than one year. It specifically is captioned “falsely reporting an incident in the third degree.”
In a June 7, 2020 statement on the New York District Attorney’s website, Vance opened the door for other victims to use the existing law local prosecutors should have been using all along to stop the practice.
“Today our Office initiated a prosecution of Amy Cooper for Falsely Reporting an Incident in the Third Degree. Our office will provide the public with additional information as the case proceeds. At this time I would like to encourage anyone who has been the target of false reporting to contact our Office. We are strongly committed to holding perpetrators of this conduct accountable,” Vance said in a statement.
Cooper’s attorney, Robert Barnes, in a statement offered that his client was not a “perpetrator,” but a “cancel culture” victim. The “cancel culture” concept is based on the idea of “cancelling” a person’s career who makes offensive comments through public backlash. Barnes’ words are captured in part below.
“When all the facts are known, Amy Cooper will be found not guilty of the single misdemeanor charge she faces. Based on a misunderstood 60 seconds of video, she lost her job, her home and her reputation,” his statement read.
“Public shaming, lost employment, denied benefits & now prison time for a misperceived, momentary alleged ‘wrong think’? For words said in a sixty second interaction where even the alleged victim calls this reaction way excessive? This criminalized, cancel culture is cancerous and precarious. That is why acquitting Amy Cooper is important.”
Despite Barnes’ attempt to re-cast Cooper’s call to police to “cancel” Christian Cooper because he was an “African American man,” the ex-Franklin Templeton employee’s “caught on camera” call to police the world has seen as evidence is more than likely headed for a plea deal once he gets past his public rhetoric.
The language of the New York law staring Cooper in the face on October 14, 2020 is inescapably straightforward. The malicious Cooper would be convicted at either a bench or jury trial just on the facts and her apologetic confession to the “public” instead of directly to the man she’d wronged.
A person is guilty of falsely reporting an incident in the third degree when, knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to be false or baseless, he or she:
1. Initiates or circulates a false report or warning of an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime, catastrophe or emergency under circumstances in which it is not unlikely that public alarm or inconvenience will result; or
2. Reports, by word or action, to an official or quasi-official agency or organization having the function of dealing with emergencies involving danger to life or property, an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a catastrophe or emergency which did not in fact occur or does not in fact exist; or
3. Gratuitously reports to a law enforcement officer or agency (a) the alleged occurrence of an offense or incident which did not in fact occur; or (b) an allegedly impending occurrence of an offense or incident which in fact is not about to occur; or (c) false information relating to an actual offense or incident or to the alleged implication of some person therein; or 4. Reports, by word or action, an alleged occurrence or condition of child abuse or maltreatment or abuse or neglect of a vulnerable person which did not in fact occur or exist to:(a) the statewide central register of child abuse and maltreatment, as defined in title six of article six of the social services law or the vulnerable persons’ central register as defined in article eleven of such law, or(b) any person required to report cases of suspected child abuse or maltreatment pursuant to subdivision one of section four hundred thirteen of the social services law or to report cases of suspected abuse or neglect of a vulnerable person pursuant to section four hundred ninety-one of such law, knowing that the person is required to report such cases, and with the intent that such an alleged occurrence be reported to the statewide central register or vulnerable persons’ central register. Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.
Section 3 of the law not only convicts Cooper, it appears to be an offering from Vance to celebrity victims of “Me Too” complaints as a defense. For reasons like the image offered by Cooper’s malicious attempt to exploit her white femininity to cause Christian Cooper’s arrest, Vance has been reluctant in prosecuting old rape and sexual assault complaints against celebrities like Harvey Weinstein.
Cooper’s on-camera performance is why so many of the “Me Too” women complainers are often disbelieved. The entire world saw her dramatic acting job-like call to police. They heard the force of her words and saw her fake hysteria in her attempt to use New York police as her personal hit men to take out an American Negro.
Barnes should be careful. According to his own statement, Vance’s office has thus far charged Amy Cooper with a single offense. It’s a long way between now and her October 14, 2020 arraignment date.
The New York Times has quickly sought to generate some Amy Cooper sympathy out of Christian Cooper by portraying him as an uncooperative victim. The writer, Jan Ransom, appears to have solicited comments from Christian Cooper and American Negro politicians and scholars who view her as being punished enough. According to Ransom’s New York Times piece, Christian Cooper issued a “statement” after learning of Vance’s charges.
“On the one hand, she’s already paid a steep price. That’s not enough of a deterrent to others? Bringing her more misery just seems like piling on,” Cooper reportedly said of the woman other published reports have shared is someone with whom he does not want to meet.
According to Ransom, Christian Cooper “added” that “he understood there was a greater principle at stake and that this should be defended. “ So if the DA feels the need to pursue charges, he should pursue charges. But he can do that without me.”
Based on the video and his client’s decision to surrender her dog, which has now been returned, Amy Cooper can also be criminally charged by Vance’s office with animal cruelty and violating the city’s “leash law” under its health code. Vance could add a charge of “menacing in the third degree” under Section 120.15 of the state’s penal code since she intended for police to commit some harm against audubon enthusiast Christian Cooper.
There’s the dispatcher’s time Barnes’ client stole. She also diverted police away from a legitimate emergency and created a manpower shortage. The trip to Central Park cost gas and added wear and tear to the public vehicle. More theft because of her false call and the fake crime scene she left. New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio is pleased with the prosecution. DeBlasio’s wife, like Christian Cooper, is an American Negro. He originally described the female Cooper’s acts as “racism, pure and simple.”
Vance is using a law similar to one which exists in Ohio that ex-Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney Tim McGinty should have used to charge the person who called police on Tamir Rice in 2014. That person’s identity was never publicly-discussed despite the insidious aftermath of his call. In Ohio the offense is called “making false alarms” pursuant to R.C. 2917.32.
(A) No person shall do any of the following: (1) Initiate or circulate a report or warning of an alleged or impending fire, explosion, crime, or other catastrophe, knowing that the report or warning is false and likely to cause public inconvenience or alarm; (2) Knowingly cause a false alarm of fire or other emergency to be transmitted to or within any organization, public or private, for dealing with emergencies involving a risk of physical harm to persons or property; (3) Report to any law enforcement agency an alleged offense or other incident within its concern, knowing that such offense did not occur. (B) This section does not apply to any person conducting an authorized fire or emergency drill. (C) (1) Whoever violates this section is guilty of making false alarms.
(2) Except as otherwise provided in division (C)(3), (4), (5), or (6) of this section, making false alarms is a misdemeanor of the first degree. (3) Except as otherwise provided in division (C)(4) of this section, if a violation of this section results in economic harm of one thousand dollars or more but less than seven thousand five hundred dollars, making false alarms is a felony of the fifth degree. (4) If a violation of this section pertains to a purported, threatened, or actual use of a weapon of mass destruction, making false alarms is a felony of the third degree. (5) If a violation of this section results in economic harm of seven thousand five hundred dollars or more but less than one hundred fifty thousand dollars and if division (C)(4) of this section does not apply, making false alarms is a felony of the fourth degree. (6) If a violation of this section results in economic harm of one hundred fifty thousand dollars or more, making false alarms is a felony of the third degree. (D) (1) It is not a defense to a charge under this section that pertains to a purported or threatened use of a weapon of mass destruction that the offender did not possess or have the ability to use a weapon of mass destruction or that what was represented to be a weapon of mass destruction was not a weapon of mass destruction. (2) Any act that is a violation of this section and any other section of the Revised Code may be prosecuted under this section, the other section, or both sections. (E) As used in this section, “economic harm” and “weapon of mass destruction” have the same meanings as in section 2917.31 of the Revised Code. Amended by 129th General AssemblyFile No.29, HB 86, §1, eff. 9/30/2011. Effective Date: 09-27-2002 .
Cleveland Councilman Kevin Conwell failed to use Ohio’s criminal complaint process found in R.C. 2935.09 and 2935.10 when a Case Western Reserve University student called police on him for standing on a public sidewalk that flows through the “campus” near his home. The incident occurred in March 2018 under Michael O’Malley as the county’s prosecuting attorney.
The student called 911 to complain that a black male with missing teeth and wearing a blue hat was acting funny and mumbling to himself. He said something to her, but she didn’t understand what he was saying. In her mind he just didn’t belong on the campus and she wanted police to do something about it. Conwell’s reaction was typical.
He held a news conference to discuss racial profiling. That produced media attention for him and an apology from CWRU president Barbara Synder.
What Conwell did not pursue were criminal charges against the student caller for the false report of a crime. He sought no charges against CWRU police for their unlawful detention. Conwell failed to even obtain confirmation from his own law director that the city council he serves on has never entered an agreement with CWRU’s board that authorizes its law enforcement officers to make stops on public streets and sidewalks past the campus’ property line. The streets and sidewalks through the campus belong to the taxpayers of Cleveland.
Had Conwell been more versed in Ohio laws after 16 years on council, he would have called Cleveland police to arrest CWRU police for stopping him. R.C. 737.11 gives “municipal” police criminal law enforcement officers authority everywhere inside the municipal corporation to obey and enforce “all” federal, state and local criminal laws. Without an agreement entered between council and CWRU’s board that would let campus cops engage in warrantless pursuits pursuant to R.C. 2935.03, CWRU police have no authority on the public sidewalks and streets surrounding the campus’ property. Highway patrol troopers have authority on state college campuses.
The issue was larger than the “racial profiling” one Conwell offered as his perspective of what had taken place with the racist student’s 911 call about an “unh huh. Black” man who doesn’t belong being on the campus. The opportunity New York Mayor DiBlasio and DA Vance saw in the prosecution of Amy Cooper was missed here in smaller-minded Cuyahoga County.