Commonwealth v. W.P.
Undercover police officers were on their way to a drug surveillance location when they observed the defendant and a friend drinking a beer on the steps of a property. They decided to stop and conduct an investigation, and claim that the defendant walked away from police and then refused to answer their questions. According to the officers, there was a nearby car that was blasting loud music, and the defendant instructed the police to go into “his” car to turn the music down (presumably so they could continue to remain silent). When one of the officers leaned into the car, he conveniently noticed a bag (which, of course was open) that contained a firearm. According to the police, the defendant then claimed that he was a federal agent who was entitled to carry the firearm without a license, and that he was exempt from all laws. Although the car was not registered to the defendant, they claim that he showed them title to the car in his name, yet they failed to collect that document into evidence and failed to mention that fact in their police report. Both officers’ credibility were thoroughly attacked on cross examination, and numerous inconsistencies in their stories were exposed. Mr. Link, a Gun Lawyer from Philadelphia, PA assisted the jury in seeing these inconsistencies which then a quick verdict of not guilty was reached.