Friday, August 20, 2010

Victim's Attorney Claims Bisard May Have Purchased Vodka Before Deadly Crash

An attorney representing one of the victims of a crash caused by IMPD Officer David Bisard claims in a letter to the Marion County prosecutor he has evidence Bisard may have purchased a 1.75 liter bottle of vodka in a CVS store within a 48-hour period prior to the accident that left one man dead and two others seriously injured. The reliability of this evidence, however, may be less than reliable based upon a WTHR report this evening. Bruce Kehoe, the attorney for one of the victims, relied on information he received from a CVS customer who may have seen Bisard make the purchase at one of two CVS store locations on the city's northeast side. Kehoe is calling on the prosecutor's office to use its subpoena power to determine whether surveillance records or credit card purchases would offer further proof of the purchase. The letter suggests the officer was dressed in full uniform when the purchase was allegedly made.

15 comments:

Paul K. Ogden said...

FYI, Vodka is the alcohol prefered by a lot of alcoholics as it is difficult to smell on one's breat unlike whiskey, beer, etc.

Indy4U2C said...

Now that is sensationalization! An attorney wants to subpoena evidence that a person made a lawful purchase of an item within 48 hours of a tragedy????

Now I'm sure that attorney would have been trained that subpoenas should have some relevance to the matter at hand! This would not be relevant to the cost of gasoline, leave alone to the tragedy.

It's called sensationalization.

Advance Indiana said...

Hard liquor, in general, Paul is preferred by alcoholics because they don't have to consume as much to get buzzed. There was so much media at the site of the crash and top brass from IMPD. I'm having a difficult time believing the police conspired to cover it up. It probably doesn't help, though, that Jason Cottey, Jack Cottey's son, was one of the police officers at the scene investigating.

Indy Student said...

Who is Jack or Jason Cottey and how doesn't it help?

Downtown Indy said...

Lawful purchase, but in violation of department regulations if true. In uniform - you don't buy booze. In your police car - you don't buy booze. And if booze is consumed within 24 of active duty and/or you are not 0.00%, you don't go on active duty.

Advance Indiana said...

Jack Cottey is the former sheriff of Marion County. Check out this video of his reaction to his car being towed after he parked it illegally on the Circle. You'll get the picture. http://advanceindiana.blogspot.com/2009/10/will-jack-cotteys-coattails-help-tim.html

Bob said...

Doesn't the prosecutor's office have deputies on the Fatal Alcohol Crash Team (FACT)?

If yes, what responsibility did they play in allowing someone who could not draw blood under Title 9? I thought their job was to advise on how to avoid these kind of problem.

artfuggins said...

The police would get the security tapes to examine for any other suspected murdered. Why shouldn't they do it for this suspected murderer in a IMPD uniform.

indyernie said...

Bisard if found guilty should pay the price...until then what happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?
Reading this reminds me of a scene out of an old western movie. The one with the lynch mob in the local saloon working up some courage.

Paul K. Ogden said...

AI,

You're definitely right that hard liquor is preferred by alcholics over things like wine and beer. But some hard liquor like whiskey can be smelled a mile away.

I had a great uncle by marriage who was an alcoholic. He would leave bottles of vodka hidden around the house.

Paul K. Ogden said...

George Crooks of IMP who was demoted ran for Pike School Board. He was endorsed by the Pike Teachers Association in the at-large race but finished about 2 or 3 people behind me in the vote tally. Both of us finished out of the money.

Paul K. Ogden said...

Indyernie, I think the problem is how IMPD screwed up the investigation. Then again, I know that anything that raises questions about the Ballard-run IMPD wouldn't sit right with you would it?

indyernie said...

Paul anyone who knows me or who has read what I've posted knows that I am PRO public safety. I know and talk with enough LEO's to know that the "Blue Line" in Indianapolis is very thin and is actually broken in most spots. Our LEO's if they trust you, will tell you that they want the troublemakers and bad cops off the department. I don't think that there is a cover up in this case.
Was the blood mis-handled? I don't know I wasn't there and neither were you. Your suggestion that IMPD under Ballard has done something wrong is pre-mature.
As an officer of the court you should know that we live with correct findings, we know that the guilty sometimes walk and we know that innocent men have been sent to death row. If you know how to perfect the system from incident to execution please share it with our lawmakers...after all you are... the all knowing.

Indy Student said...

Ernie, while Bisard gets the presumption of innocence, there's no debate of if the blood was mishandled or not. Prosecutor Brizzi explained clearly why the blood evidence won't be admissible in court. It was done at a medical center and not a hospital, and the tech that drew the blood wasn't qualified to do so in a criminal investigation. He also explained in more detail earlier today on his radio show.

Marycatherine Barton said...

It should be concerning to all, that a witness has claimed he saw a police officer, in uniform, purchase a bottle of vodka. This is not allowed, and the grieving father of the deceased wants his attorney to gather evidewnce, which obviously, Brizzi is incapable of doing. Incompetent and corupt, that is Carl.