A Metro officer based in Louisville provided a false testimony in a DUI case confirmed by a judge’s recent order. This potentially jeopardizes dozens of pending DUI charges. In a ruling on 31st July a Jefferson judge stated that the false testimony given by Officer Eberenz is extremely troublesome. She also ruled that the stop wasn’t proper effectively dismissing the DUI charges.
Jeff Eberenz testified that before each shift he would always maintain and certify his radar gun. This questioning centered around the need to stop the defendant (Justin Wagner) in relation to speeding which led on to the DUI charges. While on the stand Eberenz confirmed he checked the radar gun’s calibration daily also stating he used tuning forks to verify moving speeds. In May, however, maintenance records appeared to contradict this. Records confirmed the gun had not been certified since early 2011 (April) almost 3 years before the stop and subsequent DUI charges.
The judge put forward that it was almost without question that the officer knew that his statements were false. As the officer relied upon the gun for daily use it seemed difficult to understand how unfamiliar he was with it’s maintenance history. In addition, Eberenz also testified the defendant (Wagner) failed to engage his turn signal however there was no support including the on board police car video. The testimony may well affect all his existing DUI charges.
In another case in Louisville a further 200 DUI charges are in question following the sacking of a Metro corrections breathalyzer officer. Officer Liliana Hernandez admitted lying under oath. This follows court room video of the officer who admitted to lying over a defendant’s refusal to have a breathalyzer. However during a trial on July 21st (DUI charges) Hernandez testified she was a still a breathalyzer technician. Hernandez was accused over lying in respect of a defendant who had refused to take a breathalyzer test.
As for pending DUI charges numbering around 300 does she have any incentive to testify. Hernandez may well be advised over taking the stand in case of incrimination in respect of whether police bring a prosecution.
DISCLAIMER: Please note the content within this blog/site is for informational, educational and entertainment purposes and should not be construed or perceived as professional or legal advice in respect of any of the subject matter. Any information you may rely on you do so at your own risk. The site owner/s will not be held responsible or liable for any damages from or related to your use of content, information and blog posts. The site owner/s take reasonable care to ensure that the information contained within this site is complete and correct but does not warrant this to be the case and accepts no liability for any errors, spelling mistakes or omissions. Any opinion or information in this site are put forth by the site owner/s on the basis of information obtained from sources believed to be reliable but not verified independently.