This could be a 'beyond a reasonable doubt' thing, where the jury wasn't *sure* that his version of events was bullshit.
Presumably that is what happened, but I'm mystified as to how they could've had even that much doubt - I don't think he denied that he'd DMV-ed nine other women from the same club, or gone out of his jurisdiction to pull her over, and there was no good explanation for how the GPS got disabled. From the article, it sounds like he had a very persuasive lawyer to get the jury past those things.
He did lose the civil suit and get fired over it.
AFAICT from those two articles, the suit was against the police department rather than him personally; they settled, but presumably he's not the one who pays. I didn't see whether he was fired or quit, but either way, apparently he now wants to rejoin the PD. I hope they have the sense to say no.
no subject
Presumably that is what happened, but I'm mystified as to how they could've had even that much doubt - I don't think he denied that he'd DMV-ed nine other women from the same club, or gone out of his jurisdiction to pull her over, and there was no good explanation for how the GPS got disabled. From the article, it sounds like he had a very persuasive lawyer to get the jury past those things.
He did lose the civil suit and get fired over it.
AFAICT from those two articles, the suit was against the police department rather than him personally; they settled, but presumably he's not the one who pays. I didn't see whether he was fired or quit, but either way, apparently he now wants to rejoin the PD. I hope they have the sense to say no.