A felony drug and weapon possession case was dismissed in court last week at the request of the 10th Judicial District Attorney�s Office after it was discovered that a Pueblo police officer reportedly reenacted body camera footage of a search of the defendant�s car after the initial search of the vehicle had already been conducted.

The case involved Joseph Cajar, 36, who was facing charges of possession with intent to manufacture or distribute a controlled substance, possession of a controlled substance, possession of a weapon by a previous offender and special offender; all felony charges.

Cajar was pulled over in his car in November 2016.

According to a police report, he could not provide his current registration or insurance, so his car was towed.

During a search of the car at a tow yard, a scale with residual traces of suspected heroin on it that police had seen in the passenger seat at the time Cajar�s car was stopped was located.

Other items reportedly recovered from the vehicle included 6.8 grams of suspected heroin, a Ruger .357 Magnum firearm, a pill bottle containing amphetamine residue and $43 � all in $1 bills.

A preliminary hearing in the case was held March 22, during which Officer Seth Jensen was cross-examined.

Following that hearing, text messages were exchanged between Jensen and Anne Mayer, a deputy district attorney, in which Jensen allegedly revealed that the body camera footage of the execution of the search warrant on Cajar�s car was not a real-time documentation of the search, but rather a recreation which he staged after the actual search of the vehicle, according to Joe Koncilja, the attorney who represented Cajar.

In the text messages, which were obtained by The Pueblo Chieftain, Mayer writes, �You�ll have to watch your body cam before the motions to make sure the report and camera are the same.�

Jensen replied back, saying, �For the search, the body cam shows different than the report because it was. Prior to turning my body cam on I conducted the search. Once I found the (expletive referring to evidence), I stepped back, called (a fellow officer), then activated my body cam and walked the courts through it.�

Mayer then replied back, �Was that in the report? If not you�ve got to write a supplement explaining that your body cam was off during the search and that the body cam that does exist is a reenactment.�

That information was disclosed by Mayer to Michelle Chostner, the deputy district attorney in charge of the case.

From there, the information was sent to Koncilja, along with the text messages between Jensen and Mayer, and a decision was promptly made by the DA�s office to dismiss the case, which happened officially on Thursday.

�The People move to dismiss the case in the interests of justice,� the DA�s office stated in its motion to dismiss.

In a letter written by Koncilja to The Chieftain about the case, Koncilja said the actions of Jensen were concerning.

�Everyone is led to believe that the body camera footage actually represents in-time sequencing of events as they transpire,� he said. �This was concerning because all indications in the discovery and during his testimony at the preliminary hearing indicated that the body camera footage actually represented the sequence of events as they developed regarding the search. Furthermore, the staging was done in such a way to make it look like it was done in real-time.�

The Pueblo Police Department on Tuesday said it is aware of the incident and is looking into it.

�We are investigating the situation and certainly (Jensen) could face discipline,� Deputy Chief Troy Davenport said. �The investigation is open and active and it is an internal investigation. Certainly if there�s a violation of policy, he would be disciplined.�

The police department�s written policy regarding the activation of body cameras states: �Members shall activate the portable recorder any time the member believes it would be appropriate or valuable to record an incident.�

The policy states body worn cameras shall be activated in any of the following situations:

All enforcement and investigative contacts including stops and field interview situations.

Traffic stops including, but not limited to, traffic violations, stranded motorist assistance and all crime interdictions stops.

Self-initiated activity in which a member would normally notify the communications center.

Any other contact that becomes adversarial after the initial contact in a situation that would not otherwise require recording.

The policy also states that department supervisors are authorized to review relevant recordings any time they are investigating alleged misconduct, reports of meritorious conduct, or whenever such recordings would be beneficial in reviewing the member�s performance.

ryans@chieftain.com