MONDAY ON NBC, it's an all new two hour return of the American Gladiators with new Gladiators and new events. Then on ten at ten, imagine going through an expensive medical treatment and having the money from a fundraiser just disappear. Could this happen to you? Mike McKnight investigates what questions you should ask before handing your money over to someone who promises a surefire investment. "Show Me My Money", Monday at ten only on 6 News.
The Weather Authority
Currents
Doppler Radar
7-Day
Find a Local Business with Local Lookup
 
WOWT.com on Demand
  • 6 On Your Cell
  • RSS Feeds
  • Desktop Alert
  • Text Alerts
  • Daily E-News
  • What’s on 6
  • MarketPlace
  • Restaurants
  • Auto Map
  • Business Connections
  • Financial Advice
  • Legal Advice
  • New Home Listings
  • Your Home, Your Investment
  • Entertainment
  • Recipes
  • Education
  • Jobs
  • The Wedding Planner
  • Martha's Tip of the Day
  • Advertise With WOWT
  • Mistrial In Officer Assault Case Save Email Print
    Acquittal on second charge
    Posted: 1:00 PM Mar 26, 2008
    Last Updated: 8:22 PM Mar 26, 2008
    Email Address: sixonline@wowt.com

    A | A | A

    A Douglas County jury Wednesday failed to reach a verdict in the trial of Koko Sessou on the charge of attempted assault on a police officer. The judge then declared a mistrial on that count.

    The jury deliberated for approximately 15 hours before notifying the judge they had acquitted Sessou on the second attempted assault charge involving a bar employee, but couldn't reach a decision on whether or not Sessou tried to run over an off-duty officer.

    They sent Judge Thomas Otepka a letter which in part read, "We as a jury are locked on count one. After two days of intense deliberation and five days of testimony we are at a point where tempers and emotions are rising in the jury room."

    The jury foreman called it a disagreement on the perception of the facts while other jurors called it a very difficult time.

    "I happened to be one of those, I got a little bit mad about people continuing to push me to do what I felt I could not do and I wasn't going to change a vote," said juror Pat McGill. "Intent was the biggest thing by far, how do you know intent?"

    Omaha Police Officer Dave Brumagen shot Sessou in a parking lot confrontation at Rockbrook Village in April 2006.

    Off-duty officers were working as security guards that night, trying to clear the parking lot and police say Sessou tried to run Brumagen down with his car. Sessou claims that he left when officers told him to, but he headed out the wrong way.

    Officer Brumagen says as the vehicle came at him, he fired six shots into Sessou's car. Two of those shots struck Sessou.

    Brumagen testified that he had to pivot out of the way of the oncoming car and the vehicle missed him by just six inches.

    After learning of the hung jury, Sessou is eager to get back to a normal life. "Was going back to school this quarter when I find out my trial date was set, so I put that on hold for now, but I might be going back to school after all this, hopefully in summer."

    Despite the smiles on the defense team, a mistrial is not a full victory. "The unfortunate thing about not retrying it is that I've got a client who is not guilty, but who will not be exonerated," said defense attorney James Martin Davis.

    Davis tried to discredit Brumagen, calling into question his reason for approaching Sessou, the estimated speed of the car and the threat level Brumagen felt.

    Davis said the picture Brumagen painted of Sessou was inaccurate. "He never swerved or he never tried to run down either of these officers."

    The jury split 9-3 on the attempted assault charge involving the officer. Davis said the vote favored acquittal.

    It will be up to prosecutors to decide if they will seek to try Sessou again for the charge of attempting to assault the officer.

    Email  del.icio.us   Google   Yahoo  digg
    More Stories
    Bond Set for Three of Four in Marriott Melee

    Alleged Assailant Falls Through System Cracks

    Alleged Theft Investigated

    Jury Splits on Assault Decision

    Adieu, Blue

    Shooting Investigation

    Interstate 480 Construction

    Major Omaha Street Closed

    Post Your Comments
    First Name:
    Location:
    Enter Comments: characters left
    Email (optional):
    Email will not be displayed on site. For station contact purpose only.
    Read Comments
    Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
    Posted by: The Original Cop Location: Omaha on Mar 27, 2008 at 08:52 PM
    Reality Check- I care about supporting my family, and I do that by working hard even with a second job on occassion. Whether you like it or not the law is that an officer is an officer on or off duty. Several years back an officer working security at a bank was nearly killed when two guys came in to rob the bank (a crime). They shot him several times. He had to take a disability retirement, and it was made a work related disability by the city because he was disabled while doing his job upholding the law that was being broken. Officers that work off duty are there to enforce laws and keep the peace. If officers were not allowed to work at these places, the call load for on duty officers would increase dramatically. It actually saves the taxpayers money for businesses to pay for their own security instead of having the police there all the time.

    Posted by: yeah Location: omaha on Mar 27, 2008 at 07:17 PM
    Right on reality check! Cops are living well on TAXPAYER DOLLARS! Solve some crimes why don't they: Double murder in Dundee? No arrests, no progress. I filed 2 reports last year for a buglary and stolen property, nothin ever done about it. They acted like I was wasting their time. Well to most of the OPD: "you're wasting our money by arresting our people after YOU SHOOT THEM!

    Posted by: reality check on Mar 27, 2008 at 03:41 PM
    To the Origional cop.... Yes. If somebody else is paying him OTHER THAN THE TAXPAYERS he/she should not be considered a cop. You are just using your uniform and badge to make more money because that is ALL you care about.

    Posted by: Anonymous on Mar 27, 2008 at 03:09 PM
    Steve- because it is dark you cant hear? Did the car have headlights to see the officer? Here you are making it sound so easy to "prove guilt" but your examples are weak at best!

    Posted by: Steve Location: Omaha on Mar 27, 2008 at 01:18 PM
    Ask yourself if this situation is plausible. You're at a nightclub. You leave, get in your car, and start driving out of the parking lot the wrong way. Of course it is. Now ask yourself, is it plausible that that is exactly what Sessou was doing? If it is, then he was completely blindsided (i.e. shot) by someone while going about his business. If that is the case, then whoever shot him should be held accountable (i.e. criminally prosecuted) for assault with a deadly weapon. A badge is not a license to shoot someone at will just because they're driving the wrong way. Other considerations: it was dark. Who is going to see or hear an officer directing him to stop? Who is going to know that it's an officer? Who is going to respect someone yelling at you or motioning to you in a nightclub parking lot? Very hard to prove guilt in this case.

    Posted by: Sarah on Mar 27, 2008 at 12:51 PM
    If you were paying attention, you would have realized Koko was shot in the back! He was just trying to get out of the lot!! Did we ever stop to think maybe he was just confused! As a man I know and my kids know, Koko is a great man whom got into a situation with an overzealous officer. Maybe some people "get off" with crimes they very well should not have but in this case...a job well done My Mr. Davis and the Jury.

    Posted by: pete Location: omaha on Mar 27, 2008 at 11:57 AM
    What do you expect? There isn't much justice in Omaha.. The crooks, drunk drivers that murder people on the roads and rapist..They seem to slide thru the cracks. Or maybe it the city proscuter that can't do their jobs right. This town is beginning to look like a "mad max" movie.

    Posted by: Sara Location: Omaha on Mar 27, 2008 at 10:03 AM
    The jury was not the bottom of the barrel, unemployed or illiterate, but quite the contrary as the majority was highly educated and very competent. A lot of conflicting statements left the jury with a tough decision, they did deliberate for nearly 18 hours! This can be tried again and if so the prosectution needs to get a stronger case to prove that Sessou meant to cause harm to the police officer. There were many mistakes I believe made by Sessou that night, but the jury can only go on what was presented as EVIDENCE, not just maybes or feelings.

    Posted by: Terry Location: Bellevue on Mar 27, 2008 at 09:47 AM
    Rather on or off duty they are still officers of the court. If this indidivual was able to convience some of the jury that it was as accident, then so be it. However don't waste our tax dollars you the the outcome will be the same. Of course if it were him being injured I'm sure you all would be hollering police burtally. Either way no one wins.

    Posted by: Steve Location: Ponca on Mar 27, 2008 at 09:14 AM
    With James Martin Davis for a lawyer, what do you expect? This thug is just a punk loser!

    Posted by: Jerry Location: Omaha on Mar 27, 2008 at 07:04 AM
    Why are they allowed to wear their uniform when moonlighting at another job?

    Posted by: Tom Location: Omaha on Mar 27, 2008 at 07:00 AM
    You have to excuse "reality check" their showing their stupidity to the situation. "Original Cop" said it all.

    Posted by: Eric Location: Omaha on Mar 26, 2008 at 11:38 PM
    Ok, people, a Police Officer is always a Police Officer, whether they are on duty or not. This Officer has every responsibilty when moonlighting as he does when he is working on duty. This is why many Police Officers wear their uniforms while working off duty. "Reality Check," A Police Officer doesn't "play" rent-a-cop, they ARE a cop. And how is an Officer going ask questions after he is hit by a car? Why do we assume that Koko had no intent? It was a mistrial not an aquittal. Props to the Officer for DOING HIS JOB.

    Posted by: reality check? on Mar 26, 2008 at 09:38 PM
    he is playing rent-a-cop and shouldn't fire? Oh, Ok, so if it was an unarmed rent-a-cop, he should have been run over because he had no gun to fire? Prase the bad guy!!!

    Posted by: The Original Cop Location: Omaha on Mar 26, 2008 at 08:33 PM
    Reality Check- Let me get this straight. An officer hired by the bar, in uniform, to prevent disturbances etc. should not be considered a cop if they are assaulted, but the officer that responds to the 911 call for a disturbance, in uniform, and gets assaulted is to be considered a cop? An officer in uniform is a cop no matter what, and if they are giving a lawful order then people have to obey it, and if you assault that officer in uniform you are assaulting a cop. Tammy your comment is just clueless. They did not have a mistrial because they were debating whether he was a cop or not they could not reach a verdict because they could not agree on the guys intent.

    Posted by: Chris Location: Omaha on Mar 26, 2008 at 07:10 PM
    A police officer in uniform working another job is STILL a law enforcement officer and he or she is still duty bound.

    Posted by: The Original Cop Location: Omaha on Mar 26, 2008 at 05:20 PM
    Anonymous- When officers work off duty they are in uniform and if they get assaulted it's assault on an officer. It's not where they are it is who they are. If an officer is off duty shopping in a store somewhere, sees a shoplifter, identifies themselves as an officer with their badge etc., and then said shoplifter assaults him to escape then it is still an assault on an officer. Hey Black- What questions was he supposed to be asking while a car was racing towards him? What question was Platt supposed to ask when Javon got out of the car and pointed his gun at another officer? Gee Mr. REED are you going to pull the trigger or are you just trying to get away? If you are just trying to get away why didn't you leave the gun in the car? Officers faced with split second decisions don't have time to ask questions first or they die. Tim- Please submit a list of all the police shooting that you don't think were justified. I'd like to know where your coming from.

    Posted by: pete on Mar 26, 2008 at 05:16 PM
    right on, some form of justice at last

    Posted by: reality check on Mar 26, 2008 at 05:04 PM
    The charged was trumped up. The "cop" was playing rent-a-cop. A simple assault charge should be filed NOT assaulting a cop.

    Posted by: Bad Jurors Location: Nebraska on Mar 26, 2008 at 05:02 PM
    Pretty much all you get for jurors these days are the unemployed, the illiterate, and the homeless. Change the venue to McCook and see if things go better.

    Posted by: J Location: Bennington on Mar 26, 2008 at 04:27 PM
    I don't think we're sending a message to "trigger happy cops", so much as the jury was saying, we don't believe either story. Someone posted previously, "There's the cop's story, Sessou's story, and the truth." I don't think the truth got told in court - neither story told by off-duty Officer Brumagen nor by Sessou rings true. Perceptions under heightened emotions are notoriously hard to sort out later. No wonder the jury was hung.

    Posted by: SCOTT FREE on Mar 26, 2008 at 04:26 PM
    James Martin Davis, you da man!!!

    Posted by: jt Location: midtown on Mar 26, 2008 at 04:25 PM
    I hope they try him again. Tim our cops are not trigger happy. They are sticking up for the rest of us innocent bystanders. If the safety of your loved one was involved I am sure you would be singing a different song. I dont really think your one to judge unless you put your life at risk daily for others safety. An officer is an officer whether he is on duty or not. If you were getting assaulted in a parking lot and an off duty officer was the only one there on your side you wouldnt complain would you(anonymous)?

    Posted by: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008 at 04:22 PM
    Hurray! Finally some jurors with common sense. Police officers lie all the time to justify their illegal acts. I was one and have seen fellow officers twist events and lie to save their necks from the stupid mistakes they should be held accountable for.

    Posted by: Tammy Location: Omaha on Mar 26, 2008 at 04:11 PM
    Obviously annonymous didnt read the story. The officer is only an officer when he or she is on duty. The rest of the time they are just another one of us. 6 shots into a car that hasnt touched him? Wow, i knew there was a reason people were medicated for paranoia and not given weapons.

    Posted by: Tom Location: Omaha on Mar 26, 2008 at 03:53 PM
    Here we go again. Open season on running down police officers. Crimminals running rampant in the "City of the Gangs", I mean Omaha.

    Posted by: Tim on Mar 26, 2008 at 03:30 PM
    Wow. Are we FINALLY sending a message to the trigger happy cops in this city? I hope so.

    Posted by: black Location: omaha on Mar 26, 2008 at 02:28 PM
    Again....officer shots first ...than ask questions...again its a black male...again a white officer.....why do we allow this to happen to our people? somehow I have a feeling that the comments previously posted officer was a saint the young black male the sinner time....justlike the 17 year kid old who was killed by the white officer who already has killed twice he'll probaly get a raise

    Posted by: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008 at 02:26 PM
    I think it should only be assaulting an officer if that person is on duty... not at a second job.

    Posted by: Lori Location: omaha on Mar 26, 2008 at 01:32 PM
    Sounds like we must really be scraping the bottom of the barrel for prospective and eventual jurors...

    Posted by: JJ Location: OMAHA on Mar 26, 2008 at 01:13 PM
    FINALLY SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE.

    Posted by: Anonymous on Mar 26, 2008 at 01:05 PM
    just another criminal getting off with no punishment! What else is new.

    Desktop Weather
  • Video: Hour-by-Hour Forecast Updates
  • AP Online Network
    Health News
  • Family Health
  • Health Check
  • Kids Corner
  • Channel 6 News Features






  • Heartland's Most Wanted
  • Product Recalls

  • Media Partners