DUI discrepancies led to 65 of Georgia officer’s DUI cases thrown out in court, reduced

The issue – field sobriety test clues on police reports and sworn affidavits that do not match the video.

One judge was so troubled, she apologized to a defendant for Lau’s actions.

[DOWNLOAD: Free WSB-TV News app for alerts as news breaks]

“Hey, Officer Lau, Gwinnett County Police. I stopped you. The speed limit is 45 and you were going over 60,” said Lau on body camera video.

The 2021 traffic stop would end with Anthony Jamison arrested for DUI.

“I gotta ask you because I can smell it. How much have you had to drink tonight?” asked Lau on body camera video.

“I had a few,” replied Jamison.

Lau had Jamison step out of the car and put him through field sobriety tests and a breathalyzer.

“I felt like I did pretty good, everything he told me to do. But then he just went on ahead and just handcuffed me,” said Jamison.

MORE 2 INVESTIGATES

• People fear apartment floors will collapse under them
• Woman who lost eyesight after starting GLP-1s wants warning added to labels
• ‘I gave him my life savings’: Woman alleges $80K investment loss

But it’s what happened after Jamison’s arrest that would raise questions about Lau’s police work.

Lau got a judge to sign a search warrant allowing police to draw Jamison’s blood. The result came back at .087 – just over the legal limit.

But when Jamison’s attorney compared the body camera video with Lau’s police report and the sworn affidavit he used to get that warrant he found they didn’t match.

Channel 2 spent months reviewing Lau’s reports, body and dash cam videos and shared them with former law enforcement officer and now DUI expert witness Matthew Malhiot.

He said that’s a big problem.

“So, you’re giving bad information to the judge. You’re telling the judge ABC when actually XYZ happened. So, it’s a deception to the court,” said Malhiot.

Four years later, prosecutors told a judge there were “very significant issues” with the search warrant.

The judge called what she learned “extremely alarming” and then did something she said she’d never done in more than a decade on the bench.

“I’m going to apologize for the officer and that’s rare,” the judge told Jamison.

Jamison eventually pleaded guilty to failure to maintain lane. The DUI did not stand.

“I was relieved. I was happy. I knew I could start my life; you know what I’m saying, really get back to work,” said Jamison.

The truck driver said he struggled to find work for years.

“It was devastating for me,” said Jamison.

[SIGN UP: WSB-TV Daily Headlines Newsletter]

He’s not the only driver.

“He said that I was swerving. On video, I’m not swerving,” said a man arrested for DUI by Lau in 2021 who asked us to conceal his identity.

“The judge took off the DUI off my case because I was not drunk,” he said.

He was not convicted of DUI, but it cost him his driving job.

Channel 2 also found a Brady letter that prosecutors sent to a defense attorney alerting him that a half dozen of his client’s cases could be impacted by information that raises questions about Lau’s credibility.

Myatt said what he reviewed should have triggered a much closer look inside the department.

“I would have immediately referred that to internal affairs for an internal investigation to determine why. What is going on with this officer? Is there others going on?” said Myatt.

But instead, at the Solicitor’s Office request, the department had two of Lau’s supervisors do an informal review. It found serious mistakes in three search warrants.

The department sent us this statement:

First and foremost, there has never been a formal allegation of wrongdoing against Cpl. Lau. With regard to the transcript, GCPD respects the Gwinnett County Solicitor General’s Office, and they have full discretion to determine the prosecution viability in their cases. Regarding the transcript, it is important to note that a full review was done by GCPD after learning about that case and what was said about Cpl. Lau during that plea hearing. Of note, Cpl. Lau, nor any member of his supervision, was contacted prior to the comments made in the hearing about him, there was no discussion regarding his case findings, nor was the case or the BWC reviewed with any member of our department prior to the hearing and case disposition.

GCPD was requested by the Solicitor’s Office to informally review several of Cpl. Lau’s cases after that case disposition and did so. Trained professionals in Field Sobriety Evaluations, DUI detection, and years of law enforcement experience reviewed BWC without review of Cpl. Lau’s reports or notes first and reached nearly all the same conclusions in all cases requested for review.

With regard to the Brady letter, you will need to discuss with the Solicitor General her specific reasons for compiling that letter, but it is my understanding that she did so in an abundance of caution to comply with what she believes were her ethical obligations under Brady, and it allows defense attorneys the opportunity to do their own research to determine if there is anything that may be impeachable contained within those six cases listed. Nothing more and nothing less. At no time did the Solicitor General indicate to GCPD that she believed Cpl. Lau did anything intentional or malicious. Of the cases listed on the Brady letter, one case deals with a search warrant for blood where there was a copy and paste error that occurred and Cpl. Lau acknowledges and accepts his mistake. I believe that is the reference you make to a search warrant for blood where the warrant does not match the BWC and incident report. Again, the cases listed on the Brady letter were determined by the sole discretion of the Solicitor General’s Office and without input or discussion with Cpl. Lau or members of GCPD. We were notified of that letter and its intent. We appreciated the Solicitor General’s candor in the matter and understand her decision.

Additionally, per best practices and procedure and to not distract suspects during roadside evaluations, officers are not allowed to make notes and must go off memory as to noted clues in each field sobriety test. Search warrants for blood or other bodily substance are done by memory immediately after arrest. It is later in the process that officers may review BWC while compiling their incident reports which can result in a change as to the number of clues observed, sometimes for and other times against the suspect.

Cpl. Lau remains a police officer with GCPD in good standing. He is currently assigned to our uniform division where he continues to make DUI arrests and all other cases in accordance with our mission statement and core values.

As far as the GCPD DUI Unit goes, it was recently recognized by Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) who partnered with the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) to recognize agencies and individuals who work to keep our communities safe from impaired drivers. For the third year in a row, GCPD was awarded The Agency DUI Hero Award for making the most DUI arrests in the State of Georgia. The work of that unit continues to be the leader on best practices across the state and for which our department and Gwinnett County should be proud of their dedication and hard work.

—  Gwinnett County Police Department

Jamison said he wonders why Gwinnett County Police kept Lau on the job.

“I mean, who basically is not being transparent and not being held accountable,” said Jamison.

Lau was promoted to Cpl. In January 2025, but he was removed from the DUI Task Force that May, although he still makes DUI arrests.

Channel 2 asked for the body camera video and reports used in the informal review of Lau’s DUI arrests and we’ll let you know what we find once we get it.