The Long, Hot Summer of '97

Lake Evans, "Safe Haven"?



"A lot of bad stuff happened here. It's as good a place as any for it to end."
--Bud White, L.A. Confidential

No one can agree who the first person thrown into Lake Evans by Riverside Police Department officers was, or the last, but everyone can agree on which incident was the most notorious. Lake Evans has woven itself into the fabric of Riverside's history, including that of its police department, but this incident stood out on its own, for different reasons. The incident involved Jose Martinez Rodriguez, three or four police officers depending on who provides the accounts and a date with serious misconduct of a criminal kind under the moonlight, on a hot summer night at Fairmont Park in 1997.

Back Story:

Police officers tend to refer to this incident as the one involving the "two Black officers who beat and tossed the guy into the lake" when in actuality, as most of us in the general public know, there was at least a third officer who was White who actively participated in the beating and its coverup. His participation in this travesty might have been erased by those in the RPD, but not by those in the community. It was three officers who engaged in the beating and attempted drowning of a Latino man, and all three of them should have seen the inside of a jail cell. However, none of them ever did...unless you count the short stint served by Graham, only after the D.A.'s office caught him assigned to work detail rather than serving time in jail.

Another argument tossed out by police officers in the department was that this incident was an example of Affirmative Action gone bad, or as an argument against hiring Black officers in the department. But they are wrong, and anyone who has read the biannual Equal Employment Opportunity Reports for the past 15 years will know that the department has hired few Black officers.

But they are right in the sense that an Affirmative Action program of sorts was in place within the police department. Only, the program centered around athletic talent, preferably that shown on the gridiron. When Philip Graham was hired by the department, it was not just to be a police officer in the field, but a star on the field, as well. You see, Graham was the son of Tom Graham, the former star player for the Denver Broncos, and was himself a star defensiveback at Colorado State University.

He was recruited by then Officer Duane Beckman, according to a March 14, 1996 article in the Press Enterprise to play football for the department's intramural team. When the reporter who wrote that article asked Beckman if the stories about Graham's background and hiring were true, Beckman said:

"You bet. This is serious stuff."

According to that PE article, the RPD had competition for Graham's football skills: The Riverside County Sheriff's Department. Graham had done some time there before being hired by Riverside PD who put him to work...including on the gridiron. When asked by the PE reporter of the March 14, 1995 article about his prowness on the football field, Graham said:

"When you put the helmet and gear on, you are not out there to play patty cake."

Indeed, you are not. This philosophy was transferred by Graham in his police work, each time he put on his badge and gun. Only two years later, the department would see how "serious" Graham was, when he and two other officers became involved into what is now called, The Lake Incident.

THE OFFICERS:

Graham, was viewed by those in the department as "mild mannered" and a respected member of the SWAT team, which he belonged to, despite only having been in the department six years.

Graham, Tommie Sykes and Jason McQueen collectively were known as "good, young cops who looked out for one another and answered supervisors with the words, 'yes sir'. Graham and McQueen were both members of the department's Honor Guard.

McQueen had been with the department a little over five years when the incident happened. The only noted blemish on his record was a car accident he had experienced onduty which led to a young man on a motorcycle suffering serious injuries including a broken back. The city eventually issued a $1.75 million settlement in relation to the accident.

Sykes was hired out of the United States Air Force where he had worked as a pharmacist and had been working with the department about four years.

THE VICTIM: Jose Martinez Rodriguez, a 59 year old legal immigrant who worked as a laborer who on one job had helped in the construction of Zacateca's restaurant, a centerpiece in the Eastside neighborhood. His neighbors described him as a quiet, helpful person whose attitude changed completely after his beating at the hands of the officers.

THE PLACE: A departmentally designated "safe haven" for inebriated people known as Lake Evans.

NARRATIVE:

The first notice of the incident in the Press Enterprise occurred in an article written in July 1997 which detailed the OTHER beating of a civilian by an officer resulting in a prosecution that occurred that summer. That involved a White officer, Robert Mauger who hit a teenager named Jerry Maroney who was handcuffed at the time, first on the scene and then while he was being booked. The officers involved in the Lake Evans incident were mentioned in that article, but not named. That would come over six months later after two of the three officers involved in the case entered guilty pleas in exchange for wrist slaps in Riverside County Superior Court.

The story broke in the Jan. 29, 1998 edition of the Press Enterprise when it was announced that Graham, Sykes and McQueen had picked up Jose Martinez Rodriquez from University Avenue and taken him to Fairmount Park to "sleep it off" and instead, beat him, stomped him and threw him in the lake. Martinez climbed his way out of the lake, hid in the foliage until he was sure his abusers had left, then walked home.

Within days of the beating, rumors swirled around the department and officers began asking the three officers about what they had done. Investigators from Internal Affairs and the General Investigations Bureau launched inquiries into the incident, which lasted longer than three months. The department however, remained perusual tight lipped on the matter to those outside its ranks. That worked until Graham became involved in his second assault and battery of the season, this time at a bar-restaurant hybrid known as Carlos O'Brian.

In this incident that occurred Sept. 27, 1997, Graham, Sykes and another White officer allegedly had appeared at the door of the bar already heavily intoxicated and were initially refused entrance...until they flashed the bouncers their badges. The doormen allowed the three men and their entourage to enter, and were quickly rewarded for that favor, by Graham who proceeded to assault a female patron and two bouncers who had intervened to stop him. Graham pulled a gun on one of them, and allegedly forced him on the ground, and the gun in his mouth, breaking the bouncer's teeth. Another bouncer suffered injuries in his altercation with the violently intoxicated Graham, including a broken wrist.

According to then-chief Jerry Carroll who had slipped in the revolving door of the department's administration and had been in charge all of about three months before all this happened, there were no 9-11 calls made from the bar in relation to this incident.

However, someone had to pick up Graham, and according to witnesses, two officers appeared and told Graham that if he went quietly, they would not tell the sergeant what happened. Graham was not willing to cooperate with that rather generous offer, so the officers arrested him. He was later charged with two felonies including brandishing a firearm and assault with a deadly weapon.

Of course, the public was left completely in the dark about this incident as well for many months. In hindsight, few people were surprised about the department's decision to do that.

After the Lake Incident, the Riverside County District Attorney's office in a rare display of zeal decided to convene a grand jury, and they went to Jason McQueen(the White officer) to testify but McQueen wanted no part of breaking that code of silence rule until the office granted him full immunity from prosecution. So, McQueen testified abeit reluctantly to the Grand Jury. He was followed by Sykes who also invoked the Fifth Amendment before the D.A. offered him partial immunity in exchange for his testimony. Later, the D.A.'s office would reward Sykes for his efforts by offering him an even lighter slap on the wrist than they would give to Graham.

McQueen testified first, and his words should put to end any assertion that this incident was solely a Black on Hispanic crime, because it turned out, McQueen was on equal footing with Graham when it came to participating in the beating at the lake, while Sykes's participation was actually less than that of the other two officers. If you do not believe that, go back and read McQueen's account of the incident in his own words, under threat of perjury.

McQueen's Story:

Press Enterprise feb. 18, 1998


McQueen testified that on July 5, he had worked a two-man car with his partner and friend, Graham, when they encountered what they saw as an inebriated male Latino walking down University Avenue. It was 11pm, seven hours into their 4pm to 2am shift and both men were tired and hungry and on their way to an anticipated date with a third officer at the McDonalds restaurant on the corner of Eucalyptus Avenue and University. It was not to be, at least not right away.

McQueen and Graham turned around to stop Martinez, and even without doing a breathalizer test, they concluded he was drunk and that they would have to delay their rendevouz with Mickey Ds to arrest him. Instead, they decided to take him to what they called a "safe haven" at Fairmount Park to allow him to sleep it off. They parked their squad car at a dark spot about 100 yards away from the American Legion Hall. Martinez had struggled, yelled and cursed at them, McQueen said.

"He had gotten my goat."

McQueen gave as his excuse for beating Martinez, four years of rage at having been yelled at by civilians. It was for him, excuse enough. The D.A. thanked him for his testimony by not charging him and the department allowed him to resign on Dec. 10, without being fired.

So he and Graham beat and hit Martinez, until he was on the ground. Then, Graham stomped on Martinez's chest with his boot. Both officers assisted by a third(Sykes) then picked up Martinez, swung him two or three times, then tossed him into the lake.

Afterwards, they discussed what to do, with McQueen saying they should arrest him.

"We got to do something about this, because you know this is not going well."

They left the lake and went to McDonalds to eat but the conversation was not centered on anything pleasant, McQueen said.

According to McQueen, he, Graham and Sykes got together to meet to discuss the beating during several onduty meetings afterwards. Just to say when asked that they weren't at such and such when such and such happened, if anyone happened to come to them and ask.

The Victim's story:

Martinez naturally was not called before the Grand Jury to testify about his experience at the hands(and feet) of these officers, because he was a civilian who had 6-8 beers, so he imagined the whole experience, of course. At least until it was collaborated first by McQueen and then Sykes in their testimonies.

Martinez did tell his account in a Feb. 20 Press Enterprise article. He said that he was walking home from a bar after having some beers when he saw two squad cars stop in front of him. Out of one of the cars, came one Black officer and one White officer. He thought at first he was going to jail, then after he realized they were going some place else, he thought he was going to die. At the park, he was hit six times and then felt a knee on his chest, then hit again, by four officers. Next thing he knew, he felt himself being picked up by two officers, then swung back and forward a few times, before being tossed in the lake. He sunk to the bottom of the lake and crawled his way out, because he could not swim. He hid in the grass until the officers left, then walked home.

He called 9-11 which dispatched an ambulance but he said the ambulance refused to take him to the hospital. He said that the employees made him sign a form refusing service which was in english even though he spoke mostly spanish. His family came to see him and they tried again, and he spent eight days at the hospital recovering from injuries and pneumonia. It would be months before he could work in construction again. Martinez suffered from nightmares and other signs of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. So did most of the neighborhood, many living in fear that they too would receive visits from officers like Graham, Sykes and McQueen.

In 2001, the city of Riverside settled a law suit filed in U.S. District Court by Martinez for $550,000.


After the Fact:

Sykes had testified that he had arrived at Fairmount Park to clear it out since it was closed to the public, and had ran into the other two officers at a stop sign. The D.A. thanked Sykes for his testimony by granting permission for him to be sentenced by a judge to only three years of probation. The department fired Sykes on Dec. 9, 1997.

Graham plead guilty to felony charges in the Carlos O'Brian case and misdemeanor charges in the Lake Incident, and was sentenced to six months in jail. Only, a judge placed him in work detail instead of taking him into custody. Graham refused to pick weeds as part of his detail because he said he suffered from a wrist injury and was assigned to desk work for one day.

In June 1998, he surrendered to do time in jail, and three years later, he had his misdemeanor conviction in connection with the Lake Incident expunged along with one of his felony counts from the Carlos O'Brian case.

Martinez, his attorney Andrew Roth and others decried the wrist slappings given to two of the officers and the immunity deal given to the third. Perennial D.A. Grover Trask called the offenses by the officers, "borderline felonies" which was interpreted by most people to mean that if the officers had been civilians, they would have had the book thrown at them.

Eight years and a consent decree have passed since the Lake Incident, and many lessons have been learned and others still to be learned. To start with, one being when you hire police officers, hire them for the desired personality traits and skills necessary to do that job. Do not go looking for gridiron prowness and expect to find a mentally sound police candidate. Leave the football recruiting to the pros and stick to hiring people equipped to work as police officers.

As for the other lessons to be learned, the next opportunity for that was just around the bend...and three miles away from the lake.

Sources:

Press Enterprise articles dated: March 14, 1995, July 21, 1997, Jan. 29, 1998,Jan. 30, 1998, Feb. 10, 1998, Feb. 19-22, 1998.

The People of California vs Philip Graham, Tommie Sykes(Riverside County Superior Court)

The People of California vs Philip Graham(Riverside County Superior Court)
FELONY CASE

Jose Martinez Rodriguez vs the City of Riverside (U.S. District Court)

The CPRC, and Ward 2 candidates

Last night, the League of Women Voters held a forum at the Kansas Avenue 7th Day Adventist Church, which offered community members an opportunity to listen to and field questions at all the city council candidates running for the Ward 2 seat.

Candidates appearing were businessman Andrew Melendrez, retired teacher Gloria Willis, retired Riverside County Sheriff deputy, Ruben Rasso and retired city employee, Deen Teer.

The four candidates spoke on the issues that had impassioned them to run for office, to an audience of 40 people. Traffic, public safety, University Avenue, job training, traffic, economic development, the new ethics code and traffic were the issues that were discussed by the candidates.

The candidates agreed on several issues, disagreed on many others, but all of them agreed on one thing: When the voters of Riverside passed Measure II last year, they had spoken about the importance of keeping the city's civilian review mechanism in place. The message sent by all four of them was this:

The Community Police Review Commission was a valued and necessary componant in the city of Riverside.

All of them began their comments when asked about their positions about the CPRC with the assertion that the people had made it clear that civilian review was an important part of the fabric of this city and if elected, they all intended to honor the wishes of their constituents.

Melendrez even said he was endorsed by the CPRC, which was likely a flub. Rasso stood up and said he was no body's puppet and that he would honor his constituents' feelings about the CPRC by supporting it. He said he believed it was necessary to keep officers accountable for their behavior.

The behavior of all these city council candidates in terms of being so willing to carry out the wishes of the people who spoke through a crucial vote last year is to be commended.

The election that is scheduled for Nov. 8, 2005 includes municipal races as well as a list of very important propositions to vote on, include proposition 75 which will determine how union members will decide whether or not their annual dues are spent on political campaigns launched by their PACs.

The cost of racism

$1.64 million is what tax payers in this city will have to pay to cover the expenses that resulted when members of the department's management decided to engage in racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation against one of the department's Black officers.

Jury awards $1.64 million in racial discrimination, harassment and retaliaton case

The jury of two African-Americans, two Latinos and eight Whites deliberated for a day and a half before agreeing in most cases on a verdict. They decided that Sutton was entitled to $140,945 in economic losses and $1.5 million in non-economic losses. The verdict, as juror Charles Espinoza said in the Press Enterprise article, was intended to help take care of Sutton's need but also to send a message to the city of Riverside in the form which would deliver the most impact: Through the city's coffers.

So taxpayers in this city will be the ultimate payers for the "outrageous treatment" which management chose to impose on Officer Roger Sutton when it removed him from the canine unit in 1999, and then engaged in retaliatory behavior against him when he complained of racial discrimination in the department.

Earlier, in 2004, Sutton was forced to take his case to arbitration after the civil court system froze its trial schedule to handle a backlog of criminal trials. After a "mini-trial" lasting several days, the arbitrator awarded Sutton, $200,000, which is peanuts in comparison to the jury's verdict. The city refused to pay chump change to Sutton and the case went back to the courtroom. In 2004, Scott Silverman had said that he felt his client would receive a larger award if a jury heard his case.

And on Oct. 20, he was proven right.

Of course, racism in the RPD is old news by now, what with federal and state investigations done involving the agency. The state's investigation was prompted by Riverside County District Attorney Grover Trask, who though his office decided not to prosecute the four officers who shot Tyisha Miller, was concerned about possible evidence of racial animus in connection with behavior displayed by the four officers and their sergeant after the shooting. The only people still in denial are those at City Hall, who even after this huge indictment by a 12-member jury against the pre-decree RPD's management will continue to bury its head in the sand and will likely opt to take this decision out of the hands of ordinary citizens performing one of the most important civil duties, and place it into the hands of a judge with the Court of Appeals. The city's continued practice of denying culpability in the racism that plagued the police department especially its management for many years, is part of the reason why people have difficulty believing that things have changed. For those who have tried to change the racial environment inside the department including officers, the city's stance makes that courageous task much more difficult.

Although most of the management personnel including former Deputy Chiefs Michael Smith and Audrey Wilson, who contributed to this mess are long gone through timely retirements, two of the principal players still remain. Now, they will not just be drawing high salaries for doing whatever it is that they have been doing, but they will cost the tax payers in another way, through a payout on this costly verdict. Sure, an insurance carrier might pay out the costs above $500,000 but what happens to your insurance policy when they are forced to pay out a claim? The costs of premiums goes up.

And given that other Black city employees have pending trials against the city of Riverside in the more amiable U.S. District Court, it remains to be seen how the huge jury's verdict in this case will impact their legal decisions as well as those of the city's. One thing for sure is this. The emotional impact of racism in the city's workforce has been long known, and often ignored. However, for the first time, this racism's financial costs have also become known, and those can not and will not be as easily ignored. The fact that this new revelation came from a vote of 12 ordinary people who heard all the allowable evidence, rather than from a city quickly settling reverse discrimination claims outside of public scrutiny makes the message that the city received through the verdict all the more clear in terms of race relations among its own employees.

More rain drops in Riverside

Jury deliberation began this morning in the racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation case filed by Officer Roger Sutton in 2000. The trial which lasted nearly a month heard closing arguments yesterday afternoon, in front of an audience of representatives from the department's management.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ernest Cohen, who was due to be arraigned on a misdemeanor battery charge on Oct. 17, in Dept. 34 failed to make an appearance, according to court minutes. A bench warrant has been issued for his arrest. Hardly a surprise in my opinion. It's not like he hasn't done this before, in earlier cases. *shrug*

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The city's appeal of the reinstatement of former Det. Al Kennedy has recieved an appeal number. Kennedy was fired by Leach several years ago for having sexual relations with a rape victim whose case he was investigating.

An unpleasant memory returns to town

Adam James Brown returns to Riverside to face over 65 felony charges of child molestation, after a police department launched an investigation in 2004. Brown, who had spent the last 18 months at a federal detention center in Wisconsin has already plead guilty to felonies related to the bust of an Internet child molestatin ring, by the FBI.

Chief Russ Leach said that the only good thing to come out of this appalling situation is that Brown promptly resigned from the department after his arrest, sparing the city and everyone in it the difficulty of firing him. He was right about that.

Still one asks, how did he slip through the cracks? How did a child molester become an employee of the police department? Was he, as a son of a senior management member vetted as properly as he should have been? How does the department uncover a history of child molestation committed by one of its candidates?

Brown hurt his victims in ways that no one can fix. They'll bear the mark of his acts on their souls forever. He hurt the community, he worked in. He made every mother or father of small children who ever crossed his path worry about their kids. And he hurt his department, which has had its share of its own problems to fix during the past five years. Hopefully, he was the only one of his kind in its employment.

Will Brown take a guilty plea, as the prosecutor suggested? Hopefully yes. His young victims have been assaulted already. They don't need to be assaulted again during the criminal proceeding.

Adam Brown transferred back to face charges in Riverside

Storm Clouds on the horizon??

In the midst of a whirlwind of city elections, police union elections and the waning months of the arranged marriage between the city and the state AG's office, comes potential storm clouds on the horizon.

Or at the very least, a potential range war between the Riverside Police Department and the Community Police Review Commission.

Not that the CPRC is a stranger to strife between itself, and factions of the police department. But this one if it erupts could be entirely different.

The CPRC's previous range wars were fought with the RPOA, including a five year battle which culminated in a public vote that placed the commission in the city's charter away from the whims of the city council.

For the most part, the battles between the CPRC and the department's management have been a few relatively minor squalls, under the radar of most city residents. Chief Russ Leach attended a workshop with the CPRC on March 17, 2004 and told them that the CPRC was the most important commission on the city's roster.

Only one week later, two members of the RPOA board came in front of the same commission and unleashed a litany of complaints against the body including the claim that the commission had made some really horrible decisions and most of its cases were thrown out in arbitration, but when asked by the CPRC to provide documentation of this claim, the RPOA demurred. Instead, several of its boardmembers targetted their pique at a commissioner and pushed for her ejection by circulating a letter around City Hall. When that failed, they lobbied one of their council members to push for the disqualification of active(but non-RPD) law enforcement officers from serving on the Commission. This council member, reading me as an anti-cop person, lobbied me for my support in this endeavor and if I had truly been anti-cop, I would have gladly helped him. He guessed wrong.

So we moved on to the city charter amendment, and the resulting campaign.

Then came the whole Officer "Hands Tied" episode where slow response time was not blamed on the shortage of officers(as it is now) but the existance of the CPRC. Dan Bernstein saw the obvious, and wrote it in his column, and the public responded by voting the CPRC into the city's charter. In part, not because they had not heard the RPOA's message(as claimed by its PR representative, Richard St. Paul) but because, as Bernstein wrote, they had heard its message loud and clear.

Measure II probably would have passed without the RPOA's high-priced campaign but every little bit helps.

Calm seas prevailed for a while. Maybe the RPOA's leadership had finally figured out that the CPRC was not the enemy but really the best thing that ever happened to it.

The CPRC once again fell off the radar of most people who returned to taking its existance for granted.

Until revelations about the Summer Lane shooting investigation conducted by the CPRC's own investigator came to light. Revelations which do not match those included in the RPD's report which made it clear as early as a memo written by Sgt. Steve Johnson to Leach on Dec. 7, 2004 that it was a justified shooting, done to deal with the highest level of threat.

That statement was echoed by a memo written by Det. Jay Greenstein to Johnson on Dec. 21, 2004.

"The female suspect hit Officer Wilson with her vehicle three times and was preparing to attempt to run him over again when Officer Wilson eliminated the threat to his life by discharing four rounds [sic] firearm into her vehicle, mortally wounding her,"

In fact when you read the transcript of the interview given by Ryan Wilson to Det. Jay Greenstein and Det. Ron Sanfilipo, by its end, they are telling him what happened in their question including their own perceptions and experiences as police officers, and Wilson's saying "right", "yeah" and so forth.

When they tell him they can tell how traumatized he is because he is still shaking(the interview took place the day after the shooting)Wilson laughs. Then Greenstein congratulates him for surviving a "hair raising ordeal".

Absolutely true words about the ordeal, but words which should have not been said by the two detectives interviewing him as a potential criminal suspect, during the actual interview used as part of an ongoing investigation which will ultimately determine whether or not Wilson ever faced criminal charges. Especially by two hardworking and talented investigators like these two, who are above the mean. It also looks too effusive to be explained entirely away by the team-tagging "good cop"/"bad cop" interrogatory tactics. Perhaps it just means that officers in the department are too close, emotionally and experience-wise, to one of their own to investigate shootings done by their own officers.

So this investigation essentially ended early as all investigations really do when conclusions are drawn and expressed from the beginning, at least as far as the Officer Involved Shooting Team is concerned. The District Attorney's office, as Deputy Chief David Dominguez(who had little else to say) said in the PE article backed them up in its own decision, just as it has in the past.

The Internal Affairs Division refuses to say a thing about the conclusions it reached in the administrative investigation, but it seems safe to say that they did not close the book on the shooting much slower than the DA did.

Usually the CPRC follows stead, and as its chair, Michael Gardener, said in the PE article decides the shootings are within policy. Once, in the Rene Guevara shooting, the body determined that the officer had waited too long to fire his weapon.

This time, however, you have commissioners in public meetings referring to the shooting of Summer Lane, as "an executionary type of shooting. He executed her." and another saying:

"Given what we have in front of us, the D.A.'s office should be the greater concern."

With that comment, hell just froze over, because in the past, commissioners had been reluctant to even mention the words, "DA" and "CPRC" in the same sentence, let alone in this context.

Dominguez, in his lack of comments, seems to be hoping that with time, the commissioners will come around, issue the appropriate ruling and then he can break the department's silence on this shooting. He could be right, as the department's policy on lethal force is quite liberal.

Still, moods would have to change at CPRC meetings inside the city council chambers before they come around as departmental officials likely hope. After all, there is quite a large gap to bridge between these two terms: execution and justified shooting.


Two inquiries two opinions in the Summer Lane shooting death

***registered site***

Book Club Selection

Now, that there are so many people from the Riverside Police Department(which has been monitoring this site for months) showing up at this Web site and some of them breaking their silence, it seems like this would be an appropriate time to announce the Book Club Selection of the Month.

Breaking Rank: A Top Cop's Expose of the Dark Side of Policing

by Norm Stamper, former lieutenant from San Diego Police Department, and former chief of Seattle Police Department.

Copies are available at Barnes and Nobles, Borders and online for anyone who wishes to purchase it. Some of you out there might wish to some day be promoted in the administration that you are somewhat at odds with today. Do you agree with Stamper's philosphy of police administration, or not?

Occasionally, selections from Stamper's book will be posted here.

Politics as usual at City Hall

The city council minus Frank Schiavone played to a full house last night, as three important items on the discussion calendar came on the plate. Over 100 city residents, police officers and other city employees sat in the audience or spoke on the three items which purtained to the police department.

(Frank despite the annual contribution of $3,000 from the RPOA PAC obviously had better things to do.)

The police administration had very little to say about any of the three items, prefering to take up the half of the front row and sit like bumps on a log. A man with a love for elephants, and an oxygen tank formed the dividing line between the command staff and the RPOA representatives. Once again, the job was left to City Manager Brad Hudson and his assistant Tom DeSantis. No one really wanted to come up to the podium to address the agenda item on recruitment incentives, until Leach came up to say a few words about the "best of the best" and not sacrificing quality in search of quantity. The command staff and Mayor cited "fatigue" as the reason not to respond to the issue of recruitment. With all the city funds that is going to pay all those tired people in the front row, better excuses are needed.

Pat McCarthy, president of the RPOA and clearly practicing his election speech, spoke about how there was a crisis on the frontlines, due to the increased population growth both from migrations and from the city's annexations of several populated areas. Actually, this crisis was there last year, but the RPOA was too busy spending over $30,000 of its dues to fight Measure II, by scaring the voters into believing that if they cast a "yes" vote, the police officers would not be able to respond as quickly to calls for service. But then, the RPOA did not hold elections last year and any opposing candidates were not on its radar.

Steve Adams, playing to his constituents in the front row, blasted anyone who questioned the quality of the department's officers. Most likely, he was not listening or out of the room taking a phone call(as he often is at meetings)when several residents spoke about how important it was not to sacrifice quality, in search of quantity. Agencies in cities like Washington D.C., Los Angeles and Miami among others learned this the hard way in the early 1990s.

Former RSD employee, Ruben Rasso practicing his campaign speech, fresh from receiving an endorsement by the RPOA PAC said that public safety is his first priority. Judging by his appearance at recent meetings and his list of political contributors, it is his own priority. If elected, then, will he jump in with the GASS Quartet(picked by the RPOA PAC, financed by the members of the RPOA) and focus on development over the quality of city services?

With two elections on the city's horizon, politics was an obvious flavor in the background, as people debated over issues impacting the quality of life of those who live in what is sometimes fondly, but often not referred to as RiverCity.

Going public...

When I started this blog, my intention was mostly to store material and articles obtained in research done on the Riverside Police Department since the stipulated agreement began between this agency and the city on March 6, 2001.

This past week, the address of this blog, which previously had been private, was obtained by employees of the police department and one of them posted some disturbing comments in response to one of the entries on this blog. It is not known how employees of the Riverside Police Department obtained the address of this blog, but they have and began posting on this blog beginning with "Kevin" who prayed that in an example of beautiful poetic justice, I or a member of my family would be a victim of a violent crime, then he described the perpetrator of that crime and insinuated that it would occur near where I live. He also stated in his comments that the Eastside, a community populated by Black and Hispanic populations, should be turned over to Animal Control. When he discovered who he was talking to, he backtracked and began explaining away his prior comments. But despite that, I did learn something when I read his comments and if he wishes to continue to share his views, then he is welcome. He has created some fear in my heart towards him, but I am willing to put that aside and allow him to voice his opinions...while exercising precautions of course.

Since he appeared, other people have appeared both in my defense and in opposition, all anomynous. I have appreciated their contributions to this site, even though initially I felt as I would if my kid brother had stolen my journal and was reading it on the playground. But it has been interesting reading their comments. I think it's been educational as well and they also provide an education to other potential readers.

However, now that the blog has been visited by members of the police department and some civilians who have easier access to criminal reports including investigative reports(confidential) than most civilians, it seems that the time has come to go public with this blog so that everyone can read it. Not just members of the RPD and their friends.

With the city and the state scheduled to part ways next March, this blog will continue to be a place where issues pertaining to the department and the stipulated agreement will be discussed. One anomynous poster brought up the topic of the proportion of officers in a particular racial group in the department, which is a topic to be addressed as well. As is staffing issues.

Even union elections.

I will be asking questions of those who respond as well, and it is their decision of whether or not to answer them.

Until March, do we part...

The PE had a fascinating article about whether or not the city and the state were going to end their five-year shotgun marriage on schedule on March 6, 2005.

Will they or won't they?

***registered site***

Interesting study on the characters that populate the fabric which began stitching itself back together after being ripped apart by the tragic shooting of Tyisha Miller in December 1998. The police brass and union so rarely on the same page, or same side of a court battle actually agree on the contention that the reforms are over and done with and it's time for Bill Lockyer and co. to roll up the carpets and head on back North. Fascinating metaphor indeed.

The community members are all on an advisory board handpicked by the chief himself in 2001. All but one says "We have more work to do...but we're done...maybe."

Woodie Rucker-Hughes and Chani Beeman make good points in their comments, but their comments mirror the assertion Beeman made about the relationship between the community and its police force, being "schitzophrenic".

The other, Michael Crichton, a former law enforcement officer, is more blunt with his remarks. He chose to go a different route and say, show me the money, which could be akin to challenging whether the emperor has no clothes! Not an easy choice, but a brave one.

But it has been on the minds of many including those who were not invited to participate in any meaningful way in the department's reform process. Now that the gala is coming to a close, those invites will not be forthcoming. And if you contest the end of the forced marriage between the city of Riverside and the state, well then you are one of two things depending on whom you ask.

1) an igorant person who can not tell the difference between a court-mandated document and a booklet with glossy pages.

****pssst, it has something to do with the Strategic Plan****

2) a chronic liar.

2.5) a complainer who is not doing the work

Words that surely would soothe the minds of those who are not entirely convinced that this marriage of convenience is ready to end? Whether they do or they do not, is beside the point. It matters little what the communities in Riverside most impacted by the problems(sorry Kevin) in the police department express doubts, or want to see proof that change has indeed occurred.

excerpts from the cast :

BRAD HUDSON: views the stipulated agreement as a business deal he does not wish to see go sour.

City Manager Brad Hudson said, "This council and these taxpayers have spent almost $20 million on this. ... We're gonna get better and bigger and do more."

Maybe open up some more franchises of McRPD??? Money matters of course, but this stipulated judgement was about people. That is how it should remain in its waning days and beyond into the future. The future of course remains unwritten.


CHIEF RUSS LEACH:

Police Chief Russ Leach said, "I know there's some well-meaning people in the community who have concerns." But, he added, the consent decree has been a huge investment.

"Overnight we're not going to turn into ... reckless cowboys," Leach said.

Leach said he doesn't expect to continue the annual traffic-stop study, which is used to determine if racial profiling exists within the department, but aside from that, nothing will change.

"How do we convince them that we won't just roll up the carpets and go home?" Leach asked.

His answer: Read the strategic plan, which lays out department goals through 2009.

"People don't seem to understand -- that's a court-ordered document," Leach said. "We didn't just throw a bunch of words out in a glossy little book."

RPOA President Pat McCarthy:

Pat McCarthy, president of the Riverside police union, said it's unfair for people who haven't been involved in the reform process to point fingers.

While the union certainly didn't welcome the consent decree with open arms, McCarthy said, the department has thrived in the years since it has been in place.

"People are gonna cry wolf no matter what," McCarthy said. "I'm ready to move on."

Put it in the history books, the police chief and the RPOA president in agreement on an issue. So maybe after this current marriage is annulled, these two parties will run off and elope. Then the city's residents can wait and see how this pairing works out, before we throw our rice.

Shhhh...don't look!

***This information is not currently accessible by the taxpaying residents of Riverside***

Anticipating the end of its marriage to the State Attorney General's office, the police department has rearranged and reconfigured its management structure. The Field Operations Division now presides over four regions or precincts, North, Central, East and West. The long vacant Captain of Personnel position has been filled by the promotion of John Wallace. The Special Operations Division which includes Aviation, Canine and Traffic, will be overseen by newly promoted Capt. John DeLaRosa.

Hidden in the impressive chart that details the infrastructure of the new, model(tm) department, is one small detail which spells trouble. Buried at the bottom of the chain of command is the Audit and Compliance Division, formerly known as the Attorney General's Task Force. The Task Force was set up by the department in order to implement required reforms and monitor the progress of these reforms. Originally, it was headed by a lieutenant, who presided over a sergeant, a detective, an officer and an administrative assistant. Various officers have rotated on and off the Task Force during the past four and three-quarter years the department has spent under state consent decree.

Out with the old and in with the new, and the philosophy that seems to fit the mood surrounding the cutting of the department's chains with the state, is to forget the old through embracing the new. Meaning that this critical task force is part of the old, and thus has no place in the new, model(tm)agency. Consequently, there will be no lieutenant heading the new, defanged Audit and Compliance unit. Instead, it will be headed by a sergeant, who will preside over a small group of civilian employees known as criminal analysts.

Initially, the city and department had planned to phase out the Task Force completely on March 6, 2006, and this was shown by the lack of budget funding provided for this unit after that date in the city's biannual budget. Obviously that decision has been put on hold, but the weakening of this body just goes to show that the city and the department wish to exorcise their collective memories of bad behaviors including those that reflect the years of gross negligence and incompetance which led to the necessity of the consent decree in the first place.

The philosophy of defanging the Task Force and burying it in its command structure is one that goes to show that the department is operating under the flawed assumption that the reforms under the consent decree were nothing more than a checklist to be completed and chucked aside.

More officers...check.
More supervision...check
More equipment...check
More cool toys...check, check

But what Attorney General Bill Lockyer had in mind when he set his sights on the RPD, was to destroy the department's culture of racism, sexism and paranoia and rebuild it anew.

From San Diego Indymedia:

Lockyer on RPD

"I decided there were systemic problems with the Riverside Police Department," Lockyer said. "There were a lot of instances in which African-Americans were beaten, Hispanics beaten and tossed in the lake, and Gays and Lesbians harassed and beaten. I spent a year and a half negotiating with the Riverside Police Department for such basic demands as psychological evaluations for officers before they are hired, up-to-date training, community relations boards, availability and training in use of non-lethal weapons, TV cameras in the chief's office and the squad room and video and audio recording in police cars."

Here's the kicker:

The intent of these reforms, Lockyer said, was to break the macho culture of the police department and the racism and sexism that went along with it.

Why was it important to file a law suit against Riverside in Superior Court in order to ensure that it would reform its troubled agency in the wake of the shooting death of Tyisha Miller?

Lockyer found that the Riverside City Council balked at signing on to the deal. "They did some things of their own. which they'd done three times before, and each time there had been slight improvements and then things had got worse again," he recalled. Finally I went to one of the Council meetings and said, The choice is, you adopt the reforms or I will sue you and we'll see what the federal courts have to say.? They said, "Our constituents don't like outsiders coming in," and I said, "I've got news for you. All your constituents are my constituents as well."


But it remains unclear whether Lockyer's version of judicial tough love will keep the scandal-plagued department on the straight and narrow. Defanging the Task Force, is not a forward step on that road.


And there lies the danger that always cloaks this type of voluntary amnesia. As well as with the tried and true adage that if one forgets one's mistakes they are doomed to repeat them.

The wrong kind of crime victim, in the wrong place

Meet Officer Paul Stucker, who works for the Riverside Police Department.

Tall, muscular, bald and White, he could be one of many officers working in the Riverside Police Department. But Stucker was the officer dispatched to respond to an assault and battery on Sept. 5, 2005 at 2pm, near the intersection of Market and University Avenue.

A young man had just purchased a computer printer and was biking down University Avenue, with purchase in hand, when his path crossed that of his assailant. The assailant decided he wanted the computer printer, so he jumped this young man, knocked him off his bicycle then began kicking and stomping on him as he lay defenseless in the congested street. Eight shocked motorists jumped out of their cars and intervened in this situation. Three men pulled the assailant off of the victim, while others there tended to his bloody injuries to his face. Two women called 911 on their cellphones. Those calls were routed to the CHP in San Bernardino which added to the delayed response by the Fire Department, American Medical Response Ambulance service and the police department.

Twenty minutes later, the fire and medical vehicles arrived, and those driving them promptly saw to the victim's injuries. One of them, rolled the assailant who was under guard by three male civilians over on his stomach, sat on him and pulled items out of his pocket including a switchblade.

Enter, Officer Paul Stucker, who turned onto University from Market and did a u-turn so he could park on the side where the incident occurred. As Stucker exited his car, he asked the eight good samaritans, "Who saw it happen?" Nine hand went up. Initially, Stucker's name tag was not visible, and when his name was asked, he looked down, then smoothed his shirt and it appeared from behind a crease. Stucker walked to the ambulance, talked to the victim for a couple minutes, then walked back to the samaritans. All the samaritans asked him if they could give their statements, when, if they could get a card from Stucker, or contact information. All emphasized how terrible it was to see a man get brutally assaulted in the street in front of them. Stucker begged off, telling them he had all the information he needed. Earlier, he had put the assailant in handcuffs saying this doesn't mean you are under arrest and placed him in the back seat of the squad car. A short woman had arrived driving a white vehicle with traffic accident investigations written on it. Stucker told her to watch his car while he talked to the man in the ambulance. Then Stucker left, about five minutes after he arrived.

Well, the situation did not end there. The victim's name was Ken Michael Dunn, and his parents are members of the Riverside Coalition of Police Accountability. He suffers from diabetes, notice of which is tattooed on his arm for emergency purposes. He also wears one shoe that is three inches higher than the other to correct a leg length difference.

His case number is: P3-05-248-143

The police report written by Stucker is sparse, with only S1/Cohen hit V/1 Dunn. The suspect by the way is Ernest David Cohen, a short burly White man with a long criminal history in Riverside County which includes three felony convictions, two associated with auto theft and a third with methamphetamine possession earlier this year. Currently, he is serving formal felony probation. But, three days before his arrest, his probation officer Renel Gaines issued a memo alleging that Cohen had violated his probation by failure to show up to a rehab center and undergo mandated drug treatment and failure to report to his probational officer. Despite at least 10 allegations of probation violations filed against Cohen in an assortment of criminal cases stemming back to 2001, Gaines stated in his memo that Cohen simply needed more intensive treatment.

Security Guard Ardell Wallace knows about Cohen and had come upon the incident involving Cohen's assault on Dunn after the fact. He said that Cohen had tried to rob others in the downtown neighborhood, but that the police have not done much about him. He believed that Cohen had jumped Dunn to take his new computer printer.

That would lead one to think that the following felony crime might have taken place:

PC 211. Robbery is the felonious taking of personal property in the
possession of another, from his person or immediate presence, and
against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear.


Did Officer Stucker take Cohen to jail to be booked for attempted felony strong-arm robbery and violation of probation(commission of a crime, possession of a weapon, switchblade knife)?

No, Stucker drove Cohen to some undisclosed location, cited him with a ticket then released him. Then the next day, Sept. 6, Stucker wrote his report, for a PC 242 misdemeanor battery.

And there the fiction writing began...

"Was there a witness to the crime?" NO

NO??????

This revelation would be news to the nine people who witnessed the incident and intervened in the apprehension of the assailant and the treatment of the victim. This deliberate attempt to falsify information by Stucker is a slap on the face to those who not only saw this incident occur, but intervened rather than looked the other way.

Weapons Seized? NO

NO????? Well, okay, after all, Stucker was not even onscene when the EMT pulled the switchblade out of Cohen's pocket as he searched him.

Weapons? Hands

The victim was kicked numerous times and stomped on the chest and head.

As to whether Stucker realized that Cohen was on probation, He checked that box.

Motive: Unknown

Apparently the fact that Dunn was in possession of his newly purchased computer printer at the time never switched a light bulb off in Stucker's head that the assault might have been an attempt to forcibly steal that computer. If Stucker had bothered to interview witnesses, he might have had that bulb switched on for him.

No charges have been filed in this case. The investigations division has no record of it ever happening, nor has this unit assigned this case to any detective, let alone one in robbery or crimes against persons. At last notice, is that this case was sent to the impound division, even though no motor vehicle was involved. Why a criminal case would be sent there inside a "model" LE agency is a question that so far remains unanswered. Perhaps the Impound Division doubles as a "slush pile" for crimes involving victims who in the scheme of things don't really matter.

Victims who are poor, non-white and in this case disabled, will have their cases sent to this slush pile rather than the Investigations unit which serves mainly to build up cases to prosecute poor and homeless people, not look for those who assault them, kill them or rob them.

And so ends the story of the officer who celebrated Labor Day by refusing to do the job he took an oath to do, and the addition of yet another crime to the RPD's new slush pile.

Did Diabetes kill Terry Rabb or was it an accessory?

Terry Rabb is a 35 year old man who is diabetic.

Or he was. Now, he is dead after Riverside Police Department officers responded to a call for assistance with a man who was having a diabetic episode and acting "hostile", according to department officials.

The department has very little to say on the matter, until an autopsy of Rabb has been completed. Still, Lt. Darryl Hurt, himself no stranger to incustody deaths, said that he believed that Rabb died from complications related to diabetes, and not from the brief struggle he had with the police officers. The officers had been dispatched to assist the man, Hurt said. Sgt. Leon Phillips, who heads the Robbery/Homicide Investigations Unit, said that the officers had only grabbed Rabb.

The CPRC, under the city's charter, has the authority to investigate incustody deaths which arise from the direct or indirect actions of police officers. The problem is, that the CPRC may opt to wait until the police department decides whether or not the death of Rabb falls within the requirements set by the Charter. Instead, the CPRC needs to take an active role in its own investigating and begin gathering facts independently which will essentially determine whether or not the death of Rabb falls within their jurisdiction.



Dying While Diabetic

***registration required***

A drop here and there...

The Roger Sutton Racial Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation trial is ongoing...

Trying to get that southern jury

Sutton tells his story

Interesting how a Black officer can be removed from a unit for forgetting his commands, but a White officer can be exonerated for shooting someone to death while apparently forgetting his commands.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting article by Press Enterprise reporter Sarah Burge, on the police officer shortage:

More cops needed, Mayor promises 50 more cops on campaign trail
***registered site alert***

Interestingly enough, just several weeks ago, as part of the latest Eastside action plan, there was a proposal to work with Human Resources Director Art Alcarez to hire more cops, and to speed up the hiring process. A short conversation with Chief Russ Leach revealed that the area of hiring to be sped up was the background checking. He assured me that doing so would not compromise the quality of officers hired by the department. Famous last words by many a police chief before who did just this, and then woke up one morning to the realization that they had officers out doing home invasion robberies, robbing banks and becoming involved in corruption scandals, ala Rampart CRASHed.

Yes, there is a serious need for more officers, especially with the population growth that comes along with being one of the fastest growing regions in the nation, not to mention several huge annexations that the city has done without of course, ensuring that they had the proper infrastructure in place beforehand. Greed can not be thwarted or slowed by pesky things like details. However, you can not sacrifice quality in the search for quantity. Yet, every department that has tried to quickly beef up its troops in the past has done just this and has paid a heavy price for it, publicly. The community pays the price. The officers and agency plays the price. Hiring a quality cop will take serious money($125,000 or higher) and time, and it will always be that way. Accept it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Day 60 in the ongoing quest to obtain statistical information from the police department regarding its internal investigations has passed without no response from Police Chief Russ Leach. It is always a struggle to get information the public is entitled to receive from one of the least transparent agencies in the state. LOL.

It just goes to show when it comes to keeping your agency on the right track in a wide variety of areas, you can never turn your back on it...especially its administration.

Did the RPD amend its version of the Summer Lane shooting?

As stated in the previous entry, a bombshell was dropped by Investigator Norm Wright at the Sept. 28 CPRC meeting regarding the officer involved shooting of Summer Lane last December. But what was downplayed, was the fact that the RPD's version of the incident matched that presented by Wright in front of the stunned commissioners. Even Officer Ryan Wilson's version of events he provided in a statement fit the picture.

Contrast that, with the version of the shooting the RPD presented at a special meeting on Dec. 22, 2004. At that meeting, the police department said that Wilson had been placed by witnesses BEHIND Lane's car, and that he shot at her while she was trying to back into him. When asked by one commissioner if Wilson was on the ground, the department said:

"Yes....We think so..."

You think?????

Looking back, it is crystal clear that the first version, no wait, the second version of the shooting farmed out by the department has no basis in fact, according to the eyewitness testimony provided. Apparently, even Wilson's version, at some point, contradicted the department's version that it presented last December.

So what happened between last Dec. 22 and Sept. 28?

Why was the department providing a version of the Lane shooting that could have been nothing else but the figment of their imagination? At that point in the investigation, the primary interviews of Wilson, the participant and all the civilians standing by and watching, were done. All that was waiting by Dec. 22, likely were more sophisticated toxicology tests conducted on Lane's tissue samples and/or her blood and ballistic analysis and tests done on Wilson's firearm.

Let's look again:

DEC 22, 2004: Wilson was on the ground behind Lane's car and shot at her while she tried to run him over.

Sept. 28, 2005: Wilson walked behind Lane's stationary vehicle, up to the driver's window and shot at her three-four times, without issuing verbal commands, before walking back to handcuff a subdued or unconscious Grotness.

Wilson's statement adheres to the Sept. 28 version, a source has said. All the eyewitnesses stories match the Sept. 28 version, Wright has said.

Again.....

Where did the RPD's version of the Lane shooting it gave in its briefing on Dec. 22 come from?

Can any of the department's brass answer this question, please?