Lee Deante Brown: Many questions, fewer answers

Last week, the Community Police Review Commission voted to send questions to the Riverside Police Department's Officer-Involved Death investigation team regarding the April 3 fatal shooting of Lee Deante Brown.

Here is a partial list of those questions in the wording in which they were asked that have been brought up during the past several months mostly by Commissioner Jim Ward and members of the public. It's interesting watching the commissioners discuss the drafting of the public report in connection with the Brown shooting. Each time the discussion has been opened, there is silence from most of the commissioners in terms of discussing it until they are prompted on it by Chair Brian Pearcy. They appear to be taking their cues on how to continue on the discussion through him.

Ward on the other hand can discuss it freely, using evidence gathered by both the police department and the CPRC's own investigator, Butch Warnberg, to make his argument.

These questions have been sent to the police department for responses back in writing. Hopefully, the department will provide them.




Conflicting Officer Statements


1) Officer Stucker said Mr. Brown was sitting or squatting when shot, Officer Ellefson said he was standing, four(4) independent eyewitnesses said he was sitting or on the ground when shot. Who's credible?

2) Both Officer Stucker and Officer Ellefson said Mr. Brown had possession of the taser. However, six(6) independent eyewitnesses who saw the shooting said he had nothing in his hands when he was shot. Who's credible?

3) What evidence did the RPD find that linked Mr. Brown to the taser other than the officers' statements?

4) Officer Stucker claimed he was tased and, as a result, was disengaged from the struggle prior to the shooting. When he turned around, Mr. Brown had Officer Ellefson's taser in his hands. However, according to his belt recorder, he was engaged up until seconds before the shooting and according to the Coroner's report, Mr. Brown's body had three(3) wounds consistent with taser probes and one taser probe was embedded in his belt. Do you find Officer Stucker's claim creditable? If yes, how? Why?



The Custody of Chain of Officer Ellefson's Belt Recorder

1) Why wasn't Officer Ellefson's transcribed belt recorder not submitted with the criminal casebook?

2) How as the "Drop the gu"-"Drop the gun" discovered?

3) Who discovered it?

4) When was it discovered?

5) Who was it reported to other than the FBI investigator?

6) Why wasn't this information made a part of the criminal casebook?

7) Who shared this information with the FBI investigator?

8) Why wasn't the statement picked up on Officer Stucker's belt recorder? All the other statements were!

9) All other commands were repeated over and over, but the "Drop the gun" command was made only once. After Mr. Brown was shot and reportedly still had the taser in his hands, Officer Ellefson's first command to Mr. Brown after shooting him was, "Stay down", not "Drop the gun". Why?

10) Why didn't Officer Ellefson claim this statement when he signed his enhanced transcribed copy of his belt recorder?




The Custody Chain of Officer Ellefson's Taser


1) Why were there no fingerprints and only traces of DNA on Officer Ellefson's taser?

2) Had it been wiped clean prior to testing?

3) Why was Officer Ellfeson's DNA not found on his taser?

4) Were Officer Ellefson's fingerprints found on his taser? If not, why?

5) Which analysis took place first, the fingerprints or the DNA? Does one compromise the other?

6) Why wasn't proper protocol followed, i.e., using one swab for each area of the taser rather than one swab for all areas? Could this process be tantamount to wiping the taser down?

7) According to the evidence, Officer Ellefson's taser was cycled seven(7) times. The sixth(6th) cycle was at 13:49:11 and the seventh(7th) at 13:49:17. How could Mr. Brown gain control and cycle the taser in six(6) seconds considering all the officers said took place between the statement, "Watch that cuff" and Mr. Brown gaining control and cycling the taser.

8) If a taser can only be used for contact tasing, can the taser be cycled if no contact was made?

9) On Nov. 30, 2006, we were directed not to review and discuss the Brown OID case because additional relevant information was being developed as part of the criminal investigation and that this information would be important to the criminal review of this case. I am unaware of any additional relevant information being shared with us(The CPRC). All we received was a faxed copy of the physical evidence examination report from the Department of Justice(DOJ) to Det. Medici that was sent on Nov. 13, 2006, approximately two weeks prior to the directive to cease and desist review of the case. This directive was in effect for approximately one and a half(1 1/2) months. I would like to know what relevant information was developed by the RPD during this time (see attached email).




It's not clear when responses to these questions will be received back by the commission from those who can best answer them in the police department. It does appear that further discussion on the Brown shooting might be postponed until these questions receive a response.






More news about the classified advertised threat against Riverside County District Attorney Rod Pacheco, which is under investigation according to the Press Enterprise.


(excerpt)


Pacheco on Friday had announced that he was seeking a court injunction to limit the ability of East Side Riva gang members to congregate and commit crimes. Pacheco said he thinks the advertisement was an East Side Riva intimidation tactic made in response to his injunction effort.

Using the word "memorial" in the ad "raises it to a certain level, a criminal level," Pacheco said Monday after speaking at a luncheon meeting of the Corona Chamber of Commerce. He said his office is investigating the incident as a possible threat against a public official.

Making such a threat is a crime that carries a maximum penalty of three years in state prison, the district attorney's office has said. Investigators served a search warrant at the newspaper office Monday morning, but it was not clear what information was obtained.

"What better way to put terror in the community than threaten the district attorney?" Pacheco asked in an interview. "When they threaten me, they threaten all of society."




Some community members had concerns about the injunction in that it might be applied in a discriminatory fashion.

(excerpt)


Larry Gallegos, a member of the pro-cannabis Patient Advocacy Network, said the injunction has angered some Hispanic residents, who fear how the injunction will be enforced.

"I think he is doing a great job with the gangs," Gallegos said. "I'm just concerned with how the injunction will be administered. Is there going to be an increase in racial profiling?"





9-11 phone calls made from cell phones in Riverside will be heard by local dispatchers rather than the CHP, according to this article in the Press Enterprise. About half of all 9-11 calls were made from cell phones, which caused serious delays in response.



(excerpt)


Some callers reported being placed on hold for five to eight minutes, said Riverside police communications manager John Wright.

The CHP was overwhelmed with more than 8 million calls per year, Wright said.

"Now calls go directly to the correct 911 operator, which is probably cutting minutes off the response time," Wright said. "In a life-saving situation, that time is critical."

Riverside has seen a 30 percent increase in wireless calls into its call center since the conversion began, Wright said.

Other Inland cities that have switched over include Corona, Beaumont, Banning, Palm Springs, Murrieta, Indio and all cities that contract with the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department.

The Riverside County Sheriff's Department is still reviewing whether the conversion would be possible and beneficial to its county, Executive Officer Tom Freeman said.



Nothing beats trying to find a pay phone(which are nearly extinct at this point) or other land line when you need to call for assistance especially on a holiday. Hopefully, these changes will help alleviate the situation.



Outgoing Riverside County Sheriff Bob Doyle has picked the man he hoped will succeed him and it's Neil Lingle. More about Lingle here.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)


Doyle also criticized other candidates for lobbying county supervisors for the appointment to fill the three years remaining in the sheriff's term.

"We've had people that were fired and that I wouldn't allow to stay because of incompetence calling board members looking for support," Doyle said in a phone interview. "If they are stirring stuff up trying to cause dissention and anxiety about people, and not being truthful about people, that's a problem."



Because God forbid, it be an open appointment process. In Riverside County? I don't think so.






In 1999, Mayor Ron Loveridge made a speech during the dedication of the Martin Luther King, jr. statue and said that there would be no tolerance for the use of racist and sexist slurs in Riverside's work force.

Eight years later, has this vision become reality?

Does the city of Riverside really practice a zero tolerance for racial and gender slurs in its workplace? What happens to those who report them? What happens to those who use them? Are you more likely to keep your job if you use slurs than if you report them?


What agencies do you report it if it's happening to you?




At the Plum House place on 12th and Almond, there's a sign that states there is a meet and greet with Ward One candidate, Mike Gardner. Not sure what the date is, but it was displayed.