Meetings and motivations

The Community Police Review Commission had its monthly regular meeting and included a packed agenda. It's taken upon the task to complete its regular meeting, adjourn and then reconvene as the community outreach committee which hasn't worked out very well.



The discussion of the timeline for the commission's investigation and review of the fatal officer-involved shooting of Douglas Steven Cloud which took place all the way back in October 2006, took off into an interesting direction when suggestions were raised by Commissioner Chani Beeman to access any depositions which may or may not have been given by the police officers to attorneys in relation to the lawsuit that was filed against the city over the Cloud shooting. That lawsuit as you know settled about a month or so ago for $800,000 making it the second highest payout in connection with an officer-involved fatality or shooting since at least the 1980s. Any additional statements by the involved officers and perhaps those who served as witnesses can only enhance the quality and depth of the CPRC's investigation and perhaps provide clarity on a shooting that has really disturbing undertones.

Who paid for the settlement of this shooting? The city residents did. Were any improvements made to put into place to perhaps address issues that surely arose during investigation into a shooting that the city paid a huge chunk of money out on so early in the litigating process? That remains to be seen as far as the public is concerned. Because after all, the city's legal and risk management divisions are loathe to part with city money and they parted with a rather significant sum in this particular case. What made them do it?


Here's the current standings for money paid out by the city for wrongful deaths or excessive force incidents.


Tyisha Miller (1998): $3 million settlement

Douglas Steven Cloud (2006): $800,000 settlement

Hector Islas (1997): $790,000

Derek Hayward (1994): $715,ooo jury's verdict

Jose Martinez (1997): $550,000 settlement

Summer Marie Lane (2004): $390,000



Anyway, when the suggestion came up to either request or possibly even subpoena depositions (and it was interesting how few people on the commission seemed to either know or remember the commission can use subpoena power) that were given particularly by the officers who had shot Cloud. It would be interesting to compare and contrast whether the statements the officers gave to investigators in the police department through the Officer-Involved Death investigation were the same accounts provided in the deposition. It would also be interesting to compare and contrast how officers answered questions or provided statements to civil attorneys for a wrongful death lawsuit compared to how they would do like to departmental investigators who in other shooting investigations have asked leading questions particularly of the officers, most notably in the case of the Summer Lane shooting.

If the commission is able to access the depositions, then it would add a new dimension to the commission's investigation of an officer-involved death indeed.

Cloud's still in the earliest stages of the review process and no discussion on that shooting has taken place yet on how to draft its public report. The commission has yet to be briefed on the progress of its investigation into the October 2006 officer-involved shooting of Joseph Darnell Hill.


The CPRC also included in its closed session agenda a discussion on a final finding to assign to the shooting of Lee Deante Brown investigation. Only they know if a final decision has been made in this case. If so, it was made 724 days after the shooting occurred.






Meeting number two of the Library and Museum Renovation Task Force held its second meeting on Wednesday. Its members appeared undecided on which direction in regards to renovating both downtown institutions they wanted to pursue.

What was interesting was that the city's hired consultant seemed to believe that they needed to anonymously create lists of things they didn't want to discuss out in the open. Not surprisingly, the list included at least one city employee on it.




(excerpt, Press Enterprise)




Early in the four-hour meeting, consultant Jeffrey Scherer discussed what he called the "elephants in the room" -- big issues the task force might not be inclined to discuss openly but that everyone knows are out there.

At the task force's first meeting on April 11, he had asked panel members to write anonymously a short list of such issues.

Two of the people that task force members mentioned as "elephants in the room" in their anonymous comments were Hudson (mentioned in at least three lists) and former Library Director Judith Auth, who now heads the Committee to Renew the Library, a group that opposed the joint museum/library project as it was proposed. Somebody even wrote that one "elephant" is city employees who can be fired without cause and who therefore must speak the party line.

"There's a major amount of distrust in this room," Scherer said.

In a memorandum to the panel and again at Wednesday's meeting, he recommended members and the public try to move beyond bashing others involved in the process.

"I think it would be very helpful if we could get away from looking at a bad guy," Scherer said.




The next meeting will be held on May 19. Time, to be announced but likely during a time when few people can attend. It's important for those who are committed to the library, the museum and their proposed renovations keep paying close attention to what goes on during these meetings.



Ontario is presenting it's new version of tent city. Much smaller than the older version and this one's got a fence around it!



An Orange County Sheriff's Department deputy who molested a teenaged boy may have other victims. But Deputy Gerald Stenger killed himself in his squad car after charges were filed against him.




In Spokane, those who advocate for civilian review are critical of the current mechanism proposed by the city government.


(excerpt, Spokeman Review)



“The reality is, police problems in Spokane are severe enough that we’re not going to accept icing on a rotten cake,” said Pam Behring, a South Hill activist and League of Women Voters leader. Behring moderated a series of community forums at Gonzaga Law School on police misconduct issues after the 2006 death of Otto Zehm and other high-profile incidents.

Spokane City Council President Joe Shogan told the crowd packed into the council’s small fifth-floor conference room that they’d have to wait for a public hearing later this year to voice their concerns or to hear any detailed comment from elected officials on the proposal.

“If you expected more, you’re welcome to leave,” Shogan told the audience, saying Spokane Police Guild members need to vote on the tentative agreement. No public testimony is allowed at the monthly Public Safety Committee meetings.



And Shogun is welcome to vote along with Spokane's other city residents on a proposed civilian mechanism on the ballot. It's very difficult to do but sometimes at least initiating the process is enough to motivate city officials to make a little more progress with implementing civilian review.





The Reverend Al Sharpton said that if the three New York Police Department officers were acquitted of charges in connection with the shooting of Sean Bell and two of his friends, it would be like the Old South.


(excerpt, New York Daily News)



Sharpton, on the steps of City Hall, was rankled by a defense lawyer's claim that the 50-shot police fusillade that killed Bell resulted from the "attitude" of shooting victim Joseph Guzman.

"This smacks of Emmett Till, of reckless eyeballing," Sharpton said, involving the infamous 1955 slaying of a black youth for whistling at a white woman.

"Is that now what we're going to bring this city to?" Sharpton asked. "How do you justify self-defense against a non-threat?"



Sharpton led a rally in New York City today and Nichole Paultre-Bell provided her account of what she believe happened on Nov. 25, 2006.



The judge's verdict is expected to be announced on Friday, April 25. Judge Arthur Cooperman has already said that he's going to explain his reasoning behind the verdicts before announcing the verdicts.