Election 2009 kicks off and who's moving to the Greyhound Station?

The Community Police Review Commission met again for its only scheduled meeting this month and the first news of the day, was the sudden resignation of its Ward Four representative, Linda Soubirous who was appointed in early 2007. The official explanation is that she was hired by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, which had just allegedly implemented a 5% pay cut across the board and has frozen many of its positions.

Her resignation took place several weeks after Soubirous and other commissioners had voted to initiate independent investigations into the officer-involved deaths of Carlos Quinonez, Sr, Jose Luis Sanchez and Marlon Oliver Acevedo. No action was taken as the request to initiate those investigations never traveled further than the staff, a revelation which startled several commissioners but really goes back to the contention of several individuals including former commissioner Steve Simpson that the executive manager couldn't serve two masters. And only one available one signs pay checks.

It's not clear when Soubirous' vacancy will be filled by the city council. If the vacancy is open more than 60 days, then the mayor's given the task of filling the spot. It's likely that Mayor Ron Loveridge and Councilman Frank Schiavone will decide amongst themselves who will fill her seat instead of putting it to the vote of the entire city council which has been the past practice of selecting any commissioner for the CPRC.

After that bombshell was dropped, the meeting got started.

Over 30 people attended including King Downing from the ACLU's national headquarters to watch the proceedings which took place over about three hours, with the lights going off about twice.

After it happened once, Commissioner Art Santore stood up, said "enough" and was out of there. He told City Attorney Gregory Priamos in the hallway that the commission had been promised by the city that the lights would stay on until 10 p.m. but it was only about 7 p.m. when they turned off as they have a tendency to do every 30 minutes or so at City Hall at night. His meltdown was the only one this meeting, but some tempers were frayed as commissioner sparred off with commissioner and commissioners sparred off with Executive Manager Kevin Rogan. In other words, it was a fairly typical CPRC meeting.

There was some discussion of the issue involving the move by the city manager's office to bar the CPRC from effectively and timely investigating officer-involved deaths even though it's not on the agenda.

As of this day, there's been no real response save an 11th hour phone call by Mayor Pro Tem Rusty Bailey to CPRC Chair Brian Pearcy on behalf of the city government including at least two members of the city council who had no idea he was doing so, that it was to follow the directive issued via memo by City Manager Brad Hudson.

Rumors are that there will be an announcement of some sort that the city council will come away from its discussions which have been taking place out of the public forum and bring the issue to one, in the next week or so. Odds are that the discussion will take place at the Governmental Affairs Committee despite its lack of interest in the CPRC during the past several years. Packed with council members not supportive of the CPRC's directive by the charter to do independent investigations, it's likely that the CPRC will crawl out of that committee with further recommendations to weaken it.

Commissioner Chani Beeman tried to request that an agenda item be placed on the next meeting's agenda to discuss the process of initiating investigations into the three officer-involved deaths but asked if it would be definitely placed on the agenda or would be at risk considering the city's employees reviewed all of the commission's meeting agendas. It's really sad when you have a commission that's so micromanaged that the commissioners have to worry about whether or not agenda items they request even make it on the agenda after they are reviewed by both the city manager and city attorney's office. But that's what it's become.


Priamos finally stepped into the discussion by stating that according to the charter, the executive manager of the CPRC reported to the city manager's office and not the commissioners. It was nice to have someone at City Hall at least make that announcement official.





The Riverside Police Department has begun to move its divisions into the building that currently houses both Greyhound Bus Lines and some divisions of the city's fire department. Everyone should know by now that the decision to oust Greyhound wasn't ever really about it being a crime-ridden center or about it being a nuisance. That's why you've got individuals at City Hall coming out of the woodwork and pulling the ultimate reversal which is to blame the Riverside Transit Agency for the problems downtown and not Greyhound Bus Lines. People had been pointing that out for months but the city council at that time was too busy blaming Greyhound and demonizing its passengers.

No, the decision to oust Greyhound probably had more to do with the city revisiting an old proposal to move the administrative divisions of the police department which are currently housed at the Orange Street Station to what will be a fully former bus terminal at the end of January. With the city facing a serious budget crisis, it's moving its administrative divisions which use rental space to the downtown terminal. It's looking more and more like Greyhound kind of got into the way.

In fact, the police department's already began moving its operations over there, even before Greyhound has vacated the premises.

The police department's Internal Affairs Division is in the process of moving out of its rented office space on Central Avenue to its new home at the downtown bus terminal building where some of the fire divisions are housed, according to news that was announced at the CPRC meeting. This had been in the works for a while and it's too bad no one came out from the city and said what a bad idea this is if the city does follow through and move other police divisions to the bus terminal to join it.

In fact, there's been little fuss at least in public regarding this latest move. But then the public most often is kept in the dark when the city's making decisions. In fact, they would rather let the public believe Greyhound was a crime magnet (and RTA's section of the terminal was not) and all its riders were thugs and criminals (and not elderly, disabled and/or poor families) than believe that it was more about intent on relocating portions of its own city departments into that space.

Here's some history involving the original move of the Internal Affairs Division from its former home on the second floor of the Orange Street Station which has served for years as the police department's administrative headquarters. That building was somewhat cramped for space and that impacted all the divisions which were housed there.


Chief Russ Leach went around to meetings from 2001-02 or so stumping for a separate location for the Internal Affairs Division. Former State Attorney General Bill Lockyer pushed for that as well. The reasons both provided at the time were sound reasons and the decision to move Internal Affairs away from the other police divisions which it had previously shared housing with was a very good one. The Internal Affairs Division was then moved to leased office space near the Riverside Plaza.

Why is this decision to move it to the terminal not a great one?

For several different reasons. For one thing, it will not be the only division which is housed at the building for very long because other police divisions which were located at the Orange Street station are planning to move there eventually as well. That's probably the most serious problem with this ill-planned decision.

It seems would have to do a lot of renovation at the old bus terminal to have an adequate facility for any police departments including Internal Affairs which would require secure quarters for any files including ones that are protected by state law.

In addition, there's lots of police assigned downtown so it creates a problem about moving witnesses, complainants and officers in and out of a facility for interviews without them being seen by other police officers. For complainants, they have the option to have an interview at another location if they are made aware of that option. But in some cases, that might not be possible for them or their witnesses. For police officers, it's important for those involved in Internal Affairs cases either as subjects but especially witnesses or even complainants to have that separation from the rest of the department and that includes physical separation.

Now, there will be witnesses, complainants and officers going into the Internal Affairs division for interviews and they can be seen by other police officers. That's going to hurt the integrity of that division.

It's also critical for the perception of the public that the Internal Affairs Division is a separate entity from the rest of the police department to maintain that geographical separation. There's already some separation of Internal Affairs personnel from other officers during their 2-3 year stints working in that division. It's not a popular assignment in any police department. Most people who file complaints or are witnesses for complaints and internal investigations don't want to have to fear they will run into that officer who's the subject of the investigation or any of his friends or other officers while going to interviews. Many officers probably don't want to be seen going to interviews either particularly if they are reporting misconduct in a department which historically has not been kind to its whistle blowers.



So for both civilian and officer populations, it's important to maintain the Internal Affairs Division in a separate geographic location than any other police division including the chief's office. But now that's not being done. Who made this decision anyway? The city? The department? A flip of a coin?




Election 2009 hasn't even officially kicked off yet in Riverside and already the innuendo is flowing nicely with insinuations of some sort being made against Ward Four candidate, Paul Davis by the usual nameless suspects.


(excerpt, Inland Empire Craigslist)




So, Mr. Davis I just read the Nation's Rent to Own "press release" of your intentions to run for City Council. What I find most interesting is that Mr. Davis refers to himself as a former police officer. What he probably doesn't want you to know is why he's a FORMER police officer.

What's bound to come out during a campaign is the fact that Mr. Davis was "technically" fired from . . . first, the Riverside County Sheriff's Department and then the Riverside Police Department but was allowed to resign.

Oh, but that is confidential.





Of course, naturally as is this person's identity. And if he decides to run, then this person will... There's a name for that actually and it's not nice.


It would be a miracle if anyone running for office in this town ever campaigned on the issues. And it looks like the mudslinging on this particular race is going to start even earlier than predicted. If Davis' history as a law enforcement officer is an issue, then it can be raised in a forum that's not solely used to discourage him from even running for office or else.





A former Riverside County Sheriff's Department deputy plead guilty to misdemeanor sexual misconduct in court. He's the latest deputy in that department to do so out of the half-dozen or so who are being prosecuted for sexual crimes under the color of authority.




Former Riverside Police Department officer, Robert Forman appeared in Riverside County Superior Court on his three felony counts of oral copulation under the color of authority and sexual battery to tentatively schedule his preliminary hearing to Dec. 22. He was arrested on Oct. 14, after being investigated by the department's sexual assault and child abuse division for alleged incidents which were reported by three women between February and April this year.




The Orange County Sheriff's Department receives very few complaints and it's trying to figure out why.



(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



Newly appointed Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens said she wants the department to track complaints from the public more closely. The department is overhauling its complaint process, Nighswonger said.

"We're going to become more in line with some of the bigger agencies as far as the tracking and accountability that we don't have right now," Nighswonger said.

Wayne Quint, president of the Assn. of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs, said he doesn't think changes are necessary. The low number of complaints, he said, underscores the cooperative relationship between his department and the public.

"You walk into our academy and you'll see the slogans on the wall about treating people with dignity and respect, and it starts there. Our deputies are the very best," Quint said. "The people of Orange County are the greatest customers a law enforcement department could want. I'm not just saying that because the numbers are low, but because there's a great working relationship between law enforcement and the community. It's always been like that. It's why the housing prices are so high here."





Pomona Police Department loses its latest police chief. Joe Romero, a long time employee is gone.


(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



On Wednesday, Assistant Police Chief Dave Keetle was named the department's acting chief, according to a city official.

Council members could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

Community activists were surprised by the dismissal. "Everyone's upset about this. [Romero] is respected and well-liked." said Frank Delgado, 32.

"I think it's unjustified," said community activist Virginia Madrigal. "He's served [more than] 30 years with the city."

Romero was hired as a police cadet in 1975. By 1994, he had become the department's first Latino police captain.

In September 2006, Romero was sworn in as police chief.

He has been praised by community activists for being accessible, staying active in the community and promoting youth programs such as Gang Resistance and Education Training.

But his short tenure as chief has also been filled with several controversies.




In Atlanta, it didn't take long but even as this city has created a civilian review board, the police department is pushing changes which could as some people say, turn it into a "toothless tiger".



(excerpt, Atlanta Journal Constitution)

The Atlanta Police Department, with the help of the city’s Law Department, introduced legislation Tuesday to amend city law regarding how the Citizen Review Board investigates complaints about Atlanta’s law enforcement officers.

The proposed change comes just as the review board has begun its work. Created in the wake of an illegal police shooting that left an elderly woman dead, the board was intended to restore the public’s trust in the police department.

The city law recently enacted to create the review board gives the board “full access” to police reports and documents. Police officials are asking the city to allow them to only turn over documents and information that are public record, which is minimal when an investigation is ongoing.

If the change is approved, it would essentially allow the police department to withhold most information from the Citizen Review Board until after the department conducts its own investigation.

Those on both sides of the issue attended the city’s Public Safety Committee meeting, including Lane Hagin, the police major who heads the internal affairs unit and spearheaded the effort.

No police officials spoke, but state Sen. Vincent Fort (D-Atlanta) and the review board’s secretary, Rod Edmond, addressed City Council members, both voicing their opposition to the amendment.

“In effect, it would defang the Citizen Review Board and make it nothing more than a paper tiger,” Fort said.

The three New York City Police Department officers were arraigned after being indicted in relation to the alleged incident where a man was sodomized in a subway, but not before one plain-clothed officer called Michael Mineo a "faggot" inside the courtroom. Nice.



The Fraternal Order of Police will be footing the bill in the defense of a Chicago Police Department charged with perjury to the tune of $1 million.



The Better Late Than Never Award


It took two whole years but now a Seattle Police Department officer admits he was drunk when he plowed his vehicle into three others. At the time, he was driving the wrong direction of the freeway and after causing a serious accident, he fled the scene.

Verdict first, investigation second

"Sentence first, verdict afterward."


---Lewis Carroll




Another discussion has started on the filing of a $5 million claims for damages filed by a Los Angeles Police Department officer against the city of Riverside. An anonymous individual wrote this comment about the situation.


(excerpt, Inland Empire Craigslist)



I don't have the time to scroll through Mary's posts, but I recall her account of the FBI meeing and Mr. Guillary getting up and telling his account of his "incident" with RPD.

I remember thinking while reading it. . . . . WHY IN THE HELL DIDN'T HE SAY HE WAS A COP? No where in Mary's account of Mr. Guillary's account did she mention he tried to tell the cops he was a cop. It struck me as extremely odd!

Now, suddenly he has a "witness" that verifies he tried to do so - come on! He knew he had an ace in the hole and played for all it's worth - 5 million now.

Sounds to me Mr. Guillary got his duck in order to fatten up a huge lawsuit against the city.

He was looking for a lawsuit to make him rich from the first Hello. Not the first time, won't be the last. He could have avoided the entire incident with a few words - instead he took it as far as he could in order to cry foul!

Shame on Mr. Guillary! Money hungry manipulater!

Tax payers should NOT cave to this manipulation. Mr. Guillary saw the dollar signs the minute he challenged the police department! What an opportunistic ass!

Karma's a bitch and this will come back to bite him in his sorry ass.

btw I'm not with rpd.

I would ask Mary to re-post her original post about the event as was told to the FBI forum by Mr. Guillary and as she reported it. In Mary's "report" he didn't identify himself as police officer until AFTER HE played it to the extreme and he never indicated that there was a witness that said he did. That's my recollection of reading her account. But then, a blog's re-post could be manipulated. Put your bias aside and recount it here Mary.





Sounds like this individual has more than a casual curiosity about the case. When terms like "karma" and "bite him in his sorry ass" start getting invoked, there's some serious angst involved.


This individual raises some interesting points in his or her comment. First of all, a link to the old post is included in the one preceding this one and the account provided by Guillary at the forum actually took place after he had filed his claim for damages with the city and wrote a letter about the incident to the Community Police Review Commission.



Except for adding an ironic bent to the alleged incident, the issue isn't whether Guillary identified himself as a police officer or did not. It wasn't even as much about whether or not he even was a police officer or not unless you believe law enforcement officers carry special privileges or rights in these situations. Of course if Guillary hadn't been a law enforcement officer, this incident wouldn't have received nearly as much attention as it has received.

The issue was whether or not Guillary was trespassing on the property or not and whether or not the officer had probable cause to believe that might be the case. And if so, what was that based upon. Was it based on Guillary's actions which aroused suspicion or did it have to do with the fact that he was Black, the woman he spoke to was Black and they were sitting in front of a $1 million mansion in one of Riverside's upper crust neighborhoods?

As for not immediately identifying himself as a police officer, it's possible that if that's the case it was because Guillary could have been asserting himself as the property owner instead because that's the more relevant issue here than whether or not he was a police officer.

It's been two months since the report was written by the police officer that Guillary was resisting arrest so his first court date on those charges must be coming up soon because most often, the Riverside County District Attorney's office files charges very quickly on similar cases. So perhaps the procession of the criminal case which takes place in a public forum will provide some answers.

According to Dan Bernstein's column, it appears that the investigation by the police department on this incident is already completed by the department's internal affairs division, its conclusions have been reached as evidenced by comments made by Police Chief Russ Leach and so it would be perfectly valid to ask the department to release one "eye witness" account of the incident and that would be the belt recording submitted by the police officers who responded to the situation including the first responder. Not to mention any video recordings that originated from the dash cameras that are now installed inside every squad car. Equipment which has exonerated officers of false misconduct allegations in the past.


According to departmental policy, any police officer who initiates a professional contact with an individual is required to activate his or her department issued belt recorder. If the department is insisting that the officer was responding to complaints (which wouldn't have been covered by the policy), then perhaps those records could be produced as well. Hopefully, that will be done soon so that this situation can be exposed for what it is, true or false.

If the police department is upset about the press coverage of this incident and its inability to respond in an open fashion, the blame shouldn't be placed on the media and members of the public. After all, neither the media nor the public lobbied aggressively for Penal Code 832.7 or the Police Officers Bill of Rights, the latter being set up to protect the rank and file from abuses from management not to shield them from the public. These laws are what is gagging the police department from responding and it should understand that you can't have it both ways. You can't demure under state law by saying you can't talk about something and then talk about it anyway, knowing that state law prevents you from providing evidence to back your exonerated finding to the media as long as it's under the administrative banner. But that's what is being done here. And if the involved Riverside police officer is the innocent party here, it's not karma that's biting him so to speak, it's these state laws set up to "protect" him. If he's guilty, then these same laws are protecting him by shielding misconduct from the public. Now there's a dilemma but it's not one of the public's making.


One of the interesting things about Leach's comments to Bernstein is that he said that Guillary was taking the incident public to get exonerated in an internal affairs investigation being done by the Los Angeles Police Department when he could have said that Guillary was using the press to exonerate himself from a criminal investigation of resisting arrest being done by the Riverside Police Department because that's the paramount investigation of the three as far as the department is concerned. It's hard to know what to say when the police department which is conducting the criminal investigation has more to say about another agency's internal investigation.

Also interesting is that when Leach produced a brief list of priorities in addressing this situation, examining the actions of his officers was at the bottom of his "to do" list.


But first you had a nonresponse from the police department in an article, then a response from the police chief in a column. Neither provided much of a service or really provided much in the way to feel confident in the complaint investigation process except to spread the perception that the department's got its mind made up about complaints against its officers before its completed its investigations which might take many months. That's very unfortunate.


A better response from the police department would have been to say that we've received the information, we've initiated an investigation which will be conducted in a thorough, objective and timely manner. The reason to do this doesn't so much have anything to do with the current situation but it's necessary to do it for the benefit of the department's complaint and investigation process. The department is the one that says that of all people, they can't jump to conclusions and make premature statements about an incident early on in its investigation.

There's been a lot of talk about the necessity of maintaining the integrity of departmental investigations in the discussion that's taking place more or less on the CPRC's power to conduct independent investigations of officer-involved deaths. Even dragging out straw men arguments like the one Bernstein raised about investigators trampling over crime scenes after an officer-involved death has happened. When asked by numerous people when that had ever happened during the CPRC's eight year history, what was the response?


***pin dropping***


But what is it exactly doing when representatives of the police department say they can't talk about it publicly but then they wind up doing so anyway, by painting a complainant's story in the press as publicity being done to "win" an internal affairs investigation elsewhere. As if the police department's never used the media in connection with one of its own investigations before. And in this case there are at least two investigations by the Riverside Police Department and one by the Los Angeles Police Department which are still being conducted.

After reading Bernstein's column, I didn't even need to guess when the first time would be that a person wanting to file a complaint through the police department's state mandated complaint system would express concern that the police department would start talking about it in the press or basically sustain an investigation before it had even been done. They would ask if it's true that complaints were actually decided so early on in the process of investigation when they might have been told it would take several months or longer before they would hear back about it. After all, more often than not the average time it takes for a complaint to just reach the CPRC is more than 100 days, sometimes much more. But if it appears that the department decides early on they are unfounded, then why does it take 100 to 200 days or longer for the complaint to even make it to the CPRC let alone have the complainant receive a final letter of disposition from the city?

It seems like that letter should be sent out within the first month.

Since the investigation of the Guillary case is clearly over and done with given the statement by Leach, that means that it's probably way ahead of that curve. That's good news for the CPRC because if the investigation's done and the officer's been exonerated by the police chief himself in the press, the case material should be on its way to the CPRC by a week or so at the latest so it can reach its own recommended finding to forward to the city manager's office.



This discussion is continuing on as well as it has been for a couple of days.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



I just read both articles. And its unfortunate in both cases with Mr Guillary and RPD. It is obvious there was some form of miscommunication. What I don't understand is how some people judge a whole department by the actions of one man. Whether it was LAPD or RPD, people don't understand that we are not the enemy. Police Officers are the only ones that keep you and your family safe from the real criminals. Just remember and don't forget who you call in a case of an emergency. In the case of Guillary maybe he should had said something, identify himself, spoken up, advise him that he was the owner, not just walk away like uncooperative suspect. And Riverside Ofcr maybe he wasn't that experience and or was afraid...Yes Police Officer do become afraid at times...you can blame the guy working in a single man unit.




kcgirl05--I don't think there is any reason that any attention should be diverted away from this story, and that was not at all my intention to do so. However, the point that I WAS trying to get across, is that off-duty police officers ARE NOT ABOVE THE LAW! So when RPD arrived to the location, and inquired as to what business these two people had "at the far end corner" of Mr. Guillary property, and his response was to walk away and toward the home ignoring the officers request he made the wrong decision(period) Is it because LAPD thinks that they are above all other law enforcement while off duty ? and can do as they please? Simply ignore the law that everyone else has to abide by? Hell, even mortally wound an innocent person and face little if any repercussion? (oh and if you werent already aware, that off duty LAPD officer driving the HummerH2, that was involved in the fatal shooting in Corona, he was also black) so dont let ethnicity play a factor in YOUR judgment.




i try to make sense of this but can not. why did the officer stop and confront Guillary at his house and treat him like he had robbed a bank. no quest to get identification prior to pulling his gun. i would expect that in Mississippi in 1960




ChargerDsrt8 & GLF4LF14 you guys need to wake up! God Bless both of you. GLF4LF14! Didn't you read the articel? Guillary did try to ID himself. According to Ms. Young he tried but the officer wouldn't let ID himself and did't want to believe that he was a police officer or the home owner. Blatant Racism. Secondly, Guillary was under no compulsion to ID himself to this officer. He was off-duty, not bothering anyone. The person who should have been professional was the police officer




My dad was a Gardena Police Department reserve officer during the early '60's. I worked as a community liaison with LAPD Southeast Division while serving as a block captain in the LA City Strip in the '80's. I've always respected and supported our police officers and our current neighbors are wonderful law enforcement officers serving two IE agencies. But in my opinion, RPD needs all new leadership at the highest levels and new direction in discipline and field training. I've seen the aftermath and affect of their over-reactionism and brutality, as well as inappropriate behavior on-scene (this incident is a drop in the bucket here, folks). I'm sure there are some damned good RPD cops out there who have a ton of integrity and character, who can diffuse a volatile situation without resorting to extreme measures, and build community relations - bless you men and women. But RPD definitely has officers on the force who ought to be stripped of their badges, and I mean NOW. Believe me, RPD needs radical reform from the ground up. City managers, you have a very, very serious problem in River City. I sincerely wish you all the best, Officer Guillary.

Okay, ChargeDsrt8, first of all, I don't let ethnicity play a factor in my judgment, so give it a rest with the assumptions. Anyone who is astute should be able to ascertain from this story that there was obviously racial profiling going on here. RPD approached this guy because he was a black man in this high-priced area, and they probably thought he was "bothering" the poor white people. This wouldn't have happened to me if I were standing on this property (I am white), nor would it have happened to Mr. Guillary if he were white. Anyone who says that isn't true is being disingenuous.

Lastly, if the police approached ME on my own property and tried to hassle me, not only would I walk toward my house, but I would tell them where to stick it. You are also being disingenuous if you say you would not do the same. Perhaps you don't know that a person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest or detainment, but that is the law in CA. Mr. Guillary had every right to do as he wished on his property, and the behavior of these officers was appalling.

I think the only thing 'interesting' about this story, is how fast everyone seems to jump to conclusions about an incident involving police, regardless of city/race etc. Im sure that there is a lot more to this story then what you all are commenting on. How quick you all are to judge, do none of you remember the incident that occured a few months ago? In which AN OFF DUTY LAPD OFFICER FATALLY SHOT AND KILLED AN UN-ARMED CIVILIAN AFTER A FREEWAY ALTERCATION IN CORONA. Never heard anything more about that, and the sickest part is that the LAPD officer still frequents the parking lot where he killed an innocent person(who was not black) for cutting off his HummerH2. I dont know very many cops that arent armed at all times, on duty or off. YOU DO THE MATH





Dan Bernstein's column is receiving comments as well.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



It is obvious that the public campaign to exonerate his officer is being conducted by Russ Leach and the RPD. I notice that Leach did not mention conducting a comprehensive investigation into his officers actions. At what point did Guillary fit the profile of a "solicitor in the neighborhood". RPD is looking to cover this up and make it go away.

Russ lets be open and tell the truth about the complaint history of your rogue officer..keeping him on the force is whats referred to as negative retention.

I sure hope the community does not allow RPD to exercise KARL ROVE like tactics ie.. when you have no defense for your actions, attack the person complaining.





Over the edge: I agree man! This whole thing does not make sense! If this sergeant did some outrageous things that day, then why wasn't he arrested, charged with threatening an officer or something? This is all BS! I bet any money RPD is trying to sweep this s... under the rug. Secondly! If this thing got out of control on the date it occurred, why wasn't Chief Leach, his subordinates (commanders,captains and those with power) involved at the very beginning to help minimize the damage? Or did Leach himself participate in filing the report with RPD and then sending it to the sergeant's employer. The sergeant told his side of the story. Come on Leach! Tell the truth. It will set you free! If all this .... against the sergeant is false, I hope he (sergeant) gets them (RPD) for defamation of charter. And the same should stand true for the sergeant if he has lied.




These six retired judges will be presiding over civil trials in Riverside County to reduce the backlog in that system which was caused by the ongoing trial backlog in the criminal courts. So one of these judges might be trying a civil case in a classroom at an abandoned elementary school near you.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

"This is a who's who of Riverside County judges," Fields said of the volunteers. "They really bring experience to the table."

Fields said the judges did not give an end date to their volunteer service, "but they are retired, and we respect that. As we reduce some of the older civil cases, the need is going to be reduced."

The court began several efforts this year to reduce the civil case backlog. Four civil-trial-only courtrooms were opened, three in January at the former Hawthorne School in Riverside and one in September in Palm Springs.

An experimental program during the summer used volunteer lawyers at the downtown Historic Court to help settle some civil cases before trial.

The summer settlement effort was formalized into a Civil Mediation program that starts next month, with 36 participating attorneys trained last month by the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution.

In the Historic Courthouse, Superior Court Judge Gary Tranbarger has also been hearing civil trials. The district attorney's office has an ongoing policy of filing papers to keep Tranbarger from hearing criminal cases.

Even as many cities are laying off their employees, Rialto's city council has seen fit to give itself a pay hike.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



Later in the same meeting, the council voted to give its members 10 percent pay raises but rejected a proposal to accept $600-a-month car allowances.

Mayor Grace Vargas was sworn in by Councilman Joe Baca Jr. Councilmen Edward M. Palmer and Ed Scott were sworn in by City Clerk Barbara McGee, who also was re-elected.

Palmer unseated two-term Councilwoman Winifred "Winnie" Hanson.

He told his fellow council members that he would abstain from voting on the pay raises.

"It didn't seem right on my first night on the council to vote myself a raise," he said.



In Maywood, California, the mayor and two city council members facing a recall vote stemming from its controversial appointment of Al Hutchings to be an interim police chief of the city's beleaguered police department. Hutchings brought with him to the position, two firings including one from the Maywood Police Department for getting caught having sex with a woman on video and a conviction for petty theft. He would be the second interim chief in the row to have a criminal record.

After a threatened lawsuit by Deputy State Attorney General Lou Verdugo, Hutchings was ousted and replaced by the current leader.


(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)



Supporters of the recall drive said their campaign stemmed from the council's decision in February to appoint Al Hutchings, who was convicted of theft and resigned from the Los Angeles Police Department, as the city's interim police chief. Mayor Felipe Aguirre and council members Veronica Guardado and Ana Rosa Rizo are the targets of the recall effort.

"They voted three to two in favor of Alfred Hutchings," said Ramon Medina, 49, who hopes to unseat Aguirre in today's election. The auto repair shop owner said he voted for Aguirre when he first ran for office in 2005.

But after Hutchings' appointment, Medina said, he felt the mayor was not acting in the best interest of the city.

"I was disappointed because we've been hoping to take Maywood in a direction where the neighbors are living a normal life, having a safe community, a place where you enjoy living," Medina said. "We lost all of those feelings."

Hutchings' selection prompted protests from residents. Aguirre then asked Hutchings to step down and withdrew his support after meetings between the city and the state attorney general's office, which had been investigating allegations of wrongdoing by officers in the troubled Police Department. The Los Angeles County district attorney's office was also conducting an investigation, authorities said.

Two weeks after Hutchings' appointment, the City Council voted unanimously to appoint Maywood Police Cmdr. Frank Hauptmann as interim chief.







Three New York City Police Department officers have been indicted by a grand jury in connection with an alleged assault against a man in a subway station.


(excerpt, New York Daily News)

Officer Richard Kern faces trial for aggravated sexual abuse and assault, while fellow officers Alex Cruz and Andrew Morales were charged with trying to cover it up, Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes announced.

Authorities say two other cops testified about the attack before a grand jury and that the DNA of the accuser, Michael Mineo, was found on the baton.

"We're pleased that the grand jury has contemplated and given significant weight to very reckless and serious acts that were committed against my client," said Mineo's lawyer, Kevin Mosley.

More information on the indictments was provided by the New York Times.




Several hundred Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department deputies may be going to Washington, D.C. to work at the inauguration. However, some of the county's supervisors are cross about that.


Rioting continues in Greece since the officer-involved death of a 15-year-old teenager. Violence broke out during the funeral.



While salaries remain frozen at Belo Enterprises (which publishes the Press Enterprise, the CEO gives himself a raise.

Comments and commissions

More news about the city of Riverside's layoffs which were apparently under reported to and by the Press Enterprise last week as including only one layoff last week and seven total since the fiscal year has begun.



It's believed that the city laid off at least four employees last week and at least 10 full-time total, even though the city manager's office and at least one councilman believe that the city has only laid off seven employees in all. This number was comprised after adding the previously announced six employee layoffs plus one that was announced by Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis last week.

Fire Department: 1

Police Department: 1

Mayor's Office: 1

General Services: 1



More layoffs are likely and it looks like the finance department might be the scene of more of them, even though several key positions inside that department have been left vacant which caused some members of the Human Resources Board to express concern about these vacancies including one in the workman's compensation division. At least one board member recommended filling these positions, but that's unlikely to happen given that in reality, many positions across the city have been frozen as they become vacant and the city's bracing for another round of layoffs potentially as early as January when the city hits the midway point in its current fiscal year.

Don't be surprised if there starts to be an increase in retirements and transfers involving employees as well.




The city of Riverside is being sued by a developer over a contract to build Arlington Heights sport park.


The Big Threes of City Hall's reactions.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



City Manager Brad Hudson told the council on Nov. 18 that Stronghold was scored the lowest among all the bidders. He also said officials did not believe the unauthorized release of the bid pricing information invalidated the rest of the contract-award process.

"It had no effect on the outcome at all," he said.

Priamos would not discuss the merits of Stronghold's case because it is coming to the council for discussion in closed session tonight.

Councilman Frank Schiavone, who was absent from the Nov. 18 meeting, would not discuss the Stronghold case and whether the city should start the bid process over.

But in general, he said, "The integrity of the process is fundamental to democracy."


"Democracy", what a fascinating word that's been sorely lacking involving discussions on other issues where all the discussion has remained behind closed doors at City Hall.



The Community Police Review Commission which is awaiting its announcement from the city council either this week or the next that it will be discussed in some public forum, meets again this Wednesday, Dec. 10 at 5:30 p.m. at City Hall.

One of the agenda items will be the discussion of the final draft of the public report into the October 2006 fatal officer-involved shooting of Douglas Steven Cloud.

Both the commission and city of Riverside exonerated Officers David Johansen and Nicholas Vazquez in the shooting. However, before that happened, the city paid off the second largest settlement in a police-related lawsuit in recent history, when the city council approved the $800,000 settlement approximately 18 months after the shooting took place, which also placed this litigation high on the list of the quickest lawsuits to be settled in recent city history.

So did the city really exonerate these police officers for the Cloud shooting? Well, yes and no. Yes when it came to backing the exonerated findings of both the commission and most likely the police department (which has only found one fatal shooting out of policy in the case of Tyisha Miller). But the large payout does speak for itself especially given that this settlement was hammered out quicker than the one involving a lawsuit filed in connection with the Tyisha Miller shooting.


Teresa Cloud, who was Doug's mother spoke before the commission many times and talked about how as part of the settlement the city had promised to examine the hiring and training of the city's police officers and to use the shooting of her son as an example of what not to do in a similar situation.

City Attorney Gregory Priamos denied that the city had made these promises, essentially trying to brand her a liar in front of everyone at the meeting. But she remained resolute despite his words and his complaints to one of her attorneys about her comments at the meeting and pushed for better policing practices.

Interestingly enough, the commission came out with a recommendation quite similar to Cloud's push for a training scenario to be used by the department in the future. Even though it's the most anemic policy recommendation ever produced by this body, it's a somewhat ironic closure to a shooting that troubled many people and judging by the check signed by the city council, the city's risk management division most of all. But the commission's handling of the shooting didn't make concern about it go away.

Now the waiting begins until Priamos figures out what to say about them for bringing back a somewhat similar issue that Teresa Cloud had during the settlement of her case and at commission meetings.





The discussion about the filing of a claim for damages by a Los Angeles Police Department sergeant against the city of Riverside for $5 million continues here with over 35 comments since the article was published. As usual, the discussion's been passionate on the issue as it always seems to be with issues involving the Riverside Police Department.


(excerpts, Press Enterprise)



There is serious animosity between Riverside P.D., sheriff's and d.a.'s office and off duty L.A.P.D. and L.A. county sheriff's who live in the area. Numerous times they have arrested and filed weak cases. They have been caught engaging in prosecutorial misconduct. Their investigators have been caught engaging in misconduct to make weak cases stronger. With more attention on these incidents, perhaps more light will be shed on other citizens in Riverside County who have their civil rights violated. Check with any major department in the United States and you will find if Mr. Guillary had resisted arrest and generated a criminal report, he would have been arrested. This covers you for civil liability. It dosen't seem to be that unsual for agencies in Riverside County to write reports well after the fact to cover up inapproriate acts or make weak cases stronger. Where is the probable cause for the contact and detention. We have laws to prevent this for a reason. To many good people have been swallowed up in the system of Riverside County, causing a back log of epic proportions.



This just smacks of the outlaw cops on the force that keep demanding any chief that attempts to corral them to step down or they"ll use a "vote of no confidence" to discourage any effective management of the force. I remember back a while a young white man by the name of Chris (who's last name will be left off) was involved in a vehicle crash with an off duty officer who chased him down around the streets of orangecrest. Who then attempted to pull a gun on young Chris after getting involved in a fistfight with him. Luckily someone seeing chris yelling for help as he was chase called for on duty officers who arrived just as the gun was pulled. All the evidence showed that the accident was the fault of the officer A quick phone call from the chief of RPD to his parents to (keep this out the news) and all of this was swept under the radar for the fine citizens of Riverside not to see. Ignorance is bliss.
Corruption runs rampant throughtout the citys government. Watch and see how this too goes away.
By the way that area this latest incident occurred? It wasn't too long before that development was built that a flyer inadvertently showed in my mailbox touting how the commining development had a very low percentage of black, hispanics (they pointed out that it was 2.1 mi from casa blanca) and asians their were in the surrounding area. And even explained the racial makeup of Harwarden Academy??? Discrimination, subtle, and low key just the way many people prefer.
And now some would rather focus the attention on the home the this fella lived in??? Lets see how well some of his white brethern live within Riverside and surrounding counties. You's be surprised.




after reading the article, i took a neutral approach..should the officer have asked for id; should the officer have checked with the owner to determine if he hired them to be on his property;even if it was not Guillarys property can the officer order someone off a non complaining person property; a bible salesperson was an independent witness and confirms Guillary's account; and how come the officer did not order the male white neighbor off his property a few doors down..
the only rational answer..RACIAL PROFILING




The article stated that Guillary's employer, the Los Angeles Police Department is conducting an internal investigation of the incident. As of yet, no criminal charges have been filed against him since the Oct. 7 incident, which is a bit unusual for the Riverside County District Attorney's office to wait that long to file a case but it's not unprecedented.


(excerpt)

A week after the incident, the LAPD launched an investigation of Guillary because of the report filed by Riverside police. Guillary has not yet seen it. His supervisor shared snippets with him about his resisting an officer, balling his fist and assuming a fighting stance -- all false, Guillary said.

Several neighbors told him that LAPD officers have since come to question them.

A complaint was sent to the Community Police Review Commission in letter form so that body will be looking into the matter at a later date as well as the police department's internal affairs division.




Press Enterprise Columnist Dan Bernstein wrote on the Guillary incident asking where all the transparency over the police department has gone. The answer is, it went away with the consent decree.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



We need to know much more and right now the city is being less than up front. It fits a pattern. Over the last few weeks, City Hall has made it clear that, when it comes to matters of police conduct, Riverside civilians should mind their own business.

City Hall has ordered the citizen police review commission not to investigate officer-involved deaths until law enforcement wraps up its own probes. It harbors a bogus fear that professional investigators, dispatched by the police commission, will tromp all over crime scenes.

The later an investigation begins, the more inconclusive it is likely to be. City Hall's edict undercuts the police commission, whose legal mission (endorsed by voters) is to "promote effective, efficient, trustworthy and just law enforcement in the City of Riverside ..."

And now, in the Guillary case, the city tersely dismisses an incident that has provoked the same charges of racial profiling the city faced in 1998, when RPD officers shot and killed Tyisha Miller. (The 10-year anniversary of that case, which the city eventually settled for $3 million, is 20 days away.)

Haven't we been through this enough? The stonewalling, the spinning. The tight-fisted central control. (At least the city hasn't hired a PR firm. Yet.)

"Publicity campaign" or not, Guillary's allegations are serious and haunting. If he's all wet, City Hall should tell us why and tell us now.




The incident involving Guillary was blogged about here on this site last month.




A joint project to create facilities for the currently feuding Riverside County District Attorney's office and the Riverside County Public Defender's office in French Valley has run aground but not due the current war of words. It appears that the current developer on the project has run out of money.




Is Temecula participating in a land grab?



The corruption trial of a former Murrieta councilman continues as his ex-wife takes the witness stand.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)


Julia Enochs took the stand for more than two hours Monday under cross-examination by Virginia L. Blumenthal, who is defending former councilman Warnie Robert Enochs.

Julia Enochs remained composed during her testimony, speaking softly and never raising her voice.
Story continues below

Blumenthal interrupted her frequently, telling her to "just answer the question," and Julia Enochs constantly responded, "What do you mean?"



The federal corruption case of former Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona continues since it's severed from that of his mistress. A former Newport Beach Police Department officer testified about



$23,000 for five special badges. Another witness testified how he won that wager with Carona.


(excerpt, Orange County Register)

Ghaby "Gabe" Nassar, a businessman who said he ran the Star E Media Corp. in Lake Forest, said he won the bet, and secured badges for donors.

For winning the wager, Nassar said, Carona and assistant sheriff George Jaramillo gave him $100 in cash and penned "We'll never doubt you" on the bill. The trio also snapped a photo to remember the day.

Nassar, who was the 27th witness to testify in Carona's federal public corruption trial, said he thought up the idea for the money-for-badge program around 2000 or 2001.

"(Jaramillo) said 'that's a great idea, I should have thought about it a long time ago','' he testified.

Nassar said he wagered with Jaramillo and Carona that he could raise $25,000 by getting five contributors to pay $5,000 per badge.

Live blog coverage of the Carona coverage here.



Two of the New York City Police Department officer facing grand jury indictments are turning themselves in.



(excerpt, New York Daily News)



Officers Richard Kern and Alex Cruz were told Monday morning that they both were being indicted for assaulting Michael Mineo in a subway station Oct. 15.

A fellow cop accused Kern of inserting his police baton between Mineo's buttocks as cops tried to arrest and cuff the tatoo shop worker for allegedly smoking marijuana.

Kern's lawyer John Patten declined to discuss the indictment. Kern, 25, has previously denied he acted improperly.

Mineo originally said it was Cruz, 26, who violated him as he lay face down in the Prospect Park station - but NYPD transit Officer Kevin Maloney testified before a grand jury that it was Kern who wielded the baton, sources said.

"My client steadfastly maintains his innocence and he observed no misconduct," Cruz' lawyer Stuart London said.




Not much is known about the indictments which are expected to be released tomorrow.



(excerpt, New York Times)

Stuart London, the defense lawyer for Officer Alex Cruz, who also was involved in the scuffle, said on Sunday that based on the investigation and the allegations against Officer Kern, he expected that his client may be one of the other officers charged. But he stressed that Officer Cruz had committed no misconduct whatsoever in connection with the matter.

“I have not been contacted by the prosecutors and I have no idea if any charges will be brought,” Mr. London said. “But I hope if my client is charged, he will receive the same amount of media attention when he is exonerated.” Nonetheless, the indictment was still sealed, and the identity of the two other officers who have been charged remained unclear



After the officers are indicted, Mineo is going to be filing a lawsuit.


(excerpt, Newsday)



Kevin Mosley, who is representing Mineo, 24, said he could file a notice of claim with the city - a necessary first step - as early as today after Hynes announces the charges. Mosley said he is preparing a federal civil rights lawsuit but has to give the city 30 days to investigate the claim before he files any complaint with the court.

"In terms of the dollar amount it is not an insignificant case," Mosley said. "It was a life-changing event for this young man, mentally and physically. . . . He has been hospitalized twice, and mentally he is still struggling."





Join us for… A SILENT VIGIL for PEACE

A quiet, respectful, interfaith, inter generational event ~to move toward a culture of peace and nonviolence ~to honor victims of past and current warfare ~to honor peacemakers everywhere ~~~ Sunday, December 14, 2008 6:00 – 7:30 p.m. On the Front Lawn of the downtown public Library Mission Inn Ave & Orange St Followed by Hot Beverages, Music, and Holiday Snacks for all... With Bill Hedrick and Matthew Crary

LAPD sergeant files $5 million claim against Riverside

The Los Angeles Police Department sergeant who was blogged about here last month has filed a $5 million claim against the city of Riverside. The Press Enterprise caught wind of it and has written an article on the situation.


Wayne Guillary filed the claim last month, before attending a meeting conducted by the FBI at the Riverside Medical Clinic as part of its involvement in a multicultural outreach effort. The incident took place on Oct. 7 in the early afternoon at his $1.3 million house in White Gate Estates.

The LAPD is conducting its own investigation of Guillary and are questioning several of his neighbors.

Guillary spoke about his experience.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

"My biggest fear is the Riverside Police Department," said Guillary, himself a sergeant with the Los Angeles Police Department, for which he has worked 27 years.

Guillary, 52, is black. He believes he is a victim of racial profiling and law enforcement bullying and has filed a damage claim against the city of Riverside for more than $5 million for violating his rights, trespassing on his property and intentionally inflicting emotional harm.

"There was such animosity, hatred and antipathy," he said in a phone interview. "It was dehumanizing."

City Attorney Gregory Priamos gave the usual line for claims in that it had no merit and would be denied by the city. The vast majority of claims that are filed against the city are denied by it. The claim for damages process is usually utilized primarily as a precursor for filing civil litigation in federal or state court as a means to prove that the filing party has exhausted all available remedies. A formality more than a hope for resolution.

Many of the lawsuits involving the police department lately including those which paid out settlements of $390,000 or $800,000 either had claims rejected by the city or would have if claims had been filed by the plaintiff attorneys. So it's hard to take the city's hard-lined response on claims that are filed against it very seriously.


This is the account that Guillary provided for the Press Enterprise.



(excerpt)

Young said the officer ordered them to leave immediately and to resume their conversation at a park.

The officer warned them they were trespassing on private property. Guillary, who is 6 feet 2 inches tall and 200 pounds, said he walked toward the front-entrance gate, unarmed, and stayed 40 feet away while the officer backed his car into the driveway. Despite attempts to explain that he was an off-duty Los Angeles police officer and the homeowner, Guillary said, the officer pointed a Taser at him, and then a gun.

"Wayne kept saying, 'Let me show you my badge and my ID,' but the officer wouldn't let him," Young said. "I was so scared I was crying."

Guillary said he complied with the officer's orders to lie face down for more than 10 minutes on the burning asphalt in 99-degree heat, but begged to crawl onto the cooler grass. The officer threatened to shoot him if he moved, Guillary said in the claim.

With car lights flashing and sirens blaring, eight or nine additional officers, none of them black, arrived at Guillary's home, he said. Guillary said he was handcuffed, searched and humiliated, adding that the arresting officer commanded him to sit in a flowerbed rather than on the concrete wall.

They released him without apologies after verifying his identity.

"Not one Riverside police officer, supervisor or agent made an attempt to offer an explanation to my wife, family and me as to the reason for the unlawful detention and arrest," Guillary said in the claim. "They just departed."

The article has already elicited some comment from its readers.


(excerpts)



Why should he get $5 million for being detained and told to lie on the ground? If the cops did act the way he describes they did not practice good customer service skills that is for sure. But because they were rude the taxpayers of Riverside should have to pay $5 million. I don't think so!!!




This along with previous stories about Riveside's police department and city management point at deep problems that should concern the citizens of Riverside. Is the City and its police department accountable at all for its actions?



according to the police this man gave them trouble?
"His supervisor shared snippets with him about his resisting an officer, balling his fist and assuming a fighting stance -- all false, Guillary said."

Only they know what really went down?




Yes but why did he stop in the first place? Nothing was illegal about what those two people were doing.




Rate My Cop has this profile on Guillary including comments by people who visited it. His profile had over 30,000 hits, five pages of comments and his average rating is five stars, the site's highest. There are other sites praising him for his conduct at a demonstration that took place in his area last March. This brief video was taken of him at the Scientology demonstration. It obviously had a big impression on activists who watched it or attended the demonstration. Does it define an officer's career? No, only video of misconduct has a tendency to be longer lasting in people's minds and officers (like elected officials) often behave differently when they know they're being filmed. But, this kind of praise is somewhat unusual.


Guillary was also named as a potential class member in this lawsuit filed in 2000 by members of the LAPD's sworn divisions against the city and LAPD management for violations of the state's Fair Employement and Housing laws. That's not an action that's going to make him very popular with an agency like the LAPD which has a history of punishing whistleblowers on racism and sexism. And often, the residents of the city end up footing the bill as they did in these cases.

The summary of the 2000 lawsuit was the following.


(excerpt, lawsuit)



1. This lawsuit is about officers who tried to do the right
thing, by reporting misconduct and/or illegal activitiese who then
suffered for making these reports of wrong doing. The Department
enforced a "Code of Silence" by harassing and retaliating against those
officers who reported misconduct, so that officers knew they had to
keep their mouth shut if someone in management (Administration) did
something wrong.

2. The policy and procedure of the IiAFD in preventing officers .':.
from reporting misconduct, was a direct and legal cause of corruption
scandals within the department, such as the Rampart Corruption scandal.




A subcommittee of the Los Angeles City Council receives advice from the city attorney to settle Guillary's lawsuit in 1999. In 2002, the city settled a bunch of similar lawsuits filed around that time. It should be used to settling these kinds of lawsuits by now in 2008.

This case is at its beginning and it will be interesting to see how it proceeds and what happens next.








This week, the Riverside City Council is meeting again on Tuesday, Dec. 9 at City Hall, for both afternoon and evening sessions. Attendance for now is free and anyone can show up and watch their city government in action or express an opinion on an issue.







The ordinance to charge businesses for police services if they call them too often comes up for a final vote. That's one way to get them to stop calling the police for help if that's the city's intention or to spend more money to get the money they would be charging than they probably will ever see from these businesses.





The Frank Schiavone vs Paul Davis debate is starting here even though no one has officially declared in the Ward Four city council race yet through filling out and filing those papers through the city clerk's office which happens early next year. This could make for an interesting election run next year especially if other candidates come out of the woodwork and file their papers to run as well. Another reminder that Election 2009 and all its excitement is almost upon us.



Heating up is the ongoing feud between Riverside County District Attorney Rod Pacheco and the Riverside County Public Defender Gary Windom on who's to blame for the gridlock that's impacted the Riverside County Superior Court's ability to do business.


Pacheco struck the first blow, flowing in letter form.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

In a letter dated Oct. 22, Pacheco had asked Windom to look into accusations that Windom's attorneys worked to keep pending cases out of trial court until the constitutional speedy trial clock runs out so they could be dismissed.

As of Nov. 18, there have been 134 misdemeanor and 60 felony case dismissals for lack of a judge to hear them. The first cases were dismissed in January 2007. Almost all felony cases are immediately refiled. Misdemeanor cases cannot be refiled unless the dismissal is successfully appealed.

Using earlier figures in his October letter, Pacheco noted that Windom's office handled the majority of the dismissed cases, 127 of 159.

According to figures from fiscal 2006-07, the public defender's office handled 64 percent of felony and misdemeanor cases filed in the county.

"Creating a crisis through gamesmanship that results in a dismissal of any criminal case could and should lead to discipline by the State Bar," Pacheco wrote. "I hope we have not come to these dire straits. I hope you can convince me otherwise."

He added that "I am regularly informed that members of your staff have stopped negotiations on misdemeanor cases in order to 'roll the dice' for dismissal."

Gary Windom responded to those accusations and made a few of his own.



(excerpt)

Windom responded he could find no wrongdoing by his staff in the cases cited by Pacheco, but said, "My review of these matters reveals a disturbing pattern of questionable conduct" by prosecutors.

Pacheco's lawyers say they are ready for trial when they are not, just to keep a case headed for dismissal on the docket, Windom claimed. When trial begins, they are unable to produce witnesses. That results in either dismissals at trial or unreasonable delays, Windom said.

He also said Pacheco contributed to the problem in other ways.

"The backlog and dismissals are primarily created because of the charging and settlement policies you created," Windom wrote. "Your failure to make reasonable charging decisions and your refusal to engage in realistic settlement discussions are primary causes of the current dismissals."

And so they went back and forth, tit for tat.

There will be no referee from any higher court this time as the state appellate court announced in the article that it has ended its involvement in the criminal court mess and has moved on to trying to fix the civil court mess (which stemmed from the criminal court mess).

One possible strategy, is to give the two department heads boxing gloves they can settle it that way.






Los Angeles Police Department Chief William Bratton speaks about how he still has so much to prove as the chief of one of the country's largest law enforcement agencies. Into his second term as chief, he wants to improve how his officers relate to city residents, a problem that came with the department he inherited that's been under federal consent decree since 2001 with no end in sight. It's scheduled to come up for review again in June 2009 to see if the LAPD has implemented its reforms and kept them going over a two-year period including its Early Warning System it was required to put in place.



(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)




The mess attracted Bratton.

"It was another laboratory," he said. "Once again, I had an opportunity to take a major police department that was in crisis and show that police count, that cops matter. If we could get it done here, with a much smaller police force, it would reinforce the importance not just of how many [cops] you have, but how you use them."

Bratton promised to deliver on three things when he was hired and has largely done so: Crime rates have fallen steadily every year since he took over, with violent crimes down nearly 50%; the department's anti-terrorism bureau has become a formidable intelligence-gathering force; and nearly all of the major reforms required by the Justice Department have been pushed into place.

He has also forged a solid relationship with the police union and is praised by leaders of other law enforcement agencies for pulling the LAPD out of its bunker mentality and encouraging collaboration.

As important,Bratton has cultivated a close, mutually beneficial relationship with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. The mayor has left Bratton largely alone to run his department and took a considerable political risk in raising voters' garbage collection fees to hire 1,000 new cops. In return, Bratton has given the mayor impressive crime numbers to tout during an otherwise uneven first term.

It is telling that Villaraigosa, a self-professed progressive with a civil rights background, has made the law-and-order issue of hiring more police a priority. To the mayor -- and to other liberal-leaning politicians -- Bratton is an appealing hybrid: a police chief who has figured out a way to deliver on crime while also working to rehabilitate the department in the public's eye.







A criminal grand jury indicted three New York City Police Department officers on criminal charges stemming from a man, Michael Mineo who was allegedly sodomized in a subway station. The exact charges faced by the officers aren't known at this time because the indictments won' t be officially unsealed until Tuesday.


(excerpt, New York Times)

One of the officers, Richard Kern, 25, faces an assault charge, the most serious of the charges in the indictment, which is expected to be unsealed on Tuesday. The charges stem from accusations by the man, Michael Mineo, that one of the officers jabbed a piece of police equipment — later identified in testimony as a baton — into his buttocks, causing internal injuries.

The other two officers are facing lesser charges. It was unclear which of the other four officers involved would be indicted or what the charges would be, said the people briefed on the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it. “Kern’s charge is more serious than the others,” said one of those people.




Mineo and a lawyer for Kern responded to the news of the indictments.


(excerpt, New York Daily News)

Kern's lawyer, John Patten, said he would not comment because he had no official notification of an indictment against his client.

"I don't know anything," he said. "I've heard no official word of anything, so I'm not going to comment."

Charges presented before the grand jury included assault and aggravated sexual assault, but the exact nature of the jury's decision is unknown.

The indictment will be unsealed on Tuesday.

Mineo and his attorneys celebrated the indictment, but called for charges against the others as well.

"It's the first step toward seeing that justice is done," Mineo said through his lawyer, Stephen Jackson. "I think the other officers present are equally responsible. They aided and abutted the officer and attempted to cover it up afterward."

"We're pleased that justice appears to be taking it's course," said Kevin Mosley, who is also representing Mineo. "If that's the only one we'd still be pleased but not happy because the others were acting in concert, acting as a team."

In New York City, a police officer there has been charged in relation to a road rage incident that took place while he was offduty.




(excerpt, New York Times)

On the afternoon of Nov. 17, a civilian, Geoffrey Hollinden, 41, was crossing Queens Boulevard near 109th Street in Forest Hills when he was nearly hit by a car, the authorities say. Enraged, Mr. Hollinden pounded on the car, a 2006 Infiniti, as it passed.

Suddenly the car pulled over, and out sprang a large and irate man — identified by the authorities as Jamel Dennis, 32, an off-duty Brooklyn narcotics officer. Officer Dennis, who is 6-foot-6, grabbed Mr. Hollinden, the authorities say, dragged him to the boulevard’s service road, lifted him to shoulder height and slammed him to the ground, knocking him unconscious.

Mr. Hollinden was hospitalized for three days.

“As a motorist — and more so, as a police officer — the defendant should have known better than to allegedly take matters into his own hands and elevate a minor traffic dispute into a felonious assault,” the Queens district attorney, Richard A. Brown, said in a statement on Tuesday.







In Maryland, state police officers spied on activist groups and false labeled over 50 activists as terrorists.


(excerpt, Los Angeles Times)


Maryland officials now concede that, based on information gathered by "Lucy" and others, state police wrongly listed at least 53 Americans as terrorists in a criminal intelligence database -- and shared some information about them with half a dozen state and federal agencies, including the National Security Agency.

Among those labeled as terrorists: two Catholic nuns, a former Democratic congressional candidate, a lifelong pacifist and a registered lobbyist. One suspect's file warned that she was "involved in puppet making and allows anarchists to utilize her property for meetings."

"There wasn't a scintilla of illegal activity" going on, said David Rocah, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed a lawsuit and in July obtained the first surveillance files. State police have released other heavily redacted documents.

Investigators, the files show, targeted groups that advocated against abortion, global warming, nuclear arms, military recruiting in high schools and biodefense research, among other issues.

"It was unconscionable conduct," said Democratic state Sen. Brian Frosh, who is backing legislation to ban similar spying in Maryland unless the police superintendent can document a "reasonable, articulable suspicion" of criminal activity.






A Niagara Falls Police Department officer is being accused of drug trafficking and forcing women to have sex with him.


(excerpt, Buffalo News)



Officers from his own department, working with federal agents, arrested Officer Ryan G. Warme, 27, on multiple felony charges, U.S. Attorney Terrance P. Flynn said.

"These are very disturbing charges, involving the misuse of an officer's police powers," he said. "It started with an internal investigation by the Niagara Falls police, with federal agents joining the investigation. These are federal charges."

Warme is accused of trafficking in cocaine, sometimes while on duty and in uniform. He is also accused of wielding a weapon -- his police sidearm -- during the commission of drug crimes and is charged with forcing two women to have sex with him.

Investigators learned that at one point, Warme was purchasing cocaine from drug dealers in Niagara Falls "two to five times a week," Flynn said.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Anthony M. Bruce accused Warme of holding his hand on his police firearm while forcing one of the women to commit sodomy on him. Authorities said Warme forced the woman to commit the sex act after he was called to her apartment last year to investigate an allegation that a former boyfriend abused her.

The woman who made the allegation knew Warme and had a previous relationship with him, authorities alleged.

A second woman alleged that Warme raped her last year.




Riots erupted in Greece after the fatal shooting of a teenager by police officers.


(Yahoo News)



Rioting in several cities, including Hania in Crete and cities in northern Greece, began within hours of the death Saturday night of a 15-year-old shot by police in Exarchia. The downtown Athens district of bars, music clubs and restaurants is seen as the anarchists' home base.

Soon stores, banks and cars were ablaze.

The rioting was some of the most severe Greece has seen in years. The last time a teenager was killed in a police shooting — during a demonstration in 1985 — it sparked weeks of rioting. In 1999, a visit to Greece by then U.S. President Bill Clinton sparked violent demonstrations in Athens that left stores smashed and burned.

The two officers involved in Saturday's shooting have been arrested and charged, one with premeditated manslaughter and the illegal use of a weapon, and the other as an accomplice. They are to appear before a court Wednesday. They and the Exarchia precinct police chief have been suspended.

Interior Minister Prokopis Pavlopoulos, whose offer to resign was rejected Sunday, has promised a thorough investigation.

"It is inconceivable for there not to be punishment when a person loses their life, particularly when it is a child," he said. "The taking of life is something that is not excusable in a democracy."









Someone once sneered in my face and told me that I was making enemies at City Hall and that I had a "nasty personality". To each his own.

If you blog in this town about what' s going on, you're going to make some enemies and I suppose I have. But I've met a lot of interesting people as well and that's why blogging is proving to be a rewarding experience. There's a lot of good people in this city who are very concerned about what's been going on inside its boundaries. Many issues have arisen and many questions are often asked. The answers to some of them seem more scarce these days.

But to have someone thank you or even hug you in a church, a community center, a store or other location because of something you said or wrote that resonated with them, that's special. That helps make even experiencing the negative side of blogging worthwhile.



Here are some examples of "nasty personalities" that I have encountered because I blog to help create some healthy perspective on this issue of who has some issues.




Mary, Mary with shorter (yet still greasy) hair -e.

Why do you hate people so?

Do you truly despise others?

Or, perhaps just your mother?

Or, maybe...just yourself.



---Email (under a Yahoo account using my name) received July 2007 from I.P. Address: 192.248.248.66 (City of Riverside). Within one week, this unknown individual sent an email of apology.





Dear Mary,

I have seen you on your daily strolls around the east side, about five times or so the last couple of weeks. Each time I see you, you are wearing the same purple sweatshirt and blue jeans. Then I think to myself, I wonder if she wears the same pair of skid marked granny panties everyday..... Then following that thought, I throw up a little bit in my mouth.

Instead of spending so much time trying to find negative things about cops, why don't you try taking a shower and changing your clothes at least once a day!

B. Fife

----April 2006




Oh Mary, don't worry where we're from. It doesn't concern you who we are. Do you really think that we'll identify ourselves or our departments on this circus act. You know how Internal Affairs are these days. Your website has a lot of readers these days. People find it quite comical when alleged "Cops" poke fun at a local writer. The only thing that does matter is that your name is Mary Shelton, and you live in the Eastside. Good day.


---November 2007





Dearest Mary, to the contrary.
Men love women and women love men. This leaves the question? What do we call a freak like Mary? Again, I believe that to be Mary has had such negative contact with men from her past including her father. It is obvious that Mary has issues with men. Seems that Mary is jealous of the fact that women are attracted to men and men are attracted to real women which discludes you Mary. Sorry Mary, you've gotta take that up with the creator. Natural selection.


----May 2006






Mary said,

"You are like a boil that festers and spews pus"

Flashback Mary? reminds you of your birth, when you had to fight through that mess when you exited your mother's filthy uterus.

P.S. i support anything that ecourages YOUNG women to take off their clothes. This excludes you, Mary. Old wrinkled, cast-offs like you, please keep your clothing on.

P.S II For the benefit of men everywhere, we pray that your county employed gynocologist has already sewed it shut.


-----July 2006




Mary Shelton: You're still the same bitter cunt that I knew back when. Some things never change...



---via email from the blogger site in March 2008. This visitor used proxy ISPs from different European countries and from an adult internet services site called "cozynewsletter.com"





I think and some of the other 200 or so messages I've received from 2005 to just several weeks ago are much better examples of what truly is nasty. And is it just me or does anyone notice the use of gender slurs and general misogyny in some of these comments? What kind of people write this stuff? That's a question I've never had answered. If there are indeed people who know any of these comments or emails, I'm certainly not in that loop. For that to happen, the laws would have to change.

But I receive many more positive comments about my blog which provides perspective on the hateful rhetoric but it doesn't make it less disturbing reading vile writings by individuals who don't like the site.