When is an Officer-Involved shooting, murder?

Did Officer Ryan Wilson Murder Summer Lane?

It began on Dec. 6, sometime after 8pm, when RPD officer Ryan Wilson may have crossed the line, into murder if the information provided at a recent CPRC meeting is indeed factual evidence. If it is not murder, the relevations certainly shook the reticent review board's membership to the core, guaranteeing continued discussion and debate among its membership, and possibly a range war with the police department and its membership down the line.

That night, Wilson was dispatched to respond to a call for service from Food 4 Less inside the mall near Chicago and University. A cashier inside the store had called the police department on their non-emergency business line after refusing to accept what was believed to be the cashing of a payroll check by a man, and his girlfriend, Summer Lane. Her boyfriend was heading out of the store, when he was approached and tackled by a security guard to the floor. Wilson then arrived and the struggle continued between himself and the boyfriend in the parking lot outside the store.

At this point, versions of what transpired next differ depending on the source. One participant, Lane, of course was unable to tell her side.

The first blurb from the police department was brief, and filled with holes. It stated that Officer Ryan Wilson shot at Lane's car as she tried to run him over. It also stated that she may have actually struck him once.

The presentation by the department at the CPRC meeting on Dec. 22, 2004 was more lengthy but left a few issues unexplained. Not that it would answer many questions being what Chief Leach once testified in a deposition as being "a very sanitized version of the shooting incident."

The department had said on behalf of Wilson that Lane had tried to hit him with her car several times, and in fact ran over Wilson's left leg two, three, even four times. The department also said that Lane was backing into Wilson while he was fighting with her boyfriend on the ground, when he grabbed his gun and shot into the rear of the window, because he was in fear for his life.

That version of events was allowed to stand unchallenged until Sept. 28, when private investigator Norm Wright, a retired FBI agent, presented his own investigation of the Lane shooting to the CPRC. He agreed with the department's version, up to a point. Then he dropped the bomb shell that shook the CPRC especially its law enforcement booster quartet to the core.

According to eye witnesses, Wilson was not even on the ground when he shot Lane. He had gotten up, walked all the way behind her stationary vehicle, then walked up to her window or just behind it, and shot her four times straight without saying a word. Even though his left leg had allegedly been run over by Lane's car up to four times, Wilson not only did not limp, he walked at a quickened pace all the way to the point near the car where he pulled the trigger.

Lane died of at least one of those bullet strikes on the way to the hospital. Wilson eventually went to the hospital too, allegedly according to early reports with a broken ankle. Then it was reported that although his left leg was ran over by Lane's vehicle up to FOUR times, it was okay enough for him to be interviewed shortly after at the General Investigations Bureau, and even return to duty after the mandatory 72 hour cooling off period. Photographs in Wright's report showed only a couple of small abrasians aka road rash, and perhaps a contusion on Wilson's knee. Miraculous, for someone who had just had his left leg pressed into the ground, up to four times by a 1996 Honda car checking in at over a ton.

The DA after reviewing the investigation submitted by OIS shooting investigator Jay Greenstein declined to file charges against Wilson. The Internal Affairs Division which does not even conduct independent investigations of fatal shootings also pretended it did not see a thing. But apparently, Norm Wright did and through his report, the CPRC did also. Its blinders came off as it saw that life is not as simple as officers always telling the truth and always taking lives in a justified fashion. Real life is much messier, and even the most santitized version of an ugly incident put on display, can reap an awful truth.

The invite list to Sutton's party

After three days, jury selection has been completed. There are 12 jurors and four alternates seated to hear the case. Of the main panel, there is one Black and two Hispanic jurors. Of the alternates, one is Black. The city kicked off at least four Black and Hispanic jurors and the judge called three Wheeler motions.

Over 50 witnesses are expected to testify:

Off. Richard Aceves
Off. Michael Andrews
Carla Aquino
Lt. Tim Bacon
Off. Brian Baitx
Capt. Mike Blakely
Sgt. Ed Blevins
ret. Sgt. Skip Blythe
Bill Burnett
Capt. Jim Cannon
Former chief Jerry Carroll
Off. Michael Carroll
Carl Chapman
Lt. Jeff Collapy
Capt. Richard Dana
Dep. Chief David Dominguez
Mark Elliot
Lt. Pete Esquival
Sgt. Valmont Graham
Penny Harrington
Off. Greg Hayden
Lt. Darryl Hurt
Sgt. Jeffrey Joseph
Offr. Kopkitch
Off. David L. Martin
Lt. Mark McFall
Al Mendoza
Padelford
Sgt. Leon Phillips
Dep. Chief Andrew Pytlak
David Reever
ret. Lt. Wally Rice
Off. Steve Sdringola
Brad smith
ret. Asst. Chief Michael Smith
Off. Roger Sutton
Off. Ray Soto
Off. David Taylor
ret. Lt. Jay Theuer
Lt. Alex Tortes
Ret. Dep. Chief Audrey Wilson

Jury Picking, Riverside style

It was not until the end of the second day of picking a jury in the Roger Sutton case that Commissioner Joan F. Burgess realized that they would run out of prospective jurors in the current pool. At the beginning of the first day of trial, there had been 47 filled seats in Dept. 6. On Thursday afternoon, at 4:30pm, only 12 jurors remained besides the 10 seated in the jury box, and both sides announced that there would be 15 for cause challenges. That, is in addition to the presumptory challenges which remain for both sets of attorneys to exercise which could whittle down the jury pool even further.

Before recessing for the weekend, Burgess finally relented, and decided that 15 more jurors will be sent up from the jury room. It will not be enough.

The vast majority of jurors removed, have been for cause. Anyone who had any contact with anyone who hired, fired, disciplined, promoted, demoted or censored employees was gone by the second day. Anyone who lived in Casa Blanca, anyone who had prior negative contacts with the RPD(which on a bad day can be half the jury pool, this time somewhat less) was also quickly gone. If you were White and thus allowed to be ignorant about race and racism, you stayed. If you were Black or Hispanic and thus not allowed to be ignorant about race, you were gone. And predicably if you were of color, it was the city's stable of attorneys that sent you packing.

The black female juror who said, "I am Black. I can not separate myself from it. I'm for my people", well she will have to endure the entire voir dire questioning process before she's officially removed for cause.

When it came to race, the city was awfully shy about discussing it in public. Instead, they asked Burgess if they could retreat to the confines of her office, and always she agreed. It is one thing to close off interviews with jurors about personal experiences in a semi-confidential environment. It is another to use the guise of confidentiality to hide behind when discussing race and racism in the city of Riverside. Race, after all, being the heart of what this trial is about.

At one instance, Eugene Ramirez, etal retreated into Burgess's chambers, along with Sutton, his attorneys, the court reporter and oddly enough, Lt. Bob Meier, the city's representative in this case. The only time he was invited to chambers was when the city's attorneys aired their views on race in this trial. Why was that?

If you read the witness list or heard it read in court by Burgess, you will notice Meier's name is on it. As it should be, because he was a principal player in this episode. However, not only will he not be testifying, but he has been designated the city's representative in this case. Why is it, that the police department would assign an officer to monitor the case including what goes on in the judge's chambers, who has a vested interest in that case?

Hopefully, Meier was not invited into chambers when a juror was inside talking to the parties of the case about any negative experiences with the RPD. Inappropriate, would not begin to describe that kind of interaction.

But it is typical of the city to make decisions like this one with Meier, just as it is typical of the city to ignore the problems of racism within its employment ranks.

Elections

Mayoral:

 

Ron Loveridge: UCR professor and incumbant

 

Ameal Moore: councilman

 

Terry Frizzel: former mayor

 

Ward 2:

 

Andrew Melendrez: businessman

 

Deen Teer: Retired city employee

 

Gloria Willis: former school teacher, now activist

 

Ward 4:

 

Frank Schiavone: Business man and man of the Developers

 

Debrah Freeman: Works for County of Riverside Human Resources

 

Sam Cardalucci: Owns NEWCO, the city's former private refuge collection contractor

 

Corrine Parker: city employee

 

Ward 6:

 

Nancy Hart: City Council incumbant

 

Ric Costillo: Businessman

 

 

Bits and pieces from here, there, everywhere

On Sept. 2, presiding Judge Joan F. Burgess issued tentative rulings on motions in limine submitted by attorneys for both sides in the racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation case filed by RPD officer Roger Sutton in 2000.

After about an hour of argument had passed and the dust had settled, Burgess decided on all but three of the motions.

IN:

Alleged racist commments witnessed by Sutton, as well as those publicized in the media in relation to the shooting of Tyisha Miller.

Allegations of racist incidents after 1991, and several incidents in the 1980s.


OUT:

Most racist events alleged to have occurred pre-1991

Testimony on a law suit filed against former Chief Sonny Richardson in the 1900s.

Testimony about an incident in 1999 when according to former Riverside County Grand Jury Chairman Bill Burnett, then-Internal Affairs Lt. Bob Meier handed over Sutton's entire personnel file to Burnett, calling Sutton a "troublemaker", at the same time the Internal Affairs Division was purportedly investigating allegations of racism Sutton made against the department.

UP IN THE AIR

Statistical information about racial disparities in the department's firing or suspending of its officers after sustaining allegations of misconduct against them

Tyisha Miller testimony

Testimony in relation to the complaint filed by former officer Rene Rodriguez, with the state's Fair Employment and Housing Office in 1999.

The trial which has been put on hold for nearly five years is tentatively set to begin next week, if the trial which is scheduled to precede it is put on hold, or settled.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Earlier in this blog, there was an entry about the current status of the city's very own 800 lb gorilla, formally known as the RPOA and how its leadership is isolating itself from the officers they are supposed to represent. It appears that many officers in the rank and file are very displeased with the actions taken by the RPOA's PAC in terms of the candidates it endorses. Most of these officers are not informed or even asked if they believe in supporting the endorsements of the candidates the RPOA PAC selects, most notably in the fourth ward, which makes sense because most of the officers who reside in Riverside live in the "white flight" ward. Frank Schiavone, the current councilmember in that ward, serves first and foremost, the developers who fund his campaign and attend his fundraisers. Police officers, as a profession, comes a bit lower on his list, and police officers who live in his ward and their families come further down, with the rest of us mortals.

Say, you live in OrangeCrest(Riverside's own CopLand)and you have to commute to work on what passes for streets(i.e. Allesandrio is a great example) in this city. Unchecked growth, hopelessly backlogged infrastructure including that which eases traffic congestion may be more pertinent issues to you than whether or not 500 more multi-million dollar estates get approved for development down the street. More traffic and congestion hassles for you, more $$$ for Friends of Frank, and you are voting him into office, why????

Because your union PAC tells you to?

LOL.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An update on the NARCO-Gate entry as well. It appears that the situation that broke in 2002, after the DEA spilled the beans to the RPD about the conduct of two of its Narcotics detectives, was(at the time) only the latest allegation of misconduct to befall on Kipp.

It seems that closer to the beginning of his career in the RPD(which began on Jan. 2, 1981)Kipp's job was endangered by allegations made against him which led to another internal investigation. If not for assistance he received from an employee in the RPD's brother agency, The Riverside County Sheriff's Department, Kipp might not be with this agency today, sources say.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NARCO-Gate

This scandal came to you, courtesy of the California State Attorney General's Office. No, they were not involved in creating it, but without this office's presense "in the back pocket" of the police department as one detective put it, this appalling and embarassing episode would have merely been treated as business as usual in the Riverside Police Department and swept beneath the carpet with the rest of the dirt.

The central figure in this sad chain of events is Det. Ron Kipp, a 24-year veteran of the police department, who spent over 18 years of his career working in narcotics.
This officer, who looks like a less washed up Nick Nolte, also had a clean personnel file despite his involvement in an off-duty arrest for assault, multiple nonfatal shootings including one that injured the female passenger in a pick up truck and one fatal shooting in 1996.

The number of years Kipp spent inside the narcotics division without being reassigned should have triggered a red flag. Instead of looking at his long tenure as simply creating a more experienced and seasoned narc, his supervisors should have been looking for signs of trouble. They were just around the bend.

Kipp was busted in April 2001, for telling an informant to sell drugs at a higher price than that authorized by the department and telling him to keep the extra money from the sale. According to a memo he received from then Internal Affairs Lt. Bob Meier, Kipp had violated two sections of RPD policy 2.23. These were:

V. The failure to reasonable action while on duty:

W. Exceeding the lawful peace officer powers by unreasonable, unlawful and excessive misconduct.

He received as discipline after a four month investigation, an eight-month suspension and a transfer to the robbery unit. Another narcotics detective, Roberta Hopewell, who was the initial subject of the allegations made by a DEA agent, was transferred to the Auto Theft Unit. Kipp later accused Hopewell of lying to investigators when she pointed the finger at him for misconduct she had been accused of, in a deposition he gave in relation to a civil law suit filed in connection with a criminal case.

Defense Attorney Andres Bustamonte, who represented a man named Benito Salazar in a felony drug and animal welfare case, deposed Kipp, yet it was the arrival of another attorney, Victor Sherman that turned the deposition into a confessional by Kipp of how the RPD's narcotics division conducted its operations. Kipp, who openly admired Sherman, said that although the department and the Riverside County's District Attorney's office had clashed over the use of "walled off" stings, the prosecutors of that agency jumped on the bandwagon several years before and were more willing accomplices in the process. Even though this type of sting, which involves concealing information or existance about informants from prosecutors and judges, is not illegal, in certain cases such as those described in the deposition by Kipp, the RPD clearly crossed the line.

Barbara Taylor, a deputy prosecutor with the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office said in a May 14, 2003 article published by the Los Angeles Daily Journal

"If the informant is a percipient witness, if he watched something go down, then we need to know that because it has to be given to the defense"

The lawyers for Salazer later alleged that there were at least five criminal cases involving the same informant selling pseudoepherdine cases to people to use for meth production, then secretly broke their tail lights from 2002-2003 before leaving them to drive off. A short time later, a patrol car would pull them over on the tail light, do a search and find the drugs. In at least one case, Kipp allegedly tailed the suspects in a gold colored pickup truck with no license plate before the traffic stop. Those officers would then call either Kipp or another detective in narcotics named Danzek and they would come out and handle it. Several of the patrol officers who made the stops are now in narcotics.

According to Kipp's deposition, the patrol officers had no knowlege that he knew beforehand there were drugs in the vehicles and just believed they were conducting pretext stops on traffic violations. Why, any members of the department would set up unsuspecting officers in such a fashion is one only those individuals can answer, though if the officers involved in the stops knew that they were actors in a staged event, then there is still another can of worms to open out there.

Allegations were made against Kipp that he allowed this informant which he hid as part of a "walled off" sting to sell drugs on the side, and if he gave Kipp 4-5 busts a year, "his back was covered." Kipp denied all of them, including those made by the DEA agent.

links on the crackdown at the RPD:

RPD Narcotics operations brought to standstill

scroll down to "It's just Business as Usual".


15 narcotics cases under review



Kipp was deposed by a lawyer, allegedly for a civil case. The city attorney's office did not know about this for several months. A representative appeared from the State Atty General's office and Kipp had believed he was being questioned by him. The AG representative, Michael Stamp, remained silent during most of the proceedings except to prevent Salazer's attorney from asking Kipp questions about the city attorney's involvement in trying to suppress the use of portions of this deposition to gain access to Kipp's personnel records in court.

When Salazer's attorneys tried to uncover information about the informant, nicknamed "El Lobo", they were thwarted for over two years. Finally, presiding judge Edward D. Webster ruled that the prosecutor had to turn over a list of cases where the informant was involved. Webster added that related criminal cases could be overturned on appeal, and civil litigation could be filed against the police department and the D.A.'s office.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kipp on the investigation against him: (excerpt People of the State vs Salazer, RIF123653--deposition taken Nov. 18, 2002)

"I think this is why this thing is getting held up is because they are a little afraid to mess with me on this deal b/c it's the way business was always conducted even when he[then Capt. Andrew Pytlak] was sergeant."

Kipp on the reluctance to discipline him:

"Because this is way we've always done it. It's never been a secret."

Kipp on the Attorney General Investigation:

"I don't know what the hell their problem is. I think the big problem is the Attorney General's office. They're so afraid of not looking proper. You know, with the A.G.'s office being in our back pocket and overseeing everything we do. I think that's our biggest problem."

Kipp on fighting his suspension:

"I won't go down for this. They don't want me exposing their administration's policies. Not only can I prove that they lied about their policies, I will do it."


Again, ladies and gentlemen, this latest scandal was uncovered by the State Attorney General's office's presense "in the back pocket" of the RPD. This office will be checking out on March 6, 2005 hopefully taking all of the department's scandals, uncovered and otherwise, with it.

Roger Sutton's day in court stymied again

Today, Commissioner Joan Burgess of the Riverside County Superior Court postponed the set trial date of Roger Sutton v the City of Riverside in deference to several other cases on her civil calendar. The case that was first filed five years ago last month, is once again tabled.

Burgess opened the door to settlement talks, mentioning that some times even the cases where both parties appear the furthest apart in terms of reaching a consensus often settle. The firm shakes of the heads of the attorneys for Officer Roger Sutton, and the city, shut that door quickly. There will be no last-minute meetings held in chambers, it appears in this case. So, Burgess finally scheduled about a dozen motion in limines filed by the city to be heard at 1:30pm on Sept. 6. Both sides agreed to that date, but the actual trial date remains once again, up in the air.

The city of Riverside filed the dozen motions to trim down what it views as the excess material in the Sutton case. What the city objects to as it has in every racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation case filed by a Black city employee, is the evidence these employees use to prove their cases. As far as the city is concerned, at every incident of racism it stares at, it exclaims "Out, Out Damn Spot"!

If all the evidence is allowable at trial, both sides said the case will take between three to six weeks, and over 50 witnesses including past and present members of the RPD brass will testify.

With all the delays, from attorneys donating their kidneys, to the periodic freezing of civil calendars to accomodate Riverside County's criminal trial schedule, the question has been asked, Will this case ever be presented in a courtroom? Will the racial environment of the Riverside Police Department which had brought federal and state scrutiny to investigate its workings, ever be put on trial?

What about that 800 Pound Gorilla?

I was talking not too long ago to a police officer who made a point of saying that although he belonged to the department's labor union, the RPOA, he did not agree with the politics of its current board. The funny thing, is that he is not the only officer who has said this, or who has made it a point to separate themselves from the union. Which makes some sense, after all, because the closer you stand to King Kong when he's out wreaking havoc, the better your odds of being stepped on. The RPOA, is often called the 800 pound gorilla in the room that no one wants to talk about....except apparently some disatisifed officers.

Maybe, it's backlash from that hideous campaign the RPOA ran in opposition to Measure II, where it basically stated that if you did not vote the way the union wanted, don't count on the police responding as quickly to save you from criminals, as it might have, well the day before the election. After all, it was about that time that the whispers started.

Several rank-and-file officers even said that they had stepped outside the official party line and voted in favor of the measure which would place the Community Police Review Commission in the city's charter. Not because they supported the CPRC, but in protest of the campaign the union was conducting, with the union dues they had put in the coffer. Hmm, that's an interesting event, to hear of officers protesting through their vote, the action taken which was payed for by their money. However, in a way it's a brave act of defiance against the RPOA to step outside the official stance. After all, if your actions were uncovered by its leadership, you might find out later how traitorous you are, when you call out for an 11-11, and no one comes to your rescue.

But contrast the anti-Measure II campaign and its lackluster response, at least publicly by the masses who are members of the union, with the 1999 parade of officers, with pale shaven heads reflecting the setting sun, marching two-by-two away from the city council meeting they had just unceremoniously crashed. Something has changed. Still, it is those officers who remember that night with perhaps, wistful nostalgia who are running the show, even one that someday might see its audience dwindle in size.

Maybe, it's the fact that this current union board arose from the ashes of the backlash that occurred after five White officers were fired as a result of their actions surrounding the shooting of Tyisha Miller in 1998. A good chunk of the current board of directors consists of former SWAT/METRO team members, which is significant considering that the METRO team was one of the units where its members threatened to resign enmasse to protest the firing of the Riverside 5, as they were called.

Source: Riverside Grand Jury report on RPD under "Findings"

Following the termination, most of the SWAT, Defensive Tactics and Field Training Officer teams offered their resignations to the department. These were not accepted, but many of the officers have requested to be rotated off these duty assignments.

Other members of the current RPOA board were supporters of Sgt. Gregory Preece, including current Vice President Chris Lanzillo, who was quoted in a March 2001 issue of the Press Enterprise newspaper as saying that Preece was the best sergeant he ever had(assuming that meant Preece's supervisory abilities).

Source: March 3, 2001, Press Enterprise

Treasurer Aaron Leigh Perkins(of "road rage" infamy) was once disciplined with a written reprimend for putting a stink bomb in Rene Rodriguez's car.

Source: Roger Sutton v the Riverside Police Department/City of Riverside deposition given by Capt. Richard Dana

Many if not all of the current RPOA board members had been in the forefront of the movement in June 1999 when over 200 officers, mostly patrol officers and detectives, decided to shave their heads bald "in protest" of the firing of the officers in connection with killing Miller. They knowingly, as one former officer-now sergeant said in August 1999, adopted a symbol associated with white supremacism. So much so, that during the officially sanctioned head shaving rally held at Ramona High School on one sunny afternoon in June 1999, some self-identifying racist skinheads were in the area and apparently confused the barbershop session, with a white supremacist revival event.


In contrast, most of the current pool of rank and file officers were hired after that turmoltous time period. Many of them have little to no memory of the Miller shooting and its aftermath. Many only know that they were recruited by a department that had recently entered into a stipulated agreement with the state, as a result, if they knew that much.

Each time, an officer vents about the union that he belongs to, I just say this. I tell him, and it's mostly men who vent, (although you would think it's the women that would feel most excluded from the "He mans women hater club" given their invisibility among its leadership) that he should get either through joining a committee or through running for a position on the board. If you are upset or feel alienated by the current leadership(and let's face it, who wouldn't?), if you don't want to put your career on the line to join a harassment/surveillance exercise against someone that the board members are mad at, especially for something stupid like the color of a police car, if you are partial to your hair and do not consider it a vestige to be sacrificed at the whims of the leadership(who might be worried about their lack of hair):

VOTE THEM OUT

Otherwise, stop complaining because no one really wants to hear about it. Don't play the apathy game and decide not to vote for the leadership of the organization in which your hard-earned money is going, and don't sit on the sidelines looking embarassed if they ever spend your money on another embarassing campaign.

From whence shall come police accountability in Riverside?

The consent decree is set to expire in 192 days, or, six months and 11 days.

With time ticking until the end of the consent decree between the State Attorney General's office and the city of Riverside, this is a question that even after five years still begs an answer...

The answer is, there is no mechanism of accountability in place.

Many people in Riverside, representing all political stripes may disagree with this assessment. But the facts are, is that very little has changed inside the police department since the city entered into a stipulated agreement with the state in 2001.

TO BE CONTINUED....

Then on the Other Hand....

Last night at City Hall, the Executive subcommittee of the Human Relations Commission met to discuss among other things, the recent violence in the Eastside and the police department's response.

Lt. Alex Tortes, who's worked in the Eastside for many years, presented a strategy which he said the department enacted on Aug. 9. That date was in between two speeches given by Acting Chief Andrew Pytlak and Chief Russ Leach, respectively, which presented the "Let's talk tough and get tough" philosophy of policing.

Tortes, who is not a fan of the suppression type of policing that was batted about by some of the department's administrative heads, told the committee that instead of flooding the neighborhood with police officers, the department had put together a task force to cull out the active gang members who participated in the recent shootings, with surgical precision. Take out the scalpal instead of the broad sword, in a matter of speaking.

The task force consists of Tortes, as supervisor, Sgt. Brian Dailey who heads the Police and Corrections Team and Sgt. Frank Assuma, who is in charge of the gang unit. They put together a list of active gang members, including those who were in violation of probation or parole and have active warrants. The shooters involved in 13 out of the 16 most recent shootings were rounded up. Some of them would be prosecuted on weapons charges by federal agencies, so that instead of being sent to serve long prison terms in California's state prison system(inside, are prison gangs calling the shots in the local neighborhoods of many Southern California cities)they will be doing time in federal institutions.

So, why the differences in action plans presented for policing in the Eastside? What was that all about?

Two completely different plans of action, from one department. Does this indicate that there is a struggle within management of how to police in the city of Riverside?



Marchand rally through the Eastside sparks feelings of deja vu

The Latest Round of Occupation in the Eastside

RPD occupation strategy, 2005


It happened in 1997.
It happened in 2002.
It's happening again in the summer of 2005.
The Eastside is being occupied by the forces of the Riverside Police Department.
Chief Russ Leach, at times channeling LAPD Chief William Bratton, told community residents at a recent meeting that it was time to talk tough about crime and the gangsters in the streets.

People agreed. After all, people can not buy gas, pay utility bills, play in their yards, sit in their yards or walk home from a party without getting shot at in Riverside. Violence, including gang violence which plays some role here, is cyclical and it's that time in the biorhythem of life in this city again.

Leach fresh off of his vacation stint in Maui took the reins of the department away from Chief-in-training Andrew Pytlak and appeared before the Eastside Community at a meeting sponsored by current councilman and mayoral candidate Ameal Moore to be blunt, to talk tough. He said his troops were in the Eastside to do arrests, not smile and wave at people.

Smile and wave? Since when have cops done that in the Eastside? That's for functions sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce and the Mission Grove and Orangecrest Neighborhood Watches. Cops come to the Eastside to get tough, or they do not come at all. And it's tough to see them smile and wave if they stay inside their squad cars, windows rolled up, until there is someone to chase and arrest.

An interesting idea, proposed by more than one middle-management officer, was to ask police officers to get out of their squad cars, take off their shades and talk to people from one end of a block to the other. Unfortunately, that frightens some of them more than chasing after a suspect. The idea that maybe everyone in a neighborhood isn't a suspect....

Leach continued:

"What are we?," Chief Leach said, "We are an occupying force for a short period of time."

And in between?

"We are going to be here," Chief Leach said, "We are going to stay here."

What he meant was that after the most recent exercise in suppression had ended, the department would go into a maintenance mode. But what is maintenance, a time period when police presense in the Eastside is less, because the troops have been moved to another neighborhood to put out the next fire. Not before scheduling the next return date about two hot summers from now.

This is the state of community policing in Riverside, California, four years, five months and 11 days into the stipulated judgement, with only six months and 25 days remaining until the state cuts our police department's strings loose.
Supression.
Regroup.
Pullout.
Maintenance.
Supression.

For a good definition of Community Oriented Problem Solving Policing(COPS), check out Norm Stamper's book, Breaking Rank:A Top Cop's Expose of the Darker Side of Policing

It makes sense in that it actually involves the community rather than the community standing back while the police come in full force to do their thing, before leaving again to move to the next hot spot. But after spending over $10 million on reforms, and hours spent training officers how to better do their jobs, that concept still has not come to Riverside.

"We are here to make arrests. We are going to get complaints. We are profiling criminals. We have carte blanche within the law."

In other words, accountability be damned. Consent decree be damned. Let's just forget about that now, while we go about and do our business. We never make mistakes. If we do, do not think of telling us so, or we will spend valuable time telling you that you are wrong. And so forth. Read any manual on parimilitary watchman style policing in inner city neighborhoods and these words will start feeling familiar.

It might seem petty, in the face of all the violence, to even talk about the issue of accountability, but it is always an important componant of any police/community interaction, even one that is requested in a moment of desperation. The wise thing to say would have been, our police are coming in, but they are going to be held accountable by their supervisors, watch commanders, everyone up and down the chain, and most importantly, me for what they do. If they do something "over the line" then come to me, come to the area lieutenant(Alex Tortes) and there's the Community Police Review Commission. That would have given evidence that even given the department's decision to send its forces into the Eastside for the umpteenth time, that it at least has learned something in the past five years.

Oh well, maybe by the end of the next consent decree, perhaps...

Interviews involving Norm Stamper and Community Policing

Norm Stamper Q&A on Community Policing

(excerpt)

Does your vision of community policing include a civilian review board?


I am a very strong supporter of civilian review, civilian oversight. In fact, I believe that we need civilian participation in policy making. I have said for twenty years that we are the people's police, that we belong to the communities that we serve. And that means vastly increased citizen participation in virtually everything that we do. That means a review of citizen complaints and allegations of police misconduct. The question is how to structure it.... I am a believer in the need for radical re form, which some would call revolution, and that is not a word that I use lightly. I think it is time for a fundamental, sweeping change in the way that we think about who we are, who we're here to serve, and what we do. For me that means getting out in to the community, talking about community policing and massive community organization and mobilization. I'll take the risk of helping to raise expectations, knowing that if they are not met that the crash, the fall, can be quite damaging. I don't think we have a choice. We have to believe that something can happen in this country. I think we have to believe that police officers and people in the community, including blind-and-loyal supporters, as well as critics and ideological adversaries, can actually find a way to make a difference at the neighborhood level. I believe that people are looking for a method that will allow us to put our best intentions to work. It's absolutely frightening in some neighborhoods to think about what community policing might really mean. Because for me it does mean direct citizen action. And it means a banding together of the disparate and different forces in the neighborhood and the community, all of whom are aligned under a desire for safety and civility and sanity on the streets. I don't care if you are from the far left or the christian right, or any other philosophical orientation, what matters to me is do you reject violence as a way of life. Do you want to make these streets safe for your children and yourself? If you do, let's find a way to work together. Leaders have to be living emblems of what they represent, what they stand for, what they believe in. I have worked very hard in my life to be able to stand in front of a group and say what is in my heart or in my head... I have to believe the same thing about beat cops and detectives, sergeants and captains, and people in the community. If we can create situations in which we can share our visions and not be embarrassed or ashamed of them, and raise expectations in that process, we damn well better get about that business.

Alternet interview with Stamper

Four steps forward, three steps back...

With the chief away, the underling will play, and that is exactly what Deputy Chief Andrew Pytlak has done. Whether it is using the chief's parking spot instead of his own, or rehearsing his role as the future head of the RPD, not a second has been wasted of the last two weeks...

You can have a conversation with people, in the community or from the department, about the future of the department and its next chief, without dropping names most notably Pytlak, quite successfully. Even though Chief Leach has not stepped down, it is already a done deal in City Hall about who will fill his shoes. Someone has spent the past year campaigning for the job very diligently even though no current job opening has officially been announced.

Bad news to the community which has watched and waited for the new, improved police department to emerge from its five-year stipulated judgement.

Bad news for those who were proponants of community orientated problem solving policing, over the older paramilitary style.


For one thing is clear, when it comes to policing, Pytlak is strictly by the book, the dusty worn out guidebook used for years by those in the "Old Guard".

Unpleasant fortune telling aside, it was a busy two-week whirlwind stint for the chief-in-training.

Thrown into his lap has been the strife which has shown itself in the city through a series of shootings, Pytlak appeared at a community meeting at Zacatecas, to present the police department's planned suppression plan. That the Eastside community caught between a rock and a hard place had agreed to enter into, through the Eastside Think Tank's leadership.

His suppression plan included a cop car on every corner, and a combined effort to crack down on the violence, by different divisions including Field Operations, Special Operations, Gang Intelligence and the Police and Corrections Team. The community leaders gave a collective nod, to everything that Ptylak suggested.

Except it turned out that Ptylak had not informed the Eastside Think Tank that there was yet another tool in its arsenal that would be put to use by the department. Not even Lt. Alex Tortes, who has been the area commander of that neighborhood for years.

Instead, it is councilmen Frank Schiavone and Steve Adams who drop this bombshell at the city council meeting on Aug. 9, with the cooperation of City Attorney, Gregory Priamos. The item was placed on the agenda under the emergency exemption of the Brown Act, the one reserved for natural disasters, riots and terrorist attacks.

What was the solution to what everyone can agree on, is a crisis?

SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS

Not just anywhere. Not downtown. Not at the bus terminal(a havin for drug dealers) but University Avenue. Not in Casa Blanca, which has also seen its share of shootings and death recently, which is within Schiavone's ward. It is an election year, and as someone dryly observed, Schiavone would get hung if he tried to push that over there.

Schiavone and Adams however pushed it on University Avenue, long a haven of sex workers, johns, drug dealers and as Chief Leach would put it at a public meeting, "too many pedestrians".

So the city council was about to pass an emergency action to put cameras on University Avenue, when there was no one from the Eastside which University splits in half, to respond on the issue, whether to agree, or disagree.

Several city residents balked, after getting over our initial shock and spoke, urging the council to put the issue to a public forum, in the involved communities. Fortunately, several city council members balked as well, and the body voted instead to create a broader action plan to address the most recent spree of violence within the city's limits. That plan will be put together by the city manager's office.

Pytlak was very disappointed in the vote, and as he stood with Lt. Robert Meier making fun of those who spoke against Schiavone and Adams' motion, he gave a fine example of the philosophy and professionalism he plans to bring to the department when he becomes its next chief.

After the meeting, I went home and after 10pm, when I walked around the block, I saw in the back, a squad car parked with no one inside it. On closer perusal, I saw a young bald White male officer slouched in his seat, so he could not be seen, perhaps taking a breather on a night where there's an officer on every corner in the Eastside neigbhorhood.


Eastside seige

The other alleged RPD pedophile back to work soon?

First of all, this is not a commentary on former RPD officer Adam Brown who plead guilty to federal charges in relation to his involvement and participation in a child molesation ring in Wisconsin.

Before Brown's outing as a pedophile by the FBI, there was former officer Vince Thomas who had been charged by the San Bernardino County District Attorney's office with 33 counts of "lewd behavior" with a teenage girl, who had been living in his home, over a threee year period. Thomas' case was tried twice, and both times the jury deadlocked after considerable time spent in deliberations.

After the second mistrial, the DA declined to retry Thomas, and dropped the charges. Thomas took that as a sign that it was time to go back to his old job as a Riverside Police Department officer.

Prosecutor Laura Robles remains convinced of his guilt, and expressed some concern about him returning back to his career as a police officer.

The status of Thomas's departure from the RPD has caused some controversy. His attorney Grover Porter said that Thomas had resigned before he could be fired by the department. Deputy Chief Andrew Pytlak said that Thomas had been fired and had planned to contest the department's decision through the arbitration process. Since the criminal case has reached its conclusion, Thomas is free to do just that.

Michael Gardner who chairs the CPRC, was asked his opinion on the matter for unknown reasons. A man of considerable understatement when it comes to questioning the integrity of a police officer, Gardner admitted there could be "some amount of community concern" if Thomas returned to work.

"In reality, it may not be fair if the guy is truly innocent," Gardner said. "If he's not, he probably shouldn't be a police officer anywhere."

So should be be an officer, or not?

It's a question the usual cast of talking heads can not or will not answer, because those who can provide those answers without fear are not usually placed in positions of leadership within this city. But for those who called me to tell me that they had allowed Thomas inside their homes to take police reports with their children in the vicinity, how could or would their fears be alleviated if Thomas returns to work? The truth is, they can not be lessened, simply because two juries were unable to reach a verdict in terms of whether or not Thomas had molested a teenage girl, whose care he was entrusted with as her legal guardian, according to civil court records.

A police officer's character and integrity must be beyond reproach. The standards they must adhere to, should be higher than those of civilians because of the powers they exercise and the responsibilities their positions require them to carry. Can anyone in the community look at Thomas, and not think that he may have molested a child, because while his guilt was not proven, his innocence was not either, and there are always some people on a jury who refuse to convict a police officer even if he clearly committed the crime in question. For some people, the mere idea that a police officer could commit so heinous a crime is too far outside the realm of possibility to even allow them to fairly deliberate on a criminal case where an officer has been accused of such a crime.

Thomas's integrity has been tainted, and that extends to his professional life, so he must never be allowed to return to work in the Riverside Police Department.




DA gives up on trying Officer Vince Thomas on molestation charges

It's Raining in the Bucket

More rain drops continue to fall in the bucket....known as Rivercity, even as the annual monsoons that blow through the county have left the city bone-dry.

There has been a recent upswing in shootings involving African-Americans and Latinos in the Eastside neighborhood, the magnitude of which are as bad as those that occurred in 2002. Remember back that year, when civic leaders and community members broke bread in the vacant lot adjacent to where 13 year old Anthony Sweat, a Black teenager, had died after being shot by Latino gang members? The city broke its promise to that community, plus nearly dropped the ball earlier this year when the fate of the city's only gang intervention program, Project Bridge, was on the chopping block once again. Project Bridge, a favorite bargaining chip, or pawn of both the city council and Police Chief Russ Leach could be one of the solutions to the remerging crisis of violence involving youth in one of Riverside's most economically depressed neighborhoods. Will it be allowed to fulfill its mission, or will it be bled dry and neglected by a city council backed by developers who sees the Eastside simply as an obstacle preventing two of the city's prime locales, Downtown and the University areas, from realizing their full potential as tax revenue generators. Is it true instead that the Eastside neighborhood, populated increasingly by Latinos, less so by African-Americans, is being allowed to die on the vine economically and spiritually, so that the city's redevelopment agency(aka the City Council) can come along and pick up the property cheap, or grab it through eminient domain, citing the ongoing problems with "blight" in the neighborhood?

The police department will throw more men at the problem, and likely at some point, the METRO/SWAT team will revisit the area, but in the long term, will things change or merely set up for the next round of an ongoing situation which has stretched out over 15 years, since the "tough on gang violence" laws catalzed a metamorphis inside the street gangs which has caused them to become mirror images of the gangs operating inside the state prisons that according to the police department, are calling the shots(pun intended) in the Eastside.

Time to revisit the adage, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, certainly it is worth much more than a bad one. Not to mention the adage that all children matter in this world, not just the White middle-class ones.

Project Bridge on the crossroads

Community steps up to save Project Bridge
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CPRC just received the first excessive force case involving a stun gun in its five-year history. Members of an African-American family alleged that they were assaulted by four police officers, and that one of them, a woman was tased in the breasts twice by Officer Rod Anthony W. Fletcher. According to that woman, Fletcher had held her in a chokehold earlier, telling her he was going to put her to sleep now. Then he had told a civilian to get his taser from the squad car. That civilian ironically, was on criminal probation, while none of the members of the family were, although the fact that the young man was a son of a states corrections official no doubt more than balanced that factor out. The other officers allegedly involved to varying degrees were Sancho Lopez, Nicholas Vasquez, Robert Olsen and Sgt. Patrick M. McCarthy.

Attempts to receive copies of the officers' reports were met with a long wait in the lobby of the Orange St. Station and two different excuses as to why only an abbreviated version of ONE report would be available. One civilian employee said that only the first page of a police report was public information, while a case was "open". Her supervisors said that the officers had not completed their reports yet.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Former police officer and convicted child molester Adam Brown is back in the local news again, not too long after he plead guilty to federal charges in relation to his involvement in a child molestation and porn ring in the Midwest....


From the Los Angeles Times

IN BRIEF: THE REGION / RIVERSIDE
D.A. Wants Ex-Officer to Face Sex Abuse Charges
From Times Staff and Wire Reports


The Riverside County district attorney will seek to extradite a former Riverside police officer sentenced Friday in Wisconsin to more than 30 years in federal prison for his involvement in a nationwide child pornography ring.

Adam James Brown, 32, pleaded guilty in March to charges of traveling across state lines with the intent to engage in a sexual act with a minor and producing pornography.

Investigators said Brown also molested four Riverside County boys under the age of 12 during his time as a police officer, leading to a 65-count case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Det. Joe Miera, from the gang unit testified recently in a criminal trial involving a man charged with a possession of a gun while a felon. Apparently, this means that the pesky internal investigation that was done involving him, by the Internal Affairs Division, is a thing of the past. Let's hope if that is true, it is for the right reasons, not for the sake of expedience or the wrong reasons.

The news is not as good for the pack of patrol officers who were investigated by the same division for undisclosed violations. Apparently, when that investigation is concluded, Leach will make some sort of announcement about the situation.

Whatever happened with Officer David Hackman?

Hackman, in trouble again

This is what is happening to former RPD officer David Hackman now. What happened earlier during his stint in Riverside made what followed inevitable.

As mentioned in the article, Hackman was the center of some controversy in Riverside when he made racist slurs after four other RPD officers shot Tyisha Miller to death on Dec. 28, 1998. After an internal investigation, Hackman received a 30 day suspension without pay.

While in the locker room during the early morning hours following the shooting, Hackman saw fit to entertain some of his blue buddies with his rendition of Joan Miller grieving over the death of her granddaughter, Tyisha. He imitated her voice, and said, "Here's big Mama here to do the Watts' death wails". One of the officers present was not laughing. Former Officer Rene Rodriguez instead reported the comments made by Hackman and other officers to the Internal Affairs Division.

Another comment made by Hackman was in response to a comment made by former Sgt. Gregory Preece. He had referred to Miller, an African-American woman, as an "NHI". If you peruse the most recent manual of law enforcement venicular terms, you will find that NHI, means "No Human Involved" and is reserved for incidents where people of color have been beaten or killed by police officers.

Eventually, although the RPD refused to fire this racist cop, it did prod him to leave the agency and Hackman packed up his slogans and headed off for greener pastures, up in Northern California. Like his disgraced blue brother Michael Alagna, Hackman picked a LE agency nestled in a rural town in the central valley of Northern California, where there were relatively few African-Americans in residence to hide. Of course, predictably enough, Hackman got himself into trouble.

Hackman's boss, Sheriff Curtis Hill is defending his man.

Hill said he felt confident hiring Hackman and did a thorough background check before bringing him aboard.

“He did a fine job for us,” Hill said. “It’s unfortunate he got himself into this situation, but we’ll work our way through it.”

Work through it? Are you nuts? You have a deputy who is violent on and off the job and you want to keep him employed? Oh yeah, right it's your ass that's on the line here as well...you hired him, after the (cough)thorough background check. (cough)

The sheriff's boss, a member of the Board of Supervisors is playing it cool...for now.

When Supervisor Ruth Kesler heard the lawsuit was filed she sighed and asked, “Who’s suing us now?” but declined to comment further until she is able to read the suit.

“There’s two sides to every story,” she said. “Until I get the other side of the story I don’t want to make any comments.”

Ruth, the other side of the story is in Riverside. Conducting at least a portion of Hackman's background check in this city could have saved you a lot of grief, two men a few broken bones and a bucketload of cash that the county will have to pay out to make Hackman's victims and Hackman go away.

In Search of...Racial Profiling

There used to be a show by that name hosted by Leonard "Mr. Spock" Nimoy, over 20 years ago. The show tackled different unexplained occurances like crop circles, phantom hitchhikers and the Bermuda Triangle. Were any of these things real, or not? Some evidence would be presented, but those questions would remained unanswered.

That's how the forum on Racial Profiling or in P.C. terms, Pretext traffic stops took place. Filling the shoes of Nimoy, was Human Relations Commission chair A.J. Wilson, and special guests were Dr. Larry Gaines, from Cal. State University, San Bernardino's Criminal Justice Department and in its entirety, the Attorney General Task Force.

Lt. John Wallace did all the talking for the Task Force, while Sgt. Mike Cook, and Officers Phil Hernandez and Cheryl Hayes forming a rainbow of sorts, sat on the sidelines. About 25 people attended the forum, mostly the same people who attend any meeting that has to do with the police department. Hundreds and thousands of other city residents stayed home. Some who did, said that they were used to the police department holding public forums defending its practices, or trying to sell the rightness of them to the public. The PR train to celebrate the winding down of the five-year consent decree had already began rolling, so to speak.

The discussion began with polite words and an academic focus which was where most of the interest appeared to be. Those who don't give a damn about Chi-squares and variances, but just do not want to be singled out by the police for harassment in the department's search for criminal suspects with only a race and a broad age range to go with, stayed at home. The study and how it was conducted became the focus of the discussion rather than the problem of racial profiling in a police department found to have violated the state constitution while its officers had conducted traffic stops on the public.

When the questions began to be asked, Dr. Gaines started becoming more defensive. And it was only at the end when things began to get interesting. The RPD's agenda involving the annual study was revealed further with each word that spilled out of Gaines' mouth. Even HRC Chair A. J. Wilson appeared to notice and jumped into the fray.

Racial Profiling, back beneath the rock

Is it possible(or legal) to discipline a cop?

PORAC, or the Police Officers Research Association of California provides services for law enforcement officers throughout the state, in areas of legal and labor issues. It publishes a monthly magazine filled with articles, about issues faced by law enforcement officers, written by officers. The obvious slant in the articles allows readers to view one side of the story. As far as LE officers are concerned, that is all that is necessary.

Many articles are stored in the archives, regarding officers from the RPD who've been fired or suspended, always unjustly of course, then reinstated back to duty.

WARNING: These articles leave out a whole other side of the story, and because the average citizen is not legally able to determine the truth through examination of the evidence and facts, there is no way to know for sure if the officer really is guilty or not guilty of committing misconduct.

Cliff Mason: mid-1990s, excessive force when using a flashlight. Reason: feared for life.
Received 40 hour suspension. Reinstated in arbitration.
Currently, heads the SWAT/METRO team. Flashlight policy written in 1997.

Benjamin Shafer: fired in connection with handling narcotics seized as evidence.
Reason: the stress of studying for his detective exam combined with the hectic atmosphere of "Narco Bay" caused him to forget to make report corrections
Employment terminated. Reinstated in arbitration.
Currently, works as a motorcop in the traffic division and is a board member of the RPOA.

Richard Prince: Suspended in connection with a finding of excessive force suspension due to use of wrist lock, by Internal Affairs and the CPRC.
Reason: Believed it wasn't excessive
Suspended. Discipline reversed in arbitration
Currently, works in patrol. Shot and killed motorist Rene Guevara in December 2004.

Erich Feimer: Fired in connection with dishonesty about use of force during an arrest on report and to several supervisors
Reason: Memory loss
Fired, Reinstated in arbitration and by Riverside County Superior Court
Currently, works in patrol.

The reversal of Officer Cliff Mason's suspension

Officer Benjamin Shafer is unfired in arbitration

Richard Prince's suspension overturned

Erich Feimer: Did poor memory cause him to be less than honest?

More drops in the bucket

Is Officer Daniel Floyd up to his old tricks in his new assignment at La Sierra already? If so, the honeymoon is over folks. All Latino/as are urged to file complaints with the CPRC if they believe that Floyd has mistreated them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Racial Profiling...oops I mean Traffic Stop Study Forum sponsored by that interesting duo, the Human Relations Commission and the Riverside Police Department. Appearing for the department will be former Lexington Police Department officer and current Chair of the Criminal Justice department at Cal State Univ. San Bernardino, Larry Gaines, accompanied by Police Chief Russ Leach. Directing the production will be Dr. Pedro Paynes, who serves as the director of both the HRC and the Community Police Review Commission. Their combined message to the community is that:

THERE IS NO RACIAL PROFILING BEING DONE BY THE RPD SO SHUT UP ALREADY!

Starring Russ Leach and Dr. Larry Gaines

With Dr. Pedro Paynes, as EMCEE

The Chorus will include members of the HRC....performing a variety of dance numbers.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The forum is supposed to have 45 minutes allotted for Gaines to present his report, then 10 minutes for the representatives from the RPD led by Officer Cheryl Hayes(one of the department's three Black female officers) to respond. Yes, it appears they are going there. An hour has been set aside for the audience to comment and ask questions about Gaines' presentation. We'll see how that goes....

The Racial Profiling Forum, or dog and pony show?

Riverside Police Department

and

Human Relations Commission

PRESENT:

2004 Traffic Stop Study Special Public Forum

Wednesday, July 20

at

6 PM

at

The Main Branch of the Public Library

The intent of this forum is to discuss the 2004 Traffic Stop Study prepared by Larry K. Gaines, PhD at California State University, San Bernardino, Department of Criminal Justice

The report is an analysis of traffic stop data in the City of Riverside. The Riverside Police Department continues to collect and analyze its traffic stop data to determine if any patterns emerge that point to racial profiling.

------------------------------------------------------------

Is it racial profiling, or Criminal profiling?

Okay, this is an age-old question in my town, when it comes to defining the reasons behind the tendacies of police officers to focus their attention on Black and Hispanic motorists. And this latest "special forum" by our city's buffer commission is supposed to put this complex issue into terms of black and white for all of us

I'm asking the above question, because according to Gates who is mentioned in this flier as the author of the RPD's traffic stop studies, RPD cops only perform pretext stops on criminals. But if the release rates are well over 50% for Black motorists, and the hits from searches on Black motorists is so low(<10%),>Some like former city councilman Alex Clifford say, that there is no such thing as "driving while Black" because actually it's "driving while criminal". Ameal Moore, the only Black council member became really upset at Clifford's words. He wasn't the only one.

Also appearing will be Chief Russ Leach, who will represent his department, and will most likely back up whatever Gates says.

Absent from the podium will be the professor who conducted the OTHER research study on the RPD, in 2000. Dr. Robert Nash Parker, from UCR's Robert Presley Center, though he has been invited to come as a member of the public.

TO BE CONTINUED...

What exactly is an internal investigation?

Lt. John Wallace, who heads the Attorney General's Task Force said it.
Lt. John De La Rosa who heads the department's Internal Affairs Division said it.
Chief Russ Leach who heads the department has said it.

There's a whole lot of internal investigations going on!

Civilian complaints are down!
Internal Investigations are up!
Accountability reigns!
Knock out some champagne.

When De La Rosa appeared before the Community Police Review Commission during a training session, he said that things were very busy in Internal Affairs. Buried in the police department's 2005-06 budget in the middle of a footnote, is the addition of a fifth sergeant to the Internal Affairs' Division.

So what exactly is an internal investigation?

In official terms, an internal investigation is one initiated against an officer by another officer. Statistically, these investigations tend to take longer to complete, and are also more likely to have their allegations of misconduct sustained. Why, should be obvious. Since they are initiated by police officers who never lie while the general public is comprised of liars, then there really needs to be no explanation for the higher sustain rate.

By their nature and because of state laws passed to protect the reputations of law enforcement officers, internal investigations are considered, top secret. Hence, the reaction of both De La Rosa and Leach to my attempts to obtain more information about an investigation conducted involving Det. Joseph Miera.

Miera has worked for the RPD for about 14 years, and has spent two separate stints totalling six years inside the department's gang intelligence unit. Last January, the Internal Affairs Division was conducting an internal investigation of Miera for undisclosed reasons. It is not clear whether this investigation has been completed. It is not clear what allegations involving Miera the department investigated.

Internal investigation aside, Miera continues to work in the police department, and continues to testify as a gang expert on criminal cases. He continues to testify in cases involving the seizure of narcotics. On April 14 and April 28, Miera testified in the preliminary hearing of an alleged 1200 Blocc Crip who was arrested last December on drug charges related to selling cocaine. Mark Roberts was arrested on Dec. 8, 2004 and had been an associate of another alleged gang member, Dione Mckinnon who had been arrested on July 14, 2004 on drugs and weapon charges, also by Miera.

McKinnon's lawyer said that his client had made allegations of the contraband being planted in his vehicle, said that he was being set up. In Miera's police report that he wrote detailing the events which led up to McKinnon's arrest, he states that McKinnon had said "that's not mine" after he pulled the change purse out of the secret compartment inside the dashboard of McKinnon's car, with the packets of cocaine still out of sight.

Miera's deduction on his report was that McKinnon was proclaiming his innocence, knowing that the change purse contained drugs, which could very well be true. Or perhaps, McKinnon did not recognize the change purse being removed from inside his car. The fact that the detective on this case is under investigation by his own department for alleged misconduct complicates the issue greatly when it comes to who is telling the truth and who is lying. The additional problems faced when it is not known what the alleged misconduct is, and what the investigative findings were create a situation which can not be anything but tainted with doubt and suspicion. That is the legacy of "top secret" internal investigations of police officers.

Business as usual, for a detective in the gang unit to testify at preliminary hearings and criminal trials. But does this mean that Miera has been investigated and cleared of wrong-doing? Does it mean he is being investigated and has not been notified, because supposedly when internal investigations are conducted by the RPD, the subject officer is the last to know.

How much damage an officer under investigation for allegations of misconduct does to his unit, and those in it, can not be estimated easily, but it is there.

Or does it just mean that internal investigations are just two words strung together that really have no meaning at all.