LA Times: Controversy a Setback for the Department

"The message should be loud and clear: that special treatment is not acceptable. We should all be treated fairly and equally before the law, including the police chief. But I don't want to judge what might come out of an internal investigation."

---Riverside Mayor Ron Loveridge to Los Angeles Times presumably with a straight face.




"That's a death blow.If you're an alcoholic, you've got to be all the way down before you can start up again. That investigation said, 'You guys are at rock bottom.' "

---Former Chief Russ Leach to the Los Angeles Times. He instituted the reforms of the consent decree during the first part of his tenure but did he leave the department as it was when he arrived?






Bud White: "The Nite Owl case made you. Do you want to tear all that down?"

Ed Exley: "With a wrecking ball. Do you want to help me swing it?"


----L.A. Confidential (1997)










The Los Angeles Times has hooked onto the ongoing story which began when former Riverside Police Chief Russ Leach crashed his car and then drove for three miles before being pulled over by two patrol officers. How does this impact the Riverside Police Department, the writer asks.

And several community leaders provide their answers. Here are three different statements from three different people.


(excerpts from article)



"It's a far different organization than it was 10 years ago. A great deal of that had to do with the leadership of Russ Leach. . . . A lot of progress has been made. Is something like this going to be harmful? No doubt."


---Chani Beeman, Community Police Review Commission:





"The African American community has enjoyed a much more transparent and good relationship with the Police Department since he came.That's not to say there haven't been incidents of concern. But it only took a phone call [to Leach] to have someone get on it and look into it. . . . Before, we would've said it's business as usual -- the fox guarding the henhouse."


"......I was quite impressed. He didn't want 'yes' people to agree with him. He placed people on the committee who didn't mind telling him when they thought something was wrong," she said. "For as much as he did for the community, for one incident to color all that . . . it's unfortunate. I'm not condoning what he did. But the man is a good man."



---Woodie Rucker-Hughes, NAACP, Riverside Chapter and former member of the Chief's Advisory Board





The department "was effective in accomplishing things as long as there was a mandate from the attorney general's office to do so. Since then, what we've seen is a loss of will on the part of the city to continue the work toward making this a more progressive Police Department."


"There's this whole perception by the public of police covering up for one another. The public could easily see this as slipping back to the behavior patterns of a different time and be left wondering whether those behaviors had ever changed."


----Michael Dunn, Riverside Coalition for Police Accountability





Three different people. Three different viewpoints provided. One effusive in her praise for the former chief. One cautious. One questioning. And that's what is sorely missing in this review of community leadership or "watchdog" response are the obvious questions. Why aren't the community leaders asking them? Their constituents and those they purport to represent are certainly asking them. All those who purport that they are for better ethics in government need to ask some questions about the ethics of what happened in this incident. Their communities truly are waiting for them to do so. But really, any city resident should be asking questions and many of them are, in fact some of them are setting up written petitions to take to governmental officials to ask them the questions their leadership won't. Then when that happens and hopefully it will, the leaders will likely start lining up to ask those questions themselves. I've received emails from different people around the country asking the questions that the local leadership should be asking and trying to figure out what's going on in Riverside.

The people in this article have their opinions and they are more than entitled to them and at least someone raised the unhealthy dynamic between the police department and City Hall and the loss of trust because of what's happened, which is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. But it's hard to formulate an opinion about what's past or the future when there are still so many questions without any answers about the present. The mayor says that there's essentially a zero tolerance for preferential treatment for well, special people. But is that the truth? From what has been revealed so far, it doesn't sound like it.

However, Loveridge has said zilch about whether or not any elected officials including himself have asked the head of that "internal investigation" City Manager Brad Hudson about whether or not he had Leach tested for drugs and alcohol intoxication as mandated under a city policy which requires such testing to be done when city employees damage city owned vehicles. The report makes it clear that Leach didn't own the car. It's an onduty emergency vehicle that is self-insured and both mean that it's thus city owned. The city gets to self-insure its vehicles which means that any costs resulting from their use that normally would be paid out by an insurance company are instead passed on to the city residents to pay out. That's what self-insurance means. And this means that Leach should have been tested for drugs and alcohol under a city policy.

But if Hudson didn't adhere to the city's policy and have Leach tested after the accident within the appropriate window when such a test would be meaningful, then he's as guilty as those who are currently being investigated in his "sweeping" investigation may or may not be. His involvement in any investigation would also be compromised if either he or his assistant, Tom DeSantis were involved in any prior similar incident involving Leach if they took place. But there's reasons why Hudson called immediately for a "sweeping" internal investigation which he himself would head because for one thing, he probably wanted to offset any probe launched by an outside agency including the Riverside County Grand Jury by saying to the world, hey we're serious about stamping down on preferential treatments and coverups in Riverside so you really don't need to come over and look over our shoulders or trample on our garden. It's easier to control your own probe than someone else's because after all, what if you're one of the individuals whose decision making needs to be looked at? What then?

But interestingly enough, launching what could be a lengthy administrative process now could put the new chief at a disadvantage from the start if one is hired from the outside of the department by Hudson. Since the Internal Affairs Division is to report directly to Hudson, then that would leave any newly hired chief out of the loop of a very important administrative situation right from the start, giving Hudson full management of the police department and thus relegating any newly hired chief to a supporting role. If there were an outside probe, then any newly hired chief as the head of the department would be notified of any results or updates involving that probe. Any ability of a chief to run his or her department and not be micromanaged depends on how skillfully he or she can navigate through the mine field of Riverside in terms of forces within the department and City Hall not wanting him or her to have any kind of independent control. And once the new police chief whoever he or she is has given up that advantage, then they're already giving up a lot of their ability to lead the department to City Hall. If you were the police chief and a big chunk of what's happening was outside of your purview, how would you read that?

One of the people quoted commented on the efficiency of the chief's advisory board that he put together not long after the signing of the stipulated judgment by all parties. It was comprised of members from business, development and community backgrounds and people generally had their memberships renewed once a year. But for being a "community" board, there were probably CIA briefings less secretive than this board. I was asked at the beginning of its inception by a member or two to attend and witness what business was being conducted, when it had a five year agreement with the downtown Marriott hotel to hold monthly meetings in its boardrooms.

But within five months, the meetings were changed to meeting in police facilities and when I tried to follow up so I could attend (never having been told to leave), I was told that the meetings were private and that seemed odd for a "community" based board. The members of this board were never allowed to disseminate any information at those meetings back to their communities or constituents. With such a tight hold on information on meetings where information that was disseminated was that in the public domain, what was its purpose? How were the community members supposed to benefit from this board and its actions? It could have been a very powerful tool of accountability and transparency but those two words don't go together in this city very well. Again, that's most likely by design.

At the board meetings I did attend, the members didn't discuss issues much except to discuss the creation of one of the policies mandated by the stipulated judgment but were given presentations and the department did most of the talking. Many actually complained later that they weren't able to ask the questions they wanted to ask on the issues presented before them and dropped out of the process. Others who did ask questions didn't get invited back during the annual review of members. And their absence after a period of asking difficult questions likely wasn't lost on the remaining membership. But the secrecy about the board's business would seem more likely to foster a bigger disconnect between these community leaders who served on it and their communities especially if their members came up to them with questions about the department. Instead of becoming the very important tool it could have been if the intent would have been to allow the community leaders to serve as conduits of information to the communities rather than having them instead keep any information close to their chests and not share it.

Play along to get along, is the motto in this city and that's been to its detriment many times especially since any type of disagreement is viewed as being a conflict or disruption to the legislative body or board or commission. It's led to a lack of real leadership any place and it's that lack of leadership both in the department and at City Hall which has led to some very serious problems within both.

So the comments in the article were interesting, but where was the call for an independent investigation? Community resident after community resident have said that is the only way they can trust the police department again. Until that day comes when it gets that probe, the police department won't have a chance of gaining anything positive in a meaningful way except a temporary state of relative peace in between incidents. But then there' s probably people who could just admit that they did give the police chief special treatment and that would undo some of the damage and help the majority of the people who weren't involved but there's no one who's quite up to making that happen so the police department will be mired in this situation much longer than it has to be. It's clear that there needs to be tremendous change within the organization and how it's run, given that it hasn't thrived during the past several years of micromanagement from City Hall. It's gone backwards. But it's also clear that it didn't have to go backwards much because it didn't seem to have come as far in some respects as many people believed it to be.


But what else struck me most interesting about the article which looks more like a retrospective of Leach's 10 year tenure at the department than anything else was the following passage:


(excerpt)


Police watchdogs said they fear the incident threatens to undermine public confidence and the hard work that went into ridding the department of a bigoted culture in which transgressions by officers were swept under a thick blue rug of silence.



There's something contradictory in this statement, being that it states that "watchdogs" fear that the incident will undermine confidence and hard work into ridding the department of its problems including any floor sweeping that took place. But the incident itself and its public display isn't the only problem here and focusing on the public reaction as being the step backward is a big mistake. The problem here is what happened, because if this incident involving the former police chief was indeed swept beneath the rug, then it seems that this hard work that went into ridding the department of its problems including again, floor sweeping wasn't anywhere near completed. If it had been, then this incident which is unfolding even as these community leaders are talking to various media outlets would never have happened the way that it did.

One community advocate said in a Press Enterprise article published early on that the community had to use this incident to make something positive rather than take a step backward by reacting. Of course by then, the city residents were in an uproar about what happened and the apparent double standard between what happened to Leach and what happened to them. But what had happened itself was a step backward or maybe it was part and parcel of what had been going on in plain sight. If so, then it needs to be addressed. Until it is, nothing will change, nothing positive will take root and grow and the city will revisit this over and over again.







"The police chief is drunk. We need to do a DUI."



Is this what one or more of the officers should have said at the scene of the traffic stop? Perhaps that was necessary and it wasn't said in the interest of keeping it all under wraps. But what if instead one of them did? And if so, what happened next? What would happen in Riverside 2010, four years after the dissolution of the consent decree with the state? Have things really changed all that much is the question that most needs to be asked, even as it has been asked and not answered of the city's officials and community leaders. But as one television character on a famous television show once said, The truth is out there.



"Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive."



---Sir Walter Scott who can't believe what's going on in River City.



More to come... including the Chessmen

The RPD Promotes Six...and the Hudson Probe Continues...And what of the Chessmen?

"Never Play Checkers When the Game is Chess."


---Unknown



In the midst of the tremendous upheaval of former Riverside Chief Russ Leach's accident and the resultant white wash probe, the Riverside Police Department has announced six promotions including four in supervisory positions done earlier this week which went to in effect on Friday. The promotions of the one lieutenant and three sergeants were done to partly alleviate the continued dwindling number of filled supervisor positions as people retire or get demoted and the positions remain vacant under an ongoing promotional freeze that's been at place regarding supervisory and management positions since late 2008. The only promotions which have been done since 2008 are those involving the detective rank pursuant to an early 1990s MOU agreement between the Riverside Police Officers' Association and the city. If that MOU hadn't been in place, it's likely that the detectives division would resemble what the other divisions look like right now.

The issue of the depletion of the supervisory ranks and resultant vacancies has been covered extensively in this blog for some time and in fact, there has been and will continue to be a "Supervisory Watch" here to serve as a reminder that there are still too many vacancies particularly at the sergeant level. The unfreezing of the positions began earlier this month when City Manager Brad Hudson either agreed to meet with or was ordered to meet with representatives from the Riverside Police Officers' Association. Hudson didn't want these promotions to go through until his hand was forced one way or another to get that job done and so four positions were thawed to be filled. Acting Chief John De La Rosa who made the promotions has told people that he had the positions unfrozen as has RPOA President Cliff Mason after negotiating with Hudson, but at any rate the positions were finally filled.

Below are the vacancy lists as they were before this week. As you can see, the sergeant vacancy rate would have approached close to 25% at the end of the year and the lieutenant's vacancy rate was roughly at 25%.



Vacancies (before promotions):


Lieutenant:


Paul Villanueva

Robert Meier

Brian Baitx

Rick Tedesco

Ken Raya



Sergeants:


Kevin Stanton or Terry Meyer (medical retirement)

Duane Beckman

Patrick Watters

Don Tauli

Leon Phillips (promoted to lieutenant)

Lisa Williams (transferred to new position in Communications Bureau)

Cliff Mason: (now a detective)


Also vacant:

Two classified level captain positions:

Dave Dominguez (deputy chief)

Mark Boyer (captain)




The lieutenant promotion means that the traffic division will get a supervisor, filling a vacancy that's been in place since the last traffic lieutenant retired late last year. The sergeant positions will fill a current vacancy in the department's Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Unit and some patrol supervisor positions. It's an important step to try to stem the serious problem of high vacancy rates at the supervisory level even as more retirements are on the horizon for this year. The department's Internal Affairs Division is down five sergeants to four (even as in the past it struggled with its investigation loads) and the Vice/Intelligence Unit may still be without a sergeant. But all the patrol positions are currently filled.



How many anticipated retirements for sergeants this year? Five (including one on medical disability and these aren't always easy to forecast) and that number as stated could easily grow as the year's still young and some of last year's retirements at different ranks were unanticipated. As stated in this blog many a time, it's important to be mindful of the past, including crises that erupted in part due to a dearth of supervision in the ranks, especially inside the very young and relatively inexperienced patrol division. That was part of what led to the department being under a stipulated judgment with the State Attorney General's office in 2001.

The average patrol officer in the department is about 24 years old and with only several years of experience. The department recently unfroze six patrol positions and filled them, with those new hires currently in the training academy. Perhaps hoping that this agency gets itself straightened up including at the top before they graduate. What kind of department does the city want to create to meet these upcoming graduates? That's the question that hasn't even been addressed let alone answered by the department's leadership or City Hall.

Coming to Work for a Problematic Law Enforcement Agency...

But if there's a white wash probe instead of a truly independent investigation that comes from outside Riverside's rather peculiar power structure that permeates both City Hall and its satellite, the police department, that unfortunately won't happen any time soon. You can't put a new house on a rotten foundation without it toppling over as well and this dysfunctional dynamic with the police department's leadership and the city management, the city attorney's office while tossing an elected official or two in there just isn't working. Just look around you but don't get hit by one of those falling walls.

The key in home rehabilitation or police department rehabilitation is to find out what parts of its structural foundation are rotten and which ones are not. Then you strip out the rotted wood and replace it with new, sturdy and much healthier wood when rebuilding your foundation and eventually, your new house...or police department. Then you can move forward, and not backward. It's well and good for civic leaders to say that we all have to be careful not to take a step backward with city residents' responses but the fact is, the department itself took a step backward and the question is, what is the city going to do about it?

The Hudson probe is not designed to look at the quality of the foundation. It's simply being done at great tax payer expense (for those who think a Best, Best and Krieger attorney comes cheaply and by the way...did Hudson ever say what it would cost?) to polish the walls and cover its windows. After all, Hudson is in charge of a probe of what really went down and why during the accident, traffic stop and subsequent noninvestigation but what if it's he who has to answer some questions? Beginning with whether or not he ordered Leach to be tested for drugs or alcohol which would be in accordance with a city policy which requires that to be done for any city employee who damages a city owned vehicle in an accident.

Did Hudson adhere to that policy and have Leach tested, or did he pass, thus contributing to any cover up? Until he can answer that question with yes, I had Leach tested, he has no credibility being in charge of any investigation except perhaps to those who have to please him to keep their jobs or maybe some keynote community leaders who will probably want to be on any "community" committee involved in the selection of the next police chief and know the best way to do that is to keep quiet. But who puts a person in charge of an investigation when he's on the list of individuals who have questions to answer? The person at the top of the pyramid of course.

And perhaps he and De La Rosa could do the CHP a favor and go over to their regional office and sign Sgt. Frank Orta's report on the incident thus affirming its validity as an appropriate and professional response to the situation. That should have been De La Rosa's first action taken as acting chief if he believes that there's no problem with what happened. But then neither he or anyone else put a signature on it before the firestorm began and to this date, it still doesn't include one. And why it doesn't is yet another question that needs to be answered.

The majority of employees at the police department and the city's residents are left paying for the actions of a much smaller number of decision makers who have been busy as bees since either at the time of the initial traffic stop at Arlington and Rutland or when city issued phone calls likely started being ringing all over town as people might have been asking for or receiving directions on Operation: High Profile Stop (in deference to Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis' comments in the earlier article). The city neglected or decided not to include the CAD incident report connected with the actual traffic stop involving Leach even as they turned over that involving his earlier accident at Hillside and Central. It might not matter much if most of the communication between involved parties took place through cellular technology, not through police radios and mobile data terminals which the CAD report is highly dependent on.


Leach did say the traffic stop was taped but didn't specify what he meant, in terms of whether it was through audio recording devices carried by patrol officers or through dash cameras which should have been activated. Hopefully, soon those will be released to the public in the interest of full disclosure of what happened if Leach is correct that it was taped.

And that's the rub because unless the city does the transparent action of releasing the information on these recordings not to mention on who called who (which is public information on city issued phones and phone accounts) then unfortunately, this whole "sweeping" probe is a farce. Because among its other problems, it will be taking public information and making it confidential under the guise of an investigation. This is being done solely to number one, reduce the city's financial liability (which must always come first) and two, to keep the city residents including those whose tax dollars provide monies to the city's general fund in the dark as long as possibly. They really hope that the public stays in the dark forever if possible. But as long as that happens, the police department's future path remains less than positive. People will soon simmer down and let the police department and city go on their merry ways but when the next shoe drops, they'll be back and more angry. And then what? The city will return to polishing those walls and covering those windows again.


So here they were, the promotions that took place in the midst of the great turmoil hitting the department and city. But whose promotions were they as that's a question which often gets asked? It appears that at this point that De La Rosa made the decisions. However, it's always hard to be sure given that Hudson has said the charter gives him the absolute power to hire, fire and promote and in fact, he apparently promoted two police officers in 2007 to higher positions.

Promotions:

Lieutenant:

Andy Flores



Sergeants:


Michael Barney

Ben Shafer

Chris Wagner


Detectives:

Don Nelson

Dan Koehler

The promotion list is interesting and in fact, includes one officer, Shafer, who was terminated by the police department around 2000 for professional misconduct but was reinstated through the arbitration process several years ago. Also on the promotional list for sergeant which included roughly 15 names were two white women including a female detective and an African-American detective.

What's interesting too is when you look at the top five positions in the lieutenants list which included about 13 names. This is how they apparently break down by race and gender.


1) White female

2) White male

3) White female

4) Black male

5) White female

6) Hispanic male (promoted)


With three females in the top five, it's a little hard to complain that there's "low numbers" of them applying for promotion and given that there's about five female sergeants now, 60% of them are in the top five on this list. But at any rate, the department did fill these positions and there will be more discussion of them later on. There's been allegations online and elsewhere that the promotional process is somewhat...flawed and that it's based not on what you do but who you know and what have you done lately. That kind of thing. Is that the case? Well, I guess we shall see. But some corporate cultures work along those lines, is that the case for law enforcement as well?

I'm so and so, I did this and I'm wearing this Team tee-shirt so what are my chances? Let's hope it's a bit more in depth than that. It would be really disappointing to learn that the department consisted of little more than fiefdoms within it, struggling to control it rather than was a law enforcement agency that is operating the way that it's supposed to be operated. But clearly something's not working well because there's been five officers arrested and charged for crimes since October 2008 and then there's the very important one who leads them who was not even cited for leaving the scene of an accident. That's not prone to happening in a vacuum.

While all this is going down and about, Hudson's trying to put together a hiring process within 30 days to hire another puppet...oops chief to run the department. Because it doesn't seem that Hudson's interested in hiring truly independent department heads and he seems perfectly content to allow himself and his assistant, DeSantis run the police department and boy, have we seen how well that's worked lately! And this current probe of his which will be going on for months or longer was designed to actually circumvent the authority of the new police chief, allowing Hudson to keep his foothold on the department.

There will be plenty written here about the recruitment and hiring of a new chief and what that individual will face when he or she arrives to take command. Okay, so it's only during that honeymoon before Hudson and DeSantis likely lay down the law but it will still be interesting to watch unfold. Who will the chief be? Inhouse or outside? Within the lines or out of bounds? And how will the Chessmen respond and move their pieces?

What a Difference One Year Makes

This chart reflects the hierarchical structure of the police department in 2008-09 and a lot has changed since then, including the loss of two lieutenants in the Special Operations Division last year. The position of the traffic lieutenant will be filled through the latest promotion. But as you can see, a lot has changed in part due to attrition rates costing some of the mid-level supervision not being filled with new personnel.







A Riverside County Superior Court Judge ordered the release of search warrants connected with the probe into a recall effort in Lake Elsinore.


Corona lays off 31 employees as part of another round of budget cuts.

Public Meetings

Tuesday, Feb. 23 at 3 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. The Riverside City Council will be meeting to have its weekly meeting, this week headed by Mayor Ron Loveridge and not Mayor Pro Tem Steve Adams which means fewer pyrotechnics and temper tantrums are expected. There are several items of keen interest on the agenda that day.

In closed session, there will be an update and discussion of the WCAB involving former Police Lt. Robert Meier who retired last autumn.


Then there's item 1a which addresses the certificates of participation in connection with the construction of a hotel downtown which is devoid of any written backup material at least online but has been continued until the meeting on March 2.


Wednesday, Feb. 24 at 4 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. What's left of the Community Police Review Commission will meet and argue over this agenda. Its highlight is that the commission apparently will be taking some loooooong overdue training in civility and communication training. Most of the other items are holdovers from last month or months ago because there's so much arguing that they never get to them on the agenda at their marathon meetings. It will be interesting to see whether the civility and communications training is a sincere effort to not be so hostile to the public or if it is simply going to be a tactic to flagellate the commission's minority viewpoints. The commission's got to get it together in time for when two years down the road, they're asked to issue policy recommendations or review any from the Hudson report, which is his white washed probe that he's engaged in doing right now.





City Council Committees not holding meetings in February included the following:


Finance Committee (Nancy Hart, Chair)

Governmental Affairs Committee (Andrew Melendrez)---Hasn't met yet in 2010.

A little election trivia


How many rumored mayoral candidates for 2012?

Eight

(including several city council members bailing midterm)



Current rumored list includes:

Andrew Melendrez
Art Gage
Rusty Bailey
Ed Adksison

City Manager Brad Hudson on VIP treatment: "It will not be tolerated."

"The public will never know anything about that investigation, any discipline that may or may not be given. By law, none of that can be disclosed."

---Riverside City Manager and de facto police chief, Brad Hudson about the city's ongoing "sweeping" investigation. Mind you, this was after he originally said the investigation was being done in the interest of transparency.

Riverside's White Wash Probe Continues

The latest news from the media on the situation involving the car accident of former Riverside Chief Russ Leach is that suddenly city officials come out of the woodwork and say they weren't called that morning. The electeds are not allowed to talk about it or else they could face being charged with misdemeanor violations having likely been warned by their legal authority. City Attorney Gregory Priamos just loves performing that duty of admonition as he has in the past. And apparently, one of the accident's witnesses might have been told not to say anything even to investigators in a less polite fashion than the elected officials. But maybe if that's the case, it's just how this city works.

But while they remain quiet at City Hall, the rest of Riverside's been talking about all this intrigue for over a week now just about everywhere. Mostly about the double standard afforded people like Leach compared to the rest of the city's residents. As this situation unfolds, it's hard to keep those comments from being made because it's hard to argue against them if there's even one case where someone like the chief received preferential treatment. Makes city residents wonder about the ones they don't know about.


It could definitely be true at least this time that Hudson and his assistant city managers were left in the dark about the incident for a few hours which should provide a few clues there about who made that decision. However, I've already received comments about an interesting statement made in the article by Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis who said that the usual scenario in this situation was that his office would be notified if major incidents involving city employees erupted as they have in the past. That comments led to some interesting questions but first, this is what was stated in the article.


(excerpt, Press Enterprise)

Police department policy says the city manager should be notified when a high-profile person is involved in a serious incident, though De Santis said he typically gets those calls.

"It would have been usual for me to get a call," he said. In this case, "It was unusual that I didn't."

Meaning what exactly? And what incidents were these? Because there hasn't been many announcements to the city's residents since DeSantis or Hudson have been employed of "serious" incidents involving the high-profile people and the police department. And why does it matter if the person is "high profile" or not if police officers including supervisors and management personnel are supposed to enforce the laws the same for everyone? In the article, DeSantis didn't elaborate what "high profile" means. Does it mean you don't get handcuffed and forced to sit on the curb while they search your car or that you don't get handcuffed and put in the back seat of a squad car after you flunk a sobriety test or are positive for DUI? Does it mean instead you get a ride home and not even a citation in your pocket for any legal violations while it's all swept under the rug? And what's the definition of "high profile" anyway? What people fit in this elite category?

He needs to provide some clarity on this issue since he's so helpfully opened the door on the topic of "high profile" traffic stops, because about 99% of Riversiders right now believe there's a double standard by the city and the police department on how it handles criminal offenses including DUI stops and he's just added fuel to that fire. What if the RPD conducts another DUI checkpoint and motorists from this city just laugh in their faces and ask to be treated like Leach was treated when he was driving a damaged car riding on two rims not even knowing where he was at? How can that be addressed by the city or department with any credibility right now? And it's the higher ups both in the department and at City Hall's fault if they created a double tier system for "high profile" people like the chief getting preferential treatment and everyone else being told, you violated the law, tough luck. What a can of worms this city's created for itself by apparently having at least two separate standards, one for the police chief and one for people who are not the police chief. That's something that an independent probe devoid of city influences might show. This white wash sponsored by Hudson? Probably not, and it's not like the city residents who are going to be funding this investigation would ever know the truth anyway.

And who steps in for DeSantis when there's a call coming in about a major incident involving him, like the 911 phone call made by a woman named Celia Valenzuela reporting an altercation with him in Hemet in July 2006? DeSantis' explanation of the process in practice appeared to cause more confusion than anything else especially pertaining to this particular case and one would think that wouldn't happen with an individual with a background in disseminating public information as he did for Riverside County.



It’s also not clear why DeSantis includes Councilman Steve Adams on the list of people to be notified in case there’s a major incident. DeSantis really should be able to present the information more clearly on this issue given that he himself was once one of those “major incidents” involving a city employee which had to be reported back to city management. This took place during his altercation with a woman in the parking lot. Was Adams singled out because he was the mayor pro tem at that time given that Mayor Ron Loveridge at some point in this situation was up in Sacramento? If that’s the case, why not just call Adams by that title?


Also the exact employment status of Leach has changed from medical leave to medical retirement to resignation and now he's back to being on medical leave while negotiating his medical retirement.



Hudson also makes a statement about the handling of such cases.


(excerpt)

"If special treatment was given to any city official or any VIP, we will address that through the administrative process," Hudson said. "It will not be tolerated."

The funny thing is if that were true, if the city and department had such a zero tolerance policy in place, this incident would have been handled appropriately. Meaning among other things that the police department would have handed it over to the CHP or another designated outside law enforcement agency right after it happened, not over 24 hours later.

But Hudson can start by answering this question, not that he ever will. When it became known that the police chief, a city employee, crashed his Chrysler 300, a city owned vehicle, then he must have been tested for drugs and/or alcohol intoxication, pursuant to city policy. Did that happen? If it never did, then Hudson himself has some explaining to do especially if he's making statements like the one above. Because if Leach was never tested by the city, it would seem that Hudson would have to explain why he didn't follow his own standard set of behavior to not give anyone preferential treatment. And it seems that Hudson himself would have to be investigated for that reason.

What it sounds like is that Hudson and DeSantis are breaking their silence on the issue after probably facing some heat and trying to distance themselves from any allegations that they might have known of similar problems with Leach in the past. Because that's what many people are wondering in terms of how much these two men knew about Leach and any possible DUI stops he had in the past involving either this police department or other law enforcement agencies.

It’s very difficult to have any confidence and faith in this “sweeping” probe when those involved with it especially in decision making positions are already circling their wagons around themselves if not each other because it might get to a point where it is each person for himself. Because this is the point in the process when those involved at the upper echelon will start distancing themselves from each other which appears to be precisely what they are doing. They have to because as de facto police chief, Hudson is the final arbiter on this so-called “sweeping” investigation and as a result of that, has to distance himself from any past knowledge he might have had of any prior contacts between Leach and police officers under the definition of traffic stops. After all, how else can you make the final findings on a “sweeping” investigation if you yourself need to be answering some questions? You really can’t do that so in a public relations move, you have to publicly distance yourself from a problematic subordinate employee and lift up your hands and say, we had no idea what was going on with him either. We are just as much in the dark as anyone else. And then hope that enough people believe it. Right now, I wouldn't count on that happening.

The troubling aspect of that “sweeping” probe is that there are individuals in leadership roles within it that themselves might have questions to answer. Acting Chief John De La Rosa might be in that situation depending on whether or not the question is answered in terms of whether or not he was involved in the handling of the traffic stop at Arlington and Rutland in any way. Actually he might have been in that situation because he really can’t be asked anything about that by the internal Affairs Division (which is conducting the sweeping probe) which can’t investigate employees higher in rank than its investigators who are sergeants. In such cases, the Personnel Captain, which is Mike Blakely, would be assigned to conduct any investigation. But what happens if the probe were to (in theory, as in reality this wouldn’t happen) lead outside the police department? The police department’s internal affairs division has no jurisdiction there because it’s purview is only within the police department.

It is interesting how Hudson tosses the community a bone in response to his announcement that it will never know the truth about what happened on Feb. 8 by saying that the Community Police Review Commission will engage in policy review and recommendation. The commission he's essentially turned into a ruinous mess in less time than it took the then leadership to destroy its predecessor, LEPAC.

But then it’s interesting how there’s this public relations tour going on in the community and inside the police department telling people that the department is a family that needs to come together and support its command structure. The fact that this is taking place at all should tell you something about what’s really taking place inside the department if people who work there and people in the community need to be told how to think. But there’s a simple solution to all this that the people engaging in this public relations campaign can provide that could put this to rest. Instead of putting on this campaign all over the place, why not walk down to the CHP investigative headquarters and say, “Hi I’m so and so from the RPD and I understand you have one of our police reports that needs to be reviewed and signed by one of us. And guess what, I’m your guy, just hand over the pen and I’ll do it.” One of these folks who aver that the traffic stop was conducting properly needs to put action to their words by signing off on Sgt. Frank Orta’s report on Leach’s accident and subsequent traffic stop and taking responsibility for it being an accurate and truthful representation of how it was done properly and professionally.

I doubt you’ll find a single person inside the police department in the position of supervision or management who will do that. Why would they now, when they wouldn’t even take that step before this situation with Leach came to light?



Per usual, plenty of written comments were left in response to this article including the following. There's probably been at least 800 written comments left on the newpaper's Web site since the first article about the accident. And very few of them have been positive.


(excerpts, Press Enterprise)






O.K., I can't believe they are even saying they weren't notified. I bet the phone logs will prove that they were! Brad Hudson and his lap dog, Tom DeSantis, are and were fully aware. You know, this isn't unexpected. Leach got preferential treatment from his command staff and luckily the officers who pulled him over were relived of the burden of being asked to cover this up by the command staff members that showed up. This starts with the Lieutenant who was out there and goes all the way to City Hall making stops along the way.The reason why they are just now saying they weren't notified is because they couldn't figure out what to do and think this will work to distance themselves from this and make somebody else the scape goat. That's how Brad and Tom work! Sorry guys! Your dirty!

For a long time now, the Chief has rewarded unquestionable loyalty and has made promotions mostly based on loyalty and not ability. So now you have a command staff that is jut like Leach. And don't dare question or show disloyalty or you walk around with a target on your back. You get passed over for promotions even though you are much more qualified than the leg climber that shows unquestionable loyalty! I feel bad for the good people that were promoted because they unfairly get lumped in with all the rest.

For instance, if you're a poor performer and pick up the Captains kid from his house and take him to school so he doesn't get bullied then you get special treatment. And if your Sergeant tries to document your poor performance in an evaluation then, because you took care of his kid, the Captain steps in and squashes it. Then that Captain advocates for you to get your lazy, unqualified a!! promoted. Isn't that a great system we have? The citizens of Riverside deserve quality promotions and there are plenty of people working for RPD that fit nicely.

It seems that the Consent Decree addressed the officers and never touched the command staff. They got off scott free and were never held accountable for their actions. As a result, its been business as usual. The Assistant Chief has been covering for the Chief for years. Half the time the Chief wouldn't even show up for work! Looks like the Assistant Chief and his command staff have failed the citizens of Riverside and the good men and women of the Department again. You should see the faces of the command staff now that they have to worry about a new Chief coming in and running their ineffective and incompetent butts out of town! Absolutely hilarious!

The bottom line: Fire the lying City Manager and his lying lap dog then clean out the RPD command staff, from the top down, and replace them with honest LEADERS that LEAD by example and you fix this department. Plain and simple!


---"Dirty Leadership"





If I ever get caught drinking and driving in Riverside, after crashing my vehicle and leaving the scene of the accident, I expect to be given the same treatment, no breath test, no ticket, no charges filed and a free ride home.

---"LISA"





Word is the mayor is throwing the chief a retirement party at the mayors home. Only a very selected few will be invited. The invites have already gone out will post additional info when it becomes avaliable.


---"R.S.V.P"




Phone" Ring...Ring...
Hudson Hello?
Leach: Look I'm not taking the fall on this by myself!
Hudson: Look Russ , calm down! we're working out a solution
Leach: I'd better get my medical or I'll open this investigation up I took..
Hudson: Russ I said calm down..you took your meds right?
Leach: Da*m that these folks are looking to crucify me!!!
Hudson I know, I know..If that newspaper would just back off I'll make another phone call overthere i have friends there that can...
Leach: Too late the sh*t has hit the fan!
Hudson: I told you to stay the he!! out of that club. I knew your drinking would get the best of you...
Leach: well Im know but you guys gotta help me here..remember you owe me...
Hudson: Ok..Ok..we're gonna release a statement that'll settle all this we knew nothing and we're not able to share anything with the public so...
Leach good...good...gimme another shot I need it...
Hudson: Ok well as long as you're not driving...


---"Guest"




More of these comments to come in future days and weeks for sure as this controversy doesn't seem to be dying down as quickly as the city would like.

The Former Chief Speaks

Press Enterprise Columnist Dan Bernstein writes this column about his recent conversation with Leach. Leach explains what happened at that traffic stop, at least the way he saw it.


(excerpt)



Leach said the CHP found out about his night at Club 215 when "I brought it up. They never brought it up. I started remembering." He said he watched the Super Bowl at home with his girlfriend, left Club 215 alone and couldn't explain how he wound up in the area where he crashed and got stopped.

As for the accident, Leach says, "bouncing off a fire hydrant or light pole didn't happen." Damage to the car (he says he'll pay for it) "is consistent with me hitting a curb." When he was stopped, Leach said, "There was absolutely no interference" on his part. He says the CHP has tapes of the stop.

Leach, who has said prescription meds disoriented him, "probably" told officers "I had been drinking." But "was I driving drunk that night? Absolutely not." The investigations will show "the officers did their jobs." Yet, Leach lamented that he wasn't stopped by another agency (CHP), which would have given him a sobriety test. This suggests that, for whatever reason, RPD officers didn't do their jobs.

"I made a huge mistake," said this "pretty good speaker" who now consults GQ for advice about how (and how not) to apologize in public.




The problem with his statements about him just hitting a curb is that the damage done to his car tells a different story as there's damage to different parts of it including the front fender, left side and two missing wheels. That's a lot of damage from just bumping against a curb.











[One of Leach's cars which was in the accident currently being investigated, showing the damage from running into a curb.]

Still Waiting...

As you can see above, there is something missing from this report written by Sgt. Frank Orta and that's a reviewer's signature and date. But there's still some time! For those who outrank him that truly believe this is the legitimate way to conduct this type of police situation, just head on over to the CHP office pronto and lend your John Hancock to this report saying that you've reviewed it, you find it acceptable and thus take responsibility for it. Don't push each other out of the way getting there to do the honors first! Be courteous to each other and proceed in an orderly fashion but it needs a signature!






Cassie MacDuff with the Press Enterprise continues writing on San Bernardino's ongoing corruption problems.

RPD: What if You Wrote a Report and No One Signed It?

A lot of discussion has risen in the communities of Riverside about the accident and traffic stop involving former Riverside Police Department Chief Russ Leach that took place in the early morning hours of Feb. 8, 2010 and since then has generated a firestorm both in the department and in the city. A couple probes are being done including a criminal investigation by the California Highway Patrol and a somewhat less than independent internal probe being done by the police department's Internal Affairs Division and controlled by City Manager Brad Hudson who hired Best, Best and Krieger Attorney (and former Riverside County District Attorney) Grover Trask in a closed doors decision making process to serve as "independent oversight" over the process. It's so independent that it's being conducted inhouse and it's so transparent that the public likely will never know the outcome or the findings of the investigation that their tax dollars are paying to conduct. That's by design folks.

Not too long after the incident began to get away from efforts taken by the police department and city to keep it more under wraps, the city released the single police report taken on the incident to the local press. Perhaps it was trying to do this to make it look like it wasn't hiding public information from the city's residents but what happened instead and for good reason is that the report generated even more anger and disappointment not to mention distrust in the communities against the city and the police department. The city needs to understand that the populace that it governs isn't nearly as stupid as it thinks we are. Of course, the city would understand this if it actually went out and talked to the people instead of putting up roadblocks for public participation and sitting around tables at meetings going through board and commission applications asking if they knew this person or that one, do you know them? The public has seen through this mess from the beginning even as the city continues to do its side step. Its very quiet sidestep.

There are several important reasons for why the report has generated such distrust, but what it comes down to is that what's in the report and more importantly what's not, more than hints at a cover up of the accident, the hit and run and most of all, the traffic stop conducted by Officers Jeremy Miller and Grant Linhart which took place three miles distant and some time after the original accident involving Leach and one of his city issued black Chrysler 300s vehicles. Appearing on the scene were others including Sgt. Frank Orta and the watch commander, Lt. Leon Phillips who apparently have lawyered up but other than that haven't been seen much lately.







This is a portion of the incident report from the CAD, which details what transpired in terms of police response and actions taken by officers from the beginning to the incident to the time it's closed out. This one-page sheet compromises the final page of Orta's report even as it's not all inclusive of what is written in Orta's report especially pertaining to the traffic stop. There's no mention of the patrol officers or their call numbers or even that they made a traffic stop. between 3:14 a.m. when the incident allegedly began and 4:44 a.m. when it was closed out. Was their traffic stop documented on the CAD sheet which is highly dependent on the use of police radios and mobile data terminals as communication between officers (whereas the use of cell phones and Blackberries as communication devices might not show up very well on a CAD sheet) and if so, why did the city not release that portion of the CAD incident report when they were being so open and transparent with Orta's report?

What's significant about the part of the CAD incident report that was released is close to the end of it which is when Sgt. Frank Orta (known as "S48") has the incident transferred to him by another primary responding officer (to the accident at Central and Hillside) and at around 2/8/10 at 4:44 (a.m. as military time is used), you'll see what's called the disposition of the incident which in this case reads "NR". That is an acronym assigned to mean "no report" meaning that no report was taken or to be taken to this incident. It was changed from being something else but what exactly's not quite clear. The CAD report does add that there were no license plate information recorded, that they might have been "blacked out". But it doesn't really mention much about the multiple dispatches that were made reporting different 911 calls coming in about the black vehicle throwing off sparks while it traveled down the streets of Riverside.

What's so fascinating about this is that isn't quite the way things turned out, because as you know there was one police report that was filled out by Orta which was turned over to the Press Enterprise by the city. No reports were taken by the two officers who engaged in the traffic stop at Arlington and Rutland under Orta's supervision and that of anyone else in the chain of command who might have been involved. Why the primary responding officers weren't writing reports on the incident has yet (along with just about everything else) been answered by the department including its current acting chief. It probably won't be.

The likelihood is that the two relatively inexperienced officers including one hired post-2007 handed it off to Orta to be handled, which was smart considering that Orta, a 30 year veteran officer set to retire in the next few months just happens to be a trained DUI expert recognized in the court system as an expert on this type of crime in part due to his years working in the motor patrol division. So it makes sense that if you've got an incident with all the signs of a DUI and hit and run incident and you're fairly newly hired officers that you'd want to hand it off to a supervisor with Orta's apparent expertise to handle. It's very likely that this is what the officers who are currently being called for a public hanging in the Press Enterprise comment sections did. It is beyond inexcusable that the management of the department sits by in silence while people are demanding the terminations and prosecution of the two patrol officers when it's likely that one or more of these individuals in higher positions have all the answers for what transpired that morning.

But it's not clear why Orta, who's trusted by the court system to testify expertly on DUI cases, would not want to write this troubling incident up as anything but a traffic collision report to file away in some cabinet some place if in the face of what was in front of him he chose not to even conduct a field sobriety test. Why did that happen? What would have happened if instead Orta had reported to his supervisor, Phillips that he did have a suspected DUI? What happens next? Well, it's logical to guess that's when conversations start happening between different parties including those who weren't even there. Conversations that wouldn't appear on a CAD incident sheet.

What if you're a supervisor who has to tell on your boss to a mid-line supervisor and perhaps even to someone higher up than you on the food chain but somewhat lower than the boss? Well, most people know what would happen in a business culture. But a police culture, is more confusing to the average citizen due to its insulated and its isolated nature. The one thing that would be deduced is that if the boss got in a compromising situation that almost everyone in his direct food chain downward would know or soon know about what happened. Discussions would take place from different places in the food chain or chain of command about what to do, how to handle it. And most importantly how to contain it, in particular from the outside world.

Is that what happened here?

After all, how long again, did it take the inhouse investigation performed by subordinates involving their boss to get farmed out to the CHP? How long did it take the city to respond to this situation? And how long did it take before contingency plans were created and exercised by the city and within the department in terms of who would next control the RPD. Let the games begin as some would call it.

But the whole "no report' aspect to the case is very fascinating and itself begs so many questions.

So from 3:14 a.m. the time of the initial accident, somehow the situation of a vehicle with no known license plate who hit a fire hydrant and then left the scene as it turned out became about 90 minutes later, a "NR" or a "No Report". This notation as told during testimony in the criminal trial involving former Officer Robert Forman is provided when the officer and/or supervisors decide to use their discretion on a call for service or other incident requiring a police response that essentially there is no report that needs to be written and submitted to the department.

There could have been a notation on some CAD incident report some place else that a report was taken involving the traffic stop that occurred three miles away from the accident site but alas, as stated earlier, there's no CAD information or CAD incident reports connected with the second part of the hit and run incident submitted in Orta's report. Why the department's only including the information associated with the original accident and not the traffic stop where two patrol officers pulled over Leach's car is not clear. There's probably a good reason for it, at least the people who made that decision not to include it must believe so. Suffice it to say, there's no information in the CAD made available in the interest of transparency to the public that indicates whether a decision was made to write the incident report done by Orta on the day of the incident itself.

But it's pretty easy though a bit cynical to guess that it would only make some strange sort of sense to not include information from the much more problematic component of the two-part situation, meaning the "hit" being perhaps easier to reveal to the public than any CAD or dispatch information associated with the "run".

Except for the fact that there was a report taken. Well, kind of as it turned out. Oh what a difference one day can make! It goes from No Report and a possible report taken on a missing CAD report sheet, to some semblance of written documentation that finally surfaced, one riddled with so many problems that it's hard to take it seriously.

Below are excerpts of the report written by Sgt. Frank Orta on Feb. 7, 2010 which happened to be the day before the incident happened. Whereas most reports written by officers are typed on computers which officers login to access for use (which was detailed in testimony during the Robert Forman trial), this one is done the good old-fashioned way, meaning that it was handwritten on some copy of the report template form. Meaning that it wasn't first written in a computer. Meaning that Orta didn't login to access a computer to write it and thus managed to write a report without leaving an electronic trail of exactly when this report was written, both date and time. And folks, it could have in this case been written at any time up to the point it was turned over to the CHP and the daily newspaper.

It's probably safe to say however, that the report wasn't written on Feb. 7 which was Super Bowl Sunday which was before the accident occurred. So because this report was handwritten, you have no way of knowing when Orta sat down and wrote it and really not much of a way to find out except through Orta or any witnesses that could have seen him sitting down and hard at work on crafting this report.




Just above is page one of the "traffic collision" report written by Sgt. Frank Orta. And it's here that you'll notice something very odd about this police report if you look at the very bottom of the page of the report. That's when you look for the name of the supervisor who reviewed it and signed off on it. That's the blank space at the bottom of the above page and you'll find a similar blank space throughout the six page report. That means that no supervisor ever reviewed or signed off on Orta's work product. Oh, there might have been supervisors that reviewed or read the report, certainly that's the case by now, but none of them signed off on it. That includes the officer that should have done so and that's Phillips who worked as the watch commander during the incident. But if you were a supervisor, would you want to sign that report under the following conditions? Where your boss, the police chief or in this situation a "potential DUI" had been drinking crashed his car, left the scene and then has no memory of the accident, part of the prior hours and no clue how badly he has damaged his car. All he can remember is driving in some field somewhere and needing to change his tire but no, no possibility that he's intoxicated while driving. So naturally no sobriety test was ever conducted and there's no mention of drugs, alcohol or that he committed a hit and run. Combine the above circumstances and yes, I'm sure you'll have a long line of supervisors and/or management personnel waiting to sign away their reputations along with their names on that report.

Despite information and indications that intoxication might be involved, no field sobriety test was done which could have settled the issue one way or another. Nothing was noted about why the car that crashed at Point A was found at Point B three miles away, which would make it seem like a hit and run, which is a crime.

This map will show you where both points were in respect to one another. So what you had was a hit and run incident that was never mentioned in Orta's report as being such and the words "alcohol", "drugs" and "prescription drugs" were never mentioned either. No field sobriety test even discussed let alone done during the narrow window of time when one can yield useful information pointing towards intoxication or sobriety. They probably couldn't find a supervisor in the department who would be willing to put their John Hancock on that report, not Phillips the watch commander, not his field operations captain who might have been either John Carpenter or Meredyth Meredith, not Deputy Chief Pete Esquivel and not Asst. Chief and now current acting chief, John De La Rosa. Maybe no one wanted to sign onto something that on its face looks like a load of bull waste product. Which of course leaves the report writer holding the bag. And then in the face of all this including a report no one at the supervisory or management (and that includes Hudson) level will sign, the department holds onto the investigation for two days until they feel outside heat and threat of exposure.

Why if this report is a legitimate representation of what happened during those early morning hours why couldn't Orta find anyone in the department who outranked him to review and sign it? That question needs to be asked over and over by different people including many of the peculiarly silent community leadership and the *pin drop* civic leadership as to why it is this way.







[This is one of the report's pages. Notice on the bottom, there's two blank boxes. Those are where the supervisor "reviewing" the report is supposed to sign and date the report to show he or she has completed that process. Didn't happen in this report and after reading it, it's pretty easy to figure out why.]



[Exhibit 2. Excerpts of police report on former Chief Russ Leach's "traffic collision" where Sgt. Frank Orta recommends that it just be received and filed away without any investigation. Notice how the report is handwritten, not typed up on a computer which means there's no way for anyone to know exactly what date and time it was written.]


Entire police report by Orta is here for the city's residents to read but as stated above, a lot of pertinent information wasn't included including the CAD incident report information for anything that took place at Arlington and Rutland as opposed to the original accident at Central and Hillside. So readers will only get a partial picture of what happened during the incident which of course is by design. They'll only read the part where the city including its legal division deemed it was okay for them to have a clue what happened. Fortunately many city residents are filling in the blanks.


As stated earlier, the report submitted by Sgt. Frank Orta is actually an interesting document to review as much as for what's missing as what's been included. For one thing if you've reviewed police reports before, then a few oddities stand out right away with this one and even more of them will be posted out here.

More to come...

RPD: "We are a family..."

“Don’t talk to blogs. Don’t talk to the press. We are a family.”


---RPD to RPD






I have received many comments and have had many conversations with individuals who live in this city. Many of them registered voters, out in the communities of Riverside about what’s transpired in this city since the early morning after Super Bowl Sunday and people appear to be much more astute than those at City Hall appear to give them credit for being. People are talking about what's been taking place on their front porches, in super markets and health clubs. In shopping malls and churches and universities. Not to mention in different cities from all over. All of them wondering what happened to Riverside and the RPD in the past week.

No one appears to want an inhouse investigation paid for by their tax dollars that they will never be told its outcome. An investigation of an alleged cover up followed by a cover up to the tune of thousands of dollars, of which how much exactly hasn’t been passed along to those who will be paying for it. What’s the value of that except to provide a civics lesson on why civilians in Riverside voted overwhelmingly at the polls in 2004 to put civilian oversight of the police department in the city’s charter? Many when asked what they wanted to see in civilian oversight said they wanted to expand its powers to investigate well, police cover ups. Many of them frankly want a changing of the guard in City Hall, something to keep in mind for those planning on running for reelection anytime soon.

And it’s hard to really surgically excise the word, “cover up” out of the equation in the minds of many Riversiders right now. More problematic for the police department is that many people have put a bulk of the anger and blame on the street level police officers who have a much more difficult job to do but those individuals who had a handle in this mess are really to blame for that, because they made the decisions they made with no concern about the people who would pay for them. But the only way to remedy that is an independent and transparent investigation of the entire affair, not to mention the incredibly destructive dynamic that apparently contributed greatly to it, one that’s been entrenched in one way or another inside the city and the police department for some years. If William Shakespeare were alive today, maybe he would fully appreciate it. It makes for great staged drama but the police department will never be able to “move forward” as long as it exists and is the standard set for behavior. It will remain exactly where it is now mired in what could be a scandalous mess which could taint it for some time to come.

It's a shame that the city had so little respect for the hard work done during the stipulated judgment period by both community residents and police officers that it squandered most of those gains away and it's coming full circle in some respects. The lawsuits are piling up. The city residents heavily distrust it. The staffing levels are falling including at the supervisory levels, a situation only partly alleviated by the recent promotions. The incoming chief whoever he or she is has to inherit all of this in the pattern of Leach who faced the same challenges before he went down the road to create them for his predecessor. Not to mention inheriting the position of being placed in the dysfunctional micromanagement style operated out of City Hall over the police department.

Almost everyone I’ve talked to in different areas of the city want an independent probe of what happened that morning when former Chief Russ Leach crashed his car and then was stopped three miles away from that scene, and more importantly, its aftermath. Many people have called for the investigations to be expanded to include others that are outside the purview of the department’s internal affairs division and its “sweeping” investigation. Many are concerned that it will be a “sweeping” investigation in the sense of being swept right beneath the rug. After all, one reason to call for a “sweeping” inhouse investigation is in the hopes of offsetting any prospective probes from other agencies including law enforcement agencies outside of Riverside. Because if you're potentially at fault for the latest crisis or critical incident, then you want to keep any potential outside probes at bay by saying, see we've got our problems under control here and no need for you to look over our shoulders.

After all, that's what they tell the public most of the time it comes looking for more information on how the city's spending its money. Because it wasn't urgent to hire outside counsel behind closed doors without taking it to a public forum like a city council meeting for the legislative body to discuss, debate and vote on whether to take that step or not and if so, who to hire. It's one thing to do the independent investigation that's truly needed. It's another to pay for a white wash and call it independent and transparent (which the city did originally) only to say later, sorry but it's probably confidential and we can never tell you its outcome which Hudson did in a recent Press Enterprise article.

Many don’t want it left in the hands of those who might have questions themselves to answer in relation to the events which are the focus of different probes by different agencies. Many have made it clear that they will be paying close attention to what’s being done or not being done by City Hall and those in both the odd and even numbered wards will remember it long enough for it to help them decide which candidates to support or not during the upcoming election cycles. What people really want is what they’re not getting which is a voice from the government that will say that it will not participate in a tax payer funded white wash of an incident that threatens to send the police department where it was just after the Tyisha Miller shooting in 1998. If this doesn’t happen, then the city is in for a very interesting election cycle next year, judging by the sentiment being expressed in the wards that will be up for grabs beginning at the June 2011 mail in first round election.

There's been concern about whether the department needs to be looked at in terms of functioning as an independent law enforcement agency by an outside agency, and if so which one. If it needs a bit of a house cleaning or whether the new chief should come from outside the department or from its inner ranks. On the last one, the public poll in the city so far is about 99% towards picking someone from the outside. RPOA president, Cliff Mason said that current asst. chief, John De La Rosa has "unwavering support" from his membership and current RPAA president, Ed Blevins hasn't had much to say about the issue on behalf of his union yet. But it would be nice to believe them but a part of me and other people think it's almost akin to Oz saying to Dorothy and her friends to not look by the curtain. Comments like that almost invariably generate even greater curiosity towards what's going on in the place where no one wants anyone to look. Does the RPD have unwavering support for De La Rosa? That's a question only it can answer as members of a labor force.


The Los Angeles Times stated in this article that Leach had four whiskeys while at the Club 215. Then he left the club without appearing to be intoxicated or driving erratically according to the club's attorney. Which is similar to what the attorney told the Press Enterprise and it's really kind of interesting that the lawyer for the owners of Club 215, the strip club off of the highway with the same name have come forward to clarify the situation in that Leach wasn't intoxicated when he left the club. That might or might not be true as it might turn out but what's also clear is that the owners of Club 215 might be in a bit of a pickle if left to explain why they allowed Leach to leave one hour before his car wreck if he was intoxicated if that's the case. Establishments that sell alcohol have been known to lose liquor licenses and other conditional permits for similar cases and there have been cases in fatal vehicle crashes where businesses or people who have supplied the driver with alcohol have been under civil and criminal scrutiny.

But the CHP did say it's wrapping its investigation up by next week. So it will be interesting to see what happens then. The city's own white wash job is very early on in its process and even though City Manager Brad Hudson behind closed doors went and hired himself a Best, Best and Krieger attorney, former Riverside County District Attorney Grover Trask to provide "independent oversight", the public will pay for this investigation but will never know its outcome pursuant to state laws prohibiting it from being privy to the outcomes and processes involved with peace officer investigations.

What will most likely happen is that the investigation will be focusing on the two patrol officers and the two immediate supervisors. Missing will be the cast at the police department who is somewhat higher in the structural ladder and key employees at City Hall, who should be facing questions about how much they knew about any prior similar problems involving Leach during his tenure with the RPD. Internal Affairs sergeants and even its lieutenant head can't investigate those who outrank them. So what if someone somewhat lower said during a compelled aministrative investigation that someone a step or so higher than them told them to do something or more accurately do nothing, then what would be done in those circumstances? That part hasn't been explained by Hudson or anyone else to the city's residents who will be paying for this "sweeping" investigation. Don't expect that to change anytime soon.





Coming soon: The First Post-Leach Promotions (when not being in the top five is more than enough the higher you go)-----> "It's all about who you know..." or is it about how you stack up and should women even bother applying at all?




Coming Soon: RPD: A Police Department or a Chess Board?


"One town very like another
When your heads over your pieces, Brother
It's a drag. It's a bore. It's really such a pity
to be looking at the board, not looking at the city."


---Murray Head, "One Night in Bangkok"




Coming soon: In Search of: A Brand New Chief or Puppet?




And the one thing you won't see....


The Hudson Report: What Happened to the RPD on My Watch.







Budget cuts at the Los Angeles Police Department impact its staffing.



Simple Simons which suffered a serious fire on its premises will be hosting a fundraiser to help the employees who work there but can't return until the place is fixed up. The date is Feb. 25 beginning at 6:30 p.m.

Why was Corruption Able to Flourish in Riverside?

Update: Motorcycle officer injured in car accident near 1oth street in Riverside ***



Not too long ago, I was told by a Riverside Police Department officer that if I continued to sit on the grassy knoll outside of City Hall, I would be looking at a citation. Someone at City Hall told me later on that there was an ordinance in the books prohibiting sitting on the grass by City Hall but couldn't believe it was being enforced. There's no sign actually telling people it's not allowed and most people didn't seem to know they were breaking the ordinance while sitting on that grass. I found it curious too, only because it just goes to show that when it comes to City Hall, there's more concern about appearances like what grass looks like outside of it than what's reality, what can't be easily seen and in fact, might be hidden from view to the city residents. And that anytime there's something that needs to be seen by city residents, it seems more hidden than ever even in the light of this city's history in the consequences that it has paid for this type of behavior.

Hence the distrust when something blows up like what happened last week and that which has been lighting the comments threads at the Press Enterprise Web site since the accident came to light. Some of the targets are probably accurate, being the police chief, a police employee or two, some individuals at City Hall. But some of the targets are also very wrong, being the majority of the police department's officers. But as unfair as that is, it can't be any other way as long as there's a cloak of secrecy around this so-called transparent process being instituted by City Hall to address this situation. You don't want people crying that there's a coverup going on, then don't cover up the investigation into those allegations. Don't put people in charge of them from the city's ranks who might have some explaining to do about their own actions and words. People always get a little concerned when they believe that the brooms have come out and the sweeping's begun.

The fact that yes, there was a car accident by former Chief Russ Leach, who left the scene and was pulled over three miles distant by two patrol officers who never submitted written reports. One of the sergeants, Frank Orta, they called did but the report failed to say whether a field sobriety test was done and there's scant mention of drugs, alcohol or even prescription medication even though the 300 Chrsyler with sparks flying from the rims was reported as a "potential DUI" and the police chief, Russ Leach, had no memory of the accident or no apparent clue about the damage to his car. And then there were concerns about coverup being raised by many people who wondered why a potential crime was treated so casually by the department that Leach led until last week. That the officers including one who was fairly new were told not to even submit incident reports by a supervisor who was told by someone higher than him. That the noninvestigation written off as a "traffic collision" report to be filed away was only handed off to the CHP to investigate when heat was applied to the police department and public exposure was imminent. All of these concerns were raised in the communities. All of this has been denied but questions remain in part because City Hall has been fairly quiet. The lack of a truly independent investigation and an active dialogue of the issues raised does both the city's residents and the police department's employees a tremendous disservice.

Then did the lies continue onward apparently at City Hall, when city employees were allegedly not truthful to people asked questions about what had happened that morning and the circumstances? Was the truth told by everyone or was it not and will city residents ever know? That's a common question in the communities meaning what did employees at City Hall know. That perhaps this was an ongoing pattern of treatment for the chief going back some years even while most people in his shoes would be facing arrest and prosecution for hit and run and DUI (whether alcohol or prescription medication). Too many questions remain in this case that need answers or there's really not much hope for this city or the department to ever regain what both have lost because of the actions of a relative few at the penalty at the majority of both. But is there any real investment by the city to reach that point?

So many allegations and questions but few to no real answers. And an investigation to answer some of them that will never be made public, even as the city claims to push for transparency. The public which funds the city and the agency will never know what happened that early morning and in its aftermath. It's not hard to believe that's exactly how some individuals at City Hall and the police department would like it to remain.

There's been comments of witness intimidation and of prior attempts to address malfeasance and criminal conduct among other things involving Leach which leads to more unanswered questions. Were these allegations ever investigated by City Manager Brad Hudson? Were they ignored by him and the then city council instead? What has happened in the past week is far worse than what happened in the original crash because of the way it was handled. But it makes me wonder why someone felt they could put this bad behavior on the city's residents and on the vast majority of police officers and civilian employees who do professional and conscientious work? What gave them that right? And who's going to take that right to put a law enforcement agency in this situation a scant four years after the city dissolved its stipulated judgment with the state attorney general's office?

You can't have those who may through their actions need to be investigated be the investigators. You can't have anyone in Riverside investigate what's transpired here. But who will? In a city where the government appears more concerned about keeping people from sitting on grassy knolls their tax dollars paid for than what's been going on inside one police department and its unhealthy dynamic of micromanagement from City Hall for quite a while now. There's been a lot of talk about coming together and moving forward but if you rebuild the house on a rotten foundation, then it will just collapse again. The fundamental problems which have plagued the police department beginning but not ending with its management and relationship to city management have to be addressed first for this agency to ever make sustained change.

The city rarely has needed leadership like it does right now and it rarely has so much needed to do the right thing as it does right now. But this is tougher than shopping for logos or serving as a lending institution to developers, this case involves multiple ethical issues and just as many alleged violations of ethics. And whether the city's leadership is up to it remains to be seen in the days and weeks ahead as more and more questions like those above pile up.

"He wasn't drunk; He wasn't disorderly."

The picture of Leach's hours before the wreck including a visit at a strip club may have been intended to answer questions but raised more instead. Why was he portrayed by the club owner's attorney (and that he's responding tells you something) as being sober about an hour before the accident yet by the time eye witnesses saw him crash his car at Central and Hillside, they suspected him as a DUI. In fact, someone flagged down the two officers and reported him as a "potential DUI". By the time these officer caught up to Leach three miles and some time later, he had no memory of the accident, didn't know how badly his car was damaged and that he believed he had been driving through a field and dirt road and got a flat tire. Contrast his own very confused and confusing perceptions with the photos taken of the vehicle and then contrast that with the scant written documentation of this "potential DUI" that turned into a "traffic collision" report to be filed away. The whole affair was to have been filed away but that's not what happened.

So now the story is that Leach was at a strip joint watching naked women which may or may not speak volumes about why the department has had problems attracting and retaining female officers. But it collides with comments by Leach's friend, former Councilman Frank Schiavone who was fairly adamant in his comments before Leach's retirement that Leach was on pain medication and even one beer could be very harmful for him, ergo he couldn't have been drinking. Yet now the manager of the strip club is saying that Leach had three drinks during his time spent at the club. So which is it going to be? Leach didn't drink because it would have been very unhealthy or even dangerous for him to do so. Leach drank three servings while at the strip club and was captured on surveillance cameras while doing so. And if he had been on prescription medication, he would have been warned more than once not to drink while taking it if it would have had detrimental affects.

The owner of Club 215's attorney did most of the responding so it makes you wonder that in the face of the CHP investigation that he's worried about potentially putting his club at risk including its liquor license if an investigation revealed that Leach had left that club intoxicated not long before his accident. Strip clubs have precarious relations at best with law enforcement agencies because by their nature, they are seen as attractants for crime. But at any rate, there's still a huge disconnect between him being sober at the strip club and then having no memory of anything but driving through a field on a flat tire and in between the two points is an hour or so of missing time.

And the list of those suddenly not having a comment to tell the media grows.

Mayor Vs Mayor Pro Tem

"Let's get ready to rumble..."

"Either run it or not."


---Mayor Pro Tem Steve Adams



"As mayor, I will be as permissible as possible."


---Mayor Ron Loveridge




A little bit of a tussle for power of the gavel took place between long-time mayor, Ron Loveridge and short-term Mayor Pro Tem Steve Adams during the afternoon session of the city council meeting. After Adams interrupted what city resident Karen Wright was saying at the podium, Loveridge didn't respond to him. This led to the exchange above and then Adams saying why don't you listen to my point of order and Loveridge essentially saying he would run the meeting. Loveridge is much less threatened by people at the podium than is Adams who has been known to get police officers onduty in the chambers to evict speakers and to engage in verbal temper tantrums on the dais. His first meltdown while mayor pro tem was within five minute of his first time leading a meeting when the mayor left the podium for a short time.

He's planning to run for a third term in Ward Seven but hopefully the voters there will install someone to represent them on the dais who is somewhat calmer and can handle himself or herself more professionally on the dais with minimal meltdowns. What's kind of funny is that Adams' acting out is in contrast to fairly professional conduct from the other elected officials and Loveridge having to treat Adams as you would a recalcitrant child and having to explain to him some of the job responsibilities of being an elected official.

Riverside Police Department has looked into several specific complaints connected with a raid several weeks ago in the Eastside. And apparently according to Special Investigations Lt. Ed Blevins, the officers' behavior has already been justified including the case of an 87 year old man with severely bruised man. Kind of makes you wonder why the department even needs an Internal Affairs Division to figure all this stuff ou when it appears that the department has much quicker and decisive procedures in place. Since the police department's made up its mind already, then it's a waste of time to fill out a complaint to undergo the investigation process. But then that's why most people don't file complaints for precisely the reasons which Blevins displayed in the news article.

Maybe that's why more and more people are filing claims for damages and/or lawsuits instead to bypass that process.

Lt. Ed Blevins: Man Verbally Confronted Officer and Used Profanity

RPD Supervisor Promotional Freeze Thaws:

Three sergeants, lieutenant promoted


Lieutenant:

Andy Flores


Sergeants:

Michael Barney, Chris Wagner, Benjamin Shafer


Detective:

Dan Nelson
Dan Koehler

In the midst of turmoil inside the Riverside Police Department, comes the news that there will be between three to five promotions, including three definite promotions at the supervisory levels. Two sergeant positions and one lieutenant position have been unfrozen and if any detectives are elevated into the sergeant positions, then those positions vacated will be filled through the promotional process pursuant to a MOU in place since the early 1990s. These promotions come within days of the medical retirement of former Chief Russ Leach and over a year since the last supervisory promotion was announced by the department.
The department has been promoting to fill detective promotions that have been vacated through retirements or in the case of former Det. Scott Impola, through termination. But the last promotion of a sergeant was Julian Hutzler over a year ago. The last lieutenant’s position was that involving Leon Phillips on July 1, 2008. The vacancy rate for lieutenants was five and that involving sergeants was about seven. However, the level of anticipated vacancies at the sergeant’s level was anticipated to rise by the end to 2010 given that there were four planned retirements and one departure. The department during its latest shift change which went into effect around Feb. 5 managed to fill the sergeant staffing positions in its patrol division but had pulled sergeants out of the Internal Affairs Division and some detective units in both the centralized and special investigation bureaus during the past year or so including Sexual Assault and Child Abuse as well as the Vice /intelligence squad. Possibly soon to be vacated is the sergeant position in the department’s family violence division if current sergeant, Paul De Jong retires to take a job elsewhere.

These promotions come in the wake of discussions between members of the Riverside Police Officers’ Association leadership and City Manager Brad Hudson which was referred to in an earlier blog posting about two weeks ago. There had been ardent and consistent pushing for some of these positions at especially the sergeant rank to be filled in light of the issues which have arisen regarding whether this situation has created staffing shortages over the predominantly young and inexperienced patrol division. The fear was that lower staffing of supervisors would mirror the problems in the 1990s that took place after a recession in the mid 1990s led to reductions in the patrol division including its supervisors. But the city manager’s office has long been believed not to see it that way. Perhaps because neither Hudson nor his assistant, Tom DeSantis were here when this happened the first time and because Hudson’s experience is mostly in the economic development sector of government rather than labor management. Several city employee unions including the SEIU have gone to city council meetings expressing their frustration at having to deal with Hudson and DeSantis on labor issues including those involving terms of their MOUs with the city.

The Special Operations which used to have three lieutenants lost two of them to retirement and now only has one. The investigations division has no captain, except one that splits duties between that division and Special Operations.

Riverside's Pass/Fail Test?

Press Enterprise Columnist Cassie MacDuff over in San Bernardino write this article about what happened in Riverside's police department with the departure of former Chief Russ Leach. She has a conversation with City Manager Brad Hudson about the whole affair.



(excerpt)

I asked City Manager Brad Hudson why the officers had not been placed on administrative leave during the two parallel investigations.

Four Manhattan Beach police officers were put on leave after a three-car crash involving a vehicle reportedly belonging to an officer. So why are the Riverside officers still working?

Hudson said in the Manhattan Beach case, no police report was taken at all.

It's a distinction with not much difference. The Riverside police report has so many holes in it, they glare even to the untrained eye. There's no mention of the hit-and-run violation, and the cause and extent of the chief's impairment is glossed over.

Fortunately the chief, Russ Leach, took a medical retirement three days after the accident, saying he takes full responsibility for driving while he was "obviously" disoriented from prescription medication.

On Monday, Leach reiterated his chagrin and said the accident was a wake-up call to him that he was taking more medication than he should. He said he's working with a doctor to get the problem under control.

The CHP investigation should be done soon. But Hudson warned that the results of the internal affairs investigation may never be made public, because peace officers' discipline by law is confidential.

That's too bad. Because the public needs assurance this blunder was addressed.



Actually, it's called business as usual in Riverside.

Metro Wi Fi Outages Continue

Both the city’s free and paid Wi Fi services have been experiencing multiple outages in the wake of the last rain storm over a week ago. Problems with water flooding the containers which held the equipment have contributed to several major outages located around Box Springs and Alessandro and Trautwein as well as smaller outages throughout at least the northern part of the city. At least one string of access points went out yesterday near the University Avenue corridor.
AT&T has dispatched technicians out to repair the outages and restore services but over a week after most of these outages began, many places remain without service. No estimate of when the entire network would be up and running has been provided. More rain is predicted early next morning which if it plays out as it has in the previous storms will likely create more outages to the network.