Police officers are entrusted by the public with an awesome responsibility: the power of life and death. In a city of one million it is inevitable that officers will use weapons in the course of their duties. It’s part of the job and something that is accepted by the citizens whose laws are enforced by the police in their name. Any time an individual officer decides to use any weapon—whether gun, baton, Taser, fists, boots, or karate—that results in death, the act must be just and justified. It seems to me that the best way to assure the public that their law enforcement representatives are making correct decisions in applying lethal force according to the circumstances, and are operating within the law in doing so, is an automatic oversight enquiry by an independent auditor who reports to our elected representatives.
With that in mind, the San Jose City Council’s 10-1 decision to impose limits on the city’s Independent Police Auditor’s (IPA) oversight in cases of lethal force is puzzling to me, especially in light of the fact that it appears that the decision was based on flawed legal analysis by City Attorney Rick Doyle. The way I understand it, the decision limits the IPA’s authority to investigating deaths caused by police firearms and in other cases only where there is a complaint from the public. The council is limiting and weakening public oversight of the police’s power to kill when it should be expanding and strengthening it.
I know that Chief Davis, most police officers and a number of fellow citizens feel that the IPA is yet another unnecessary layer of bureaucracy breathing down the neck of our police force, given that there are grand juries, Internal Affairs, the county DA and the FBI who can be brought in under certain circumstances. However, I would argue that since the matter we are talking about is exercising the ultimate power of life and death in the name of the citizens, it calls for extra-special consideration. Accordingly, the public’s best interest is served by an IPA who is empowered to investigate each and every case of death caused by the actions of the police and report to our city council. This also better serves the evolution of department policy and the ongoing training of police officers themselves who may learn from the lethal-force experiences of their fellow officers.
The uniform application of an IPA enquiry in all cases of death of a member of the public caused by the police does not in any way imply that a killing is unjustified. It is important that we accept that police officers are not superhuman and they are called upon to make decisions on the spur of the moment in the course of carrying out their duties. The IPA’s role is solely to determine, according to all the evidence available, whether the circumstances warranted the use of lethal force, not to accuse any police officer of anything. Obviously, in most cases, it will be determined that the force was justified. In cases where it is not, this is valuable information for the public, and our council and police management representatives. Any further action in those rare cases is not within the IPA’a authority and would obviously be dealt with as the circumstances dictate.
It is important that citizens always be fully informed in instances of lethal force. Open public oversight is the only way to maintain the people’s confidence in their police force.
Jack,
I cannot agree with you on this. The IPA we have is so bias against our Police Chief and so anti Police, that I wouldn’t believe any finding she made. She has no training or experience out in the field, so I don’t believe she is qualified to make such decisions. If she was a retired Police Chief, or Police Officer, I may think differently.
In my opinion, Ms. Attard seems to forget whom she is working for, and what the word neutral means. I attended the special Council Meeting in which her report was submitted. She was told to make a stronger effort to work with the Chief, rather than participating in a power struggle with him, by asking for more power, and a Charter change. I haven’t seen her change her MO at all.
I have watched Ms. Attard in public forums, including this Monday’s forum at SJSU. She collaborates with anti Police groups on a regular basis, and asks them to lobby the Mayor and Council on her behalf. I don’t think that kind of behavior on her part makes her look very independent, integrity ridden, or trust worthy.
I see her or her staff trying to get unwilling members of the public to file complaints about the Police. Even when I’ve heard people tell them no, and say things like, well I was in the wrong, they continue to push.
I never see the IPA out at community events advertising their department. I have never seen them put up an info booth at festivals, or in community centers either. So that further leads me to believe that their partnership with anti Police groups is what serves the IPA best.
As to Police oversight in use of force/weapon related deaths, there is a long, difficult layer of investigation done before anyone is cleared of wrongdoing. Most times when a Police Officer is involved in a shooting or any other kind of death related to force, they are put through hell by the community, the press, and anti Police groups. You hear very little about the methods used to clear or condemn these Officers. And once they’re found innocent, nobody cares, they don’t believe the findings anyway. And what about the innocent Police Officer? How have these investigations affected them, their families? Nobody cares enough to ask. And yet we all wonder why no one is applying to become a Police Officer.
#1 Kathleen. Good post. Your last paragraph is so very true. Lots of folks want to tell the law enforcers how to do their job and criticize their efforts. I don’t know any other profession that is scrutinized as the police are. Whenever a patient in a hospital dies I never hear anyone telling the doctor how he should have done the job. Or a dentist on engineer or any others, never.
If the person who is doing the job is not doing it appropriately, wouldn’t the solution be to find someone who can do the job, rather than eliminating the job?
#2- You are right about that!
#3- We do need a much better IPA, and as for getting someone who can do the job RIGHT, and work in collaboration with the Chief of Police, you’d have to FIRE Attard. Her contract is up for renewal, and if we get lucky, it won’t be renewed. I’d love to see her replaced with someone who truly understands the terms, independent, and neuteral.
I have often wondered if the recent timing of this power grab, and media blitz is a way for Attard to pressure the Mayor, and Council into renewing her contract. You do realize she has a six figure income, and great benefits care of tax payers?
In the private sector, if an employee chose to bash their bosses in the media, and behave like Attard does, they’d be in the unemployment line. Who is overseeing her behavior?
Kathleen
I agree that the current IPA appears to be unfit for the position. (She certainly seems to be her own worst enemy.) She should get the boot and the council should be able to find someone who can do the job properly. That is a separate issue; we certainly must have an IPA that the public can trust and respect. Nevertheless, my view remains the same as stated above, so in order to do what needs to be done, a new IPA should be re-empowered by the council to review each instance of police lethal force.
If, as is stated in the first paragraph, the justification for inserting the police auditor into the investigation of in-custody deaths is to assure the public that law enforcement is making correct decisions in applying lethal force, then one must assume that the police auditor possesses:
a) A full understanding of the responsibilities, concerns, and limitations that confronted the officers upon their encounter of the suspect.
b) Expert knowledge of the range of effectiveness, inherent limitations, and the potential ramifications accompanying the use of the various weapons and tactics that were available to the officer(s) involved.
c) A working knowledge of the impact that rage, mental illness, alcohol intoxication, hysteria, drug influence, and all possible combinations thereof, have upon persons subjected to the type of stressful incidents that typically lead to encounters with the police.
d) A demonstrated objectivity.
e) A level of familiarity with stress and fear sufficient to ensure that the actions of the officer(s) are not judged against a standard impossible for humans to attain.
f) Knowledge of the applicable laws and police policies.
Now, let’s examine the reality:
a) How can the auditor, a person with no experience in enforcing the law, dealing with combative persons, or having the responsibility for the lives of others, be expected to possess such an understanding?
—Upon arrival at the scene of an incident, an officer immediately becomes responsible for the safety of everyone present. A suspect running away may seem to represent no immediate threat to a citizen witness, but to an officer that suspect threatens everyone he might encounter along his path. Likewise, a suspect turning to reenter a motel room may not appear threatening to a guest across the hallway, but to the police who responded to a plea for help or a reported man with a gun, that suspect must be prevented from getting back into that room uncontrolled.
—To the inexperienced, the idea that someone could struggle violently with three, four, or even five officers doesn’t seem possible—it sure didn’t happen on Cagney and Lacey. But experienced officers understand that it does: they have hardwired in their memories the superhuman strength of the insane, the drugged-up, the hysterical; they remember those fights in tight spaces, on slippery floors, in terrifying darkness; they know that struggling suspects grab for guns, don’t always feel pain, and never place their hands behind their backs for convenient cuffing.
—Without having ever enforced the law, how could the auditor know that no two people react the same, or that it is not unusual for the same person to react differently from one encounter to the next? That a man has a long arrest record with no previous violence might lead the inexperienced to suspect that his motives were harmless, but an experienced cop cannot afford to allow it to mean anything. They know that a good percentage of police officers are murdered by men with no priors for resisting arrest.
b) What does the auditor know about the weapons, or use thereof, that she claims the expertise to judge?
—How effective is a police baton? Certainly not 100%, but that should surprise no one who has ever watched the news. But now, imagine what is it like when an officer, in a fight for his life, strikes the suspect hard, once, twice, three times and sees no reaction, or worse, sees it embolden and inflame the suspect even more. Think that wouldn’t make him alter his strategy? Think that might not persuade him to forget the approved strike points and instead crack the suspect on the head? Not an approved blow, but one that is all but guaranteed to win the officer a moment, a bit of distance, a chance to go to Plan B. But then, what if that drug the suspect overdosed on kills him? What will the auditor, who has never been in a fight of any kind, think about that split on the deceased’s forehead? I can hear her now, “A clear violation of policy and training; grounds for criminal charges.” Imagine the consequences if the deceased is, as are a disproportionate percentage of police assailants, a black or Hispanic? My, with the ruckus the auditor would raise even the Mercury might sell a few papers.
—What is the right circumstance to employ the carotid restraint? To an auditor well-versed in ACLU stats but ignorant of street fighting, the answer might be never: after all, there have been documented deaths. But to a police officer fighting in close quarters, or one who must overcome a person of superior strength (or endurance), the carotid is the absolute best choice—one that, prior to being politicized, was used safely and effectively in SJ for decades. But lord help the officer if a suspect dies subsequent to the restraint. No matter how fat the suspect, how drunk, drugged, or long his history of self-abuse, the auditor is going to have her case, her headlines, her angry mob—REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE CORONER RULES.
(continued)
Just as the public is entitled to due process, so are our fine police officers. The Office of the IPA was formed to be able to conduct an independent review of the Internal Affairs complaints involving officers. Nothing more, nothing less. This is in the city charter. Barbara Attard had demanded the power to go beyond this and conduct investigations against officers. Please look at Barbara Attard’s background…just do a Google search of her name. She has no practical police experience and more importantly has an extreme anti-police bias. Her attempted power grab is disgraceful. Just as citizens should be able to file complaints against officers with no fear, officers should be able to do their jobs without the fear of being investigated by one who has an obvious hatred towards the officer. Officers do not deserve to be put in this position. We expect officers to keep us safe and put criminals in jail. How can we expect them to do this knowing the more they do the more it increases their odds of being dragged through the mud by the IPA in a tainted process? If any one of us were wrongly arrested, we would hope like hell that the judge and jury were neutral and objective so we would get a fair trial. Officers deserve the same in the complaint process. Officers can’t expected to be noble and do the right thing to the point of stupidity and self destruction. They have families, and car payments, and house payments like the rest of us. They will simply do less, and decrease their exposure of having their life made a hell. This is already happening according to those I know on the SJPD. In Barbara Attard’s world, more credibility is given to criminals than police officers. This is the wrong time and the wrong person to charge with more power in any investigation or allegation against a police officer. The city council did the right thing for the safety of the citizens and sending a message to the officers that they will not throw them to the wolves, which are basically a few malcontents with Barbara Attard as the $200,000 a year cheerleader. We have a great police department. I am so tired of the 95% of the public that thinks the same being ignored just because they don’t make asses of themselves at city council meetings. I am tired of the Mercury taking desperate potshots at the police department so sell a few papers to keep from going under. Now the Mercury is filing lawsuits that all police reports be made public. Is this really for the good of our city or simply to sell more papers? Does a victim of a crime or witness want to come forward knowing the police report is to be made public?? I would think twice. It is funny that I learn of the great work that our police does and the cases it solves primarily from the SF Chronicle or other outside media sources. Our city has so many problems deserving of the city councils time and resources. It is a shame we are all paying a price of disproportionate attention the city council and staff has had to give to Barbara Attard in this non issue.
(continued)
—The Taser poses a particular problem due to the fact that it is typically used from a distance and to force compliance. Suspects are tased to avoid a physical engagement, thus, the justification for using it tends to be a compilation of the officer’s perceptions: the degree of danger posed, the likelihood of flight, the peril to the community, etc. The TASER is never used with the intent to kill, yet what the auditor would like to do, and what has been done elsewhere, is to have the officer’s perceptions dissected against the backdrop of deadly force (again, no matter what the coroner rules as the cause of death). And since the Taser is not used in deadly force confrontations, and since it is never acceptable to kill someone to avoid breaking their kneecaps with a baton, politicized race groups and the ACLU need only to bring doubt or distract the public away from the official cause of death to achieve their goal of showcasing a given incident as a murder at the hands of the police.
c) What range of experience has the auditor had with the dangerous people in uncontrolled situations?
—An experienced officer understands this about the mentally ill: there is never one right approach. Even tactics with a high degree of success guarantee nothing, which is why even institutions (with controlled environments and staffed with experts) are forced to rely on four-point restraints, straightjackets, and locked cells. This uncertainty of response is equally true of drunks, dopers, raging maniacs, and the hysterical. When dealing with such people, reading the signs and adapting to each situation is a skill that defies explanation, one forged on experienced and shared by cops, paramedics, firefighters, and ER personnel. The knowledge that “anything can happen” is a key component in the minds of those experienced in public safety, and one that, if unaccounted for in the unraveling of an event turned tragic, dooms even that officer with the best of intentions. An officer insisting, even to the point of twisting an arm, on handcuffing an otherwise docile inebriant, may appear heavy-handed to an onlooker, but to the experienced officer that use of force pales in comparison to the horror of his prisoner running out into traffic and getting killed.
d) If there is a shred of evidence that the police auditor possesses a level of objectivity equal to that of the average cop on the beat, I have yet to see it. Kathleen (post #1) makes my case. And when you consider that in-custody death cases invite the false testimony of people motivated by politics or personal gain, objectivity in assessing the credibility of such witnesses is paramount.
e) What does the auditor know about the abilities of the officer’s she wishes to judge?
—Even if the auditor has experienced terror once or twice in her life, has she ever encountered it accompanied by the responsibility to confront the threat, engage it, and render it neutral? Has she ever done it twice in a single night; three times in a week; or regularly for ten years running? When participating in citizen’s academies it is traditional that the “trainees” participate in car stop scenarios at night. The result is that all get to experience fear plus duty, and they all eventually shoot someone they shouldn’t have. The reason for this is simple: they have not incorporated into their psyches something that is a part of every working cop’s, that being the willingness to give up the odds. Just in case you assumed that there was a fail-safe method of approaching a stopped car, let me assure you that there is not. Those cops you see out there making stops at night must give up a level of safety just to get up to the driver’s door, let alone get close enough to see who is in the car and what they might be doing. Sure, there are techniques that can be used to make it more difficult for an armed assailant, but in all but the highest level of felony car stops, the chance to point and shoot comes second to the police officer. This disadvantage is present every time a cop investigates a burglar alarm, robbery call, or family fight. It all but defines the job.
—I have no doubt that if asked, the auditor would assert that female officers are the equal or superior to their male counterparts in all areas of the job. She would say this because such nonsense is part of the propaganda that commonly passes these days as education, and that is the only source of her knowledge. But the truth is what common sense would suggest: that in physical confrontations with male suspects, female officers are at a pronounced disadvantage, a fact that is not lost on male officers who are sent into confrontations with a 110 pound partner on whom to depend. (This disadvantage is also not lost on female officers, who now hide from street duty in such disproportion that they dominate all the dull and demeaning inside job assignments.) Use of force decisions, such as whether to wrestle a suspect into handcuffs or employ the Taser, are regularly affected by realities such as partner capability (young/old, weak/strong, fat/fit) and staffing shortages.
-continued-
-continued-
f) Can the auditor be up to date on all laws and policies?
—Though I do not doubt the auditor’s familiarity with such things, what I cannot overlook is the fact that current police policies are the product of procedural evolution, that is that what were once presented as static guidelines for use when confronting dynamic challenges are today, when expedient for political and liability purposes, treated as if they were laws handed down by the gods. It is bad enough that the police chief will, when pushed into a corner, ignore an officer’s good intentions and sound decision-making by employing an unfairly strict interpretation of the rules, but imagine such a weapon in the hands of someone who has no stake in the morale and good running order of the police department. I think the question here is should the local public, a public that prides itself on justice and allegedly honors public service, subject our police officers to an Inquisition of the ACLU?
Consider this: were a jury to hear a case involving an in-custody death, the IPA might be allowed to testify, but never as an investigative expert or authority in police procedures. The expert testimony would come from police officials, training professionals, medical doctors, and, perhaps, legal experts. These experts are the same type as those who would be utilized by decision makers in the police department, city attorney’s office, DA’s office, and, if called in, by state and federal agencies. The professional resources are there; the credibility established; justice exists.
We, the citizens of San Jose, pay our police chief over $200,000 a year to oversee the police department, a department whose actions are subject to review by all three branches of government. The chief is our first line of checks and balances. He reports to the city manager, who reports to the council, who reports to the citizens. We don’t need another level of political accountability, and we certainly don’t need to insert into important and costly cases an overseer who lacks the expertise needed and the objectivity expected.
Monday morning quarterbacking by people not on the street/in the situation must be hadled professionally, dispassionately, and with a neutral, and open mind.
Ms Attard seems to be more of an obdusman for the relatives of the (predominantly) scumbag deceased than a the neutral evaluator the office requires.
The Murky New is complicit, in that its news stories of the event contain much editorial bias; e.g. the Asian woman weilding a 6” long sharp weapon, described incessantly by the Murky News as a vegetable peeler.
Should we return to the old days when a few bad apple cops killed with impunity? Of Course not. But must we now presume cops guilty until proven innocent, and subject them to a standard in the calm of post-event review, rather than the dangerous, emotional, and swift-moving situation on the street? Nope.
It’s getting worse now for cops, as well, since the former respect cops had from even the bad guys has all but evaporated. There are a whole lot of people out there that have no respect for life of any kind. The opening scenes of The Brave One, strarring Jodie Foster, chronicles all too well the viciousness of many people today.
An adversarial IPA is not what we need.
And in a related matter, releasing police reports of crimes just puts victims at further risk. It’s astounding to me that anyone would propose such a thing. But it shouldn’t be, since criminals’ rights have trumped victims’ rights in this entire country for several decades now.
Frustrated finfan very well done and said! Excellent!
Very well said Dave!
#12- In last night’s Sunshine Task Force meeting, opening Police records and reports was up for discussion. If you go to the City’s website, you can read and view everything that happened. I got the impression that the ACUL wants this proposal to pass to sue the City, same with the NAACP.
I’ll tell you that it frightens the hell outta me that members of the Task Force are members of the press. They are really pushing hard to get more info to sell newspapers with. I honestly don’t think they give a dam about whom they hurt as long as they can sell their ads, and newspapers. I’ve seen them write things in the paper that practically draws you a map of where a victim lives, and tells you so much about a crime victim that if you had half a brain, you’d know who they were. Nothing like helping criminals re-victimize victims!
I spoke last night on behalf of victims, and supported the many concerns the Police listed in a memo. I also asked them to get input from as many victims’ rights groups as possible. I’m very disappointed that people sitting on a task force with ZERO experience in this area, are making these kinds of life altering decisions about our rights to privacy. It’s already difficult enough to get witnesses and victims to come forward as it is. Can you imagine how much worse it will be if this kind of request for information is granted?
Also, I work with criminals. I can tell you that they will study the investigation techniques used by the Police, just to become more adept at avoiding getting caught. I once took a self-defense course with my neighbors. The Police were offering it. The main thing they stressed to us was you have to think like a criminal to protect yourself. Go outside your home, and try to break in. Imagine all the ways a burglar might use, then put locks, alarms in the places you were able to get in at.
They told us that we become victims of crimes, because we don’t think like a criminal. And the most effective way to protect yourself, is to think like a criminal. That was about 20 years ago. I have never forgotten it. And the criminals I work with, have proven to me that this Police advise is nothing but the God’s honest TRUTH~
A most thorough analysis, as usual, by finfan, and most persuasive re the quals of the so-called auditor of police conduct. Someone chosen by the City Council to get a six figure salary and great bennies, and advance the Council agenda is immediately suspect. However, I can imagine that a smart person who can prove they are familiar with all necessary laws and procedures, and have experienced some serious difficulty with the police AND a thug or nut or two might be found. We’ve all driven by a scene where there’s one perp and 4 or 5 police cars, and most of us remember Rodney King, writhing on the ground while cops take turns beating the shit out of him, 20 or so watching the show (and not their own beat, where there might be a menacing thug or two needing correction). That he was a scumbag of serious dimension doesn’t justify what the cops did. And just last night on CNN we see a really fat cop tasering the crap out of a handcuffed woman, over and over, as she howls in pain. Must have been fun, for him, and may well have been “legal”, if not legal. My bro, an SF cop, was bitter about the number of times dispatch would call his car about mayhem with gunshots, and though there were other cars in the area he had to deal with the perps alone. No backup if it might be dangerous. And his peers were bitter about him graduating first in the first ever police academy in SF. There was hazing. Some cops are terrific. Some are really not. I always wondered why someone would want a job catching someone doing something wrong, when “wrong” is mostly NOT evil-scum-crazy-drugged-thief-folks, but just folks who were misdemeanoring, sitting at whites only lunch counters or whatever. A little perspective, please. Since they’re so well armed and trained, a scared cop is pretty scary. George Green
I hope that the city council. sunshine task force or other powers that be, come to their senses regarding releasing police reports to anyone who requests such. This is an absolutely idiotic and ludicrous proposal. The Mercury is pushing this under the straw man argument of protecting the public from police wrong doing. Nothing good can come of this. Mercury reporters will have free access to the information and identification of victims and witnesses to contact and/or publish their information for anyone, including suspects, to see. This is insane for the ‘Sunshine’ task force to even consider doing. Victims will no longer come forward without fear of retaliation or the public shame of being the victim of a crime. How would you feel if your wife, daughter, or mother was a rape victim, only to have their name published along with the details of the crime? Even if names are withheld from some ‘sensitive’ reports, just the details in the police report are probably enough for a reporter or criminal to figure out who called the police, who was a witness and who was the victim. If Pierluigi is reading the prior posts and my post, please, please for the safety and dignity of victims and witnesses, do not go through with the proposal by the Mercury to release any police report. It is very ironic that it is a felony in the State of California for a police department to release the criminal history of a suspect, yet we have a city council that is entertaining the idea of releasing police reports to just anyone. Another case of criminals having much more rights than victims. This is sickening.
The ‘Sunshine’ task force is recommending releasing all police reports to the press and public, endangering victims, witnesses, and investigations. I looked at who comprised the ‘Sunshine’ task force and there is a glaring discrepancy; there is no one to advocate for victims or witnesses to provide balance as to why these reports should not be released. Before the ‘Sunshine’ task force makes any recommendations, they need to immediately allow someone to join the task force who represents the Santa Clara County Victim Witness program if they want credibility.
Also, for the sake of complete disclosure and ‘transparency’ into police investigations, I hope Barbara Attard and the ‘Sunshine’ task force are pushing for the release of names of those who file complaints in the Internal Affairs department at SJPD, along with the complete transcript of their complaint and the outcome. In the interest of full disclosure ‘Barb and the Sunshines’ should also push for the release of the criminal history of the person complaining as well as how many prior complaints this person has filed against officers. Of course, this will never happen as per California law information regarding those who file complaints is all confidential, but victims and witnesses be damned, if ‘Barb and the Sunshines’ has their way.
This was printed in the Merc last night. As you can see, some of these have ADDRESSES! Now, imagine even more transparency of Police reports, and records that allow more detail, and information. Just Frightening, if you are a victim, or a witness.
Police Blotter (71%)
09/20/2007 – SAN JOSE 2200 block of Story Road, 8 p.m. Sept 19 A man who tried to run off with a woman’s purse was chased down and confronted by her husband, who forced the man to return it. The man is being similar results
Compiled from police department reports
Police Blotter (70%)
09/21/2007 – SAN JOSE 2200 block of Story Road, 8 p.m. Sept . 19 A man who tried to run off with a woman’s purse was chased down and confronted by her husband, who forced the man to return it. The man is being similar results
Mercury News
Police Blotter (68%)
09/18/2007 – CAMPBELL 1690 S. Bascom Ave., 5:50 p.m. Sept. 17 A man and woman, both 22 years old, were arrested and charged with strong-arm robbery. According to police, the man robbed a woman of her purse similar results
Compiled from police department reports
Police Blotter (68%)
09/19/2007 – CAMPBELL 1690 S. Bascom Ave., 5:50 p.m. Sept. 17 A man and woman, both 22, were arrested on suspicion of strong-arm robbery. According to police, the man robbed a woman of her purse outside Whole similar results
Compiled from police department reports
Police Blotter (68%)
09/19/2007 – CAMPBELL Campbell Avenue, Sept. 17 Someone reportedly tried to pry open the door of a locked building during a reported burglary attempt. Apricot Avenue, Sept. 17 All the tires on a 2007 Chrysler similar results
Compiled from police department reports
Police Blotter (67%)
09/20/2007 – MOUNTAIN VIEW 2000 block of Bryant Street, 2:16 a.m. Sept. 17 A person reportedly found with stolen property was arrested. 1700 block of Rock Street, 7:46 a.m. Sept. 18 A person was arrested and similar results
Mercury News
Police Blotter (66%)
09/17/2007 – LOS GATOS 15300 block of Los Gatos Boulevard, 8:27 a.m. Sept. 14 A burglary attempt was reported. 100 block of Altura Vista, 8:47 a.m. Sept. 14 Attempted burglary was reported. 16100 block of Los similar results
Compiled from police department reports
Police Blotter (65%)
09/18/2007 – LOS GATOS 15300 block of Los Gatos Boulevard, 8:27 a.m. Friday A burglary attempt was reported. 100 block of Altura Vista, 8:47 a.m. Friday An attempted burglary was reported. SANTA CLARA 1900 block similar results
Mercury News
Police Blotter (65%)
09/18/2007 – LOS GATOS 15300 block of Los Gatos Boulevard, 8:27 a.m. Sept. 14 A burglary attempt was reported. 100 block of Altura Vista, 8:47 a.m. Sept. 14 An attempted burglary was reported. SANTA CLARA 1900 similar results
Mercury News
Police Blotter (65%)
09/15/2007 – CAMPBELL Budd Avenue, 8:50 p.m. Sept. 13 A 26-year-old man reportedly “zoned out” while driving under the influence of prescribed medication and was treated for neck pain at a hospital after similar results
Mercury News
Dave you bring up some excellent points. One point you made that I very much agree with is, “In the interest of full disclosure ‘Barb and the Sunshine’s’ should also push for the release of the criminal history of the person complaining as well as how many prior complaints this person has filed against officers.”
Many people, not all, who file complaints against the Police, do so for several reasons. One is to get out of trouble with the courts by screaming Police brutality, or using the racial profiling/discrimination excuse. Another reason is because they don’t take any personal responsibility for how they behave when stopped. They mouth off, sometimes they’re drunk or high, or they just feel a sense of entitlement to act like an idiot.
Another great point you’ve made is about the composition of the Sunshine Task Force. No victim rights advocate is sitting on the Task Force to ensure a sense of protection for victims. There is no youth component either. Both the City, and county have Youth Task Forces that are comprised of the brightest, most responsible young adults we could hope for. They work very hard in our community, and are very civic minded.
I’m deeply concerned about the IPA and her power grab. Even if a new IPA is hired next year, and I hope that happens, it has to be someone with a Police background, training, and expertise, who will be able to remain neutral and able to stand firm against undue pressure by special interest groups. I don’t know if such a gem exists, but I’ve got my paws crossed.
By the way, does anyone know who put together the Sunshine Task Force, and why he or she chose whom he or she did? It seems odd to me that so little of our community’s everday citizens weren’t appointed.
Amazingly, the Mercury had an article (more of an editorial) by a local personal injury attorney providing more reasons not to release police reports, at least until looked at by a judge, which provides very valid points regarding constitution rights to privacy.
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_6982549
Also, Kathleen #18, I agree with your points completely.
Interesting article:
http://www.counterpunch.com/roberts09252007.html
Any comments?
Put down the koolaid. Step away from the fridge.
JVZ (#20),
I wonder how many strikes on my head from a police billy it would take before I could ever be swayed by such nonsense as was offered in Paul Craig Roberts’ Counterpunch article.
If we use the arrest/use of force statistics recently released by SJPD, we should expect one arrest per every twenty-seven citizens in a given year, and that 4.4% of those arrests will involve the use of force by the police. Now, using those ratios as a gauge in examining our nation of 300,000,000 people, we would, annually, expect eleven million arrests, and 480,000 documented use of force incidents.
Read that last number again: 480,000. That’s 1320 a day, 55 an hour. If only ten percent of those force cases qualified as brutal and unjustified—in other words, if just one-tenth of all use of force arrests were made by a profession who were, as Roberts’ asserts in his article, “terrorists” armed with nightsticks, mace, and Tasers, the issue of police brutality would not be confined to over-the-top tirades such as his or even the reasoned discussion we are having here. It would instead be a national crisis: a top concern on every American’s mind.
Imagine how different things would be if every day across America our news organizations had over a hundred brutal cases from which to choose, race-merchants in every big city had a dozen freshly-bandaged victims to parade before the public, and lawyers packed our courts with new faces and new claims.
Now, take a look around. Clearly that is not the case. What is also clear is that, at some point on the use of force scale, the actions of brutal or stupid cops will register. But it will not intersect at ten percent of use of force cases, or even five (which in San Jose, would equate to six cases of obvious, not merely alleged, brutality a month). I doubt that the correct figure constitutes even one percent, unless SJPD is discovering 15 hardcore brutality cases a year (and, of course, firing the cops).
Working with the general public can be trying; working with the agitated and uncivilized is a nightmare; working in dangerous, uncontrolled situations is challenge; working in public view exposes every flaw; working in front of ubiquitous video cameras turns every viewer into a judge; for the police, these are the conditions that currently define their workplace. That there exists video of cops involved in questionable, foolish, or even savage acts, is not news, nor is it, when analyzing the big picture, evidence of anything. What it is is about what one would expect of fallible human beings routinely confronted with abject lawlessness and incivility, and caught in a profession where hiring and promotional standards have been subjected to the whims of charlatans of every stripe.
Every day, on operating tables around this nation, patients die during procedures thought to be safe. Sometimes the surgeons and/or those assisting them have obviously erred; sometimes the reason must be investigated; sometimes the reason remains a mystery. If all surgeries were done in view of our camera-at-the-ready public, the interest in seeing those operations in which the patient died dramatically would be high and those videos would find their way to an eager public, YouTube, and the evening news. Thus, for a pundit or health care critic, it would be quite easy to put together a collage of disasters, to recite a long list of mistakes, to defame an entire profession. Everyone would have their favorite stories and passionate opinions, but if they believed that those isolated incidents, those statistical anomalies, were sufficient evidence with which to formulate a valid opinion, they would be as wrong about surgeons as Paul Craig Roberts is about this nation’s police.
Jack,
I read the article by Paul Craig Roberts in the link that you supplied in #20. Just to show the mindset of Roberts, he has made statements in the past that it was impossible that the World Trade Center Towers collapsed according to all subsequent investigations, and Roberts alledges a government coverup as to the “real reasons”, and the 911 attack was staged by the US. He has also stated that “Today the US media is owned by 5 giant companies in which pro-Zionist Jews have disproportionate influence.”
Paul Craig Roberts is a nut and should be given no credibility. He is an economist, and has apparently gone off the deep end. His article on ‘police brutality’ is interesting in as much as it has also been ‘interesting’ to hear the dictator of Iran say the Holocaust never happened.
Here is a link to an article by Roberts detailing his feelings on Jews in the media, and the 911 ‘conspiracy’ according to him, as well as some other gems. Any comments on this article?
http://www.vdare.com/roberts/060816_what_know.htm