Good evening, Netizens...
After a very frustrating afternoon performing the lowest-level research imaginable, but getting a lot of answers, I believe I have the reason why a Spokane Police Investigation, including a number of arrests and the “missing” video tape all have created such a controversy surround the Spokane Police Department. However, before you assume the worst, you probably should go read Jim Camden's thorough and technically-accurate reports here:
Then I will add some comments of my own about the Criminal Investigation Unit of the Spokane Police Department and its involvement in the demonstration in Riverfront Park and consequential arrests. I have been in contact with several person(s) from the Spokane Police Department and nearly all of them have stated emphatically that there was no malice of forethought about the video which surfaced just prior to the court trial of Michael C. Lyons that was supposed to take place Tuesday.
First, by their very nature, the CIU do not always share the product(s) of their investigations with other departments within the SPD. Actually, can we rewrite this to say few if any of their reports ever end up in the Police. Granted, that may be a flaw in the system design which I would speculate will be or is being addressed already. Moreover, some of their reports and data are not “shared” because upon occasion, they are a part of an ongoing federal investigation. That does not seem to be the case in this instance.
Rather, as several people have stated, this was human error, pure and simple. If they learned from their mistakes, and in this case I believe they did, then we have a better product that will serve us well into the future.
Unlike most journalists in Spokane, I have seen the CIU up close and personal, and they do perform a thankless but extremely vital job, but that is all I can say about THAT.
One of the things they didn't do, unfortunately, is correlate their videos and reports with other ongoing police investigations. However, that was a human error, as I have stated. I doubt they will repeat that error in the future.
Of course, your results may differ.