Spokane7
67°
November 7, 2010 in City
Officers making life or death decisions in an instant
Facing the muzzle of a gun, a Spokane County sheriff’s deputy said he had one immediate thought: death.
Ryan Walter squeezed off eight rounds at the gunman, Donald J. Lafavor. His partner, Deputy Rustin Olson, fired three.
Lafavor survived the gunshot wounds and faces two counts of second-degree assault for allegedly pointing the gun at the deputies, who had responded to a domestic violence report at Lafavor’s Broadway Avenue apartment last November.
Afterward, Walter summarized his relief in an interview with investigators: “I’m glad we have good training.”
That training now is under scrutiny after four officer-involved shootings in the past 2 1/2 months in Spokane County. In three, sheriff’s deputies pulled the trigger. Two – the shooting of an armed property owner in August and the shooting of a reportedly suicidal man with a knife on Oct. 24 – were fatal. Olson, a four-year veteran of the Sheriff’s Office, was also involved in that fatal shooting late last month.
Law enforcement officials say the job is more dangerous than ever.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder recently pledged $800,000 to help train police officers nationwide to learn to anticipate and survive violent encounters. He cited the ambush-style shooting deaths of four Lakewood, Wash., police officers in a coffee shop last November. That same incident prompted the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office to begin preparing for ambush-style shootings such as sneak attacks on police cars.
But while acknowledging that police officers have dangerous jobs, some question whether placing so much training emphasis on such unlikely scenarios is helping or hurting efforts to increase public safety.
The concern, said Spokane lawyer Breean Beggs, is that “in training officers to protect themselves from the rare occasion when someone is out looking for them, they are (overlooking) training that is preventing officers from overreacting and killing citizens.
“If you measure the effectiveness by the results, it doesn’t look good, currently,” Beggs said.
Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich dismisses the notion, suggesting that any community concerns are unwarranted and based on what he considers inflammatory media coverage that focuses only on negative aspects of law enforcement.
“That’s not even taking into consideration what the deputies face, and all the fact patterns behind it,” Knezovich said. “It’s easy to sit back and Monday-morning quarterback.”
Statistics compiled by the Sheriff’s Office suggest you’re more likely to be killed in a tornado than by a deputy sheriff.
Knezovich, in fact, is preparing to present the Sheriff’s Office firearms training as a statewide standard for all law enforcement agencies.
‘You hesitate, you die’
Gayle Yeager has “shot” hundreds of police officers. The 59-year-old volunteer has been helping with Spokane Police Department and SWAT team training for about six years, and she played an armed assailant intent on killing officers in three months of training for Spokane County Sheriff’s Office employees after the Lakewood shooting.
“We taught them to pay a little bit quicker attention so that they don’t die,” said Yeager, who has not worked in law enforcement other than as a volunteer trainer.
Yeager, Catie Padilla, 77, and other volunteers wage a variety of surprise attacks on officers aimed at testing their reaction skills.
“They have to have positive, undeniable probable cause,” Yeager said. “And that’s the key thing we train them on – you make sure you have absolute probable cause before you pull that trigger.”
Volunteers try to help hone the observation skills of law enforcement during the training, because, Yeager said, “you hesitate, you die.”
“Nine times out of 10, we kill the officers,” Yeager said.
Yeager points to her longtime friend, Spokane police Officer Brian Orchard, the last law enforcement official murdered in the line of duty in Spokane County. He was shot to death as he worked undercover in 1983.
“He hesitated, he died,” Yeager said. “You can kill an officer within a microsecond.”
Within that microsecond, officers need to consider all aspects of a situation, from the placement of a weapon to an assailant’s demeanor. And they must remember that assailants can still grab weapons if they drop them.
“It’s very easy to harm someone,” Padilla said. “I’ve put a gun down my shirt before and they didn’t notice it.”
All Spokane County sheriff’s employees attended the ambush training with Padilla and Yeager, which ended a few weeks before Deputy Brian Hirzel shot and killed Pastor Wayne Scott Creach on Aug. 25 in Spokane Valley. Yeager said the Creach shooting was very similar to ambush scenarios rehearsed during the training.
Hirzel told investigators he shot Creach after Creach refused commands and was seen reaching for a gun in his back waistband.
Law enforcement officers are trained to look for such details.
“If we have noncompliance with verbal commands, that right away suggests that any movement toward the officer is to be viewed in a different light,” said firearms expert Thomas Aveni, executive director of the Police Policy Studies Council in Spofford, N.H. Aveni taught a class on deadly force at the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office about a year and a half ago.
“If you do all the wrong things in the wrong context, you’re increasing the likelihood you’re going to get shot,” Aveni said.
Of the 48 officers killed in the line of duty in the United States last year, 15 were ambushed, according to the FBI.
“I think we’d be a little bit derelict in our responsibilities to our staff if we don’t teach them how to deal with those scenarios,” Knezovich said.
A rash of shootings
Every Spokane County sheriff’s deputy carries a firearm. Only a handful carry Tasers.
Knezovich said the electric shock devices were never intended to replace the use of firearms in a potentially deadly situation; they’re intended to reduce officer injuries by supplying another nonlethal tool.
“There’s no guarantee the Taser’s going to work,” said Eric Johnson, Taser expert for the Sheriff’s Office. For the device to work properly, two metal probes must connect to the intended target. Johnson said Tasers are effective about 60 percent of the time.
“If you have one chance to end the threat and you go for (a Taser) … you may yourself be a victim,” he said.
Some Sheriff’s Office employees also carry pepper spray, but like Tasers, trainers say using it comes down to a personal choice by a deputy.
Some people believe “we have this Bat belt on” that can be used to defuse any situation, said Mike Brooks, pepper spray expert for the Sheriff’s Office. That’s not the case.
Said Knezovich, “It really comes down to what you’re comfortable with and what you’re willing to carry on your body.”
Deputies aren’t trained to use a specific weapon in a specific situation because “every situation is completely different,” said Rick Johnson, firearms instructor for the Sheriff’s Office.
But, he said, “There’s a simple philosophy. … I’ve never seen anybody get hurt by complying with law enforcement. It just doesn’t happen.”
A week after Creach was shot and killed, Knezovich said at a press conference that deputies “were able to save the lives” of people they shot on three previous occasions.
A review by sheriff’s officials in one of the shootings said the deputies may have jeopardized their own safety by assisting the suspect after he was shot.
In that case, deputies rushed to Michael E. Young after Young was shot outside his home at 11709 E. Fairview Ave. after a friend reported him as suicidal. He survived several gunshots and is facing first-degree assault charges.
“Was it possible their rapid response saved the suspect’s life? Possibly,” according to a report by Daniel Knight, lead firearms instructor for the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office. “But rushing up to someone who was armed and just fell to the ground is dangerous. … The deputies could have stayed in position and assessed the situation for a short period of time before making the approach to ensure their safety.”
Sheriff’s officials recommended additional training on how to respond to injured suspects and to “continue to reinforce the concept of ‘shoot until the threat ceases to exist.’ ”
Lawyer questions choice to shoot
Creach’s fatal confrontation with Hirzel was the first of four recent officer-involved shootings in Spokane County. Less than three weeks later, sheriff’s deputies David Westlake and Thad Schultz fired several shots at a domestic-violence suspect who had arrived back at his home with a gun. Schultz said he believed the suspect, Sean P. Houlihan, fired shots at the deputies, but Westlake has said Houlihan pointed his gun at them but didn’t fire. Investigators still have not determined if Houlihan fired shots during the Sept. 16 confrontation.
Nine days later, an unarmed pregnant woman was shot by Washington State Patrol Sgt. Lee Slemp, a 25-year veteran, while members of the Spokane gang unit and the Quad City Drug Task Force searched an apartment on Lincoln Street.
Then on Oct. 24, Quentin D. Dodd was fatally wounded after two sheriff’s deputies responded to his home on a domestic violence call. Deputy Olson, who was involved in the November shooting, said he shot Dodd after Dodd charged him with a piece of obsidian that had been carved into a sharp object.
The cluster of officer-involved shootings sparked concern – and sometimes, outrage – in the community.
Beggs, the Spokane lawyer, said the Dodd incident, in particular, raises questions about how law enforcement deals with mentally ill suspects.
“It’s not just that there are shootings, it’s that there are concerns with the shootings,” Beggs said. “The question is, could you have done something three steps earlier to make sure the person doesn’t turn on you with a knife?” Beggs said. “It’s possible they did everything right even by the best police practices out here.”
But Beggs questioned why deputies didn’t use a Taser on Dodd after he initially refused to drop the weapon. “If the training is then you’ve got to shoot them in that situation, that would not be the right training,” Beggs said.
Knezovich said the shooting occurred because Dodd charged at Olson. “There are a gamut of things that may have been done differently, but that’s not what happened here,” Knezovich said. “It would have been ineffective to use a Taser on someone that’s running at you.”
Dodd, who tried committing suicide last summer, had repeatedly yelled at Olson and Deputy Todd Miller to shoot him while ignoring their commands to drop the weapon. The deputies exited their patrol cars, and Dodd charged at Olson with the weapon; Olson fired his gun three times, striking Dodd, who was pronounced dead at a hospital.
Dodd’s family is dubious of police accounts of the shootings and deny that he was suicidal. His brother, Charles Dodd, questioned why deputies felt threatened by the 7-inch rock his brother was carrying.
“You look at the thing they call a knife, and it was just a rock,” Charles Dodd said. “It’s just unreal what people can get shot for these days. I just hope something gets done about it. These cops are just getting out of hand.”
Knezovich had a different way to describe the object Dodd clutched when charging Olson: “Our ancestors killed mammoths with those types of weapons.”
Human trafficking suspects released 
oneanddone on November 07 at 3:37 a.m.
I know the local boo-birds will be out there in full force but there’s one essential fact: you come at a police officer with a deadly weapon, don’t expect hesitation or leniency. It’s combat, kill or be killed.
Sadbuttrue on November 07 at 6:35 a.m.
And in Spokane, if you come at a police officer with a rock or if you are minding your own business with a pop bottle don’t expect hesitation or leniency, either.
It’s just absolutely astonishing how the first writer states dogma that is so incredibly at odds with the current state of the law. Hopefully for the financial welfare of the citizens of the Spokane area, police officers stating such drivel publicly will be rooted out and expelled from the force.
And yes, we know that the police are in combat against us. We know that we are viewed as hostile enemy combatants.
That’s actually the real problem here.
terryalan on November 07 at 6:54 a.m.
or run from a drunken off duty cop with a gun and be shot in the back of the head…..
lewis8457 on November 07 at 7:28 a.m.
or enter a mini mart only to buy a candy bar and be beat to death while being given no opportunity to stop resisting. I am sure oneonone has a good explanation for that.
Ozzie has to let us know they tried their best while the bodies are piling up. Talk about blowing smoke.
lewis8457 on November 07 at 7:31 a.m.
I thought that was why we are paying the cops such high wages, they are supposed to be trained to make CORRECT split second decisions. Hell anybody can just point and shoot.
Ron_the_Cop on November 07 at 8:09 a.m.
Sadbuttrue and Lewis,
I’ve think you’ve touched on the key element here. I won’t rehash what I’ve written in these threads before (Click on my name and read my previous posts). It’s the rules of engagement (ROE) the fundamentally distinguish between civil/domestice law enforcement and the military. We are not in a war zone. The police are us and WE OUR the police.
I agree with “you hesitate you die” meme. We lost six officers during my thirty-five year career - four in ambush situations. I’ve read the entire 700 page police report. I will report my findings to Sheriff Knezovich in the near future and I would expect him to act on my recommendations in this OIS. The area of my concern are not with the officer’s initial reactions and response, it’s all about what followed and the investigation itself. OISs for many reasons require an A+ investigation not only for the potential criminal and civil ramifications but to learn from errors/mistakes change police policy and procedure. Implement training to prevent these tragic shootings from happening in the first place. We all benefit as a community from an A+ investigation and should expect no less.
Det. Ron Wright (Retired)
Riverside PD, CA Now living in Spokane
BTW - Folks should watch KREM2 piece from Friday night. My question is why the apparent rush?
http://www.krem.com/news/Internal-police-emails-reveal-cage-fight-over-pastor-shooting-report-106795423.html?commentPage=0#comments
Albert on November 07 at 8:18 a.m.
Good morning everyone! Look at the “bright” side, if you are a family looking to relocate to a peaceful, well regulated, goose-stepping community, then Spokane is the place. As previously noted we are now making national headlines with our enforcement combatants. However if you are in the ministry, desire to purchase large plastic bottles of cola, decide to run away in panic from an drunken off duty goose stepper, or in anyway confront these neanderthals in combat attire, then you had better stay away from Spokane. Outside of these minor factors, we the citizens of Spokane are kind, courteous, respectful of others, and do our very best to make up for our less-than-sterling national reputation.
Sadbuttrue on November 07 at 9:47 a.m.
Ron,
The problem with many of the facts and experiences that you cite is that it justifies force protection above every other value for the police. This is not to downplay those terrible ambush situations wherein the “hesitate and you die” actually applies.
The “split second decision” canard is mis-cited in this article. The police are given wide latitude in situations wherein they are in an ambush or in actual hand to hand combat with violent felons. None of the recent police shootings in the Spokane area have any of the applicable facts wherein the cops’ use of deadly force could be justifiable. The desire to conclude such situations swiftly, as has been stated over and over again, is not the kind of compelling governmental interest that justifies the use of deadly force.
Its all the rest of the times when the police are in no or little danger, or alarmingly manage to escalate a situation that could have just as easily been defused. It just amazes me how every other profession that deals with these very same people without killing them manage to deescalate tense situations and stay safe at the same time.
Ron_the_Cop on November 07 at 10:44 a.m.
Sadbuttrue,
Actually I think we’re in agreement. Officers have every right to defend their lives and the lives of others in immediate life threatening situations/ambushes.
This was my point re the fundamental distinction between a domestic law enforcement force and the military. This harks back to the time of Sir Robert Peel in London with the creation of the first “professional” policing organizations. It was because of domestic disturbances where the military was called in to quell them and people were shot indiscriminately. Here America in NYNY there were similar incidents which led to the establishment of the first professional policing organizations. Up to this time we had volunteer night watchman patrols (largely for fire watches) and county sheriffs who had a few deputies and would call upon able bodied citizens when necessary.
Bottom line - this has to do with ROEs. The police are us and WE ARE the police. We empower the police to police us. The police are not an occupying military force. The police are ULTIMATELY responsible to WE THE PEOPLE.
We are not in a war zone so the ROEs are different. Just as it would be inappropriate to hold our military in combat roles to maintain the same ROEs that we expect of our civilian police officers. When the enemy hides behind civilians there will be unfortunately civil casualties. This is the nature of war.
BTW please excuse the typos in my previous post:-) That I will correct when I forward to others.
misjustice on November 07 at 11:11 a.m.
Great propaganda piece, SR.
All this “training” has not lessened the incidents of homicide by cop. WHY?
Sadbuttrue on November 07 at 11:35 a.m.
The “training” that police receive nowadays is all about giving Police the upper hand over a civilian society. The Police have seized the levers of power over huge swaths of society and the economy on a level that would astonish and mortify the Founding Fathers.
I am convinced that the unbelievably staggeringly-huge role the police play in our society is an often overlooked and significant factor in our current economic malaise and our national decline. You simply cannot arrest and imprison the number of non-violent offenders that this nation does and expect to remain unscathed.
Part of the problem the police face is that the less-educated among us are protesting the obvious wrongness of this situation by pushing back physically on the streets. They do not protest by writing on these blogs. They refuse the commands to kneel down in supplication before people who demand, but have done nothing to deserve their respect.
Somehow, it seems remote that applying ever-greater levels of deadly force to this situation is going to fix it.
Ron_the_Cop on November 07 at 12:02 p.m.
BTW I think the list of SO OISs is missing the one from up north several months ago. This is the one where the deputies responded to the shots fired call, engaged the suspect who would not drop his gun on command and was shot and survived.
BitofBacon on November 07 at 12:04 p.m.
Sad-how is writing on these blogs working out for you? Any less shootings since you started? I would say there are more, therefore you caused them. Something to keep in mind was the training was more or less the same in 2008 when there were no civilian deaths in Spokane from law enforcement so two years ago it must have been great but now it’s bad?
eagleproducer on November 07 at 12:18 p.m.
bitobacon: If the training is the same as before (as you claim) then why the dog and pony show since the Lakewood ambush? Care to explain that?
disgusted on November 07 at 12:54 p.m.
Yes people lets look at the picture above! Now picture two HEALTHY Spokane Taliban members (police officers) as pictured above with BULLET PROOF VESTS confronting a 50 year old in poor health with a dull rock and a history of mental problems give me a break murder is murder and just because they have a badge they should not be allowed to use it to conduct hennas acts of crimes. This officer cannot be allowed to patrol our streets and neighborhoods again his shoot first lie later tactics is just not acceptable We need good Police officers to protect our community members. We do not need a Taliban death squad! to allow this man back into our streets would be like dropping a shark into a community swimming pool during peak season and expecting nothing but good from it.
MrNatural on November 07 at 1:24 p.m.
Training…how?
Like a police officer amongst the citizenry for which they are sworn to protect and serve or like a combat soldier on a sweep and clear mission.
I do not wish to criticize Spokane’s Law Enforcement…I actually have no right to do so…or at least until I’m shot, but I’m really beginning to believe that they are “Taught” a black and white scenario and to react with extreme prejudice….and whether it’s right to have this training walking among us. I do not like to see people die for being stupid, mentally stressed or misinterpreted.
Bob_Knows on November 07 at 1:33 p.m.
The blue gun thug gangs always CLAIM to “protect” the people. Corrupt politicians lie to us about “public safety” when they use OUR money to hire roving gangs of murderous thugs. But out on the street, did the “protect” Pastor Creach? Did they “protect” Otto Zehm. NO! They murdered the people. If you watch what they actually do, all the LIES about “public safety are total fraud. They are hired cold blooded killers who spend their time out looking for men to destroy or murder. They are the “police” in police state tyranny. They are the Gestapo thugs who use a reign of terror and killing to keep the people under control.
To you politicians. CUT their budget. Fire most of them. Run them out of town NOW. We the people do not need roving gun thug gangs murdering us.
Bob_Knows on November 07 at 1:35 p.m.
Since 9-11-01, more Americans have been murdered on our streets by terrorist gangs in blue shirts than by Al-Queda, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. The real terrorists who kill American citizens every day are the blue gun thug Gestapo.
BitofBacon on November 07 at 1:35 p.m.
Spoketucky-I think you might want to ask the man behind the curtain, the Great Ozzie, that question. I don’t think the dog and pony show started with Lakewood, I think it started with Creach and Dodd.
Bob_Knows on November 07 at 1:43 p.m.
Did you see the TV news Friday morning? Some one (1) man who “might have been disturbed” was in his home. The blue gangbangers showed up with a small army of “SWAT” pseudo military thugs, and 20 other blue shirt gang members ALL AT OUR EXPENSE. They spent many hours, much on “overtime” before going back to their pig sty. ONE (1) flatfoot going ‘round to have a chat with the guy would have defused the situation and restored peace to OUR neighborhood for less than 10% of the tax money. The reason they send 50 when 1 would do the job is because their BLOATED BUDGET hires 10 times as many bored gun thugs as are needed to do the job. Most of them are sitting around in their pseudo military uniforms keeping their armored vehicles (tanks) warmed up looking for some excuse to assault one of OUR neighborhoods.
Its time to CUT TAXES and fire 90% of the sniveling thugs. Let them do good work by sending 1 or even 2 flatfoots around to have a chat instead of responding with a huge gang of cowboys playing military space cadet.
Bob_Knows on November 07 at 1:47 p.m.
Did you notice how Killovitch waited until after the election to talk about how many men his gun thug army murders on our streets?
Bob_Knows on November 07 at 1:50 p.m.
oneanddone wrote, “don’t expect hesitation or leniency. It’s combat, kill or be killed.”
That killing protects the people? HOW?
We the people should pay taxes for those killers? Why?
Bob_Knows on November 07 at 1:59 p.m.
“Officers making life or death decisions in an instant”
Far too many blue gun thug killers are deciding death — for the people they pretend to protect. How do we convince them to decide on life?
misjustice on November 07 at 2:08 p.m.
@ Ron; thanks for the link to the article about the e-mails regarding the Creach homicide…I’d “heard” that the story was out there but hadn’t read about it. I encourage other readers to check it out…
From the article in Ron’s link to KREM;
“In addition, the emails also show Prosecutor Tucker had knowledge of the investigation’s progress before he received the report, despite telling KREM 2 News earlier he had been trying not to follow the case.”
This is the dude that will be “our” Prosecutor for another term. Brilliant!
eagle on November 07 at 2:14 p.m.
I see the sheriff is once again reacting to public criticism of his officers behavior. But the public needs to be careful that they don’t follow blindly down the primrose path of obvious deception. The SCSD employs professionals to craft and shape public opinion often diverting public attention from what really matters. The recent string of shootings for the most part have been in violation of Constitutional freedoms guaranteed to all of us and paid for in blood. Note that in the training, both mentioned and alluded to, that officers are justified to use lethal force when they see a citizen carrying a weapon, be it a rock or gun, there is no mention of how it is displayed or the apparent demeaner of the armed citizen. The presence of a weapon = justifiable use of lethat force.
In the Creach shooting the officer in question had crossed onto Creach property, not public property, but property clearly marked closed, and was acting in a suspicious manner to any reasonable person who may have observed his behavior. Example He backed his unmarked unidentified car up to the outdoor displays of plants in an obviously closed business. See any video of the shooting scene.
His intent was to do paper work unrelated to any Creach business. Violation of fourth ammendment property rights. Note that in the investigative report he states that Creach placed his gun in his back waistband when he realized that it was an officer of the law. ( he did not have a holster) In the same report the deputy states that Creach never pointed the gun or verbally threatened him. Thus the officer had no right to demand that Creach put his weapon down, a violation of Creach’s second amendment right to keep and bear arms, especially on his own property. Finally the officer assaulted Creach when Creach did not do as he said and get on the ground, something that he physically could not do and the officer alludes to Creach telling him the same, ultimately he took Creach’s life, a violation of his human and civil rights. In short, Creach placed his (unchambered) handgun in a neutral position after discovering that the unidentified, unannounced, suspicious acting individual in the unmarked car backed up to his sale merchandise at 11;07 PM was really a police officer who in turn beat then shot and killed Creach in his own parking lot all the while claiming self defense as the attached training tool says to do. And note that now the Sherriff is proposing that the state adopt this training program as a state wide training model
Bob_Knows on November 07 at 2:33 p.m.
You are right Eagle. The hired gun thugs should be PROTECTING our civil rights to own and bear arms. Instead they are murdering the people. The murdering thug who assassinated Pastor Creach should be tried and hanged.
A long time ago in a land far, far away, there once were free men.
zelda on November 07 at 4:43 p.m.
Democracies derive their power from the consent of the governed. The civilized way to keep things from reverting back to the times of vigilantes and gin mobs is to put forward better leaders than Tucker and Knezovich, who ran unopposed while Tucker was weakly opposed. Looking at this situation I can only conclude that the governed are consenting to this, maybe with a lot of doubt or misplaced confidence, but consenting nonetheless at the ballot.
Is it indifference, apathy or…what? The Inland NW gives the U.S. military a lot of support (after all, enlistment is the job of last resort for many young people around here) so do residents equate the military with LE? As Ron says, this is a dangerous notion.
cpd805 on November 07 at 5:21 p.m.
In the article, Beggs stated “… they are (overlooking) training that is preventing officers from overreacting and killing citizens.”
That is patently not true. As one who routinely goes through this training, I can say from experience that a lot of our firearms training is in “shoot/don’t shoot” scenarios. These scenarios, whether role-playing or FATS, cause us to analyze the threat, and make a decision as to the use of force in a split second. That said, they teach us to shoot, but also to analyze a situation to determine a don’t shoot situation.
We saw this in the standoff on W Decatur earlier this week. I put out some information regarding the restraint shown by officers that was not mentioned in the article. Here it is. http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/nov/05/standoff-ends-peacefully/?comments#c216076
Sad, yes, our training does give us the upper hand in specific tactical scenarios, but not a general “upper hand over a civilian society”. But if someone pulls a knife on me, I’m not pulling out my knife to make if “fair” in some Steven Segall show of bravado. So, as a law enforcement officer, I will gain the tactical “upper hand” in potentially dangerous situations and frankly don’t care if some bloggers like that or not.
cpd805 on November 07 at 5:28 p.m.
Zelda, of course the residents do not equate the military with law enforcement, at least not that I have seen, and I meet and talk to a LOT of the public. I agree with you that effective government is through the consent of the governed. However, you asked about the elections of Tucker (I did not vote for him) and Ozzie…”Is it indifference, apathy or…what?” I don’t think so. Maybe, just maybe, the majority of the public do not see law enforcement in the same light you do. Perhaps the real public doesn’t agree with the majority of bloggers on the SR site.
Ron_the_Cop on November 07 at 6:41 p.m.
Cpd05,
Thanks for your comments. There is more to the Creach OIS I’m not prepared to discuss openly right now. Some of this follows the discussions we’ve all had with Brad Z. I may in the future depending on how LE responds to my analysis of the 700 page plus redacted report. I do see issues that need to be addressed. Just as the SPD OIS investigators believed the investigation was incomplete when apparently they were ordered to deliver to Tucker as KREM reported on Friday.
There appears to be a political rush put on this investigation. I’m not prepared to detail by whom and why at this point.
I will leave it at if I had a competent prosecuting agency that had jurisdiction over Tucker I COULD make a strong case of rendering criminal assistance in the Savage manslaughter case when he covered it up by not filing criminal charges. BS that this case was completely and thoroughly investigated.
Ron_the_Cop on November 07 at 6:46 p.m.
I should say my comment re “BS” applies to the Savage case. I will say at this point the OIS as handed off to Tucker was incomplete. I will say I believe in the end Creach OIS will be justified.
I can factually cite a number of areas as an experienced criminal investigator I would want to clarify both by forensics, further investigation and interviews before I would be satisfied in handing off my work product to my district attorney’s office to review let alone for the subsequent IA investigation.
eagle on November 07 at 8:46 p.m.
Ron I have to say at times I like what you say and at times you are FOC. In regards to the Creach shooting being justified, I do not agree and I believe that if you had acces to the crime scene photos you would would see the light so to speak.
Cpd805 it’s been said around the SD the word on Hirzel is he has an” I either take you to jail or shoot you” reputation as stated by other SCSD have you heard any of that from where you are.
Ron_the_Cop on November 07 at 9:14 p.m.
Eagle,
This story is not done yet. Stay tuned! Fasten your seat belt. You’re in for a wild ride. Dep. Hirzel’s not out of the woods yet. The truth we all seek will come from the crime scene forensics.
My issue is those charged with doing an A+ OIS investigation do what they’re being paid to do. And I don’t mean to bad mouth the worker bees either. You caught a glimpse of this battle in the “Cage Fight” reported by KREM2.
misjustice on November 07 at 9:18 p.m.
cpd stated, ” However, you asked about the elections of Tucker (I did not vote for him) and Ozzie…”Is it indifference, apathy or…what?” I don’t think so. Maybe, just maybe, the majority of the public do not see law enforcement in the same light you do. Perhaps the real public doesn’t agree with the majority of bloggers on the SR site.”
-The number of those registered to vote in Spokane County is 261,250
- VOTER TURNOUT - TOTAL … … %58.41
-BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL… … . 152,607
-The vote for Sheriff (running unopposed)
County Sheriff
Ozzie Knezovich … … . . 111,293
WRITE-IN… … … . . 4,543
Over Votes … … … 3
Under Votes … … … 36,768
http://www.spokanecounty.org/News.aspx?dept=0&news=629
Of the people registered to vote which returned ballots, over 41,300 did not cast a vote for Oz Man or wrote in a candidate other than Ozzie.
I’d hardly call Ozzie’s numbers a resounding vote of approval by the “real public”. Maybe the “real public” is more in step with the critics on these threads than cpd would care to acknowledge.
Note to cpd; saying “real public” is Palinesque, kind of like her “real Americans” quote. And requires refudiation.
lewis8457 on November 07 at 9:24 p.m.
Bits-o-bacon i actually agree with you, i also believe the Creach murder started the dog and pony show and the Dodd murder needed it to be demonstrated. For us idiots.
Not that it really matters. I don’t care what it is supposed to look like. I want to see the officer use his special training that makes them so damn valuable to make a split second decision that doesn’t involve killing someone.
cpd805 i can only hope your one of the many to be laid off. “and frankly don’t care if some bloggers like that or not”.
Eagle that has already been stated by a person Hirzel pulled over back in July. Hirzel threatened him with jail or death, if he did not co-operate. And this law loving maniac is back out on the streets. Hard for me to believe Ozzie really cares about our safety.
cpd805 sadly i do think you are right many people in spokane don’t see a problem i suppose that is because you guys haven’t murdered someone they know yet. With Tucker still in the drivers seat i suppose that is just a matter of time isn’t it?
Civil Liberties what a joke. We have none in Washington as stated by Steve Tucker a citizen must obey a police officer regardless if the officer is acting in the right. And that will be the reason for him to say Hirzel was justified for murdering Scott Creach. Even though Hirzels story as more holes in it then swiss cheese.
I was watching the TV show Conspiracy Theory w/Jesse Ventura and he was all upset because he could be shot for crossing a line in the desert at area 51 and he said I can be shot with no trial, what happened to my civil liberties and i thought Jesse don’t come to Spokane if you think civil liberties is going to keep you from being shot.
Ed Byrnes on November 07 at 10:04 p.m.
On November 5th at 6:25 p.m. I commended citizens and law enforcement for communicating directly with each other rather than at each other. I also asked for anyone to put forth constructive ideas for healing our community.
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/nov/05/standoff-ends-peacefully/
In that posting I also stated that “….we can count on each one of us having our own personal reactions, on an emotional level, to ideas that might be presented. Our challenges, if we are serious about communicating with, rather than at, each other are to (a) avoid using suggestions which stereotype each other, (b) avoid offering judgments about the ideas for a couple of days, and (c) avoid attacking each other no matter what our emotions are doing.”
That was the last posting in that forum by anyone.
Any SR articles aside I am most bothered by an increasing pattern of deep and mutual mistrust between us citizens and local law enforcement, which at times turns to hostility. I acknowledge that I have used some very derogatory terms about law enforcement in our community in the past. I believe that the stakes are too high for me to offer excuses for my own past behavior in these forums, so I am asking those who I maligned for forgiveness.
I have consistently suggested direct citizen review of all law enforcement use of lethal and potentially lethal force, and did so again on November 5th. Elloki suggested on November 5th at 3:20 P.M. that we go on ride alongs with law enforcement.
These are only two ideas and I am certain that there are more ideas out there.
Let us all, both citizens and law enforcement, please begin to bring forward ideas that will heal our community. We need to come together for the sake of everyone’s safety, be you a civilian or a law enforcement member.
Ed
zelda on November 07 at 10:56 p.m.
@misjustice — I agree. I would hardly call his showing Nov. 2 a ringing endorsement from the voters.
IThe judicial positions got a large # of under votes since a lot of them were unopposed and noncontroversial. It will be interesting to crunch the numbers on Ozzie K. relative to the other positions with no opposition.
Noticed also that Ozzie K. called the recent shootings a “cluster,” but the problem with clusters is how big you draw the circle. Conclusions from crime statistics rely on longitudinal data and the timeline’s always moving forward. I suppose if shootings continue we might conclude that the populace has gone loco from unemployment, drink and drugs, the cops are reacting or over-reacting or some of both. Probably not due to phases of the moon, though. I’m hoping for a lull.
nslopeofw on November 07 at 11:34 p.m.
Key thing to think about. These officers are paid to make these decisions under stress. If they cant handle it, then we need to eliminate all the current officers, and have them test (both physically and mentally) to prove they can handle the stress of the job. If they can, then re-hire them. Then, they should have to re-test every year, If they can’t pass, then we have a whole slew of new rent-a-cops for night security at warehouses.
it’s sad that they make it to this point in their careers, and have never been evaluated to see if they can actually handle it. The other sad part is the propaganda being put out for use to feel sorry for these thugs. If you can’t handle the job, quit.
Sadbuttrue on November 08 at 7:20 a.m.
Basically, the citizenry needs to peacefully revolt by withdrawing financial support from these thugs, until it really really hurts and catches their attention.
At this point, I am working diligently to get the word out among travel professionals, travel writers and others in the travel industry that this area should be regarded as a “no go” zone for tourism, due to the superabundance of insanely-dangerous and unhinged police. A concerted effort on everyone’s part, in the one area that will be most noticeable, should create the kind of dramatic repercussions that could create a “perfect storm” for real change.
It is very clear from the writings of cops and cop supporters that they are primarily interested in protecting themselves. When it comes to budget cuts, they howl that the police should not be cut because they are “willing to take a bullet for us.” Somehow, it just never works out that way.
The piles of civilian corpses who gave up their lives to protect the police is getting rather immense.
lewis8457 on November 08 at 7:21 a.m.
Ed I don’t know if ride a longs would work they would just put you in a car with a honest to goodness cop. Now if we could go for a ride along with Officer Hirzel, Olsen, Thompson,we might be able to see the problems, that is if we lived through it.
And don’t we have someone who is supposed to be bridging the gap while pulling in 100 grand? The police ombudsman, isn’t it odd in all these shootings we have not heard one word of encouragement by his office? Can you say wasted money, because that is what his office is.
If he can not have independent investigative powers how could a volunteer citizen board get any info? The powers that be have the truth door locked and well guarded. All i can say is good luck.
misjustice on November 08 at 7:44 a.m.
And the guard is no-charge Tucker. Don’t worry, boys/gals in blue, err BDUs, he’s got your back.
Bob_Knows on November 08 at 9:26 a.m.
You are right Sadbuttrue. The only thing the people can do would be to cut their bloated budgets. Our corrupt county and city councils have alway robbed us to give them all the cash they can waste. Before the election I had a chat with French about cutting off funding for the County Persecutor who refuses to do his job by prosecuting killer pigs. The Council holds the purse strings. They need to demand that the County Persecutor does his job before he holds his hand out for funding. And the pigs only need about 10% of their bloated budgets. They have far too many of them going around in gangs beating good men to death, etc.
Ed Byrnes on November 08 at 7:00 p.m.
Frustration is understandable though I do suggest that using epithets prevents direct dialogue and invites monologue.
So we now have ride alongs, citizen review and cutting budgets being discussed.
I concur that we cannot count on our imunicipal leaders to do anything in support of the latter two of these ideas, however we citizens can.
How many of you would vote YES if a ballot initiative appeared stating something along these lines:
The Spokane County CEO and the Mayor of Spokane shall form a Citizen Review Panel to independently investigate any and all use of lethal or potentially lethal force by any SPD officer or Spokane County Sherriff’s Deputy of any rank, including those providing contractual service to municipalities within the county. This review panel shall be nominated from the citizenry, have independent investigatory power and shall conduct public hearings as part of their investigations. The Spokane City and County Attorneys offices shall provide substantive assistance with securing evidence, including subpoenas, at the panels request. This panel shall make recommendations for actions, including internal discipline and criminal prosecution, to the Chief of Police, The Spokane County Sheriff, The Spokane City and County Attorneys and Prosecutors offices, the Spokane County CEO and the Mayor of Spokane. Reports and recommendations of this panel shall be made public by all means possible.
So clearly I am not an attorney and welcome the voluntary help of one in improving the language of this.
Also, getting something like this on the ballot requires feet on the ground. Who is willing to help with this? Knocking on doors, collecting signatures in public settings, making calls will be necessary. Also, anyone from the communications industry who is interested in helping with PR and fund raising for local advertising in the lead up to the election is most welcome.
I look forward to hearing from you, my fellow Spokane citizens.
Ed
misjustice on November 08 at 7:20 p.m.
@ Ed; I would vote yes.
Maybe Brad could/would help with the legal drafting. He’s out of the area for a while but does log on to the blogs from time to time. Ron may know how to reach him.
I’ve done some organizing, phone banking, and door knocking in my time. I’d be willing to participate in those types of activities in order to try and get an initiative on the ballot.
Icarus on November 08 at 8:58 p.m.
I thought the job was to protect and serve…. What ever happened to shooting to wound or the tazer? But hey Ill just make sure if a cop stops near me I throw my self in to a prone position wet my self and take it like a champ….
cpd805 on November 08 at 10:04 p.m.
Ron,
The “cage battle” has been a subject of distaste mixed with humor among those I work with. Personally, I think a lot of the criticisms against Chief Kirkpatrick by the Guild and others have been blown a bit out of proportion. However, there are some legitimate leadership concerns, and this has been exascerbated by her insistence on releasing the investigative report prematurely. There have been other leadership concerns I will not air here, but many are getting fed up. I won’t even go into the Savage case other than to say it stinks.
Mis,
Many times when a candidate runs unopposed, many people will decide not to fill in the oval, which may account for the majority of the “undervote”.
And Lewis,
To actually wish another person would get laid off from their job speaks volumes as to your character. I would not wish than on you, no matter how vitriolic and caustic your posts are. You let us all know just what kind of person you are. And to alleviate your concern, I am in no way even close to getting laid off. Thank you.
cpd805 on November 08 at 10:14 p.m.
Ed,
I have said in prior posts that I would not necessarily be opposed to civilian review, as long as “review” is the actual description of the panel or board or whatever. I only have a couple of concerns: 1 - how would members of this review board be selected, and what qualifications would be required? 2 - What legal power and authority would the opinion of the review board carry?
The concern most officers have is being judged by persons who have no knowledge or understanding as to law enforcement policy and procedures, statutory and case law pertaining to use of force issues, and the personal biases some on the board may or may not have.
If these concerns can be addressed and overcome, a civilian review process may serve to bridge a gap between law enforcement and the public.
Ed Byrnes on November 09 at 12:18 a.m.
cpd805,
First, thank you for your part of keeping this conversation productive and focusing on bridging the gap between law enforcement and the public. I also appreciate your patience with the broad variety of posting content.
I will endeavor to answer some of your questions with suggestions and invite you to help construct the answers to them with your suggestions as well. I believe that a shared and transparent conversation is a credible one and that you and I are beginning on this path.
Selection Process:
I suggest that Mayor, the County CEO, the SPD Chief and the County Sheriff jointly issue a call for citizens to nominate their peers, or themselves if they are so inclined, for membership in the review panel.
I suggest that a selection panel that includes members from the citizenry and law enforcement be assembled by these aforementioned officials with a charge to review all nominations and arrive at a group of members for the citizen review panel. At this point I suggest that the mayor and county CEO present this group to the city council and county commission for a public discussion and vote in their respective meetings. I also suggest that this selection panel establish clear criteria for citizen review panel membership as their first task.
I am trusting that shared responsibility for reviewing and recommending citizen review panel membership between citizens and law enforcement will establish a credible process.
Responsibilities and authorities:
I suggest that the citizen review panel be empowered to conduct its own investigations based on evidence that is immediately related to the case. Because personnel histories are protected these should be excluded, and the facts of the immediate case are what the panel would have authority to review.
In what would be hopefully rare occasions when any party is withholding evidence I suggest that the citizen review panel have the legal authority to request a subpoena for evidence be drawn up by the city or county attorney.
I originally suggested that the work of the citizen review panel be done in public in its entirety and I have reconsidered this because evidence considered by the panel could be prejudicial if a case did make its way to a court, if it were made public beforehand. I do suggest that the report and recommendations of the citizen review panel should however be public documents.
Because I anticipate that the members of the citizen review panel may not be completely current in their knowledge of case law, the RCW, the WAC, municipal codes and labor law I suggest that their work result in recommendations made to the Mayor or County CEO, the SPD Chief or County Sheriff, and the city or county attorney. I suggest that the response from these officials to the recommendations also be made public.
This is a starting point of my suggestions and as such I invite your suggestions and the suggestions of other readers.
I concur that the concerns of officers and deputies about the knowledge level of review panel members about law and procedure are legitimate ones. Throughout most of my career I have found that peer review by knowledgable and reasonably objective individuals is not only fair but moves the overall state of affairs forward. I will say it plainly, prejudices and biases are present among us citizens and do not belong in an effort at transparency and accountability, so in essence the reviewers must be credible if the process is to be credible.
I trust that including law enforcement and citizens in the selection process will contribute to the overall purpose of citizen review being one of bridging the gap between law enforcement and the public.
cpd805, thank you for keeping our discussion so constructive. I look forward to your suggestions and the suggestions of other posters such as misjustice, Brad, and Ron who want to construct a bridge that our community needs.
Ed
Ed Byrnes on November 09 at 12:27 a.m.
@misjustice:
Thank you for your support for this idea and offer of bringing your skills to bear for this purpose.
Please offer your own suggestions about the structure, organization, responsibilities and authority of a citizen review panel.
What I put forth just before are my initial suggestions and are that, suggestions.
I have read many of your postings and look forward to reading your ideas about how this process can work,
Ed
Liberty_Bell on November 09 at 7:28 a.m.
We already have a citizens review panel, it’s called a jury for Washington State’s well known gang of criminals, just think we get to buy them guns, badges and Crown Victoria’s, so then they can get out on the road, and show the world that crime always pays, with a great salary, benifits, health and retirement package ffrom the great Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission.
It shows with perfection how this process works!
http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2010/10/29/1229010/region-yakima-deputy-accused-of.html
Liberty_Bell on November 09 at 7:35 a.m.
And Only in Washington State could a Politician Elected Sheriff, be so clueless!
“The Sheriff’s Office has started a separate internal investigation to determine whether Moore violated any department policies.”
What a classic, the Sheriff can’t figure out if rape is a violation of departmental policies, and just think they givwe em a gun with bullits too…???
The Ku Klux Act of 1871, 42 USC 1983, still educating your local sheriff for over 130 years.
Read more: http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2010/10/29/1229010/region-yakima-deputy-accused-of.html#ixzz14ndTdVK1
cpd805 on November 09 at 8:37 a.m.
Liberty,
Of course what that deputy did was a violation of policy, probably from many different fronts. Conducting the “investigation” to “determine if a violation of policy occurred” is the standard due process procedure regardless of how obvious the violation is. It is not a reflection of the intelligence of the Sheriff….he has to follow due process regarding employment matters. If not, the Deputy could possibly retain his pension while in prison. Wouldn’t like that, would you?
Every profession has its occasional bad apples. Look at the cases where nurses kill their patients. You don’t hear people badmouthing the entire nursing profession do you? The guy is in jail and it looks like the system is working to put him away (good riddance).
bszottlinger on November 09 at 10:09 a.m.
Ed,
As a starting point I would suggest that a local University, EWU perhaps, be approached to initiate a project examining citizen review panels nationwide. Studying such areas as structure, protocol, make up etc. with a final recommendation as to the need and how it could be implemented in the Spokane area. The reason I suggest this, is quite simply that it would provide a springboard independent of all the “complainers” that post on this and other blogs. The study, once made public, would force City/County leadership into a position where they would have to respond in some way, and any resulting organized effort to establish a citizens review would have some credibility should the study findings recommend implementation.
I have no experience in the area of citizen review, however I can see how the make up of a review panel is extremely important from the standpoint of credibility. Each interest would want their own member/s who they feel would best represent their position and unless careful steps were take to insure that the panel wasn’t loaded one way or the other it would be rendered entirely ineffective.
I personally can not think of a way that a citizens review panel could actually become an investigative body because of various labor laws that would prohibit an actual investigative process. I do see how a quality citizens review panel could be very helpful in establishing community trust.
Spokane law enforcement has established precedent by apparently releasing the Creach investigative report in it’s entirety to the public, and my understanding is that Ron Wright is doing his own review of the investigative file as could any citizen if they had the time and understanding to do so. The problem with Ron’s review, no matter how accurate, is that it will have credibility only with a small segment of the community and WILL be ignored by the people who really should take a serious look at it. An established Citizens Review Panel could not be ignored, much like the Federal investigation of the Zehm case was not ignored and changes were made by local law enforcement only when it was thrown in their face.
I would also recommend that the panel make up include a member of the local defense bar with a background in criminal defense who would have the ability to point out areas of the investigation that would be significant to the defense or perhaps from a personal injury standpoint.
I also feel it is important to keep in mind that the city leaders completely ignored consultant recommendations that were made regarding the Police Ombudsman, and unless care is taken in establishing a Citizens Review Panel it too will be ignored unless it in someway is able to garner citizen/law enforcement acceptance, as well as credibility with the local press.
I don’t share any concern law enforcement might have regarding subsequent criminal or civil litigation and a recommendation from a review panel. If the investigation was poor and recommendations for change were made, the criminal defense and the plaintive, who would have access to all the discovery and their own experts would have picked the investigation apart to an even greater extent on their own. I could see how members of the panel might be called as witnesses, but so what, it is what it is.
Just some random thoughts, but I guess what I am saying is that it is an uphill battle, that will require considerable work and dedication. As anyone can see from recent press reports regardless of what the law enforcement public genre is, there was turmoil going on in the Creach investigation. Law enforcement now is in a defense posture, and I would suspect simply because they feel the need to project a competent image at a time when obvious investigative mistakes which were made during the investigation will come out.
Brad
Ron_the_Cop on November 09 at 10:46 a.m.
Misjustice, Cpd805 and Ebrynes,
Yes I do have a contact for Brad Z. I will send him an email and alert him to this thread.
I have mixed feelings about police civilian review boards or their derivations as both a criminal investigator and former police union president. At my agency a review panel was created after a very tragic shooting situation - Tyisha Miller (Feel free to Google). Is this panel effective to do what it was intended to do is a good question? Does it solve a political need and give the public a feeling of confidence and false sense of security perhaps.
As former Sheriff Tony Bamonte has explained if you have police chiefs and sheriffs doing their jobs that they are sworn to do to WE THE PEOPLE there would be no need for these review mechanisms.
In officer involved shooting cases (OIS) for the benefit of us all as a community, we need top flight criminal/IA investigators doing A+ work. Doing anything less has both criminal/Internal affairs/civil ramifications. Do sloppy work and we as taxpayers we suffer the financial consequences when in the subsequent civil actions that will follow we have to pay the piper. We have the right as citizens to hold our elected/appointed accountable when they fail to do their jobs and the financial consequences of their poor work product is that we have to indemnify their mistakes as taxpayers.
If you’ve been following the recent KREM2 reports last Friday and last night (Log on KREM2 to read them), there is information to believe/suggest that the work product that SPD handled off to the County Prosecutor was incomplete. SPD and SCSO brass in Monday’s KREM2 report have said otherwise.
I have read the some 700 page redacted report that was publicly released. I’ve read the ME Report and seen the ME’s bullet trajectory diagram. I’ve seen the photos supplied to me by the Creach family that were released to them. I’M NOT the forensic expert that the family has retained.
Based on my professional training, education and experience as both a criminal investigator and police union president from a So Cal agency with over 500 personnel, the Creach OIS case as handed off to Steve Tucker to review is incomplete with many areas in need of further investigatory work.
I do understand the complaints/concerns by the OIS detectives re giving this investigation to Tucker at the time they did. The detectives’ concerns were apparently over ruled by the law enforcement brass. What was the rush? I would be embarrassed to present such a work product to my district attorney’s office for review to determine whether a police shooting was justified criminally.
As I said before I will be providing my in depth analysis of this OIS report and provide recommendations in my opinion for further investigatory work IN CONFIDENCE to the WSP and Sheriff Knezovich to act on. If they fail to act after an appropriate time I will release my analysis publicly. I do this as a concerned citizen/taxpayer to hold those elected/appointed accountable for failure to do their sworn duties to minimize potential financial losses.
[Continued]
Ron_the_Cop on November 09 at 10:48 a.m.
[Continued from above]
I WILL NOT reveal at this point whether I believe this shooting was criminally justified or not. I will say I have serious issues with what happened after this shooting as to how the investigation proceeded re timing of the interview with the involved officer that may have caused physical and other evidence to be tainted, investigatory steps/procedures that were not done that would have made this an A+ work product to answer all of the questions from the framework of the criminal justification, subsequent internal affairs investigation and lastly the civil ramifications based on police policy, practice, procedure and training. Whether mistakes were made or not the reason for doing A+ level work is to identify areas where police policy, practice, procedure and training need to change to prevent the repeat of similar tragic incidents in the future.
This is just good police practice whenever lethal force is used by the police when an individual officer’s life or others are in imminent danger. To be sure my biases lie with law enforcement.
Further I will not go into detail here but there was a public official that reached out to my current employer and accused me of making “wild speculation” re this OIS. Was this an attempt to silence me as a citizen with unique experience, education and training from offering constructive critique?
BTW my former department just lost another officer in-the-line of duty yesterday:
http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_shooting09.110cb89.html
We lost six officers due to gunfire in my thirty-year career:
http://web.mac.com/rpdremembers/RPD_Remembers/Memorial.html
Det. Ron Wright (Retired)
Riverside PD, CA
misjustice on November 09 at 11:28 a.m.
Brad; Hey ya! How’s tricks?
I think that you gave great advice with your suggestion of having one of the Universities take a leading role in researching/constructing/developing an effective plan of action, and how to best impanel a citizen review board.
Ed Byrnes on November 09 at 12:05 p.m.
Hi Brad, cpd805, misjustice and Ron,
Thank you for all of your really thoughtful ideas. I am more encouraged right now about bridging the gap between law enforcement and the public than I have been since before moving here.
Since I am a faculty member at EWU with deep background in criminal justice issues and research I will initiate this research. I will begin by getting published and NIJ research reports on this topic and will have time for more in depth analysis to begin in 2-3 weeks.
Who is game to review my work as it progresses? I am really thinking that transparency and inclusiveness is essential throughout this whole process.
Ron has my email address and he can share it with you all so we have the option of correspond more directly with each other as we move forward.
Gratefully,
Ed
zelda on November 09 at 1:25 p.m.
I have mixed feelings about citizen review panels, as echoed by Ron and others. While it icould be a good way to foster understanding between the public and LE, it can also add to antagonisms among stakeholders, i.e., citizens, rank-and-file cops, LE management, union reps., city administrators, trial attorneys, prosecutors, et al.
My trepidation on the subject is that it could become yet another bureaucratic apparatus without some sort of sunsetting provision.
Could a citizens’ review panel be formed for a specific time period and when it is satisfied that a desired result has been obtained, dissolve itself?
The problem with a lot of committees is that they cannot agree from the outset on the definition of success and they tend to think that just having a meeting is a result.
Ron — yes, said news about the Riverside, CA officer. I hope they catch the guy soon.
eagleproducer on November 09 at 3:10 p.m.
Citizen review, schmitzen review!
Isn’t it clear to EVERYBODY by now that they (cops/their elected official apologists) don’t care what the citizens think or feel? When then first thing that comes out of a cop’s mouth when describing his/her job is “putting my life on the line” every shift for the unappreciative public, you know they view every citizen encounter as a threat to themselves and their institution.
I’m tired of hearing that. You don’t hear loggers and fishermen bragging on reality T.V. shows how they are putting their lives on the line to bring us lumber and seafood, do you? But their jobs are markedly more deadly than being a cop.
bszottlinger on November 09 at 4:01 p.m.
“The problem with a lot of committees is that they cannot agree from the outset on the definition of success and they tend to think that just having a meeting is a result.”
No disagreement from me in that regard. The same is true with just about everything I can think of done by committee , including investigations, unless the buck stops somewhere, and the goals are clearly established the committee ends up being of little benefit to anyone. So resolving those issues would be of paramount importance. As an example; Just exactly what does the City Council’s “Public Safety Committee” do, and what good are they?
Tucky:
I too get a little tired of that tune, even though I greatly appreciate the risks involved in what the law enforcement officers do for us and the sacrifices they often make. It is a choice and one that I would hope was well considered before the decision to take the job was made. They do have to take a lot of crap at times but I’m sure they also get a lot of satisfaction over the course of a career that out weighs the crap. Tucky I honestly believe that particular genre is coming from a very vocal few.
If an officer is so concerned about whether s/he will make it to the next shift, then they need to re-evaluate what they are doing.
Take a look at the Secret Service, their job is to catch a bullet for the President, and you don’t hear much about that from them. The ones I know worry more about the lousy travel arrangements then catching a bullet.
Brad
cpd805 on November 09 at 5:10 p.m.
Bradtucky,
I think roofers have the most dangerous job. Why do they wear those harnesses when up on the roof? Statistically speaking they do not fall that often. They know the risks of falling off the roof and should just accept that as part of the job.
Seriously though, I know the risks associated with my job and decided to do it anyway. I have NEVER said or alluded to anyone…ever….that I “put my life on the line every night”. Sure I have been in some very dangerous situations where an elevated use of force was necessary, but those occurrences are occasional and are not the norm. Heightened awareness, however, is the norm, and is necessary because you never know.
That said, I will follow my training and take the necessary precautions to protect myself. That means maintaining the tactical upper hand in contacts with the public. Sound tactical procedures is my “harness”.
bszottlinger on November 09 at 5:31 p.m.
cpd805:
Or, they could limit their work to flat roofs.
Nothing wrong with “Sound tactical procedures”, to protect ones-self as long as they are intended not only to protect, but also deescalate. Some times it is impossible to maintain the “tactical upper hand” in contacts with the public, in those cases I would hope your “harness” would be a quick wit, understanding, and the ability to communicate. Retreat doesn’t hurt either.
cpd805 on November 10 at 10:01 p.m.
Brad, good points.
Like I said in another post, these actions are the norm for most police officers (yes, there are few exceptions). Quick wit, understanding, effective communication skills, etc, rarely ever reach the public’s ears because what was avoided or prevented from happening is not sensatinal enough for media attention. What does reach the public’s ear is the occasional incident where confrontation was not avoidable or even less often, the errant officer embarasses the rest. When that is all the public hears, a false impression is left.
worried_citizen on December 05 at 12:02 p.m.
My main concern is that if no one in the police department or local community does something about this, that the citizens will start to adopt the same tactics as the SPD “you hesitate you die”. If the citizens start shooting with no regard to whether there are other alternatives then we will be at war with the police. I am not saying that LLEs don’t have a right to protect themselves, but they are in that position to protect the citizens of their county or jurisdiction.
I am just saying that there is some kind of misunderstanding going on here. Police demand our respect but have not recently given us civilians any good reason to give it to them.
@cpd805 - These bloggers that you dont care what they have to say are the people you swore to protect when you join the LLE. If you don’t like what we have to say then you need to find another job. Remember that your job is PROTECT THE CITIZENS OF SPOKANE! ( your comments are an example of an officer wanting our respect but not deserving it. Maybe you need to rethink your statement? )