September 18, 2010 in City

Deputy’s order to Creach to drop gun was lawful

Location of confrontation irrelevant, professor says

Thomas Clouse The Spokesman-Review

Tags:Alan CreachBrian Hirzeljeffry finersteve tuckerU.S. ConstitutionWashington State Supreme CourtWayne Scott Creach

Tucker
(Full-size photo)

223 comments on this story so far. Add yours!

vinnydogg on September 18 at 3:39 a.m.
For less than $500 a life (LIVES) could have been spared.
http://www.pepperball.com/products.php?category_id=48&sort_ord=1&sort_dir=asc
Its too bad our tax money couldn’t be spent a little more wisely. . .
vinnydogg on September 18 at 3:49 a.m.
Oh and this product is for civilian use.
Check out the police/military
products……. Anne, Ozzie ???
cpd805 on September 18 at 4:35 a.m.
Vinney…
Less lethal options are good to have and our local LEO’s have them…..beanbag rounds, tasers, etc. However, when an officer is alone in a confrontation with someone with a gun, these are not options that are viable. Here is why they are not viable: they have a tendency to fail. You shoot a man (who is armed with a gun) with a taser, beanbag, or pepperball and it fails to have the desired effect (and they often do), you’re likely gonna get shot. The times these tools are used is when there is more than one officer on the scene. One officer has the less lethal, and another has a lethal option in case of failure.
Just for info.
oneanddone on September 18 at 4:54 a.m.
You people are out to lunch. Non lethal options for police are never intended for confrontations involving firearms. Police are also trained to shoot for center mass when they fire their weapon. If you don’t want to get hurt always do what the cops tell you. If they violate your rights get them in court. This whack job ‘pastor’ was ALL in the wrong.
maria on September 18 at 5:42 a.m.
HAHAHAHAHA!!! It’s the SAME ARTICLE with a different headline! Lol.
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/sep/17/when-police-issue-order-only-legal-choice-comply/
Tell us something we don’t know, Mr. Clouse. Derp runs deep in your article once again. Lots of us think the cop is lying. Big deal if a prosecutor in Spokane won’t deal with it…this will not go away. I hope the family sues and wins. Now, don’t get me wrong…I’m not religious, don’t care for open gun laws and can’t stand people who support Sarah Palin. I’m confident Creach was my opposite. I probably wouldn’t have gotten along with him myself. But the cop clearly has gaps in his story and needs to come clean on what really happened.
maria on September 18 at 5:47 a.m.
“Even in the Old West”
Yesiiree, youbetcha! Saddle up boys, time to go a ridin’ into town and git some ackshun. Jedediah, you still got that candle thingy we alls kin light up to lettum know we’ze the law?
CommonSenseJoe on September 18 at 6:57 a.m.
The more the son talks, the more unreasonable he sounds, and the more he loses any sympathy with me. What Tucker is saying is apparently accurate given the comments by Finner, but, of course, Alan thinks that Tucker is biased in this whole thing. I may be alone on this, but the son definitely sounds like a very arrogant man, who may have taken a vacation from reality like Hirzel did to Vegas. At the very least, at least Hirzel came back…
soccermomsusie on September 18 at 7:20 a.m.
This makes no sense. Let me get this straight… I can’t point my sidearm at a police officer? I thought this was America.
Pastor Creach was not a minority, not a druggie, not a street person, not a liberal, not a Muslim and he spoke English. Yet, he couldn’t point his weapon at a sheriff. This makes no sense at all.
I want my America back!
HEAR OUR VOICE!!!
lewis8457 on September 18 at 7:35 a.m.
So who passed the law we have to do what the cops say even if we are in the right? That is dangerous law since our cops seem to think our lives have no value to us.
So Mr. Tucker most likely will stick with the point he made at let Hirzel kill again. He has two accidental deaths on his hands so we will continue to pay him big money so he can make a number 3 somewhere down the line, heck it could be me.
So when they were beating Otto to death he had no RIGHT to fight back. He was BY LAW just supposed to lay there take it and DIE!
Basically this law takes away our civil liberties.
Basically as i see it, if a cop attacks you like Karl did to Otto you have no right to fight back, and if you do fight back the cop has the right to beat you harder, did i get that right?
lewis8457 on September 18 at 7:41 a.m.
commonsensejoe, your father has been gunned down the police give you the normal song and dance,. you have never been in this situation before where is the learning curve to not appear ignorant?
His father is DEAD, I doubt if Alan gives a damn if he appears ignorant or not. If I was him i would bring a noose to every news conference with Hirzels name on it.
johnclarke on September 18 at 7:41 a.m.
I really hope that susie does not actually own a sidearm.
lewis8457 on September 18 at 7:43 a.m.
according to Tucker if a cop attacks you, you have to fight to his death because he will kill you otherwise and he has that right. God is that scary or what?
cpd805 on September 18 at 7:51 a.m.
One (bullet) anddone, you are very correct….never for a confrontation involving a firearm regardless of how many officers on scene. I was (or at least meant to be) referring to less lethal in general. For someone armed with a knife, BB bat, or other weapon other than firearm, less lethal is not viable with only one officer because of their tendency to fail.
Maria, since you believed in what you have to say strongly enough to post it twice, by Derp do you mean stupidity? or Mr. Derp on South Park….or both?
Derp!
cpd805 on September 18 at 8:09 a.m.
Piggybasher said: “Basically as i see it, if a cop attacks you like Karl did to Otto you have no right to fight back, and if you do fight back the cop has the right to beat you harder, did i get that right?”
No, you did not get that right….as usual. You would get it right if you said something like: “If a police officer attempts to detain you, you do not have the right to resist because you assume you did nothing wrong…..even if you actually did nothing wrong. Normally, if you don’t resist, the cop will not have to escalate force.”
If some wacko cop just starts beating on you with no verbal commands, human nature will kick in and you will defend yourself, and rightfully so. That was not the case with Creach. I doubt that was the case with Zehm either, but I’ll let the court sort that out. I won’t make that judgement based on a grainy, poor quality video with no audio, and neither would any reasonable person. Forget the last two words (reasonable person), I forgot I was talking to someone who advocated shooting cops if they walk up and knock on his front door….er, trespass on his property.
Piggyhater also said: “according to Tucker if a cop attacks you, you have to fight to his death because he will kill you otherwise and he has that right. God is that scary or what?”
See above comments.
cpd805 on September 18 at 8:14 a.m.
Sorry, missed one. Piggyloather also said: “So who passed the law we have to do what the cops say even if we are in the right?”
That is actually a very good question….answer: State Legislatures; Congress; State and Federal District, Appellate, and Supreme Courts.
crader72 on September 18 at 8:27 a.m.
If Pastor Creach he had bothered to call the cops they would have put out a radio call and the deputy would have called in and informed dispatch that he was the car in the lot. Dispatch then could have informed Pastor Creach and he wouldn’t have had to go running out to try and play Clint Eastwood again. I would however like to know more about the phantom baton strike on Pastor Creach. It seems the deputy may have been embellishing his story to make it seem more reasonable. The ME’s report hopefully will tell a more complete story than the rehearsed statement the deputy gave investigators.
maria on September 18 at 8:33 a.m.
Shoulda, woulda, coulda
garnet87 on September 18 at 8:33 a.m.
1. Hirzel should have called for backup first not after he already killed Creach
2. Hirzel should do the right thing and tell the truth it will put his mind at rest knowing full well it is the right thing to do.
3. Mrs. Creach was listening out the window and she didn’t here anything come out of Hirzels mouth saying he was a police officer she heard her husbands voice but couldn’t here what he was saying.
citizen on September 18 at 8:33 a.m.
The deputy said Creach had his gun in his back waistband when he hit him in the knee with the baton. If that is true then the deputy could have decked Creach or disabled his arm with another blow faster and easier than to holster his baton as he said, draw his weapon and murder Creach as he did.
Could it be Creach found the officer was gilty of something the officer and his only way out was to shoot creach? Hirzel and his wifehad some hidden business dealings with porno, he wouldn’t be the first cop who killed to protect himself and some of his buddies.
Someone other than law authorities should be doing the investigation on a case as questionable as this. City police, state patrol, sheriff office and the prosecutors are all one big brotherhood. Citizen
straighttalk on September 18 at 8:43 a.m.
Come on guys, he calls the police for assistance and then, without waiting for the police, takes a gun to do what he wants the police to do. He goes out without a shirt in the dark of the night. How were the police to know who he was after he had called the police to report a prowler and ask for assistance.
Let’s use a little common sense here. Unfortunately, he was the victim of fhis own actions.
misjustice on September 18 at 8:46 a.m.
@ maria; woulda, coulda, shoulda, DIDN’T!
Well, it’s nice to know that cpd isn’t on the streets today, they’ll be safer no doubt; unfortunately he’s at his second job, name calling posters on this thread.
maria on September 18 at 9:09 a.m.
“straighttalk on September 18 at 8:43 a.m.
Come on guys, he calls the police for assistance and then, without waiting for the police, takes a gun to do what he wants the police to do. He goes out without a shirt in the dark of the night.”
Creach isn’t the one who called the cops that night. It was a neighbor who called about her son’s teen friends…she didn’t want them coming over to the house. Read the report. This wasn’t a prowler call at all.
horse_feathers on September 18 at 9:12 a.m.
First one would have to believe the Deputy to even consider that he told the pastor to put a gun down. Too many of the deputies statements are not consistant with the evidence for me to believe him; the light on, Creaches wife not hearing the deputies repeated commands to put the gun down, no marks on a 73 year old man from a baton strike and the deputy only shot one shot when he is trained to do a double tap. The evidence shows it was probably a unitentional discharge.
Tucker by making a preliminary statement is tipping his hand for a decision of no charges by his office. Hell if he didn’t charge Thompson in the Zehm case with video taped evidence what makes anyone think this case will be treated any different. The only hope for justice will be if the feds get involved or a civil lawsuit is filed.
I am voting for Malone.
eagleproducer on September 18 at 9:13 a.m.
Which person, Creach or Hirzel, wore a bullet-proof vest during this encounter?
Creach did not need to die and that is the point of all the posts against the police. That the pigs don’t get that shows how disconnected they are to the people they are sworn to serve and protect.
What I find most distasteful is their reliance upon “case law” to defend their actions. It’s easy to come up with an air tight explanation when one has had nine days to consult with their lawyer and fellow pigs about “case law.” A “civilian” would be sitting in jail getting advice from Bubba and it probably wouldn’t include “case law.”
The Cda cops are Keystoners too.
If Jay Olsen had been drug tested after he nearly killed Shonto Peete his blood would have more than likely contained high levels of methamphetamine, the drug of choice I hear for LEO’s.
Lose the Blackwater mercenary garb and stop acting like we are children who need your supervision. We don’t. Your jobs will continue to get more dangerous if you fail to realize this.
Gimple on September 18 at 9:20 a.m.
Ya sneak up behind the tresspasser and place the muzzle of your pistol gently against the back of his skull and tell him that he’s tresspassing and to please leave. HE WILL COMPLY, If he resists, pull the trigger.
bdr on September 18 at 10:01 a.m.
I have a bone to pick with Tucker…….!
if ignorance of a law is no defense when laws comes to question like this.
Then Mr Tucker. why do you have reams and reams of case law books behind you.
The very fact CASE LAW is put into a book proves YOU TOO are ignorant of the law.
(you require a book to retrieve it from).
I had no idea a cop could do this to you on your own property.
nor did Creach, or Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates
How about the partial deaf Seattle man with a whittling knife,
Its quite obvious CASE LAW isn’t mainstream knowledge
(we keep revisiting this questionable shooting stuff over and over.)
Its apparently so bad in Seattle the Chief there has begun a massive overhaul in the way cops are trained.
America is a melting pot, one policeman screaming English orders into a crowd of people with 20 different nationality’s is simply not enough reason to remove them from the earth.
someone in that crowd isn’t going to understand.
Obviously Creach didn’t understand case law
He told Killer Hirzel (I don’t have to) proving ignorance of case law.
Then we had Zehm who replied to his killer officer (why) proving ignorance of case law
Then we had beer gate Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates
that refused commands on his own property. proving ignorance of case law
Having ignorance of laws as high as a Harvard professor’s
(is it really a law Mr Tucker?)
misjustice on September 18 at 10:18 a.m.
@ spoketucky; Meth use would explain the paranoia, the us versus them attitudes of many cops. And steroid use would explain their rage when someone tells them “no”. Combined use could prove deadly for citizens.
Scoutster has asked continually asked why cops shouldn’t have to do an UA following use of force…he hasn’t gotten an answer from the cop proponents.
My guess is that the Guild/Union won’t allow it; they know their guys are dirty.
And why wouldn’t they be? Cops are just as tempted, just as likely, to succumb to drug/alcohol use as the rest of us; after all, they are human - not Gods that are immune to the siren’s call of temptation.
opiemuyo on September 18 at 10:19 a.m.
Less than lethal…. only an idiot would bring a knife to the gunfight….
maria on September 18 at 10:26 a.m.
Sounds to me like the idiot brought a baton to the gunfight
maynard on September 18 at 10:26 a.m.
The one issue that has never been solved in this case is whether or not Deputy Hirzel announced himself as a Sherrif or Police officer BEFORE telling Pastor Creach to put down his weapon.
I just know that if that question were asked and answered, I would feel better knowing or not knowing Deputy Hirzel was in the right to shoot and kill Pastor Creach.
Mr Tuckers knowledge of knowing that if an officer tells you to drop your weapon, you do it is good but in this case, it was pitch black out and like I said above, it is still unclear if the Deputy announced himself as an officer. Mr Tucker is clearly living in the period of the Old West and needs to play catch up.
dfresh on September 18 at 10:31 a.m.
Live by the gun die by the gun. Mr. Creach was counseled many times that his gun toting actions were a dangerous up taking. His pride toting actions proved just as dangerous especially when they were combined. This officer did nothing wrong and Alan Creach who was probably witness to Mr. Creach’s pride toting persona all his life is in denial. LEAVE THE OFFICER ALONE. He’s the one that should be suing the Creach estate and family for putting him in the situation in the first place and for the defimation of character after.
maria on September 18 at 10:40 a.m.
dfresh, Hirzel has defamed his own character by not revealing his other income source to his superiors, as required. He should be fired for that alone. And where is the record of Mr. Creach having been warned not to carry his gun around on his own property? Some cop said that and you believe it? Creach has never been charged with, cited or convicted of doing anything illegal. Stop trying to trash his name.
dfresh on September 18 at 10:42 a.m.
Mr. Ross. I think that question has been answered by the fact that Mr. Creach put the gun in his waistband behind his back. Based on his past performances when dealing with trespassers I don’t think Mr. Creach would have done that if he didn’t know that Hirzel was an officer.
Thoreau on September 18 at 10:43 a.m.
Using a beanbag round, or rubber bullets will only enrage someone who is high on speed. That’s why it’s not an option.
maria on September 18 at 10:47 a.m.
dfresh, why did he get shot after he put his gun away? He got shot because he wouldn’t get on the ground. Maybe he couldn’t. He was a senior citizen, after all. He probably had bad knees. The cop bullied him then blew him away.
dfresh on September 18 at 10:49 a.m.
Maria, You sound like an angry relative of Creach’s. Are You? It would explain a lot about your completely bias and insulting comments to others on this forum that are weighing the facts.
maria on September 18 at 10:51 a.m.
Actually, I’m liberal, gun hating, Obama-loving atheist Muslim. Does that help?
maria on September 18 at 10:55 a.m.
dfresh, just weighing in on the “facts” as I see them.
chouligirl on September 18 at 11:12 a.m.
Are you kidding me?! I would not have gotten down on the ground for that cop either. I can talk just fine standing up. If I put my gun in my back waistband then what’s the cop’s issue really?? A power struggle that defines police today. He’s dealing with a 70+ year old man! His need for compliance took him over the top and he murdered the Pastor. Yes, MURDERED him.
I’m thinking their conversation could have been just fine standing and clearing the issue up, but NO, he had to make the property owner get face down on the ground to talk. Big tough man…what BS.
And then to have a prosecutor say we have to do whatever a cop tells us even if that cop is using excessive force…no way. NO WAY! That cop is no better than me and has no more rights than me. If your a cop and you’re that scared of confrontation THEN STOP BEING A COP. If you don’t like the element of danger in the job, then STOP BEING A COP.
I don’t believe a word Hirzel has said. Why should we? I’m still reeling from the whole kill a man & take a vacation…I’ll tell you my story after my vacation. How casual. And yes, his wife’s side business in ‘adult noveties’ adds to his personal background and integrity. And having killed someone else previously in CA… yikes. Shooting the Pasor in the chest at close range after Hirzel used excessive force because he was scared…not valid. I wonder how scared the Pastor was when he shot him?
If this nut job cop goes free how long will it be until he does this again? I’m sure it’s a badge of honor to have 2 kills under your belt for that sick brotherhood. This isn’t justice.
Where did the citizen’s rights go? Time to change the laws if that’s the case. Law enforcement isn’t a sacred cow. This will not go away.
It’s time to stop hiring the bottom of the barrel for our law enforcement personnel. City & county = bottome of the barrel. How often do you hear about the State Police having this kind of trouble? Yea, they’re the professionals with actual standards to become a State Officer.
chouligirl on September 18 at 11:22 a.m.
dfresh,
you need to do a reality check. you actually said the officer did nothing wrong and he should sue the Creach family!!!
you are the one who is biased.
why should an elderly Mr Creach have to get face down on the ground to talk to this so-called officer? his gun was put away.
what does that serve other than to prove Hirzel is a badass bully? how about some respect for the citizen who is on his own property? and why was Hirzel parked on private property to write up some unrelated report? just hangin out?
Instead of talking Hirzel xhose to escalate this into a murder.
CommonSenseJoe on September 18 at 11:26 a.m.
PigBuster,
I agree that a person’s natural reaction to a situation like this would be to get upset. That’s what the police report indicates happened. I believe it said something about how the son arrived on scene and was ranting and raving about his father being shot. Fine, I would be pissed, too. But, when you have people who are trained in the law who are completely uninvolved in this situation saying that what Hirzel did was legal, maybe the son should just keep his mouth shut at this point and let the professionals take over. Saying things like Tucker is obviously biased doesn’t prove anything except the son’s arrogance in continuing to talk about a subject he obviously knows nothing about - lets not forget that Finner said Tucker’s legal conclusion was correct. At this point it’s starting to seem like some of the other allegations about the son/family are starting to rear their ugly head - that they simply do not like people involved in law enforcement.
maria on September 18 at 11:32 a.m.
Took the words right out of my mouth. Why was Hirzel doing his side work/reports on private property? Wasn’t he supposed to be on a call about some troublesome teens in another part of the neighborhood? I thought after the Lakewood/Parkland cop killings that cops in Washington were told not to do reports in vulnerable areas. Was this cop breaking a department rule? I still think he got caught looking at porn on his computer and he got rid of the only witness.
fredjames on September 18 at 11:35 a.m.
Tucker? Did you listen to the police interview of Hirzel? How many times did he say he knew he was talking too fast? 1. How is the person speaking?
Although a change in voice can be the tip-off to a lie, experts say that to be sure, you should also pay attention to a person’s speech rate and breathing pattern — if either speeds up or slows down, chances are you’re not hearing the whole truth.
I read the police interview it is posted .
2. Hirzel stated he had completed his prowl watch for the area women, and found nothing to continue any watch in that area, in fact he was not responding to any specific request, just computer options. 3. Hirzel was incompetent in completing a earlier paperwork associated with a car accident,so he was using taxpayer time to fix his screw up in paperwork. Instead of SCOPE office, he was loitering on private property with no official reason to be there. This is a huge civil wrong when Hirzel harmed the owner. The police baton was excessive use of force and that becomes a issue now. Hirzel did wast taxpayer time to return to the police yard and take the unmarked police car instead of continuing to use the marked car, because some other policeman was smoking or crewing and it smelled bad.
So if Hirzel had stayed with his original marked car, or gone to a SCOPE office or a open business like a fast food 24 hour place and fixed his screwed up ticket or not attacked Creach Spokane taxpayer’s would not be on the hook for millions of wrongful death legal costs
maria on September 18 at 11:38 a.m.
Joe, I read that Creach’s body lay where he was killed for over 8 hours. The family could see their dad lying out there for hours and they couldn’t even go hold his hand and grieve over him. His hand may have been warm to the touch for some time after he died. They could have been allowed to say goodbye. Yeah, I’d be pissed, too.
maria on September 18 at 11:54 a.m.
“At this point it’s starting to seem like some of the other allegations about the son/family are starting to rear their ugly head”
What allegations? Whose? Where are they documented?
Albert on September 18 at 11:58 a.m.
I note mr. tucker’s picture…it looks like something out of South Park, which fits perfectly. How soon can we dump this cartoon character?
The “ToyBoy” has already killed another man by strangulation. This is a very dangerous individual who continues to demonstrate a willingness to kill others. He should have never been hired to begin with. We can all take our various comments and views within this matter, however the FACTS remain - the ToyBoy will kill you. Think for just a second on how he went from killing another person to a vacation without any remorse at all.
Perhaps I’m completely missing a major point in all this, however when I examine these “facts” it becomes very haunting. What is wrong with our law enforcement personnel…including mr. tucker?
misjustice on September 18 at 12:03 p.m.
Joe; “But, when you have people who are trained in the law who are completely uninvolved in this situation saying that what Hirzel did was legal,…”
Hey, Joe, NO ONE has made the determination that what Hirzel did was legal; remember, we’re waiting for Tucker (rhymes with ____) to make that determination.
All that’s been cited is Washington State law and case law, not a decision in the Hirzel homicide.
maria on September 18 at 12:07 p.m.
http://www.krem.com/home/related/Raw-Alan-Creach-We-need-to-keep-in-mind-my-father-is-the-victim-103015664.html
Oh yeah, Alan Creach sounds like such an arrogant man. Not.
monkeyman on September 18 at 12:31 p.m.
“Tucker said this week. “Even in the Old West…”
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm36671232/tt0060196
Now it makes sense to me :)
zelda on September 18 at 12:43 p.m.
Is the day coming when the Red Cross, besides offering CPR classes, will provide instruction to the public in “Dealing with Law Enforcement Authorities”?
I still don’t know what Hirzel intended Creach to do with the command to get on the ground. Was he supposed to kneel, protrate himself with his hands at his side or outstretched, face down? Would sitting have been sufficient?
The whole methodical sequence of events is implausible. What happened, happened fast and Hirzel’s account, whole possible, is improbable.
If there were eyewitnesses (or surveillance video) instead of ear-witnesses, investigators could make a determination of unreasonable force by the cop and self-defense by the victim. But for now, it’s just Hirzel’s word against a dead man’s mute testimony.
Ed Byrnes on September 18 at 12:54 p.m.
citizen: Thank you for your clarifying point that someone other than the law enforcement community should be reviewing this case. Law enforcement in this community has no credibility with anyone but the most obsequious of our fellow citizens. This loss of credibility is because no good officers or deputies ever speak out against their colleagues, even when their colleagues lie to investigators (Thompson in the Zemm case) or cause DUI hit and run accidents (Bradley Thoma). The code of silence has the price of lost trust from and credibility with us citizens.
What we need is direct citizen review of any law enforcement use of lethal or potentially lethal force against anyone in our community. Since the city council and county commission will be advised against this, the mayor is afraid to do this, and the Police Guild is against the citizens we must do this by a ballot initiative. As learn more about how such initiatives work here in Spokane I will be calling on you, my fellow citizens, to volunteer in collecting signatures. It is time to take back our community.
Shylock13 on September 18 at 1:08 p.m.
The Deputy is clearly not telling the truth about the baton blow. The Pastor was taking daily a 325mg aspirin. That dosage makes one hypersensitive to bruising. I know. I take a 325mg aspirin daily, and I can bruise myself by slapping at a bug on my arm. Because the autopsy indicated that the Reverend was not bruised by the baton blow, there was no such blow and the Deputy is lying.
If the Deputy is lying about that, why should we believe anything he says? By the Deputy’s own admission, the Reverend put his gun in his back waist band. Why, then, did the Deputy feel it necessary to use his baton? Just to feel important and have an old man lie down on the ground for him?
And the Deputy says he shot when he saw the butt of the gun, not the barrel. If the Pastor was displaying the butt first, he did not have his gun in position to fire at all, and was, most likely, in the process of putting the gun down. He probably brought the gun out butt first to show the Deputy his peaceful intentions.
Tucker will “tucker” this case away, as he has several others. The election is in November, folks! Let’s get a Prosecutor who works for the public!!
lewis8457 on September 18 at 1:32 p.m.
cpd you forgot one pigbutcher.
I suggest you read the grand jury summary on Otto’s death. He was never ordered to do anything but drop the pop bottle he was using to protect his face after Karl Thompson bashed him over the head twice sending him to the floor with no commands of any kind.
And demanded he stop resisting arrest as he continued bashing Otto never giving him a chance to stop resisting. Even the grainy video shows that.
So my next question oh great one why did the feds indict Thompson for removing Otto’s civil rights when we don’t have civil rights where the police are concerned in Washington?
Maybe the fed doesn’t know the folks in Spokane have no right to protect themselves against rouge cops. And don’t say it didn’t happen it did, I don’t think the feds would have got involved for a fairy tail. Plus Mary Verner was nice enough to say it was a justified death. So it really did happen. Or maybe you don’t remember because you were there?
misjustice on September 18 at 1:41 p.m.
And as most of us know, surveillance video was what proved Thompson to be a liar. His version of the “truth” and the video version of the truth were 2 entirely different stories. But even with a video, with “truthiness” on the part of the officer, and major violations of Otto’s civil rights, Tucker, tucker [rhymes with ______ ] filed no charges.
It will be the same conclusion in the present case; Tucker will back Hirzeliar.
Hirzeliar is more apt to be fired for breaking departmental policy regarding outside employment, than he is to be charged in the Creach case. His punishment, if any, will likely be paid administrative leave!
JJS1947 on September 18 at 1:49 p.m.
Gimple said on September 18 at 9:20 a.m.
“Ya sneak up behind the tresspasser and place the muzzle of your pistol gently against the back of his skull and tell him that he’s tresspassing and to please leave. HE WILL COMPLY, If he resists, pull the trigger.”
That my friend is against the law plain and simple and will get you some time in Walla Walla. Even brandishing a gun can be construed as assault if I become frightened as a result of your brandishing. I’ve noticed a lot of comments about constitututional rights on this and other forums concerning the Creach shooting but I suspect none of the posters have ever read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Nowhere in those documents does it give you those rights. All it does is give you the right to keep and bear arms. If you choose to do so you had best make yourself knowlegeable of all the restrictions and laws that governs such a right. It was, in fact, against the law for Mr. Creach not to comply with the legal directions of a police officer to put the gun down and go to ground. He was a cantankerous old fool, a self proclaimed gun rights advocate, he’s accosted many people with his gun in the past, and obviously had no ability to deal with someone had they chosen to use their own weapon against him (criminals do that from time to time as we all know). He thought he was within his rights. He wasn’t and look where it got him. DRT!
Gimple on September 18 at 1:59 p.m.
The supreme Court ruled in Warren v. District of Columbia, that the only group the police are required to protect us from,( are you ready for this?) are the police.
It would appear that failure IS an option, perhaps even a lifestyle, with these overarmed and apparently over authorized MORONS.
Orphan on September 18 at 2:10 p.m.
John Strait’s statement is pure BS
“You don’t have the right of self-defense under that case even if the police officer is completely illegal and using way excessive force,” Strait said.
The right to self defence is God given no man made law overrules that. At no time does anyone have to allow them selves to be killed or hurt badly just because the person illegaly assaulting them is a LEO.
JJS1947 on September 18 at 2:13 p.m.
soccermomsusie on September 18 at 7:20 a.m. said
“This makes no sense. Let me get this straight… I can’t point my sidearm at a police officer? I thought this was America.”
No, soccermom you cannot legally point your sidearm or any other weapon for that matter at a police officer. It is against the law and unless you were born before 1920 it has been against the law for your entire life. It will result in your arrest or you quite possibly could end up dead.
If fact, you can’t point your weapon at me either and I’m just another citizen. If you point it at a criminal chances are he’ll shoot you dead with his own weapon or take yours from you and shoot you with your own weapon. If you were to point it at me I would file a complaint and have you charged with assault. If I deemed that you had anything worth taking in civil court I would then proceed to sue you everything you own or would ever own driving you to bankruptcy and quite possibly ruining your life. Guns are serious business and ownership of same should not be taken lightly. Keep in mind there is constant pressure to amend the Bill of Rights and take away the privelege of gun ownership making us like the British, the Germans, the Japanese, and just about every other first world country.
JJS1947 on September 18 at 2:28 p.m.
Gimple on September 18 at 1:59 p.m. said
“The supreme Court ruled in Warren v. District of Columbia, that the only group the police are required to protect us from,( are you ready for this?) are the police.”
Actually, Gimple they ruled as follows:
By a 4-3 decision the court decided that Warren was not entitled to remedy at the bar despite the demonstrable abuse and ineptitude on the part of the police. The court held that official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for a failure to provide adequate police protection.
They said NOTHING about protecting us from the police. Do you suppose they made this ruling so that every time a criminal element prevailed Law Enforcement, States, and Cities couldn’t be sued?
This care bears reading by all as it actually points out the need for police in this country even though in this case the police were incompetent and the criminals prevailed. It goes to one of my earlier posts about chaos and anarchy that would exist if we didn’t have law enforcement, somethiing which Mr. Gimple feels he/she could do without.
Gimple on September 18 at 3:33 p.m.
A significant enough special relationship exists between a person being detained by the police and the police, such that they fall into the category of those persons whose rights and safety must be protected specifically.
If the threat derives from unlawful police action then the police are required to offer assistance and protection. You and I know that this NEVER happens.
eagleproducer on September 18 at 3:36 p.m.
jjs: Suzie is a satirical writer. It says loads for your intelligence level that you were not able to discern something that simple to detect. List one time in the history of the U.S. when there has been a serious campaign to repeal the second amendment. Just one will do. I can’t remember when I last read a more ridiculous statement. Cops in Spokane solve less than one in seven crimes that they are involved in and none of the countless others that they chose not to involve themselves in. They’ve killed 42 citizens since 1992. Is it that hard to understand why the public is more than just a bit upset with them?
zelda on September 18 at 3:38 p.m.
JJS1947 — Soccermomsusie is a doing a performance art put-on and is not to be taken seriously. It’s a fad thing going around, most recently and infamously enacted by Joaquin Phoenix in his new movie, “I’m Still Here.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/17/movies/17affleck.html?src=me&ref=movies
Now back to our regular programming.
JJS1947 on September 18 at 3:42 p.m.
Gimple on September 18 at 3:33 p.m. said:
A significant enough special relationship exists between a person being detained by the police and the police, such that they fall into the category of those persons whose rights and safety must be protected specifically.
If the threat derives from unlawful police action then the police are required to offer assistance and protection. You and I know that this NEVER happens.
Hey you can read and write English! Having cleared that up I would agree with what you said if the police action is unlawful. Just how do you know this NEVER happens. I work in a profession closely allied to Law Enforcement (and therein lies my respect for them). I have never seen them act unlawfully in 20 years. On more occasions than I enumerate I’ve seen them abused, bit, spit on, cursed at, and worse and yet they always seem to maintain a sense of demeanor and professionalism. I’d be interested to know how you can say NEVER. Have you some experience in the field? I think not or you wouldn’t say what you’ve said.
CommonSenseJoe on September 18 at 3:45 p.m.
Maria,
A couple of the officers noted that the son was “very irate” - understandable initially - and another officer noted they were “ranting and raving, saying the police department was more interested in giving tickets than what was going on.” Then, later in the report, another officer commented about how he spoke to the son about a previous theft, and “recalled that the son did not appear to be law enforcement friendly”. The next is my own conclusion about not respecting law enforcement, but another officer said that Creach was “adamant” that he was going to “protect” his property by pulling weapons on people, even after he had been told by deputies not to engage in that type of behavior.
Scoutster on September 18 at 3:51 p.m.
What in the world would cause someone to not be “law enforcement friendly” in this town!?
Better still, what does someone look like when they “do not appear to be law enforcement friendly”? Is it like a limp or a twitch or a rash on their face? How can you tell?
Or, is it just that they don’t wear a police uniform?
misjustice on September 18 at 4:13 p.m.
“Keep in mind there is constant pressure to amend the Bill of Rights and take away the privelege of gun ownership making us like the British, the Germans, the Japanese, and just about every other first world country.”
Quite the contrary is true, JJS, if anything gun “rights” have been strengthened, expanded, and assured by McDonald v. Chicago and District of Columbia v. Heller.
Trust me, no one is gonna take yer guns; the NRA/Gun Lobby is too powerful to allow that to happen.
maria on September 18 at 4:25 p.m.
misjustice: They locked me out of the nun thread.
misjustice on September 18 at 4:51 p.m.
I think the entire thread is like, frozen. Were you bad? Maria?
maria on September 18 at 5:26 p.m.
Well, I stayed out past choir practice last night, made play outfits for the orphans from those drapes the captain was going to throw out and….oh my, I’ve told you too much! How DO you solve a problem like Maria?
Shylock13 on September 18 at 5:27 p.m.
Why does no one answer my questions? Or comment on them!
maria on September 18 at 5:30 p.m.
I will Teddy Bear. I like your comments.
Gimple on September 18 at 5:35 p.m.
Have you ever actually SEEN a cop intervene and arrest another cop on the spot? I didn’t think so. Cops NEVER arrest other cops unless they are forced to. There are no good cops, only bad cops and ex cops. You can look at it any way you want to but if a cop tries to do something about bad cops he quickly learns that he has to play for the team or the team won’t play for him. His choice then is to play ball(bad cop) or try to fix it (ex cop).
misjustice on September 18 at 6:05 p.m.
soccermom says: Let me get this straight… I can’t point my sidearm at a police officer?*********
I say, “Sure you can & please do! Just be prepared to have them point back at you!!! More than likely they’ve had target practice & you haven’t so I say you will probably lose.”
IMHO I feel the Creach son is irate because with Tucker not charging the officer, Creach’s idea of becoming instantly rich in a lawsuit against the county will not become to reality. I’d be angry too.
Also, I wonder if all these postings by the bloggers that hate the police & about how some of you think the officers should be taken out & how they are ALL wrong, had anything to do with the man shooting at the police up north. Mob mentality! You incite a riot/action? Well, you need to pay the price for doing so.
Have you all noticed there are about 6 or 7 people… all the time the same people… stirring up trouble. Doesn’t matter what the subject is. When someone takes a “satirical” comment & believes it to be true, I say it was probably meant to be true. When they are called out on the carpet for it, they then come up with the satire issue. Well, without facials or tones being on the site, how can one REALLY tell it’s just being sarcastic?
Way to many children on this site!!!!
dfresh on September 18 at 6:40 p.m.
My God Maria is this all you have to do on a Saturday. You never did answer my question about if your a relative or not. All you made clear with your political, godless, religious, and hateful confession of your convictions is that your part of the problem with the way this country has been headed. Get a life will you!
socialchange on September 18 at 7:05 p.m.
The location is important, the deputy was called for a prowl on the property of Pastor Creach by the neighbor, instead of investigating the prowl, he was filling out a collision report in an unmarked car. He had no buisness parked on private property doing his reports at that time of night. The neighbor should have called Creach to inform him of the possible prowler and his notifying the police. Sad turn of events, for both sides!
maria on September 18 at 8:03 p.m.
dfresh, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You’re here too on a Saturday night. Loser. I’m not a relative nor a nun. Boo hoo for you.
eagleproducer on September 18 at 8:11 p.m.
The nutty nun thread gets too heated and locked down. Too freakin’ funny!
How do we solve a problem like Maria?
What were in those “documents?” Inquiring minds want to know!
maria on September 18 at 8:28 p.m.
spoketucky: I think it must have been a stack of Playgirl magazines.
chouligirl on September 18 at 9:47 p.m.
Gramma:
Sheesh, maybe the reason there are so many negative comments about the local police is because the citizens are getting fed up with this cop mentality here.
What’s wrong with you? Creach loses his father and you right away assume he’s after a lawsuit from the county? How heartless are you? His father was murdered by a rogue cop and you think law suit…is that because you really believe there is cause for a law suit and that worries you because your police department will be shown to be corrupt?
It hurts when you call the folks posting on this site “children”…oh wait, that was sarcasm…thought I’d better tell ya.
Have a good nite all…
chouligirl on September 18 at 9:55 p.m.
Well said Spoketucky…”Lose the Blackwater mercenary garb and stop acting like we are children who need your supervision. We don’t. Your jobs will continue to get more dangerous if you fail to realize this. ”
The ideal of “protect and serve” has long been lost.
fredjames on September 18 at 10:15 p.m.
Tucker is running for prosecutor so if you do not agree with his newspaper interview that citizens must obey any lawful order, especially in the Creach investigation, then vote him out of office on this one or the other recent citizen killings. First, read the police interview of Hirzel . Then vote Tucker out. Hirzel had more than enough time to call for backup, that is from 30 feet of time to call for backup( how nice for him that there are no witness) Hirzel claimed he could not take one hand off his gun while pointing it at Creach from his car seat at 30 feet to 2.5 feet, to press his microphone on his chest and call for a code, it could have been done with just the code number, police knew where he was. Next Hirzel the scared cop, WAS able to take his baton out with his left hand while still pointing his gun at Creach with his right hand and hit him. Hirzel said he had to approach Creach to hit him from about 6 feet. Read the report, also one way experts determine liars, is if you are talking fast or slow, Hirzel said many times he was talking too fast. So far Hirzel has two citizen kills in a 18 year career at age 43 and Creach no kills in a 74 year life, in spite of all the crap I have read about him being some kind of cowboy.
Big civil lawsuit is got to happen, Tucker, it appears, has already decided to say it was justified, if he thinks a quiet command 5-6 times by Hirzel to put you gun down was actually the command, Hirzel claimed was too scared to take both hands off his gun, so maybe he was too scared to raise his voice.
That is very convenient, as it matches Mrs. Creach statement that she said she never heard any loud commands. If scared for your life, , the officer would be giving Drill Instructor volume commands. I have had cops yell at me to move my car, and that was not a kill or be killed situation. I guess he had 13 days while in Vegas to run that one through his mind, the retired prosecutor also said to wait more than 48 hours is never a good idea to get accurate statements. So this guy Tucker needs to be kicked out of office or for the next several years cops will be killing more taxpaying citizens who are handicapped or simply doing a prowl seach on their property . Do not let Hirzel get behind you he choked to death his other victim and got away with it so he knows he can kill, kill, kill, he likes it so much he even goes on vacation to look for more sex toys to sell in Vegas.
lewis8457 on September 18 at 11:50 p.m.
Gramma why do you call us all cop haters? we are not haters we simply want justice for one of our fallen. Just like the cops do when one of theirs gets blown away. Except they always get their man, us well we get to see him walk away and climb into his Lexus.
You think you are so rightous you threatened a poster with death. is that the way the cops think death is the ONLY answer? no witnesses?
“I say, “Sure you can & please do! Just be prepared to have them point back at you!!! More than likely they’ve had target practice & you haven’t so I say you will probably lose.”
You Gramma are the one filled with hate rather you want to admit it or not.
lewis8457 on September 18 at 11:56 p.m.
I find it disturbing all the cops that come on these blogs and all of them have the same attitude like we are all haters and we deserve to be attacked. They rarely if ever give decent info. Basically they are here to stir up the hive.
Well keep on stirring because the madder we get the less of us will be voting for your budgets and you will be unemployed.
There are some real moronic cops over at KXLY. And they don’t censor like the SR does.
misjustice on September 19 at 8:55 a.m.
According to “Law Enforcement News” there have been 18,983 officers killed in the line of duty since 1792. If my calculations are correct that is 218 years of records. 218 (years) X 365 (days per year) = 79,570 days. 79,570 (days) divided by 18,983 (officers) = 4.191645 officers killed EVERY DAY in the line of duty.
Now tell me (with a straight face) being an officer is less dangerous than being a tree cutter.
lewis8457 on September 19 at 9:21 a.m.
Gramma those numbers are not from spokane, national numbers mean nothing. how about showing both sides run a count of how many citizens get killed by police, i think you will find being a citizen is much more dangerous.
actually i do know the spokane numbers NO police officer have been killed in the line of duty for 73 years! while since 1992 48 civilians have been killed by police.
so in Spokane every 3-4 MONTHS one of us is killed by police but only 1 cop is killed every 100 years.
I only care about spokane because i live here, and am afraid a normal traffic stop could result in my death and according to Steven tucker i have no right to even defend myself.
Sadbuttrue on September 19 at 9:39 a.m.
During the period 1980-89, nearly 6,400 U.S. workers died each year from traumatic injuries suffered in the workplace [NIOSH 1993a]. Over this 10-year period, an estimated 1,492 of these deaths occurred in the logging industry, where the average annual fatality rate is more than 23 times that for all U.S. workers (164 deaths per 100,000 workers compared with 7 per 100,000).
Even if you look at the homicide rate on the job, the police have a miniscule death rate from homicides compared to many other occupations.
Table 10. Circumstances of Workplace Homicides—United States, 1992–94
_____________________________________________________________________
Homicides (% of total)*
1992 1993 1994
Circumstance (N=1,004) (N=1,063) (N=1,071)
_____________________________________________________________________
Robbery and other crime 82 75 73
–––––––––––––––––––––––
Business dispute/work associate 9 10 9
–––––––––––––––––––––––
Coworker/former coworker 4 6 5
–––––––––––––––––––––––
Customer/client 5 4 4
–––––––––––––––––––––––
Police in line of duty 6 6 7
–––––––––––––––––––––––
Security guard in line of duty † 5 7
–––––––––––––––––––––––
Personal dispute/acquaintance 4 4 4
So the police have demanded, and received a draconian reduction in your civil rights and your safety from the police who are supposedly there to protect YOU, based on non-existent statistics about the supposed dangerousness of their job.
bszottlinger on September 19 at 10:33 a.m.
I agree with the case law assessment made by Mr. Finer. The waters are indeed muddy.
Law Enforcement and Pro-Law Enforcement posters, please understand that my intent here is only to point out the need for a quality, competent, investigation of these matters, in the interest of the victim, officer and public. I base my observation only on that which has been made public.
I feel Mr. Tucker must consider some of the following:
Were lawful orders given and what evidence is there to prove they were?
At this point only the statement of Officer Hirzel.
Can Officer Hirzel’s statement be rebutted?
Perhaps by Mrs. Creach.
Was officer Hirzel on the Creach property performing a legitimate law enforcement function?
At this point we only know Officer Hirzel said he was.
What steps were taken to establish Officer Hirzel’s lawful purpose on the property? (I know from experience that to often investigators presuppose the officer/s are telling the truth about their purpose)
We do know he stated he changed from a marked car to an unmarked car because the marked car smelled.
Did investigators check with the next officer using the marked car to see if he/she noticed any smell?
Hirzel stated that his positioning of the vehicle was such that it afforded him open safety. Did the scene investigation establish that as fact? Or was the vehicle secreted on the property in a way that was not safe nor allows him to view the prowl check address he said he was watching? Was the vehicle visible to passers by?
Were there items belonging to Mr. Creach near by which could have easily been placed in the trunk of the car Hirzel was using?
Would there be reason Officer Hirzel would be in need of any items located on the Creach property?
*(I AM NOT ACCUSING OFFICER HIRZEL OF ANYTHING, ONLY POINTING OUT THE NEED FOR THE INVESTIGATION TO CONSIDER ALL VARIABLES.)
Is there any evidence that Officer Hirzel’s judgment was in any way affected by drug or alcohol usage other then his own statement that he was not?
Investigator Hammond’s investigative summary does not document a blood draw on 8/25/10, nor does any other public document at this point, I must therefore assume there was no blood draw. The first mention of medication or alcohol usage is during the 9/9/10 interview. Why?, clearly in all cases like this the officer’s judgment will be questioned? Will steps be taken by the prosecutors office to obtain Officer Hirzel’s medical/prescription records by consent, subpoena, or search warrant?
Was a physical demonstration of Officer Hirzel’s actions with his baton and weapon preformed on video tape during the first interview on 9/3/10. If not, why not? A demonstration which could be used by the ME in determining with a reasonable degree of medical certainty whether the lack of trauma on Mr. Creach’s body was consistent with the blow demonstrated. A video demonstration on 9/3/10 could also have been used to compare statements made during subsequent interviews if the subsequent interviews were not tainted by public release of investigative detail.
Witness credibility is always at issue in cases like this. In many cases the victim has a long criminal history which can sometimes help to explain an officers actions. That is not the case here, so Mr. Tucker will have to address the credibility of Officer Hirzel.
Are the statements of Officer Hirzel after 9/3/10 credible given the media leaks and his admission he had been following the media reports? Although Officer Hirzel was cleared in his previous involvement with an officer involved death, what were the circumstances, what was the evidence, or lack there of? How does that matter, compare with this matter and what if anything could Officer Hirzel have learned from that experience? Can the issue of his side business be considered in addressing his credibility?
Continued:
bszottlinger on September 19 at 10:35 a.m.
Continued from above:
Mr. Tucker has a number of options open to him at this point. Although he can not undo any mistakes made in the initial investigation he can require investigators or his staff to continue the investigation to attempt to resolve a number of issues. He could request a special prosecutor be appointed to investigate the matter. He could attempt to convince the ME to conduct a public Coroner’s Inquest as he did in the Zehm case. He could utilize an “Inquiry Judge” proceeding to obtain medical records, previous internal affairs or criminal investigations involving Officer Hirzel. He could request a Grand Jury be impaneled where 12 citizens could review the evidence, and issue subpoenas for various pieces of evidence. Lastly, he could call a press conference on Monday and say he is satisfied with the investigation as it stands and say that the case law in Washington State supports Officer Hirzel.
It will be interesting to see which route he takes, but at this point I think the waters are in fact muddy and public discussions of Washington State Case Law are premature.
Brad Szottlinger
misjustice on September 19 at 10:38 a.m.
Spokane County is the third in the state for line of duty deaths. Two hundred and sixty-nine law enforcement officers have lost their lives in the line of duty in Washington State.
National Numbers mean everything! You only want to know Spokane’s numbers but you throw out national numbers when it comes to the logging industry. That’s like comparing apples & oranges. There were 1,492 loggers killed in 10 years? Let’s see… . That’s 10 (years) X 365 (days) = 3,650 (days). 3,650 days divided by 1,492 (loggers killed) = 2.446 (loggers killed per day). Nope, still don’t see it. Still 1/2 the amount of officers killed in the line of duty.
Also, there was an officer killed here in Spokane in the line of duty in 1983. Detective Brian Frederick Orchard was with the Spokane Police Department & was killed Wednesday, July 20, 1983. Detective Orchard was shot and killed while conducting an undercover stakeout of two thieves wanted for the theft of a valuable gun collection. The suspects had attempted to ransom the collection for $20,000. When the men pulled up to the surveillance area Detective Orchard approached the car and identified himself. One of the occupants fired a shot from inside the car, striking Detective Orchard in the head. The men were later arrested and convicted of the murder.
There were others that died while on duty also. If you care to read about the others: http://www.spokanecounty.org/Sheriff/content.aspx?c=2009.
Ron_the_Cop on September 19 at 10:38 a.m.
fredjames,
If you read my other posts, you’ve hit the name on the head. DO NOT VOTE for Tucker if you want real change and oversight of the actions of our law enforcement community.
And yes I’m a career cop from So Cal and former police union president.
Det. Ron Wright (Retired)
Riverside PD, CA
Scoutster on September 19 at 11:13 a.m.
Gramma…
Glad I could catch you as you are obviously watching this thread very carefully.
Can you answer this one question for me:
Why shouldn’t a LEO involved in a critical incident be required to take a drug test? How does it serve the cause of justice to not require that, as apparently your contract allows?
bszottlinger on September 19 at 11:16 a.m.
Scoutster:
There you go whinning again! :)
Brad
misjustice on September 19 at 11:21 a.m.
As I’ve said a million times!!!!!!! I am not, repeat again, NOT in law enforcement! So, quit whining about that!
Also, You need to ask someone that is with the board/union that writes up those contracts. I don’t know that they don’t have to take one. It’s just your assumption that they don’t. And we all know what assuming things mean. Right?
misjustice on September 19 at 11:24 a.m.
Brad wrote, “… the waters are in fact muddy and public discussions of Washington State Case Law are premature.”
I would say that Tucker’s discussion of WA state case law gives insight into how Tucker is leaning/thinking about the case. It essentially is short hand for “I’ve reached a decision, no charges will be filed.”
TBear; I too, have a problem with the alleged baton strike but not for the reasons you listed, although your reasons raise legitimate questions. My main problem with the alleged baton strike is that it seems almost physically improbable for Hirzel to have performed the alleged strike in the manner he has described. It doesn’t make sense. And here, Brad raises great questions also, particularly about the video/demonstration of how Hirzeliar made the alleged strike. Ron the Cop has also raised questions about the alleged baton strike as have others.
gramms; all that I want is an accurate accounting for the death of Mr. Creach; much as you laud the capture and judicial punishment of the killers of Mr.Orchard I’d like to see the apprehension and judicial punishment of the killer of Mr. Creach, oh and Otto, too.
As for supporting Tucker in the general election, the only vote he’ll garner from me is a vote of NO confidence. My money’s on Malone.
I’ll be voting the same way on the Sheriff’s vote, a vote of NO confidence for Ozzie!
Scoutster on September 19 at 11:28 a.m.
Gramma…
Oh, right. I forgot you are not a cop. Gee, sorry.
Maybe you could ask one of your friends, then.
misjustice on September 19 at 11:31 a.m.
scouster; It’s my guess that they don’t have to give an UA or blood draw because of their “contract”. Which if true, basically is another example of the uneven playing field that citizens are on with cops, their “rights” versus our “rights”; try being a citizen defendant/suspect and denying an UA or blood draw. Yeah, good luck with that.
I’m guessing on your question, scouster, but do find it interesting that the cops and cop lovers on here haven’t given you an answer!
Scoutster on September 19 at 11:31 a.m.
Oh, and Gramma, I HAVE asked repeatedly. I would love to ask the Guild, but they don’t even have a way to contact them on their site.
What’s a poor citizen to do?
SR: Can we get a copy of the collective bargaining agreement posted on here?
Sadbuttrue on September 19 at 12:01 p.m.
It is a given that Tucker will not prosecute this killer. The sooner he reaches his inevitable decision not to prosecute, the sooner the Feds can prosecute and get this killer sentenced to a very long prison sentence. Personally, I believe this case fairly cries out for a fixed-life prison term.
There is no way the Feds can decline to prosecute this egregious violation of the Pastor’s civil rights. The precedents set by the Zehm and Rodney King case, if anything, indicate that the Pastor’s murder is even a greater violation of civil rights.
Comparing Rodney King’s response to “lawful orders” is revealing. When ordered by a CHP officer to “get to the ground,” King grabbed his buttock and told the female CHP officer to “kiss my ass,” after leading that same cop for several minutes on a drunken, 100-mile-per-hour car chase. At one point, he lunged at and attacked one of the LAPD defendant/cops, before the baton blows started, during which he repeatedly disobeyed orders to stay still. Rodney King had a mile-long record of violent crimes, including armed robbery, for which he had only been out on parole from for a short time. Stacie Koon, one of the officers who served time in prison for the beating, feared King was on PCP given his resilience to less force (two taserings, wherein the huge King sprung up immediately from the ground to the cop’s horror) and feared King’s young, massive prison-weight-lifted body. All of the Officers at the scene complied with LAPD’s ban on chokeholds. King received no permanent disfigurement or disability. One cop who physically intervened to stop the beating was nonetheless tried criminally in both State and Federal Court (he was acquitted on both).
As I said, Pastor Creach’s murder cries out for a maximum life-in-prison sentence. This time bomb has now killed twice. Putting him in prison for life will go along way towards making the streets of Spokane safer for the public.
bszottlinger on September 19 at 12:30 p.m.
Scoutster:
I noticed in Mr. Tucker’s interview with KXLY he mentioned he did not yet have the toxicology report regarding Mr. Creach’s blood draw at autopsy, which would answer some important questions regarding Mr. Creach’s blood sugar levels etc. Mr. Tucker did not mention nor was he asked anything about Officer Hirzel’s blood toxicology, which tells me he already has it and knows what it was, or he doesn’t have it and wishes he did, or he doesn’t care (which I doubt).
If it makes you feel any better the investigators did ask officer Hirzel in the 9/9/10 interview if he had taken any medication or alcohol and he said he hadn’t. But remember this was after you made your big stink about it. I’m not implying that the investigators are following this blog, but be careful what you say will you.
Justy:
You seem to be of the belief that the union contract prohibits the taking of body fluid samples of the involved officer/s. I am not so sure because the level of sophistication here in dealing with this type of matter does not appear to reach the level that it does in other areas of the country and that includes the union involvement.
Granny:
If you happen to take issue with anything I have posted please let me know and I will try and explain how a thorough, competent, objective, protocol and investigation benefits an innocent officer.
Brad
chouligirl on September 19 at 12:47 p.m.
Gamma, if any police officer thinks his career is too dangerous, then they need to get out of it. Many types of careers are dangerous, by far more dangerous than the donut eating, lower age retirement, extra benefit job of being a police officer. There is an element of danger in law enforcement, that’s true, but please…it’s not the most dangerous job around. If ya can’t stand the heat, get outta the kitchen. It takes a special personality to do law enforcement PROPERLY. Unfortunately, they must be in short supply…or mostly in the State police.
And blood tests after any shooting should be required. I thought it already was required. Silly me, cops don’t have to follow the rules the rest of us have to follow. Without that blood test, there will always be that shadow of doubt against the cop. It’s in theri interests to have that test done.
Think back to your high school class and remember the biggest dork with the biggest chip on his shoulder (bully) and guess what—he’s likely to be a local cop. Power trip a-go-go.
misjustice on September 19 at 12:47 p.m.
Brad; I’m not certain of anything! Lol!
I am only guessing that the Union negotiated a non-test clause; I don’t recall having ever read of an UA or blood draw being performed on any local law enforcement individuals following either homicide or assault against citizens. If they have been done, someone please correct me on this…
I did read, from the released documents, where investigators asked Hirzel about medication or the use of alcohol. I haven’t read, however, that either an UA or a blood draw was done prior to or after the “tactical” interview on the night of the homicide. Have you? Cause I certainly could have missed it…
bszottlinger on September 19 at 12:50 p.m.
Nope!
bszottlinger on September 19 at 12:55 p.m.
Justy:
SOP elsewhere apparently not here. A good question for the media to ask.
bszottlinger on September 19 at 1:10 p.m.
Ron_the_Cop:
Chouligirl called you a “dork”.
Ron_the_Cop on September 19 at 1:19 p.m.
OK re blood/UA draws.
If at the outset there was probable cause to believe an officer committed a criminal act that BA/UA will go to state of mind/level of intoxication, then you could probably do a compelled draw just like a DUI. To be extra careful I would write a search warrant for the blood/ua.
For what it’s worth I negotiated the drug testing policy on behalf of our union. This was after a death in custody unit (physical fight no shoots fired) and the chief wanted to test all involved. We sought a temp restraining order from the test results being released to the department pending a determination of the legality of the forced draws.
In the meantime we had a wildcat case of “blue flu” in patrol over contract negotiations. I had nothing to do with this case of blue flu. If I did we would have done it correctly. Our members were still in town to be served. As it was the Chief immediately filed an injunction and served me. The Chief was demanding sick notes retroactively. Mind you our contract allowed for two days sick without a doctor’s note. This was getting nasty as our Chief was doing a witch hunt using IA and was going to seek a permanent injunction which would have required involved officers to testify under oath.
The City Attorney’s Office wanted drug testing in critical incidents for damage control for future liability issues. We negotiated an acceptable drug testing policy in exchange for dropping the permanent injunction case re the blue flu.
In short the involved officers (not officers that merely assisted and were not directly involved) must give a blood. There is considerable language re the actual testing protocol. The initial results go to a qualified medical examiner (QME) to be screened first for the presence of prescription drugs within therapeutic dosage ranges and noise level for false positive of illegal substances. The QME can interview officer and consult with their physician if they have a question.
Once this is done the department received the results re illegal substances and/or usage of drugs beyond normal dosage levels - the main areas of concern are pain meds, the disclosure of HIV related meds, antidepressants et al.
Ron_the_Cop on September 19 at 1:25 p.m.
Brad,
I must have missed it:-) I guess the blog gods must have deleted it.
bszottlinger on September 19 at 1:28 p.m.
Ron_the_Cop
Right on point, and Riverside is not the only California jurisdiction. I believe testing is also covered in your old Public Safety Officer’s Bill of Rights.
Brad
Ron_the_Cop on September 19 at 1:34 p.m.
Brad and all
Here’s a copy of the current statute from PORAC the state police labor organization. I have screened the latest version for drug testing protocol but it does cover investigation of police officers as to what is acceptable:
http://www.porac.org/POBOR.html
Mind this law was passed after a number of police administrators used abuses tactics on the rank and file.
misjustice on September 19 at 1:34 p.m.
Ron; that is interesting but do you know anything about the UA/Blooddraw policy here?
Ron_the_Cop on September 19 at 1:42 p.m.
Misjustice - NOPE!
I too have written emails to the S-R staff suggesting that they file a PDR for the critical incident protocol and the MOU for the cross investigation of critical incidents. I’ve also emailed Sheriff Knezovich and suggested that they make this available on their website. I haven’t heard back from anyone.
I’m painting the outside of my house right now before the weather turns:-) If I get a chance I will file a PDR with both the City and County and see what happens. You’d think the S-R would be on this as they filed other PDRs in this case. Chief Deputy Counsel & Public Information Officer Emacio (works for Tucker) and I have a history over him refusing to release other public documents.
Scoutster on September 19 at 1:50 p.m.
Ron..
sounds like it is possible to have a perfectly rational and fair system in place for drug testing.
C’mon cops and kneejerk cop-defenders! What’s the rationale for not testing?
Don’t be shy. Just jump on in! We’d all love to hear!
misjustice on September 19 at 1:51 p.m.
Ron; if you’re up on a ladder, be careful! Good luck with the painting!
Thanks for your continued efforts to get more information out to the citizens, your efforts are appreciated.
lewis8457 on September 19 at 2:11 p.m.
It has been my understanding by watching these blogs for 4 years now the police do not take drug test of any kind pre-employment or random after hire. and that is because their union will not allow it.
misjustice on September 19 at 2:20 p.m.
“C’mon cops and kneejerk cop-defenders! What’s the rationale for not testing?”
cpd, gramms, where are you? Why so silent, now? I’d like to hear your defense of not UA testing cops that kill.
lewis8457 on September 19 at 2:20 p.m.
yes Ron, Brad, Fredjames, it is nice to hear from guys that are in the know. I think most of us just want some honest answers. Your posts help me understand both sides of the coin.
Gramma i could care less about cop death numbers any where but in spokane, but since you brought it yes we have had too many police deaths on the west side of our state, but look at how many citizens have been killed. two weeks ago 7 people were gunned down by police in one week! I still think of you would bother to run the numbers i asked you to, you would see citizen deaths by police far out number police deaths by 6 to 1 at least.
Sadbuttrue on September 19 at 2:26 p.m.
Scoutster,
Assume that cops will argue, due to their special training and experience and their lives being in extreme mortal danger every single minute of every single day, that drug-testing for them is substantially different than the forcible drug and alcohol tests routinely administered to the citizenry.
Normal citizens would never be able to understand the superhuman demands of the incredibly grueling eight- or ten-week police training academy. This comprehensive training regime gives them special abilities and expertise known only to few mortals to deal with drug and issues and makes them far less likely to abuse drugs or alcohol. Therefore, the misuse of substances is unlikely to ever play a role in their decision-making, thus testing is redundant.
The ungrateful and petulant citizenry could never comprehend the minute by minute mortal danger that cops face every single day and with every single interaction they face with the public, which ignorantly and maliciously wishes to harm the police and obstruct them in the performance of their duties. When a cop drives down a suburban street, for instance, they know that lurking behind every single bush awaits a cop-hating homicidal maniac anxious to notch another slaughtered cop on their sniper rifle stock. Having to take a drug test after such a grueling day of being virtually a target for every cop-hating gun-nut is an insult.
Scoutster on September 19 at 2:26 p.m.
But, saying “their union won’t allow it” is not the rationale.
Ask the question of why that is in the contract? Then, why that, then why that, then why that.
Ask the question “why” 5 times in public policy, and you usually get to the real reason.
This sordid episode has shown me the LE community is made up of policy cowards. They might look sweet in their BDU’s carrying big fat guns and commanding their dogs, but when it comes to speaking rationally and simply to the community about why they do what they do, they are children hiding behind the aprons of the Guild and the “you have no idea what we face every day” whine.
C’mon, cops. You are reading this. Tell us what you think about the policy to NOT test after a critical incident. Do you have any sense that that might be a good idea for YOU as well as for us?
lewis8457 on September 19 at 2:27 p.m.
Brad you have made it easy for tucker, all he has to do is make a pie chart of your suggestions and play spin the bottle and just keep spinning it until it hits “justified don’t do anything tee time at 1pm”
bszottlinger on September 19 at 3:01 p.m.
PigBuster:
Either that or some time to put it past the election! :)
Ron_the_Cop
My bad, memory going with age it might have been the Maryland or Virginia Police Officers Bill of Rights where I had to deal with this issue.
Brad
misjustice on September 19 at 3:01 p.m.
Or shake the Magic 8 Ball; reply hazy, try again.
bszottlinger on September 19 at 5:08 p.m.
I was going to hold off on this until we actually saw the “Protocol”, and I do believe the SR is working on getting a copy.
Although I haven’t researched any case law regarding Washington State drug testing or the Washington Administrative Code. I wondered long ago whether there was anything, aside from a union contract, that might prevent local law enforcement from establishing a drug testing requirement for involved officers in incidents like this. At first glance the link below seems to allow required drug testing of officers in critical incidents. It will be interesting to see the extent of care and consideration taken in developing this protocol and the procedures associated with it.
I don’t know why I am thinking this way but I have this sneaking suspicion that the SR is going to have a hard time securing a copy, and when they do get a copy there ain’t going to be much there.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=357-37-200
Brad
bszottlinger on September 19 at 5:29 p.m.
Scoutster:
I would hope you know that I have been kidding you about putting up a stink and whining about the drug testing issue. You and I had a dialog about this long ago, “Roid Rage” etc. I am as concerned as you are about it but your insistence and perseverance regarding the issue is far more eloquent then mine, and I already have family members unhappy with my continued rants on this blog, so please persevere.
Brad
bszottlinger on September 19 at 5:43 p.m.
Ron_the_Cop:
http://www.dpa.ca.gov/personnel-policies/drug-testing/regulations-dpa.htm
Brad
cpd805 on September 19 at 10:16 p.m.
Sorry Mis I have been so silent lately….I have been at work. My money does not come from SSI or TANF, so occasionally I do not have time to post 30 or so times per day on a blog that approximately 20 people read.
As a knee jerk cop supporter, I FULLY SUPPORT requiring any officer involved in a deadly force situation to undergo toxicology testing. It only makes sense. I’m not sure what is in the protocol, but I know that a law enforcement supervisor can compel toxicology testing if they have reasonable suspicion the officer is under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
Pigster said: “actually i do know the spokane numbers NO police officer have been killed in the line of duty for 73 years!”…..That is factually inaccurate. Det. Brian Orchard was shot in the head and killed 27 years ago. I think Gramma brought that up. Anyway, to only look at line of duty deaths in Spokane and Spokane only is fallacious. The majority of murders of police officers occur in jurisdictions where there are historically few officers killed, or where no officers have ever been killed before. The point is…it can happen anywhere. A better scale to judge the propensity of violence against officers is to look at how many officers have been assaulted in that jurisdiction. I know in Spokane in the past 9 years, there have been no fewer than 7 incidents where police have not only had guns pulled on them or pointed at them….but have actually been SHOT AT. It is blind luck, devine providence, or a combo of the two that none of these officers were actually killed.
Pig also said in the same post: “how about showing both sides run a count of how many citizens get killed by police, i think you will find being a citizen is much more dangerous”. How many citizens are there….more than 310 million. How many officers are there….less than 700K. Per capita…I would venture to say more officers are killed by “citizens” than citizens killed by officers.
A lot of different occupations are dangerous. People are killed in many occupations, not just law enforcement. That said, most occupational deaths outside law enforcement are accidental deaths. The number one cause of death for law enforcement officers is gunfire. The number murdered by gunfire this year so far is 43. The next leading cause is auto accidents (31). What profession other than law enforcement and military have such large numbers not just killed, but intentionally murdered? I don’t consider law enforcement particularly more dangerous that many other professions, but the dynamic of the danger is much different.
Scoutster on September 19 at 11:05 p.m.
Brad..no worries, I get it.
cpd, for whatever its worth, I have no problem in calling policing a dangerous gig. Of course it is. It is also voluntary (we don’t have police conscription) so I take it for granted that they understand the risks, willingly accept them, and are paid accordingly.
The issue is accountability and the obvious contempt many police seem to have for the public they are meant to protect and to serve.
Also, although it might be convenient to stereotype all those who are concerned about such issues as shiftless dopers living in the basement, I happen to be a mid-50s white middle-class professional who has paid taxes (police salaries included) for many, many years. You don’t want to lose my demographic.
misjustice on September 20 at 12:23 a.m.
And my demographic, cpd; small business owner, college graduate (honors), veteran of the US Army (honorable discharge), tax payer, non-criminal. Not that it matters to pigs/citizen-haters like you; who see us all as parasitic malcontents. And what’s it to you if I work from home and post on a blog thread? Geez, nothing makes some pigs happy and ones like you don’t miss a chance to show contempt for the citizens paying your bloated salary. And you wonder why you’re held in low regard? Oh, and once again, bite me! ; )
cpd805 on September 20 at 12:26 a.m.
Scoutster,
You are right, it is a voluntary job and I believe most officers don’t complain at all about the danger aspect. I would surmise the biggest complaint among officers is the Monday morning quarterbacking by the cantankerous critics who have a propensity to automatically assume police misconduct, cover-ups, and conspiracies. In most on-going investigations, limited information is released regarding an incident, sorry…but that is the nature of criminal investigations. So the tendency is to “fill the gaps” with (often erroneous) assumptions, then these assumptions are repeated as if they are facts, and become facts in the minds of some gullible people who hear them enough. I’m sure it is very frustrating for most officers, but I guess that goes with the territory.
If I comment about welfare rats living in their mom’s basements with ample free time to post blogs all day with their internet service I pay for, eating pizza rolls I pay for, smoking their dope……it is in jest (for those who fit the above description, that means I was just kidding).
cpd805 on September 20 at 12:59 a.m.
And Mis…….I think I love you! But I’ll have to take a rain check on the biting….
I actually think the vast majority of citizens are like me: decent, honest, hardworking people who appreciate the work police do. I do believe some of the criticism of police absolutely has merit, and some officers do things I’m sure embarass the rest of their colleagues (initials J.O. mean anything?).
Here’s my demographic (since everyone is posting theirs): 40-something, professional, college graduate (also with honors), married with 3 kids, interests include history, politics, seasonal sports, movie night with the family, and riding my Harley.
Sadbuttrue on September 20 at 5:47 a.m.
The advent of cellphone cameras has been an unmitigated public relations disaster for the police. The police can repeat Scoutster’s sarcastic whine of “you have no idea what we face every day,” but that claim is just embarrassing with the number of bad cops caught in flagrant delecto on videos readily available on the internet. In point of fact, we DO know what cops are doing every day, and the heretofore apathetic citizenry is transforming into a growing movement of public alarm, disgust and revulsion.
Predictably, cops have started charging citizens with a felony for videotaping them without their permission. Gee, that’s a swell idea for winning back support for your profession!
I would propose that police training and practice as it currently exists simply cannot survive the video and internet age. It is a doomed industry in its current form. Police seem to imagine that the Blue Code of Silence and their circling the wagons dis ingenuousness is still viable and functioning, when it actually looks ridiculous and outdated in the face of the torrent of jaw-dropping videotapes of horrific police misconduct readily available with the touch of a button. The old “Move along, nothing to see here,” “you basement-dwelling welfare druggie”, and then committing flagrant perjury in court to hide the deed is getting ripped to shreds by upstanding members of the community on blogs like this one.
The so-called “investigation” of this serial killer - complete with a Vegas vacation!! - reminds one of the last gasp of the buggy whip industry, as it painfully floundered and won protective laws passed in response to the automobile.
Sadbuttrue on September 20 at 8:37 a.m.
This revolution against the police, who are trained to act like and think like a hostile enemy occupation force, is also similar to the collapse of the Soviet Union and its occupation of Eastern Europe. As soon as the citizenry of those countries had videos smuggled into them showing Western Civilization in all of its finery, well, the revolt was on. Those videos demonstrated that their system was, by contrast rotten and based on lies
The videotapes that brought down the statue of Lenin with a resounding thud were one-sided, expensively produced and from limited sources. You could not talk back to “Dynasty.” The cellphone cameras and internet movie sites and blogs detailing the systematic abusive reality of modern policing are multi-sided, cheap and widely available for free. They are an irresistible force that cannot be stamped out and demonstrate clearly that the police have declared war on us. They dress like it, act like it, and think like we are hostile enemy combatants.
The police defenders on this blog try to argue that the murder of the Pastor was defensible, or in the alternative, it was an aberration that does not demonstrate the rottenness and lies of the system as a whole. What they cannot cogently argue against is this: Once people DO understand what police “go through every day,” they conclude that the police should do a lot less, or none of it. It has nothing to do with protect and serve and has everything to do with maintaining control and power over the citizens.
eagleproducer on September 20 at 8:37 a.m.
“Buggy whip industry” Classic!
bszottlinger on September 20 at 8:50 a.m.
Cpd805:
Let me first say that I am very pro-law enforcement and I have previously supplied my demographic. I post here because mobility issues provide me the time, the subject matter interests me and I do have direct experience related to the subject matter.
My understanding is that far more than 20 people including law enforcement personnel and leadership, personnel in the prosecutors office, and some of the community leadership have been following this and other blogs.
I do have issues with the way the Zehm investigation was conducted as do most, including the federal government, which I might add, was not in any way the fault of the vast majority of officers on the Spokane Police Department or the Sheriff’s Office. I attribute the poor investigation and handling in the Zehm case to very, very poor leadership as well as a low level of expertise in dealing with these situations.
I was hoping that the Zehm case would be a springboard for law enforcement leadership to develop investigative and procedural standards that would be in the interest of all. It does not appear to me that that has taken place. When the blame game regarding the investigation starts, and it has to an extent already, I won’t be blaming the troops, rather I will blame the leadership and I have every right to do so.
One of the very few laughable moments for me in this mess was during Chief Kirkpatrick’s press conference when she attempted to put citizens minds at ease by saying that she was on the telephone often with the local Bureau SAC. The federal government does not have jurisdiction in this matter at least at this point and they must be very careful in any role they play while this case is ongoing at the local level. I know exactly what is going through the minds of the local FBI and US Attorney’s Office. They are praying that the locals don’t screw this one up so they have to again become involved. I can only imagine the hard feelings that have developed between federal and local law enforcement as a result of the Zehm case.
Again I have some questions I would like to get your take on.
I would assume you have read the WAC Code I posted above. Section(2) of that code specifically allows for body fluid testing of police officers in incidents like this. Though my research is limited I find nothing, short of leadership negotiating it away, that would prohibit testing to be a part of an OID procedure and protocol.
Would you agree that drug/alcohol testing should be a part of any OI death protocol?
Would you agree that if testing was not done the issue will be in the minds of the public for ever and haunt Officer Hirzel, if he was clean, for the rest of his career?
Would you agree that the release of investigative detail by an SPD investigator to family members was a mistake?
Would you agree that if a physical demonstration in front of the video camera during the interview of 9/3/10 was not conducted any subsequent demonstration is tainted?
Brad Szottlinger
misjustice on September 20 at 8:58 a.m.
**********That is very convenient, as it matches Mrs. Creach statement that she said she never heard any loud commands. If scared for your life, , the officer would be giving Drill Instructor volume commands.**************
Even if the officer did give Drill Instructor commands, it’s very convenient that Mrs. Creach can selectively state she didn’t hear the officer. Sorry, but I don’t buy her story. If she hears one, she hears both. She can just say she didn’t & that makes her in the right? Not.
misjustice on September 20 at 9:11 a.m.
“Would you agree that if a physical demonstration in front of the video camera during the interview of 9/3/10 was not conducted any subsequent demonstration is tainted?’
Hey, Brad!
Have you read, in any of the available documents that have been released, that the 9-3-10 was videotaped; or the “tactical” interview on 8-25-10? I know the 9-3-10 interview has an audio tape but have not been able to discern whether or not it was videotapped; or the 8-25-10 interview either.
Ron, are you still on a ladder? ; )
bszottlinger on September 20 at 9:28 a.m.
Justy:
According to the transcript of the 9/3/10 interview it was both audio and video recorded. However I can not discern from the transcript whether or not a physical demonstration was done. It does appear that a physical demonstration was done during the 9/9/10 audio/video interview, but this was well after the press leaks.
You have to read the 9/3//10 transcript carefully, it looks like Investigator Hammond initially forgot to add in permission to video but he did add it in later.
I believe Mr. Wasson’s crew is trying to get the video copies.
Brad
chouligirl on September 20 at 9:51 a.m.
hmmm, it seems the folks posting on this are all upstanding citizens who work and pay our taxes and have no criminal records…that must piss off cpd and gramma… looks like you jump to incorrect conclusions.
as for me, I’ve said previously that I am educated, BS from a Big Ten University, have been employed my whole life, have over 25 years employed with the State, have never been arrested and have no record other than an occasional traffic ticket, my grandfather was a chief of police in a small town in PA, I used to have the utmost respect for the police but things have changed greatly from the Mayberry days… protect and serve is gone.
Do I think all police are corrupt? No, I don’t.
I think their leadership is all corrupt and I think there needs to be big changes in how police are trained and who gets to be a police officer because they aren’t weeding out the ones who should never have that authority. Raise the standards for county and city police. Stop covering up and admit when cops screw up. They break laws too but they are always taken care of by their own.
how’s that saying go…absolute power corrupts absolutely.
bszottlinger on September 20 at 10:04 a.m.
Justy:
I have not read the tactical interview transcript if it was an actual interview. I don’t know that it has been made available. In some jurisdictions there isn’t an actual interview, but the officer is required to submit a written tactical report which is sometimes a detailed form that covers various tactical and evidence issues and an affirmation as to the truth of the report.
It is necessary in cases like this to do a critical read of all of the documents. In some cases I have read the same document over 20 times each time finding something I missed previously. Along with getting some of the information I suggested earlier Mr. Tucker and his staff should be doing the same for each and every document they receive and correlating the information in each document with others.
I don’t agree with Mr. Tucker’s position of not having any involvement in or directing the initial investigative process. However, if he does take steps to see to it that he has all of the information available to him, including all of the documents concerning the previous death, all I/A reports from the 3 agencies, Officer Hirzel’s medical/prescription records, Mr. Creach’s medical info, the report from the ME, etc. I will not hold it against him if his decision goes beyond the election. These are some of the things that I believe should have been submit to him when the investigators submitted the case. To do this right it takes time, and you want to be able to demonstrate that you attempted to answer every question that might come up. As an example if body fluid testing was not done, I am sure scoutster would like to know whether or not Officer Hirzel had been prescribed something like Zoloft, even though Officer Hirzel denied the use of any medications.
Brad
misjustice on September 20 at 10:05 a.m.
Brad:
Thanks. Yeah, I did read the add in re; permission.
Do you have any info on the 8-25 “tactical” interview re; demonstrated baton swing? It would seem that any video of that interview could speak more to the alleged baton strike/swing as it would have been recorded/conducted prior to the “news-leaks”, and would not have been tainted from Hirzel reading news/blogs that he was instructed not to access; and later admitted that he’d done.
Anyway, just a thought…
bszottlinger on September 20 at 10:08 a.m.
See Above
misjustice on September 20 at 10:09 a.m.
Our posts crossed…thanks, again.
Sadbuttrue on September 20 at 11:00 a.m.
“Even if the officer did give Drill Instructor commands, it’s very convenient that Mrs. Creach can selectively state she didn’t hear the officer. ”
Then there is the most obvious and simple explanation, which is that the Deputy is lying.
Which is really amazing, given that the Deputy had a whole week in Vegas to fabricate a plausible lie. He can’t even lie well enough to meet the basic job requirements of being a cop, even though he had access to the internet and the news reports.
bszottlinger on September 20 at 12:06 p.m.
Gramma:
If in the unlikely event you made it through Voir dire and ended up on a jury in this matter you would be instructed on some guidelines you could use in assessing the credibility of the witnesses in the case. I would be interested in knowing what criteria you are now using to asses the credibility of Mrs. Creach, and also what criteria you are using to asses the credibility of Officer Hirzel.
Brad
misjustice on September 20 at 1:40 p.m.
First, I wouldn’t want to be on the jury & I would tell the truth about being biased when it comes to choosing whom is to be believed. Let me see… someone who has worked in law enforcement for 14+ years to defend the public or someone who’s family member’s routinely took the law in their own hands (21 times in the last 5 years?) & didn’t think there was anything wrong with what they were doing? Let me see whom I believe first.
I also probably use the same criteria you are using to say the opposite of Mrs. Creach & Officer Hirzel. What Proof does anyone have Hirzel is lying? None. But it doesn’t stop anyone from speculating or stating so. We don’t know anything about either of these people other than what the papers & TV reports. I have the same “right” to think negative of the family as those do to think negative of the officer. If Creach had called the police when he suspected someone was on his property, then he probably wouldn’t be where he is today.
This officer is in enough trouble without people speculating what a terrible person he is/was. I have a friend that lives in the Palm Springs area. When asked about the death of the person that Hirzel was involved in he stated: The officer had approached a person that was being threatening to others. When he tried to arrest the man, the man went for the officers gun trying to take it from his holster. The officer wrestled him to the ground to keep the man from taking the gun & shooting anyone, including the officer or bystanders. He used the choke hold on the man to gain control of the situation & get him in cuffs. Other officers had been called by both the officer in need & by bystanders. There were many witnesses to what happened. The force used was deemed to be justified. End of story.
So everyone can spin their yarn about a murdering cop, but I tend to believe someone that is out there, day in & day out dealing with the drunks, crooks, hookers, liars, druggies, pedophiles, etc., until I have good reason to believe otherwise.
BitofBacon on September 20 at 1:50 p.m.
Gramma-I love you.
misjustice on September 20 at 1:59 p.m.
BitofBacon… I love you too!!
misjustice on September 20 at 2:11 p.m.
Wow, a geriatric greasy bacon love fest…icky. Sorry, I feel like I walked in on something weirdly incestuous.
bszottlinger on September 20 at 2:22 p.m.
Gramma:
BitofBacon:
You might want to take note of the fact that I haven’t attached more credibility to one party over the other, the only thing I have done is point out what at this point appear to be issues with the investigation. A poor investigation is a detriment to the officer involved, I hope you understand that. Your admitted bias is fine with me, I don’t have one at this point. If an investigator were to have the same bias as you it may well affect the way he/she handles an investigation just as your bias would not allow you take make an unbiased decision as a juror.
I have said a number of times that those assigned to the investigation, should never believe the officer, or the witnesses, until the evidence helps to establish the truth.
I won’t go into all of the things you would be asked to consider in establishing credibility, many of those things not one of us knows.
If either of you learned that the officer involved in this matter had lied during the previous death investigation or was disciplined elsewhere for not telling the truth, would that change your credibility assessment?
If you learned that Mrs. Creach was hard of hearing and was over 30 feet away behind a wall, would that change how her credibility should be assessed?
If you learned that Officer Hirzel was prescribed medication for violent mood swings, would that change how his credibility should be assessed?
Just three of many as yet unanswered questions.
Brad
bszottlinger on September 20 at 2:35 p.m.
Just one other thing. Dealing with the aftermath of officers who lie, cheat, steal, rape, rob, and murder, is a rarity here in Spokane although I understand that has happened in the past. If you have ever had to deal with that, and I have, you learn that the best approach in matters like this is to not believe anyone.
Brad
Scoutster on September 20 at 2:44 p.m.
Well, gramma, that’s good enough for me if you have a friend who knows all about the incident in Cathedral City.
I mean, what more evidence would we need!?
And, gramma, what would constitute a “good reason to believe otherwise”? It sounds like you would like to just fold up this whole investigation now. Why bother, huh?
We just need to think of Creach as collateral damage in the fight against crime who probably brought this on himself anyway, don’t we?
misjustice on September 20 at 3:04 p.m.
As I said before, everyone is speculating. Speculating about the officer taking medication for mood swings. Speculating about Mr. Creach being hard of hearing (is there any medical tests showing such), or Mrs. Creach being 30 feet away & behind a wall (she can hear her husband but not the officer who was close enough to the man to strike him with the baton?). If she heard one, then she heard both.
What makes you think or say the officer lied during the previous investigation? Do you have proof or are you just speculating also? Didn’t the witnesses verify the officers story? The officer’s actions were found to be justified. (Yes, Scoutster, I have friends in the area. As a matter of fact I was there just last summer for their wedding & it was in Cathedral City. Do you want my hotel receipt as proof?)
Yes Brad, there are many, many unanswered questions. As I say again & again, I will give my final opinion when ALL the facts are out & until then? Well, I stand by my opinion & say no one has shown me why NOT to believe this officer.
bszottlinger on September 20 at 3:24 p.m.
Gramma:
Here is a link to the definition of “If”,
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/if
valleyman on September 20 at 3:34 p.m.
Here’s a thought:
A land without the force of law behind the police and their ability to demand compliance is a lawless land. A lawless land has no force of authority and thus injures the weak and the average person who cannot or will not project force upon others. Gangs, thugs, and criminals thrive in these lands…
Imagine if you will this scenario:
A man, not being an expert on the law, believes a deputy who has shown up at his home to serve a warrant for his arrest, is acting illegally. He thus believes he has the right to resist this attempt at arrest by the deputy that he believes is unlawful. Can you see where this is a slippery slope and would lead to any criminal being able to argue they resisted arrest, fought the police, or used deadly force against law enforcement because they believed the act of law enforcement to be unlawful? THIS IS ANARCHY!
Now consider this:
1) You are legally compelled to comply with the police whether you believe them to be acting lawfully or not
2) You have the right to legal recourse against authority when it is used illegally, i.e. you can sue the police when your rights have been violated.
Our courts have shown time and time again through rulings like Miranda and others that they will step in and act when law enforcement breaks the law or even bends it. To insinuate this does not happen is untruthful and clearly ignores historical precedent.
It’s time to stop posting inflammatory comments encouraging people to resist police actions with force, violence, or with deadly weapons. It’s time to stop pretending that Creach was somehow justified in refusing the deputy’s commands. It’s time to look at reality and bring yourselves back into alignment with it. If you don’t like the way things are, use your abilities within the law to change it and don’t step outside the law to bring the lawlessness you claim to abhor to our city.
bszottlinger on September 20 at 4:33 p.m.
valleyman:
Let me preface this by stating I detest guns, I do not advocate in any way disobeying a lawful order. But since you posted a scenario what would you suggest in this one.
Two NYPD narcotics Detectives come to the door of a heroin dealer, without an arrest or search warrant. Demand entry and are denied, they kick the door gain entry shoot and kill the dealer and another occupant. Both the dealer and the occupant had firearms found near their bodies. The two Detectives testify that they had gone to the address to contact the dealer in an effort to find a wanted subject and the dealer and the other occupant started shooting. The officers are cleared by a shooting investigation. Two years later in another case an informant comes forward and supplies information that the two Detectives were doing drug rip-offs and had stolen over a pound of heroin from this dealer which they sold. The informant also supplies information regarding several other drug rip-offs the two Detectives had perpetrated, all unreported. The second investigation of the shooting was able to tie the weapon next to the body of the occupant to one of the Detectives several months prior to the shooting. In the original investigation, among other things no effort was made to establish whether or not powder residue was present on the hands of the dead occupants. No effort was made to trace the firearms supposedly used by the occupants. Although an individual came forward providing information that the two Detectives were doing drug rip-offs, a report was never made, and no follow-up was done. A witness to the original shooting was never contacted although she was in an adjacent apartment and heard the dealer or the other occupant screaming please, please don’t shoot followed by gun shots.
Realizing that the drug dealer and his friend were not the salt of the earth, what options from a legal perspective would they have had to protect themselves?
Brad
misjustice on September 20 at 4:53 p.m.
Well, I’m glad you know how to look up the definition of “if”. I happen to have a dictionary too, but I didn’t need to look it up. Just seems to me there are way to many if’s in this story.
valleyman on September 20 at 4:57 p.m.
Brad,
Good question although I have to say the scenario you mention has the police (who are acting outside the law and not in a law enforcement capacity) as equally as guilty of breaking the law as the drug dealers they are ripping off… Under my scenario and under the Creach shooting, you have law enforcement officers acting in a legal fashion. I do also believe that in the case you mention that the police detectives would be charged and found guilty following the second investigation.
It’s really tough when you start trying to examine things from the benefit of hindsight, but let’s say we do this here. Did Pastor Creach have any instances in his background that would have given him reason to have cause to disobey law enforcement officers? Had a bad cop stolen plants from him and thus give him cause to refuse to disarm? I know that it has been widely reported that Creach was unhappy with the lack of law enforcement response to his property for crimes in the past. However this unhappieness does not translate in my mind to a legal cause to challenge a law enforcement officer on his property doing the very thing he had complained so often about not receiving… conducting an emphasis patrol…
A uniformed police officer giving a lawful order to comply with his command to disarm and get on the ground is hardly an abnormality in this country, in fact I’d go so far as to say this happens daily somewhere across this country. What I believe happens a lot less are incidents like the one you portray. Again, if you say just because police in the past have abused their authority that this gives you the right to resist all police actions in the future because they might also be abusing their authority leaves society open to anarchy.
bszottlinger on September 20 at 5:15 p.m.
Valleyman:
Unfortunately you are presupposing that Officer Hirzel’s presence on the property was to perform a legitimate law enforcement function. One of the first things investigators should have done was to make every effort to establish that was in fact the case. At this point you appear to be taking his word for it, which is fine, and that may be all we ever have. The true scenario I posted demonstrates the need not to believe anyone and make sure a proper investigation is conducted.
Brad
lewis8457 on September 20 at 5:19 p.m.
cpd just so you know not that i give a damn i work 20 hours a week thanks to the recession, just was denied my SSI disability because i make to make much money it was recommended i quit my job and go on welfare to qualify, which i will never do. I am a multi-property owner and a ex army MP so you have judged me wrong just as i have tried to show you,
the amount of hate you cops have is amazing, there are two on KXLY that are just………my god did they say that?
misjustice on September 20 at 5:48 p.m.
********Unfortunately you are presupposing that Officer Hirzel’s presence on the property was to perform a legitimate law enforcement function. ********
And you - unfortunately - are presupposing that it wasn’t.
Ron_the_Cop on September 20 at 7:34 p.m.
Brad,
You really need to read Timothy Egan’s book “Breaking Blue” which chronicles former Sheriff Bamonte’s solving of the oldest open homicide case in the US. There was a criminal gang inside of SPD that was stealing butter and selling on the black market in Spokane. The town marshal of Newport came across them and he was killed. The murder weapon was tossed in the Spokane River:
http://www.spokesmanreview.com/interactive/bookclub/reviews/staff_review.asp?RevID=24
You seem now to share the opinion of Chief Kirkpatrick being in over her head that both Sheriff Bamonte and I concluded several years ago. I’ve linked to this piece before but it’s worth a read:
http://tinyurl.com/2454jjf
Here’s a quote from that piece re Kirkpatrick:
“Most police officers aren’t just good, honest people, they are among the best of people,” says Bamonte, who holds a master’s degree in organizational leadership from Gonzaga University. “They risk their lives constantly for others. There are bad apples in every profession and organization. The first job of all leadership is keeping those bad apples from spoiling the others. That’s what’s so disturbing about what Kirkpatrick’s doing. She’s rendering criminal assistance to the Cowles family in return for good press. She’s sacrificing this community’s police force to do that. I can’t tell you how bad I feel about this.
“Chief Kirkpatrick unsuccessfully applied for the police chief jobs in San Francisco and Seattle. When you apply for these types of jobs, exceptional weight is given your resumé. She needs the goodwill of the media and, to benefit herself, she has stooped to the lowest possible level to get it. She has betrayed the trust of her department and our community. That betrayal seems to be working for her. As a result, she has received excellent press during her short tenure in Spokane. One Spokesman-Review article labeled her the best police chief in the history of Spokane,” said Bamonte.
I’ve come down after the ladder. So far no injuries. Only the rear part of the house remains to be done.
misjustice on September 20 at 7:49 p.m.
KXLY has put up, on their web site, the audio from dispatch on the night of Aug. 25; there is a transcript in the text of the article and a link to listen to the released tapes.
bszottlinger on September 20 at 8:34 p.m.
Gramma:
Look honey, I haven’t presupposed anything. At this point do I believe the Officer? No! At this point do I believe Mrs. Creach? No! At this point do I believe Alan Creach? No!
You might try looking beyond your bias and understand that there are some of us that post here that don’t have a bias one way or the other and have far more experience in these matters than you do my dear. I just hope the investigators and the prosecutor take the same unbiased approach to the investigation and the decision making process. If the pro-law enforcement people could bring themselves to understand that not all Officers are truthful, and if the anti-law enforcement people could bring themselves to understand that not all pillars of the community are truthful. Then perhaps some balance might be obtained. Should you continue to provide blind support for your side and the other side blind support for their position what does that say for each sides ability to reason?
I think there were only 2 “Ifs” in the above paragraph.
Ron_the_Cop
I will read the book keeping in mind that it is the product of one view point. I have continually said since Zehm and other cases, now including this one that Chief Kirkpatrick is in way over her head. How anyone could believe that a person with such limited experience could lead such a troubled police force is beyond me.
Brad
bszottlinger on September 20 at 9:09 p.m.
Valleyman:
I wasn’t going to mention this, but in the interest of fairness and since you decided to provide a possible scenario in support of the officer. Here is another what if scenario.
What if Officer Hirzel needed some fertilizer for his newly planted lawn, drove by the Plant Farm in his marked car, saw some sitting out, went back and got an unmarked car and backed it up to the fertilizer bags and was loading the trunk when he was interrupted by Mr. Creach?
We can what if, each other to death but the test will be the quality of the investigation and eliminating the “What Ifs” will it not?
I would never advocate non-compliance because of past abuses, nor do I advocate anarchy. The type of incident I described previously is rare, even for the east coast. Though incidents of officer’s involved in theft on duty may be rare here in Spokane it is not in other parts of the country.
Brad
Ron_the_Cop on September 20 at 9:12 p.m.
Brad,
That’s my point. Kirkpatrick was not ready for prime time. She screwed up the Savage case. She should have fired Asst. Chief Nicks for the Zehm and firehouse sex case. The Guild does have some valid issues with her that the the S-R won’t cover. Why? I’m betting the City Attorney’s Office who does not represent the people of Spokane.
bszottlinger on September 20 at 9:21 p.m.
I agree. she did fire one assistant chief early on didn’t she?
cpd805 on September 20 at 9:37 p.m.
Brad,
You asked the following:
“Would you agree that drug/alcohol testing should be a part of any OI death protocol?”
I posted this earlier. While some police officers will disagree with me, I fully support tox testing as a part of an OI protocol. That is just common sense to me.
“Would you agree that if testing was not done the issue will be in the minds of the public for ever and haunt Officer Hirzel, if he was clean, for the rest of his career?”
Yes, at least with certain segments of the public. If I were in Hirzel’s shoes I would want it done for that very purpose.
“Would you agree that the release of investigative detail by an SPD investigator to family members was a mistake?”
That depends on the info you are referring to and whether or not it would compromise the investigation. It is a bit touchy with family members in the mix. You don’t want to compromise the investigation, but at the same time, you empathize with their predicament and do not want to leave them in the dark over what happened with their loved one. It is a balancing act, but the first priority has to be investigative integrity. I think everyone wants that in the long run.
“Would you agree that if a physical demonstration in front of the video camera during the interview of 9/3/10 was not conducted any subsequent demonstration is tainted?”
Tainted in the eyes of some in the public? Absolutely. Tainted in the eyes of the court? Not necessarily. When I read the interview transcript, I thought it sounded like he did demonstrate it, but I could be wrong. We would have to see the video to know that for sure.
Ron_the_Cop on September 20 at 10:25 p.m.
Brad and All,
I emailed Sheriff Knezovich a few days ago and suggested that they post the critical incident protocol on their website. I just got a msg that it was up. Go to the Sheriff’s home page.
http://www.spokanecounty.org/Sheriff/content.aspx?c=2068
Scroll down right side under “quick links.”
misjustice on September 20 at 11:14 p.m.
Ron; glad you made it off the ladder. ; )
Thanks for the link, and for petitioning Ozzie to post it. I gave it a quick read tonight, as it’s late. I’ll be reading it more closely in the coming days.
I did find the part relating to UA interesting.
bszottlinger on September 21 at 7:40 a.m.
Cpd805:
I think we agree on most things. I can not tell from the 9/3/10 transcript if a demonstration was done or not. I hope the heck it was. If it wasn’t, the information regarding the lack of trauma on Mr. Creach’s body being leaked was a big mistake. It isn’t with the court that the taint would be an issue, it is with the jury. A good defense attorney would put the investigator and Officer Hirzel through hell on cross. The jury would have to decide if Hirzel marginalized his description of the blow after he learned there was no body trauma. This is something the investigators and the prosecutors will also have to access.
As a matter of course media releases are compiled by both the prosecution and the defense in major cases to determine whether or not investigative detail could have been learned by a witness from press reports. I’m sure you know that one of the reasons information is guarded in a “who done it?” case is so when a witness comes forward with information known only to the killer and the investigators that witness has credibility. The same is true for documenting a suspects confession.
I understand there is a difficulty regarding what to release to the family, but in my opinion the integrity of the investigation is in the family’s very best interest and a nice lengthy explanation during a sit down with them is always appropriate.
Brad
bszottlinger on September 21 at 7:42 a.m.
Thanks Ron, A cursory read makes me wonder.
Brad
RValenzCatCityPD8702 on September 21 at 7:47 a.m.
Well, I have found the desire to participate in this public frying of my friend Brian and law enforcement in general once again. It’s not out of a need to defend him or law enforcement, it’s just to shed a little light on the Pacific Northwest, as you’re often cloud covered.
You’ll debate and arm chair quater back any action by law enforcement unless you see it on tv or in the movies. Then it’s hooray for the good guys, even if their tactics are outside the lines or even violating civil rights. If a tv or movie cop has an excessive force complaint or a shooting, give ‘em another gun and let go hunt the bad guys, even if the the comissioner has taken his badge. Wow, great entertainment but not reality. Here, if an officer has used force, even on a gun tottin’ vigilante pastor, you folks don’t key in on the suspect’s (yes, i called the “pastor” a suspect) actions. instead, you’d rather sit back and gossip, contribe & speculate about the officer’s wife’s completely legal mail order business. Wow, that’s hypocritical, I’m sure none of you have never engaged in the purchase of anything sexually related or even a neglige for the little lady. A side note, I believe most of these types of businesses have females as clients, Just food for thought.
Now for the juicey stuff. As for Brian’s involvement in the death of an inmate here in So Cal. I worked with him for (10) years and I don’t remember such an incident. But your paper writes 2 lines about it and you guys are off and running.
As for the use of deadly force issue, I used to be a trainer and put every officer through various simulations, including Brian. All passed. I even put members of city council and the media thru the same simulations & found each and everyone FAILED. They all used excessive force, shot innocents or failed to respond and were killed. Interesting aint it?
A couple of last things. A fatal officer involved shooting occured over the weekend from Cathedral City PD. Similar to this, as the suspect was a “good guy”, he just had a gun late at night that he too did not want to drop. That bad decision also cost him his life.
For those interested, heres the address. http://www.mydesert.com/ What I think is also interesting, is the fact the police were grilled for this shooting of an innocent man and members of the community began taking part in discussions like this. Here’s the kicker, the paper’s editor closed the forum as he felt the comments and participation had gone too far and were more of personal attacks than a communication forum venue. Interesting I think.
Also, as a side note, to the erroneous writer who said Rodney King was awarded $10 million, check your facts. He only received approximately $3.
misjustice on September 21 at 7:58 a.m.
Brad; what are you wondering about, re; Protocol? Care to share? ; )
bszottlinger on September 21 at 8:41 a.m.
ebyrnes:
At first glance there are a number of things in this protocol that stand out to me. The first one I noticed is the “Board of Directors” is made up entirely of law enforcement representatives. What an opportunity to get the public involved by appointing an equal number of citizens to the “Board of Directors”.
Brad
bszottlinger on September 21 at 8:45 a.m.
Justy:
A whole bunch of stuff. But I need to go through it. It’s a good thing I don’t drive. I just hope if my drivers get pulled over the officer doesn’t ask me for ID.
Brad
bszottlinger on September 21 at 8:51 a.m.
Rvalenz:
Let me know if there is anything I post that you think is bias one way or the other, and I will either agree or defend.
Brad
misjustice on September 21 at 8:51 a.m.
Ron, what is code 99 in police talk? Wanted/stolen record? I noticed it was one code called in on dispatch tape disclosure.
Brad, your papers, please! ; )
I noticed the same thing, re; the “Board of Directors”.
bszottlinger on September 21 at 9:49 a.m.
Scoutster:
“Law enforcement employees have the same rights and privileges that any civilian would have regarding intoxicant testing.”
I don’t agree with this statement from the protocol. Law Enforcement Officers by virtue of their employment CAN be compelled to supply samples for testing or possibly be fired, unlike the average civilian.
No mandatory testing in the criminal investigation.
“When Investigative Team members determine that a law enforcement employee’s state of sobriety is relevant to the investigation, they have these options:”
In my mind the state of the officers sobriety is always relevant in matters like this, and the public, as we see here, will always have questions. Mandatory testing would take the onus off the investigators in determining relevancy. A decision no matter how appropriately made would have to be later justified.
(1) Obtain the blood, breath, and/or urine sample by valid consent;
Mandatory testing would protect all officers from the inevitable questions that would arise as to way he/she consented to it and he/she didn’t (see cpd805’s above post).
There are no procedural standards protecting the officer/s in the handling of test results and there should be.
“(2) Obtain a search warrant to obtain samples;”
You have to be very careful here, if an officers refuses a mandatory test which he/she can do, there might be a tendency to jump in with an administrative demand, in my mind that would be a mistake. The need to obtain the samples immediately after the incident is important and great care must be taken in the preparation of the affidavit. If mandatory testing later becomes a part of this protocol the board of directors along with the prosecutor and the investigative staffs need to spend considerable time considering the ramifications involved in the search warrant process.
“(3) When applicable, utilize the provisions of the Vehicle Code or state statutes for vehicle driving incidents;”
Self explanatory.
“(4) If an arrestee refuses to comply with the request for a sample, attempts will be made to obtain the sample in accordance with case law.”
I am not at all sure what the intent of this section is, perhaps there is an option besides a search warrant that I’m not aware of.
We still don’t know what happened in this case. It will be interesting to see if samples were in fact taken. If they were not taken, given the protocol options, why not? The fact that in the criminal, case samples are not mandatory MAY bring about a whole lot more Monday morning quarterbacking as I have admittedly done here.
Brad
bszottlinger on September 21 at 9:51 a.m.
Justy give me a chance will ya!
bszottlinger on September 21 at 10:05 a.m.
Ron_the_Cop:
There is something absolutely hilarious in here that I can tell was put in because of a big mistake Chief Kirkpatrick made in another case, and no one will be able to convince me otherwise.
Brad
Ron_the_Cop on September 21 at 10:15 a.m.
RValenzCatCityPD8702
If you’ve read my post up thread, I’ve been there done it at Riverside PD for thirty-five years before moving up here. A couple of retired RPD Lts. who worked in our IA unit, and others from RPS now live in this region. One thing that is apparent to us the state of the LE community is that in some areas, is about 20 years behind what we took as the norm in So Cal re police policy, tactics and procedure.
As I said before I was just going out as RPD POA president when the infamous Tyisha Miller shooting occurred. I personally know the detectives that handled this incident. There was no criminal wrong doing - perhaps bad tactics that had a bad outcome. BTW the fundamental issues underlying this shooting have to do with City management and the police command staff re budget cuts and rationing of police resources. We were looked at under a microscope by both the US DOJ and the State AG’s Office - no criminal filing:
http://tinyurl.com/25q947n
Also BTW Spokane is in East Washington and not socked in like the Wet Coast (Seattle). East Washington is more red than blue. In some ways Seattle is much bluer like San Francisco in CA. While CDA, ID has been discovered, Spokane is “undiscovered country.” This region has many fine attributes and amenities that would be uncharacteristic of the Inland Empire in SoCal. This region has also been called the Inland Empire too. Spokane serves as the regional hub for Eastern Washington, and the bordering states of Idaho, Montana, Oregon and parts of Canada.
Having said that this region does have it problems. One is the political/governmental environment is so “hinked” up and incestuous that it can barely function. SPD has had several recent critical incidents that has caused the public to lose the trust/confidence in its police agencies. The Hirzel shooting is probably the first for SCSO. SCSO had a run in with a meth head a while back that became somewhat controversial but not like the Creach shooting. SCSO is generally a lot more transparent that SPD which can be very secretive and nontransparent - “Trust us!” I think this is from the culture of the police command staff and the penchant of the City Attorney’s Office to CYA at all costs.
Yes we have some gang bangers and a good deal of meth heads here but not to the same degree as in Riverside, Rialto, Colton, Pedley, Mira Loma and San Bernardino. SPD has only lost one officer in the line of duty from an ambush shooting in the last 30 years. SPD does have a colorful past. Read the link to Breaking Blue about former Sheriff Tony Bamonte above and his opinion of SPD Chief Kirkpatrick.
To those that consider the job as police officer not particularly dangerous here’s some information to the contrary. Perhaps in Spokane but that’s not the case in other areas of the Country. In Riverside alone during my time there Doug Christiansen and Paul Teel were killed in a shotgun ambush, Larry Walters was killed in a traffic stop after altercation in court, Dennis Doty and Phil Trust were killed by Jackson Daniels when they went to arrest him for a felony warrant. I was the first patrol unit on the scene. The last was Doug Jacobs, a young officer, that was killed in a 415/neighbor dispute. This does not include those that were wounded, killed and or injured on duty by DUIs et al. The RSO also lost deputies. Some I knew and one I went to the RSO Academy with.
Here’s some press accounts:
http://www.riversideca.gov/rpd/Memorial/Chrstn_Teal.htm
http://www.riversideca.gov/rpd/Memorial/LWalters.htm
http://www.riversideca.gov/rpd/Memorial/doty_trust.htm
http://www.riversideca.gov/rpd/Memorial/DJacobs.htm
http://www.riversideca.gov/rpd/Memorial/CConnelly.htm
And of course there was the notorious Norco Bank Robbery that lead to the death of RSO Deputy Evans:
http://www.rcdsa.org/norcorobbery/robbery.html
[Continued]
Ron_the_Cop on September 21 at 10:16 a.m.
[Continued from above]
I’ve been working with Sheriff Bamonte re the corruption in this City. Read the quote from Sheriff Bamonte above. There are many fine men and women in local law enforcement here. What the problem is particularly with SPD is the culture of the police command staff and the City Attorney’s Office. Further the lack of spine by our local elected leaders to deal with this problem because of their co-option/corruption by the power elite of Spokane.
This problem is systemic and the lack of leadership from the police command staff is a symptomatic result of this dysfunctional government do its corruption. The Police Guild has done itself no favors either by retreating to a “them/us” siege mentality. The Guild do eshave valid complaints re the current chief, Anne Kirkpatrick, but this was spun against them by the local paper that the power elite own.
The County Prosecutor’s Office (In CA the District Attorney’s Office) would be the normal check on police abuse and governmental corruption cases. The Spokane Co Prosecutor has no investigation bureau like Riverside and San Bernardino Counties that have special units that investigate political conflicts of interests/corruption and shadow critical incident investigations by local law enforcement.
I personal know Judge Paul Zellerback who just ousted Rod Pacheco that I know too, as the Riverside Co DA. Neither would tolerate this kind of corruption. I also know Mike Smith (former Asst Chief RPD) who heads the investigative division at San Bernardino County DA’s Office who would not tolerate this for a minute either. In Spokane County the prosecutor’s office is impotent and ineffectual in these areas.
The current incumbent, Steve Tucker, buried a first degree manslaughter death as the hands of the ruling family of Spokane as a side note to a public bond swindle that robbed the Spokane taxpayers of minimally $87.5 million dollars with the complicity of City elected/appointed officials with the assistance of the City Attorney’s Office.
Spokane Co Prosecutor Steve Tucker is MIA on most days. In the controversial Zehm death case he relied on the police reports to conclude that there was no grounds for filing a criminal case. Since then the feds have now gotten their nose under the tent edge using a federal grand jury and have uncovered false police reports and statements. This is the reason that the public has lost confidence in the law enforcement community particularly with SPD.
This has spilled over to SCSO as well. By protocol this investigation was being led by SPD whose normal SOP of secrecy and lack of transparency had fueled the wide speculation that you have witnessed in these discussion threads. I actively campaigned for Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich. While Knezovich disappointed me greatly for not outing Tucker’s burying of the Savage manslaughter case, he is definitely much more transparent in his administration that SPD Chief Kirkpatrick.
Det. Ron Wright (Retired)
Two-term president Riverside Police Officers’ Association
Thirty-five year veteran of RPD
(See my vitae up thread)
bszottlinger on September 21 at 10:24 a.m.
Rvalenz:
Were you also a party along with Officer Hirzel in the law suit against the police chief?
Shucks! I’ve got a medical appointment so I can’t play now.
bszottlinger on September 21 at 10:28 a.m.
Just one other thing. I think it is great that Sheriff Ozzie posted the protocol, he knew what would be coming and it sounds like he is willing to except the criticism.
Good On Ozzie!!!
Brad
Sadbuttrue on September 21 at 11:12 a.m.
“You’ll debate and arm chair quater back any action by law enforcement unless you see it on tv or in the movies.”
Anyone who works closely with the court system in the inland empire has intimate knowledge with just how out of control, dishonest and corrupt the local police are. For the California cop transplants, perjury is a standard operational procedure. Having witnessed first hand the amount of dishonesty in court under oath by our noble public servants, I tend to always believe the citizen over the cop. No, I didn’t become this way by watching TV or the movies, neither one of which I frequent.
“Since then the feds have now gotten their nose under the tent edge using a federal grand jury and have uncovered false police reports and statements.”
Pretty amazing that the Feds are coming around to the position of regarding any statement out of the local police as being highly suspect, but not the local prosecutor and police executives. So the police defenders, for the life of them, cannot comprehend why anyone would believe the citizens.
Ron_the_Cop on September 21 at 11:40 a.m.
Sadbuttrue,
For once we can agree. I don’t like the line officers being made the scapegoats for the sins/omissions/lack of leadership by SPD’s command staff and the penchant of the City Attorney’s Office for CYA ‘ing at all costs in covering up bad police policy, procedure, training and tactics. I think this is what was the cause of Zehm’s death as opposed to Ofc. Thompson intending to kill Zehm.
It’s the cover up that occurred afterwards that concerns me the most. WELCOME to Spokane.
Sadbuttrue on September 21 at 12:09 p.m.
Ron,
If I were going to predict, I would guess that sooner or later the Feds will seize daily operational management authority of the local police departments under some sort of Federal consent decree, much like they did in the New Orleans Police Department following Katrina.
The local police have demonstrated time and time again that they are not capable of supervising, disciplining and controlling themselves. There has been a clear practice and pattern of tolerating and deceiving the public about grotesque civil rights violations and too many instances of official corruption and deceit.
The Creach murder and the inevitable decision not to prosecute may well be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. The fix is in.
Ron_the_Cop on September 21 at 1:36 p.m.
Sadbuttrue,
I agree with part of what you’ve said. Sorry I can’t agree with you on the trespass issue though unless Hirzel can be shown was doing an actual illegal act. I don’t believe his mere parking of his unit in a business parking lot was a criminal trespass.
This was a tragic series of events on both parts that led to a bad outcome. The real question is whether Deputy Hirzel has lied during the investigation to embellish his justification for using lethal force against Creach. The baton strike does not ring true in my mind nor the witnesses in the area hearing any commands from Hirzel.
Trust me if I were giving commands to Creach those nearby neighbors would have heard my commands before any shots were heard.
Unfortunately incidents these can be “he said she said” incidents with the tie going to the officer. However with the track record in this town the public has lost the trust of its officers. Not disparaging local officers this is why we went to audio/video records from dash cams and officer worn digital recorders. In most cases these records were able to clear or back the officer’s account of what transpired.
If I were the Police Guild I would be advocating for such equipment for transparency purposes as opposed to retreating behind the “thin blue line” into “them/us.”
misjustice on September 21 at 1:56 p.m.
Yes we have some gang bangers********
You are kidding, right? SOME gang bangers???? Anybody that is familiar with the gangs in this area know there are over 50, yes over 50, different gang affiliations.
Ron_the_Cop on September 21 at 2:11 p.m.
Sadbuttrue,
I wouldn’t be so trusting of the feds either. They have their own issues/problems in and with Spokane. In the Zehm case I think you have an Asst. US Attorney that decided to do their job. I wouldn’t trust the current US Attorney for the Eastern District of WA, Jim McDevitt, as far as I could throw him.
Read Tim Connor’s and Larry Shook’s reporting - McDevitt was heavily involved in the RPS bond fraud scandal and should have disclosed material facts to the defrauded bond holders. The review of McDevitt’s actions by the Seattle Office of the US Attorney’s Office was a whitewash. They should have thrown him under the bus:
http://www.girlfromhotsprings.com/
What is particularly galling to me is that Senator Patty Murray submitted Michael Ormsby’s name in nomination for US Attorney of this District to replace McDevitt. Talk about calling the kettle black. Murray was also involved in the RPS bond fraud re the securing of the HUD loan. See April Fooled by Shook:
http://www.camasmagazine.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?aid=147
Ormsby was the subordinate of McDevitt when they were both at the firm of Preston & Gates that was involved in the bond fraud. Ormsby’s got feathers still stuck to his mouth in this fraud but yet the Obama Administration has formally submitted his name for confirmation to the US Senate Judiciary Co. Talk about leaving the fox to guard the hen house. You can read more here:
http://tinyurl.com/3a47lwh
That’s assuming the powers that be don’t kill my links as they have issues with Tim Connor, Larry Shook, Tom Grant, Randy Shaw, Tony Bamonte, former Mayor John Talbott and Councilperson Cherie Rodgers as we will not going quietly into the night re the RPS bond frauds and the death of Jo Ellen Savage in the RPS parking garage that was covered up by SPD and Steve Tucker with some help from the State AG and the feds. This is why I am upset with Sheriff Knezovich for not taking a stand and outing Tucker.
Ron_the_Cop on September 21 at 2:12 p.m.
Gramma,
Perhaps true but it’s a matter of degree.
Ron_the_Cop on September 21 at 2:20 p.m.
Sorry the tinyurl was broken. Try this one re Ormsby:
http://tinyurl.com/2g8p2my
bszottlinger on September 21 at 3:04 p.m.
I knew this would be in the protocol, and if you read the links below you understand why it is.
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2007/mar/29/police-chief-backs-officer/
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2007/apr/05/police-sheriff-on-same-page-after-confusion/
Henceforth I will refer to the below listed sections of the Protocol as the “Anne Kirkpatrick Sections”.
c. Investigative Response Team does not have the authority to issue “Garrity” orders of involved officers. This can only be done by the involved officer’s agency head or designee. If an Investigative Response Team member discovers that a “Garrity” order is being issued prematurely they should take steps to prevent this from taking place.
d. Before a “Garrity” order is given to an involved officer by his/her employer agency the Investigative Response Team member should be given a reasonable amount of time to talk to witnesses, review evidence, and consult among themselves and with the County prosecutor regarding the facts of the case and determine if a “Garrity” order is advisable.
Brad
Ron_the_Cop on September 21 at 3:37 p.m.
Yep - Brad you caught that one:-)
bszottlinger on September 21 at 6:18 p.m.
The need to balance the publics right to know and need to know is critical in cases like this. The media is the conduit by which the public receives their information. I’m not entirely sure whether the Media was even involved in the development of this protocol, but they sure as heck should have been.
This protocol assigns the responsibility for media releases to a PIO. In the case of the Spokane Police Department, Jennifer DeRuwe(Wow!), the Sheriff’s Office, Sgt. Reagan. I can’t imagine the media being happy with this set up.
Why in cases like this is the responsibility for media releases not assigned to Command Level Staff ? Perhaps that would have helped resolve the PR nightmare this case was with the Sheriff going out front and at least trying to inform the public, while Chief Anne is behind her desk or on vacation and Jennifer DeRuwe just being Jennifer DeRuwe.
Why not assign media interaction to the “Incident Commander” who is supposed to know everything that is going on with the case and can readily get answers to questions that come up. Why not have bi-weekly press updates with the media instead of those stupid typed “Press Non-Releases”?
The Incident Commander could put off any scheduled vacation until the case went to the prosecutor.
Once the case goes to the prosecutor he is on his own as far as dealing with the media.
V. MEDIA RELATIONS
The interests of the public’s right to know what occurred must be balanced with the requirements of the investigation and with the rights of involved individuals.
As in all other cases, care must be taken to ensure that intentionally misleading, erroneous or false statements are not made to the media.
Once the Investigative Team has initiated an investigation, all media releases related to the investigation shall be made by a Public Information Officer (PIO) with the approval of the Team Commander.
Involved officers’ names will not be released to the public until at least seventy two (72) hours after the incident. Any release of evidence to the media will only be done with the approval of the lead investigative supervisor and detective.
Designated Public Information Officers shall adhere to the PIO Protocol.

While any agency cannot be prohibited from making statements to the news media about the incident, these guidelines are established:
* I have no idea what the last sentence in this section means. Does it mean, we can’t keep you from talking to the press but here are some guidelines? Or does it mean yep we established these guidelines but do what every the hell you want?
cpd805 on September 21 at 6:18 p.m.
Brad,
If the officer’s agency or the investigative agency prematurely invokes Garrity, they are essentially contaminating any criminal case should the officer found to be criminally culpable. Garrity is not typically invoked until the criminal investigation is completed and the internal investigation is underway. The criminal investigation is completed before the internal investigation even starts primarily because of the Supreme Court’s Garrity rule.
The protocol is a cooperation between several LE agencies in Eastern Washington and if I remember correctly Northern Idaho, for conducting the criminal investigation of the incident, not the internal investigation. Each individual agency conducts their own internal investigation to determine if policies and procedures were violated. Each agency has their own policies and procedures regarding when to invoke Garrity and regarding toxicology testing. When the protocol says “if” the investigator collects UA’s, that is dependent on the policy of the agency where the involved officer is employed.
For those not familiar with the “Garrity” rule, it basically says the employing agency can compel a statement from the officer, but anything the officer says is not admissible in criminal court (it is used only to determine policy violations and can be used for internal discipline). The reason it is not admissible in criminal court is because the statement is coerced, and using those statements in criminal court is a violation of the 5th Amendment.
Sadbuttrue on September 21 at 6:26 p.m.
“Sorry I can’t agree with you on the trespass issue though unless Hirzel can be shown was doing an actual illegal act.”
Excuse me? I have never argued that Hirzl was “trespassing.” I don’t believe that he was trespassing. What I argued the fact that he was on the homeowner’s property without permission or knowledge and without any belief whatsoever that the Pastor was a suspect in a crime are important factors on whether the cop’s warrantless seizure of the pastor, his escalation of force, and finally his use of deadly force was justified under the balancing test of Graham v. Connor.
Breaking this down, if he were on the pastor’s property and the pastor was suspected of a crime then his seizure (by ordering him to his knees) of the pastor and his escalation of force is more likely to be found proper.
Second, if the Pastor were a suspect in a crime AND he had a history of violent crime, then it would be more likely that his escalation of violent force would be found proper.
Finally, if the Pastor was suspected of a felony, was armed and aiming the gun at the cop, then Hirzl’s use of Deadly force would likely to be found proper.
At every stage of this analysis, different facts permit differing levels of force. However, from what I can tell, with the cop not having permission to be where he was, without the Pastor being suspected of any crime or having a history of violent criminal activity, and without the pastor even pointing his gun at Hirzl, then it is highly unlikely that the use of deadly force was permissible. While it is apparent that Hirzl created and had control over the entire deadly escalation, that does not equate with him trespassing.
Elkay on September 21 at 6:44 p.m.
cpd805,
Thanks for explaining the Garrity rule for us who are non-up-to-speed in legalese. I had Mr. Google explain it to ignorant me about an hour ago.
(Reminds me of articulating in airline-ese when I worked for a major airline at O’Hare. We, in that industry, just “knew” what we were talking about. Heh! Sometimes got a little raunchy, too!)
I’ve learned so much just reading here, and want to thank the Calm Ones in this case. (@Ron_the_Cop, Brad, you, etc.)
As hard as it is, I still adhere to patience until ALL evidence (forensic and otherwise) appear. I want the simple truth from all sides … to protect or incriminate. Non-thinking emotional drama has no place in this tragic incident.
bszottlinger on September 21 at 6:56 p.m.
Cpd805:
Believe me I have been involved with Garrity issues for many years. My point in the above post was apparently Chief Anne Kirkpatrick has not.
Brad
bszottlinger on September 21 at 7:01 p.m.
Cpd805:
We had a lengthly discussion here some time back regarding Garrity. In which I explained how the feds would be able to use Thompson’s statement even if it was a Garrity statement.
Brad
Sadbuttrue on September 21 at 7:01 p.m.
I ended my harangue too soon. Once again, clearly the officer was not “trespassing.” However, that does not end the inquiry of whether he violated the Fourth Amendment by being on a private residential property after the business was closed for the night without permission, without the occupants being suspected of a crime and without a search warrant or an exception thereto.
The Supreme Court has clearly ruled that the law of trespass and the privacy interests protected by the Fourth Amendment are not precisely analogous.
There are many instances of where Fourth Amendment violations occur, but no trespass occurs (I have protected privacy interest in the phone booth I am occupying, for instance, but a cop would not be guilty of “trespass” if he barged in). There are instances where trespass DOES occur, but no Fourth Amendment violation happens (When a cop goes onto my 180 acre cornfield without permission and discovers my marijuana grow). You might not violate the Fourth Amendment by coming onto my business property during business hours, but do so if you come onto my business property at 3 am.
Additionally, it is clear that the Creach property included a residence and was not solely dedicated to the greenhouse business, which makes it more “off-limits” especially at night unless the cops have a warrant or a recognized exception to the warrant requirement, neither of which is suggested in the present case. I may be able to beat you up and tie you up until the cops get there if I catch you in my house (and may even be able to shoot you), but I can neither shoot you or beat you up for stepping off the highway into the edge of my lawn abutting the road.
I think the cop clearly violated the Fourth Amendment by parking at that time of the night on the Creach property. Who did he think he was, a part owner? And because he violated the Fourth Amendment with his impromptu appropriation of the Creach property, his options for using force were thereby severely circumscribed.
bszottlinger on September 21 at 7:12 p.m.
Cpd805:
Which bargaining unit has a contractual agreement prohibiting mandatory testing in these cases?
As I have said in the past if mandatory testing in these cases was negotiated away then leadership needs their head examined, and the union should reconsider the public perception ramifications. That is not saying the union should not attempt to prohibit random testing which is a completely different ball game.
Beyond the union contract a search warrant is a viable option.
Brad
Elkay on September 21 at 7:20 p.m.
Sadbuttrue,
Um, er, ……..”There are instances where trespass DOES occur, but no Fourth Amendment violation happens (When a cop goes onto my 180 acre cornfield without permission and discovers my marijuana grow). You might not violate the Fourth Amendment by coming onto my business property during business hours, but do so if you come onto my business property at 3 am.”
I hope Mr. Garrity doesn’t read these blogs.
Ron_the_Cop on September 21 at 8:24 p.m.
Elkay,
I’m assuming your quoting Sabuttrue to point out his misunderstanding of the Fourth Amendment re search and seizure. I’m sorry no trespass and or Fourth Amendment issues re being on business property no matter what time of the day or night. Same goes for the front yard of your residence that is normally open to visitors. Backyard surrounded by a fence is another matter where there is an expectation of privacy.
A small pot operation in the middle of 180 acres could be a problem re legal right to be within the field to find the grow. On the other hand if seen during routine patrol by aircraft at normal flight altitude probably okay. Using FLIR in a residential neighborhood to randomly looking for grow houses because of their IR signature probably not okay.
Sorry. Deputy Hirzel was not trespassing or violating Fourth Amendment rights of Creach when he parked on his property. Unless of course Hirzel was doing something illegal or intended to steal something not in the course or scope of his duties/employment as a police officer.
bszottlinger on September 21 at 9:01 p.m.
Cpd805:
Dealing with the family is very difficult, I am aware of that, but there is no excuse for releasing information concerning the baton blow and lack of body trauma to the family. This protocol needs to address the family issue and many others. The section below is poorly considered and poorly written as are many of the other sections. You need to get with your people and recommend that everyone, the unions, Sheriff, Chief, Prosecutor, WSP, ME, and the other agencies involved come together get some help from outside and redo this whole protocol. It is obvious this is a knee jerk reaction to the Zehm case and it needs a lot more work. No one likes to be told how to do their job but there comes a point when someone has to admit that things were not done as well as they should have been and then take the steps to correct them.
I’d like to be able to say “It’s All Good”, but I can’t.
Ron_the_Cop
Cpd805 apparently missed the lengthy and repetitive Garrity dialog.
Brad
VII. CONFIDENTIALITY
Investigators, including protocol Public Information Officers, shall not share information considered “Confidential” with individuals other than assigned investigators.
A. Information considered confidential:
1. Documents related to a protocol investigation;
2. Verbal statements or conversations related to a protocol investigation;
3. Information that would compromise an investigation;
4. Information and/or records deemed confidential by law;.
B. Information not considered confidential:
1. Information shared with agencies and individuals outside of the protocol that have been requested by assigned investigators to assist in an investigation. The amount of information shared shall be no more that that information which is pertinent to their role in the investigation.
2. Information shared by the Investigative Team Commander and/or Supervisors with the involved agency’s administration that does not compromise an investigation.
3. Information cleared by the Investigative Team Commander for release.
4. Spokane City/ County Protocol with member agencies
bszottlinger on September 21 at 9:22 p.m.
Cpd805:
Look, I am not the person to be talking about spelling and grammar errors and any document I submitted to the court or anywhere else had to be triple proof read by someone with those skills. A document like this should be triple proof read prior to completion. I believe there is a double “that that” in the paragraph below, being picky, perhaps, but it doesn’t look good. I won’t proof this whole thing, nor do I have the skills, but someone should.
Brad
Information shared with agencies and individuals outside of the protocol that have been requested by assigned investigators to assist in an investigation. The amount of information shared shall be no more that that information which is pertinent to their role in the investigation.
cpd805 on September 21 at 10:05 p.m.
Brad,
I was not involved in this forum when Garrity was brought up before, so I missed that.
And I’m with you on releasing the baton blow info to the family.
As far as union contracts and UA’s. The one I am familiar with says a supervisor can compel a tox screen if there is “reasonable suspicion” the employee is under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, is using any illegal drug, or is abusing any legal substance (such as prescription meds or alcohol). It does not specifically prohibit or mandate tox screens regarding OI deadly force incidents.
bszottlinger on September 21 at 10:11 p.m.
Thanks which agency?
bszottlinger on September 21 at 10:19 p.m.
It really doesn’t matter which agency, which ever one it is the city/county could write policy making OIC testing mandatory. The union would file a ULP but the city/county would win because of the critical nature of the incident as well as I believe the case law.
Brad
bszottlinger on September 21 at 10:39 p.m.
Cpd805:
I don’t know if people get my drift with my postings here, maybe you will now. Hirzel could be guilty as sin. But Hirzel could also be innocent as hell and still be the victim of a p… poor protocol and investigative process.
Not only does the Brass have to do some serious thinking about this and eat some crow, but the unions have to as well.
Brad
Ron_the_Cop on September 22 at 2:46 a.m.
BINGO!!! Brad
bszottlinger on September 22 at 7:21 a.m.
Cpd805:
If I recall correctly in one of the various interviews Alan Creach stated that someone in the ME’s Office had shown him that there was no trauma to his fathers knee area. This was after the investigator had told him about the baton blow and that there was no trauma to the knee area. As I have stated in earlier posts, the only public record regarding any death is cause and manner and that is all that should be released to the family until the conclusion of the investigation. The inclusion of the ME in this protocol is limited and I am not sure whether or not the ME has his own investigators who responded to the scene or not. If he does those investigators need to be included in this protocol. In Federal CRV cases it is standard practice to obtain reports from the ME’s Investigators compare their observations at the scene to the law enforcement observations. There are sometimes glaring differences between the two, and Agents are tasked with interviewing the ME’s investigators. On the civil side, I am not sure what happens here in Spokane, but in other areas of the country the ME’s Investigators reports are commonly subpoenaed for the personal injury action.
I am simply trying to point out the need for your leadership to do something about providing some credible system for dealing with OID’s. In my mind Zehm was strike one, Creach will be strike two, I hope someone at the top can hit the ball.
Brad
D. The Medical Examiner’s Office
Release of information will generally be limited to the following:
1. As defined by state law, only the cause and manner of death are public record. The written autopsy report is not disclosable. Involved agencies should be provided information about cause and manner of death prior to public release;
2. The identity of those present at the autopsy, including the identity and affiliation of the pathologist(s);
3. The general nature of further medical testing or medical investigation
bszottlinger on September 22 at 7:36 a.m.
All:
I feel as if I might have become a “blog pest” in offering my opinion regarding this protocol. If anyone besides Chief Kirkpatrick wants me to quit…just let me know.
Brad
misjustice on September 22 at 8:27 a.m.
I don’t want you to quit, Brad! Keep on keepin’ on! ; )
I’ve been a little busy with work so haven’t been able to delve into the protocol, have only done a quick read through. I’ll have more time in the next couple days and plan on reading it more closely.
Ron, what is code 99 in police “talk”?
Sadbuttrue on September 22 at 9:12 a.m.
The Spokane area police have a very simple and easy solution to stop all this “cop-hating” negative publicity and debate about their internal protocols and procedures.
Just stop killing people.
misjustice on September 22 at 9:31 a.m.
b s zottlinger… Looked up the name brad zottlinger to see if he was an attorney. or what? No last name zottlinger anywhere in Spokane or the US. So I looked up the word zottlinger in the dictionary (since zottlinger thinks I should look up the word “if” & use the dictionary). Thought the definition was funny. Zottlinger means “pig”. BS (bull s**t) Zottlinger (Pig).
LOL… Sorry couldn’t help myself. I bad. Okay, comment can be deleted by SR now.
bszottlinger on September 22 at 9:53 a.m.
Granny:
LOL, no ethnic jokes now, it’s “Szottlinger” which is Polish and was my natural fathers name. Messy divorce in high school, new name, a few high school chums around here no me by my given name. Keep searching you will find it. One of my kids is in practice here and they don’t want to be embarrassed by their nutty father.
Bradford Szottlinger
Ron_the_Cop on September 22 at 10:30 a.m.
Brad,
Hang in there. It’s via the new/alternative media/social networking that the people of Spokane will be informed about issues/problems that so far the power elite, the government elected/appointed officials, the police command staffs, the Police Guild, Co Prosecutor Steve Tucker and others don’t want the public to know - TRUST US! No more - the free flow of information will ultimately breakdown these walls of secrecy and expose the frauds. Look the LA County District Attorney just arrested eight elected/appointed officials from the City of Bell, CA for defrauding the people. Those we empower to govern will be held accountable from the ground up.
The City of Spokane has been carrying a structural deficits due to the RPS bond frauds and other deals that so far they’ve been able to conceal in the budget deliberations until now with the down economy. These poor decisions are leading to the actual layoffs of police and fire personnel. One of the people I would fire on my punch list for the Mayor in addition to Police Chief Kirkpatrick, Fire Chief Billy Williams, Utilities Director Dave Mandyke, is Spokane CFO Gavin Cooley, the architect of the RPS Settlement Agreement along with Atty Laurel Siddoway who is now appellate court judge. BTW the State Board of Accountancy investigators have finished their investigation re Cooley’s misuse of the title of CPA and now has been given to the Board for deposition:
Gavin Cooley CFO Spokane, WA - Misuse of CPA complaint filed
http://tinyurl.com/ylmmodu
These decisions could have played a factor in the tragic death of Mr. Creach due to budget issues affecting SO staffing/training. Staffing in the rural areas of Spokane County is very low compared to counties I’m familiar. Yes the crime picture/occurrence may be relatively low because of demographics and other factors but Spokane is going to grow and when you need the police- you need the police to respond professionally in sufficient numbers to deal with the situation whether it be criminal or disaster related.
A related issue is the Whitley Fuel fire and the initial response by SFD. This required chemical foam which eventually came from the airport FD and Fairchild AFB. Look with have two major transportation corridors I-90 and 395 as well as RR mainlines that transect Spokane that transport varying degrees of hazmat through the City on a daily basis. Are we prepared?
Yes of course this is the City of Spokane Valley which contracts with the SCSO to provide police services. The County of Spokane is not immuned from making poor choices with other people’s money (OPM) - the racetrack. Yes it could become a law enforcement regional training center with pursuit driving training but was this expense justified with all the problems now coming to light?
Misjustic - re Code 99
Many police codes are related to the underlying criminal penal code section and variations of the 10-Code. There are various regional dialects. I’m not familiar with what the specific usage in Spokane is but this was typical in SoCal.
11-10 Officer requesting routine assistance
11-11 Officer needs immediate assistance - usually responding backup roles Code-3 with red lights and siren.
11-99 Officer needs help. Generally all Hell has broken loose and requires mutual aid from other nearby agencies - civil unrest/riot (Watts Riots), the Norco Bank Robbery, and the North Hollywood Bank Robbery with the suspects armed with automatic weapons and wearing body armor.
bszottlinger on September 22 at 10:55 a.m.
Ron_the_Cop:
It’s pretty predictable what the response will be when the leadership is confronted with the legitimate criminal justice deficiencies “We realize there is a problem, but we just don’t have the funding to do things the right way.” “We don’t have the staffing levels we need.” “Lets have a bond issue.”
The truth is as long as they are allowed to fake their way through things they will continue to do so. Lay off 40+ cops, what a joke!
The money that was spent and will continue to be spent on a racetrack could have been spent on the development of a quality OID process. Including training and appropriate staffing in the DA’s office.
Since you mentioned it people should take a look at how the LA County DA handles OIDs.
Brad
bszottlinger on September 22 at 11:16 a.m.
Granny:
BTW, if I’ve offended you because I have been criticizing your granddaughter Anne, keep in mind she is a public official and I pay her a lot of money so I can criticize her all I want. You might think about mentioning to her that it’s obvious to all she wants out and it looks like she is headed in that direction so it wouldn’t hurt her career to stand up and say. “Damn it I don’t want these people laid off, you are hurting the public Ms. Mayor and council, you better find a way not to cut these people, I don’t care where you get the damn money find it!”
Instead of, “Gee I hate like heck to have to give these poor officers pink slips, I feel so bad for them and their families.”
Brad
Ron_the_Cop on September 22 at 11:16 a.m.
Agreed Brad,
Bottom line it’s up to the citizens to hold these LE officials accountable when they are BS’ing. If they don’t become involved to make postive changes then there’s little reason to gripe when the Zehm/Creach cases occur and or their tax money is misspent. That is the value of these forums of the new media.
I still know folks in our homicide unit that I’m sure have access to these docs.
The County Prosecutor’s Office needs it’s own top flight investigators so that it isn’t so heavily dependent on the investigators of the local LE agencies. This isn’t meant to bad mouth those agency investigators either. This would have a side benefit for those smaller agencies that may lack the in house investigative experience for a OID, a major crime, complex criminal investigations involving regional conspiracies/gangs and or complex high tech related crime.
The Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange County DA’s Bureau of Investigations function in this capacity for the smaller cities like Beaumont, Banning, Sun City, Brea, Placentia, La Habra and Yorba Linda and other suburb bedroom communities that have their own PDs and do not contract with the SOs for law enforcement services.
Spokane is set to grow in the very near future because of its many fine amenities/resources. It’s better to be in front of the curve than behind. I don’t mean to diss local LE but in dealing with these situations it’s useful to study what other areas have done. There’s no need to reinvent the wheel when you can beg, borrow or steal from others that have already experience these issues and have worked out solutions:-)
Well I be off line for the rest of the afternoon. I’ve moved my scaffolding to the back yard to do the rear of the house:-(
bszottlinger on September 22 at 11:20 a.m.
Ron is in arrears, got it!
cpd805 on September 22 at 4:38 p.m.
Brad….Me waaaaayyyy down toward bottom of totem pole! Not all da way bottom, but me only wun step from dirt level.
bszottlinger on September 23 at 9:24 a.m.
Cpd805:
It is the young folks like you regardless of the lack of strong leadership that will eventually be responsible for turning the public perception around. Your job is dangerous and each and everyone of you should do what ever you can to make sure you go home after the shift, unfortunately at some point in time not all of you will. It is a risk you excepted when you hired on. Most all of us admire that and are thankful for it. A culture of self-protectionism and consumer be damned can develop in any business, including the business you are in. When that happens, trust and confidence is lost. The loss is so much more evident in your profession because you don’t deal with widgets, or money, or property, you deal with people the most complex and diverse commodity on the planet. On your way up the ladder the officers you should admire are those that do their job well, treat the good guys and the bad guys with courtesy, respect, and understanding. Please don’t get involved in a culture where the officers that you admired are those officers whose badge is so heavy they walk with a lean to the badge side.
Case Files/Report Writing
When I read in the Zehm case that an AUSA had asked Detective Burbridge where his notes were, and the Detective responded that he had destroyed them, my first thought was “What are you thinking”. In the Zehm case you have a big issue regarding whether or not there was a cover-up so what is the jury going to think when they hear the notes were destroyed. I don’t know if there is any statutory requirement in Washington for officers to maintain their notes in all cases but in matters like Zehm and Creach it would make sense to me that it be a protocol requirement for a number of reasons including transparency. In the “Case File” section of the protocol it mentions “other documentation” whether that would include notes or not is not defined. I think there should be and a requirement for making officers notes and personal recordings used to prepare reports a part of the investigative case file.
As I have mentioned earlier if I was representing the Creach family I would have sent a demand letter to all the agencies involved, demanding they maintain the officers notes. Since Chief Kirkpatrick has stated that she initiated contact with the local Bureau, it wouldn’t hurt if someone called them and asked if they would suggest that all of the officers involved maintain their notes. You might also ask the US Attorney, Anne.
Along the same lines in the report writing section of the protocol it requires investigators to submit their reports within 7 days. In my mind that is far to long of a period in cases like this. Although requiring reports to be done on a daily basis may cost some overtime you should at least get more accurate and more concise reports. In the case of Investigator Hammond he did not do his report concerning the 8/25/10 interviews and observations at the scene, until 7 days later. I think juries, based on their own experience, would be well aware that it would be impossible for Hammond to remember all of the detail he reports 7 days later unless he tape recorded all of his actions and interviews or took notes. In my mind any recordings he made or notes he took are discoverable and should not be destroyed.
Brad Szottlinger
Elkay on September 23 at 1:29 p.m.
^^^ Sounds like old-fashioned common sense. Too bad there isn’t more of it around. (Hope the “leadership” has been reading this.)