May 12, 2011 in City

Clark: Unmarked police car bill solves no one’s problems

Doug Clark The Spokesman-Review

Tags:2010 Washington LegislatureBrian Hirzellarry crouseMatt SheaSpokane County Sheriff’s OfficeWayne Scott Creach

58 comments on this story so far. Add yours!

ChefGus/ John Olsen on May 12 at 5:23 a.m.
The officers can park right in our residential neighborhood driveway and use the perch to nab the speeders on 17th avenue and on Grand Avenue… and nab the folks speeding by those of us trying to use the cross walk at 17th and Grand… 2000 dollars an hour in revenue sitting right in front of the city council if they’d just enforce it…. we’ll do our part by offering a place to hide and nab folks… and i promise i won’t break out my 1911 to question the officer…. j
Krakor on May 12 at 6:02 a.m.
Spokane cops are a bunch of wanna be cowboys……I have no respect for the bullies. Why would ANYONE want the police invading our privacy, it’s not what they are paid for. Apparently all the Spokane cops are paid for is to shoot people. All we hear is crying about how we need more of them. I got a ticket a few weeks ago for having my own car parked on my own freakin lawn………..screw the police in spokane, pathetic excuses for law enforcement.
Orange on May 12 at 6:05 a.m.
Hey Spokane County Deputy’s! Please park your unmarked patrol vehicles in my driveway too. Up on Five Mile, on Strong road. It’s only 35MPH on the whole prarie. People to 50 plus up there. Please yes, snoop around all you want.
Shea and Crouse won’t be getting many votes on their next election bids. Don’t worry about stupid laws like this. Keep doing what you’re doing.
Put a motorcycle up there, the tickets he/she can write up there would pay for all of your salaries. REALLY!
Orange on May 12 at 6:06 a.m.
And ignore Krakor. He’s Kranky
Krakor on May 12 at 6:11 a.m.
That’s the type of ignorance that is going to hand this country over to martial law. I bet you like all the retraction of liberties brought upon by the BS “war on terror” too. The masses will always be blind I suppose. It’s amazing what scared little people will do when they are TOLD, not see, that we need more of this or that for our own protection.
Orange on May 12 at 6:18 a.m.
Martial Law? LMAO. You’re paranoid.
Krakor on May 12 at 6:24 a.m.
You are complacent………the worst type of citizen. The one who doesn’t know anything about what’s going on in their government. I’m sure people were paranoid about the concentration camps too.
Orange on May 12 at 6:26 a.m.
omg
skeeter on May 12 at 6:34 a.m.
Sorry for the family’s loss, but is this REALLY what the pastor would have wanted…finger pointing, blame, self rightousness, causing more hurt….that doesnt sound like the work of God. The family should practice acceptance. Not always easy but …..
luludesevilla on May 12 at 6:42 a.m.
I think it is a wonderful bill. The police have no right what so ever to be on my property without a warrant. That includes my driveway, parking lot, yard or any other inch of any property I own. These people seem to forget they too are bound by laws and that includes the one that say you can not enter my property without my permission or a warrant.
Krakor on May 12 at 6:45 a.m.
^ Amen friend, a voice of reason amongst the typical lemming nonsense.
Albert on May 12 at 6:50 a.m.
Orange…I have a buddy on Strong who tells me that a number of cops live there on 5 Mile, thus I believe YOU are a COP. Your comments therefore reflect this prejudice.
SPD and SO are nothing less than Storm Troopers who need to be in marked cars and stay off of PRIVATE property. No exceptions. If you have a warrant, then that’s another story, but the Constitution of the United States along with our Bill of Rights still holds true as LAW. The less we see of you the better. The less of you on the payrolls and streets, the safer the People of Spokane will be. You offer nothing except violence, corruption, and disgrace. Period.
The Pastor had every Constitutional right to protect his property. The Storm Trooper who assassinated Mr. Creech, along with the standard cover up, is reflective of the sub-human people who work as LEO’s in our community. Sad indeed.
remember_alamo on May 12 at 6:54 a.m.
Hirzel murdered a man while trespassing on his property.
I am not comfortable with that.
RCW 46.08.066, Section 2
lewis8457 on May 12 at 7:11 a.m.
hey while you out catching speeders sit on my sidewalk and nab all the cops cars going up Monroe at 45+. Want the same law breaking rights as a cop, put a blue bear in your rear window of your car. Get out of jail free card.
This may have never happened before but with the current mentality we are all possible terrorists, so the tables are turned. They are no longer here to protect us they are here to control us.
This story is just something to fill the paper nothing will come of it,
maybe this incident never has happened but i have documentation dating back to the early 70’s that shows the SPD, County Sheriffs like beating and injurying citizens for fun. And in 40 years no one has been able to change their attitude, why does everyone think they care now.
Ozzie is a clown that says one thing and then does another. Like his promise to get to the truth of the Creach murder. Nothing but empty talk.
garmiester on May 12 at 7:22 a.m.
Unmarked Parol Vehicles are that “unmarked police vehicles”. They are used to patrol the areas that have high crime rates and high traffic violations.
Its purpose is to be non-descript and blend in with other vehicles that travel and use these areas.
I know that normal citizens get angry when they get get caught speeding by these police vehicles, but in essance, these police vehicles are doing their job.
When you use these police vehicles in high crime rate ares, they are there to blend in,and watch for the thiefs that steal your property, or try to break in when you are sleeping.
Come on and get me a break, Shea and Crouse, all you are doing is hanging on to the shirt tails of the Creach family to enhance your political aspirations.
Lets all get off the band wagon, including Mr. Shea and Mr. Crouse, and realize that unmarked police vehicles are an essential tool in today’s police enviroment.
hamrsrscarry on May 12 at 7:23 a.m.
sometimes I imagine a different world, a world in which disputes and attitudes could be handled by divergent groups getting together over coffee and just talking it out.
I visualize these internet commentators sitting down with a bunch of cops and just sharing their concerns, questions, issues, and talking it all out. Finding common ground and really hearing the other side out.
My vision continues and I see one of the internet guys reach quickly inside his sport coat to hand a business card to one of the officers but the officer is jumpy and unholsters his Glock 9mm and punches three rounds into the chest and liver of the internet guy, killing him almost instantly. Then, I am afraid, all the ground gained is lost before the echoes of pistol fire have even faded from the room.
detroitdude on May 12 at 7:27 a.m.
I don’t think this legislation will go anywhere.
I don’t think cops should be allowed to park in unmarked cars on my property in the very first place. What is so hard about pulling over to the curb on a side street if you need to do some paperwork?
Secondly, while I do think the 20mph zone on Grand ought to be enforced more since there are lots of pedestrians around that area, I don’t really have any respect for a cop who spends his shift just busting people for going a few miles over the limit. Seriously, there are a lot of hills in this area, don’t post a 30-35 mph speed limit when someone can break that limit simply by coasting down a hill, not only that, but to stay in compliance it wears out the brakes on your car faster, SPD wanna pay for replacements??
If it weren’t for the tragedy of Pastor Creach this idea would never have come up. But all the same, I’m of the opinion that in this particular area, Spokane/Spokane Valley, all law enforcement at this point should be on “probation” for lack of a better word.
Ron_the_Cop on May 12 at 7:39 a.m.
Doug,
I disagree with you on the use of unmarked units. I believe local law enforcement is operating outside the law and intent of the legislature regarding the exception under the RCW 46.08.065:
… This section shall not apply to vehicles of a sheriff’s office, local police department, or any vehicles used by local peace officers under public authority for special undercover or confidential investigative purposes.
Yes Shea’s bill is over broad and will be reigned in. In my opinion as I’ve said before in these threads unmarked units should not be used for routine patrol and traffic enforcement. The use of unmarked units to issue traffic citations could invalidate them:
…I think it is best to keep it simple - routine patrol/traffic doesn’t equate with the current exemption under the existing State law for the use of unmarked vehicles by local police agencies. I really have issues from a public safety standpoint of working traffic in unmarked cars. This allows impostors to prey upon the public and for misidentification issues with the real police. Fundamentally who are the police supposed to be protecting?
I do agree with you as to your other questions as to what happened that night. We only have the statements of Dep. Hirzel as to what happened that night. Unfortunately law enforcement is giving him the benefit of the doubt and the media is reporting as fact that this is how it happened.
There are inconsistencies in Dep. Hirzel’s statements and actions as well as forensic at the scene that I’m not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt at this point. Because as you suggest we may never know largely do to the flawed investigation by SPD. We can only hope that Sheriff Knezovich will address these issues in his IA review and investigations.
All are free to read my, “Creach OIS Investigation - Report and Analysis”:
http://tinyurl.com/4ohxhd9
http://tinyurl.com/4wz2fpc (Update)
As a former police union president my biases definitely lie with the police rank and file. Having taught forensics and crime scene investigations, community oriented policing and controversial issues in law enforcement, there are definitely police policy, procedure, and training issues that need to be addressed in this case. The same can be said about the Zehm case too. Not recognizing when mistakes are made and moving to correct them, does no one any good.
I’ve tried to be fair and objective in my assessment. I’ve freely admitted I could be wrong and have been wrong in the past but constructive critique is what allows all of us to do better jobs. I have been very vocal that Steve Tucker has abdicated his duty and responsibility to the people to ensure that local law enforcement is held to a high standard and that mistakes are not swept under the rug. For this I’ve been dismissed, marginalized, accused of libel and making wide speculation by local law enforcement officials.
Sorry I’m a private citizen now and expect better of my law enforcement colleagues.
Det. Ron Wright (Retired)
noridare on May 12 at 7:56 a.m.
I read the police investigation. The officer said he pulled his gun first, not his badge. When Pastor Creach found out he was a cop he put his gun in his waist band. At that point he was no longer a threat to the officer.
Officer Hirzel then ordered him to the ground that is where is all went wrong. If I was out investigating on my property a strange car I would not give up my rights either. I am sure Pastor Creach was head back to bed but then, this want to be cowboy cop, who by his actions proved, that to be a cop was the only way he could ever be in charge of anything.
No, he has to get out of his car and push his weight around. He should have and could have ended the whole thing by saying good night to Pastor Creach. No this no good cop has to be brain dead. Pastor Creach told him he was out investigating because of the crime problems. He was not four blocks up investigating someone elses property. I say fire Officer Hirzel and those like him. That is the Bill that needs to be past.
valleyman on May 12 at 8:07 a.m.
Doug,
Well put.
It’s pretty obvious from the people posting on here to the opposite viewpoint that they are either anti-government nuts (jackboot, storm trooper, come here with a warrant only…) or people with their own agenda (Sorry Ron, but your reading of the current RCW is the same as Shea’s and it’s wrong… The comma is a separating device not a stringer and it is used that way in almost all legislation…).
Hamstringing local law enforcement’s efforts to be proactive and show a presence even while doing ‘routine’ activities like paperwork, is misguided at best and absurd at worst. I can with absolute confidence assure you that the vast majority of business owners welcome police on their property regardless of what kind of markings are on the car they drive.
Which is easier and makes more sense:
1) Passing a law that effectively takes away something almost all businesses want for the sake of one family whose situation has not been repeated anywhere else in this state, let alone this country in memory?
2) Asking business owners who don’t want the police on their property to call and notify the local departments (Crime Check) of this?
Again Doug, you nailed this one… Perhaps the only detail you didn’t ask about was how wet the ink still is on the political contribution check from the Creach family to the Shea and Crouse reelection funds…
Kivaari on May 12 at 8:08 a.m.
The proposal is a really dumb idea. The car issue in the Creach incident is a construct of the Creach family and their supporters. A Ford CV, sitting with marker lights on, a lighted interior, illuminated by Creaches flashlight, looks like a police car. We can only speculate on what Creach saw. His now admitted poor vision and a suspected ill temperament seem to be the ultimate reason for his death. I am sure I would not have responded as Hirzel did. We can read what he was thinking, but only guess as to Creach.This bill is ill conceived and is a real piece of reactive law. Trying to solve a single incident with a tiny possibility of recurrence.
Let’s close one more barn door while we are at it. How often has similar circumstances resulted in serious problems? I can think of no other cases. I can think of many cases where officers were shot while sitting in the car. People attack cops for no reason. People shoot at cops for no reason. People walk up to cops on the street and kill them. People make fake crime reports so they can ambush them.
This event was an anomaly, and should not trigger this really stupid bill.
Albert on May 12 at 8:20 a.m.
“People attack cops for no reason. People shoot at cops for no reason. People walk up to cops on the street and kill them. People make fake crime reports so they can ambush them. ”
Kivaari, as you sit there collecting your cop bucks from an obscure Idaho town, you should seriously consider moving back where you retired from…of course you may very well be a Hirzel and can’t go back.
Kivaari on May 12 at 8:47 a.m.
I would like to know, how many times in the last 10 years, has a similar shooting happened in the US? How many innocent property owners killed? How many times were police officers shot when seated in their cars? How many times were they lured to a fake crime report and ambushed? How many were just doing paperwork in a coffee shop when gunned down?
The Creach case and similar cases, are almost non-existent. This is a dumb law.
Albert, What is wrong with my questions? I actually read the summary of police officers killed, and cops are the target of nuts and crooks all across this country. I suspect last year, Creach was the only person shot under similar circumstances.
I love the meanness posted by the underclasses. In a classless society, there always seem to be those that seek to occupy a sub-culture. They post on this site.
detroitdude on May 12 at 8:53 a.m.
“His now admitted poor vision and a suspected ill temperament seem to be the ultimate reason for his death. ”
And that statement only makes the man’s death even more of a tragedy. Again, if you are close enough to strike someone with a baton, how are you not close enough to tackle him, and subdue him, and either call for backup, or hold him and explain to him what you’re doing till he cools off? Able bodied policeman on the beat, cannot subdue a 74 year old man at arms length without killing him….that just stinks of a person who is over-aggressive.
Ron_the_Cop on May 12 at 8:57 a.m.
Valleyman,
I agree the wording in the existing law is poor and could be made clearer. From reading the entire section I believe the legislature intended to put a limitation on ALL local law enforcement use of unmarked vehicles.
I agree with Sheriff Kenzovich and others that Shea’s bill is over broad as to restricting law enforcement from parking on unobstructed commercial property normally open to the public.
I believe the use of the unmarked unit was a fundamental factorin this tragic shooting both for the Creach family and Dep. Hirzel . Having been involved in the legislative process involving law enforcement bills, I believe there will eventually be a compromise between those interested parties that will clarify the existing language to what I believe the legislative intent was - to limit the routine use of unmarked units for special undercover or confidential investigative purposes. I don’t wish to unduly restrict law enforcement but on the other hand limiting unnecessary risk and liability makes common sense.
Kivaari on May 12 at 9:08 a.m.
Detroit, An officer isn’t supposed to try to wrestle a gun from anyone. Trying to do that more often then not results in the death or wounding of the officer. Just because a man is 74 years old doesn’t lessen the threat that a .45 creates. Can a 74 year old man, with a .45 kill you? Can a 10 year old with a .45 kill you? Have you ever trained to be an officer? How many carjackings do you read about? Where thugs attack a driver so as to steal the car, and in the process shoot the driver. If I am downtown Spokane and some thug comes at me with a gun, I wont say anything, I’ll just shoot first, and answer the officers questions latter. Creach did some real dumb things that night. He is ultimately responsible for his own death. Had he acted in a reasonable manner, he would still be alive. Why would he approach a car with a gun in hand? Why didn’t he recognize the car for what it was? Why didn’t he obey the officer? Why did he try to draw his gun? Why when he got up to the cars door, did he not see the uniform, computer, radios, siren control head, the roof antennas, the cage? He was close enough to touch the car, he had a flashlight, so why did he do what he did?
nslopeofw on May 12 at 9:09 a.m.
Two words:
PRIVATE property.
lewis8457 on May 12 at 9:19 a.m.
valleyman you are funny anyone with a different opinion then yours is anti government? How about they are private property owners that pay the tax to have their right to do what they want on their property and when they see these rights taken away, By gun toting thugs with badges. It tends to upset us.
I am not against government i am not against the police, i am against the belief that they can come on our property in our homes and gun us down with no accountability.
Beat us to death in a mini mart and not even care! Come on these blogs and call us idiots while we are paying their wage.
Opps i am only a lowly citizen what right do i have for my opinion?
lewis8457 on May 12 at 9:21 a.m.
Gus i drove to the south hill to work for 6 years i always took Manito, at the park 5pm people would pass me like i was standing still. no cops in sight day after day. But the city needs money and the just doesn’t know where to get it. duh.
Ron_the_Cop on May 12 at 9:24 a.m.
Kivaari,
I disagree your putting too much confidence in the statements of Dep. Hirzel. I would normally do so as well. Having read all of the reports, read the interview transcripts and watched the interviews of the first two that were recorded with Dep. Hirzel’s, I see inconsistencies in his statements/tactics as well as scene forensics. Until these are resolved I’m not willing to give Dep. Hirzel’s statements the benefit of the doubt as to what happened that night. Just suppose that Dep. Hirzel is not being entirely truthful in his account?
What if Creach got all the way to the door of Dep. Hirzel’s unit without Hirzel being aware of his presence. Dep. Hirzel’s attention was distracted and looking downward at his laptop. Creach gets to the door and scares the crap out of Hirzel and Hirzel reacts instantaneously? Or perhaps Dep. Creach does get out of his unit. Granted Creach still poses a threat with his gun in his rear waistband but I question the tactic of closing the distance to issue a baton strike with his left hand while still covering with his weapon in his right hand. Unintentional sympathetic discharge? Why not just continue to cover Creach and move to the other side of his unit and wait for his backup to arrive? Bad tactics do not make this criminal but there are definitely issues of police policy, procedure and training.
lewis8457 on May 12 at 9:34 a.m.
Kivvari as usual you are mixing fact with your warped fantasy of an ideal police world. Creach did not approach car with gun held high Hirzel said Creach never pointed the gun at him. He did obey the officer he put the gun in the waist band. he only supposedly reached for the gun after he complied and the cop hit him with the baton.
he did as was told and still beaten and killed.
Honestly after he complied and Hirzel hit him, Creach should have had the right to take Hirzel down.
Just not in Washington state, the second Hirzel saw Creach, Creach lost every one of his civil liberties, and was dead right then and there he just didn’t know it yet.
If you value your life stay away from Washington
detroitdude on May 12 at 9:36 a.m.
Kivaari, I understand exactly what you’re saying. And yes, doesn’t matter who’s hand a .45 is in, it can kill. But that still doesn’t answer my question, if you are in close enough quarters to draw and strike with your baton, how are you not close enough to overwhelm the guy with non-lethal force? Secondly, if this was a case of miscommunication, why didn’t Officer Hirzel simply leave this mans property after he announced who he was? He could have diffused a tense situation by leaving, wasn’t his property anyways. So if I own a business, that I pay taxes on, and a cop rolls up and parks himself in my lot and I come out and tell him to move along he doesn’t have to listen and get off my property?
eagleproducer on May 12 at 9:51 a.m.
skeeter: I’m thinking if the Creach family were all that interested in “acceptance” they wouldn’t have subjected their employees to Xtian radio while working and a non-stop barrage of faith based propaganda.
PlanB on May 12 at 10:03 a.m.
Knee-jerk reaction? It’s been nine months! People like Clark are the idiots that are politicizing this issue.
If you want to prevent crime, give law enforcement a high visibility rather than the threat that they are sneaking around in the bushes somewhere.
Liberty_Bell on May 12 at 10:42 a.m.
Could someone explain why the Tacoma Police Chief Brame also murdered his wife out of his unmarked Crown Victoria, with assistance from the Tacoma Dectitive Squad?
Ever see a pattern, or is everyone blind in the State of Confusion?
Kivaari on May 12 at 11:06 a.m.
Ron, I actually agree with you. I don’t see from all I have read, why Hirzel didn’t just hold Creach at gun point. I have no idea why Hirzel would bother to pull his baton, and then strike Creach. I have no idea how he could put the baton back into its ring/holder, and respond to Creach drawing his gun. I don’t like how this turned out, and it was done in a way, I would never have used. As I told you before, I hated batons, they are more trouble then value. Yes they can be effective, but not for me. I can’t answer why Hirzel did what he did. I understand being startled, and responding with a drawn gun. I don’t know what would have happened had he put the “I don’t have to” remark of Creach into the mix. Now the car issue. This law is flawed. Private property claims are idiotic. Unmarked car issues are foolish.
Liberty_Bell on May 12 at 11:08 a.m.
Patterns from Olympia?
http://www.king5.com/news/local/Video-of-fatal-Seattle-police-shooting-of-woodcarver-released-112106374.html
Of course the United States is finally taking action, where murder could only confuse a local prosecutor, police chief, and the rest of the local government criminal syndicate.
Kivaari on May 12 at 11:16 a.m.
Detroit, No cop is trained to respond to a gun with a physical attack. They are taught, that if you do try to disarm the suspect, expect to get shot and killed. If the suspect has a gun, you use your gun. I don’t have a clue as to why Hirzel used his baton, it makes no sense to me. Had creach approached Hirzel in a safer manner, and had asked him to leave I am sure he would have left. That didn’t happen as far as we know. WHY, didn’t Creach use more tact?
Lewis, How can you keep up the silliness?
Liberty Bell, Chief Brame was pushed through the system because of family connections. He should never have been a police officer, The shrink failed him. The TPD detectives had to go along with the bosses. Tacoma has a long history of corruption and poor policing. Brame killed his wife and himself, because he was nuts. His car had nothing to do with the case.
Kivaari on May 12 at 11:37 a.m.
When Creach got to the car and was at the drivers side door, touching the car why didn’t he know it was a police car?
detroitdude on May 12 at 12:03 p.m.
OK Kivaari, I stand corrected on the use of force issue. I’ve not had police training, was never a line of work I was interested in. Fair enough. However, the fact that he mentioned use of the baton makes Dep. Hirzel’s side of the story even MORE suspicious in my eyes.
Liberty_Bell on May 12 at 12:36 p.m.
Kivarri,
In this state we have a well known criminal code.
RCW 9A.52.080
Criminal trespass in the second degree.
(1) A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the second degree if he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in or upon premises of another under circumstances not constituting criminal trespass in the first degree.
(2) Criminal trespass in the second degree is a misdemeanor.
Kivaari on May 12 at 1:09 p.m.
Liberty bell, Not closing off commercial property is an invitation. Police traditionally have accessed commercial property. In fact most police forces were initially hired by the business community to patrol the business section of town. Later the entire village would police itself with volunteers. Eventually they needed to establish rules and laws and a way to pay professional police, marshals and sheriff’s. But cops are expected to use commercial property. Had Creach fenced his area off, it would mean no one comes onto the protperty unless an emergency develops. Your RCW doesn’t describe the situation that night.
Kivaari on May 12 at 1:16 p.m.
Detroit, If a cop parks on your commercial property parking lot, you can ask them to leave. They will. Doing so on commercial property would be counter productive to the property owner, unless they are involved in criminal activity. It would hurt your relations with your community. I can only think of one time when a bar owner got mad. But I was always arresting his customers, so I hurt his business. I didn’t do it while he was open, but it provided shaddows from which to watch a big part of the commercial district. He not only hurt himself but all of the neighboring businesses.
opeled on May 12 at 1:54 p.m.
Unmarked cars are a form of entrapment
Byrdie714 on May 12 at 2:13 p.m.
I can’t believe our legislators are discussing the absurdity of this bill.
Don’t we have enough that needs to be resolved, like the state budget?
Liberty_Bell on May 12 at 2:37 p.m.
Evidently Kavarii your not from Washington State, the legal burden is on the trespasser, not the owner, to know if their on private or public property.
Commercial, Residential, or any other form dosen’t matter, Private’s Private.
A short read, of Article I Section 1, of the State Constitution, is Supreme, over any theory from a political party.
Liberty_Bell on May 12 at 2:47 p.m.
But when you can’t count to 1
your obviously not from Washington State
Creach has an Individual Right to Life, Liberty and Property
Just in case your not from Washington.
http://www.leg.wa.gov/lawsandagencyrules/pages/constitution.aspx
Liberty_Bell on May 12 at 2:57 p.m.
Of course flunking #1, always stands for #2.
Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.

George Washington
valleyman on May 12 at 4:32 p.m.
Liberty Bell… You statement is foolish in that you allude to the police being violators of private property rights when they enter onto, uninvited an otherwise open piece of commercial property that is open to the public at large. This would be like saying any person who walks onto that property whether a customer or not is also guilty of trespass…
Your logic is flawed, but I doubt that matters since you have taken an ‘us vs. them’ mentality. Please understand the police are there to help and to enforce the same constitution you claim they flaunt. I’m sorry this is so hard for you to grasp… The police are citizens just like you and me who have taken an extra oath to uphold and defend rights the rest of us are two cowardly to defend ourselves…
kschmadeka on May 12 at 6:36 p.m.
Quick note on the legalities involved. The complete exemption cited by Sheriff Ozzie reads:
“This section shall not apply to vehicles of a sheriff’s office, local police department, or any vehicles used by local peace officers under public authority for special undercover or confidential investigative purposes.”
The sheriff claims that the “or” in that sentence separates it into two categories of vehicles, only the second of which does the “special undercover or confidential investigative purpose” requirement apply to. However if this were actually two separate categories of vehicles, they would be noted with an (a) and a (b). Don’t believe so? Read the very next sentence of that law, which says:
“This subsection shall not apply to: (a) Any municipal transit vehicle operated for purposes of providing public mass transportation; (b) any vehicle governed by the requirements of subsection (4) of this section…”
Note the a and b. THAT is how you designate separate categories, and the undercover requirement applies to all the vehicles in that sentence. The sheriff knows that and is wilfully misreading the law, and Deputy Hirzel is guilty of operating his unmarked car that night in violation of RCW 46.08.065.
As Hirzel was not operating his unmarked car for confidential, undercover, or investigative purposes, and the Creach family was not the subject of an active investigation, he had no special power or privilege to trespass on private property that was not open to the public, and to which he had received no invitation. The Plant Farm had a sign reading “closed” at the entrance. The property was also residential as well as commercial, and was closed to the public either way. Hirzel is also therefore guilty of trespassing.
In short, Hirzel trespassed on private residential/business property in an unidentified vehicle and then killed the owner when investigated.
The bill presented by Reps. Shea and Crouse isn’t the perfect solution, nor is it meant to be. It’s only the conversation starter so it can be perfected for next year. (But don’t expect the sheriff to be a constructive participant in that discussion, public officials cannot tolerate the idea of surrendering power once usurped.) A simpler solution to the unmarked car on private property issue would be to simply affirm in the law that unmarked cars have no superior right to trespass on private property not open to the public than any other citizen.
If the sheriff wants to park in business lots not otherwise open to the public, that’s perfectly fine. Get permission and use a marked car.
For those who haven’t seen this outstanding piece, please review it here:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/may/01/safety-demands-marked-squad-cars/
ChefGus/ John Olsen on May 12 at 7:06 p.m.
Very interesting string here….. read it a bit more and comment in the morning…. J
Kivaari on May 12 at 7:45 p.m.
Using the idea that police can not trespass onto private property means that they can not park at a huge shopping mall. Nor a closed gas station, strip mall, doctors office or any commercial property. Nor can the police walk around those properties to conduct business checks. So, using that logic, don’t ask the cops to investigate any vandalism or thefts from any commercial property. Hire private security, have them do it. Dispatch can give you an incident number so you can add it to the insurance claim. It would mean cops will be able to concentrate entirely on crimes against persons. Vehicle collisions will only get a response if it is blocking or involves government owned properties. Otherwise I think you anti-cop people can go screw yourselves.
kschmadeka on May 12 at 8:28 p.m.
The operative phrases here are “open to the public”, “permission to trespass”, and “legally marked.”
Get the differences?
Kivaari on May 12 at 8:50 p.m.
Ron, Has Hirzel ever clearly stated how he did the baton draw and strike? I can’t see him doing the thumb up draw, but with a loose baton ring I can see a thumb down, and pull straight to the front (at belt level). What I can’t figure out is how and why he would replace the baton in his ring/carrier. Some rings are pretty easy to use, if you look at it while replacing the stick. When I went back and re-read his comments about a palm-in thumb-up draw, it was a big “What?” I had missed that when I read the statements before. Then the change to the palm-out move made more sense. But that bit about putting it back one handed is odd. Maybe it is because I hated the stick, and almost never carried it. I preferred the old “C-cell baton light”. Light was more important then hitting anyone. Maybe guys that carried a stick daily could return it one handed. Me, I never could. It is odd, but I don’t know how we will ever know anymore at this stage of the confusion.
Ron_the_Cop on May 12 at 9:53 p.m.
Kivaari,
The baton thing is one of the inconsistencies in the statements of Dep. Hirzel. At one point it’s thumb up and later it’s thumb down. They never pursued this or had him demonstrate this with his gun belt and baton. He says he re ringed it one handed. This was a full length baton. This was not a PR-24/side handled and or an ASP baton.
You tell me how he did this:-)
Kivaari on May 12 at 10:18 p.m.
Ron, I don’t know how he could do it. With a gun on the suspect, I would not have even tried to get the baton out. If things have gone so bad that you need to draw the pistol, the only things I want to do with the off-hand is support the gun hand or key a mic.
Hirzel did do a code 6, but I don’t know how or when he did it with a gun and baton. He secured the baton in its holder. What kind of holder, I never used a conventional stick after 1975. We never went to ASP batons until 98-99 when we had a strike issue. Then we all refreshed on them. I was pretty good, but it only meant extra weight. I never drew it on the strike line or anywhere else.
It’s like the issue with a flashlight, if it came time to draw my gun, I often just dropped the light, and used a two-handed hold. Ambient light was enough when on the street. If I ended up chasing the person we carried a Sure-fire 6P at all times. I’d leave the big plastic light behind.
Ron_the_Cop on May 13 at 11:04 a.m.
Another newer thread in today’s S-R Editorial Opinion:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/may/13/editorial-bill-would-limit-police-in-protecting/
robert1964 on July 07 at 7:16 p.m.
im sorry about the loss of the pastor - but police need unmarked cars to go after and investigate thug - drug and gang activity - they are finding out it is way more effective on the element of suprise as the same as home invasion and car prowling and burglar and gangs also do the same tactics of element of suprise - they are catching way more criminals with unmarked cars and need them for survaliance - and last time i checked an officer has to claim himself as an officer wether in a marked car or unmarked car - it truly was a tragic thing that happened - but i am not going to sit down to thugs drugs gangs and burglars and carprowlers and homeinvasion people run the streets either - they do need the unmarked cars regaurdless