Spokane7
68°
February 8, 2012 in City
Fired Spokane police detective sues city, seeks pay
Former Spokane police Detective Jeff Harvey filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the department that fired him last year, seeking back pay and damages for emotional, physical and mental “injuries” to be determined at trial.
Harvey’s attorney, Bob Dunn – who recently won a $722,000 jury award and $833,000 in attorney’s fees in similar case involving Office Jay Mehring – pointed the finger at former police Chief Anne Kirkpatrick.
“She came here on a campaign to make a name for herself at the expense of officers who were working for her and didn’t care one whit about due process,” Dunn said.
Dunn sent the city’s new administration a demand letter three weeks ago, seeking to settle the case out of court.
“With the new regime, we thought we might hear something that would eliminate the exposure the city would have,” Dunn said. “We didn’t hear squat.”
Acting police Chief Scott Stephens could not be reached late Tuesday for comment.
Last July, the city released Harvey’s 10-page termination letter, which was signed by Kirkpatrick and City Administrator Ted Danek and hand-delivered to Harvey’s home. It documented other discipline and negative evaluations during Harvey’s years in the department. He was suspended for 20 days in 1987 after breaking a man’s arm; given an oral reprimand in 1989 after eight detention employees reported that Harvey and two fellow officers used excessive force against a 17-year-old boy; and suspended for 40 hours in 1991 for calling in sick so he could go hunting.
In the lawsuit, Dunn accused the city of violating Harvey’s confidential employment records and retaliating against him because Harvey had served as a vice president of the Spokane Police Guild.
“In this role, (Harvey) was very vocal regarding the Guild’s disapproval of police leadership, particularly how Defendant Kirkpatrick abusively handled discipline and treated guild members,” Dunn wrote. Harvey’s “comments and opinions were commonly published in numerous local news broadcasts, as was his involvement in the 2010 vote of no confidence against Defendant Kirkpatrick, making him a target of Defendant Kirkpatrick for unlawful retaliation and employment discrimination.”
Harvey was terminated after he was charged with obstruction of justice following a January 2011 encounter with a state Fish and Wildlife officer. However, a jury last September decided 5-1 to acquit Harvey, and Deputy Spokane County Prosecutor Brian O’Brien said he would not retry the case.
1992 murder trial begins against sex offender 
ChefGus/ John Olsen on February 08 at 3:55 a.m.
Yeah this is just the sort of “peace officer” that we should be protecting and allowing him to set policy for the force… This may be the tipping point for the Federal Government to come to grips with the death hold that the Guild has had on this city for years. John
brianrbreen on February 08 at 6:21 a.m.
@ChefGus
I don’t want him back on the job either. But this was another one of Kirkpatrick’s screw ups with the assistance of Howard Delaney’s office that I’m afraid would cost us a lot of money if it went to trial. It is better to settle it as soon as possible as long as reinstatement isn’t involved in the settlement. This is just another example of how the SPD is unable to properly deal with discipline issues; he should have been fired years ago. The involvement of Delaney’s office cannot be overlooked; it is my understanding that his office Okayed the release of Harvey’s termination letter to the media prior to Harvey having his day in court, and from a legal standpoint approved his pre-trial termination.
Although Mayor Condon inherited this one, and will have to deal with others from the past administration, so far. in his only kick at the can, “The Salute”, he has decided to allow SPD Officers to feel comfortable that nothing has or will change. Though Mayor Condon denounced the salute during the campaign he apparently has approved allowing all of them to skate.
As long as Mayor Condon is receiving his counsel from those who have been a big part of the problem with the SPD…nothing will change.
Notapatriot on February 08 at 7:02 a.m.
Is anybody surprised here?
garmiester on February 08 at 7:17 a.m.
Please understand that Mr. Harvey was charged and cleared for the charge of obstructing justice. This charge was brought forth due to the fact that Mr. Harvey would not allow the Wild life officer to talk to his son. In fact, his son has the right to invoke his constitutional rights and remain silent. Mr. Harvey was charged because he was protecting his son and was not committing a criminal act as in his son’s accusation of illegal hunting. If the administration wanted to terminate Mr. Harvey, why didn’t they do so earlier due to past his indiscretions. It is my opinion that Ex-chief Kirkpatrick was vindictive and had a personal agenda for those who opposed her leadership.
misjustice on February 08 at 7:27 a.m.
“As long as Mayor Condon is receiving his counsel from those who have been a big part of the problem with the SPD…nothing will change.”
Yup!
Which is why Roco and his boss must go, if Condon is to be viewed as sincere in his pre-election stand on the Zehm homicide. And if there is no change in the legal eagles advising (and running) City Hall then all other promises by Condon ring hollow.
*sigh*
lewis8457 on February 08 at 7:28 a.m.
big bad cop has mental anguish what a load, maybe the city can see if the girl scouts have a place or this big tough guy.
lewis8457 on February 08 at 7:29 a.m.
missJ we have been duped again by a two faced politician
brianrbreen on February 08 at 7:30 a.m.
@garmiester
It is also important to note that in a sworn deposition on another matter Kirkpatrick’s Assistant Chief Jim Nick’s testified under oath in response to a question that in essence Kirkpatrick was bias toward Harvey. Something that Howard Delaney is very aware of, and something that would be very hard to defend. I wonder if Mayor Condon knows about that.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 7:37 a.m.
@lewis
Please understand, I’m not in any way defending this guy for the type of cop he was. I’m only saying in THIS CASE he got screwed, and in the end so did we.
lewis8457 on February 08 at 7:41 a.m.
brian it gets me how all these cops cry over spilled milk.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 8:09 a.m.
@mistjustice
So far from my perspective things aren’t going as well as I had hoped. There is another one coming up, Officer Brad Thoma, which Kirkpatrick screwed up on and we will pay for. But you have to look beyond Kirkpatrick, and go to the individual/s who should have put a stop to it rather then trying to cover people’s butts and do the right and honest thing.
I will link this again you should read it. It provides a pretty good picture of what Kirkpatrick and the City were up to (divide and conquer). It also speaks, in my view, to the integrity of some.
http://www.perc.wa.gov/databases/ULP/11263.htm
Don’t misinterpret my position with respect to the Guild, but there are two sides to everything, and if you see what the arbitrator found that the City “unlawfully” did perhaps some would understand.
There is also a little tidbit in the link that provides some insight with respect to one of law enforcement’s go to persons when they want something in the press.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 8:13 a.m.
@lewis
Maybe they should all get cats so they don’t have to clean it up, and maybe the SR should bring milk to go with the cookies if they don’t have a decent cookie recipe.
Nugget on February 08 at 9:03 a.m.
If he was found not guilty of charges, & he wins his lawsuit, then he should get his job back. If he wins the suit because he was illegally fired, then there shouldn’t be any reason why he’s not reinstated to his previous position.
Can’t have it both ways…..either wins & gets job back, or loses & doesn’t get job back.
opiemuyo on February 08 at 9:04 a.m.
Perhaps the guild should have standards also, when you screw up, you get the boot from the guild. Appears they make you leadership when you are a bad egg, however.
Dazzeetrader11 on February 08 at 9:21 a.m.
Condon’s been Mayor for 5-6 weeks and you thought all this might be cleared up right away? It’s been going on for years. What makes you think all this would just vanish with a snap of the fingers?
Please…Verner had all this to work with for 4 years and did nothing. It got worse with her “leadership in conjunction with Nicks and Kirk.. I think the Guild should be terminated. Jobs…just not union jobs. Nothing will happen untill the Guild is gone. Their sole function is to battle with the city over money and keeping their guys working.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 9:30 a.m.
@Nugget
Did he appeal the termination through the contractual grievance procedure of binding arbitration?
brianrbreen on February 08 at 9:42 a.m.
@Nugget
Remember when Mehring got screwed and when the verdict came back, the City Attorney right away recommended reinstatement, and he was. Then came the lawsuit. Does that give you any kind of a clue where the city is headed with this?
horse_feathers on February 08 at 10:40 a.m.
Prosecutor Brian O’brian did a softball job prosecuting the case against Harvey. Wonder how much Tucker had to do with that.
Brian you should be ashamed.
Nugget on February 08 at 10:42 a.m.
@Brianbreen
Yes, I have a feeling exactly where this is going. Everyone always believes the officer should be fired or sued for wrong doing, yet when it’s the city that is in the wrong, the officer is still considered wrong. They can’t win for losing!
If the city had wanted to fire him for legitimate wrongs, then they should have done so when it happened. They can’t wait until it suits them to fabricate a reason “just because” they should have done it before.
I was a business owner. I know there are times you may want to fire someone. You don’t just wait until you’ve “had enough”, you have to have a legal reason. My understanding is the city did not have one AT THE TIME of firing. Thus he gets his job back & wins the lawsuit.
The city should try to settle now before it has to pay astronomical attorney fees on top of the settlement amount.
IanJones on February 08 at 10:47 a.m.
Not guilty by a jury of his peers…SHOULD get his job back….anyone can be accused of anything…so therefore anyone ACCUSED of a criminal act should automatically be fired? NOT….I read the attachment BB provided….sounds like that chief is gonna cost this city/tax payers ALOT of money… ..she sounds like she thinks labor laws didn’t apply to her….. Oh and a “two faced” politician…who woulda thunk???
Ron_the_Cop on February 08 at 11:15 a.m.
Ms. Justy and Brian,
We are all thinking alike that the legal advice from the City Attorney’s Office concerning SPD has been flawed, penny wise and pound foolish and IMO in some cases (Zehm) actually has obstructed justice.
I neglected in my presentation to the Council on Monday night ( http://tinyurl.com/6qwpvpr ) that independent legal counsel be provided ASAP for the SPD. It’s quite clear these discipline cases have been screwed up and Atty Bob Dunn is making fat paychecks on these settlements.
While I was out of town I received a letter ( http://tinyurl.com/7vwm8go ) from Interim Chief Stephens in reply to my formal IA complaint regarding the infamous salute by members of the SPD. The Chief in his letter said they could not hold the officers accountable for this behavior since they were there on there own time. This, “… would be considered a first amendment issue.”
These are the same talking points that former Chief Kirkpatrick and Mayor Verner were saying publicly. IMO these talking points are coming directly from the City’s Attorney’s Office.
I disagree with the Chief’s findings as Brian has said as a condition of employment these officers must abide by department policy that EXTENDS to both on and of duty actions/behaviors. As Brian provided from the SPD Manual:
In my reply to Chief Stephens ( http://tinyurl.com/7zzt4t3 ) I said:
Shelala on February 08 at 11:19 a.m.
Unbelievable.It does speak to the caliber of SPD Officers we maybe stuck with. And they wonder why the public has no confidence? Why even go through this dog and pony show of reform, accountability and transparency? It is almost laughable to envision these eely teflon-coated coated officers trying to restore pride in their department. SPD could be considered a viable career path for anger management drop outs and those who can not find employment in areas which require moral fortitude. It would appear the only choice citizen’s have is get a front row seat and watch the show because we are paying for the performance.
Shelala on February 08 at 11:43 a.m.
I understand that Stephens has declined to act on the saluters. IMO opinion the salute was a show of support for violent felon and his actions and “one of their own”. Seems to fit under the Washington definition of a criminal street gang
(12) “Criminal street gang” means any ongoing organization, association, or group of three or more persons, whether formal or informal, having a common name or common identifying sign or symbol, having as one of its primary activities the commission of criminal acts, and whose members or associates individually or collectively engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal street gang activity. This definition does not apply to employees engaged in concerted activities for their mutual aid and protection, or to the activities of labor and bona fide nonprofit organizations or their members or agents
Maybe they don’t believe one of their primary activities is the commission of criminal acts, but breaking arms, clubbing people, DWI and more shooting at people don’t count.if they get away with it?
Ron_the_Cop on February 08 at 11:48 a.m.
@Shelala,
Sadly you do have a point.
therailroader on February 08 at 12:00 p.m.
Tough luck, buddy. Same as what happens in the real world when you get fired. Hopefully, this wingnut rtepresents the minority of the SPD mindset.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on February 08 at 12:44 p.m.
Nugget.. “?Can’t win for losing’…. actually feels to me more like
“Can’t Lose for Losing” but this actually was not handled in an HR way in the proper way.. and when that A H Kirkpatrick did what she did… it was clear to me as a manager in my prior life that she really did make a very very large mistake…. and the verdict should stand… and the officer deserves the compensation because the proper HR procedures were NOT followed….perhaps the City of Spokane could go after Ann K…?? and get the money back? john
brianrbreen on February 08 at 12:53 p.m.
@Nugget
Yes. I’m with you. In my opinion this is a case of a cop getting screwed, and no matter what my opinion of him is. I don’t want to see other good cops get screwed in the way he and Mehring did.
You are absolutely right, the public will look at his record and say this guy needed to go, but they won’t understand even though that might be true, if you look at the history no one did it when they had the righteous chance. Kirkpatrick backed by the City Attorney, IMO, in a power play, had the chance to take a shot at him and was stupid enough to think she would get away with it, and didn’t. Just like where she was caught in a power play in the link above.
I agree… the City should settle now, give him some reasonable money, but don’t allow him to be reinstated. He has enough time in he can vest, and with that and the money he gets he can hunt all he wants. Plus Dunn will make his cut.
Getting his job back is an entirely different thing, Mr. Clouse does not mention in his story whether or not reinstatement is a part of the lawsuit. If it is, and it goes before a jury Mr. Dunn knows what might happen, so does the City.
@horse_feathers
We have been through this one before. Although I wasn’t there to hear the testimony, I don’t belive O’Brien tanked the case. If he did, show me where. I DO believe that O’Brien made a mistake (whether there was pressure to do it or not I don’t know) in signing the complaint without much investigation and simply believing the wild life agent. He gave Kirkpatrick and the City a basis for termination, and they used it. Dumb on O’Brien’s part if it was he, or whoever made the call. When Steve Tucker met with…and I suspect he did (careful I might know)…the wild life agent and his brass subsequent to that meeting there was a trial. Was that O’Brien’s call or someone else’s?
There wasn’t a case there, and the likely hood of a citizen being charged under the same facts, and going to trial is close to nil here. I understand your position, but by the same token if I was involved in defending Harvey, and if you were, it never would have gone to trial if people and you were objective.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 1:09 p.m.
@Shelala
I would hope that you would point out that it was not an acquittal by a “JURY OF HIS PEARS”, it was a hung jury…and how that happened is a whole other story.
IanJones on February 08 at 1:42 p.m.
Im sorry…I thought acquit meant not guilty….the article says he was “acquitted” so I am JUST believing what I read….
acquittal n. what an accused criminal defendant receives if he/she is found not guilty. It is a verdict (a judgment in a criminal case) of not guilty. (See: acquit)
But BB you are much more versed in this area then I am…so maybe the article should of said Hung Jury, not acquitted…the media COULDNT be wrong…..so he was acquitted.
One a side note….when you put something in quotations it is suppose to be what exactly was said…..I think I said a jury of his PEERS….NOT PEARS…
brianrbreen on February 08 at 1:50 p.m.
@Shelala
With respect to the “Salute” and Mayor Condon, I suspect (and know who is providing it) he has been provided with counsel that if you want to improve the morale of the PD let it go, the media cycle will run, and lets give the new guy a chance.
The best chance to prove Stephens and Condon are in fact serious about reform of the SPD is to see how they react to certain situations. As an example most everyone has overlooked the fact that after the “Salute” there is alleged to have been some type of inappropriate physical contact between a reporter doing his job and a police officer. Mayor Condon now knows, unless it has been hidden from him by the City Attorney’s Office, that there may be a letter of apology sent to the SR regarding the conduct of officers during and after the “Salute”. The best thing to do is give it to me, I’ll pay for it, as I did all the other PDRs, and then be prepared to deal with what ever kind of a justification someone would suggest be made.
Just an Idea.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 1:53 p.m.
@IanJones
Sorry about the spilling error. I’m gosh awful at that kind of stuff.
Shelala on February 08 at 2:04 p.m.
A hung jury simply means the jury was unable to reach a verdict and the case may be retried. Acquittal is a not guilty finding A hung jury does not mean a not guilty verdict. it’s sad when an officer even has to seek technicalities within the legal system to defend his actions when he shouldn’t have created the scenario that put himself there in the first place. Says a lot. BTW Ian, Quotation marks can be used for emphasis or to stress a point, but then again, you seem pretty desperate about those technical differences.
Shelala on February 08 at 2:24 p.m.
@Brian
The “wise” counsel IMO sure got it wrong if he felt that the salute issue would blow over in the media and within help restore moral. The very last thing on my priority wishlist of reform is improve moral within the SPD.- right after planting petunias in the courthouse planters. I think a lot of citizens won’t forgive and forget the salute, the FB rants, the wristband sales and all the other outrageous actions by the SPD surrounding the Thompson/Zehm case. Heck, it even won Condon the election. How out of touch and self-servicing can they be? I feel I have duped by Condon and frankly Stephens has shown to be just as out of touch. I am planting my merger sign well into the ground. Not because it is perfect by any means, but because it MAY get rid of some of the more notorious gang embers on the SPD.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 2:28 p.m.
@IanJones
I realize your position is that the media tried to screw Thompson, but I think Judge Van Sickle took that out of the play when he moved the trial to Yakima. I understand that the Jury supposedly watching news accounts during breakfast is gone, and the comment about Clouse supposedly making a comment to the defense team didn’t do much good. I would hope you realize I know what a “voluntary” witness is and one that is perhaps a “Material Witness” or an allegation there was a toy gun in Zehm’s pocket.
Let us see what happens with the Grant Fredericks thing, and go from there. In the mean time I linked the SR documents page and PACER, you should read Durkin’s new filing. It might interest you. I don’t, nor have I ever take a media reports as gospel,
I don’t mean any disrespect but I have forgotten more about this kind of stuff than you will ever know.
DickAdams on February 08 at 2:40 p.m.
I thought Mayor Condon was going to clean house when the voters elected him into office? I can remember his lip service when he was campaigning for mayor. Obviously Condon was not truthful and merely used the trouble former mayor Verner was in re the Zehm cover-up. It now appears, at least to me, the Mayor has joined those same officials that disgraced the Lilac City. Maybe Condon learned how to suck in the voters from his prior boss, Cathy McMorris Rodgers. Rodgers, a career politician, knows how to hoodwink the voters to be elected to office. The career legislators do it all the time and is causing the biggest problem our country has ever seen.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 2:53 p.m.
@DickAdams
If the media reports are correct and Howard Delaney did show up at Mayor Condon’s election victory party, it may be he is a Republican now… who knows.
Ron_the_Cop on February 08 at 3:10 p.m.
@Brian,
Hmmm. Gee I hadn’t scanned PACER since I got back into town. Could this be what you’re referring to - Durkin’s Declaration Doc 874? Looks like Judge Van Sickle sided with AUSA Durkin on his Motion to Expedite and also with CO’s Motion to File Supplemental Declarations and Exhibits … Fredericks Confidentiality Agreement
From PACER’s recent document history:
02/02/2012 872 NOTICE OF HEARING ON MOTION: re 869 MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Declaration and Exhibits in Support of Defendant Thompson’s Response Regarding Grant Fredericks’ Confidentiality Agreement : as to Karl F Thompson, Jr Motion Hearing set for 2/2/2012 06:30 PM in Without Oral Argument before Senior Judge Fred Van Sickle. (Oreskovich, Carl) (Entered: 02/02/2012)
02/03/2012 873 REPLY MEMORANDUM by USA as to Karl F Thompson, Jr re 831 MOTION to Expedite Hearing on Motion for Nunc Pro Tunc Extension of Time & For Stay of Confidentiality Release (Durkin, Timothy) (Entered: 02/03/2012)
02/03/2012 874 DECLARATION of Timothy M. Durkin by USA re 873 Reply Memorandum as to Karl F Thompson, Jr (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 6, # 2 Exhibit 7, # 3 Exhibit 8, # 4 Exhibit 9, # 5 Exhibit 10, # 6 Exhibit 11, # 7 Exhibit 12)(Durkin, Timothy) (Entered: 02/03/2012)
02/07/2012 875 TEXT ORDER (no pdf)granting 860 Motion to Expedite as to Karl F Thompson Jr (1). Signed by Senior Judge Fred Van Sickle. (KJH, Judicial Assistant) (Entered: 02/07/2012)
02/07/2012 876 TEXT ORDER (no pdf) granting 869 Motion for Leave to File as to Karl F Thompson Jr (1). Signed by Senior Judge Fred Van Sickle. (KJH, Judicial Assistant) (Entered: 02/07/2012)
brianrbreen on February 08 at 3:31 p.m.
Yes, that would be interesting…gee I wonder what the “exhibits” are.
IanJones on February 08 at 3:37 p.m.
Shelala I am just repeating what the article says…..it says ACQUITTED not hung jury…..Sounds like everyone in here getting a little irritated that SPD is going about business as usual….and things aren’t crumpling apart like u guys thought….listened to Fiitzsimmons yesterday….think he was spot on and people really trust our police department and people in here are in the minority…
Ron_the_Cop on February 08 at 3:59 p.m.
Brian and all,
Sorry for going off thread. Hopefully Mr. Clouse will continue with his excellent reporting on these matters and fill in the blanks.
Here’s AUSA Durkin’s Reply Memorandum dated 02-03-12 re the Motion to Expedite … and for Stay of Confidentiality Agreement.
http://tinyurl.com/735mets
Brian as before I think this is much ado about nothing regarding any new exculpatory information/evidence from Fredericks.
It appears the US DOJ did disclose to the defense what Fredericks would testify that there were no initial baton strikes by Thompson. Of course as Durkin points out Thompson even admits in his statements to investigators that he did strike Zehm upon first contact. Not to mention this was Thompson’s testimony at trial. Of course there was other witness testimony to these initial baton strikes and independent expert testimony from the video of these strikes.
Do you think the US DOJ’s position on Fredericks confidentiality agreement may have more to with the potential release of other sensitive information to the City Attorney’s Office that the US DOJ doesn’t want disclosed yet?
After all Durkin in one of his previous filings was shocked to learn that Fredericks gave work product e.g., video stills to Treppiedi after the feds retained Fredericks and were paying him?
Could Treppiedi and others be persons of interests should the feds continue with their criminal investigation re obstruction of justice?
IanJones on February 08 at 4:03 p.m.
I will correct you one more time since it appears you might have short term memory….I don’t have an opinion one way or the other about whether or not the Feds “screwed” Thompson….but sure seems like people in here are irritated because all their posts apparently don’t phase how the PD conducts business….pretty sure I read posts from most in here about how the police were shaking in their boots….doesn’t appear to be the case….
liveinfearoftheSPD on February 08 at 4:12 p.m.
Not quite Ian, but almost.
Ron_the_Cop on February 08 at 4:13 p.m.
@Brian,
The exhibits go to Durkin’s arguments in made in his reply memo (linked above) that the US DOJ fully disclosed BTW of discovery that Frederick would testify if called he couldn’t confirm that there were baton strikes when Thompson first made contact with Zehm. As I said above there is plenty of evidence to the contrary and by Thompson himself that there were baton strikes. CO appears to be grasping at straws on this one.
The prosecution motion approved by Judge Van Sickle if I read this correctly allows Durkin to file a reply brief in response to CO’s motion for a new trial that exceeds the standard local rule of 20 pages. Durkin was asking for an additional 5 pages.
Shelala on February 08 at 4:20 p.m.
@Ian
Yeah, there certainly must be a lot of trust out their for our police department (wink, wink). No one wants to reform a good department, do they? What rock have you been hiding under? Things aren’t crumbling apart because they have already crumbled. Like some shady slick used car salesman, Stephens and a FEW others are trying to pass off a real clunker lemon called the SPD as a polished well running machine. The public have kicked the tires and run a carfax and see the truth. My apologies to all the car salesman out there. I would never insult them this badly.
IanJones on February 08 at 4:49 p.m.
Livinginfear….show me in the article where it says hung jury…..Yes it did not say by a jury of his peers, but I was focusing more on the word acquittal….Im just saying the the reporter couldn’t possibly be wrong on the fact he stated Thompson was “acquitted” could he??
Shelala all I am saying is that according to Mike Fitzsimmons is that from his perspective and through talking to the public the majority of Spokanites trust their police dept….another media personality that couldnt be wrong right?? After all if the media says it happened then it MUST be true….He also used words like agenda, and bandwagon, when he referred to people that were saying PD was corrupt…..It seems the posters in here are just outraged that the saluting officer’s have a freedom of speech….and not squat was done after your complaints…..Just an observation
Shelala on February 08 at 5:22 p.m.
@Ian
You are entitled to whatever opinion you have.. Go for it. Have a lovefest for Fitzsimmons and the SPD.? Good for you. You regularly demand past articles and posts be presented to you by others - do the research yourself. If you are trying to tell me that the opinions posted on blogs, in the media and elsewhere by citizens have no impact -think again. The public are the SPD’s employers and if you believe their opinions don’t count, think again. Why do YOU post?
liveinfearoftheSPD on February 08 at 5:32 p.m.
I must apologize Ian, I was reading without my glasses again. So my focus wasn’t quite the same as yours.
SMARTGUY on February 08 at 5:42 p.m.
Every cops a crimminal, and all the sinners saints.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 6:07 p.m.
@Ron_the_Cop
I think, the confidentiality agreement was entered into when Fredericks decided that even though a different client on the same issue hired him it was okay for him to run back to the old client and tell that client everything even though he knew there was a conflict of interest. Something I personally would never have done, but by the same token I never would have agreed to work for the second client in the first place. It would be like first taking a job with the defense (City), and going to the other side on the same case prosecution (DOJ), then running back to the defense and telling them everything I learned. Remember Fredericks junk came about when the DOJ was playing nice, and then they figured out they can’t play nice with these people.
As far as I’m concerned looking at all of the discovery the DOJ gave to the defense regarding Fredericks, unless CO can prove that they intentionally withheld Brady material it is a none issue, and why Fredericks decided so late in the game to pitch a bitch about his anticipated testimony in a proffer over a year prior to trial makes me wonder, what his motives are.
If this was such a big deal, and Fredericks had something to say that would have helped Thompson, CO could have taken the steps to call him prior to trial, I’m sure CO reviewed all of Fredericks analysis, and decided not to call him.
The defense had another one of Rocco’s people on their witness list D.T. Van Blaricom they didn’t use him either. I wonder why. Just a good choice I guess.
The DOJ made a mistake on this case in the beginning. They thought everyone in this little village would be ethical and above board. It didn’t take them long to find out other wise.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 6:14 p.m.
@Ron_the_Cop
As far as page extension is concerned that is typical. Every sitting Federal Judge, knows if they limit pages they will get an extension request because lawyers are worse than bloggers.
brianrbreen on February 08 at 6:46 p.m.
@Ron_the_Cop
One more thing, and it is pure speculation on my part but I would guess the DOJ would love to have Judge Van Sickle order a hearing so they could take a shot at Fredericks. I would like to see it as well. Maybe we would be able to find out the truth about Ogopogo.
Ron_the_Cop on February 08 at 6:48 p.m.
@Shelala - ROTFLOL
@Ian,
I do like Fitzsimmons and normally agree with his commentary on most political issues. You should also listen to Rick Rydell in the morning at KXLY as well to get a balanced opinion.
With regard to local LE as to the rank and file he may be right. Where we differ is with the LE leadership. IMO some have been inept, incompetent and in some cases corrupt e.g., Deputy Chief Odenthal et al in the editing of the Zehm video - obstruction of justice. IMO Odenthal did not act alone.
This is not my opinion alone. The US DOJ in their DC press release after the conviction of Thompson said, “… and an extensive cover-up that followed, the Justice Department announced.”
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/November/11-crt-1444.html
The infamous salute was free speech but if you read my email to Chief Stephens (above) was actionable under existing SPD policy support by long standing case law:
To sum this all up and to bring this discussion back on thread there is a common element in all of this:
City Attorney Howard Delaney and Asst. City Attorney Roco Delaney
As I cautioned Chief Stephens:
Chief Kirkpatrick and Mayor Verner would have done well to take the advice from Brian and me:-)
@Brian,
Agreed this is a much ado about nothing. Judge Van Sickle is just been very careful. IMO it is unlikely that the 9th Circuit will reverse him on appeal.
IanJones on February 08 at 7:00 p.m.
I post to show there are reasonable people with open minds……BB you sound a little irritable that someone is questioning the biased, silly posts on here……I find it interesting you can’t back up the things you claim…..you elude, infer, suggest, and imply you have things, know things, have agreements with, people or things you don’t….when ya get called out….you get a little irrational…..but hey, no hard feelings….I have read thru some of the material you posted sites to….
1. they are mostly things posted in the paper
2. they are from the prosecutions side
3. something that REALLY stuck out in one of the articles was that Zehm was not taking his medication, and acting so irrational he had to be let go from his job. (that was from one of the documents you provided a link to)
This raised a question for me…if he was that irrational like the document stated….laughing to himself, talking to himself, and acting delusional…WHAT was he capable of? WHY was he allowed to be out unsupervised?
Another piece of material I read….The girls who called stated Zehm tried to get in their car. WHY? Zehm was found to have a toy gun in his pants. WHY?
As far as the link you provided about Thompson’s divorce…WHAT does that have to do with anything??
Yes the links you provided just made me have MORE questions then answers….And my final question is…If the FEDS did not misrepresent Fredericks finding….WHY are they fighting so hard to keep him locked into the confidentiality agreement?? Things that make you go hmmm????
IanJones on February 08 at 7:02 p.m.
and Ron…I def will try to listen to Rydell….because I DO want to hear all sides….just might be a little difficult since I am usually in class at that time….However, when I am not in class I will give that a shot….what time is he on?
brianrbreen on February 08 at 7:06 p.m.
@Ian
Gosh…I thought I was going to skate…I should have known better. You got me…I’m whatever you want me to be. Coward, Bully, Irritable, Bias, and whatever else… that would be me…. keep the faith.
IanJones on February 08 at 7:19 p.m.
I never called u a coward or bully…Do I think you’re biased? Unfortunately I do. Do I think you get a bit irrational when someone questions ur opinion? Ya I do….but that is just an opinion. Do I think you absolutely believe in what you say ? OF course you do…and your passionate about it….I can’t fault a man for that…
Ron_the_Cop on February 08 at 7:24 p.m.
@Ian,
You hit on the $64 question. I inferred the answer in my post above:
brianrbreen on February 08 at 7:24 p.m.
@Ian
You are right I am biased…I have this tendency to go along with jury verdicts. Think you will ever be able to do that some day?
David Bray on February 08 at 9:28 p.m.
It’s very interesting to read the majority of these comments and I appreciate the arguments from all perspectives. However, I don’t think anyone is on the right track when it comes to holding the SPD accountable.
It’s probably to late to have any effect on these issues from past actions. They’ll play out and cost Spokane citizens a lot of money. What I see now is the absolute need for 5 things to happen with our Police Dept.
1. There MUST BE civilian oversight, with authority greater than or equal to, what the police have, regarding accountability of SPD officer’s actions….when those actions violate a citizens rights.
2. The Police Guild MUST be have greater restrictions in their powers.
3. A monetary cap MUST be set for civil suit awards for police officers.
4. A dedicated fund should be created and paid into by the city and Police officers to cover lawsuit awards when an officer wins their case against the city.
5. Loser pays the attorney fees in a lawsuit against the city by any member of the SPD.
The real victims in most of these cases (my respects to the Zehm family) are the taxpayers of Spokane. Every time we pay someone off in a settlement or by a judgement from a civil suit, taxpayer money is handed out and most likely, we lose a service in some responsibility the city should be maintaining.
These suggestions are drastic changes to the way we interact with our PD…but I believe these, or similar changes, are required not only to rebuild trust, but to maintain it.
mary1958 on February 08 at 9:49 p.m.
Why was officer Harvey shooting after hours? What did he have to hide? Why can’t his children talk if he doesn’t have anything to hide? The problem here is Harvey.
I don’t like that Kirkpatrick thought that Thompson did a swell job with Zehm. But on the one hand I hear people complain that she did not do her job right in trying to fire bad cops but there is also a complaint that nothing was done before. Maybe the problem is the system. I can’t get inside that head from the outside. Maybe Condon can.
Just as an aside, I know of a certain person (who shall remain nameless) who liked making an obscene phone call to a newly hired female officer many moons ago.
Shelala on February 08 at 11:32 p.m.
@DavidBray
I agree with you in part. IMO, it isn’t responsible to just move on from the past outrageous incidents involving members of the SPD related to the Zehm case and it isn’t water under the bridge, so to speak. The desire to see the officers involved disciplined or fired is not necessarily a vindictive one. Their actions demonstrated that they believe Thompson’s actions were reasonable and will reasonably continue to apply the same bad and questionable judgment as long as the departmental brass allows it. The failure to take any corrective action simply reinforces their misguided belief that they are somehow insulated from public opinion and their actions are condoned. They are walking talking liabilities to the city and its citizens both financially and otherwise each day they stay on the job. Stephens had an opportunity to send a clear message, but failed miserably or perhaps he shares their opinion. Either way, IMO unless we address the issues, we are doomed to see history repeat itself and the officer could honestly say no one told him it was wrong.or like Ian, the college student (yeah, right) suggests :you complained, but it made no difference - ha!ha!.
IanJones on February 09 at 6:50 a.m.
BB…once again you are trying to mislead people….I have always stated that once ALL of Thompson’s appeals are looked at…whatever the judge decides is what I agree with…if he decides Thompson has no rights to a new trial and goes to prison then I accept that…if he decides on a new trial then I also agree with that. What I do find interesting is again you refuse to answer any questions I had about the documentation you told me to look at… Shelala….After reading some of your posts….I really don’t care if u believe I am a student….after all you have posted in the past that had you been in the courtroom during the salute you would have broken the officers arms…you have posted that you teach your kid to be afraid of Police…..not exactly postings from a rational person so your opinions don’t really hold alot of merit do they?? Ok…gotta go!!
brianrbreen on February 09 at 7:39 a.m.
@mary1958
I don’t have a problem with Kirkpatrick firing people as long as it is done by the numbers, and isn’t a case of vindictiveness, and you are right Harvey should have been fired by previous Chief’s but wasn’t.
In this case Harvey wasn’t accused of shooting it was the kids that were, and a confrontation was alleged to develop when he tried to prevent the game officer from talking to the kids (a whole other issue). The kids’ testimony, which included a kid that was not Harvey’s supported Harvey’s version as did some other evidence. The jury with the exception of one felt he wasn’t guilty. What it boiled down to was a swearing contest, and Harvey had evidence that tended to prove his story. As you know when you have one person saying one thing, and another saying the opposite it is a real tough case to prove.
Another thing that happened was that Harvey and his lawyer went in and talked to the Ombudsman, presented him with evidence he felt was being ignored and basically said he didn’t feel Kirkpatrick was giving him a fair shake. The Ombudsman rightfully told Kirkpatrick she should not discipline him until after the court case. Kirkpatrick and the City Attorney completely ignored that went ahead anyway, and pretrial released his less than stellar police background to the public. Some believe to taint a jury pool.
You just can’t try to fire a bad officer in a bad way, just like you can’t try to fire a good officer in a bad way. It has to be done right and according to law. We as citizens have already had to pay out large sums because of the way Kirkpatrick handled things and it is going to continue.
You are so right about the “system”, and getting into that head. I don’t know Stephens like you do, never worked with him. You aren’t excited about him, because of your experience with him, and you might very well be right. So far he hasn’t shown much with the only issue he has had to deal with “The Salute”. However I’m still willing to give him a chance.
brianrbreen on February 09 at 7:55 a.m.
@IanJones
I didn’t mean to mislead anyone; you might have a long wait if you are going to wait for all the appeals to complete.
” 1. they are mostly things posted in the paper
2. they are from the prosecutions side
3. something that REALLY stuck out in one of the articles was that Zehm was not taking his medication, and acting so irrational he had to be let go from his job. (that was from one of the documents you provided a link to)”
1.The SR posted many, many, of the court filings in PDR format, not just news stories.
2.The documents on the SR also include the defense filings but you can get everything from PACER.
3.That is interesting, that stuck out to a lot of people, many of whom blame Otto Zehm for the entire situation. I hope you aren’t one of those that believe Otto was a crazed disabled person off his meds that that attacked KT with a pop bottle.
lewis8457 on February 09 at 8:24 a.m.
IanJones even if Otto tried to get in the girls car is that a reason to kill him? according to your posts it is.
You are missing the point a police officer whose word is supposed to be golden helped kill him and then lied about it for 5 years, and even though he was found guilty still walks the streets. I fail to understand how that outcome is good for anyone? It shows the public once again police are above the law, giving more reason to disrespect them and throwing more mud on the already dirty SPD.
his fellow officers saluted him like he was a hero in front of Otto’s family that had waited 5 years for justice, that they still have not received since he walks free.
since you are all knowing, will we ever see Thompson go to
prison?
Honestly anyone who thinks Otto death was justified I would like to meet in a dark alley, but I know the coward would bring his brothers in black to the fight.
Shelala on February 09 at 9:35 a.m.
The infamous SPD courtroom salute made national headlines and was of interest to much of the public. It also obviously prompted more than a few citizens to make complaints to the ombudsman and write letters to the SPD. A few of us discovered that Acting SPD Chief Stephens response to these complaints was to do nothing through blog posts. Why has he evaded addressing the salute and his decision in the media or through some other public forum? It isn’t like he doesn’t know the public has concerns.
brianrbreen on February 09 at 10:02 a.m.
@Ron_the_Cop
When I point out what happened to Harvey, I’m a semi-good guy, but when I take an opposite view I’m a complete bad guy.
How can the City Attorney’s Office approve of what happened to Harvey, and at the other end of the spectrum take the position that an officer fabricating a residence search should still be on the job and just get two weeks off? Is it because Officer Edwards, unlike Harvey, was well liked by the brass and apparently some in the County Prosecutors Office and was thought to be to be an honest hard charger? It doesn’t add up, there is a disparity there in my view, as demonstrated in this story that Meghann Cuniff stayed on top of.
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2012/jan/29/an-uneasy-relationship/
Who knows where the Officer Edwards case will go if anywhere when and if this Kariores guy is arrested. But if it does end up somewhere you would think Mayor Condon might take a look at where everything points.
Ron_the_Cop on February 09 at 10:25 a.m.
@Shelala - agreed
@Brian - agreed
Also I too am very concerned about the Ofc. Edwards case. If what you and I believe occurred this was a blatant federal civil rights violation that could go both civil and criminal.
A strong message needs to be sent immediately by LE leadership that such action will not be tolerated.
Again Mayor Condon I strongly suggest you seek out independent legal counsel for matters involving SPD. The actions/counsel of the City Attorney’s Office is costing millions of dollars that we don’t have.
Shelala on February 09 at 10:38 a.m.
@Ron and Brian
It should be obvious by now that SPD brass has little concern about public opinion, strong message or not. The city attorney’s office has even less concern. Realistically, why should they? They are reasonably secure in their roles and have the apparent backing of the new mayor. If a tree falls in a forest……..you know the rest.
brianrbreen on February 09 at 10:48 a.m.
@Shelala
Heck my good friend “generallyspeaking/justme09” apparently knew back on January 25 no cops were going to be disciplined for the salute. I guess one could have gotten a clue from that post where Condon and Stephens stood regarding the salute. I wonder if my new friend Ian knew.
generallyspeaking on January 25 at 11:54 a.m.
SPD saluters are NOT going to be punished for exercising their 1st amendment rights….no letter in their file, no being told, “don’t do it again”, not one of them is going to be talked to…..NOR should they be……get over it…..they have their rights just like anyone else…..I hope when KT gets a new trial…whatever the outcome they salute him again……
IanJones on February 09 at 10:52 a.m.
Lewis…I am NOT blaming Otto for his death…as a matter of fact I am not blaming ANYONE for his death as no one has been charged with homicide…I am just asking questions…not to exonerate or blame Otto OR Thompson….just asking questions that came to mind.
So here is where I am naive…..Posters are saying the local prosecutors refused to doing anything about the incident…it took the Feds to take over to charge Thompson……
So WHY didn’t the Feds charge Thompson with Murder/homicide….after all they have that capability right? Am I wrong? AND am I wrong in believing that state prosecutors CANT charge on civil charges….ie-the excessive force?
As far as Stephens addressing the issue of the salute…..didn’t that female chief address it prior to leaving? Saying that it did not reflect the attitude of the dept/city…and the case closed on that issue? WHY would Stephens address it again? It had been dealt with…..
Lewis…..I am surprised the moderator allows your posts….You have several where you make threats…Ie- meeting people in dark alleys….I don’t know maybe the moderator condones violence?? As far as Thompson going to prison….I don’t know…I assume he will if his appeals are shot down…..My sensibility based on how often appeals are denied….Is probably, and that is what everyone will have to accept….I don’t have an issue with that….
IanJones on February 09 at 10:54 a.m.
Brian…with your conspiracy theory again….like I said before…maybe I am Nugget and Dave too…..after all any positive poster MUST be the same person….when you got nothing, then try and deflect the real issues…..keep trying…
Shelala on February 09 at 11:00 a.m.
@Brian
I wonder if LE will prepare a salute for the officer/union rep in Seattle who embezzled the donated funds for the survivors of the police shooting and now face federal charges? It would be interesting to see how “blue” the line goes when they themselves are victimized? Also makes me wonder where the donated wristband funds went.
Shelala on February 09 at 11:15 a.m.
@Ian
Ya know, I don’t know if you are a really a “college student” and frankly, I don’t care. I hope you are not a cop or a police candidate because the manner in which you jump to conclusions and try to label or put words in other poster’s mouths would make you one of those bad guys without judgement.
brianrbreen on February 09 at 11:34 a.m.
@Ian
Conspiracy…what conspiracy?
Yes you are wrong the Feds don’t have murder jurisdiction except under certain circumstances, and this wasn’t one.
I realize they are opinion pieces in the SR but you might want to look at them. Mr. Brockett is a lawyer, member of the Bar, and was a Prosecutor for a long time.
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/aug/27/case-raises-questions/
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/nov/12/police-need-to-be-policed/
I still think you might want to go back and read all the stuff regarding the case. I know it might be hard with all the studying you have to do but it is interesting, and maybe it would help you to formulate an opinion since your mind is so open.
IanJones on February 09 at 2:49 p.m.
Brain…conspiracy that I MUST be generally speaking….but thank you for answering my question about Feds and the charge of homicide….It was a serious question That I Didn’t know…I am wading thru the sites you suggested as I have time. And when I asked questions that came to mind then a poster in here accused me of blaming Otto for his death…..but no one had an answer to the questions….I still would like to see something from the defense team disputing the prosecutor so I could have an idea what their thought process is….As far as Shelala it’s a good thing ur opinion doesn’t hold merit after u threatened to break officers arms had you seen the salute…..you seem a little imbalances with a possible anger management problem….BUT that’s just a observation…
Shelala on February 09 at 3:08 p.m.
@Ian
I guess you can’t determine a facetious comment from any other. I guess things have to be black or white for you to grasp. (get it, black and white, wink, wink). I guess that’s my observation.
brianrbreen on February 09 at 3:36 p.m.
@Ian
I’m not sure what you are looking at. The SR posted a lot of Defense documents including this one. Remember it? The defense wanted evidence of Zehm’s innocence excluded and the Judge did.
http://media.spokesman.com/documents/2010/05/20100505_thompson_memo_zehm_evidence.pdf
Are you trying to make a point that the SR is bias against Thompson and hasn’t been “Fair and Balanced”, like FOX News is? Not sure where you are coming from
On topic here…so how do you read this deal with Harvey compared to Edwards?
Do you think Edwards should have been fired or do you think two weeks was enough?
Do you think anything else will come of either case, or are they both done deals?
Just Curious.
I see in response to Lewis’s question your sensibility tells you Thompson is “probably” going away. I think so too, but I do want him to have every benefit of the CJ system and his efforts to get a new trial…I don’t have an issue with that if you noticed.
“My sensibility based on how often appeals are denied….Is probably, and that is what everyone will have to accept….I don’t have an issue with that….”
IanJones on February 09 at 4:00 p.m.
Brian I must not have read the document as of yet….but I will…..I don’t know who Harvey or Edwards is…the only reason I started paying attention to Otto was because it was all over the news and paper 24/7….Shelala agin you add nothing to the conversation that would give you any merit…or cause to take your rants seriously….Like I said I stopped giving you any benefit of the doubt when u started saying you would break arms, teach your poor kid to be afraid of police…..after talking about a police officer helping you during a heart attack…Hope they don’t make that mistake again….they ALL should be fired!!!!
brianrbreen on February 09 at 4:03 p.m.
@IanJones
Do you go to a local College or University?
brianrbreen on February 09 at 4:13 p.m.
@Ian
Harvey is the cop this story is about, and the one you were talking about here.
IanJones on February 08 at 10:47 a.m.
Not guilty by a jury of his peers…SHOULD get his job back….anyone can be accused of anything…so therefore anyone ACCUSED of a criminal act should automatically be fired? NOT….I read the attachment BB provided….sounds like that chief is gonna cost this city/tax payers ALOT of money… ..she sounds like she thinks labor laws didn’t apply to her….. Oh and a “two faced” politician…who woulda thunk???
And here:
IanJones on February 08 at 3:37 p.m.
Shelala I am just repeating what the article says…..it says ACQUITTED not hung jury…..Sounds like everyone in here getting a little irritated that SPD is going about business as usual….and things aren’t crumpling apart like u guys thought….listened to Fiitzsimmons yesterday….think he was spot on and people really trust our police department and people in here are in the minority…
IanJones on February 09 at 5:03 p.m.
Oh!! Didn’t pay attention to the name of the cop…..just that the chief appeared to have the opinion that she did not have to abide by the Labor Laws…..I don’t know the ins and outs of Harvey’s deal…other then he got into it with a fish and game officer ….and as the media reported he was “acquitted”….therefore if that was the reason she fired him… because of a crime he was accused/arrested (?) for…that he eventually was “acquitted” of…sounds like no reason to fire him….BUT I am admitting I really don’t know about that whole deal….Not afraid to admit when I don’t know all…….
brianrbreen on February 09 at 5:05 p.m.
Do you go to a local College or University?
IanJones on February 09 at 5:15 p.m.
How does THAT pertain to anything? You want my address, social security number, the last chick I dated, parents names too? Where I attend college has nothing to do with anything…
brianrbreen on February 09 at 5:18 p.m.
@IanJones
Oh heck no…I don’t care which one… I just wanted to give you this link again, and thought if you needed some research help you could go the school library and they usually have research help there and assist students in doing their research.
http://www.spokesman.com/tags/otto-zehm/documents/
liveinfearoftheSPD on February 09 at 5:27 p.m.
@Ian
Care to expound on this? I have neither heard nor read that Thompson was acquitted. You have me confused with that statement.
IanJones on February 09 at 7:08 p.m.
The last paragraph in the above article the reporter uses the word “acquit”….Brian I will keep that in mind as far as the library…
brianrbreen on February 09 at 7:11 p.m.
Well if you get stuck, you have my number just give me a call…I know everything.
liveinfearoftheSPD on February 09 at 7:19 p.m.
@Ian
I see the confusion is yours, As Thompson is not the subject of this article. Perhaps you are referring to Jeff Harvey the subject of the article. I hate to assume anything you are attempting to point out.
lewis8457 on February 09 at 8:19 p.m.
Ian you are not just asking questions you are attacking bloggers for their opinions.
you seem to be a lot like a our old friend generally speaking, he thought he was always right too.
I do not condone violence but anytime i hear it was Otto’s fault for having Thompson beat him into a coma I get stark raving mad.
And the fact karl the klubber still walks free gets me even madder.
so when piglets like you try to make a case for Thompson being innocent i want to scream to the heavens justice what happened to you are you corrupt too. and the answer i always get? YES!.
lewis8457 on February 09 at 8:43 p.m.
Ian since you dont read news papers i will fill you in. Harveys kids were out shooting guns after hours a complaint was called into the wild life folks a ranger went to the area the boys were seen in, when he got there the father of the boys was there picking the boys up. the ranger asked to speak to the boys but Harvey (the father) said no. Harvey tried to get into the truck but the ranger stopped him a tense communication occurred with a struggle, at no time did Harvey say he was a cop.
the ranger was simply doing his job and Harvey was being his normal jerky self. Some time later after the tension subsided the ranger found out Harvey was a cop when Harvey told the ranger Harvey will be in trouble with his department the SPD. Why didn’t Harvey just tell the Ranger that right off the bat he was a cop why did a fellow police officer treat another officer that way, why? Harvey is a jerk. He has the mentality 28% of our cops have they are above the law and we are nothing but possible targets.
Harvey was only acquitted because his lawyer showed in court the caller and the ranger were friends. Apparently in Spokane if a friend calls you and says some kids are shooting after hours a ranger can not investigate if the perp is a Spokane cop. So lesson learned anytime you go shooting after hours take a rotten cop with you for back up..
Harvey was vice president of our local police guild, this upset some folks because we want to believe our police follow the same laws we all do but once again we saw the VP of the guild disrespecting a peace officer and lieing in court of law.
now the low hanging bum wants more money why? He is a low life bum like the other 28%.
granted this happened last year i may have missed a few things but you can find that out at the library.
misjustice on February 09 at 9:08 p.m.
Pretty good summary, Lewis.
The only thing that I would add would be the written reviews that Harvey had gotten by his supervisors; repeatedly pointing to his poor attitude and other job performance issues. The run in with the Fish and Game officer was, likely, viewed as a last straw by his superiors.
Ron_the_Cop on February 10 at 11:04 a.m.
Sorry to digress and off topic.
In the interest of full disclosure - positional asphyxia is not without some controversy. In the end these cases of sudden death while in custody must be examined on a case by case basis.
In the Zehm case, Otto was not only laid out prone, hogtied AND the application of the non-rebreather mask. See this recent article re the study of suspects placed in a prone position. http://www.policeone.com/use-of-force/articles/5018007-Is-prone-positioning-really-riskier-for-suspects/
Ron_the_Cop on February 10 at 12:14 p.m.
Hey here’s an interesting article by Mechann Cuniff on the capture of the fugitive bond agent involved in the Ofc. Olsen case. This could be a tsunami that roaring towards Spokane that will dwarf the Zehm et al and the Harvey case.
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/sirens/2012/feb/09/fugitive-bounty-hunter-arrested-fla/
IanJones on February 10 at 12:52 p.m.
Livinginfear…you are correct. My error I didn’t mean to say Thompson….What I meant was the media can sometimes mislead the public…The above article states HARVEY was “acquitted”…the reporter said nothing about a hung jury….therefore the reporter misled the public to believe Harvey was found not guilty, by using the word “acquitted”…..Lewis your posts about meeting people in dark alleys….taking care of things yourself and calling posters who post something you may not like “piglets” deserve no further response…