(02-15-2018, 02:53 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Odd that an adult who considers themselves educated wouldn't immediately think of Chicago. However, common sense and logic tends to give us the answer as to why areas with single party dominance tend to have poor governance. No competition induces complacency, promotes extreme agendas and stifles debate. Essentially the political version of a monopoly. Do I need to explain why monopolies are bad?
I am no expert, but aren't most cities controlled by one party?
Quote:REVEALED: Secret documents show 319 NYPD staffers should have been fired for misconduct
In a shocking expose, BuzzFeed gained access hundreds of pages of internal documents that revealed more than 300 staffers of the New York Police Department lied, cheated, stole or even assaulted people while on the job.
The “secret” employment files lists at least 50 staffers for lying on official reports or under oath, and 38 have been found guilty of excessive force by an internal police tribunal, fighting or firing their weapon unnecessarily. That adds to the 57 staffers found guilty for driving under the influence and 71 found guilty of ticket-fixing.
The more severe, however, were Jarrett Dill, who threatened to kill someone, and Robertson Tunis who sexually harassed and touched another officer. At least 24 of those staffers were working in schools, where they used their position to harass students or sold drugs.
Andrew Bailey was found guilty of touching a female student on her thigh and kissing her while she sat in his car. Lester Robinson kissed a woman, removed his shirt and began to remove his pants while sitting in a school parking lot on duty. Juan Garcia was caught selling prescription medication to an undercover officer while off duty.
BuzzFeed explained the police commissioner makes the final decisions on disciplinary actions. They were given “dismissal probation,’ which results in few actual consequences. Officers maintained their jobs at their same salary while on a kind of probation for a year.
The secret documents are exempt from open records by using a state law protecting “personnel records.” The site verified the information with court documents as well as more than 100 calls to NYPD staff as well as visits to officers homes and speaking to prosecutors and defense attorneys. Between 2011 and 2015 at least 777 officers and staff received received dismissal probation and 463 were forced to leave or resigned.
BuzzFeed intends to publish the entire database of documents on the site over the coming weeks, they said. Read the full expose here.
Long read at the link.
More and more we see what was going on behind the scenes. I can only hope this starts to choke those weeds and things keep getting better.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(03-07-2018, 04:30 PM)GMDino Wrote: Yeah, dirty cops are funny.
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I typed "BuzzFeed" before the laughing emoji. Hmm, wait, I did. Now I'm confused. It should be clear that I'm laughing that the source of this story is an organization who's biggest claim to fame are bullshit videos asking racist questions towards various ethnicities and other nonsensical - pardon the redundancy - bullshit.
If my expectations that my simple message was clearly conveyed were too high, I apologize.
(03-07-2018, 04:35 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I typed "BuzzFeed" before the laughing emoji. Hmm, wait, I did. Now I'm confused. It should be clear that I'm laughing that the source of this story is an organization who's biggest claim to fame are bullshit videos asking racist questions towards various ethnicities and other nonsensical - pardon the redundancy - bullshit.
If my expectations that my simple message was clearly conveyed were too high, I apologize.
Your message was full received: Links to the actual information on dirty cops are funny because of the site that hosted them.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(03-07-2018, 04:46 PM)GMDino Wrote: Your message was full received: Links to the actual information on dirty cops are funny because of the site that hosted them.
Serious question: do you WANT people to think you're stupid? Because this post goes a long way towards doing so.
(03-07-2018, 05:08 PM)GMDino Wrote: I provided a link to the actual complaints and interviews with some of the officers.
No, you provided a link to a story about another story about complaints and interviews with some of the officers.
(03-07-2018, 05:08 PM)GMDino Wrote: You think its funny because of the site that linked the documents and talked to the officers.
No, I think its funny that someone that hates when people use Daily Wire and other, similar sites and also discounts Fox News as a news source then proceeds to take the word of a site like BuzzFeed as gospel.
(03-07-2018, 05:08 PM)GMDino Wrote: I don't think dirty cops are funny.
Neither do I. But you would know that if you had any semblance of intelligence.
(03-07-2018, 05:08 PM)GMDino Wrote: Guess *I* am stupid.
Contrary to what I just said, I don't think you're stupid. You are either a liar or an intentional spreader of misinformation.
No one would take what I said as laughing at dirty cops unless they were either stupid (which you're not) or a liar or trying to spread misinformation.
(03-07-2018, 06:00 PM)PhilHos Wrote: You are either a liar or an intentional spreader of misinformation.
No one would take what I said as laughing at dirty cops unless they were either stupid (which you're not) or a liar or trying to spread misinformation.
He learned well at the feet of his master. But it's just me that thinks this, no one else.
(03-07-2018, 06:00 PM)PhilHos Wrote: No, you provided a link to a story about another story about complaints and interviews with some of the officers.
No, I think its funny that someone that hates when people use Daily Wire and other, similar sites and also discounts Fox News as a news source then proceeds to take the word of a site like BuzzFeed as gospel.
Neither do I. But you would know that if you had any semblance of intelligence.
Contrary to what I just said, I don't think you're stupid. You are either a liar or an intentional spreader of misinformation.
No one would take what I said as laughing at dirty cops unless they were either stupid (which you're not) or a liar or trying to spread misinformation.
Next time I'll link directly to the Buzzfeed story then...so you can think it's funny?
I used FOX as a source before so if the DW has actual documents and actually talks to the people I'll take that for what it's worth.
The gist of this though is the story is accurate and the documents are there and the link I shared provided a better synopsis than the the rather lengthy Buzzfeed article.
I'll try to be more clear next time so *I* don't appear "stupid".
So let's talk about dirty cops who get to keep their jobs and the people who are trying to shine light on these cockroaches.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(03-07-2018, 06:00 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Contrary to what I just said, I don't think you're stupid. You are either a liar or an intentional spreader of misinformation.
(03-07-2018, 06:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: Next time I'll link directly to the Buzzfeed story then...so you can think it's funny?
You know what? I take it back you really ARE stupid and I'm going to stop treating you as someone who is deliberately obtuse.
The concept I find funny is that anyone takes BUZZFEED serious as a news source. The story could be 100% accurate, but because BuzzFeed is known for its stupid and pointless inaneness, I will wait until a more credible news agency reports this story.
(03-08-2018, 01:00 PM)PhilHos Wrote: You know what? I take it back you really ARE stupid and I'm going to stop treating you as someone who is deliberately obtuse.
The concept I find funny is that anyone takes BUZZFEED serious as a news source. The story could be 100% accurate, but because BuzzFeed is known for its stupid and pointless inaneness, I will wait until a more credible news agency reports this story.
Okie dokie.
Then I'll continue to believe that you deliberately tried to distract from the story by not reading through to see the sourcing done by Buzzfeed. Distracting from the story (and not even discussing it yet) seems to imply that the story isn't important (or true) and thus a story about dirty cops is funny.
Good talking to ya!
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
Then I'll continue to believe that you deliberately tried to distract from the story by not reading through to see the sourcing done by Buzzfeed. Distracting from the story (and not even discussing it yet) seems to imply that the story isn't important (or true) and thus a story about dirty cops is funny.
Good talking to ya!
I made a short comment that CLEARLY said I found the source of the story laughable. That's it. The distracting came from your butthurtness that I found a source you used laughable which, for some reason, forced you to spout lies about me. Had you simply responded with some reason(s) why I should've taken the article seriously despite its source or asked honest, probing questions to me, I would have either engaged in the discussion you supposedly were looking for or I would have moved on to another topic. But, I guess I should understand, doing those things requires an intelligence and/or an honest attempt for engaging conversation you apparently lack.
Quote:Sacramento police officers shot and killed 22-year-old Stephon Clark, a father of two who was unarmed, in the backyard of his grandparents' home on Sunday night.
"The only thing that I heard was pow, pow, pow, pow, and I got to the ground," Sequita Thompson, Clark's grandmother, toldThe Sacramento Bee. "I opened that curtain and he was dead."
A police department statement says: "Prior to the shooting, the involved officers saw the suspect facing them, advance forward with his arms extended, and holding an object in his hands. At the time of the shooting, the officers believed the suspect was pointing a firearm at them. After an exhaustive search, scene investigators did not locate any firearms. The only item found near the suspect was a cell phone."
Clark was pronounced dead on the scene by personnel from the fire department.
On Wednesday, the Sacramento Police Department
released video and audio of the incident: body camera footage from the two officers involved in the shooting; video from the police helicopter that directed the officers to Clark; audio of the initial 911 call reporting a man in a hoodie breaking car windows; and audio from the police dispatch.
Sacramento Police DepartmentYouTube Taken together, the audio and video paints a portrait of an incident that moved heartbreakingly fast and then achingly slowly.
The recordings begin with a man calling 911 to report a man in a hoodie and dark pants breaking car windows. The officer in the helicopter spots Clark running and walking through backyards, and tells officers on the ground that the suspect has just used a "toolbar" to break the window of a residence.
With direction from the helicopter officer, the officers on the ground follow and confront Clark.
In a dark backyard lit only by what appear to be gun-mounted flashlights, the officers' body camera footage shows what happened next.
Sacramento Police DepartmentYouTube
Sacramento Police DepartmentYouTube "Show me your hands — gun!" the first officer yells. A few short seconds later he yells, "Show me your hands! Gun! Gun! Gun!"
The second officer begins firing multiple shots. Then the first officer begins firing, too — they fire about 20 shots in all.
Hidden by tall grass and the darkness, Clark's body isn't visible, but there are no signs of movement.
The first officer yells again, "Show me your hands!" and the other adds, "Let's see your hands."
"He's down, no movement," the second officer tells the dispatch. "We're going to need additional units."
"You all right, you hit?" says one officer. "Yeah, I'm good," the other officer replies.
The first officer reloads his weapon.
"He's still down, he's not moving," the officer says. "We can't see the gun."
Backup units arrive on the scene.
"He came up, and he kind of approached us, hands out, and then fell down," the first officer tells one of the new arrivals.
The two officers who fired their weapons continue to hang back, holding position, occasionally yelling that they need to see Clark's hands.
The second officer tells someone that the suspect had "something in his hands, looked like a gun from our perspective."
For more than five minutes, the two officers are seen standing behind the corner of the house with their weapons drawn.
When they finally approach the man they shot, one of the officers handcuffs Clark's lifeless body.
"We're going to need CPR stuff," he says. The officers put on gloves and talk about going to get a rescue mask.
Then officer one says "Hey, mute?" and the video's sound clicks off. The last two minutes of the video are silent.
The two officers involved in the shooting have been placed on paid administrative leave. The officers have been with the department for two and four years, respectively; both had four years' prior law enforcement experience with other agencies before joining the Sacramento force.
The Beereports that before police released the videos to the public, they first showed them to Clark's family:
Quote:"Allowing family to see such videos before they are released to the public is part of a city policy adopted in late 2016 by the city of Sacramento after the fatal shooting by police of Joseph Mann, a mentally ill black man. Mann's shooting led to major reforms in the department, including a requirement that all patrol officers wear body cameras.
"The reforms also require police to release videos in 'critical incidents' such as officer-involved shootings and deaths in custody within 30 days of the event. Sacramento police Chief Daniel Hahn, the city's first African American chief, has been releasing videos more quickly than the requirement and for a broader range of events than covered by the new law since taking over the department last summer."
The videos of the last minutes of Clark's life have sparked questions in Sacramento and online, about how the police handled the situation — and how they might have thought Clark had a gun.
"The object ultimately determined to be what police saw in Clark's hand was a cellphone his girlfriend and mother of his two children, Salena Manni, had loaned him," the Bee reports.
"It was in a rose gold-colored case with a black clip on the back for holding items like credit cards, she said."
There is also a debate over what possible repercussions the two police officers might face. Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg released a statement on Wednesday evening.
"I viewed the videos carefully," he said. "Based on the videos alone, I cannot second guess the split-second decisions of our officers and I'm not going to do that."
"The questions raised by the community and councilmembers are appropriate and must be answered during the investigation," he continued. "For instance, what are the protocols regarding use of force and for rendering emergency aid during officer involved shootings?"
Sacramento police say additional video and audio will be released soon.
"This is an unfortunate moment," community activist Berry Accius told the Bee. "This moment is probably going to set us back. ... We got transparency. Now we need accountability. We can't get that young man back."
Quote:Why the officers muted their body cameras remains unclear. Police Chief Daniel Hahn said last week that he could not explain it. He said there were "various reasons" why officers would turn off their cameras' audio, but he would not say if the Clark shooting was one of them. The muting, he said, would be part of his agency's investigation of the shooting.
The unanswered questions about the muted cams have stoked suspicion among Clark's family and protesters, who have criticized the shooting as an illegal use of force.
"When I heard [about the muted cameras] I felt it was intentional," Sonia Lewis, a cousin of Clark's, said last week. "You're muting something you don't want the public to hear what you're saying, and that means that if you don't want the truth to come out then all of it is a lie."
The family's attorney, Benjamin Crump, plans to file a wrongful-death lawsuit, he told the Daily Beast.
Betty Williams, president of the Sacramento branch of the NAACP, said at a Monday news conference that she had demanded that the police department share its protocol for muting body cams, and consider changes.
Sgt. Vance Chandler, a Sacramento police spokesman, said in an interview Monday that officers are taught during body-cam training "to utilize mute" in certain situations, but would not say what they were.
"That's part of what we are looking at in this incident," he said. He added, "We want to determine if this was an appropriate time for them to mute it or not."
The city's body-cam policy, which is posted online, does not mention muting at all. It says that officers should record "any enforcement or investigative activity" until that operation has "reasonably concluded." The policy adds that officers may deactivate their cameras under some circumstances, including talking about confidential or tactical matters, or for privacy concerns, as long as the reason is documented afterward.
Cedric Alexander, a former police chief in Rochester, New York, and former public safety director in Dekalb, County, Georgia, said he saw nothing wrong procedurally with the Sacramento officers muting their cameras in the aftermath of the shooting. Attorneys would advise officers to do that, to avoid recording comments that could be used in administrative or criminal proceedings, Alexander said.
But Alexander, a former president of the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives and a member of the Task Force on 21st Century Policing under former President Barack Obama, said that while the muting didn't appear to break any rules, it looks bad.
"The problem is the optics of this," Alexander said.
In the immediate aftermath of shootings, officers often share what they experienced with their colleagues, said Jim Bueermann, president of the Police Foundation, which helps departments improve and reform. "My guess is one of them is about to ask what happened or he has a compelling desire to tell his friend what happened and why he did it," Bueermann said.
Bueermann said the muting of body cams does not appear to be unusual among American police officers. Agencies can request muting functionality from body-cam maker Axon, he said. But many agencies don't have policies covering how mute can be used.
"There's a void in many agency policies, and I would be surprised if they were not soon filled in response to the Sacramento incident around the muting," Bueermann said.
Quote:After 10 agonizing months hoping two officers would be charged for Alton Sterling's death, the Louisiana man's relatives didn't get the news they wanted.
Federal prosecutors announced Wednesday that there isn't enough evidence to warrant civil rights charges against Baton Rouge police officers Blane Salamoni and Howie Lake II.
But they said they would hand the case files over to Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, who will determine whether state charges are appropriate.
Sterling, 37, was killed by police in July 2016. Cellphone video showed Sterling, a black man, pinned to the ground by the white officers before he was shot, but police said he was reaching for a gun.
Video shows shooting of Alton Sterling 01:03 Outrage over Sterling's death led to renewed "Black Lives Matter" protests across the nation. Landry said state police will lead Louisiana's investigation, and a prosecutor from the state's Department of Justice will assist.
"A thorough and complete investigation could take a considerable amount of time; as such, we ask for patience from the public and the press," Landry said.
The US Department of Justice's decision was disappointing to the Sterling family, attorney Chris Stewart said. But "we're not angry. We're not gonna ... let rage rule, because it's not over," he said.
Why the feds did not file charges in Alton Sterling's death
Officer pointed gun at Sterling's head Alton Sterling There were some revelations in the Justice Department's announcement. One new detail: The officer who eventually shot Sterling first put a gun to his head when Sterling didn't comply with orders to put his hands on the hood of a car on the night of July 5.
Video shows the officers put their hands on Sterling after he refused their order and struggled with them. Salamoni then pulled his gun.
Stewart said they learned in a conversation with federal prosecutors and investigators that Salamoni also said, "I'll kill you, *****."
Authorities, citing the ongoing investigation, would not comment any further on the case.
After the news conference, Alton Sterling's aunt's emotions burst out, according to CNN affiliates WAFB and WBRZ.
"Oh my God, that was the hardest thing ever," Sandra Sterling wailed, before her attorney and others led her away from reporters. "To hear Salamoni tell my nephew, my child who I love so much, that I'm going to kill you. He put that gun to his head. ... Salamoni put that gun to his head and said I'm going to kill you. So how do you think Alton felt? How do you think Alton felt after hearing that I'm going to kill you?"
Stewart said Salamoni instigated the situation.
"The most important thing is it shows the mindset of Officer Salamoni," he told CNN.
Salamoni's attorney, John McLindon, told CNN he doesn't know whether his client said those words.
"I was not a part of that conversation the Sterling family had," he said Wednesday evening. "The US attorney did allude to the officer's behavior not being appropriate."
"If it did happen, then the feds knew about it," McLindon said. "If it's on video or audio, they have it. And they used two separate expert witnesses on use of force. Both of them reached the same conclusion -- that it was not criminal behavior. If it did happen, it did not rise to the level of criminal conduct."
The DOJ announcement also says that after the officer -- responding to a 911 call about a man with a gun -- confronted Sterling with his service pistol, the suspect put his hands on the car hood. When Sterling took his hands off the hood, Lake tasered him and both officers tackled Sterling and took him to the ground.
Among the other things we learned Wednesday:
• The Justice Department identified Sterling's gun as a .38 caliber revolver, with six rounds in it. • While two videos showing the incident have been released publicly, there are four other videos in evidence: two body camera recordings, one from a store surveillance camera, and one from the dashboard camera in a patrol car. • Lake twice used his Taser on Sterling before the scuffle.
Justice department: Not enough evidence for federal charges
Federal prosecutors concluded there is not enough evidence to support civil rights charges against either officer.
"We would have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Officer Salamoni did not believe that Mr. Sterling was actually going for a gun ... and that he simply decided to shoot him," said Corey Amundson, acting US attorney for the Middle District of Louisiana.
Read the DOJ's conclusion on the Sterling investigation
Several of Sterling's relatives wept after the DOJ told the family no federal charges will be filed. But Stewart said he thinks the state will find reason to charge the officers.
Lake's attorney, Fred T. Crifasi, called the shooting a tragic loss.
"It has drastically changed the lives of all those personally connected and has indirectly affected so many more. While
Officer Lake is certainly relieved by the conclusion reached by the United States Department of Justice, he is aware that this investigation is now in the hands of the Attorney General for the State of Louisiana," he said. Accordingly, he will continue to refrain from publicly commenting on the facts of the case."
McLindon said he agreed with the Justice Department's decision "100%" and will contact the Louisiana attorney general on Thursday about cooperating with the next investigation.
The mayor of Baton Rogue said the fatal shooting will lead to revisions in the city's police training manual about the use of force.
Mayor Sharon Weston Broome also said $2 million would be put toward toward securing body cameras for the entire force. Officers will also receive training in implicit bias, she told reporters.
Shot on the ground The killing gripped the nation because two bystander videos, each less than a minute long, captured Sterling's struggle with the two officers.
Play Video
Witness: Sterling's gun was not visible at any point 01:59
Sterling's fatal encounter with police started when he was standing outside the convenience store where he frequently sold CDs and DVDs. Someone called 911 to report a man outside the store with a gun.
Bystander video -- which apparently begins after Salamoni pointing his gun -- shows an officer rushing Sterling and pulling him to the ground. The other officer helps restrain Sterling. Someone shouts, "He's got a gun!"
Police eventually manage to pin Sterling to the ground, with one officer straddling him. In one video, an officer draws something from his waistband and points it at Sterling. As the camera turns away, more yelling ensues, followed by several loud bangs.
Afterward, the camera captures Sterling with a large bloodstain on his chest as an officer on the ground next to him keeps his gun pointed at Sterling.
As Sterling lies fatally wounded, the other officer removes something from Sterling's right pocket.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
Quote:One of the two white officers who wrestled Alton Sterling to the ground and killed him outside a Louisiana convenience store was fired after an excessive force investigation. The second officer will be suspended for three days.
Baton Rouge Police Chief Murphy Paul made the announcement and detailed the investigation into both white officers, Howie Lake and Blane Salamoni. The case stems back to the 2016 shooting of Sterling, who was later found with a gun.
Salamoni, the only officer to open fire, was terminated. Lake will be suspended for three days. Neither are in danger of being charged criminally, though, as an investigation by the state's Attorney General did not find sufficient evidence of a crime. That finding was announced earlier this week.
After the announcement Friday, the department released graphic body camera footage showing Salamoni calling Sterling a variety of profanity-laced names while the injured man lay bleeding to death on the concrete.
Paul said the disparate disciplinary actions were due to the differing actions by the officers. Lake was trying to deescalate the situation while Salamoni resorted to deadly force, which Paul said did not follow departmental policies.
"We have two officers involved in one incident," he said. "The same incident with two different responses."
It's been nearly two years since the fatal altercation, which triggered massive protests and accusations of police brutality on black men. Paul said he hopes the announcement will remove the "cloud that has been over our community for far too long."
"Our police officers are held to a higher standard," he said. "Fear cannot be a drivers" for officers.
The body camera footage, obtained by The Advocate (Baton Rouge), shows officers arriving at a convenience store in Baton Rouge where Sterling, who is black, was selling homemade CDs. Officers were responding to a report of a man with a gun, approached Sterling and told him to put his hands on his car.
The officers said Sterling refused an order to put his hands on the hood but the footage shows at least one of his hands were on the car. With concern and confusion in his voice, Sterling repeatedly asked what the officers wanted of him.
"What I did, sir?...I'm saying what happened man," he is heard saying as Salamoni starts his profanity-laced tirade on the man. Salamoni almost immediately drew his gun when he got to the store. He is heard threatening to shoot Sterling several times over the course of the 5-minute video.
Sterling has both hands in the air when a taser is used, which doesn't appear to have much of an effect. Salamoni tackles Sterling and soon both officers are wrestling the 300-pound man on the ground.
The investigation found that Salamoni believed Sterling, 37, was reaching for a gun in his pocket. In one of the videos, an officer is heard yelling "gun" before the rounds are fired.
Salamoni shot Sterling three times, then fired three more shots into Sterling's back when he began to sit up.
As Sterling lie bleeding to death on the concrete, Salamoni continued to curse and called him a number of names. He emptied Sterling's pockets with bloodstained hands but did not render any medical treatment.
The struggle and fatal shooting was captured on cellphone videos that quickly went viral, igniting protests nationwide.
Police recovered a loaded gun from a Sterling's pocket. The convicted felon was legally barred from carrying a gun.
The officers told The Advocate (Baton Rouge) that they would appeal the decision if fired.
Friday's announcement also came just hours after an independent autopsy revealed an unarmed black man in California was shot eight times, most of the bullets hitting him in the back.
The shooting death of Stephon Clark along with the findings in Alton Sterling's death have reignited tensions between police and minorities and led to nationwide protests.
More: Stephon Clark shot 8 times, mostly in back, independent autopsy finds
Earlier this week, it was announced both officers wouldn't face criminal charges in Sterling's death.
"After a thorough and exhaustive review of the evidence, the facts that can be established beyond a reasonable doubt ... the Louisiana Department of Justice cannot proceed with the prosecution," Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry announced Tuesday.
During Friday's announcement, Paul discussed interviews with both officers and said that Salamoni did not answer any questions about his conduct. Lake, on the other hand, did.
Paul used the news conference to send a message to his community and to his other officers. He cautioned his officers and said his treatment of this incident shouldn't be viewed as though he doesn't support law enforcement.
"Some people are going to tell you that I don't have your back," he said. "All lies."
He said many of his officers are great "guardians for the community" and stressed policing isn't easy.
Paul pleaded with residents to not resist and instead listen to officers, even if they complain to the department later about how they were treated.
"Treat officers with the respect that their positions deserve," he said. "I assure you that the men and women of the Baton Rouge Police Department will reciprocate."
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
Quote:Conflict of interest? DA accepted $10,000 donation from Fremont cops while investigating them FREMONT — Fremont’s police union donated $10,000 to Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley’s re-election campaign while her office investigated three officers’ actions in the fatal separate shootings of two people last year, campaign finance records show.
The three police officers were subsequently cleared of wrongdoing. One of them, Sgt. Jeremy Miskella, is president of the police union.
O’Malley’s challenger for district attorney in the June election has criticized the donation as improper. O’Malley is defending the integrity of her office and has called for the state attorney general to review one of the cases.
O’Malley’s campaign reported the donation from the Fremont Police Association on Nov. 8, 2017. Less than a month later, on Dec. 6, O’Malley’s office cleared Fremont Officer James Taylor of any wrongdoing in the fatal shooting death of Nana Adomako in February of that year. [img=981x1340]https://i1.wp.com/www.eastbaytimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/arg-l-omalley-0323-01.jpg?w=620&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C9999px&ssl=1[/img]A screenshot of a campaign finance filing shows Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley accepted a $10,000 campaign donation from the Fremont police union while her office was investigating three Fremont officers. (Bay Area News Group) And on Feb. 13, 2018, O’Malley’s office cleared Miskella and Detective Joel Hernandez in the killing of a 16-year-old pregnant Antioch girl, Elena Mondragon, on March 14, 2017.
The city of Fremont and the officers are facing federal lawsuits over both shootings.
“It’s not proper,” civil rights attorney Pamela Price, who is seeking O’Malley’s seat this June, said in an interview regarding the campaign donation.
“It speaks of the lack of accountability that we’ve experienced in the East Bay for decades between the district attorney’s office and the law enforcement community,” Price said.
“We were aware that the Fremont police officers association has taken a very strong position in (O’Malley’s) favor, and the fact that they had those investigations pending certainly creates the appearance of a conflict, if not an actual conflict,” Price said of the contribution.
In an email to this news organization, O’Malley said there was no impropriety in her office’s review of the two officer-involved shooting cases and has asked for an external review of the confrontation in which Mondragon was killed.
“Under no circumstances was the decision regarding the Fremont police officers influenced in any way by any politics,” she said. “Nevertheless, I have asked for an independent review of the case from the state attorney general to remove even the slightest appearance of impropriety.”
O’Malley did not respond to questions about when she requested the external review of the investigation, and why she made the request for only one of the two cases involving Fremont officers.
Price said O’Malley should have asked the state attorney general to take over both investigations from the very beginning.
“Both cases are serious enough, and there’s such a long relationship with (Fremont police) that it’s appropriate to ask for outside assistance,” she said.
“What should have been very clear to her is that she should not accept campaign contributions from people she’s actively investigating,” Price said, adding that accepting the money compromises O’Malley’s credibility.
Asked if taking donations from law enforcement officers poses a conflict, O’Malley said she’s “proud of the support.”
“They, like many others, support me because of my experience and my innovative work to combat human trafficking and protect women, families and other vulnerable people across the county,” she said.
In the March 14, 2017, confrontation, Miskella and Hernandez were part of a task-force operation trying to capture a man wanted for violent armed robberies, Rico Tiger.
The officers fired their rifles at a moving car Tiger was driving with Mondragon and two others inside when Tiger tried to run them over to escape, according to police. Mondragon was hit and later died.
Miskella and another officer didn’t turn their body cameras on to record the confrontation, and Hernandez wasn’t wearing one, though it’s still unclear whether he was assigned one.
In the February 5, 2017, shooting, Taylor said he was punched repeatedly by Adomako after attempting to place him in a wrist lock. When Taylor released his police dog for assistance, the dog instead bit the officer. Taylor fired three shots in close range, killing Adomako.
The Fremont police union’s $10,000 donation was the biggest amount given by any law enforcement union to O’Malley’s 2018 campaign. The Oakland Police Officers Association donated $9,500 and the Deputy Sheriffs’ Association of Alameda County $8,500.
The union for Livermore police officers donated $2,500 and the San Leandro and Berkeley police unions gave $1,000 each.
A review of O’Malley’s campaign filings show that she never previously received contributions from the Fremont Police Association.
Miskella, the union president, did not respond to a request for comment on this story. Detective Michael Gebhardt, the union’s vice president and chairman of the union’s political action committee said in an email the organization is proud to endorse O’Malley.
“District Attorney O’Malley has a wealth of experience. and we are happy to be among the thousands of organizations and people across the county who support her,” he said.
A spokesman for the California Fair Political Practices Commission declined to comment on the practice of law enforcement donating to district attorney campaigns, saying people and committees donate to the candidates they support for a variety of reasons.
“One would expect a business group to support a ‘business-friendly’ candidate, or an environmental group to support an ‘environmentally friendly’ candidate,” said Jay Wierenga, communications director for the commission.
O’Malley was appointed by Alameda County supervisors in 2009 with three yes votes; two supervisors abstained because they wanted a more thorough process to pick the successor to former District Attorney Tom Orloff.
Price is the first challenger O’Malley has had to face in an election. She ran unopposed in 2010
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](http://media1.giphy.com/media/9EmYYw6o9cmsM/giphy.gif)
![[Image: 160706112156-01-alton-sterling-medium-plus-169.jpg]](https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160706112156-01-alton-sterling-medium-plus-169.jpg)
![[Image: 160706213240-alton-sterling-2nd-video-large-169.jpg]](https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160706213240-alton-sterling-2nd-video-large-169.jpg)
![[Image: ebt-l-duisus-0103-41.jpg?w=534]](https://www.eastbaytimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/ebt-l-duisus-0103-41.jpg?w=534)
