iePolitics: Deputy district attorney arrested for making terrorist threats
Most of you have already read one of several stories on this incident. I know that by reviewing how many of you sent me a link to one of the stories or another. But if you haven’t, here is the link to the Daily Press story.
For long-time readers of this blog, this story strikes a bit of a chord. That is because we have detailed such incidents in the past and have been called “liars” and such. Some of the reason for that is that usually when a county employee faces threats on the job and complains, it is the complaining party that suddenly finds himself under scrutiny and facing disciplinary action.
My therapist at Kaiser told me that he had county employees on his case load that had to get restraining orders against their county supervisors because the workplace threats got so bad. Human Resources has traditionally attacked the employee, not the supervisor making the threat.
Over the years we have details such situations at the Auditor-Controller-Recorder’s office, Sheriff’s Department, and more recently, at the Transititional Assistance Department and the Public Defender’s office. One of the employees had to actually run and duck to avoid being hit by a supervisor.
At least one of the employees above called the Sheriff’s Department and the incident was swept under the rug. I believe the employee got into trouble for complaining about the threats her supervisor made to her.
So what sets this incident apart. Of course, none of us really know the circumstances but we do know that instead of the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department investigating the incident, the investigation was done by the Barstow Police Department. Yes, I do believe that makes a difference because neither the County Executive Officer nor the director of Human Resources can tell the Barstow Police Department what to do nor can they influence its members in the same way as they can county administrators who must depend on their funding from the County’s General Fund.
This may be a case of two women after the same man, a DDA abusing her clerk or secretary, or any other in a long list of possibilities. I can only say that it is nice to see an agency take such things seriously. I only hope they arrested the right person.
This entry was posted in Government Corruption and tagged workplace violence by Administrator
The unfortunate aspect of this case is that the suspect committed her alleged crime in a jurisdiction that is serviced by its own independent police department. I know from actual experience that terrorist threats are civil problems in jurisdictions serviced by SBSO.
Jus’ sayin’…
R
R
Really terrorist threats is a civil issue……Why is it all deputies take reports on them and send them to the DA????? I thought u knew what you were talking about…..Right up till the time u opened your hands and put them to the key board. Just sayn R.
Hypocrite,
Please tell us the penal code elements of CPC 422.
Please tell us when the crime is completed. In other words, when does PC to arrest for CPC 422 arise? What proof is required to establish PC 422? SInce many SBSO deputies are clueless about statements being evidence, how would you prove elements of CPC 422?
I know these requests will require you to think. Hoping against hope, I am praying you’re able to answer these questions. We’ll just have to wait to read your response. But I’ll bet you’re as clueless as other deputies who have kissed of CPS 422, which is a felony, right? Right? Or do you know?
Thanks,
R
Or the courthouse is in City limits and therefore the City PD investigated it?! Just a hunch?
Actually JC, you have a point. Often times, the deputies in a specific unit are called to investigate crimes of county employee on county employee, especially if the incident occurred on county time. As I think about it, the incident I cited above occurred in the city of Fontana so the Fontana PD should have been called. I may have been given bad information but I was told it was the SBSD that responded.
I have had contact with that unit several times in an official capacity (because I worked at FacMan and we were responsible for county security). I’m sorry but I can’t remember what the unit is called now. Anyway, the investigation always went the way HR wanted it to go. Always.
I remember two particular incidents that happened in downtown San Bernardino, one at the County Government Center. Both were very serious incidents. Should they not have been investigated by SBPD? I never really thought about it until now.
I just heard an interesting story about Barstow PD. Barstow seems to always be getting a bad rap, but it turns out that all of the guys and gal that left there to come to the Sheriff’s Dept have all tried to get their jobs at Barstow back. It seems as though that they are not happy with the Sheriff’s dept. Also, it turns out that all the stories abouut their Chief, yeah you guessed it. All spear headed by the good ole SBSO.
If anon was arrested for CPC 422, especially a DDA, I can almost guarantee you that SBSO had no part in it. With SBSO, it’s a civil problem. With a real law enforcement agency, law is enforced.
Jus’ sayin’ from experience…
R
R,
PC 422 First and foremost a threat resulting in death or great body injury must be taken serious by the victim. This threat can be in person or by using an electronic devise. R, let’s say you gave a victim who’s brother sends him a text ” Im gonna kill you” does this meet the requirements for PC 422……? Nope. There must be intent of death or great body injury. Now the brother says ” Im going to come to your house stab or shoot you, take you in the desert, dig a ditch and put you in it” Then yes PC 422.
Let’s say the brother keeps sending text messages or calls the brother saying the same ” im gonna kill you” “your ass is mine” and the victim says ” I know he’s just mad”. What do you have then R? PC 653m?
For me R , if the threat has specific intent to cause death or FBI and the threats are believed can happen and are causing the victim to fear for his/er life……PC 422
Last sentence should b GBI Not FBI…… stupid spellcheck
R,
If I left something out please enlighten me. Im all about learning all day everyday. Thanks…
Hypocrite,
How do you know if intent of inflict death or serious injury is present?
R
Hypocrite,
OK, I will enlighten you. You, like nearly every single SBSO deputy I have ever met, including some who post here, don’t have a freaking clue of their job descriptions. In your post you have assumed role of lawyer, and unless you are licensed to practice law in CA, leave lawyering to lawyers lest you risk prosecution. Your job is to detect crime, identify and apprehend violators, identify and collect evidence, and prepare reports. You have no authority to guess what a real lawyer might do. Moreover, you can’t do your job unless you possess knowledge of substantive & adjective law, possess interviewing skill, have inferential reasoning ability, are able to deduce logically, and can write cogent reports.
Most SBSO deputies, and I think you’re included here, don’t have a freaking clue of substantive & adjective law. So let me clue you in. Your job is to determine if a crime has been committed and whether you can tie a suspect to it. Thus, if you have PC to believe a felony has been committed, your job is to arrest the suspect, not hunt up an excuse, which is nothing more than dereliction of duty, to kiss off felonies. The second you opine what a DDA might or might not do you’re good for practicing law without a license. And believe me, you guys are infamous for kissing off felonies, assuredly because you guys don’t know what the hell you’re doing. What a lawyer might do is none of your business. Burn that into your brain.
I was a victim of a 422 (my ex-wife) more than once. When I reported the crimes have nothing to do with whether they occurred. But a moron in tan & green who would’ve been Peter Principled as a stop-and-rob clerk tried to BS me about the elements of CPC 422. He tried to BS me about there bringing an element of CPC 422 that required my reporting it when he thought I should. Either this SBSO deputy was a liar, and I think many are in order to cover their incompetence, or he was stupid, which most are. Either way, he was an abject embarrassment to law enforcement.
Hypocrite, what exacerbates infamous systemic incompetence of SBSO is that you guys actually think you’re bright while actually lacking ability to perform the requirements of your jobs. Most of you have no knowledge of substantive & adjective law. Like JustCurious, you just make stuff up in order to kiss off felonies. A retired cop buddy of mine would look at guys like you and say, “He’s so dumb he’s happy!”
Hypocrite, I’d bet you a cup of gourmet coffee that you can’t tell me when a crime occurs. For if you knew that, then you’d know that when it’s reported is not an element of any crime.
Hypocrite, you’d be far ahead of the game if you were bright enough to admit that there is a lot about law enforcement that you don’t know. And there is no doubt in my mind that but for the existence of SBSO, only a tiny percent of you guys would be cops at real law enforcement agencies. For if you were half on the ball, you would have lateraled a long time ago. And I’ll go out on a limb because it’s where fruit are: you have applied at other agencies without success.
Here is one of the most repulsive statements I have ever heard any cop say. And I hate to bring up Deputy Two Thoughts (If she had two thoughts at once, she’d die of a concussion.) again, but she did aid and abet the commission of felony child abuse and she was accessory to felony child abuse. When I questioned her, she replied that I was mad because I didn’t get what I wanted. She is right, I didn’t get what I wanted, which was justice and protection of an innocent child, concepts foreign to her diminutive brain. Her gross dereliction of duty was causal of at least four additional crimes of child abuse, two of which were as near to torture as it gets, upon the person of a 5 year old confused girl. This is why I want no SBSO deputy around my kids. It is safe to opine that SBSO deputies are dangerous to children, for the health, safety, and welfare of children is of no consequence if it interferes with kissing off serious felonies, including child abuse.
Deputy Two Thoughts must be giving it up to someone because there is no other way to defend her continued danger to children.
So, Hypocrite, you, like most of SBSO deputies, embarrass professional law enforcement. You know you work for an inferior agency when SB Schools Police think you guys are lops. And make no mistake, were I in need of a cop, I’d much rather have any school cop respond than see one of your goofy looking cop cars driving up my street. Believe me, before you open your mouth I know what you’re going to say: “That’s not a murder, that’s a civil problem,” or “Just because he was murdered doesn’t make it a crime!”
So either get up to speed, and if you were so able you’d be looking to lateral, or quit before you do any more damage to professional law enforcement.
R
Ouch… DA Mikey, what say u, what about the Hoopster?… (out with it boyz!)
R,
If it is believed the intent is real by the victim then you have elements for PC 422. Then you have pc to arrest the crook. The victim tells you yes I believe he will carry out exactly what he said. Im in fear for my life……
R,
Also thanx for the enlightenment. Great way to start off the morning with my cup o joe.
Hypocrite,
Sorry to have been so blunt but, as you can deduce by now, I have been burned by your agency more than once with the result being my child having to endure continued abuse because gross dereliction of duty.
As you’re undoubtedly aware, when any crime is reported has no bearing on whether a crime has occurred. Crime reporting is not an element of any crime of which I am aware.
According to logic of SBSO deputies, if a murder hasn’t been reported, no crime has occurred. However, if they understood the concept of when elements of any crime are completed, then they would know that when any crime is reported is inconsequential. But when it comes to kissing off crimes, SBSO deputies are ingenious.
R
422. (a) Any person who willfully threatens to commit a crime which
will result in death or great bodily injury to another person, with
the specific intent that the statement, made verbally, in writing, or
by means of an electronic communication device, is to be taken as a
threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out,
which, on its face and under the circumstances in which it is made,
is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to
convey to the person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an
immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and thereby causes
that person reasonably to be in sustained fear for his or her own
safety or for his or her immediate family’s safety
I think if 422 is reported hours or days later it doesn’t really constitute 422
and FYI R- I never said I kiss off felonies. I just don’t waste time when victim’s are uncooperative and theres emergent and priority 1 calls holding.
More of the same
JustCurious,
“I think if 422 is reported hours or days later it doesn’t really constitute 422″
As usual, you think wrong. This is a perfect example of why you were Peter Principled long before SBSO hired you. Where in CPC 422 do you find any element requiring when the crime has to be reported? Do you even know when a crime occurs? I’ll bet you don’t!
JustCurious, please do the citizens of San Bernardino County a huge favor by quitting. You have to be the most incompetent and derelict cop I have ever run across. You don’t know statements, you don’t know evidence, you don’t know penal code elements, and you’re so dumb you’re happy!
R
R,
As usual you are full of it. I am sorry that your aren’t able to apply common sense. You must be the guy who goes around taking paper all day on cases that aren’t even a crime, but you got nothing better to do because your aren’t a hunter. I am not defending any stupid comments made prior to yours, if they don’t know what the elements are then that’s on them. In this particular situation your truly superior intelligence is blinding your ability to see the obvious. Based entirely on what you replied to, in a situation where the victim reports the crime several DAYS later IS an element of the crime. Even you would have to agree you overly exaggerated the simplicity of 422PC. Merely applying common sense say’s that arguably all of the elements are not met if reported days later barring exigent circumstances. Since you like proof, under the law, if the victim is only in fear “momentairly” etc. etc. then it is NOT CRIMINAL THREATS. 14 People v. Fierro (2010) 180 Cal.App.4th 1342, 1349. (“” Sustained fear” refers to a state of mind. As one court put it, “[d]efining the word ‘sustained’ [in section] by its opposites, we find that it means a period of time that extends beyond what is momentary, fleeting or transitory.” ( People v. Allen (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1149, 1151, 1153, 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 7 ( Allen ).)”)
Simply put, you call me DAYS later and have no reason as to why you took so long to report it, yes, you have already failed to meet all the elements. Clearly the fear was momentary. I agree that 90% + of crimes aren’t diminished because of the time in which it takes to report it. This example, perhaps, is clearly not the best choice to use to drive your point home because in actuality you are not entirely correct. Depending on the threat and the circumstances surrounding the ENTIRE SITUATION, I would not discourage an incident report being taken however. Food for thought.
Stay Safe
Blase’
Your post exemplifies one of the most serious systemic problems plaguing SBSO. You have no clue of what your job and how to perform it. There are three components of the criminal justice system. Your job lies within the first: LAW ENFORCEMENT. Do you understand this concept? Unless you’re a lawyer, don’t practice law without a license. It’s a misdemeanor. Leave lawyering to lawyers! You’ll be far better off, and it might help you gain knowledge.
Blase’, obviously you do not know when any crime has occurred, for if you did you would not have posted this. You, like most SBSO deputies, just make stuff up. It’s actually borderline delusional behavior that manifests in dereliction of duty.
Simply put, Blase’, if reporting were an element of any crime, it must be listed within the description of a crime. So, m’man, show me in CPC 422 the reporting element thing you have going on. Just cut-n-paste it from the section, and put it here for me to read.
Blase’ there is no such animal as a reporting element. A hunter like you ought to know that. If you had reasoning & hunting ability you would know that no such reporting element exists within any crime. Now, Blase’, don’t confuse yourself with prosecution. That’s not your job. You need a different hunting license for that job. What a lawyer might do later in terms of prosecution has no bearing on your job, which is to determine whether a crime has occurred.
Now here’s how you could reason your way around the reporting thing. But keep in mind that reason and logic do not come into play unless you have prerequisite knowledge, which in this case apparently you do not. Your post implicates a complete lack of knowledge of adjective law. So, cop-turned-lawyer-who-doesn’t-know-his-job, let’s use a little inferential reasoning to see if your reporting theory holds water.
Follow along, Blase’: A woman has just become a victim of CPC 422. All requisite elements are present. Criminal intent is present. Therefore all elements of the legal definition of crime are present. However, mistake of knowledge is also present. She has no idea that CPC 422 is even a crime. So it’s reasonable to conclude that no one is going to call you to report a crime that s/he believes does not exist. Six months after this crime has occurred, she learns of CPC 422. She calls you. Based upon your reasoning ability, you’re going to kiss this felony off because of an element you’ve made up.
The fact is, Blase’, and you’re going out not in a “Blase’” of glory. The victim’s mistake of knowledge has no bearing on whether a crime occurred. Consistent with SBSO inveterate propensity for dereliction of duty, your job is to detect crime. But how in the world can you detect crime if you don’t know that a crime has occurred? Your lack of knowledge allows felons escape justice. Hence, in the above scenario, you’ve become yet another CPC 32 SBSO deputy.
Now, I have done a whole lot of educating really dense SBSO deputies, and Hoops has yet to compensate me. But in the interest of SB county taxpayers, I will do it once again. Now, Blase’, before reason and logic come into play, you must first possess prior knowledge, and here is where a lot of SBSO deputies become discombobulated. You guys lack essential prior knowledge. So let’s light this candle.
Blase’, before you begin the process of inferential reasoning and deductive logic, you must first identify the core issue, and here it’s when a crime occurs. Then you’re going to connect this concept to your reporting thing that’s nothing more than an illusion.
Take a look at CPC 20: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/s20
Apparently your academy does not teach this section to you guys, for if it did you would know when any crime occurs, and it’s very simple: when act meets intent. This very simple concept applies to every single law you will ever enforce. Thus, if either element, act or intent, is missing, no crime has occurred. Conversely, where criminal act meets criminal intent, you’re good to go in terms of arresting bad guys. Is this too deep for you??? Are you keeping up??? It’s so simple even a caveman can hunt it up!
Blase’, now that you know the legal definition of crime, apply that knowledge to any crime. Then reason your reporting thing into the equation. Do you think it still makes sense? Can you think of a valid reason why any state legislature would not make reporting an element?
Also, Blase’, a victim’s reason for not reporting a crime you is never an element of any crime. It might hinder prosecution, but that’s not your line of work. Your job is to determine whether a crime occurred.
Blase’, it’s amazing how many SBSO deputies make stuff up. And you guys make stuff because of paucity of knowledge. Many of you guys ought be fired for stupidity, and most of what’s left for dereliction of duty!
Blase’, I have never seen such a compilation of poorly tuned cops in my life. When I moved to this backward county, a game warden told me SBSO was screwed up. I was incredulous. He was a beat cop before he lateraled to Fish & Game. He was extremely sharp. He told me he gave an SBSO deputy a suspect of a 496 & did the investigation for him. Yep, you guessed it, the deputy told the warden that no crime occurred. Just another CPC 32 SBSO deputy running around in a unit not knowing what the hell he was doing. Par for the SBSO course…
Blase’ I am sure you guys kiss off a lot of crimes because you’re just too busy. While I do understand irreconcilable logistical factors plaguing SBSO, I do not agree with kissing off any crime. It’s dereliction of duty. How one attempts to justify it is nothing more than rationalizing dereliction of duty. Moreover, I do honestly believe, based upon my personal interaction with SBSO and what alleged deputies have posted here, most of you guys kiss of crimes including felonies because you guys just don’t have a clue of what the heck you ought to be doing. Your reporting thing is proof of this. You guys are so damned dumb you’re happy. Exacerbating this abject stupidity that results in abused children to continue to be abused is that fact that you’re not bright enough to listen when others try right your listing ship!
Blase’ I could have been a victim of a CPC 422 a year ago. Were I to report it to you, you’d kiss it off. Your post implicates dereliction of duty. Your only defense, and it ain’t much of one at that, is lack of essential knowledge. Your job is to detect crime. Here’s the question you ought to be answering: was Raisuli a victim of CPC 422 a year ago? To answer it you will need to know the elements of CPC 422 (when I report it ain’t one of ‘em & neither is reason why I reported it a year later), and the legal definition of a crime. Admittedly a DDA might not file for any reason. But don’t get confused here, Blase’: what a lawyer might later do is none of your business. It’s never an element of any crime. Your job is to determine if a CPC 422 did in fact occur a year ago. It’s really quite simple. Even a cave man can hunt it up.
I know that a lot of SBSO deputies are going to bust out statute of limitations. It’s a concept that does not come into play. It’s a bar to prosecution of a crime that was committed. Did you get that? Before statute of limitations comes into play, a crime must have been committed. It’s so easy that even a caveman can hunt that up, right Blase’?
R
Blase’,
Here’s some advice: next time to talk to a DDA, ask her/him is s/he knows of any crime of which immediate reporting and reason for delay of reporting are elements. They are never elements. They might hinder prosecution, but they are elements of no crime of which I’m aware.
Blase’, a cop’s job is applying substantive law. A DDA’s job is to prosecute. Blase’, if a 187 were to occur in your beat, would you let the suspect go because you were to think that a DDA won’t prosecute? I’ll go you one better. Let’s assume that you were to guess right, that a lawyer refuses to prosecute your suspect. Do you think that because a lawyer refuses to prosecute that probable cause to arrest the murderer for 187 did not exist?
Blase’, if you know your job, it’s a lot easier to do it. Ask a caveman. He’ll tell you.
R
Blase’,
I wasted a lot of time exposing how much you don’t know. Your reasoning is so flawed that you’re a danger to yourself. So if fear has to be sustained, which is defined by what it isn’t, victims, by your definition, will have to wait a sustained period of time before they call you in order to meet elements of a crime. Then you’d kiss off the felony because the victim didn’t call you when YOU think s/he should have.
Blasé’, whether sustained has been instilled in the person of another fear will have to be proved by an attorney. Your job is to determine whether probable cause to arrest. Your job is never to determine whether proof required for conviction exists. That’s an attorney’s job. This is so easy that even a caveman who can’t hunt can do it.
Blase’, you made up the reporting & reason elements. They only exist in your imagination as support for your inveterate propensity for dereliction of duty. Why a victim chose to wait to report a crime has no bearing on whether a crime was committed. But it does serve as basis for your dereliction of duty.
Stop while you’re behind & find a more suitable job. You ain’t got what it takes to be a cop. Maybe you can do something with that hunting thing you have goin’ on.
Adios,
R
Again, as usual, you spend more time trying to impress with your ability to do research on Google than applying common sense. You bore me. I stop reading your posts halfway into them because you can’t change fact by the length in which you write your response. At the end of the day, after all of your hot air, the fact’s are the facts. Maybe you should cut and past the elements of 422PC, the google the definitions of each element so that you can comprehend its meaning. I attempted to do it for you. My case law defining the very meaning of “sustained fear” which is an element, was included. I am sorry if you are inept and have no clue what it means to apply reasoning. It is black and white, no common sense type officers like you that drives citizens to feel the way they do. For someone who is so anti government intrusion, oppression, etc, you sure attempt to sale yourself as that very “A” type, straight lined, no application skills, drone type cop the government would love. Don’t attempt to reason, understand, evaluate, nor take the totality of the circumstances into consideration. We want more “R”‘s running around. Don’t ask questions, don’t investigate, go on face value, apply no skills, just take reports. Hey, sounds like where you worked was perfect for you. I wouldn’t want to live there. Hell your the government type that would arrest someone for that 422PC WE are discussing I assume. In essence you, as a government agent, have now arrested someone for a crime that you should have reasonably known failed to meet all the elements. So now this person is in the system, loses his right to carry a firearm, loses time and money from work, to ultimately have his case dismissed all because the bone head officer has no ability to reason, investigate, and make an independent decision.
Using your ridiculous reasoning about being a lawyer it clearly demonstrates how narrow minded you are. You are so ridiculous, a dinosaur, it’s laughable. It’s clear you have not evolved with law enforcement. Officers are expected to “Police Work” correct? Well in case you retired long long ago let me fill you in. Along with those duties Mr Simpleton, we are expected to be every bodies parent, counselor, divorce attorney, social worker, teacher, mentor, community activist, etc etc. We are expected to take on several more roles to assist other agencies with limited resources. Everyone is expected to do more than just their job. I am sorry if you weren’t able to do so.
Bottom line is you are wrong. Deal with it. You can’t always be right, I know that it is hard for you to accept. Yes there are more than one way to skin a cat. We all are assholes and with that we all have opinions. Each varies. Read my post clearly, if you can’t see how reporting the crime several days later, and like I said numerous times, the act of reporting it several days later does dictate that one of the elements was likely not met. So use your brain, think outside of your box, and extrapolate that “sustained fear” tho not spelled out for your single mindedness does not spell out for you specifically a time frame, those that can interpret words and phrases and know their meaning can understand that “sustained fear” can be an extremely important element that needs to be “investigated” and if during your questioning it is determined that the element was not met, then YOU HAVE NO CRIME. What about that do you not understand? It’s called an “investigation” for a reason. And yes, the mere delay in calling is very important. I hope you weren’t a detective. You see if you actually understood the elements, the requirement that they be met, you would know that a crime is established when ALL OF THE ELEMENTS ARE MET. I would love to continue with your remedial training on any other topic that you wish to challenge.
I forgot for a few who I was dealing with. Let me attach the elements from someone who you will understand. Now pay attention to the 5th element. Now I know this will be difficult, but take the case law example I gave you on what “sustained” is and like a monkey to a box, put 2 and 2 together. So know have what one could call the basic foundation for conducting an investigation. So “R”, be a big boy, armed with what all the elements you will need to establish a crime has occurred, and go ask the important questions “investigate”. And since I have no faith you can extrapolate what it is we are saying that yes, in this case, the delay IS an issue, one of your questions should be along the lines of this, “are you still fearful, or was it more that initially you were in shock or stunned by what you heard? I ask because it took you 3 day’s to call?” Maybe your cave man can get that too….
Our Newport Beach Criminal Attorney and Irvine Domestic Violence Attorney at Law Offices of Michael L. Guisti tell us the following:
According to PC 422 there has to be six elements for a criminal threat to be considered creditable by police and the Orange County District Attorney.
The first, the defendant willfully threatened to unlawfully kill or unlawfully inflict great bodily injury on another person.
The second, the suspect made the threat orally, or in writing, or by using an electronic communication device, like text messaging, emails or telephone.
The third, the defendant intended that the statement be understood as threatening and intended that it be received by the other person.
The fourth, the threat was so clear, immediate, unconditional, and specific that it communicated to the other person a serious intention and the immediate prospect that the threat would be carried out.
The fifth, the threat actually caused the other person to be in sustained fear for their own safety or for the safety of their immediate family.
The sixth, the other person’s fear was reasonable under the circumstances.
I’ve enjoyed this thread for awhile now. But must share my 2 cents.
Having been a SUSPECT, and put together more than a couple 422 reports in my day, I must intervene.
Kudos Blase, you made a good argument, and I appreciate your comments, refreshing compared to many I’ve read over the years on this blog. GOOD on you!!!!
One of the KEY components of 422 is the “threat” must be “unconditional”. The MOST overlooked issue in a 422 case.
Unconditional could be a number of issues rolled into one, or several issues.
One of the shortcomings LE has in these cases, especially SBSD is, many don’t bother to investigate or obtain the background information that may have lead up to the “threat” in the first place.
SBSD management is famous for allowing shit to brew to a boiling point, then when the receiving end of somone’s crap is challenge with violence or threats, completely ignore the causation and attempt to ONLY deal with the person making the threat.
PC 422 like assualt cases, there is a reason it happened, and the cops must find out why and document it in every detail. In 90% or more of the cases the VICTIM who reported the crime was in fact the one who create most of the problem or was equally guilty in their own demise in using poor judgement.
If the parties involved have a long history of disputes, one party has run their mouth with impunity for a period of time or maybe just once, the other party FINALLY gets tired of the rhetoric and says, “keep running your mouth and I’ll kick your ass the next time I see you”, well if you think you have a 422, OKAY!!!
One must find out what was being said during the “running of the mouth”.
Other comments that rise to the level of conditional is, ” if you try and hurt me or my family behind this issue, I’ll kill you if I catch you on my property”. That is a conditional threat. You try and hurt me, I’ll kill you is NOT a 422.
But many will simply run with a criminal report or arrest someone, and overlook the potential history behind the problem. YOU look the fool at the end of the day if the suspect is paying attention and you get a not filed or acquittal after trial.
Some might remember my recent comments to Billy Jack after he continued to flap his lip. Remember I said “if you were standing in front of me talking that smack I’d bitch slap you”. THAT again is conditional.
Of course Billy like many who run their mouth and say whatever they want, then hear words like this think they are a victim of terrorist threats. Again, YOU create the scenario think again when someone finally says enough is enough and acts out.
Of course since I don’t know who Billy really is, or where he lives at, it is also difficult to make a case for PC 422.
But I know a few dummies who might try to make a case, a couple more DDA’s who might be stupid enough to try to prosecute something like that.
In this case with the suspect DDA, I hope if a history exsists, it was well documented. If it’s a problem between employees and the DDA reported it to her supervisor and it was ignored or blown off. Then I say the suspect has a decent defense on most of this.
If the victim has said NOTHING to the suspect, or has no history of wrongdoing toward the suspect, shame on the DDA.
Let us not forget the recent murder case up here in the high desert where a man shot and killed 3 people who showed up on his property and he felt he was in danger. Bottom line self defense at the end of the day.
Don’t care how you slice that one, it was a burn for the DA and SBSD. Much like the “lighter deputy’s” case.
This case had a long history between ALL parties involved. SOMEONE did do their job when people started calling the cops long before this case exploded into a killing.
The jury spoke and said “not guilty” when the defendant said he had enough of others non-sense.
That should be a lesson for some.
R- “is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to
convey to the person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an
immediate prospect of execution of the threat”
calling in a 422 report six months down the line obviously there is no immediate threat. If someone tells you hey mr officer six months ago Joe Blow said he was going to kill me with a gun but I haven’t seen him since you really think that is a crime? Regardless whether the general public knows the elements of 422 its common sense and it’s a threat. like others have said most all crimes have no reporting requirements but 422 is different.
Also you say I don’t know what I’m talking about. You have responded to every post I have made. Yet I throw jury instructions in your face regarding evidence and no response. Coincidence??? I think not.
JustCurious,
You obviously do not know the legal definition of when a crime was committed. And, JC, there is no penal code element of any crime of which I am aware that requires reporting within any time limit. If you don’t believe me, as a DDA.
Ask me your jury instruction question again. However, JC, under no circumstances are you even remotely empowered to consider jury instructions unless you’re a lawyer. Jury instructions are determined by lawyers and officiated by judges in courtrooms. Your job is to detect crime and determine probable cause, of which you have no clue.
R
Blase’
Thanks for posting what we already know. However, you created the illusory elements of reporting and reason for delay, neither of which appear is CPC 422. You made them up. Being the hunter you claim to be, hunt up facts to support your assertion of existence of these elements.
Focus. So wrote that these are elements. Prove it.
Blase’, you ain;t a lawyer. Stop playing one lest you’re prosecuted for practicing law w/o the proper hunting license.
R
Hi AC,
The issues of this thread are elements of CPC 422 & the legal definition of when a violation of this section is completed. Blase’ has legislated his own elements into this crime. Nowhere in CPC 422, any crime for that matter, is there an reporting requirement or reason for delay of reporting. These elements just do not exist. Now I will admit that there might be facts that can hinder prosecution, but such facts and whether prosecution occurs are none of Blase’s business, unless, of course, he’s a lawyer. Then there would be a conflict of interest.
Take care,
R
Blase’ & JustCurious,
Do you guys understand that as cops you are legally forbidden from opining what might happen in any courtroom? If you were to considered and opine about what might happen in any courtroom you guys would be good for practicing law without a license. If you think I’m wrong, ask a lawyer.
You job as cops is to detect crime, determine whether probable cause exists to effect an arrest, identify and collect evidence and that includes statements, which are in fact evidence, and submit reports to your DA’s office for determination of disposition?
R
Did you go anywhere? When are you going to prove that your illusory elements of immediate reporting and reason are in CPC 422???
You posted the elements that you have cut-and-pasted in your post. Nowhere in your post were the elements that you allege are there. While you’re our hunting up Waldo, hunt up proof of the elements you have legislated into CPC 422.
Blase’, if you know CPC 20, which you don’t but hopefully have now tried to learn, you’ll know when a crime has been committed: when act meets intent! It’s so easy even a caveman can figure it out. When any crime of which I’m aware is reported is never an element. You just made it up.
God only knows how many felonies you’ve kissed off due to incompetence. I’d rather see a caveman respond to any call I might have for service than you with your forged hunting licenses. If you had two thoughts at once you’s become concussed.
R
Blase’
Here is your verbatim comment: “Simply put, you call me DAYS later and have no reason as to why you took so long to report it, yes, you have already failed to meet all the elements.”
Prove to me that when any CPC 422 victim decides to notify you is an element to this crime. It isn’t. You made it up. And, Blase’ you are not a legislator. You can’t make up penal code elements.
Balse’, there is no doubt in my mind I can go 10-8 tomorrow and fail you on training, which your TO ought to have done.
Now get to huntin’ up proof for this stupid comment you wrote.
Remember, if know when a crime has occurred, you’d know that when it’s reported is never an element. That’s so easy that even a caveman can bag that game.
Go back and read the elements you stole from that lawyer’s Website. In it you’ll find just how incompetent you are.
Do taxpayers a favor and quit while you’re far behind.
R
R
Really? Is that the best you got? I expected more than a broken record from you. Pathetic. I am done here. I’d be better off debating a drunk. At least a drunk knows when to shut up and go to sleep. Clearly you lack the ability to reason or comprehend what you have read. Good day sir. I will leave you and your record player alone since you both love to hear yourself repeat the same tired and useless message.
Blase’,
I am extremely familiar with elementary arguing tactics. Yours is easy to identify. You wrote stuff that you have made up and can’t prove it. Now your attacking me instead of defending the indefensible. It’s called argumentum ad hominem: http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/person.html
Blasé’, I had to teach you when a crime occurs, and that any reporting requirement that you have made up is inconsistent with CPC 20. If you know CPC 20, you would not have posted what you have. When a crime is reported has no effect upon whether that crime was committed. At the time act meets intent, tell the fat lady to start singing. About the best you can do when act meets intent is to tell a real cop of what happened so s/he can handle your call for you.
Blase’, you have only solidified the belief of systemic SBSO incompetence and dereliction. You have shown your supervisors your lack of knowledge and willingness to kiss off felonies because you don’t know basic adjective law. Know wonder child abusers are aided and abetted by SBSO deputies. You guys just don’t know how to handle your calls. Even a lieutenant from my former agency has told me SBSO is screwed up! My former dentist, who was an OC reserve in an aero bureau, told me the same thing.
Simply put, Blasé’, your “Simply put, you call me DAYS later and have no reason as to why you took so long to report it, yes, you have already failed to meet all the elements,” is a memorial of your incompetence. This comment is in direct opposition to your subsequent post delineating elements of CPC 422 of which there is no reporting requirement. Like most SBSO deputies who don’t know what the hell they’re doing, you just make stuff up in order to kiss off felonies, which makes you derelict.
Now that your supervisors know you’re good for dereliction of duty, we’ll see if they do the right thing and move you back to the jail until an investigation of your dereliction is completed. I do know that you’re a danger in a unit.
R
“Yawn”……zzzzzzzzzzzzzz There’s a good reason your all alone on this one. Stick to what you know. Every time you express yourself, you truly show how out of touch you are. Do yourself a favor before you ruin what dignity you have left and let this one go. If you don’t, you will just keep making yourself look dumber and further drive home to everyone reading this that you just got handled by a bunch of dumb incompetent SBSO Deputies. You don’t want that. Because if that can happen, then really, how dumb are you? Your retired. Stay that way my friend.
Stay Safe
R- It was a while ago and you told me I did not know what I was talking about regarding Jury Instructions. I posted those Jury instructions and I’m not going to again. It just goes to show that when someone else is right you just don’t post. It’s all good
JustCurious,
I do not remember your posting jury instructions. And I know there is no such animal as a jury instruction that reads that statements are not evidence. This is a lie and you’re a liar. Look, moron, when anyone tells you anything in the field, it’s a statement. When that person tells the same statement in court, it’s testimony. Suspects have been convicted on testimony alone. Do you understand this? Or does a caveman have a higher IQ?
JustCurious, As I have tried to teach you a million times before: you are not empowered to consider jury instructions. You are not empowered to consider courtroom strategy. If you can’t consider strategy, wouldn’t know which jury instructions a judge will allow.
JustCurious, you’re a danger to the community in a unit. Quit while you’re behind. If you supervisor reads what a derelict you are, s/he will have to transfer you out of patrol, if there’s where you’re now assigned.
R
Blase’
I down with your trying to save face. At this point, that’s all you can save. You have revealed yourself to be beyond incompetent. As my retired cop buddy would say when meeting a moron like you, “He’s so dumb he’s happy!”
R
JustCurious,
The second you posted your lie about the existence of jury instructions that indicate statements are not evidence, you revealed yourself not only as an incompetent liar, you revealed yourself to be a moron. Here’s why:
You take a statement in the field of a 211. There is no physical evidence. Two days later a sharp cop sees the suspects & arrests him based upon the victim’s statements. No physical evidence is ever found. Its only the victim’s statements that the suspect stuck a gun in his face and took his money. They money has since been spent to buy drugs. The gun has been sold to another dirt bag.
The DA’s office gets the case. A DDA files 211 against the suspect, who now becomes a defendant. The only evident the DA has is victim statements, which becomes direct evidence when s/he testifies. If your clueless, little brain, do you think there is any provision of law that declares direct evidence, which is known as testimony, which is know as statements when a cop takes them in the field, is not evidence? If it’s not evidence, what the hell is it doing in trial where evidence is presented?
The facts is, clueless one, it’s up to a judge or jury to weight the validity of direct evidence in deciding guilt or lack thereof, not to be confused with innocence.
JustCurious, you are beyond dumb. Not only don’t I believe you have ever posted anything revealing jury instructions not being evidence, your refusal to not post is is highly suspect. As I have written before, I know you’re a liar. A lying cop is worthless. If I were you I’d prove I’m not a liar by posting the jury instruction that declares direct evidence is not evidence.
JustCurious, you’re a liar & you’re incompetent. You were Peter Principled passing out chow hall spoons. It’s deputies like you that have give SBSO such a horrible reputation. God only knows how many felonies you’ve kissed off because you are clueless. You ought to be fired for dereliction of duty!
R
R,
That’s what I thought. Next topic you want to be educated on just ask. I don’t mind giving you remedial training. Your retired, I get that, I won’t hold it against you. I am here any time you want another lesson. In the mean time, do yourself a favor and re read LELR. Hopefully you know what that is. You may actually impress me slightly if you do.
Deputy Dense Derelict AKA Blase’,
You still don’t know when a crime is committed, and I must have gone over it a million times for you. You’re one dense derelict. You kiss off felonies because you’re too dumb to know elements of crimes.
Deputy Dense Derelict, you ought not last until retirement. You ought to do right by SB county taxpayers & quit, not that you have transferrable skills. But for the fact that SBSO will hire anyone with an IQ within a score shy of triple digits and who have been declined by every other law enforcement agency including SB city schools PD, you’d be standing in Home Depot parking lots competing with illegal aliens for day jobs. You’ll get only jobs they’ll decline.
Our last hope is that your supervisors will identify your incompetence based upon what you’ve posted and will yank you out of a unit where you’re a danger to taxpayers an have you passin’ out chow hall spoons, which is way above your pay grade.
R
Why is that of all the SBSO deputies who post here, real or otherwise, only two have their acts together & both are retired?
Jus’ Observin’…
R
@Raisuli – Just wait until election time for the head shed job (Sheriff). That’s when the chosen ones leg hoppers come out of the wood work here.
Hang around for that event, you may have a field day….. LOL
R
Seriously, Your an idiot. How does it feel to be as stupid as you are. The only one who is so stupid they are happy is you. The citizens of OC are far better off with a complete moron like yourself off of the streets. I knew that I had seen you before, your the guy wearing the blue vest with a big yellow happy face on it. Ya, you, so stupid your happy!!!! Keep that job, the only ones dumber than you with a smile just as big are the Obama fans. You fit right in. Your like a retard with a drum set. Someone needs to give you a fork. You are the only one on this thread who thinks they are right. Duh, I wonder why that is? Duh, I don’t know… R, your a tool. You have no clue, it’s obvious by your elementary school boy repeat rants. You aren’t even worthy to hold my pocket. “Just curious” bitch slapped you and now you just cry like a baby……. Go suck your thumb in a corner you baby, when you grow up like a man feel free to come back around.
R- are you that dumb or are you just too dense to realize it. Statements are not evidence until they are testified to in court. Only then do they become evidence. Also your stupid little 211 scenario. Because a guy matches the description doesn’t mean jack squat. Maybe if you added another element of say a “six-pack” and the actual victim being able to identify the actual suspect rather then the “suspect” matching the description. Also no DA in the world would file a case because a victim says yea joe blow robbed me and he looked like this and a few days later a guy “matching the description” gets arrested and all you have are his statements. You are literally a retard and I don’t know why I’m wasting my time on you.
Oh wait maybe you saw it on TV like your last posts on the old blog. Cuz I’m sure what happens on TV is the truth. You have no credibility.
JustCurious,
Let’s take a look at what you have written and see if it holds up under the scrutiny of reason and logic: “Statements are not evidence until they are testified to in court. Only then do they become evidence.”
First you have to know that in criminal cases evidence is primarily collected by cops. Do you agree with this JustCurious?
Now lets take a look at the legal definition of statements.
California Evidence Code Section 225:
“Statement means (a) oral or written verbal expression or (b)
nonverbal conduct of a person intended by him as a substitute for
oral or written verbal expression.”
Are you on board, Deputy Derelict? Do you now know the legal definition of statements? Now remember, Derelict, that you cannot insert your own elements into any law. You’re a cop & not a legislator, so you have to follow law. Do you understand that?
Now lets take a look at California Evidence Code Section 140:
“Evidence means testimony, writings, material objects, or
other things presented to the senses that are offered to prove the
existence or nonexistence of a fact.”
Derelict, do you agree that anything offered to prove the truth of the matter, no matter what it is, is known as evidence?
Now here’s where it’s going to get difficult for your weak brain to keep up. Statements become TESTImony when a suspect/victim/witness is sworn under oath and then TESTIfies. Prior to courtroom action, statements are evidence that are used to support probable cause to arrest. This is where you’re required by law to stop. You have no ability to predict whether statements will become testimony. Only a lawyer can make such a determination. If you bust out your jury instructions that you have made up because I know they do not exist, you will be good for practicing law without a license, a misdemeanor. Then the CHP will have to arrest & book you.
JustCurious, do you deny that a victim’s statements alone can be used to support probable cause for arrest, that no other evidence of any kind is required ti exist, just a victim’s statements? Do you deny that defendants have been convicted and sentenced to prison and death based upon the testimony of the victim alone? BTW, this happens a lot in rape cases, especially where victims report crimes long after they have occurred. Now I know Blase’ would kiss off this felony due his his reporting requirement, but it’s common for rape victims to not report the crime until they seek counseling & counselors call cops. All physical evidence is long gone. Now a DDA has to assess the strength of her/his case based solely upon statements of the victim.
How about a 187 where no other evidence exists connecting a suspect to a murder except the statements of a witness who said the suspect admitted to her/him that s/he did it? Do you think a DDA wouldn’t file here because of your belief that statements aren’t evidence?
Listen, incompetent derelict, the essence of our court system is for a jury or judge to assess evidence presented, including testimony, which are statements until testified to under oath, and decide who’s telling the truth.
From a more fundamental perspective, why in God’s name would any cop bother to record a statement if it’s not evidence? How would you mind reason “Miranda” if you believe statements are not evidence? Do you even know “Miranda”? Does: “…anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law…” ring a bell in your vacuous head?
JustCurious, if you know evidence, which you don’t, if you know that “Miranda” applies to statements that cops take in the field, you would know just how incompetent you are. For if statements are not evidence, then they’d be no reason for the existence of “Miranda”, & there would be no need for cops to take statements. But since you lack reason & logic skills, you’re completely unable to comprehend these concepts.
Now I have called you incompetent, moron, and a liar. You have proved my assessment of you to be correct. You have no clue of your job. You should be fired for dereliction of duty and gross incompetence.
JustCurious, lying, incompetent, derelict moron liar that you are, do you have any idea how many many arrests I have made having no other evidence but statements? Or where a suspect’s confession was the only catalyst that caused her/his arrest? Lying moron, I know that you would never take a suspect’s confession because you have already repeatedly stated that statements are not evidence, and, using inferential reasoning, you have never given “Miranda” because there’s no need for you to take a suspect’s statements because they’re not evidence. But in hope that you’re brain cells are not irreparably damaged, let me tell you what a lawyer with the OC DA’s office used to tell OC cops, “Bring me anything but bring me a confession (Derelict, that would be a statement.) and I’ll file.”
Incompetent Lying Derelict, I don’t think you’re bright enough to figure this out. The mystery is why in God’s name are you driving a unit. You were Peter Principled before you were potty trained.
Lyring, incompetent, derelict, are you Victorville Cheeseman’s husband? You’re about as dumb as she is.
R
R,
Try playing that same ridiculous and tired message backwards. You never know, along with your dog, your house, and your wife you may get your credibility back. You just don’t know when to quit do you. That’s just sad.
JustCurious, Anonymous, Blase’, et al,
Allow me to suggest your reading the chapter on Statement with the “Clifornia Peace Officers Legal Sourcebook”. That way you’ll know how valuable statements are, even statements that are later proved false. You would be stupid, which you three are, probably Larry, Moe, & Curly, to fail to record lies from a suspect. The reason is that if a suspect lies and you guys have the cerebral ability to prove it, which you guys don’t, s/he is married to that lie.
Keep this in mind, which you guys obviously do not know: if a suspect is good for a crime, anything s/he says about it is either a lie, an admission, or a confession. And there is no doubt in my mind that neither of you know the criteria of the latter two.
You guys are going 10-8 for SBSO because real law enforcement agencies have refused to hire you. All three of you are dangers to citizens of SB county. Like I have written a million times, were I in need of law enforcement service, I’d much prefer CHP respond than SBSO. SBSO kisses off felonies, and most of its deputies don’t have a clue of how to perform the requirements of their jobs.
With SBSO deputies, reason & logic doesn’t come into play.
R
Nearly all SBSO deputies should be expected to read this: http://www.dgs.ca.gov/osp/Programs/CustomerService/CaliforniaPeaceOfficersLegalSourcebook.aspx
However, I’d expect them to argue with lawyers from the AG’s office. That’s the way they roll.
R
Sgt Milstar,
I can’t wait. SBSO NEEDS a sheriff from a real law enforcement agency to clean house. I’d guess 90% of SBSO deputies would be fired if a cop were elected sheriff. That would mean a lot of Wal-Mart & Target applicants.
Take care,
R
JustCurious,
You are Cheeseman’s husband, aren’t you?
R
Your a joke, give it up… Try some new material, it may make you interesting again. Maybe. You have failed miserably, like your career, to convince anyone your worth paying attention to. That must be hard, having no real use. There’s always teaching. You would fit right in. You know what they say about teachers. Those that can’t. You get the picture.
Stay Boring, I mean Safe
Anonymous.
I can only lead a horse to water. Whether you drink from the trough of knowledge is up to you.
Please give me your definition of probable cause to arrest. I doubt if you know it.
R
I’ve taken many courses from the author of this article. I hope clueless SBSO deputies read and gain knowledge from this article: http://www.policemag.com/Channel/Recruit/Articles/Print/Story/2010/05/Understanding-Probable-Cause.aspx
Deputy Dense Derelict, et al,
Paragraph 5 is in direct contradiction of what you derelicts believe: http://www.duicriminallawyermablog.com/?p=80
I’m sure you’ll argue with this lawyer.
R
The simplistic answer is nothing more than the reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime. This, of course, is greater than reasonable suspicion. Lets get into search and seizure, laws of arrest. My favorite subject matter. I would love to beat you down some more.
Anonymous,
The only person you’ve beaten down is yourself.
I haven’t looked at the Legal Sourcebook in better than 10 years, yet I know probable cause and you, as usual, don’t have a clue. Here you go, right off the top of my head: facts and or circumstances that would cause an ordinary and prudent person with your training and expertise to conclude that a crime was committed and the person to be arrested committed it. See, derelicts, nothing in there about courtroom proof! That’s for lawyers to worry about. If you derelict deputies knew your jobs, you would’ve known this definition and your roles in the CJS.
Now you know. God only knows how much schoolin’ I’ve given you derelict deputies! You guys are gunna start thinkin’ I’m the bus driver takin’ you derelicts to school!
R
JustCurious,
Have your wife and you turned in your badges yet?
Blase, Anonymous, your wife, and you are incompetent and derelicts. You exemplify the paucity of professionalism within SBSO. It’s not so much that you guys are beyond stupid, it’s that you’re so freaking stupid that you guys actually think you’re bright. Not only are felons safe in SB county when you guys are 10-8, your incompetence actually encourages crime.
There is no doubt in my mind of why you guys are working for SBSO. But for SBSO, not one of you would have a law enforcement job. I’ll bet that all four of you have tried to lateral, but no other agency would take a risk on either on one of you. Neither one of you are bright enough to work SB City Schools police.
SBSO is the agency of last resort. When NO OTHER law enforcement agency will hire an incompetent derelict, go SBSO. For at SBSO, no knowledge of law enforcement is necessary, and reason & logic do not apply. Just show up, go 10-8, kiss off felonies, and look stupid doing it.
R
The only thing Raisuli may be slightly correct about is the lack of work ethic which seems to be prevalent industry wide within the current generation of up and coming cops, (it’s just a job and sense of entitlement type of attitudes). However, this is a generational issue not specific to just SBSD or law enforcement for that matter.
One of the worst sergeants I EVER worked for denied his deputies discretionary decision making abilities as it related to conducting criminal investigations and said: KIDS,GUNS, DOGS, take a report, each time, every time, minimum. EVERY contact you make should result in an investigation and be dispo’d by making an arrest, no arrest, take a report, if not a report, issue a citation. No citation warranted, fill out an F.I. card. Never walk away from a contact empty handed. Handle every call as if you are going to find the Lindbergh baby. And that was a bad sergeant.
Code 7 should be taken on the hood of your patrol car, not sitting in some gourmet coffee house. reading police one R
R
Do you speak some kind of Alien language? Do you not understand common English? Are you ESL? I do not know how to write any simpler for you to understand. I can not dumb it down anymore than I have. What part of PC did you not understand? Give me your address and I will send you the cliff notes for dummies. Just out of curiosity, you do know that because someone allowed you to pretend to be a cop on the weekends that you were just that, a pretend cop? You do know that right? Seriously, I would have a better chance at teaching an Orange County Jail deputy patrol tactics than a bonehead like you. I haven’t met anyone from Orange County worth a spit unless they lateraled from an outside agency from LA or SB before retiring. They salary in OC is good and the work is elementary. The so called tough areas are what Stanton and county area’s around Santa Ana? Wow, those guys must be hard!!!! I can tell you didn’t even have the sack to work those area’s. Your a premadonna thru and thru. Only a under worked individual like yourself would find the time to convince themselves that their high intellect is what kept them from putting in an honest days work in a truly dangerous area. R, your an Alice, that’s the only true way to describe you. A wannabe. A never was. I truly feel sorry for you and because of that I won’t waist anymore time belittling you. I feel bad for doing it. There is no challenge in it. So I apologize. I should have known you were a victim, I take no pleasure in beating down the weak and pathetic. Good day to you. The floor is all yours, the last word for you. Make it special.
Anonymous,
Thanks for confirming that JustCurious is Victorville Cheeseman’s husband. Between the menage a trois that you morons assuredly are, there’s not one of you with an IQ approaching triple digits. Victorville Cheeseman is good for CPC 31/273d. In essence, she’s a dirt bag in tan and green. She ought to be doing time in PC. But SBSO is the only lop agency where morons like you are able to get a job because no other agency will hire you.
Anonymous, SBSO is the ONLY agency with which you’re able to remained employed. As beyond stupid and possibly 5150 as you are, NO OC agency would ever hire you. You’d know absolutely zero about law enforcement. You didn’t even know the definition of probably cause until I posted it here.
R
Your right, maybe you should learn how to spell it first, then trash talk….. Or is that how you did things in OC, the probably method….
Anonymous,
In Orange County, law enforcement is practiced professionally. I will guarantee you that you would have never completed or will you ever complete any OC agency’s FTO program.
The absolute fact that you’re sententious lies in your admonishing me about spelling after writing, “Your right…” Your is a possessive pronoun. What you were looking for is the contraction of you are, with is you’re.
You have exposed your propensity for dereliction of duty when you proudly wrote about kissing off felonies because you didn’t want to kick a box, which is nothing more than rationalizing dereliction of duty. In OC, you’d be fired for dereliction. Within SBSO, you’re promoted. Only SBSO would hire a lop moron like you would would proudly post on a public forum that he’s a derelict.
Anonymous, has Cheeseman taught you how to kiss off serious child abuse thereby forcing a little girl to be abused at lease an additional FOUR MORE times by her abuser? Cheeseman, like JustCurious, was derelict. She had no idea what evidence was. And ask her to tell you how I coached a little girl who had just turned four to lie on another’s cue. The fact that that moron would have been so secure in her stupidity that she was certain she could include such a ridiculously idiotic opinion that I coached my child to lie in a her report and that her “supervisor” approve it is rock solid proof of SBSO systemic incompetency.
Now keep in mind that the victim told that lop moron, Cheeseman, that she had been repeatedly beaten with a belt by her mommy and that she had a collaborating witness, yet that incompetent derelict said she had no evidence. She, like her equally stupid husband, had no clue that statements are in fact evidence.
Cheeseman is a child abusing dirt bag. Even inmates piss on child abusers, right Cheeseman?
Maybe I ought to hang the moniker on Cheeseman of CAC: Child Abusin’ Cheeseman.
Anonymous, the only moniker that works for you is derelict. You and JustCurious are derelicts. Both of you ought to be fired. All three of you are dangers to others. And you’re assuredly dangers to yourselves since you’re too stupid to realize just how stupid you guys are.
R
R
R,
Your an ass. Hermosa beach last time I checked was in OC. Your a complete idiot who has no idea what they are talking about. I have no idea who or what your talking about with this Cheesehead crap…. they Packers fans? Get your facts straight and your whos who straight before your weak ass tries coming at me. Clearly you think you know something that you don’t. Sorry to inform you that your an idiot, but your an idiot.
hahahha I don’t even know who that is
Here I will post them again for you Ratard I mean Raisulli
California Jury Instructions
Criminal
CALCRIM 104
104. Evidence
You must decide what the facts are in this case. You must use only
the evidence that is presented in the courtroom [or during a jury view]. “Evidence” is the sworn testimony of witnesses, the exhibits admitted into evidence, and anything else I tell you to consider as evidence. The fact that the defendant was arrested, charged with a crime, or brought to trial is not evidence of guilt.
Nothing that the attorneys say is evidence. In their opening statements and closing arguments, the attorneys will discuss the case, but their remarks are not evidence. Their questions are not evidence. Only the witnesses’ answers are evidence. The attorneys’ questions are significant only if they help you understand the witnesses’ answers. Do not assume that something is true just because one of the attorneys asks a question that suggests it is true.
During the trial, the attorneys may object to questions asked of a witness. I will rule on the objections according to the law. If I sustain an objection, the witness will not be permitted to answer, and you must ignore the question. If the witness does not answer, do not guess what the answer might have been or why I ruled as I did. If I order testimony stricken from the record, you must disregard it and must not consider that testimony for any purpose.
You must disregard anything you see or hear when the court is not in session, even if it is done or said by one of the parties or witnesses.
The court reporter is making a record of everything said during the trial. If you decide that it is necessary, you may ask that the court reporter’s notes be read to you. You must accept the court reporter’s notes as accurate.
CALCRIM No. 359 EVIDENCE
The defendant may not be convicted of any crime based on (his/her) out-of-court statement[s] alone. You may only rely on the defendant’s out-of-court statements to convict (him/her) if you conclude that other evidence shows that the charged crime [or a lesser included offense] was committed.
That other evidence may be slight and need only be enough to support a reasonable inference that a crime was committed. The identity of the person who committed the crime [and the degree of the crime] may be proved by the defendant’s statement[s] alone.
You may not convict the defendant unless the People have proved(his/her) guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Justcurious,
It’s painfully obvious R is not a man, but a punk behind a key board. You or I will admit when wrong, clearly he lacks the ability to do so. He thinks that if he says it enough times that we will believe him I guess. I am done with this bozo.
JustCurious,
You have repeatedly declared that statements are not evidence. Let’s take a look at what you have posted:
” “Evidence” is the sworn testimony of witnesses, the exhibits admitted into evidence, and anything else I tell you to consider as evidence.”
Now it’s been firmly established that you’re clueless when it comes to evidence, but reading what you have posted leaves me wondering whether you’re able to comprehend English. Did you get the part that YOU posted about testimony being evidence? You do understand that before testimony is entered into court it known as statements? Is this too deep for you?
You have really exposed just how stupid you are by posting this:
“The defendant may not be convicted of any crime based on (his/her) out-of-court statement[s] alone. You may only rely on the defendant’s out-of-court statements to convict (him/her) if you conclude that other evidence shows that the charged crime [or a lesser included offense] was committed.”
Do you understand the legal concept here? Obviously you don’t as supported by the mere fact that you’re clueless about what happens in a courtroom, which is far, far above your pay grade.
The legal concept is corpus delecti, or body of crime. The prosecution must prove corpus delecti independently of a defendant’s confession, and, now sit down because this is gong to concuss you: corpus delecti can be proved by a victim’s statements alone. Now after corpus delecti has been proved, the a suspect’s confession can be considered. Now, Deputy Derelic, do you have any idea why this PROSECUTORIAL requirement exists? Since you don’t know evidence, since you’re not bright enough to realize that every single thing you have posted obliterates your contention that statements are not evidence.
Get this through your dense head, Deputy Derelict: you will be practicing law without a license if you were to consider jury instructions. You don’t even have a clue how they’re applied. Get thought your dense head, Deputy Derelict, statements and statements alone are sufficient evidence supporting probable cause to arrest.
Dense Deputy Derelict, you are completely devoid of reasoning & logic skills.
Does your head still hurt? Too much thinking???
R
you just cannot wrap your head around it can you..it states Evidence is the SWORN TESTIMONY and again it states “Only the witnesses’ answers are evidence”
Only part I agree with you on is that statements produce probable cause. I’m just referring to your ridiculous 211 scenario…go back to the beach and I hope you don’t step foot in the ghetto because you will be eaten alive…go work your BS crime…Come talk to me when you pull more then 5 DR’s a day ok well how about a week….I will run circles around you out on the street…you were probably the type of cop that no one could stand to be around and would be lucky if you got a back…you seem like a rat and a snitch…I know if you were my partner I would never be helping u out…”Mr holier then thou”
I am about to pull my hair out listening to you guys. Yes R you are right, it is not up to the Deputy/Officer to play the part of the attorney. A good cop will always take a report, no matter how he /she feels about the reporting party and send it to the DA. However, it is up to the the Officer/Deputy to decide if there is enough PC to arrest and book the suspect at the time of the report.
Now that is what is supposed to happen but it seems like SBSD has a problem with doing / taking reports. It most likely has to do with them actually doing some form of work. However, the SBSD has a reputation for arresting and booking people into jail knowing that there was not enough PC to arrest the person and knowing that the DA will not file any of the charges.
Common Man,
“A good cop will always take a report, no matter how he /she feels about the reporting party and send it to the DA”.
Surely if the “good cop” had enough to take paper, ie: all the elements to establish a crime have been met, than surely the Deputy, following all the rules of arrest, would have the PC to make the arrest. People that think “a good cop” takes paper on calls just because the RP wants them to has clearly lost sight of what their function is. It’s not tying up the DA’s office with worthless paper just to pass the buck on a case that clearly doesn’t meet the elements. This started with piss poor supervisors failing to A: stand up for the troops and back his deputies when he or she made the right call and B: failing to train the deputies who failed to recognize when a crime was established……… Supervisors of today are afraid of conflict. Instead of taking the bad apples to task, they rather avoid them and make ridiculous blanket policies that do nothing with correcting the slap dick who was responsible.
SLI is a joke. The reason why officers and deputies try to “cover” a bad call or “lie” about what they did, even over something stupid, is because SGT”s and other low level supervisors forgot their place. Every pin head is so quick to blame the deputies, when the reality is that the failure is clearly theirs (supervisors) . IA is a bunch of douche bag liars covering the inept leadership.
A Sgt, Cpl, Watch Commander is the first line of defense for liability, risk management if you will. The minute officers or deputies are afraid to approach supervisors and say, “hey, I fucked this call up”, is when the check books start opening up. This happens because supervisors are obviously encouraged by this new ignorant, self adsorbed, lying, kingdom building, clueless breed of leadership that by ruining a career of a subordinate instead of teaching and correcting minor “correctable” mistakes is the fastest way to promote.
People make mistakes, that is human. What separates a good leader from a bad one are debatable. In my opinion a leader is someone who recognizes a subordinates short comings and offers correction, not ridicule. Say’s things like “they, he, she” not “I”.
Contrary to R, the first step in fixing the obviously flawed Sheriffs Department is not firing the little people. R is the perfect example of what a leader is not. Beating the boots on streets down and not recognizing who’s responsible for their training, which is where the focus should be, is the perfect example of why things will continue to be screwed up. Hoops is a joke. His successor McMahan is a Joke. Both are liars and poor examples of leaders. They take care of the few, kingdom build, and pass over or run out those with a dissenting opinion or lack the ability to wear knee pads. True reform starts at the top and works its way down…. PERIOD
R
Would you agree that the performance of the deputies is a direct reflection of their supervision and training? There are very few leaders in the Sheriffs department. Unfortunately most of those few leaders that do exist don’t have stripes. The others since retired.
Blase, I agree with you comment, “Hoops is a joke. His successor McMahan is a Joke. Both are liars and poor examples of leaders. They take care of the few, kingdom build, and pass over or run out those with a dissenting opinion or lack the ability to wear knee pads. True reform starts at the top and works its way down…. PERIOD”
I would say the last part is not necessarily true though. The majority opinion at the bottom is that Hoops had run the Dept into the ground. We all know that SEBA has very high political clout in this county especially in choosing the next Sheriff. The problem is that the vote in SEBA is lock step with the high end of the Dept. Deputies, Corporals Sgt’s and even Lt’s need to band together and change the Dept as well using SEBA as the financial arm of that change. The higher end of the Dept will not step out of line with the executive staff. It is up to us to effect the necessary change. That is why this blog is a step in the right direction. It informs people and shows them alternatives. SEBA would take heed to listen to much to the discussion here and make the correct decision to no longer back this leadership through corruption. The last election showed that there are many unhappy people in the dept and those people are willing to back either Averback who is a real joke to be Sheriff or Schrader who was completely unknown. Remember, Hoops only got 60% of the vote. If a sensible candidate were to emerge, the chosen one would not have a chance.
Sgt,
“The problem is that the vote in SEBA is lock step with the high end of the Dept”.
That statement could not be more spot on. Your plan, which is certainly one worth exploring, has one fundamental flaw in my opinion and that is SEBA. Over the years SEBA has lost it’s political clout, most noticeably with the departure of Erwin. With all his faults, one can’t deny the political clout he built SEBA. William “the fat” Abernathie was to SEBA like Hoops is to SBSO. SEBA is so fundamentally corrupted and flawed I would distant myself from them entirely. In all honesty, I am not opposed to a second Union, much like LASO has, primarily because desertification, which is not that hard to do, of a current union is challenging.
Two unions clearly has it’s draw backs for sure. To avoid the complications that 2 unions would bring, the easiest way to restore confidence in SEBA and to get the troops united is clear to me. First and foremost SEBA needs to change its LDF plan to at the very least level II and systematically restructure. Simply put, Maria Blanca, Nancy Tate, and Michael Eagleson need to go as does the law firm of SHS. Sgt, you get that to happen and you can be assured SEBA would be on the right path to recovery, and the department would surely follow….This management under new Union leadership would no longer be able to pick and choose who they will discipline and who they won’t, along with all the other UN-ethicall b.s. it currently get’s away with. Rest assurd, with our without the help of SEBA, that shit’s coming to an end. SEBA can choose to participate and take an active role in reform or it can continue to do nothing and show how truly useless they are.
Stay Safe
@Sgt
I agree with you and Blase’ that, “Hoops is a joke. His successor McMahan (if it happens) is a Joke. Both are liars and poor examples of leaders. …. PERIOD.
SEBA is in lock step with the high end of the Dept. is true. When Hoops ran for sheriff last time, we should have backed Schrader just to let Hoops know he is an ass and we do not back him as deps. sgts. and Lts. We need to make sure we have a sheriff that’s not a player and joke.
I hope Schrader runs again. I talked to him in Fontana when the last election was on and I think SEBA gave him a bad deal. The thing I liked about him is, he did not owe anyone in the executive staff anything. It is up to us to effect the necessary change. I agree that Averback is a real joke. I think Schrader is a sensible candidate but I do not know if he will run. I was told Schrader was at Rancho Station a few weeks ago talking to some deputies, sergeants and lt. smith and others. I hope he is running for sheriff and not Rancho city council.
Has anyone heard if he is running or is anyone else running. I think Hoops is weak and can be beat. We need leadership at our department and it’s not McMahan. If the Board of Supervisors approve any appointment they should be recalled. We need an election if Hoops tries to hand the badge to Mac.
OH I just received a COOL news article from PORAC on the Boros case. Even cooler yet is the article below the Boros case from Silver,Hadden&Silver that really has a glaring message in it about some of the issues discussed on this blog. PRICELESS actually,
If Sharon posts the article I sent her, hopefully you can read for yourself and see some serious DOUBLE STANDARDS by this law firm.
Sgt, and Blase could not be more on target.
I must say, this is the first I have ever heard anything positive about Erwin on this blog. Now granted, he may have his faults, but you are correct that he did put SEBA into the lime light of having “political clout”. Erwin was able to recover SEBA from the damage that Chris Smith has inflected onto the union.
“Beef” was a useless parasite that lived off of Erwin’s gains, while sucking up to the elite who ran the SBSO.
You do have people who are members of SEBA, who could take a stand against the current leadership. All it takes is someone who is ready to retire, to begin the revolt, as he/she would have nothing to loose. They could retire before any action could be taken against them. Any takers out there to the challenge of your life to save the union?
We already know from the last election that with a alternate candidate from within the Sheriff’s office, and an outsider running against the chosen one, they couldn’t beat him. But Hoops only got 60% of the vote!
I will only argue one point with you SgtMilstar.
I saw Chris Smith in action once. He sat next to me at a Board of Chiefs LONG ago, it was another one of their fishing expeditions.
Chris who never mixed words, told the Board how flawed their decisions were on the matter and what he intended to do about it. When done, the matter was dropped.
Chris Smith when SEBA President was the one who FINANCED/SUPPORTED the retaliation lawsuit on behalf of a Sergeant who was retaliated against for arresting Assistant Sheriff Gary Huffs son for DUI. The jury came back 12-0 in favor of the Sergeant. After that verdict a $1.2 million dollar settlement was agreed upon.
Chris Smith was hated by the brass. What does that tell you when compared to Abernathie?
Chris stood up for the troops. If in doing so, some wage and benefit issues slipped by and upset some, OH WELL.
No question Smith had his own style just like Erwin and Abernathie.
Myself, I’ll always defend the obvious warrior when I have seen first hand what they can do. I’ll always join the ranks of the warrior when they have shown what they can and will do.
Smith was a DEPUTY with no aspirations to move up the ladder.
So if Smith was a POS by a majority consensus, I’d like to hear what it was?
Sgt and ACU I agree with both of what you have to say. I have always said that the union president must be someone that is retired and has nothing to lose. Someone that the department does not really care for but has the gonads to do what is right. The best person for this job would be someone that they have gone after and after because of not what they did wrong but how they disliked.
If either of you can think of someone like that please let me know and I would do whatever I can to get that person to take this task on.
And if the new guy at SEBA doesn’t do much other than support the part-time BOS intiative, he too will be in the ranks of USELESS right along with Abernathie,Eagleson, and the SEBA lawyers.
Now if you step back and look at all the money SEBA spent supporting some of those BOS members over the years, now this intiative, all you can say is WTF.
This is wasted money when you look at the big picture.
Interesting how on it’s face SEBA has targeted the BOS for their failure to support their agenda causing grief to many.
You all notice how Hoops and Ramos are still sitting on the sidelines UNTOUCHED for anything they have done?
I bet Ray Charles can see everything quite well.
I can’t remember how many Station staff meetings I attended, where the issue was a ‘Below Standards’ evaluation, and I was ridiculed for suggesting that person’s supervisor should get a below standards evaluation also. If one of your troops is ‘Below Standards’, and the first time he hears about it is in an evaluation, the supervisor isn’t doing their job! Happens all the time at SBSD. Not many Sgt’s, Lt’s or Capt’s get a ‘Below Standards’, but a BUNCH of Deputies do…
Nice one on that Mike,
A below standards evaluation WITHOUT supporting facts and documentation, How many times did someone read it’s the “perception” of the staff. LOL!!!!
And it wasn’t always the perception of staff, it was sometimes the perception of one who ordered it to appear everyone was thinkng there was a problem.
Or the below standards evaluation given to support a bigger agenda? Like an upcoming civil service hearing or something like that.LOL!!!!
I always like attaching my 4 or 5 pages rebuttals to them. Them watch them change the damn thing again.
There are sooooo many interesting points and perspectives here. I’m glad I found this thread. I only clicked the link because I saw it had recent posts… I was expecting a story about someone making a bonehead move… but it clearly evolved in the usual IEPolitics way… lol! This is a great example why we need a better way to communicate as a union membership.
Blase’ wrote: “SEBA is so fundamentally corrupted and flawed I would distant myself from them entirely. In all honesty, I am not opposed to a second Union, much like LASO has, primarily because desertification, which is not that hard to do, of a current union is challenging.”
The LASD union split was an entirely different situation than what we have with SEBA. In 1999, LASPA was started by a few (In my opinion, AWESOME) deputies that were not given the respect they deserved from ALADS. At the time, ALADS seemed to be keeping information away from its members. ALADS would not release financial information and other contractual agreements that the union members were paying for. When the deputies went to ALADS and asked questions, they were blown off… big mistake.
SEBA publishes their financials every month in the Star & Shield Magazine. Every month, each Board member is provided with a detailed statement of all income and expenses. The board members are encouraged to take all information back to their stations for everyone they represent to see.
Splitting our union is not the answer. We must force our union to evolve into what is important to us. If you never voiced your opinion to your station director or anyone in union leadership directly, how can SEBA know what you want? I assure you, not all station directors agree with one another, nor does everyone agree with everything that has ever been done by SEBA. There are people in SEBA now that are shifting the paradigm of the organization. There is strength in numbers – That’s why we have unions.
I too have been guilty of the apathy that runs rampant among SEBA members. For years I questioned things in my head, but never did a thing to find out why decisions were made. I did absolutely nothing to try to understand or change something I didn’t agree with. I have since evolved. – That certainly doesn’t mean I understand or agree with everything now… heck, I have a family and a job to manage just like everyone else. I just wish we had more advocates for us.
The purpose for a labor union is to represent the laborers. If the union moves away from that, they are no longer a labor union – it’s a business… That’s not to say a union can’t do other things to promote the interests of the majority of its members. I encourage all to go to union meetings. They are held on the first Wednesday of every month at noon.
I have posted my naive idealist views here before; I always get a chuckle when the response is that it’s pointless to try to change things because it didn’t work in the past…
None of us truly believe it’s pointless to try to change things. We would not be on a blog reading and typing our opinions if we did. Thanks for reading my thoughts… let the flaming of Boot commence… lol!
P.S. Thank you Sharon for providing a forum for us. Although I don’t agree with the back stabbing trash talk that often gets way out of line here, at least we have a place to read the perspectives of our peers and retort when we want.
Well said Boot.
If you are referring to any of my back stabbing trash, all I can say is my reputation liked or not, is for a frontal assault face to face, diplomatic if possible, but ugly if the first doesn’t work. I’ve played the game both ways until the insults to ones basic intelligence becames to much. I make NO apologies and have NO regrets. Resolve is the key.
Most of what I say is written down, I am happy to report not just by me, but the others I talk trash about. FACTS my friend. Not philisophical rhetoric.
You might remember awhile back where Sharon received a letter from Bill Hadden telling her to pretty much stop talking trash about Abernathie on the blog. Sharon was posting facts about Abernathie from the past, then applied her opinion to everything else based on her experience and knowledge of Abernathies situation, then union affairs.
I WAS the one talking the MOST trash and still am, and WILL. I did not receive a letter from Bill Hadden. I should have been the bigger target in all that. I say bring it on if they think they can keep me quiet. Even if they got a court order in all that, I’d be held in contempt.
But if your paying attention you might ask yourself WHY is that? One with basic investigative skills would know.
I am happy to report that long after I have said what I said, the TRASH continues to pile up on some of those folks at SEBA, and their lawyers too. I am working on getting more FACTUAL information out to those who care.
Just a glimmer of facts lays within the Boros case alone. But there are others who can attest to the Boros case, and their own case to further prove what I have said is ACCURATE. Accurate enough to be of great concern to FUTURE victims of a corrupt union.
We don’t need dozens of cases out there to prove the point. You know the analogy of once a liar always a liar. But if you can throw in several lies, you will win the argument if challenged. So feel free to challenge me and bring the best you have to counter what I say.
If the BOS part-time iniative is the start of things to come, ok, it’s a start. But after spending the money SEBA has to get some of those BOS members elected, now SEBA decides to do what they are, WASTED money. And a tremendous amount when it’s all added up.
As someone said to me the other day, A good idea, for the wrong reasons. This initiative appears to be political retaliation. OKAY!!!!
Just one problem, Neil Derry and Brad Mitizfelt SUPPORTED not messing with safety’s benefits. They will be victims of SEBA’s agenda if the iniative become’s law. So throw two guys under the bus who has been loyal. OKAY not a surprise if you have paid attention.
How about James Ramos if SEBA decides to support him? You will be supporting a part time BOS member? One who without question hangs with the MAFIA, badge wearing and otherwise. Yes I know he is a giving person and has more money than Neil and Brad.
I don’t think I’d mention ALADS in comparison to anything union until SEBA can run with a union such as ALADS just on appearance of “kicking ass” on a bad day.
ALADS can be confrontational more often than not with management. That goes against the grain as both Eagleson and Hadden PRIDE themselves on the NON confrontational approach to dealing with problems. Problem is they can’t show they have kicked butt in the way they do business either. LOL!!! So much for their philisophy.
In fact both bad mouth lawyers who do kick butt and have a STELLAR performance that can be backed up with countless numbers of victories. YOU got anything like that to show SEBA is running with the “big dogs”?
But I agree with you that the members are their own worst nightmare when it comes to voting on something as a MARK the X ballot and sending it back.
But even in defense of that, those fine gentlemen at the SEBA office whether it be a station rep or executive board member still have nothing to show that they are taking care of business that JUST MIGHT motivate one to get involved.
In fact I have some preliminary information on a station rep who might have committed perjury against a SEBA member. Trying to confirm the facts on that.
There still is that glaring rumor floating around that a few aggressive station reps that starting speaking up seemed to have disappeared from the inner ranks of SEBA. Seems their aggressive commentary wasn’t appreciated.
In closing Boot, compare YOUR first comments on this blog to the one that you JUST posted, compare them all. WHAT has changed about YOU?
As always, with all due respect, THANKS for playing!!!!
Laren, I mean Boot, why don’t you start by off by sending the station Reps to formal training. PORAC offers training every year in Vegas for station Reps. Maybe then they will start voicing concerns regarding impartial discipline practices. You should realize that NOT A SINGLE DEPUTY SHERIFF should be fired for anything less than 2 felonies based on management alone. Then lets get into the offspring of Ranking officials who have been CONVICTED OF CRIMES and are still in the field. Some mind you were on probation as Cpl’s, served time in JAIL, and weren’t so much as Demoted. And you are shocked that individuals like Rasuli can run his mouth and unfairly blanket ALL DEPUTIES AS CRIMINALS AND IDIOTS.
EVERYTIME YOU DON’T DO YOUR JOB EVERYBODY LOOKS BAD. MAN UP OR SHUT UP. Sorry, but that’s how I feel. And don’t give me any b.s. about moves and things being done that we may not beaware of because THAT TOO is another problem of in it’s self.
Do your job of the troops first and foremost. Listen to your speech and follow thru. Most important of all,
Stay Safe
I forgot to mention regarding your comment about a better way to communicate. Numerous members have requested a similar style comment section be attached to the SEBA website but as usual the fat ass “Beefanater” shot it down. Try bringing that to the rest of the board again.
Why do you think that was? Clearly because of what you said, a well informed union membership is a dangerous one. Certainly anti SEBA past m.o. with Eagleson and Abernathie. They didn’t want anyone to know the great lengths of b.s. they pulled and who they sold down the river……..
ACU, as long as I have been reading this blog, not once have you attempted to hide who you are or what you feel. I think everyone knows your real name… Major props to you bro! – But not all of us are comfortable putting ourselves out like that. That being said, I don’t regret anything that I have ever posted on here either… By the way, I was not slamming ALADS, I was simply stating why there are two unions in LA.
I do not agree with a lot of what is said on here. I feel that starting or spreading rumors with no foundation or merit is plain wrong. That is not an accusation toward you ACU because I’m sure you believe in what you post. This certainly doesn’t mean I agree with the content, but I usually appreciate everyone’s opinions.
I like the commentary offered by most of the regular posters here. The conversations offer valuable insight into how others perceive actions… Yes, even R (lol! Especially R – man that guy can write!)… I simply don’t agree – most of the time. I believe a large portion of communication is affected by how it is conveyed. Tact and class are often traits lost on internet posts… especially when posted anonymously.
ACU, I don’t feel I’ve changed that much in character since I started posting here, but I have progressed in my life… Because I post anonymously, I’m sure that doesn’t do you any good. Lol, but I don’t hide my opinions and people who know me, know I post as Boot.
Blase’, I assure you I am not Laren. I like that you offer suggestions and solutions instead of simply blasting our union. I agree that our reps would benefit from training. In September of 2011, the board of directors approved a revamp of SEBA’s website that will include an information exchange for members. A committee of board members was put together to develop the site. Unfortunately, I have no idea when it will go live, but it should be within the next couple months. Feel free to call the union and ask about it.
Sorry for totally derailing the topic, but thanks for reading my thoughts.
No Boot, I didn’t think you were blasting ALADS, not for second. I know what you meant.
Well you might not wish to put yourself out like me, but that is a simple addmission to a system that you are scared of. I guess it might be fair to say if there was a union like ALADS around, then folks wouldn’t be so scared to share their views.
You know, retaliate against the troops for speaking up, the department finds itself in court at the blink of an eye. YOU see that with many other unions. A little research will show that is correct. THERE was a time when the brass pushed to hard, Chris Smith was one who said ok, see you in court. The brass backed off. Erwin did once or twice himself.
You might not agree with some of what is said here, but you haven’t offered anything to refute or correct what you don’t believe in or find to be false and without justification. Normally that is based on your short on facts yourself?
As far as rumors go, your beloved bosses feed off them. They create perception without a solid foundation, then attached it to the person and it follows them around. So some of them are simply getting back what they taught us. And of course they don’t accept what they dish out to others very well.
YOUR right you have not changed in character one bit. Consistant as hell. But one who is a union guy, you haven’t come up with anything new to offer those who are bad mouthing the union either. NO change so far as SEBA goes, status quo.
When and if you become a target, you will realize how taking care of business RIGHT now and listening to others who have fought the wars might do you some good.
Now forget about me, WHY don’t you go ask Deputy Boros in a LOW PROFILE way about his case for START to FINISH. See what he thinks about SEBA and what they did. We know the results of his listening to someone who had a different approach to the solutions than you do. SEBA won’t be able to explain that case away and a few others anytime soon.
If your not digging around a little to find out the truth, then you will accomplish NOTHING.
I have listened to views such as yours for years. I would simply say SHOW ME what you have done. Talk is cheap Boot. SEBA is pretty good at that.
I bet more discussion goes into approving golf tournaments than taking care of the troops.
I noticed you didn’t comment on the Derry/Mitizfelt issue. I hope your beloved board of directors are not the ones making a decision to do all that?
Sometimes it’s better to remain anonymous, and thought of as cool among a few, versus stepping out without your ducks in a row and getting hammered. Much like Michael Eagleson did for about two years playing the roll of Publius.
Another blunder that puts little credibility into your philosophy. Add it all up, your still batting ZERO for the most part. Another reason you might be remaining anonymous?
Sorry Boot, those comments were from me. I cleaned out my cookies and erased my screen name.
ACU, I apologize for the delayed response… I just saw you called me out for not answering in the other thread… (Yikes! That was a lot of reading to catch up on!) Lol! – Don’t worry; I knew it was you posting above… I assumed you were being ironical posting as “Anonymous” immediately following my statement that you never try to hide who you are or what you feel…
As usual, you make very good points. I suppose I did not answer because most of your questions seemed rhetorical. I also didn’t think it would be fair; my opinions can not reflect the overall stance of SEBA. SEBA is an organization comprised of many people who collectively decide what SEBA is and does. Although I am a part of SEBA, I am my own person.
The reason I post is to offer insight based on my opinions. I try to explain things I have knowledge about and feel members need to be aware of. I post to clarify and push for member participation.
I agree with you; I am often short on facts and fail to offer counter arguments. I don’t want to argue with you. Although I have never met you, I think I would like you. You are strong at bringing up the injustice people should be paying attention to. My intent is to remind those same people – they can actually do something about it.
Part of the reason I remain anonymous is because I do not want my name to be the focus over of the intent of my message. I’m sure you understand… you make many many good points – but the haters will discount everything simply because who they think you are.
ACU, you go get um and keep hoops wondering. Boot you sure do not want SEBA or others to know your name if they feel you have anything bad to say about them or hoops that will be some junk to put up with. You have brought forward some truth. Keep on bro. We need more deps to air the dept laundry here in the wash. It might help clean house.
” We need more deps to air the dept laundry here in the wash. It might help clean house.”
This would be true in an honest organization. The “bosses” would actually try to change the organization for the better by rooting out corruption. But in a corrupt organization such as ours, the corrupt bosses simply try to root out the whistleblowers on this blog posting their misdeeds. If they were actually intent of finding the cause of all this evil blogging, they would realize this type of thing has been going on since before they were deputies. It just took place in locker rooms. These days,however, we have the Internet age an locker room complaining has moved into the blogosphere.
And as a follow up to my comment above, I know for a fact that several Captains are very unhappy with Hoops, however, as unhappy as they are, they are still more unhappy with us evil bloggers for airing all this dirty laundry. I would suggest to those Captains that this is simply the beginning. Blogging is a fairly new concept and it will only grow. If you feel so strongly about an opinion or position you hold, come on here and defend it or better yet, stand up for yourself. Or you can follow Hoops’ lead and “if you are unhappy, there is the door.”
This is why I have a whole heap load of respect for Captain Nicassio, because he held an opinion, came on here and defended it. I wish he would come back on here and voice that opinion more, one way or the other. Who knows, I hear he will retire soon so maybe we will see more of him. He had much bigger ones than those who simply dismiss the blog as irrelevant. He at least understands that at my estimation at least 60% of the Department reads this blog and it is growing more and more. A few months ago, they put out a TOP regarding blogging and that TOP has direct tie to this blog. They don’t realize that they aren’t going to stop it. The only thing they can do is come on here and defend their position. You can either try to mold the story or let it be molded for you.
What’s a TOP and what did it say?
Admin, Temporary Operating Procedure. I apologize but I don’t have it verbatim. Basically it said don’t go on blogs or social networks and speak about the Department.
And we see how well you all take orders!
I take orders but orders can’t supersede the constitution and I believe we have a right to be on here per our Number One, First Amendment.
Yea, I have the same problem.
Well again Sgt, thank you for that tid bit of information. Seems they cannot live with the truth, even if you tell it behind closed doors, in a politcally correct manner or otherwise.
If they ever set their egos down for a few minutes, they might learn something. Yes I would agree there are a few higher ups that are none to happy with Hoops and others. Past and present regimes should be included.
We know that, because over the years some have expressed that as they were walking out the door themselves. Hmm, the name Cardwell,Johnson,Bieberdorf come to mind. Phil Pounders expressed his concerns to his wife who talked about that openly if you asked her. SOME SAD stuff to hear.
Some of them must be smokin dope to think the stuff they have done would always remain a secret.
Some of them will never know the confessions that have been made to others at some point, confirms what is being said on this blog is just not the everyday employee talking.
The MOST chilling and moving confession I have EVER read was from Sergeant Mike Bayer!!! Some of you will remember him? He passed away several years ago, say around 2003,2004?
A close friend of his was a clerk at Victorville Station. Within a couple days before he died, he wrote a LONG email to her and others, pretty much making a bed side confession asking for forgivness for what he did at the behest of the regime. I AM SERIOUS!!!!
An apology for what he did to others, was ordered to do to others, or felt compelled to do to others in order to survive himself.
I wish I had made a copy of that. I’d post it and let you all read it for yourself. If his words would not send shiffers up your spine, YOU have NO soul.
After reading it, I handed it back to the clerk, shook my head after she said, “isn’t that sad”? It sure as hell moved me.
I know there are a few others that read it.
POUND SAND Paul Cook and others!!!!!!!!!
sgt,
I hate to be the hearer of bad news, but as a sheriff’s employee you don’t enjoy First Amendment rights. If you stand in the stead of the sheriff, which is the definition of deputy, you represent him. Therefore, he can hold you accountable for what you say and write.
An OC sheriff’s lieutenant was disciplined for what he said about the sitting sheriff while he was campaigning. He sued and lost.
I knew a sergeant who got ten days’ off for calling a watch commander weird.
Good luck,
R
Well as someone who has been threatened multiple time by neighbors for doing absolutely nothing, I know for a fact that SB County Sheriff deputies do nothing when it comes to these types of cases. These neighbors have said they are going to break every bone in my body, shoot me, kill me, etc. and nothing ever happens. I now live in a perpetual state of fear, I can’t even step outside to take care of my yard, get the mail, paper, etc. without having my life threatened in someway by these people.
With that said, the police have been out two times in less than 24 hours and all they ever do is say, and I shit you not, “Be a good neighbor and live your life.” How is that helpful or even doing their job? They tell me that in order for them to do anything I have to be physically assaulted by these people. When I ask if it falls under pc 422 they brush that off and say that I have to deal with this in a “civil and adult manner” which is a load of crap. In fact the last officer came out, he made the neighbors the victim instead of me, the one who had to call 911! This officer was a black man who so obviously sided with the black neighbors that are the trouble makers.
A former LAPD detective is the one who told me that this should fall under PC 422 and that SB County Sheriff should be taking these calls seriously. This detective told me to keep everything documented and get all of the incident records in case something does happen to me so that I can prove that I have reported it.
I know this is an old thread but I have no idea what else to do at this point. I apologize for my rambling. Any help would be appreciated.
have you gotten a restraining order?
Sorry for the delay in responding.
That is something that I am thinking of doing but I keep getting contradictory information. The first officer that came out said to try to get one but he doubts that I could get one yet. The second officer, less than 24 hours later, said not to bother with trying to get one.
Supposedly the property management company for these neighbors has already started the eviction process against them, which I found out when I submitted a bill to them for the damage these people have caused to my property. With luck they’ll be out soon and I won’t have to deal with this any longer. I’m going to start looking into a restraining order just in case that doesn’t happen.
Whoknows,
Your LAPD friend is right on the money. It sounds as though Blase responded to your calls and kissed them off because you did not report them within his time frame.
SBSO can turn a murder into a civil problem.
Back in OC
Whoknows and Back in OC – That’s what the second amendment is for. After I have reported the problem to law enforcement and they can not do the job, I just up the ante. The police are here to protect society in general, not be my body guard.