Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Updated of my 9/11 LEO encounter

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    642

    Post imported post

    So you may or may not have noticed that ive been posting here less. I'm trying to keep my posting down to things that I need help with, or that I think could help others.

    Here is whats been going on with the Sunnyvale PD since 9/11/09 during my encounter.

    First, the transcript of my encounter. (Long, but I think its a good read if you havent read it. PS, I do consider myself an activist now)



    September 11 2009

    Text from audio recording during LEO contact, Starbucks on El Camino and Mathilda.



    Odle: Sir! (from about 30 ft behind me)

    Me: (to myself) I just got waved over by a cop, I’m going over to talk to him

    He’s motioned me to stop, it looks like he’s calling for back up

    Odle: who are you with? Is this um open carry?

    Me: yes sir, I’m legally armed, unloaded

    Odle: I’m sorry?

    Me: I’m legally carrying, and its unloaded

    Odle: I understand, is this part of open carry or anything like that?

    Me: um, I frequent the forums, but I don’t consider myself an activist


    Odle: ok, are your weapons loaded

    Me: no

    Odle: they are not?

    Me: no

    Odle: please keep your hand where i can see them. Do you mind if I take a look at your weapons to make sure they are not loaded?

    Me: if you are demanding, that’s alright

    Odle: I’m sorry?

    Me: if you are demanding to look, that is ok

    Odle: no, I’m asking.

    Me: well, only my weapon right?

    Odle: ok,just keep your hands where I can see them. No weird movements (muffled) (walks over) how you doing?

    Me: alright

    Odle: you got everybody a little bit attention, you got everybody’s attention today

    Me: (to myself) three cops visible

    Odle: hey, so, there’s nothing loaded here?

    Me: ammo, clips are loaded, the weapon is not

    Odle: am I being recorded or anything like that?

    Me: audio recorded, yes

    Odle: ok, so you are part of the open carry

    Me: sort of, I’m just kind of going about my business

    Odle: yeah I understand that.

    Lt. Dale: go ahead and pull him and inspect it, verify and then send him on his way

    Odle: ok just keep your hands... what kind of weapon is this

    Me: Glock model 22

    Odle: how do we… (Trying to remove my weapon from my holster)

    Me: Just pull it out.

    Odle: Just straight out? perfect. Anything in the mag?

    Me: nope


    Odle: do you mind if I check the other mags?

    Me: well, they are loaded

    Odle: they are? Ok...alright

    Lt. Dale: (in radio) Sunnyvale 5.1. We’re code 4

    Odle: (to Lt. Dale) Anything you’d like to say boss?

    Lt. Dale: are you part of the group? Are you being taped right now by the way?

    Me: are you?

    Lt. Dale: yeah

    Me: you are being audio recorded, yes

    Lt. Dale: ok, alright, you’ve been thorough this routine several times right? You know what its about. We’re going to FI you, and then you’ll be on your way

    Lt. Dale: (to Odle) go ahead, just step on it

    Odle: would you mind if I checked your ID sir?

    Me: I would prefer that you didn’t actually.

    Odle: ok.

    Lt. Dale: I’m sorry, I missed that, you’re not going to identify yourself to us?

    Me: no sir.

    Lt. Dale: ok, you can identify yourself to us ok. We have legal cause to come in and figure out who you are, alright?

    Me: well, it’s not illegal for me to not identify myself correct? I can’t falsely identify, I’m just declining to identify. I’m not going to lie or anything. I’m not doing anything illegal.

    Lt. Dale: ok (to Odle) go ahead and finish a pat search on him. Have him put out his cigarette.

    Me: is it ok if I put it out on the ground?

    Lt. Dale: yes.

    (I put mycigarette and coffee on the ground)

    Odle: just put your hand behind your back

    Me.: you are going to search me?

    Odle: just a pat search, spread your feet for me, (Odle grabs my hands and starts to search)are you by yourself today?

    Me: Yes.

    Odle: You got a vest on too huh?

    Me: Yup.

    Me: Good? Can I get my coffee?

    Odleto Lt. Dale: Boss, what was the way to circumvent that whole ID thing?

    Lt. Dale to Odle: can I talk to you for a second? (Lt. Dale and Officer Odle go away and get on the phone, leaving me with Lopez)

    Lopez: the magazines are full?

    Me: Yes. That was Lt. Dale?

    Lopez: Excuse me?

    Me: Lt. Dale?

    Lopez: Yes

    Me: And you are Officer Lopez?

    Lopez: Yes

    Me: What was the other officer’s name?

    Lopez: Odle

    Me: What was that?

    Lopez: Odle

    (Lt. Dale and officer Odle are talking on their phones about 30 ft away.)

    Lopez: What kind of gun do you got there?

    Me: Glock 22

    Me: Do you know how much longer this detainment will be?

    Lopez: Not long, they are just clarifying some things.

    Me: I think everything has been clarified right?

    Lopez: what was that?

    Me: everything has been clarified right? Gun’s unloaded.

    Lopez: not yet

    Me: what’s left?

    Lopez:He’s the supervisor, he'll let you know if he has questions.I don’t know what he’s asking.

    Lt. Dale to Odle: (walkingback but still far away)we can 29 the weapon, and then I’ll have, I’ll go into star bucks, ok?

    Me to Lopez: I don’t think he’s actually aloud to check my weapon at this point.

    Lt. Dale: Alright sir, were going to go ahead and run your weapon for registration and make sure that it’s not stolen, and I’m going to go in and see if Starbucks is still comfortable with you being a customer, ok?

    Me: can I say something about that real quick please?

    Lt. Dale: yeah, absolutely

    Me: you only get the chance to run my serial if it comes into plain view while you check my weapon. You can’t investigate again after you’ve already checked it. You can do a 12031(e) check, verify and unloaded weapon, if the serial number comes into plain view and you happen to check it and run it that’s completely within your means, but you’re not allowed toactually search again.

    Lt. Dale: he’s going to search you again, he’s going to search again

    Me: he is going to search me again?

    Lt. Dale: yep

    Me: and you are officer Odle?

    Lt. Dale: officer Odle is going to...

    Me: search my weapon, again. Just to verify the serial number right?

    Odle: Yes

    Me: and a 12031 check has alreadybeen completed?

    (Odle takes my weapon from my belt holster)

    Lt. Dale: Yup. I will be right back (he goes into Starbucks)

    Me: Do you mind if I reach into my pocket and get some literature for you?

    Odle: Hold on.What is this a 40 caliber? (into radio) Sunnyvale, 5.1., 29 check hand gun

    Me: can I get your card please?

    Lopez: we’ll give you all of our names.

    Odle: (it’s going to be by serial number, is a glock model .22, 40 caliber [serialnumber])

    Odle: and you are the registered owner of this?

    Me: I’m going to decline to respond, you don’t have to be the registered owner to carry a firearm.

    Odle: Oh, ok. Just asking.

    Lt. Dale: Ok, Chris the manager, representing Starbuck’s has 86ed you from the premise, as long as you are showing your weapon ok? So if you come back it will be a violation.

    Me: That’s only inside their store?

    Lt. Dale: correct, and whatever property they govern.

    Me: Do you know what that is?

    Lt. Dale: You know what, I imagine they probably have off premise, so probably the tables too. (muffled)

    Lt. Dale: we good?

    Odle: It comes back to [name name and address]12 0 51

    Dispatch: additional information on the weapon (we have a transfer of ownership, dated (date) name, address)

    Odle: five-one, can you ten-twenty-nine him?

    Me: So you guys are now verifying my background as a result…

    Lt. Dale: we don’t know your background

    Me: well you’re verifying that there’s nothing preventing me from owning a weapon based on your 2nd check

    Lt. Dale: what we’redoing is checking on the status of the weapon, we don’t know who you are yet. You haven’t identified yourself; if you had you would have been on your way.

    Me: So because I failed to identify myself, this detainment is taking this long?

    Lt. Dale: Its taking longer than it would, yeah.

    Me: Alright. Do you mind if I give you some literature on this? I was asking if I could reach in my pocket and get this.

    Lt. Dale: I think it’s been handed out. I think our officers have come in contact and this is some of the protocol we are working through right now I guess.

    Me: this is taking longer than it should just to verify that my weapon is unloaded.





    At this point my audio recorder stops recording by accident, the conversation did not last much longer than this. The length of this recording was 11 minutes, 16 seconds. The unrecorded section of this encounter was approximately 3-6 minutes.



    Next is the complaint I sent in: (thanks for the help, you know who you are)



    September 11 2009

    To Whom It May Concern:

    On the morning of September 11, 2009 I was unlawfully detained by several Sunnyvale police officers. I was contacted while a TASER gun was drawn and at the “alert” position, I was detained without reasonable articulable suspicion, I was frisked, and my property was seized on multiple occasions. Numerous Supreme Court Case Laws were violated as well as my constitutionally protected rights to be secure in my person and effects, and to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures.

    Two officers; Lt. Dale and Officer Odle, intentionally committed these unlawful actions. It is unfathomable that the Sunnyvale Police Department employs officers who have sworn to uphold the Constitution and fail to grasp the very basics of what our country has held to be the most important to its people.


    California Penal Code 12031(e) states:






    (e) In order to determine whether or not a firearm is loaded for
    the purpose of enforcing this section, peace officers are authorized
    to examine any firearm carried by anyone on his or her person or in a
    vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an
    incorporated city or prohibited area of an unincorporated territory.
    Refusal to allow a peace officer to inspect a firearm pursuant to
    this section constitutes probable cause for arrest for violation of
    this section.




    This statute does not allow for the serial number of the firearm in question to be run. It merely allows for a cursory check to see if the gun has a round in the chamber or any rounds in an inserted magazine. Any competent person familiar with firearms can perform this check in less than 10 seconds. By needlessly detaining me beyond the examination of my firearm, my person was unlawfully seized, a clear violation of the fourth amendment.

    In Coolidge vs. New Hampshire, the Supreme Court explained when evidence which came in to "plain view" could be used. The court held that, "Under certain circumstances, the police may, without a warrant seize, evidence in 'plain view,' though not for that reason alone, and only when the discovery of the evidence is inadvertent." Your officers explained to me, in no uncertain terms, that they were seizing my firearm a second time for the sole purpose of running the serial numbers. This clearly violates the guidelines set out in Coolidge.

    In a later case, Arizona vs. Hicks, the court put even stricter guidelines on the "plain view" doctrine. The Supreme Court ruling stated that, "Probable cause is required to invoke the 'plain view' doctrine as it applies to seizures." In my case, not only was there no probable cause, but there wasn't even reasonable suspicion. I explained to the officers in question that they were not within their rights to run the serial number of my sidearm, my complaints went unheard. These officers clearly have violated this guideline of the Supreme Court as well.

    As you may know, California at one time had a "stop and identify" statute, but it was declared unconstitutionally vague in Kolender v. Lawson. Since that time citizens in California who are not operating a motor vehicle cannot be compelled to identify themselves. In Brown v. Texas, the Supreme Court held that, despite the fact that Texas had a stop and identify statute, "The application of the Texas statute to detain appellant and require him to identify himself violated the Fourth Amendment because the officers lacked any reasonable suspicion to believe that appellant was engaged or had engaged in criminal conduct." Once again, since these officers lacked reasonable suspicion, they violated this guideline of the Supreme Court.

    When these officers searched me for weapons, they did so without having reasonable suspicion that I had or was about to commit a crime. In Terry vs. Ohio the Supreme Court ruled that a police officer could perform an exterior search of a person's clothes provided that the officer had reasonable articulable suspicion. Your officers searched me without reasonable suspicion, clearly violating the Supreme Court's guidelines.

    These court rulings are not new or obscure; they are well-established and widely known. With the multitude of flagrant fourth amendment violations, I would undoubtedly prevail in a 42 USC 1983 complaint against these officers and the Sunnyvale Police Department. Without severe punishment against these officers, I fail to see how Sunnyvale Police Department can continue to perform its duties in an ethical manner. I am a lawful, peaceful citizen. I demand that steps be taken to prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future.


    Sincerely,

    [size=][/size]



    --------------------







    so, today, 2 months and 2 days later, i get a response: (dont feel like scanning it, im gonna type it out)



    Dear ------------------:

    On September 11, 2209, you filed an inquiry concerning the policies and procedures of the City of Sunnyvale, Department of Public Safety. i have thoroughly reviewed the incident concerning your inquiry and found the officers were following the policies and procedures set in place at the time and tehre was no misconduct on their part.



    Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. The Department of Public Safety is committed to providing the highest quality police and fire services to our community. In order to be responsive to the needs of the community, citizens input is essential.



    Should you have any questions regarding the inquiry and/or the subsequent findings, please feel free to contact my office at (408) 123-4567.



    Sincerley,



    blah






    When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member MudCamper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sebastopol, California, USA
    Posts
    710

    Post imported post

    Their response letter states, "the officers were following the policies and procedures set in place at the time", but this seems to contradict their own open carry memo. Was that memo a result of this encounter?

  3. #3
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    Speaking of Sunnyvale PD, here is an interesting link. It appears they got your message. The date of this memo is 7 days after your letter was sent in.

    http://www.opencarryradio.com/docume..._18_Sep_09.pdf

    :celebrate
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The rights existence is all the reason he needs.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    "Hoity-toity" Palo Alto, California, USA
    Posts
    103

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the update and all the hard work DK!

  5. #5
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    Gundude wrote:
    Speaking of Sunnyvale PD, here is an interesting link. It appears they got your message. The date of this memo is 7 days after your letter was sent in.

    http://www.opencarryradio.com/docume..._18_Sep_09.pdf

    :celebrate
    In this memo, they mention thatsupervisor/officer should have a voice recorder and an MVAR. Does anyone know what a MVAR is?
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The rights existence is all the reason he needs.

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    MVAR usually is an electrical engineering term, so i doubt that's what they're talking about.

    More likely MVAR is an acronym for something else. My best guess is it's their computer-aided dispatch log (i believe some systems even time-stamp and record comms).
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    MVAR usually is an electrical engineering term, so i doubt that's what they're talking about.

    More likely MVAR is an acronym for something else. My best guess is it's their computer-aided dispatch log (i believe some systems even time-stamp and record comms).
    M*** voice actuated recorder is my best guess.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The rights existence is all the reason he needs.

  8. #8
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    dirtykoala wrote:
    i have thoroughly reviewed the incident concerning your inquiry and found the officers were following the policies and procedures set in place at the time and tehre was no misconduct on their part.
    Maybe they're thinking that since they screwed up so badly that they'd rather claim they did nothing wrong to avoid a lawsuit. If they claim that they screwed up maybe they'd be afraid you'd press charges? Doesn't make any sense to me though, we already know that they screwed up.

    We documented everything they did wrong, gave citations for everything, and they basically just said that everything we said was incorrect. No citations needed. No attempt to explain their position. Apparently their position is that they can ignore the Supreme Court's rulings.

    Makes me sick.

    I'm still for filing a lawsuit. They think they're on the up and up? Let's see how the courts feel about their gross constitutional violations.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    San Jose, California, USA
    Posts
    108

    Post imported post

    Gundude wrote:
    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    MVAR usually is an electrical engineering term, so i doubt that's what they're talking about.

    More likely MVAR is an acronym for something else. My best guess is it's their computer-aided dispatch log (i believe some systems even time-stamp and record comms).
    M*** voice actuated recorder is my best guess.
    Mobile Voice Actuated Recorder???

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    560

    Post imported post

    Well, you asked nicely for them to address the issue, they blew it off. Perhaps having a lawyer ask nicely, by way of a judge, should be given reasonable consideration.

  11. #11
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bad_ace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Cupertino, California, USA
    Posts
    328

    Post imported post

    MVAR = mobile video audio recording

    http://www.sunnyvale.ca.gov/reports/1998-03/98-101.html

    San Jose is the test bed for a video version of this system that has a camera in the sunglasses of the officer. The clincher, though the recordings are kept in a tamper proof box so the officers can destroy evidence, the camera can be turned off at the whim of the officer.

  12. #12
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Sons of Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Riverside, California, USA
    Posts
    638

    Post imported post

    File a complaint against the department and officers with the FBI for civil rights violations.
    Clinging to God & Guns: The Constitution Restoration Project

  13. #13
    Regular Member demnogis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orange County, California, USA
    Posts
    912

    Post imported post

    Hey dirtykoala, if you find a good lawyer that will work on contingency, icould use help with my local pd.
    Gun control isn't about guns -- it is about control.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Saint Paris, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    346

    Post imported post

    Can they articulate a reasonable suspicion that you had committed a crime?



    A police officer can only detain you if at least one of the following is true:



    1. He has reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS) you committed a crime.

    2. He has RAS you are currently committing a crime.

    3. He has RAS you are about to commit a crime.



    What crime did they suspect you were committing? Carrying a gun is not a crime.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    My blood pressure is going through the roof right now just reading this story. The fact that these cops are so incapable of knowing even the most basic of laws is absolutely amazing.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    pullnshoot25 wrote:
    My blood pressure is going through the roof right now just reading this story. The fact that these cops are so incapable of knowing even the most basic of laws is absolutely amazing.
    It was probably part of their policies and procedures to pretend they didn't know the law to maximize the time law-abiding gun owners were deprived of their liberty. Government employees can get away with almost anything if they act like idiots.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    San Jose, California, USA
    Posts
    108

    Post imported post

    maybe they will claim ignorance...

  18. #18
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602

    Post imported post

    SouthBayr wrote:
    maybe they will claim ignorance...
    Should have filed an FOIA request for all reports, field notes and electronic communications regarding this incident.

    Sunnydale PD did not respond to your stated violations - would not have expected them to since that would have been an admission of guilt.

    They attempted to CYA themselves by side stepping the issues and hope that you will drop the matter. Suggest that you can still submit FOIA and get most of the information, then contact an attorney.

    It is a pity the "them vs us" attitude expressed in their memo. Sure hope none of the Sunnydale PD moves to Virginia, they'll have a needless heart attack.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  19. #19
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    Grapeshot wrote:
    Should have filed an FOIA request for all reports, field notes and electronic communications regarding this incident.
    A FOIA request was put in, and documents are in our possession. It's a damn good thing that FOIA-type requests exist, it helps to keep our government somewhat in check.

  20. #20
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Sons of Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Riverside, California, USA
    Posts
    638

    Post imported post

    It's amazing what little "pearls" come fromFOIA requests.

    Check this video out on an "open carry" stop in Michigan:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-fAjBy5vIQ

    At 6 minutes and 23 seconds into the video, the LEO states, "I'd rather violate his little rights of carrying a gun..."

    Confession caught on tape!
    Clinging to God & Guns: The Constitution Restoration Project

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    642

    Post imported post

    hey,I was gone for the weekend.

    what bothers me most about the response letter is that they didnt even try to address the complaint. my complaint was for rights violations, the PD responds with some crap about their policy. I didnt say anything about their policy, because I KNOW that it follows state law (KNEW). What this letter tells me is that they did not do anything against policies that were in place at the time, but they did violate constitutional rights. This is to say that they had/have policies in place that violated constitutional rights?

    Maybe this is something that the FBI would be better able to address for me.


    When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Sons of Liberty wrote:
    It's amazing what little "pearls" come fromFOIA requests.

    Check this video out on an "open carry" stop in Michigan:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-fAjBy5vIQ

    At 6 minutes and 23 seconds into the video, the LEO states, "I'd rather violate his little rights of carrying a gun..."

    Confession caught on tape!
    Lemme guess, that confession to treason went nowhere near the ultimate penalty for such.

  23. #23
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    N6ATF wrote:
    Sons of Liberty wrote:
    It's amazing what little "pearls" come fromFOIA requests.

    Check this video out on an "open carry" stop in Michigan:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-fAjBy5vIQ

    At 6 minutes and 23 seconds into the video, the LEO states, "I'd rather violate his little rights of carrying a gun..."

    Confession caught on tape!
    Lemme guess, that confession to treason went nowhere near the ultimate penalty for such.
    Worse. The copdidn't even get the correct Amendment.

    If anything, it was the Fourth Amendment (search and seizure).

    Says a lot about the police in that burg when one of them can't even name the correct Amendment.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  24. #24
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    dirtykoala wrote:
    Maybe this is something that the FBI would be better able to address for me.

    Doesn't take much time to mail a copy of your complaint to the local FBI field office. If nothing else, it's an excellent way to document your incident in case of future harassment by the same department.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    L.A. County, California, USA
    Posts
    149

    Post imported post

    dirtykoala wrote:
    Snip...
    Dear ------------------:

    On September 11, 2209, you filed an inquiry concerning the policies and procedures of the City of Sunnyvale, Department of Public Safety. i have thoroughly reviewed the incident concerning your inquiry and found the officers were following the policies and procedures set in place at the time and tehre was no misconduct on their part. ... Snip

    Sincerley,

    blah
    So, you have it in writing that they just followed their "policies and procedures". Prove, in court (or to the FBI) that those policies and procedures are a willful Constitutional violation(pretty much a slam dunk) , and you have a winner...

    Hopefully you can pursue this. Their actions need to stop. And, if possible, make them pay big time. It truly is the only effective means that will get them to stop. That includes the City, the P.D., the management at the P.D. (who are in charge of the "policies & procedures") and the officers themselves who can't be bothered with knowing the laws they are charged with enforcing. It's disgraceful.




Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •