• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

FOIA gone wild! Richmond PD honors FOIA records request; Chief wants them all back

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Holy Wingnut, Batman:

Richmond police sue anarchist for documents

Richmond's police chief has gone to court to recover some of the hundreds of pages of documents turned over to an anarchist group and now posted on the Internet.

In a complaint filed Tuesday in Richmond Circuit Court, Chief Bryan T. Norwood contends that Mo Karn, "a known and admitted anarchist," was given documents that were not required to be released under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act.

"In the present circumstances, the dissemination of these documents in any form to the public jeopardizes and endangers Richmond police officers and citizens," Norwood said in the complaint. "Specifically, this information includes tactical plans for what police do in emergency situations."

...

Megan H. Rhyne, executive director of the nonprofit Virginia Coalition for Open Government, said the police department faces a steep challenge because much of the Freedom of Information Act gives the custodian discretion over whether to release a record that may be withheld.

"You can't put the genie back in the bottle," Rhyne said.

The Genie really is out of the bottle. Richmond Copwatch has provided a wealth of information on official Richmond PD policies:

Richmond Police Department Documents

Please note: not all documents have yet been posted. Of serious interest would be any official or unofficial policy on how officers shall respond to any MWAG complaints.

The ACLU-VA will fight to defend the FOIA request:

ACLU to Defend Right to Keep and Publish Documents Obtained through FOIA

The link also includes the Richmond legal papers demanding the return of all the FOIA'd documents.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
This is good stuff.

I hope it gets mirrored a thousand places.

We the PEOPLE have a right to know how our EMPLOYEES are being instructed to behave under ALL CIRCUMSTANCES.
 

kenny

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
635
Location
Richmond Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
Nothing there to write home about. It is all just Standard Operating Procedure. Most of the stuff I have read through is just normal everyday practices. Police Officers are just like everybody else, sometimes you have to have it in writing to remember everything.
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Nothing there to write home about. It is all just Standard Operating Procedure. Most of the stuff I have read through is just normal everyday practices. Police Officers are just like everybody else, sometimes you have to have it in writing to remember everything.

Actually, there is a lot of good stuff there. And there's more policy/procedure posted that Repeater did not provide the links to.

What's the best stuff is that this whole thing points out is that 1) the left hand does not know what the right hand is thinking, 2) there is a lack of proofreading being done before policies/procedures are committed to print, 3) the RPD has trouble understanding the law as it is written, 4) the RPD wants to be allowed to cover up a major lapse in behavior by claiming legal protection that they are not entitled to, and most egregious of all 5) they are willing to use name-calling as the basis for attempting to supress the rights of a citizen of the City and Commonwealth. I'm not going to get into the lapses/omissions/failures to complete the description of a chain of tasks that show up repeatedly in the published documents.

If the Chief is bent out of shape that his underling released stuff without first passing it by him for final approval, then he ought to deal with that through personnel administration avenues. And perhaps by clearly informing his underling of the desire to have the final say (don't know if he did or not, but there is a lot to suggest he did not).

stay safe.

Edited to add: Kenny, we may need it in writing in order to be able to remember it, but the RPD needs it in writing to comply with the law, comply with agency accreditation, and to address legal liability reasons. I'm flabbergasted at myself for not having noticed your comment and addressing it in my first paragraph.
 
Last edited:

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Great Analysis!

Actually, there is a lot of good stuff there. And there's more policy/procedure posted that Repeater did not provide the links to.

What's the best stuff is that this whole thing points out is that 1) the left hand does not know what the right hand is thinking, 2) there is a lack of proofreading being done before policies/procedures are committed to print, 3) the RPD has trouble understanding the law as it is written, 4) the RPD wants to be allowed to cover up a major lapse in behavior by claiming legal protection that they are not entitled to, and most egregious of all 5) they are willing to use name-calling as the basis for attempting to supress the rights of a citizen of the City and Commonwealth. I'm not going to get into the lapses/omissions/failures to complete the description of a chain of tasks that show up repeatedly in the published documents.

If the Chief is bent out of shape that his underling released stuff without first passing it by him for final approval, then he ought to deal with that through personnel administration avenues. And perhaps by clearly informing his underling of the desire to have the final say (don't know if he did or not, but there is a lot to suggest he did not).

stay safe.

This is Spot-On analysis. I highlighted #3, "The RPD has trouble understanding the law as it is written ..."

That's scary!

There seems to be (so far) no policy on handling citizens with guns. It seems an official policy that instructs officers on the lawful, professional ways of handling citizens who carry, especially OPEN carry, is essential.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
I'm afraid the Chief may have a little trouble getting those back:lol::lol::lol:
 

nuc65

Activist Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
1,121
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
This is Spot-On analysis. I highlighted #3, "The RPD has trouble understanding the law as it is written ..."

That's scary!

There seems to be (so far) no policy on handling citizens with guns. It seems an official policy that instructs officers on the lawful, professional ways of handling citizens who carry, especially OPEN carry, is essential.

It seems that Richmond police may arrest for brandishing a firearm after the fact, in the Constitutional Rights section under, when officer can arrest for a misdemeanor crime not committed in his presence
 

FreeRoy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
23
Location
Petersburg/Richmond, Virginia, USA
RPD & armed citizens

This is Spot-On analysis. I highlighted #3, "The RPD has trouble understanding the law as it is written ..."

That's scary!

There seems to be (so far) no policy on handling citizens with guns. It seems an official policy that instructs officers on the lawful, professional ways of handling citizens who carry, especially OPEN carry, is essential.

AMEN to that, brother!
I have talked at length with the RPD counsel about my illegal detention for open-carrying while consuming a beer, and she has assured me that the Chief is willing to send me a letter of apology. Then we had to move, and in the ensuing confusion documents have been mislaid. Hope that this contretemps does not jeapordise that offer.
 
Last edited:

ProShooter

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
4,663
Location
www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
I remember one time, with a department that I worked for, we were issued policy manuals.

When the administration wasn't following its own policies, and they were called on it, they collected all of the manuals.

"Too hard to maintain and too costly to keep up with" was the reason.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
I remember one time, with a department that I worked for, we were issued policy manuals.

When the administration wasn't following its own policies, and they were called on it, they collected all of the manuals.

"Too hard to maintain and too costly to keep up with" was the reason.
Maybe we should push for a requirement that all LE agencies be ISO 9000 certified... It is a Quality Management process which essentially implements "say what you do, then do what you say" sorts of accountability in all major aspects of how you do your job.

Needless to say, a department which recalls the policy manual would not pass...

TFred
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
AMEN to that, brother!
I have talked at length with the RPD counsel about my illegal detention for open-carrying while consuming a beer, and she has assured me that the Chief is willing to send me a letter of apology. Then we had to move, and in the ensuing confusion documents have been mislaid. Hope that this contretemps does not jeapordise that offer.

They should be able to cross reference is by your name to find your file folder and probably from your picture too. :lol:

Seriously, I would pursue that.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
I found it interesting that the department [feels it] has the authority to mandate off-duty carry, caliber and even brand of ammunition.

Hilarious... Sad and hilarious.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Maybe we should push for a requirement that all LE agencies be ISO 9000 certified... It is a Quality Management process which essentially implements "say what you do, then do what you say" sorts of accountability in all major aspects of how you do your job.

Needless to say, a department which recalls the policy manual would not pass...

TFred

I'm not sure about ISO 9000, but DCJS requires certain levels of policy/procedure, and then national accreditation requires certain levels of policy/procedure. When you can get the 4th Circuit to admit to it, qualified immunity goes out the window when you show that the cop knew better because they 1) were trained and 2) signed off on the policy itself as having read & understood it. #1 & #2 are required for accreditation. A police force that does not meet DCJS minimums is asking for lawsuits.

stay safe.
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Alcoholic beverages?

I found it interesting that the department [feels it] has the authority to mandate off-duty carry, caliber and even brand of ammunition.

Hilarious... Sad and hilarious.

I find the absence of an 'Alcoholic Beverages' policy within the 'Police Weapons' General Order interesting. Hard to know what that means. Does it mean an officer may carry and consume while on duty? While off duty?

Maybe cops and alcohol don't mix. Just wondering.
 
Top