Baltimore settlements on police brutality more restrictive than in other cities

By Mark Puente The Baltimore Sun

When Baltimore residents settle lawsuits alleging police brutality or other misconduct, they must promise to keep silent about the incidents that sparked the suits — an arrangement that shields key details from the public. The penalty for disobeying: Lawyers for the city may try to recoup tens of thousands of dollars from the settlement..

But many other cities — including Washington, Philadelphia and Las Vegas — have rejected the use of such confidentiality clauses in an effort to increase the transparency of government operations.

"The plaintiff can publicly discuss the case — no restrictions," Ted Gest, spokesman for the attorney general's office in Washington D.C., said as he described that city's policy.

Jeffrey Furbee, assistant city attorney in Columbus, Ohio, said such clauses in public lawsuits "would be illegal. We are an open-records state."

Baltimore's standard settlement agreement has drawn criticism from defense lawyers and some city officials after it was highlighted in an investigation by The Baltimore Sun. The investigation revealed the city spent $5.7 million on 102 court judgments and settlements for alleged police misconduct since 2011, and critics said the nondisparagement clause helped keep the scope of misconduct allegations from becoming widely known. The clause states that limitations on "public statements shall include a prohibition in discussing any facts or allegations … with the news media," except to say the suit has been settled.

In recent years, a wide range of residents have settled civil suits for significant amounts. For example, an 87-year-old woman who alleged that an officer shoved her against a wall received $95,000. A pregnant accountant was awarded $125,000 after alleging that an encounter with an officer left her facedown — bleeding and bruised — on a sidewalk. In those and other settlements, the city and officers do not acknowledge any wrongdoing.

But the risks of violating terms of the agreement became clear in October, when city lawyers cut the amount of another settlement. They withheld $31,500 — about half the settlement — from a woman who had posted online comments about her allegations of police brutality.

Since The Sun's investigation was published in September, the Police Department and city have taken steps to provide more information about misconduct allegations. For example, city officials began posting the outcomes of all civil lawsuits alleging police brutality and vowed to give the city spending board more details about proposed settlements.

City Solicitor George Nilson also said his department would reconsider the policy of requiring plaintiffs to keep silent after settlements are reached, and pledged to determine whether the nondisparagement clause is consistent with best practices. City lawyers could not say how long it has been used in Baltimore.

Previously, city lawyers told The Sun that the clause is common in legal settlements.

"We don't want to pay taxpayers' money and then have people saying things that they couldn't say in court. Some facts are hotly disputed," David Ralph, deputy city solicitor, said last summer in addressing questions about the settlements.

Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake expects to have results from the law department's best-practices study sometime in January. Her spokesman said the mayor will eliminate the clause if it is a bad policy.

"The mayor looks forward to getting the law department's report to see if there are additional ways to bring more transparency to the process," Kevin Harris said. He added, "You don't order studies and be afraid of the results."

Clauses preventing public discussion of such settlements are common in the private sector, where they are seen as a tool to help resolve cases in which no one is admitting wrongdoing. But critics say they should not be part of cases settled using taxpayers' money. As the General Assembly's 2015 session nears, some lawmakers said Maryland should consider a law banning nondisparagement clauses in settlements for police misconduct.

"If settlements are paid with public money, there shouldn't be a confidentiality clause," said Del. Curt Anderson, a Democrat who chairs Baltimore's House delegation in Annapolis and a proponent of bringing more transparency to police issues. "I would clearly agree with a law that would ban that clause in any agreement with public dollars."

State Sen. Bill Ferguson, a Baltimore Democrat, said transparency is the best "disinfectant" in lawsuits that involve public funds. Banning the clause in police misconduct lawsuits makes sense, he added.

 "That would be a positive step to make [misconduct] go away," he said. "We should learn from other cities."

Del. Jill P. Carter, who has already pledged to propose changing a state law that guarantees procedural protections for officers accused of misconduct, agreed. "It's something we should explore," she said about enacting a new law.

In October, Baltimore Police Commissioner Anthony W. Batts asked the U.S. Department of Justice to review his agency and help with reforms. He praised similar efforts in Las Vegas and Philadelphia. Those cities underwent federal reviews to stem excessive-force cases after paying millions in recent years to settle lawsuits.

In 1991, long before the Las Vegas review began, Nevada lawmakers banned any confidentiality connected to lawsuits settled with public money. At the time, some public agencies were shielding names and settlement amounts, records show.

"We don't do that here," Clark County counsel Mary Miller said about making residents remain silent when settling lawsuits with Las Vegas police.

A similar policy exists 90 miles north of Baltimore.

"The city cannot ask forconfidentiality in settlements," said Officer Jillian Russell, Philadelphia police spokeswoman. "It is an open public record under our state statute."

 Mark McDonald, spokesman for Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, said the city does not expect residents to remain silent after settling police lawsuits. Even "if we wanted to, we could not" enforce an agreement, he added.

Since officials announced the federal review in Baltimore, Ronald L. Davis, the Justice Department's director of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, said police departments need to be open, transparent, accountable and engaging to be reformed.

City officials are aware that one of the Justice Department's objectives is openness, Harris said, but he stressed that Rawlings-Blake didn't want to make a rash decision to eliminate the nondisclosure clause without researching the topic. He also noted the city's decision last month to begin posting online the outcomes of all civil lawsuits alleging police brutality.

But a month earlier, the city took a hard line on Ashley Overbey's settlement. The woman from Northeast Baltimore lost $31,500 of her $63,000 settlement for defending herself in online comments about her allegations of brutality.

Not long after the city's spending board approved the payment in September, anonymous online commenters accused the 27-year-old of initiating her arrest to get a big payout.

lRelated Chicago-based firm to lead federal review of Baltimore policeBaltimore Crime BeatChicago-based firm to lead federal review of Baltimore policeSee all relatedí

Overbey, who doesn't have a criminal record, replied online that people should learn the facts before commenting. She accused three officers of beating her after she reported a burglary in her home in April 2012. She described the incident online, mirroring statements in her lawsuit.

Simone Mollock, Overbey's attorney, said it's "outrageous" that the city still won't release the $31,500. She is skeptical that the city will reform the settlement process for police lawsuits.

"I don't believe it for a minute," she said. "We have no transparency."

City Council President Bernard C. "Jack" Young, said he favors eliminating the nondisparagement clause from settlements. "A person should be allowed to talk about what happened to them. I would like to hear all of [the facts] myself."

Baltimore County has no official policy on nondisparagement clauses. County lawyers have leeway when brokering settlements and don't use the same boilerplate language in every case.

Since 2011, the county has paid $1.5 million to settle 13 lawsuits against officers.

A $12,000 payout in 2012 required Veleta Harris to keep terms of her settlement confidential. Harris, who sued police for being detained for 45 minutes, could discuss the settlement with members of her immediate family. But if asked about it publicly or with the media, she could only say the lawsuit "has been resolved and all claims have been dismissed with prejudice," the agreement states. She would have to pay $2,500 for each violation of the agreement.

Odatei Mills, who collected $1 million in 2013 after being shot by police, also was required to keep settlement terms confidential. But the agreement did not contain the clause allowing the county to recoup money if Mills talked publicly, records show.

County Attorney Mike Field said it's up to each lawyer to negotiate the terms of a settlement, subject to the approval of supervisors. "The differences are largely a function of the way we run this office," he said in a statement.

Field said he could not recall ever enforcing terms of a settlement to recoup money.

The county doesn't list settlement payouts in any publicly posted record or meeting agenda. But Field quickly provided documents when The Sun sought them in November.

Field, who has been handling Public Information Act requests for 10 years, couldn't recall anyone seeking the records but said the county "would, in most cases, have to disclose them," if requested.

But unlike in Baltimore, where the Board of Estimates approves payments higher than $25,000, in the county an administrative officer or a finance director approves payments without public discussion.

"This makes us very nimble and is especially useful when we are downtown in federal mediation and have arrived at an agreement that works for all sides," Field said.

Jennifer Bevan-Dangel, director of the watchdog group Common Cause Maryland, scoffed at that explanation.

The anger spreading across the country over police brutality — after the officer-involved deaths of Michael Brown in Missouri, Eric Garner in New York City and Tamir Rice in Cleveland — shows the need for increased transparency in policing, she said.

Bevan-Dangel urged Baltimore County to start making the records accessible to the public. Not doing so only raises suspicions, she added.

"People need to be able to see a pattern," Bevan-Dangel said. "Keeping it all hidden creates a sense of distrust."

Yet another cop molests another child and the federal government won't address this national issue

 A Dalton police officer was arrested for child molestation on Thursday.

By Rodney Harris

Officer Daniel Tolbert was arrested by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation shortly after 5 p.m., according to authorities.

The circumstances surrounding the child molestation charge were not immediately made available.

The Dalton Police Department placed Tolbert on administrative leave nine days prior to his arrest after being told about the investigation by the GBI and Whitfield County Sheriff's Office.

Dalton police said Tolbert was still training after being sworn in on Sept. 16, 2014.

The department said that it would start the process for Tolbert's termination immediately.

"I am very disappointed to hear about this allegation, and upset about the discredit this will surely bring on our department, and officers," said Dalton Police Chief Jason Parker.

"We would never condone or support the kind of behavior that would warrant this charge. The men and women of this department hold ourselves to a very high standard of behavior, and we know the community we serve expects our behavior to be beyond reproach."

POLICING IS NOT WAR

JOHN GARVEY

Sometimes, though, I wonder whether we aren't making the mistake of importing martial attitudes into the morally more complex work of policing.

When a nation goes to war, it is a common practice to dehumanize the enemy. When I was a young man and World War II was still a recent memory, I spent time in Paris and Normandy. I remember the vehemence with which French people my parents' age spoke about "les Boches," a disparaging term for Germans.

Americans held similar attitudes during that war. The U.S. Army produced crude posters about how to identify "Japs," and even encouraged recycling with phrases like "Give scrap to kill a Jap."

Perhaps this kind of ethnic reductionism serves a purpose. When we ask people to make great sacrifices, as we do in wars, it helps to eliminate moral ambiguity. Wartime propaganda shows our side as good and the enemy as evil.

Sometimes, though, I wonder whether we aren't making the mistake of importing martial attitudes into the morally more complex work of policing. I don't just mean the use of military-style equipment, but the very idea of police work as a version of war.

President Lyndon Johnson declared a "war on crime" in 1966. President Richard Nixon declared a "war on drugs" in 1971. President George W. Bush declared a "war on terror" after 9/11. And as President Barack Obama winds down an overseas war, something the Department of Defense calls the "1033 program" is delivering billions in surplus military equipment to local police departments.

The thing is, the people of Ferguson, Missouri; Staten Island, New York; and Cleveland are not the enemy. A few are bad actors who belong in jail, but even they are not the enemy. They are citizens of the same community as the police. They don't wear uniforms that mark them as lawful combatants. Even when caught red-handed, they are entitled to due process of law.

This is why I worry about crime fighters becoming war fighters. It's also why I think African-Americans see more significance in the recent shootings than most whites do. Warriors take a different view of the people they are fighting. If we tell our police they are fighting a war, they are likely to act as soldiers generally do. They will design quick and dirty ways of identifying and dealing with the enemy.

I'm not sure the recent police killings exhibit racism of the old-fashioned kind -- a belief in the inferiority of other people based on their ancestry. But in a world where we treat policing as war, race combined with youth and social class, maybe dress and attitude, can be the way police identify the enemy in certain neighborhoods. And because combatants in war are fair game, the cops will be just a bit quicker to draw and fire.

We can help the police by changing their way of thinking about the job. Policing is not war. It is harder, because it entails a similar risk of death but demands more deliberation and prudence.

On the battlefield, there are only two kinds of soldiers -- the quick and the dead. On our city streets, we ask the men and women who keep us safe to pause over the trigger and make judgments one person at a time because the people they meet there, even the ones they suspect of crime, are not the enemy.

---

Garvey is the president of The Catholic University of America in Washington.

Fairfax must come clean on shooting

Richmond Times Dispatch

Fairfax must come clean on shooting

For nearly a year and a half, the Fairfax County police department has stonewalled inquiries about the shooting death of John Geer. Police responded to a disturbance at Geer’s home in Springfield and talked to Geer at some length while he stood, unarmed, on his own porch. Then an officer shot him in the chest.

Who was the officer? What (if anything) provoked the shooting? Fairfax officials flatly refuse to discuss the case.

Now Circuit Court Judge Randy Bellows has ordered the police department to hand over its files to the Geer family, which has filed a lawsuit over the matter. That’s a decent start. But the public has a right to expect more from the county than grudging disclosure in the course of litigation.

For county police to kill an unarmed citizen and then refuse to discuss even the slightest details — let alone tender an explanation — for more than a year is outrageous. That sort of thing might happen in banana republics or Middle Eastern autocracies. It cannot happen here. That Chief Edwin Roessler thinks it ought to shows he is the wrong man for that job.

Two days after a video went viral, showing a Saratoga County Sheriff’s deputy slapping a man because he did not consent to having his car searched, the deputy was arrested and jailed by his own department.

When is a routine traffic stop anything but routine? When it involves a camera and a state trooper who doesn’t like being recorded.

Patricia Guadalupe

A New York state police officer recently threatened to have a motorist arrested after the driver video recorded the traffic stop. It is not against the law to record interactions with law enforcement unless it would “truly interfere with legitimate law enforcement operations.”

Police have no right to order that a person stop taking pictures or video in public places. In fact, courts have determined that it is an individual’s constitutional right under the First Amendment to record police activity, and while in most states a person has to consent before being recorded, it does not usually apply to law enforcement on duty.

John Houghtaling says he was stopped by a police officer named Rosenblatt for what the officer said was a tailpipe that was too loud, and when Rosenblatt saw him recording, he threatened him.

“How about if I see you post this on YouTube, I’ll find a way for the D.A.’s office to arrest you," Rosenblatt told Houghtaling.

When Houghtaling asked him if it is illegal to record police officers, Rosenblatt answered, “When I tell you to put the phone down and you disregard what I’m telling you, yes, it is,” a claim that is not true.

“Your exhaust [pipe] is extremely loud, that’s why you’re being stopped," Rosenblatt is heard asking. "Have you got an answer for that?”

Rosenblatt then demands to see Houghtaling’s license and registration. Houghtaling’s complies but continues to record.

The trooper asks, “What is your issue with always videotaping?” and Houghtaling replies, “Am I legally obligated to answer that?”

Rosenblatt replies, “You’re obligated because I asked, you, that’s why,” – another false claim – before returning to his patrol car.

NYPD Officer Suspended After Punching Handcuffed Black Teen

by Thomas L. Scott

 The New York police officer who was caught on camera punching a Black teenager who was already in police custody has been suspended while the New York Police Department Internal Affairs Bureau investigates the arrest.

“An individual that we have identified as a plainclothes anti-crime officer runs up and appears to strike the individual with a closed fist twice on the side of the body,” New York Police Commissioner Bill Bratton said Monday. “That officer has been suspended pending the investigation going forward.”

The NYPD announced the suspension on Friday, but they didn’t reveal the name of the officer.

In New York City and around the country, people have been protesting for months against police brutality and racial profiling. The lack of trust between police and the communities they are supposed to protect has encouraged bystanders to gather their own proof and use video to attempt to hold police accountable. A police brutality witness in Staten Island used his cellphone to record NYPD officer, Daniel Pantaleo, putting Eric Garner, an unarmed Black man, in the chokehold that ultimately killed him. Despite the video evidence, Pantaleo wasn’t indicted by the grand jury.

The Black teenager who was assaulted by the officer was 16-year-old Denzel Funderburk, according to a CBS New York. He and two other teenagers, 16 and 17, were arrested on Dec. 15 because they were suspected of assaulting someone with a cane. The three teenagers were charged with gang assault. Funderburk was also charged with assault, obstruction, criminal possession of a weapon and other charges, according to CBS New York.

The charges were dropped before the video was released on the Wednesday following the arrest, New York Daily News reported.

The video of the arrest, which was posted on Dec. 17, showed the Black teenager pinned against the hood of a car by three officers as the plainclothes cop rushes in to deliver at least two body punches.

Police procedure expert and professor at John Jay College, Robert McRie, said that police officers who attack suspects that have already been subdued are subject to disciplinary action.

“There doesn’t seem to be any legitimate reason for it,” McRie told CBS. “He wasn’t moving at the time the blows were delivered and he was in no position to escape.”

Dallas Cop Arrested for Sexually Assaulting Prostitute

By Stephen Young

Sunday morning, Dallas police officer David Kattner was arrested for allegedly using his authority to coerce a woman into having sex with him while he was in uniform. An arrest affidavit obtained by The Dallas Morning News says Kattner called a woman and told her to follow him to the 9700 block of Webb Chapel Road in North Dallas. Once there, he allegedly forced her to have oral sex with him in his marked police car. He kept one of his hands on his gun throughout the assault, the affidavit says.

Detectives in the area saw Kattner and the woman, according to police, and stopped the woman when she got out of the car. She told the detectives that the Sunday morning attack was the third time Kattner assaulted her. According to the News, the affidavit does not identify the alleged victim as a prostitute specifically, but says Kattner contacted "known female prostitutes" in order to force them to have sex with him while he was working a second job. The woman, police say, said Kattner showed her her outstanding warrants and threatened to harm the woman's daughter if the woman didn't do what Kattner wanted.

Kattner is the second Dallas cop in the last two years arrested for illegal activity with sex workers.

Jose Luis Bedoy, a former Dallas vice cop, resigned in 2013 after being arrested for trading police information for sex. When he was caught, he told the woman he gave information to that she should leave town and get rid of her cell phone. He was convicted of obstructing a federal grand jury investigation in October.

In 2010, rookie police officer Jeffrey Thorn was fired for allegedly forcing two prostitutes to have sex with him during the same shift so they could avoid arrest.

It's worth noting the Kattner was part of a group of five police officers who sued D Magazine for defamation after a 2007 article that accused them of issuing tickets to prostitutes and the homeless for offenses that didn't happen so the cops could later pick them up on the felony charge of not paying misdemeanor tickets. The cops lost the lawsuit.

Kattner has been placed on administrative leave pending the result of the investigation. He is assigned to the Northeast Patrol Division and is 26-year DPD veteran.

Why weren't these cops arrested?

4 officers punished in YPD traffic stop incident

 By WYTV Staff

YOUNGSTOWN, Ohio (WYTV) – Monday, the Youngstown Police Department announced that three officers will be suspended and a fourth will lose pay in connection with a Nov. 28 traffic stop in which investigators allege that officers failed to file an OVI charge against the brother of a YPD lieutenant.

According to results of an internal investigation obtained by WKBN, Lieutenant John Kelty will be suspended for five days without pay and demoted to the rank of police officer for his role in the incident.

Officer Thomas Wisener and Lt. Gerard Slattery will be suspended for 15 and 10 days without pay, respectively, and officer Assad Chaibi will lose his pay for four hours of accumulated time.

According to police reports, Wisener pulled over Joseph Slattery, 54, the brother of Lt. Slattery, on the night of Nov. 28 along Mahoning Avenue for running a traffic light.

Wisener, who made the stop, said he found an open can of beer on the floor of the car. Slattery received citations for failing to obey the red light and having an open container of alcohol in his vehicle.

Documents included in the investigation results show that Joseph Slattery had a blood-alcohol content of 0.136% when tested that night. Ohio’s legal limit is .08%.

According to the investigation, Wisener said that he called Kelty, who told him to charge Joseph Slattery with have an open container of alcohol and running a red light. Wisener said he wrote a police report that was not completely true to match up with those charges.

The investigation found significant differences between the descriptions of the incident by Wisener and Kelty, each saying that the other was responsible for not filing the OVI charge. A polygraph test showed deception for Kelty’s responses when he was asked if he told Wisener not to charge Slattery and showed no deception on the part of Wisener when asked the same questions.

According to the investigation, Gerard Slattery expressed his displeasure with Wisener to Kelty after receiving a call from his brother about the possible OVI charge. Slattery also picked up his brother’s car without paying the towing fee, a violation of the YPD code of conduct, the report found.

Chaibi placed the test results for the blood alcohol content testing machine in a shred bin, according to the internal investigation report. The report also states that Kelty allowed Chaibi to do this, along with allowing Joseph Slattery’s car to be released to his brother and ordering the deletion of the tow report for the car.

YPD Lt. Brian Butler, who sent the report to YPD Chief Robin Lees, made five recommendations based on the results of the investigation:

•           A camera should be installed in YPD’s BAC room

•           Lt. Slattery should pay for the towing of his brother’s car.

•           Towing companies that work with YPD should get a memo from the chief’s office stating that vehicles are only to be released after receiving a request in writing from an authorized representative from the police department.

•           An administrating officer should keep and document all BAC test results, whether or not charges are filed.

•           Joseph Slattery should be charged with OVI.

Federal authorities will probe Milwaukee officer-shooting; Oregon principal suspended after 3rd OWI arrest this month

MILWAUKEE -- The Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Justice Department, and the Milwaukee U.S. Attorney's office will all investigate the Milwaukee police shooting of Dontre Hamilton.

The word came after District Attorney John Chisholm ruled Monday that criminal charges were not warranted against fired officer Cristopher Manney. The federal review was announced a few hours after Chisholm's decision was made public. It will determine whether Hamilton's civil rights were violated.

Manney is the white officer who shot the black Hamilton to death April 30 during a scuffle at Milwaukee's Red Arrow Park.

Chisholm said Manney's 14 shots were in self-defense, and it was not his role to second-guess whether the officer violated Milwaukee Police policies against frisking from behind, which got Manney fired in October.

He's at least the third white officer throughout the U.S. to avoid charges in the past month, after prosecutors in New York and Ferguson, Missouri ruled in similar cases.

A coalition of religious and civil rights' groups joined Hamilton's family in demanding the federal review. They also want a fresh review of other Milwaukee Police cases that involve excessive force.

Hundreds of protesters marched peacefully. Many attended a private gathering at a church Monday afternoon.

Media reports said there were no indications of the National Guard being present, after Gov. Scott Walker approved a deployment if necessary.

State Emergency Management officials said they've worked with other agencies for a response if needed. Protesters planned another rally at Red Arrow Park Tuesday evening.

Milwaukee cop fired after shooting mentally ill man will not face charges

By Todd Richmond,

MILWAUKEE — A white Milwaukee police officer who was fired after he fatally shot a mentally ill black man in April won't face criminal charges, the county's top prosecutor said Monday.

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm said Christopher Manney won't be charged because he shot Dontre Hamilton in self-defense. Manney is at least the third white police officer to avoid charges in the past month after a confrontation that led to a black man's death.

"Based on all the evidence and analysis presented in this report, I come to the conclusion that Officer Manney's use of force in this incident was justified self-defense and that defense cannot be reasonably overcome to establish a basis to charge Officer Manney with a crime," Chisholm said in a statement.

Recommended: Infographic Crime falls in the US. Are you safer today?

The Hamilton family released a statement through their attorney expressing their disappointment with the decision, saying the case "cries out for justice, criminal charges against Christopher Manney, and accountability to Dontre Hamilton's family."

The family said it has asked the U.S. attorney in Milwaukee to seek a federal investigation.

Manney's attorney did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

The executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin, Chris Ahmuty, issued a statement saying the decision not to charge Manney left "a cloud of uncertainty over the circumstances of and the responsibility for Mr. Hamilton's death."

Manney shot 31-year-old Hamilton on April 30 after responding to a call for a welfare check on a man sleeping in a downtown park. Manney said Hamilton resisted when he tried to frisk him. The two exchanged punches before Hamilton got hold of Manney's baton and hit him on the neck, the former officer has said. Manney then opened fire, hitting Hamilton 14 times.

Several witnesses told police they saw Hamilton holding Manney's baton "in an aggressive posture" before Manney shot him, according to Chisholm's report. Police said they have no video of the event.

Chisholm consulted with two experts on the use of force by police officers who concluded Manney's conduct was justified. Emanuel Kapelsohn of the Peregrine Corporation said all the shots were discharged in 3 or 4 seconds and there was no evidence that Manney continued firing after Hamilton hit the ground.

Manney suffered minor injuries, including a bite to his right thumb, a neck strain and neck contusion, the report said. He was treated for post-concussion syndromes, a mild traumatic brain injury and had physical therapy for bicep and rotator cuff injuries, the report said.

Police Chief Edward Flynn fired Manney in October. He said at the time that Manney correctly identified Hamilton as mentally ill, but ignored department policy and treated him as a criminal by frisking him.

Hamilton's family said he suffered from schizophrenia and had recently stopped taking his medication.

At a news conference, Chisholm said his assessment covered only whether Manney was justified in using deadly force, not whether the initial stop was handled properly. He invited anyone to review the full investigative file. "They'll think we made a fair decision," he said.

The Milwaukee Police Association condemned Manney's firing as a political move, and members voted no confidence in Flynn soon after the firing. Manney has appealed his dismissal.

Hamilton's death preceded the killings of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and Eric Garner in New York City, but the case hasn't attracted as much attention. Hamilton's family has led mainly peaceful protests, trying to raise awareness about mental illness. Other protesters said his death underlined race concerns.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has said he will call up the National Guard if there is any violent reaction to the prosecutor's decision. Police arrested 74 protesters Friday who blocked rush hour traffic on Interstate 43. On Monday, the state Department of Military Affairs activated its emergency operations center to monitor the situation in Milwaukee and coordinate activities between any affected state agencies.

"Threaten me or my family and I will use my God given and law appointed right and duty to kill you."

Suspended San Jose Cop: "Threaten me or my family and I will use my God given and law appointed right and duty to kill you."

Ed Krayewski|

There are a host of issues that have to be addressed to effect effective police reform: overcriminalization, lack of transparency and accountability, union-negotiated protections, racism, and so on. In some states there's also the issue of self-defense. As a life-long resident of New Jersey, it always made me uncomfortable that the local super market could hire someone licensed to carry a firearm to protect their store but I was not permitted a license to carry a firearm to protect myself or my family. These, I suppose, are progressive values: you can exercise a right when you have the wealth to influence the state. New Jersey has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. But these laws, in New Jersey and elsewhere, rarely apply to law enforcement, on or off-duty. New York state recently passed new anti-gun legislation they forgot to exempt all police from and worked diligently to correct their mistake.

This disparity between the right to bear arms for the "civilian" and the right to bear arms for government agents is another issue that makes the questions of police reform so "complex" because it contributes to the sense that police officers and other government employees are a different class of citizen, with different rights and privileges, than those of us who pay their salaries.

Take this not unique attitude a cop in San Jose, now suspended over his comments, had no fear sharing publicly. Via CBS News:

In one of his tweets, [Officer Phillip] White said: "Threaten me or my family and I will use my God given and law appointed right and duty to kill you. #CopsLivesMatter."

In another, he said he would be off-duty at the movies with his gun if anyone "feels they can't breathe or their lives matter."

The tweets and hashtag played on protest slogans "I can't breathe" and "black lives matter."

Efforts to reach White through the San Jose Police Officer's Association were not successful.

The tweets and White's Twitter account have been deleted amid a social media firestorm over the comments. White's department, union and a college where he coached basketball all condemned the comments.

White was suspended with pay and not fired, not just because of the police officer's association but because California actually has enshrined job security for cops and other public employees into its state laws, be they unionized or not.

White talks about his "God given" and "law appointed" right to use lethal force in self-defense, confusing natural rights with government privileges not just because he's probably not that intelligent but also because of the systematic effort in this country by the establishment to confuse rights and privileges while curtailing natural rights like the right to bear arms from self-defense as much as they can get away with.

In California, Phillip White, who saw nothing wrong with going on social media to announce his right to defend himself and his family using lethal force in the context of peaceful protesters, and other law enforcement officials across the state enjoy the right to defend themselves and their families, on or off duty, using a service weapon paid for by taxpayers who the state treats like criminals when it comes to exercising the right to self-defense.

Parity between the rights and privileges of citizens and the rights and privileges of government employees is a crucial first step toward any kind of substantive change in the attitudes held by too many cops.

Does this sound kosher to you?

Police accidentally shoot suspect

Rebecca S. Green The Journal Gazette

Michael R. Houston has had a lot of run-ins with law enforcement.

And early Monday morning, he was arrested again. But this time, he found himself at a hospital with a minor gunshot wound to his thigh as the result of an accidental firearm discharge by one of the men sent to take him into custody.

According to a press release from the Fort Wayne Police Department, members of the FWPD’s vice and narcotics squad, as well as members of the Emergency Services Team, went to a home in the 300 block of East Branning Avenue at 6:40 a.m. Monday.

They were there to arrest Houston, this time on four charges of dealing cocaine or heroin and three additional charges of dealing cocaine. As they were taking him into custody, an officer’s weapon fired accidentally, striking Houston in the thigh, according to the press release.

Officers gave him immediate assistance and rushed him to a hospital, where he was treated and released.

Houston remains in the Allen County Jail on the aforementioned charges.

The unnamed officer who accidentally shot Houston has been put on paid administrative leave, as is department protocol.

rgreen@jg.net

Owner of dog killed by cop sues Salt Lake City PD for $1.5 million

 by Caroline Connolly

SALT LAKE CITY — A dog was shot and killed by Salt Lake City police in June of this year, and now the dog’s owner says he is suing the police department for $1.5 million in damages.

Sean Kendall said police violated his Fourth Amendment rights when an officer entered his backyard and had a fatal encounter with Kendall’s dog, Geist. The dog was shot by the officer, who said he felt threatened by the animal.

“Geist was my best friend for two and a half years,” Kendall said.

Police said in the past they believe they were justified in entering the yard, as they were searching for a 3-year-old child with disabilities who had been reported missing. That child was later located inside the child’s home.  Kendall said the search was poorly executed and led to a violation of  his rights as well as in Geist’s death.

Kendall had previously been offered a settlement in the case, which he declined as he said he wanted to focus on lobbying for change in the way officers are trained in encounters with animals. He has been active in numerous protests regarding the way police respond to animals.

Salt Lake City Police Department officials declined to speak regarding the pending litigation.

FOX 13 News’ Caroline Connolly has more on this story, see the video above for her report.

Yet another symptom of our broken police system — cops kill hundreds of dogs a year

by German Lopez

Adam Arroyo was at work on June 3, 2013, when he heard the news. "Adam, I'm sorry," he recalled his landlord telling him. "They killed your dog."

Arroyo's landlord wasn't talking about burglars. "They" were the Buffalo, New York, police, and they had barged into his apartment, torn through his belongings, and killed Cindy, his two-year-old pit bull, during a botched raid.

When he got home, he said, "it looked like a tornado hit. My dog was missing, and there were bullet holes and blood all over the walls."

Police later said that Cindy had been "aggressive." But Arroyo, a 30-year-old Iraq war veteran, insists the dog was chained when he left for work that day. It also turned out that police may have hit the wrong apartment — Arroyo believes they were targeting a neighbor who allegedly sold illicit drugs.

"That dog, everywhere I went, she wanted to go with me. Those police, they don't know what they did."

Arroyo and Cindy are not alone. The Buffalo Police Department shot 92 dogs between January 2011 and September 2014, 73 of which died from their wounds, according to a recent story from local news station WGRZ. Twenty-six of those shootings were the work of one officer — and nearly all of those dogs died. For many critics, including Arroyo, these shootings are a symptom of a larger problem in law enforcement.

"These police officers think they're above the law," he said.

Since the summer, a national discussion about the way officers use force on the job and whom they use it against has dominated the news, sparked by the killing of several unarmed black men by police — long a deep concern among civil rights activists. The deaths of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, Eric Garner in Staten Island, and, most recently, 12-year-old Tamir Rice in Cleveland, at the hands of local police have sparked a roiling, emotional debate about the latitude police are given to take lives, even when it is later discovered that a situation did not warrant it. Police officers say this latitude is essential for their safety and the ability to perform their jobs effectively.

This human toll is the primary concern in protesting a system that gives law enforcement what many believe is too much freedom to take lives and property. But for years, one of the ways this multilayered story has played out is in the killing of dogs by police.

Police kill an untold number of dogs a year

It's hard to know how many dogs are shot by police — we don't even have a firm idea of how many people are shot by police. But it's not just Buffalo. According to a 2011 report presented to the US Department of Justice, a majority of shootings in most of the surveyed police departments involve animals, particularly dogs. And based on media reports, hundreds of dogs are shot by police each year.

Police in Milwaukee killed roughly 48 dogs per year between 2000 and 2008, according to the Associated Press. Officers in southwest Florida shot 111 dogs between 2009 and 2012, the News-Press found. In metro Atlanta, according to a WSB-TV investigation, police were responsible for the deaths of nearly 100 dogs from 2010 to 2012. And Chicago police killed approximately 90 dogs per year between 2008 and 2013, the Chicago Tribune reported.

The Washington Post's Radley Balko has written extensively about police-involved dog shootings — including dogs that are leashed and unleashed, puppies and seniors, and big and small, with breeds ranging from chihuahuas to Labradors. The topic has a blog, Facebook page, and subreddit dedicated to it. Reports from advocates or people who lost their dogs at the hands of police flow into these repositories on a daily basis. Here are a few examples:

According to an email sent to the blog Dogs that Cops Killed, Megan Hood's dog, Blossom, was killed by police in Jonesboro, Texas. But Hood said she wasn't told about the police shooting until later, after a private investigator contacted her. Instead, she said, the city government initially told her that her dog had been hit by a car and that the Texas Department of Transportation had incinerated the body.

Sean Kendall got a call one day that Salt Lake City police had entered his yard and killed his Weimaraner, Geist. Police officers said they were investigating a missing child report and the dog acted aggressively, but Kendall said officers could have backed out of the yard and closed the gate to protect themselves.

 In one case caught on a body camera, a police officer in north Texas called a dog over to him and then shot it multiple times. The officer claimed the dog showed signs of aggression, but that is not visible in the available footage.

 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputies on December 5 shot and killed a family's pregnant pit bull, even though they went through a gate with a "beware of dog" sign, reported CBS Los Angeles. The dog's owner said the dog never attacked the deputies and that the deputies either hit the wrong home or were responding to a prank call.

Arroyo, now a manager at a cleaning company and member of the National Guard, said he still mourns Cindy. He moved out of his previous apartment, which was stained with bad memories and Cindy's blood, and currently lives with his uncle. He feels like no one is being held accountable for the shooting.

For Arroyo, Cindy's friendship was a way to cope with his loneliness after serving in Iraq. Arroyo bought Cindy from someone who intended to put her in dog fights. His initial goal was to save Cindy, but he quickly fell in love with the dog.

"I feel like I rescued her," Arroyo said. "But at the same time, she rescued me."

Buffalo Police officials didn't respond to multiple inquiries about an internal investigation into Arroyo's case. They previously refused to provide an update to WGRZ.

In an interview with WGRZ, Buffalo Police Chief of Detectives Dennis Richards said the dog shootings made up a small fraction of the thousands of calls Buffalo Police officers respond to each year.

"Officers generally shoot to live. We don't shoot to kill," Richards said. "It goes to the officer's safety and the safety of other people."

When can police shoot dogs?

Cynthia Bathurst, co-founder and director of animal advocacy group Safe Humane Chicago, said there's not a noticeable pattern in these dog killings. She said she's heard of it happening in domestic dispute cases, SWAT raids, and even traffic stops in which a dog is in the car.

Almost all of these shootings were later found to be justified. But animal activists believe that part of the issue is that cops are allowed, under the law and department policy, to use deadly force too easily. If an officer merely thinks a dog is going to bite or attack him, he's allowed to shoot — even if a dog doesn't pose a threat to the life of the officer or others. And since dogs are considered property under most state laws, the legal standards of probable cause and objectively reasonable belief that apply to human shootings don't apply to dogs and other pets.

Based on media reports, hundreds of dogs are shot by police each year

Even an unjustified shooting likely won't land a police officer in jail or prison. But dog owners can and do resort to civil lawsuits to claim damages for shootings, under the argument that killing a dog unlawfully is akin to illegally seizing or destroying property. There have been reports of proposed settlements as high as $10,000 in Salt Lake City; $30,000 in Riverside, California; and even $225,000 in Minneapolis, in a case that involved two dead dogs.

Arroyo is now pursuing a federal lawsuit against the city of Buffalo for the raid and his dog's death. He said the city offered him $1,000, which he decided wasn't enough. But he also insisted the lawsuit has nothing to do with money. His concern is holding the city and police accountable for their mistake, he said, and the only way to do that may be to force a big payout.

"To me, it's not about the money," Arroyo said. "I'm not the only person going through this."

Advocates want better police training and standards

The Buffalo Police Department doesn't train for encounters with dogs, WGRZ reported. Just two states — Colorado and Illinois — require such training, said Bathurst, although police departments in other states might do so voluntarily or under local laws. The hope for reformers is to get more cities, states, and police departments to adopt similar standards.

Arroyo said he believes it's only a matter of time until things change. "This is going to break," he said. "There's too many incidents for nothing to happen."

One barrier to change, Bathurst said, is that police overestimate the threat posed by dogs. The number of reported dog bites has decreased by as much as 75 to 90 percent, depending on the city, since the 1970s, according to data compiled by the National Canine Research Council (NCRC). And dog bite fatalities are extremely rare, resulting in 32 deaths in 2011, NCRC reported.

"We don't want to understate the importance of decreasing this number [of fatal dog bites]," Bathurst said. "But they are, in general, minor."

The National Canine Research Council and Safe Humane Chicago developed a series of videos that educates police officers on how to read different breeds' body language, ways to get out of a situation without resorting to force, and tools — such as Tasers, batons, fire extinguishers, and chemical sprays — that can be used to stop a dog without shooting.

At the very least, animal proponents say police departments should begin better tracking their encounters with dogs. Currently, federal and state data is spotty and scant on police-involved dog shootings.

Dog shootings further distrust between communities and police

"When [these shootings] occur, they get more and more attention, and there's more and more concern in the community," said NCRC spokesperson Janis Bradley. "It leads to dog owners mistrusting the police, which is bad for everybody — it's bad for the police, bad for the community, and, of course, bad for the dog."

Police officers are found to be legally justified almost every time they kill a dog, according to police shooting watchers and various media reports on dog shootings.

But a legal argument does nothing to repair community mistrust when police actions make people feel that the law is either not on their side or only on the side of a chosen few. Police are also found to be legally justified nearly every time they kill a person, and yet the Pew Research Center found that about 61 percent of all Americans — and 93 percent of black Americans — score police "only fair" or "poor" on "using the right amount of force for each situation."

For Arroyo, there is little police could do to give him back what he lost.

"She was my best friend. That dog, everywhere I went, she wanted to go with me. It breaks my heart," Arroyo said. "Those police, they don't know what they did."