// BLOG
We Are Going On KROQ’s Kevin And Bean!
March 1, 2010
I am honored to announce that I will be featured on KROQ’s Kevin and Bean radio program this Tuesday, March 2, 2010 at 0700 hours. The segment will be about 40 mintues of “Ask the cop.” I am nervous and excited, and expect a good opportunity to answer some questions and clear up some rumors.
Catch a listen on your way to work!
Book Reviews
February 13, 2010
I am constantly being asked to review law enforcement books. In the past I have turned these requests down with respect. I have decided this might have been an error in judgement, and have accepted my first assignment!
The experiment will be, “History in Blue” by Allan Duffin, a look at the history of women in law enforcement. Interesting read so far, and I will report on the whole piece when I complete it. If you know of a good cop tale, please comment here and let me know!
LAPD May Day – No Officers Fired
July 1, 2009
This recent article in the LA Times reports that none of the officers involved in the May Day events of 2007 will be terminated. What many in the legal community do not know is that the decision to retain those employees was not made by the Chief of Police.
In a system unique to Los Angeles, the Chief is not the ultimate authority on whether an officer remains employed after alleged misconduct. Instead, an internal board comprised of two high-ranking managers and one community member preside over a quasi-trial called a board of rights. This board alone determines whether Officer Jones committed any misconduct, and what the penalty should be. The Chief’s only option is to reduce the prescribed penalty.
Arguments abound about whether this administrative body is the correct forum for such a critical decision. The Board of Rights does not observe traditional evidentiary rules (for instance heresay is allowed), and they do not have any formal training in employment or labor law. Police unions, police managers, police officers, public interest groups, the ACLU — each have weighed in on the process pro or con.
What is for certain is that the Board of Rights is one of many internal police phenomena about which members of the bar are often unaware or under-educated. A relatively small “defense bar” has emerged to represent officers at the board, and the niche has produced local experts. If you have questions or ideas about this process, please weigh in with a comment…
El Monte Police Use Of Force
May 18, 2009
The recent El Monte Police use of force has many in the Southern California legal community scratching their heads. As usual, the pundits have jumped into the “hear me the loudest” fray. I always try to steer clear of that circus, and did so again with this incident.
I would like to note, however, that in evaluating any use of police force, it is the law and the rules that matter. By the “rules” I mean, of course, the police department’s written procedures for using force. Different agencies are free to have policies and procedures regarding when and how their officers may use force. Most attorneys are surprised to learn how varied these policies can be.
In the criminal arena, I am confident the District Attorney’s office has been reviewing the video and will look hard at any possible prosecution(s). On the civil side, there will be no shortage of plaintiff’s counsel interested in whether or not these officers’ actions violated the standard. Both of these inquests will be thorough in the extreme.
In the legal community, we should stay above the three rings, and remind ourselves and our colleagues that the officers’ actions as measured against the twin metrics of the law and internal policy, not the hype or anger in the community, that will determine the end result of any legal matters.
US Supreme Court Limits Vehicle Searches
April 22, 2009
I have waxed on poetic before about how my passion for law enforcement, and the law of law enforcement is attributed in large part to its’ perpetual motion. Police Practices and jurisprudence are most certainly changing all the time. I must say, however, that some changes are more significant than others. Once in a while, a case comes down that alters a basic, every-shift, Joe-cop procedure. Today we are in receipt of one such case.
I present you this link to the AP story. Simply put, officers can no longer search a vehicle simply because the driver has been arrested. Take it from me, this is a fundamental paradigm shift in street police work. Now, the officer must be able to articulate that the crime involved may indicate there is evidence in the car (think drug possession) or that the suspect can still access potential weapons in the vehicle (almost impossible to imagine, since the in-custody suspect is generally secured away from their vehicle).
Yet another case that proves why this is such an interesting and dynamic area of the law!