The Citizens’ Law Enforcement Review Board is moving to prematurely end its investigation of 22 death cases, citing a California state rule that bars punitive action against officers if an investigation isn’t completed within a year.
The group tasked with investigating in-custody deaths and complaints against San Diego county law enforcement is on the cusp of dismissing 22 death cases without any investigation at all, reports the Voice of San Diego. The Citizens’ Law Enforcement Review Board staff is recommending the dismissal of 22 investigations involving people who’ve died in county detention facilities or while being taken into custody. It appears to be the first time that the board, created in 1990, has failed to issue findings in a death case. The board is set to make the final decision on whether to dismiss the cases on Tuesday. To justify the dismissals, the board is citing a section of the California Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights, which declares that “no public safety officer shall be subjected to punitive action” if an investigation isn’t completed within a year.
Many of the cases being dismissed involve serious allegations brought to light by civil lawsuits and media reports, including that law enforcement officials ignored repeated suicide threats from mentally ill jail inmates and a juvenile detainee, and used excessive force during arrests. A number of experts said the rule being used to justify the dismissals shouldn’t apply to the San Diego board and similar groups in the state that exist to monitor law enforcement. Barbara Attard, who served as San Jose’s independent police auditor and now heads police practices consultancy Accountability Associates, described what CLERB’s doing as “a mess.” “To just wholesale close cases, I’ve never seen an agency do that,” she said.
Among the documents was an FBI memo describing a meeting in which Cuban exiles tried to set a price on the heads of Fidel Castro, Raul Castro and Ernesto “Che” Guevara. “It was felt that the $150,000.00 to assassinate Fidel Castro…was too high,” the memo noted. They settled on more modest sums: $100,000 for Fidel and $20,000 each for Raul and Che.
Journalists are poring over more than 2,800 records related to the John F. Kennedy assassination that were released Thursday evening. Federal authorities bowed to pressure from the CIA, FBI and other agencies to delay disclosing some of the most sensitive documents for another six months. Even so, says the Washington Post, the thousands of pages published online by the National Archives describe decades of spies and surveillance, informants and assassination plots. The paper offered thumbnails of “some of the wildest things” its journalists found. Among them: A 1964 FBI memo describes a meeting in which Cuban exiles tried to set a price on the heads of Fidel Castro, Raul Castro and Ernesto “Che” Guevara. “It was felt that the $150,000.00 to assassinate Fidel Castro…was too high,” the memo noted. At a subsequent meeting, they settled on more modest sums: $100,000 for Fidel, $20,000 for Raul and $20,000 for Che.
A 1960 FBI memo described a “high-priced Hollywood call girl” who was approached by Fred Otash, a well known Los Angeles private investigator, seeking information about sex parties involving then Sen. John F. Kennedy, his brother-in-law actor Peter Lawford, Frank Sinatra and Sammy Davis Jr. “She told the agents that she was unaware of any indiscretions,” the memo said. An FBI file contains information on the bureau’s attempt to locate a stripper known as “Kitty.” According to the file, a stripper known as Candy Cane said Kitty had been an associate of Jack Ruby, the Dallas nightclub owner who killed Oswald on Nov. 24, 1963. In an internal FBI report from May 1964, an informant told the FBI that the Ku Klux Klan said it “had documented proof that President Johnson was formerly a member of the Klan in Texas during the early days of his political career.” The “documented proof” was not provided.
New documents on Confidential Informants, Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, and Law Enforcement-Researcher Collaborative Partnerships are now available to IACP Members! Confidential Informants* – confidential informants (CIs) can be valuable sources of information in criminal investigations. However, in order to manage … Continue reading →
New documents on Confidential Informants, Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, and Law Enforcement-Researcher Collaborative Partnerships are now available to IACP Members!
Confidential Informants* – confidential informants (CIs) can be valuable sources of information in criminal investigations. However, in order to manage the associated risks that accompany the use of CIs, agencies should establish sound informant control policies and procedures, such as those found in the updated IACP Model Policy and Concepts & Issues Paper on the topic.
* Note: These documents are available exclusively to IACP Members. You must be logged into your IACP account to access the website. Your username is your email address on file. If you are unsure of your password, please click on the “Forgot Password” link to reset.
The IACP Model Policies are only available to IACP members and IACP Net customers. Not an IACP member? Please visit www.theiacp.org/membership
Would you like to further tailor your policy manual? IACP Net, proud sponsor of the Model Policies, houses over 20,000 policies from agencies across the country in addition to providing access to Model Policies. Visit http://www.commandanswers.com/improve-policies or call 800-227-9640 to join today and take your IACP membership to the next level!
A lower-level figure in Donald Trump’s presidential campaign may be indicted, but pundits are jumping to unwarranted conclusions, says a former federal prosecutor.
The news that Special Counsel Robert Mueller impaneled a grand jury in his ongoing Russia investigation means Mueller believes that there is sufficient evidence that a crime was committed, but observers are leaping to conclusions that the public evidence doesn’t yet support, writes former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti for Politico. Impaneling a grand jury does not mean that Mueller will seek an indictment, although most grand jury investigations do result in someone being indicted. A grand jury, which consists of 16 to 23 people, is an important tool that allows prosecutors to issue subpoenas that require people to produce evidence. Subpoenas can be used to compel people to testify under oath before the grand jury. You can expect Mueller and his team to issue many subpoenas.
Because grand jury subpoenas are an important prosecutorial tool, typically a grand jury is impaneled at the beginning of an investigation, not at the end. Despite all the punditry on cable news, there’s no suggestion here that Mueller is closing in on any particular target, such as the president. In all likelihood, he’s just getting started. It is possible that as a starting point Mueller will seek an indictment of a lower-level figure in or around Trump’s campaign. Sometimes, when prosecutors are facing obstacles in obtaining evidence, they seek an indictment of one individual or a group of individuals prior to completing their investigation, if they believe that those individuals might cooperate with the government and provide evidence. The work that grand juries do is secret, but witnesses may disclose what happened. We will likely continue to hear media reports about witnesses and documents sought by Mueller.
The president’s son met with a Kremlin-linked lawyer last year after being proposed damaging information about Hillary Clinton, but a former federal prosecutor tells the New York Times that so far, there isn’t evidence of an illegal conspiracy.
The president's son met with a Kremlin-linked lawyer last year after being proposed damaging information about Hillary Clinton, but a former federal prosecutor tells the New York Times that so far, there isn't evidence of an illegal conspiracy . . .
Want to read more? Please subscribe to The Crime Report!
Former FBI director Robert Mueller has submitted a budget and hired an all-star team that includes 15 Justice Department prosecutors. That got the attention of President Trump’s supporters, who issued an attack ad calling the investigation a “rigged game.”
Robert Mueller has made no public comment since he was named to lead the Department of Justice investigation into Russian interference in last year’s election. Instead, he has let his actions do the talking, NPR reports. The former FBI director and decorated U.S. Marine has submitted a budget and hired an all-star team that includes 15 Justice Department prosecutors. That has gotten the attention of President Trump’s supporters, who issued an attack ad calling the investigation a “rigged game” and blasting the special counsel for hiring at least four lawyers who have donated to Democrats. Mueller got a nod of support from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who said he didn’t think political donations amounted to a conflict of interest.
Members of Congress and lawyers involved in the probe described the main lines of inquiry as Russian meddling in the presidential election, whether anyone inside the U. S. conspired to help, and whether any wrongdoing has been committed in the surprise firing of FBI Director James Comey, who said he believed he was let go to relieve pressure on the Russia probe. There’s no timetable or deadline for the job. Among the attorneys Mueller has hired: Zainab Ahmad, a top national security prosecutor on detail from U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of New York, Rush Atkinson, an attorney on detail from the DOJ Criminal Division’s Fraud Section, and Michael Dreeben, on detail from the Office of the Solicitor General, described by ex-colleagues as one of the brightest criminal law experts of the past two generations.
IACP has released a new, five-video series on eyewitness identification to provide training for officers during roll call. The techniques featured in the videos are based on the IACP model policy, as well as the recommendations of the National Academy … Continue reading →
IACP has released a new, five-video series on eyewitness identification to provide training for officers during roll call. The techniques featured in the videos are based on the IACP model policy, as well as the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences.
The first video is a general overview of the reasons for eyewitness identification reform.
The second video talks about an officer’s initial response to the scene and modern techniques for eliciting a description and a statement.
The third video is about when officers locate a suspect near the scene and decide to conduct a show up, a live one-on-on identification procedure.
The fourth discusses photo arrays of potential suspects.
The fifth video is designed for detectives who conduct live lineups.