Make cops work FOR us.

This coming Monday, December 2nd, will be the last meeting of the Community Advisory Council of IOLERO for the foreseeable future. It will be held at the original location, 2550 Ventura Ave., Santa Rosa, 6:00 to 9:00.

The CAC will be presenting its Use of Force recommendations (attached) directly to the Sheriff's Office. Director Karlene Navarro has said she will not be interacting with the CAC or the public because she doesn't much care for it. So, no Director's Report and she has also said she will not be giving an Annual Report to the supervisors this year.

There are some really good reasons for showing up on Monday. The first is to declare your support for a strong Community Advisory Council. Navarro has declared her desire to cut it off at the knees--not her words. Come and speak about the CAC and the importance of community representation, come and speak about the importance of an improved Use of Force policy, or come and just be an interested person in the room. Invite a friend!

Use of Force is front and center right now because a deputy killed a man this week with the carotid artery hold, the same hold used to kill Eric Garner--a hold which is forbidden by many law enforcement agencies, a hold which is forbidden in the CAC's recommendations, a hold which is allowed under the Sonoma County Sheriff's current Use of Force policy (meaning it will be a-ok with Jill Ravitch).

In my opinion, the most important role of the CAC is the gathering of best practices recommendations from law enforcement agencies from around the country and from Obama's 21st Century Policing recommendations. The goal is greater safety for both the public and officers through changes adopted before something bad happens. The Sheriff and Navarro seem content with having someone die first before looking at policy--if even then. And, bingo, now it has happened!

And, whether you can make it or not, please write to the supervisors and let them know you want an 11 member CAC (not the 6 that Navarro is proposing) and that you want it to meet monthly (not quarterly, as Navarro implemented against the directive of the supervisors) and that you want the CAC to continue its important role of making policy recommendations.

Here are the supervisors by district, but it's perfectly acceptable to contact all of them, not just the one for your district.

The easiest way to email each of them is to click on their district at http://sonomacounty.ca.gov/Board-of-Supervisors/Supervisorial-Districts/ , click Contact Us and fill in the form.​
District 1 - Susan Gorin
District 2 - David Rabbitt
District 3 - Shirlee Zane
District 4 - James Gore
District 5 - Lynda Hopkins

Thank you!

The story about the latest police kill has already been spun for the public. Clearly more children need to die for reform to be reenergized. The new sheriff is most directly responsible for two steps back. Notice how he used fire to cancel meeting the public? Third man in the row.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Moon:

This coming Monday, December 2nd, will be the last meeting of the Community Advisory Council of IOLERO for the foreseeable future. ...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

The story about the latest police kill has already been spun for the public. Clearly more children need to die for reform to be reenergized.

---

I've probably had more police experiences in my life them 99% of the people here. And yes- reforms are needed. But it also needs to go both ways...

Imagine for a moment a job where every single encounter with the public you are not sure if you're going to get assaulted or worse.

In this Sebastopol case... why the ^@)% did the guy lead them on a high speed chase? Be uncooperative once his car was disabled? While I don't believe carotid holds should be used...period...because they can go so wrong so often... they *are* an attempt to non-violently end a bad situation...and apparently in this case a taser had already been used and failed to de-escelate the situation.

Personal responsibility. For whatever reason- this person created a dangerous situation that ended up ending badly for them.

Certainly we have no lack of cases in this country where the person did no real wrong to escalate the situation. And many, many more where a tense situation went wrong because of a harmless action that was misinterpreted as a threat . But I don't really see this here.

Ask yourself- why did this person willfully create a situation where police had to consider their lives- and those of others, in danger?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:

In this Sebastopol case... why the ^@)% did the guy lead them on a high speed chase? Be uncooperative once his car was disabled? ...

---

Read about this tragic incident here:

http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccob...4_17-48-38.png
Car chase ends in death in custody

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

Read about this tragic incident here:

---

This doesn't add anything to what I've already read. Nor change the facts that this individual led police on a high speed chase and when finally stopped was completely uncooperative.

As I said... there are cases where the police are clearly to blame. Cases that are tragic accidents because of a stressful situation. And cases like this- where someone, by their own actions, created a stressful situation that ended up going bad.

I know it's now been reported that the officer involved in the choke hold has been accused or cited for excessive before? And maybe he shouldn't have been a cop. Or maybe our system has failed him. I don't know...

But the facts as they have been presented so far...

1. The car was reported stolen and the person was reported as armed and dangerous. Bad information but the info the officers had.
2. This person was the legal owner of the car. And yet- ran from police and when finally stopped was uncooperative. See point one above.
3. Apparently a taser was used without effect? This to me- and I'm sure to the officers on scene screams methamphetamine- whether or not that was the case.
4. This is a situation that should never have happened. the so called "victim" did not behave in a normal or rational manner.

This is a sad...^$)%# up situation. But given the "facts" we have now... I have zero ill will to the police. And I'd say...whatever happened to personal responsibility? it surely seems this individual behaved in a non-normal way and created the situation that resulted in this outcome.

I don't know, maybe he was scared of cops because of previous bad experiences? This guy couldn't talk or walk and they choked him out after taising him. Uncooperative translation; couldn't dance to barked commands.
When I was a young man I considered law enforcement. Then the news reported a guy who applied and was turned down because he scored too high on the test. He took it all the way to the supreme court, and lost.
I've had plenty of experience with law enforcement too. Some were ok. But a hammer is a hammer. A simple tool to drive nails and destroy.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:

I've probably had more police experiences in my life them 99% of the people here. ...

---