Connect with us

News

Indicted Execs’ Claims of SWAT Raid Fouls Tossed

Published

on

In this aerial still frame from video provided by Fox 11 LA, a fire erupted from an explosion at the Santa Clara Waste Water Co. plant outside Santa Paula. It occurred when a chemical was mixed with solid waste on Nov. 18. A vacuum truck was delivering a load of waste around 3:45 a.m. when the blast occurred, authorities said. (AP Photo/Fox 11 LA)</p

LOS ANGELES (CN) – A federal judge has tossed a lawsuit filed by two wastewater plant executives who claimed the California county of Ventura illegally raided their homes with SWAT teams as part of a criminal probe into a 2014 plant explosion.

Plaintiffs Dean Poe and David Wirsing were part of a 2015 criminal indictment filed against the executives at Poe’s company Green Compass, in connection with a 2014 explosion and chemical spill at Santa Clara Waste Water Company in Santa Paula that injured three firefighters and other employees.

Earlier this year, Poe and Wirsing pleaded guilty to some of the charges in the indictment, the Ventura County Star reported.

But in August 2016, the executives sued the county for $27 million claiming its officials had used heavy-handed tactics against them because of comments Wirsing made about first responders.

The executives and their family members sought damages for assault, unreasonable search, excessive force, retaliation, political discrimination, false imprisonment and other counts.

Wirsing said he told district attorney investigator Jeff Barry that firefighters were injured when they walked into the chemical spill because they failed to take precautions.

In response, the District Attorney’s Office deployed a SWAT team of 23 officers to raid Wirsing’s home at 6 a.m. on Dec. 17, 2014. Officers wore tactical gear and brandished guns and riot shields, the executives claimed.

Wirsing’s wife and 6-year-old daughter were the only people home, according to the executives, and officers made them stand outside in their pajamas for five hours while the SWAT team ransacked the home.

A SWAT team also raided Poe’s home and forced him, his wife Dana and their children out of their residence in their underwear, they claimed. He said his wife was recovering from cancer at the time.

When Poe and Wirsing voluntarily surrendered to authorities in August 2015, officers violated their constitutional rights by strip-searching them in a communal area, the executives said.

In a ruling issued on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Gary Klausner granted Ventura and the officials’ motion for summary judgment, finding the responding officers had acted reasonably and did not violate the families’ constitutional rights.

Klausner found Poe and Wirsing did not dispute that officials had probable cause to search their homes. They had based their claim on the SWAT team’s demonstration of force, which included the number of officers on the team, the way they were armed and their conduct. A gun had been pointed at Poe’s wife face and she had been forced out of bed, they said.

But Klausner wrote that audio and video evidence undermined Poe and Wirsing’s assertions.

“In particular, the audio and video recordings show SRT [Special Response Team] members did not point their guns at any residents and did not detain them,” Klausner wrote.

The judge found that video evidence demonstrated that the officers’ conduct was reasonable.

He also ruled the strip searches of Poe and Wirsing did not violate their constitutional rights and that they had failed to establish an unconstitutional policy or procedure.

Source: Indicted Execs’ Claims of SWAT Raid Fouls Tossed

Continue Reading
Comments

News

WATCH: Copwatch | Gang Unit Vehicle Stop Foot Bail | Tossed Gun | Man Tasered

Published

on

San Diego Copwatch April 10, 2018

4000 Chamoune ave. City Heights, Mid-City San Diego

*Subscribe to My Backup Channel: IRATE Copwatch https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6JE…

Please consider donating to my Patreon Campaign to continue my efforts holding police accountable through Copwatching. https://www.patreon.com/IrateProductions

You can also donate to my Paypal at paypal.me/Uaptsd Copwatch Playlist: https://tinyurl.com/UAPTSDCOPWATCH Outro Music by *Gravy Beats* https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaaC…

★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★

©IRATE Productions https://www.facebook.com/irateprod/

United Against Police Terror – San Diego https://www.facebook.com/uaptsd/ https://twitter.com/UAPTSD https://uaptsd.org/

★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★

Image1.jpg

Continue Reading

News

POLICE claim Man said ‘shoot me’ twice before he was shot to death by police, Audio Experts Heard Different

Published

on

Las Vegas Metro police shot and killed a 22-year-old man early Friday morning after he reached for a weapon and defied commands repeatedly, police said.

 

Officers Francisco Rivera, 28, and Padilla Mills, 23, were involved in the shooting in the 200 block of Madge Lane, near Charleston Boulevard and Sloan Lane.

Assistant Sheriff Brett Zimmerman on Monday said officers were on their way to another call when they spotted Junior David Lopez driving recklessly with two women in a blue Chrysler 300.

“Hey, what are you doing? Stay in the car man,” one of the officers yelled. “Stay in the ****ing car! Don’t move! Do not ****ing move!”

When officers stopped the vehicle, Lopez got out of the vehicle with a Smith and Wesson Bodyguard .380 firearm in his hand then tossed it on the ground, police said.

Zimmerman said Lopez defied officers’ commands to put his hands up and step away from the weapon. Instead Lopez grabbed the firearm and raised it, he said.

“Hey, get away from the gun!” officers yelled. “Do not move! Don’t reach for the gun, man. Do not reach the gun.”

Officers believe the body camera footage shows Lopez twice saying the words “shoot me.”

“I don’t know what was going through his head, but he was given ample opportunity to be taken into custody and he wasn’t,” Zimmerman said.

Officers Rivera and Mills both fired their weapons. Lopez fell to the ground and rolled over. Police say he reached for the guns once more. Officer Mills fired one more round, striking Lopez.

“We’re going to need medical for the subject,” one of the officers said, over his radio. “He’s reaching. Don’t reach for it! … His 4-13 is about one foot from his left hand. Don’t!”

Lopez was taken to Sunrise Hospital where he later died at 5:15 a.m.

The two women in the car were not injured. One was Lopez’ girlfriend and the owner of the vehicle. The other was a friend.

Both women on Monday night.

“I remember when we got pulled over they told us to get the **** out of the car, for him to get the **** out of the car. Why don’t I hear that in the video?” said Lopez’s girlfriend, Amber. “He was the best thing in my life… He said, ‘Don’t shoot me. Don’t shoot me. Don’t shoot me.’ You can’t hear the don’t, but you can hear him. ‘Don’t shoot me. Don’t shoot me.'”

Assistant Sheriff Brett Zimmerman said 22-year-old Junior Lopez told officers to shoot him, twice.

“I don’t know what was going through his head but he was given ample opportunity to be taken into custody and he wasn’t.”

Lopez’s girlfriend said he was yelling, “Don’t shoot me!”

Lopez’s girlfriend also says officers told him to get out of the car… before they yelled at him to get back in the car. She argues that the first portion was conveniently cut out of the video released today.

“Everything they said is not true,” said Jorge Luis Martinez, Lopez’s father. “The video is not complete. ”

Lopez had one prior charge for false statement to a police officer in North Las Vegas in 2016

Both officers have been employed with Metro since May 2016. They are both assigned to the Community Policing Division Northeast Area Command. They were both placed on routine paid administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation.

Continue Reading

News

Freedom of Speech Everywhere except a Courthouse so Says the US Attorney General

Published

on

How an anti-illegal immigration YouTuber turned a $280 fine into a federal criminal trial

How an anti-illegal immigration YouTuber turned a $280 fine into a federal criminal trial

Gary Gileno

Gary Gileno is shown outside the federal courthouse on Friday before his trial. Gileno was fighting a $280 citation for failing to comply with orders while trying to bring a video camera into a L.A. County Sheriff oversight meeting in 2017. (Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

 

It began as a $280 citation for using a video camera in a courthouse.

But to Gary Gileno, at stake was much more than the couple hundred bucks he was told to pay.

An attorney for the anti-illegal immigration activist and prolific YouTuber told a judge Friday that the four-hour trial over the fine was really about preventing government abuse of power, protecting the rights of journalists and ensuring that citizens can hold public officials accountable.

“If he is convicted … it’ll chill speech, it’ll chill journalism, it’ll say the federal government has a superpower to do whatever it wants,” attorney William Becker said. “This is unprecedented. This is what we expect to see in a police state.”

A federal prosecutor dismissed the rhetoric, arguing the Class C misdemeanor charge was simply about Gileno’s refusal to follow a security officer’s orders.

The unusual legal battle came after Gileno, 32, tried to bring a video camera into a meeting of the Los Angeles County Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission last year. California law specifically allows the public to use recording devices at such meetings, but the commission’s meeting in August was held at a federal appellate court building where filming is prohibited.

Someone just detained at federal courthouse, where public Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission meeting takin place, 4 trying 2 take pic

The commission, a civilian panel set up to monitor the Sheriff’s Department and listen to public concerns about the agency, had been gathering in different locations around the county since it began meeting in January 2017. This was the first time commissioners had met at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals building in Pasadena.

As Gileno entered the courthouse, deputy U.S. marshals told him he had to leave his camera in his car. Gileno insisted he had a right to record the meeting under the First Amendment and the state’s open meetings law, known as the Brown Act, and began filming the officers.

They responded by handcuffing and detaining him for about an hour.

After Gileno was cited, Robert C. Bonner, a former federal judge who chairs the commission, told The Times he wasn’t aware of certain provisions of the state’s open meetings law and relied on the county’s lawyers for legal advice.

Rather than pay the fine, Gileno opted to take his case to trial, facing a penalty of up to a $10,000 fine and 30 days in jail if found guilty.

Gileno, who began his YouTube career after showing up at his local council meeting in West Covina, said he has made a living off of his channel in recent years. His copious videos — 3,237 and counting — focus primarily on denouncing illegal immigration and promoting supporters of President Trump. His criminal case may have been a boon for his channel — a recent screed on his own prosecution was viewed more than 10,000 times.

On Friday, two court security officers who clashed with Gileno took the stand and testified that there were signs clearly posted saying photography wasn’t allowed in the courthouse. They said Gileno grew belligerent and disruptive, turning on his camera after being warned several times that it was not allowed.

Testifying in his own defense, Gileno said he was a freelance citizen journalist who has attended and filmed local government meetings and legislative town halls for about five years.

“I believe in the United States of America, you should be able to keep tabs on the government,” he said.

In more than 250 other public meetings he attended, he said, he never had an issue with bringing in his video camera. He said the security officer all of a sudden “exploded” at him, so he turned on his camera “to document what I felt was a violation of my rights at the time.”

Assistant U.S. Atty. Benedetto Lee Balding said Gileno’s disruption of security officers working at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals was no small matter. It was Gileno who escalated the encounter by refusing to go along with the officers’ orders, he said.

“He decided unilaterally he didn’t have to follow the rules,” the prosecutor said.

Becker, who primarily represents conservatives and Christians in free-speech cases, worked for free on Gileno’s case. He argued that the federal courthouse essentially became a “limited public forum” when it hosted the commission meeting, which Gileno should have been allowed to film under the state law.

Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth said she could understand why Gileno was angry and frustrated given his past experience filming the meetings, but she said that didn’t excuse his failure to follow orders. Security at the appellate courthouse, where justices could be filmed without their knowledge, was a serious concern, the judge said.

“Even if these seem arbitrary or don’t make any sense to Mr. Gileno or anybody else, clearly they serve this very important purpose,” Rosenbluth said, finding Gileno guilty.

Acknowledging that a “misunderstanding” had led to the kerfuffle, the prosecutor recommended a sentence of no fine, which would leave Gileno having to pay just $35 in court fees. Rosenbluth said she felt the need for “some consequences” and ordered Gileno to pay a $50 fine, bringing his total penalty to $85 with the fees.

Gileno said he was “outraged” and “astounded.” After the verdict, he turned to nine supporters in the audience, including a man in a red “Make California Great Again” hat, and exclaimed, “I was never read my rights!”

His attorney said they would seriously consider an appeal and possibly a civil lawsuit against the government.

“What the judge just said is if a city council can move to a federal building, they can keep the meeting secret,” Gileno said. “That’s grossly illegal.”

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Black Coat Media "Revolutionary Media"

%d bloggers like this: