Please join us for our next meeting on Tuesday August 10th at 7pm.
We meet at 719 Orchard St, Santa Rosa, CA 95404. We can be reached at 707-542-7224 or info@pachline.org.
Next PACH Meeting
July 16th, 2010Police Killings
July 16th, 2010THE SILENCE MUST END!
The veil of secrecy must be lifted. Timely, full disclosure of information will restore public confidence in the integrity of the incident, investigation and the department. The voices of those who died at the hands of Sonoma County law enforcement, have been stilled following a 1999 recommendation of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission Advisory Commission for a CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARD:
1. Philip Medina, 48, January 17, 2000 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
2. James Curran, 51, March 19, 2000 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
3. Erin Colleen McDonald, 31, April 20, 2000 shot five times Windsor Police
4. Todd Eugene Dieterle, 37, May, 2000 shot seven times SRJC Police
5. Robert Comacho, 35, May 5, 2000 shot Rohnert Park Police
6. Patrick McLoughlin, 19, October 23, 2001 gunfire exchange Petaluma Police
7. Luis Solaro Gonzalez, 23, February 28, 2002 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
8. Thomas John Connelly, 49, May 8, 2002 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
9. Serena Roxanne Case, 32, January 16, 2003 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
10. Keith Thompson Suite, 42, April 8, 2003 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
11. Seth Micha Warde, 22, July 10, 2003 traffic stop CHP
12. Anthony Zakharoff, 49, July 27, 2003 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
13. Michael William Behringh, 52, November 18, 2003 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
14. Joseph A. Peay, 35, September 18, 2004 shot 10 times Sheriff/CHP
15. Kenneth Hugh Duncan, 62, November 11, 2004 shot nine times Sonoma County Sheriff
16. April Hanlon 35, November 25, 2004 gunfire Sonoma County Sheriff
17. Terry Lee Grinner, Jr., 30, January 25, 2005 shot twice Rohnert Park Police
18. Carlos Casillas Fernandez, 31, July 16, 2005 tasered 6x Santa Rosa Police
19. James Anthony DeCosta, 72, October 1, 2005 shot 27 times Petaluma Police
20. James Richard Nace, 42, December 10, 2005 shot Sonoma County Sheriff
21. Moses McDowell, 29, November 6, 2006 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
22. Haki Thurston, 22, February 23, 2007 shot 27 times Santa Rosa SWAT
23. Jeremiah Chass, 16, March 12, 2007 shot 8 times Sonoma County Sheriff
24. Richard DeSantis, 30, April 9, 2007 shot twice Santa Rosa Police
25. Walter L. Heller, 55, April 22, 2007 tasered twice Petaluma Police
26. Luis Felipe Sanchez, 27, May 4, 2007 shot 21 times Sonoma County Sheriff
27. Richard Lamont Williamson, 54, June 17, 2007 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
28. Ryan George, 22, July 9, 2007 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
29. William Townsley, 46, September 24, 2007 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
30. James Marrufo, 48, December 1, 2007 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
31. Jesse Hamilton, 24, January 2, 2008 shot Santa Rosa Police
32. Samuel Castillo-Martinez, 36, March 13, 2008 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
33. Heather Smith-Billings, 31, March 16, 2008 shot Rohnert Park Police
34. Leonardo Pacheco, 39, April 21, 2008 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
35. Guy James Fernandez, 52, November 9, 2008 stun gun Rohnert Park Police
36. Craig Von Dohlen 37, December 7, 2008 shot Sonoma County Sheriff
37. Nathan B Vaughn, 39, December 20, 2008 tasered 3x Sonoma County Sheriff
38. Jon Gerald Moore, 44, September 18, 2009 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
39. Teresa Ellen Hagan, 49, January 21, 2010 in custody Sonoma County Sheriff
40. Albert Mike Leday, Jr, 49, June 1, 2010 shot 3x Sonoma County Sheriff
a printable version of this list is here
Cop Vs Bike
July 16th, 2010Bicyclist hit by Santa Rosa police car
By MARY CALLAHAN
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 8:24 a.m.
A bicyclist who was struck by a Santa Rosa policeman on Highway 12 late Wednesday night crossed from the eastbound bike lane in front of the officer’s car in an effort to turn left, officials said.
Dylan Debiase, 18, broke his baby toe and suffered scrapes and abrasions in the 10 p.m. collision at Boas Drive, police Lt. Ben Harlin said.
The officer, Eric Rhodes, a traffic investigator and DUI enforcement officer, was responding to a call about a suspected drunken driver on eastbound Highway 12 and was headed eastbound himself when Debiase crossed in front of him to turn onto Boas Drive, Harlin said.
Rhodes was in a marked police car, but Harlin said he did not believe his lights or siren were activated.
He said Debiase, who has a Highway 12 address, was in a marked bike lane before he crossed into the two eastbound car lanes.
Rhodes moved left to try to avoid the bike but they collided anyway, Harlin said.
Debiase was taken to an area hospital for treatment and later released, police said.
Authorities, meanwhile, closed down the eastbound lanes of Highway 12 into the early morning hours of Thursday to investigate and are still seeking witnesses, Harlin said.
Anyone who saw the incident is asked to call the Santa Rosa Police Department’s Traffic Bureau at (707) 543-3600
Petaluma Cops Get an RV
July 16th, 2010originally published at www.pressdemocrat.com
Huge new police vehicle turns heads
By DAN JOHNSON,
ARGUS-COURIER STAFF
Published: Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 12:00 p.m.
The sudden appearance of a huge, new police vehicle at various spots in Petaluma may have some people wondering if the Petaluma Police Department has decided to close up its building and go completely mobile.
“Actually, if our police department building fell to the ground, we could run it from this new vehicle,” said Lt. Mike Cook. “It is a mobile command center, and can be used for any disaster emergencies and at all checkpoints we conduct.”
It also can be used during critical situations involving SWAT and hostage/crisis negotiators as well as during special events to promote public safety, and to help with crowd and traffic control.
The vehicle was designed to be a fully functional regional command, control and communications center for Petaluma and the Avoid the 13 Sonoma County DUI Task Force. It is equipped with telephones, multimedia systems, radios, computers and other specialized equipment that help to ensure public safety.
It cost a whopping $450,000, but the city didn’t have to pay a penny for it. The funding breakdown was: $260,000 from a California Office of Traffic Safety Avoid the 13 DUI grant and other OTS grants; $140,000 from the police department’s asset-seizure funds; $40,000 from an annual Homeland Security grant; and $10,000 from the Petaluma Police Officer Association’s Hostage Negotiation Golf Fund account.
The police department was able to obtain a large portion of the money because it is the lead agency for the regional DUI enforcement efforts in Sonoma County to reduce alcohol-related fatalities and injuries, as well as increase public awareness of problems associated with drinking and driving.
The vehicle, which was obtained about two months ago, has created quite a stir.
“We brought it to the Butter & Egg Days Parade, and it generated a lot of positive comments,” Cook said.
Grant money also has enabled the police department to recently purchase four other vehicles — a Chevrolet pickup for commercial-vehicle enforcement ($53,000), a Chevrolet Tahoe for its K-9 program ($50,000), and a mobile pet-adoption trailer ($35,000) and a pickup ($32,000) for its Animal Services division.
The commercial-enforcement pickup and K-9 vehicle were funded by American Investment and Recovery Act grants, while the PETCO Foundation supplied money for the pet-adoption trailer and Animal Services pickup.
“The pickup will be used for education and enforcement involving large trucks,” Cook said.
Jeff Charter, the manager of the Petaluma Animal Shelter & Adoption Center, applied for the grant for the trailer after a pilot program to increase pet adoptions was successful. In 2009, the animal shelter began displaying animals up for adoption at the Petaluma PETCO store, and allowed them to interact with customers. They are housed at the store and taken care of by volunteers.
This increased public exposure helped to increase the number of animals adopted into good homes.
The mobile-adoption trailer will build open the success of the program by allowing animal shelter workers to bring animals up for adoption to special events and thereby enable more of them to be shown to the public.
“We have found that taking the animals to the public reaches people who might not otherwise consider adopting or make a special trip to the center,” Charter said. “The exposure is great for the animals, and allows us to pair adoptable animals with good homes.
“We are very thankful to PETCO for the donation that will allow us to continue this program.”
Concerned Petaluman Documents Police Excess and Failure
July 16th, 2010originally published at www.watchsonomacounty.com
Petaluma crusader wants an honest town
BY LORI A. CARTER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
John Hanania is on a crusade.
Yet another crusade, his critics say.
The Petaluma resident has been hounding city leaders for two years about what he calls a double standard in the Police Department’s enforcement of illegally tinted vehicle windows.
At the same time regular motorists are cited for the traffic infraction, several Police Department employees flout the law, driving their personal vehicles with after-market darkened front windows, he said.
“It’s not right,” he said recently just outside the department’s fenced parking lot, where several vehicles sported dimmed front windows in violation of the state’s vehicle code.
Hanania can point out multiple violations on city employees’ personal vehicles: lack of a front license plate, covered plates, missing mud flaps and more.
“Why is it that they allow this stuff to continue without tickets when they give the public citations?” he said. “I don’t like abuse of power.”
For the past few months, Hanania has engaged in a written back-and-forth with interim police Chief Danny Fish about his complaints. He has spoken at City Council meetings, called the city manager and met with police on several occasions. He has met with city council members dozens of times over the years.
Capt. Dave Sears said last week that his department has given its employees a deadline to fix their vehicles. No one has been cited.
“It’s a minor infraction. Our people who had those vehicles not in compliance, we asked them to take care of it,” he said. “Most of them have gotten it fixed. Some need some time.”
Sears said officers often give citizens a warning for violating the statute, which says the front driver’s and passenger windows cannot be covered by any film. Nine motorists were cited for the violation in March and April.
This battle isn’t the first for Hanania. His quarrels with the way the city does business go back at least 16 years, through more than half a dozen city managers and police chiefs.
In 1994, he fought a traffic ticket he got for what police said was an illegal left turn. He won in court and it sparked Hanania’s indignation.
In 1997 and 1998, he stood up against a proposal to install surveillance cameras in downtown’s Putnam Plaza, arguing the move was unfair to teenagers. The city increased police patrols but declined to put up cameras.
In 2003, he led a crusade against junked cars, recreational vehicles, boats and trailers being left on city streets past the three-day limit. The City Council voted twice to tighten enforcement of such eyesores.
Hanania also has been the target of police action. Disagreements with a neighbor led to vehicles owned by both families being towed, although Hanania maintains his were towed improperly.
Hanania filed a small claims lawsuit against the city on May 3, demanding the towing fees be returned. He parks several vehicles in the cul-de-sac where he lives and tries to move the vehicles around before they are ticketed, he said.
Some city employees say privately that his latest complaints are an effort to pressure the city to refund the towing fees. Hanania has filed a series of Public Records Act requests seeking police records on citations, among other things.
“I have a great deal of respect for a lot of the police,” he said. “But what they are doing isn’t right.”
One city councilman has come under Hanania’s fire. He said the front windows of Mike Harris’ car have been modified. Harris said he doesn’t know if they are illegally tinted.
“I have no idea,” he said. “I’m not a car guy. If they are, I’ll have them checked and have them fixed.
“I’ve spoken to John probably 50 times in the last seven years I’ve been on the council. John is a good guy and I enjoy my discussions with him,” Harris said. He declined to comment further because of the recent claim against the city. The small claims suit is scheduled for a hearing next month.
People Resist Racist Checkpoints
July 16th, 2010originally published at www.watchsonomacounty.com
Protesters warn drivers of police checkpoints in Santa Rosa and Petaluma
By GUY KOVNER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Opponents of police vehicle impoundment practices are hitting the streets, intent on warning motorists of police checkpoints in Santa Rosa and Petaluma.
Protesters holding signs in Spanish will continue to show up at checkpoints to protest 30-day impoundments of vehicles operated by drivers without valid licenses, said Alicia Roman, a Santa Rosa attorney who is a member of the Committee for Immigrant Rights.
The cost of reclaiming an impounded auto, typically $2,000, places an “undue hardship” on low-income people, including Latino immigrants, she said.
“People are upset this is going on,” Roman said.
Police officials, who have discussed the issue with Roman’s group and American Civil Liberties Union representatives, say the checkpoints are both legal and appropriate.
“I believe it is an effective strategy for making the streets safer,” said Santa Rosa Police Chief Tom Schwedhelm.
“There are consequences for not following the law,” he said, regarding the impoundments and cost of getting the car back.
Petaluma Police Sgt. Ken Savano, who coordinates checkpoints, acknowledged that the protesters are exercising their First Amendment right of free speech and may do so as long as they do not obstruct sidewalks or get in a roadway.
“They are taking a close look at law enforcement,” Savano said. “We don’t have any problem with that.”
But he also suggested that the protests might enable alcohol-impaired drivers, “who could kill any one of us,” to evade the checkpoints.
The police stops are intended to catch people driving under the influence, as well as motorists with suspended or revoked licenses and unlicensed drivers, he said.
The 30-day impound is applied only to drivers cited for license violations, Savano said, and keeps a vehicle “away from that driver for 30 days.”
Roman said the checkpoint protests are intended to warn Spanish-speaking drivers, including illegal immigrants whose status prohibits them from obtaining California driver’s licenses.
“We are not out there to help drunk drivers,” she said.
Amalia Greenberg Delgado, an ACLU attorney in San Francisco, said that the Santa Rosa checkpoints are netting substantially more driver’s license violations than DUI citations.
Santa Rosa police statistics, obtained by Roman, show that 5,277 vehicles were screened at checkpoints between December 2006 and June 2008, resulting in 96 vehicles towed for license violations and six DUI arrests.
Savano noted that DUI arrests in Petaluma increased 8 percent in 2009-10, while vehicle collisions are down 20 percent. They have dropped to the lowest level in 10 years, a trend he attributed largely to the checkpoints.
“It is absolutely worth it,” Savano said.
Rick Coshnear, a Santa Rosa attorney and member of the Committee for Immigration Rights, said police are blurring the distinction between drivers who have never had a license and those who are currently unlicensed but may have previously been licensed in Mexico, another state or in California before it ceased licensing undocumented immigrants.
The state law on vehicle impoundment applies to people whose licenses have been suspended, revoked or restricted or those “driving a vehicle without ever having been issued a driver’s license.”
It is likely, Coshnear said, that drivers “whose licenses have been suspended or revoked…are much more dangerous than those who do not currently have a valid license.”
Santa Rosa’s vehicle impound program was started in the mid-1990s in response to a spate of hit-and-run collisions and the finding that many who flee from a crash are unlicensed drivers, Schwedhelm said.
Numerous collisions still involve unlicensed and uninsured drivers who cause injuries and property damage, he said. “That’s the other side of the story,” Schwedhelm said.
Officers have discretion to avoid impounding vehicles for license violations, enabling the driver and occupants to get home safely by taxi or with a licensed driver, Schwedhelm said.
But an unlicensed driver cannot be allowed to drive away because that would expose the city to significant liability, he said.
“We are going to encourage our officers to impound,” Schwedhelm said.
The road would be safer, Savano said, if all residents — regardless of immigration status — were tested and licensed to drive, and required to carry insurance.
Such a decision is up to the Legislature, Schwedhelm said, agreeing that universal licensing “may help the situation.”
The ACLU has submitted to Santa Rosa a proposed impound policy that would prohibit towing away a safely parked vehicle, or if a licensed driver could retrieve it “in a reasonable time period.”
It would also allow, under some conditions, the vehicle to be towed to the driver’s home instead of an impoundment lot.
In a letter to the ACLU, Schwedhelm acknowledged receiving the proposed policy. Police are updating towing and impoundment policies and “will take your recommendations into consideration,” the chief wrote.
Petaluma’s next checkpoints will be on FridayJuly 16 and July 23. Santa Rosa’s next effort will be Labor Day weekend.
You can reach Staff Writer Guy Kovner at 521-5457 or guy.kovner@pressdemocrat.com.
Funston Has Shot Twice Before
July 16th, 2010originally published at www.pressdemocrat.com
Deputy involved in June 2 shooting involved in two other shootings
By JEREMY HAY
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Monday, July 5, 2010 at 5:32 p.m.
The Sonoma County Sheriff’s deputy who shot and killed a man last month in Santa Rosa has been involved in three of the 11 officer-involved shootings that the sheriff’s office has recorded this decade.
Sgt. Mark Fuston, who on June 1 killed Albert Mike Leday Jr., 49, after a high speed chase, was one of two deputies who fatally shot a Windsor woman in 2000 after she pointed a toy gun at them. In 2003, he shot and injured a fleeing gang member.
A Santa Rosa Police Department investigation continues into the Leday shooting. Fuston was cleared of wrongdoing in the prior two shooting incidents.
Civil rights activists on Monday said they were withholding judgement but said that the prior shootings were notable.
“It doesn’t bode well,” sad Carole Howard, a member of the Police Accountability Clinic and Helpline, a group that works with people who feel mistreated by police. “It’s just one more thing to pay attention to, it’s an alert, put it that way.”
Steve Fabian, a boardmember of the county chapter of the ACLU, said, “It’s hard to second guess a police officer in this type of situation without knowing all the things that took place, both in the current situation and the prior situations.”
He added, however, “I think that at the same time, three shootings — most officers go through their career with no shootings — it just raises a lot of concerns.”
Sheriff’s officials last week said that deputies involved in multiple shootings aren’t subject to additional supervision, but that the department reviews each incident to see whether procedures were followed.
On Monday, Sheriff’s Capt. Matt McCaffrey said that those reviews do take into account prior incidents where there was use of force.
“You look at what were your findings in the previous shootings, if he followed policy, he followed law, he followed good judgment. If your findings were positive, there’s nothing really to go back and look at,” he said.
“Our point of view is to look at it internally to see if they followed procedure, and the second issue is to look at it from a training standpoint,” McCaffrey said. “That’s our job as an agency.”
Fuston is not the only deputy to have been involved in multiple shootings. In 2004, Deputy Henri Boustany was involved in two fatal shootings; he was cleared of wrongdoing in both cases.
Of the 11 officer-involved shootings recorded by the sheriff’s office since 2000, eight were fatal.
The first of those was in April 2000, and involved Fuston and another deputy, Tom Howard. In that case, the two were responding to a 911 call from Erin McDonald, 31, who said she was being held hostage by a woman with a gun.
In the house, McDonald pointed a cap gun that had been painted black at each of them separately, prompting them to fire.
Both were cleared of wrongdoing, and the District Attorney’s Office later concluded that McDonald “orchestrated” a “suicide-by-cop plan.”
In the 2003 shooting, Fuston shot Andrew Valencia, 21, five times in the back, buttocks and legs after pulling him over. In that case, Santa Rosa and Petaluma police investigators said, Valencia turned as Fuston was chasing him, appeared to be drawing a weapon and shouted, “I have a gun, too.”
No weapon was found on Valencia, who survived, but a loaded 9 mm handgun was found in his car. Valencia was later sentenced to more than 30 years in prison for a gang-related shooting.
The shooting of Leday came after a pursuit that began at a Larkfield apartment complex to which deputies had been called by a woman who said she was fearful of her ex-boyfriend who was on the premises, and that he had earlier assaulted her.
When deputies spotted Leday in his car, he led them on a chase to Guerneville Road and West Steele Lane, where he crashed into a light pole and got out of his car.
He was shot seconds later, police and some witnesses said, after he appeared to reach behind his back and pull up his waistband.
No weapon was found on Leday or at the scene.
The case remains under investigation by Santa Rosa Police investigators who will turn over their findings to the District Attorneys Office to determine if there was any criminal wrongdoing.
Funston Has Killed Before
July 16th, 2010originally published at www.pressdemocrat.com
Death was Sonoma County deputy’s second shooting case
By JEREMY HAY
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Friday, July 2, 2010 at 6:22 p.m.
Officials on Friday released the name of the Sonoma County Sheriff’s deputy who shot shot a man to death June 1, saying threats against him had been ruled out or “mitigated.”
Sgt. Mark Fuston, a much-decorated veteran deputy who is a firearms instructor and heads the Sheriff’s SWAT Team, was involved in an earlier, non-fatal shooting in 2002 when he was an officer in Windsor.
In the latest incident, Fuston shot Albert Mike Leday Jr., 49, after a high speed chase that ended in Santa Rosa at the entry to the Coddingtown Mall parking lot. Leday was shot once after he refused to surrender and, investigators have said, appeared to reach behind into his waistband.
Initial reports indicated Leday was shot in the chest.
Fuston, 50, returned to work late last week, officials said.
The Sheriff’s Office has been criticized for taking over a month to release Fuston’s name. Leday’s family retained a lawyer to try and get the information released and the Sonoma County Chapter of the ACLU formally requested the release of the deputy’s identity.
Sheriff’s officials had refused to release Fuston’s name because, they said, they had evidence of potential threats against him that needed to be addressed. They have refused to elaborate on those threats and on Friday again declined to detail them, saying that to do so might compromise confidential sources.
“If we expose that information we have, there’s the possibility of it getting back to the source of the information and how it’s coming to us,” said Sheriff’s Capt. Matt McCaffrey.
Some threats have been ruled out and others “mitigated” and “we feel comfortable that although there are risks, they are hopefully at this point not above and beyond the risks normally associated with the job,” McCaffrey said.
Steve Fabian, a director of the county ACLU chapter, said it was an inadequate response.
“They should explain in detail exactly what the threats were, and I think that an explanation’s owed as to why it took so long to determine, obviously, that these threats are not viable.”
Leday’s son, Justin Leday said, “I appreciate that it’s finally come out who shot my father.”
He added: “Obviously, I can’t make any judgment calls as to what was going through this officer’s mind. But to be involved in a shooting twice without a weapon, shows a lack of judgment, a lack of patience, and it seems like he shoots first and asks questions later.”
In the 2003 shooting, Fuston shot a fleeing gang member five times in the back, buttocks and legs after pulling him over. In that case, Santa Rosa and Petaluma police investigators said, Andrew Valencia turned as Fuston was chasing him, appeared to be drawing a weapon and shouted, “I have a gun, too.”
No weapon was found on Valencia, who was later sentenced to more than 30 years in prison for a gang-related shooting, but a loaded 9mm was found in his car.
Fuston was cleared of criminal wrongdoing after a seven month investigation.
The shooting of Leday was the climax to a pursuit that began at a Larkfield apartment complex to which deputies had been called by a woman who said she was fearful of her ex-boyfriend who was on the premises, and that he had earlier assaulted her.
When deputies spotted Leday in his car, he led them on a chase to Guerneville Road and West Steele Lane, where he crashed into a light pole and got out of his car. He was shot seconds later after, police and some witnesses said, he appeared to reach behind his back and pull up his waistband.
Asked whether deputies involved in more than one shooting come under extra internal scrutiny or supervision, McCaffrey said they are monitored “from the standpoint of their mental health.”
“In the end,” he said, “We’re going to review it internally, from the policy standpoint, from an employee training standpoint: Is there any thing we’re going to have to change or improve?”
The question of whether a deputy has been involved in more than one shooting is less relevant, he said.
“Each shooting has to stand on its own,” he said. “In other words, just because a deputy’s been in a previous shooting, whether he was 100 percent in the right or there were some problems with it, that doesn’t necessarily bleed over into the current shooting.
“Every round that comes out of the end of a firearm has to stand up on its own as a use of force,” he said.
The Santa Rosa Police Department, which is investigating the shooting under a countywide protocol that calls for outside agencies to evaluate officer-involved shootings, did not return phone calls seeking comment on Friday.
Leday Family Demands Answers
July 16th, 2010originally published at www.pressdemocrat.com
Family of man killed by deputy wants more answers
By JULIE JOHNSON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Friday, June 25, 2010 at 6:40 p.m.
Officials with the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office are still withholding the name of the deputy who shot and killed a Santa Rosa man in a June 1 pursuit, saying they continue to investigate possible threats made against the deputy.
Until they feel certain that the deputy has a plan to manage any threats made against him for his role in the incident, they won’t release his name or any details about his history with the office, Capt. Matt McCaffrey said Friday.
“We have some risks to verify,” McCaffrey said of what Sheriff Bill Cogbill had previously called possible gang-related threats against the deputy. The assessment will determine whether the safety risks are “above and beyond what would normally come with the job,” he said.
The son of the man killed in the encounter, 49-year-old Albert Mike Leday, Jr., said Friday that he has been frustrated by unanswered calls to police and sheriff’s officials as he seek more information about his father’s death.
Leday was shot in the chest after he led deputies on a high-speed chase through Larkfield that ended outside Coddingtown Mall when he crashed into a light pole. Witnesses and police officials said Leday refused to surrender and reached behind his back. The deputy shot three times and struck him once, police said.
His son, Justin Leday, 25, of Santa Rosa said calls to police and sheriff’s officials went unanswered until this week, and he said he’s still trying to get more information about the incident.
“Someone from the sheriff’s called me and said they had information on their website if I wanted to know more,” Leday said.
The family has hired an attorney to help them get a report on the shooting, he said.
Sheriff’s officials can’t tell the family anything more than they’ve released to the public, McCaffrey said. He said he hopes for an update on the investigation sometime next week.
“Some threats had been ruled out,” McCaffrey said. “We’re closer to being comfortable to releasing the deputy’s name.”
Santa Rosa Police Department officials are in charge of investigating the shooting. A countywide protocol calls for an outside agency to evaluate officer-related fatal incidents. That investigation could take months, police have said.
Law enforcement agencies are required by law to release details about a public officer’s involvement in a fatal incident. Experts in First Amendment laws have said that agencies also have a legal basis to investigate threats against their employees before making information public.
Leday’s family members have said they will not give up until they can get a fuller explanation from the sheriff’s office, including the identify of the deputy.
“I don’t want people to forget about this, I feel like they’re trying to prolong it so people forget,” Justin Leday said. “I want to make it clear I’m not going away until my questions are answered.”
ACLU Demands Killer’s Name
July 16th, 2010originally published at www.pressdemocrat.com
ACLU seeks name of deputy who fatally shot suspect June 1
By RANDI ROSSMANN
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 at 12:52 p.m.
The refusal by Sonoma County sheriff’s officials to release the name of a deputy who shot and killed a man following a high-speed chase two weeks ago is being challenged by the ACLU.
The Sonoma County chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has formally requested Sheriff Bill Cogbill release the name of the deputy, as well as other deputies present at the shooting.
Albert Mike Leday, Jr., 49, died June 1, after being shot while in front of Coddingtown Mall at Guerneville Road and West Steele Lane after leading deputies on a high-speed chase and crashing into a pole.
Sheriff’s officials said the deputy who shot him has not been identified because his safety could be in jeopardy. They have also refused to say if the deputy has been involved in any other shootings and how long he has been on the force.
Cogbill Tuesday held to that position, saying the department has information indicating a possible threat to the officer.
Leday was an ex-felon on parole for a burglary conviction with a record that included assault with a deadly weapon and two restraining orders.
Cogbill Tuesday said he had some ties to gangs, but a gang connection alone did not warrant withholding the deputy’s name, he said.
Three days after the shooting, Santa Rosa police officials leading the investigation said gang activity was not part of their concern for the deputy’s safety.
Cogbill said they’ve uncovered more information since that time.
“I believe it’s a viable threat and something we need to be concerned about,” Cogbill said.
Leday’s family Tuesday refuted reports that Leday had gang ties, his son said.
“He was an educated, well-spoken man who had zero ties to gangs,” said his son, Justin Leday, 25, of Santa Rosa.
The wait to find out more about why a deputy used lethal force against Leday, who was apparently unarmed, has taken a toll on his family, said Perla Rodriguez, 49, of Las Vegas, Justin Leday’s mother and Leday’s high-school sweetheart.
“I want answers, I need answers,” Rodriguez said. “I can’t rest, and believe me my son can’t rest.”
Steve Fabian, member of the local ACLU board, wrote to the sheriff on behalf of the agency, citing the public records act and asking for the information within 10 days.
Cogbill said he met with a county attorney Tuesday afternoon in light of the ACLU’s letter and confirmed that the Public Information Act allows a law enforcement agency to withhold a name when that person’s safety is in question.
“The law is pretty clear that if we feel there’s a viable threat to the person, then we can withhold the name,” Cogbill said.
Cogbill added that the decision to continue withholding the name was not influenced by the deputy’s record or time on the force.
“It has nothing to do with any past history or actions or who the person is,” Cogbill said.
If an investigation determines the threat isn’t real, he’ll release the name, Cogbill said.
Law enforcement agencies may be legally justified in withholding a name right after a shooting if there’s a “clear and direct threat” to the person’s safety, Terry Francke, general counsel with Californians Aware, a nonprofit public records group, told The Press Democrat last week. But Francke said there’s no legal basis to withhold that information indefinitely.
In prior cases involving deputies shooting a suspect, the release of names has varied.
It took two days for Santa Rosa Police and the Sheriff’s Department to release the names of two deputies involved in the March 2007 fatal shooting of Jeremiah Chass, a Sebastopol teenager.
It took two months for sheriff’s officials that same year to release the name of three deputies who shot and killed a man who wounded a deputy. Officials claimed it had taken that long to determine if there were credible threats against the three.
In the Leday case, deputies were called to a Larkfield apartment by a woman fearful of her ex-boyfriend. She told a dispatcher he’d recently assaulted her and was then armed with a knife.
When deputies spotted the man in his car, he led them on a chase from Larkfield to Coddingtown.
At the mall entrance, Leday drove into a light pole and got out of his car. Sheriff’s officials said he was seen reaching for something behind his back and that he wouldn’t follow commands to comply with deputies.
Deputies said they feared he had a weapon. One deputy fired three times, hitting Leday once.
He was apparently unarmed and no weapon was found in the car or at the scene.