LAPPL Blog: The official blog of the Los Angeles Policy Protective League
Officer Joshua Sewell: The right stuff in the right place at the right time
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 03/31/2010 @ 01:22 PM
LAPD Motor Officer Joshua Sewell cut his vacation short to volunteer at the recent Los Angeles Marathon. It’s a good thing he did. Just ask 21-year-old Jay Yim, who is listed in good condition at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center and expected to make a full recovery. At mile 18, Yim suffered a heart attack and Officer Sewell was one of the first people to come to his aid.
LA Times reporter Jeannine Stein recounts what happened:
…When he [Officer Sewell] tried to revive Yim he got no response and found no pulse. Sewell yelled for someone to call an ambulance and recruited an LAPD bicycle officer to help administer CPR. "I did CPR in the [police] academy 15 years ago but not since then," he said. The lapse didn't seem to matter -- the routine kicked in and chest compressions and mouth-to-mouth resuscitation were done with precise timing.
Also on the scene was Dr. Charles Chandler, chief of surgery at Santa Monica-UCLA Medical Center, who was watching the marathon from near his home and saw Sewell running by. "When I got there Jay was in the middle of the street -- completely still, and his pupils were dilated and he wasn't moving any air." Chandler helped out with CPR, eventually getting a pulse, and called UCLA's emergency room to tell the staff the ambulance was on its way.
After undergoing tests, it was discovered that Yim had suffered some seizures as well, possibly caused by the cardiac arrest, said Dr. Paul Vespa, director of Neurocritical Care at UCLA, who treated Yim. An MRI showed some brain swelling, and fearing brain injuries hypothermia was induced. In that process, the body is cooled to 32 degrees Celsius (the procedure is also used for some cardiac arrest cases) and is in a coma. The process, still somewhat controversial, basically brings on hibernation, Vespa said, causing a metabolism shutdown. "When you have a brain injury," he said, "a whole number of bad pathways get activated, and that can lead to cell death and damage. Hypothermia blocks those pathways." He added that hypothermia can also put the body at higher risk for infection, since the immune system is suppressed.
Yim's body was warmed after about 48 to 72 hours, and he is now awake and talking. He's undergoing physical therapy, and while Vespa said it's too soon to tell if Yim will ever do another marathon, his overall prognosis is excellent. What caused his cardiac arrest still isn't known, and although it's unusual for someone his age and good health to suffer a heart attack, dehydration or inadequate nutrition during a marathon or other physical activity can trigger such catastrophic events.
But Yim, a USC pre-med student originally from Phoenix, has some incentive to run again. Sewell, who ran the marathon in 2006, said he promised he'll finish the last 8.2 miles with Yim when he's able. "I told him that, and he got a big old smile on his face," Sewell said, adding that he’s been spending a lot of time with Yim and his family. "I got a little emotionally attached to this one."We commend Officer Sewell for his quick actions and dedication that saved Yim's life. He is an exemplary representative of the more than 9,900 men and women of the LAPD. Thanks to the LA Times' Jeannine Stein for sharing a great story with a happy ending.
A victory for law enforcement: Ninth Circuit rules felons cannot possess guns while asleep
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 03/24/2010 @ 04:13 PM
While we have never been shy about speaking out against decisions of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that we don’t agree with, we are also quick to cheer the Court’s decisions that are favorable to law enforcement. This is the case today as we hail the decision of an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit. (What is an en banc panel? “En banc” is a French term used to refer to the hearing of a legal matter where all judges of a court hear the case, often used for unusually complex cases or those considered unusually significant.)
In 2003, three LAPD gang officers were driving past an apartment building known for criminal activity. The officers encountered three men and two women standing on the sidewalk. One officer asked the group what they were doing and one of the men answered "[N]othing." When the group was asked if anyone present lived in the building, one man responded, “It’s okay, we're out of here right now,” quickly turning and running down the center path of the apartment complex. Two officers followed him up the walkway and observed him turn left to grasp an apartment door handle. Seeing the officers in his wake, the man quickly let go of the door, crossed the walkway to another apartment and entered, closing and locking the door.
When the officers were able to get into the apartment, they found Earl Anthony Nevils, apparently asleep, a machine gun lying on his lap and a handgun leaning against his right leg, in clear view of the officers at the door. Later in court, Nevils defense was that he couldn't be held accountable for the weapons because he was unconscious after a day of drinking. In 2008, a divided three-judge panel accepted Nevils’ contention that the government failed to show he knowingly possessed the guns.
Nevils’ luck ran out with the Ninth Court ruling, when the en banc panel upheld his conviction. Reasoning that evidence against Nevils had to be construed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, despite Nevils’ “innocent explanation,” the 11-judge panel unanimously ruled that a rational juror could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that Nevils knowingly possessed the weapons. Friday’s opinion by Judge Sandra S. Ikuta overturned the outrageous 2008 decision.
We applaud the opinion by Judge Ikuta and the other members of the Court who got it right: Chief Judge Alex Kozinski and Judges Pamela Ann Rymer, Sidney R. Thomas, Barry G. Silverman, Raymond C. Fisher, Ronald M. Gould, Richard C. Tallman, Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Richard R. Clifton and Milan D. Smith Jr. Thank you, judges!
To read the entire decision, click here.
Beware of Governor Deval Patrick's L.A. fundraisers
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 03/21/2010 @ 10:56 PM
Normally, we wouldn’t take note of an East Coast governor flying across the country to raise money in California, but we think it’s important to call attention to Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, who is visiting Los Angeles for fundraising events tonight and Monday. According to published reports in his home state, Patrick is having trouble funding his run for re-election in the fall. He has been trailing GOP opponent Charles Baker and even the state treasurer, who is running as an independent, has stockpiled more money than Patrick.
Why is the incumbent governor hurting for contributions at home? One big reason is his continued attacks on police benefits and collective bargaining rights. According to officials with the Massachusetts Coalition of Police Officers, Patrick has been chipping away at their right to negotiate health insurance, pensions and work details.
The right to collectively bargain is the backbone of organized labor, and benefits for hard-working public service employees have been under attack since Patrick took office.
We fully support our Massachusetts colleagues, who demand that the governor preserve their established collective bargaining rights.
We trust Gov. Patrick will enjoy the beautiful California sunshine but hope he falls short in his fundraising efforts 3,000 miles from home.
Case in point – what not to cut
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 03/18/2010 @ 04:11 PM
Vallejo is a city of 116,760 residents in the San Francisco Bay Area. About two years ago, the city opted to declare bankruptcy, becoming the first California city of over 100,000 pushed into insolvency. Now with so many other cities in California, including Los Angeles, facing severe budget pressures, Vallejo provides a case study in what services a city should cut and, more importantly, what not to cut.
(Photo: Angelo P./Vallejo Independent Bulletin)
KALW, the highly respected NPR affiliate in the Bay Area, has taken an in-depth look at the correlation between cuts to the Vallejo police force and a wave of violent crimes now gripping the community. As we have been preaching for much of the past year, a city’s economic recovery is dependent on a safe city. Vallejo proves our point.
Read or listen to Reporter Adelaide Chen’s story for yourself. It is recommended for every resident of Los Angeles – especially those elected officials wrestling with L.A.’s budget crisis. Let's learn from the experience – and frankly, the mistakes – of Vallejo. Keep public safety first in Los Angeles!
Hope on the horizon for body armor law
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 03/18/2010 @ 12:57 PM
We are greatly encouraged that the California Supreme Court has agreed to review the Second District Court of Appeals’ outrageous decision to overturn the 10-year-old law barring those convicted of certain violent felonies from possessing body armor. As we said at the time, the decision of the appellate court put police officers at greater risk and the law needs to be reinstated.
Attorney General Jerry Brown agreed and convinced the Supreme Court to review the decision. We will be petitioning the Court for permission to file a “friend of the court” brief supporting a reversal of the decision by the Court of Appeals. Swift corrective action by the high court would restore the protection that law enforcement needs and deserves.
The case arose when LAPD officers stopped Ethan Saleem in 2007 while he was out on parole after serving time for voluntary manslaughter. Saleem was wearing a 10-pound, military-style vest labeled "Body armor, fragmentation protection," which he was not allowed to possess because of his violent felony conviction.
The state law was passed following two famous incidents: the 1994 killing of San Francisco Police Officer James Guelff, murdered by a robber wearing body armor; and the notorious North Hollywood shootout that saw 11 LAPD officers and six civilians wounded during a prolonged exchange of gunfire with two bank robbers clad head to toe in assembled body armor.
We urge the California Supreme Court to move quickly to throw out the appellate court’s decision.
On a related track, we are closely following legislation seeking to reinstate the state law and provide a crystal-clear definition of body armor. With the support of L.A. County District Attorney Steve Cooley and California Sen. Alex Padilla, that measure has been approved by the state Senate and is pending in the Assembly. We urge the Legislature to quickly complete action on this bill and the Governor to sign it into law.
Fighting for your pensions
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 03/15/2010 @ 05:33 PM
Over the last few days, a number of politicians have proposed the elimination of defined benefit pensions for new government employees and have forced them into 401K-style retirement plans. In addition, these politicians have proposed increasing all current public employee contributions by 10%, raising the retirement age to 65 and doubling the vesting period from five to 10 years. These comments have been made in general context, but as far as we know, there is nothing stated that will exempt police and fire from the proposed changes.
The real crisis in this country is not the defined benefit plan (pensions) that most public sector employees contribute to, but reliance on these defined contribution plans for retirement that most private sector companies have set up for their employees. Defined contribution plans (401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, employee stock ownership plans, and profit-sharing plans) are destined to leave most Americans either retiring into poverty, or working until they die.
Defined benefit plans for LAPD officers have been around since June 7, 1899, and have proven to work. The Los Angeles Fire and Police Pension system, since the economic downturn, is currently 96.2% funded. Members contribute up to 9% of their bi-weekly pay, which adds up to $120,287,911 for the 2010-2011 fiscal year. Even with this sizable amount, the majority of the money needed to fund the pension systems comes from investments not contributions by the City or police officers.
The real crisis is the jerry-rigged defined contribution system, which sprung up from a tax loophole in the 1980s. As private companies abandoned their defined benefit plans, they pushed employees into defined contribution plans. Their employees were now forced to take both the risk of investment, along with longevity risks---the chance that they would outlive their assets.
The most sobering news came this week from the Employee Benefit Research Institute, which is the leading organization that surveys Americans and their preparations for retirement. A staggering 54% of Americans have less than $25,000 saved for retirement. Less than half of all Americans are aware of how much money they will need to save for retirement. As the era of defined contribution plans has grown, Americans are realizing that they cannot afford to retire. Defined contribution plans work great for millionaires, or maybe even for those with high salaries. However, the past century has proven the efficacy of defined benefit plans, with tens of millions of Americans comfortably retiring under these pension plans. As defined contribution plans stagger into their third decade of existence, evidence points to the failure of providing Americans with any semblance of a secured or dignified retirement.
If one believes that Americans should retire in poverty, then they will also agree with elected officials who believe that the era of defined benefit plans is over.
Another career criminal caught with body armor
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 03/10/2010 @ 11:15 AM
In December, a California appellate court ruled that the 10-year-old law banning possession of body armor by anyone with a violent felony conviction was unconstitutional because the “average person” wouldn't be able to tell which types of bulletproof vests were prohibited. Scarcely two weeks after the court struck down body armor ban, the real world provided yet another example of the absolute necessity of the law.
Maybe Ezra Hooker Sr., a felon with a lengthy criminal record (19 arrests and four convictions), had heard of the decision before he led LAPD officers on a high-speed chase on several freeways on January 4, 2010. After all, during the chase he threw a sawed-off rifle out the window of his car, which he doubtlessly was aware he was prohibited from possessing. He was likely fleeing police because he was also aware that (allegedly) pointing said rifle in a woman’s face was a violation of the law. But with the highly publicized court ruling weeks earlier, Hooker didn’t need to worry about discarding his body armor since possessing it wouldn’t add to his rapidly mounting legal woes.
As we – and the dissenting judge – pointed out in our sharp criticism of the court ruling, the original law did not leave violent felons in a state of confusion about what constituted body armor.
Felons with a history of violence who are allowed to wear body armor and are possessing weapons are a lethal threat to public safety. Case in point – Ezra Hooker. Fortunately for the responding officers, Hooker discarded his weapon during the chase and was unable to put up any resistance after crashing his car into a wall. However, had things gone a little differently, officers would have been facing a violent armed felon who, by wearing body armor, would have escalated his lethality in a potential shootout.
This latest case further underscores the message that we have been hammering home the past few months – that felon parolees released early from prison pose an avoidable danger to our communities. Hooker wasn't wearing body armor because he was going to visit his mother or look for a job. He was armed and wearing body armor because he was again engaged in his chosen profession of criminal activity.
While it is troubling enough that a person with as many felony convictions as Hooker was free to drive around our streets, we see a bigger problem taking shape. Combine the invalidation of laws tailored to lessen the danger that felons can pose once they are released with the budget cuts, court orders and legislation giving felons additional “good time” credit, and we are going to see thousands of Ezra Hookers on the streets.
The California Senate has already passed SB 408, Senator Alex Padilla’s urgent legislation reinstating the ban on the possession of body armor by violent felons. It is now in the Assembly’s Public Safety Committee. We urge the Governor and Assembly to pass and sign Senator Padilla’s bill as quickly as possible. Ezra Hooker is only the latest exhibit of the need for such a law.
A college newspaper gets it, why can’t the city’s leaders?
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 02/26/2010 @ 03:12 PM
The city budget crisis is commanding a lot of attention in the media, as well it should. Countless news stories, commentaries and editorials have been written and broadcast locally and even nationally. One of the best-framed commentaries we’ve read on the issue appeared recently in – of all places – the Daily 49er newspaper of California State University, Long Beach.
Noting that Villaraigosa wants to keep hiring police officers even as he proposes to cut the pay of the existing city workforce, the newspaper said: “In other words, those already working for the LAPD will be punished and others would be brought in to share in the burden. Apparently, he just wants to reach his 10,000-officer quota. Doesn’t it make more sense to stop hiring? The LAPD has already carried out several cutbacks such as relinquishing overtime pay and pay for unused sick days.”
The Daily 49er nailed it and we thank them for it.
Currently reading page 5 of 14.
