LAPPL Blog: The official blog of the Los Angeles Policy Protective League
Forty-seven years later, we haven’t forgotten
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 01/21/2010 @ 07:30 PM
There’s another parole hearing coming up next week that has our full attention.
Officer Ian J. Campbell
EOW: March 9, 1963
If you haven’t heard the name Gregory Powell, you have probably heard of the infamous “Onion Field” case. It was a best-selling book by Joseph Wambaugh and later a movie starring James Woods – but the most important thing to remember is that these depictions were based on a true story and a real tragedy.
Powell was convicted of abducting LAPD Officer Ian Campbell and his partner, Officer Karl Hettinger, on March 6, 1963, after the officers stopped Powell and his cohort, Jimmy Lee Smith, for a routine traffic violation. Powell disarmed the officers by pulling a gun on Campbell and holding him hostage.
With a gun held to his ribs, Officer Campbell was forced to drive to an onion field near Bakersfield. He and Officer Hettinger were ordered to stand outside with their hands in the air. Then Powell shot Campbell in the face. Officer Hettinger was able to elude his captors, but was haunted by the incident his entire life.
For the killing, Smith and Powell both were originally sentenced to death, but the sentences were reduced to life after court decisions that temporarily stopped executions in the 1970s.
Powell is having a parole hearing on January 27. As we have at every parole hearing, the League is imploring the Parole Board to deny Powell’s application (click here to view our letter), and we are asking our officers and the community to do the same. Please send your letters right away requesting denial of parole for inmate Gregory Powell, CDC# A-57622, to:
Parole Board
California Board of Prison Terms
c/o California Men’s Colony
P.O. Box 8101
San Luis Obispo, CA 93409-8101
We will never show any tolerance for the killing of police officers. Law enforcement and the community at large must send a clear message that in a civilized society, the murder of police officers is unacceptable – and those who undermine the very fiber of public safety must expect the harshest possible treatment available under the law.
LAPPL opposes parole for killer of LAPD Metro Officer Jim Pagliotti
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 01/19/2010 @ 05:18 PM
Officer James Pagliotti
EOW: June 22, 1987
On June 22, 1987, Metro Officer Jim Pagliotti was working a surveillance detail when he and other officers were diverted to investigate some suspects who appeared to be armed. Gunshots were exchanged, and although Pagliotti shot his assailant, he was fatally wounded by Louis Belvin Jr.
Justice was served in December 1991, when through the hard work of RHD Detectives Marv Enquist, Jerry Stephens and the District Attorney’s office, Belvin was convicted of Jim’s murder and received a sentence of 28 years to life.
Belvin is now up for parole. The Los Angeles Police Protective League vehemently opposes the release of Louis Belvin Jr. and we have communicated our position to the Parole Board and the Governor.
A hearing is set for February 23, 2010, and we need your help to help us keep this brutal killer behind bars.
At the time of Pagliotti’s murder, Belvin was a suspect in another shooting, and just moments prior to shooting Pagliotti, Belvin beat a victim at the same intersection. Belvin may now be only 40 years old, but he remains a hardened cop-killer.
It is crucial to the security of the state of California, and to the safety of the men and women who enforce its laws, that killers forfeit their freedom for life when they murder a law enforcement officer. Join us in asking that Belvins’ parole be denied and that another parole hearing not be set for the maximum time allowed between hearings – 15 years.
We urge you to honor Pagliotti’s memory by submitting a letter of opposition as soon as possible. Be sure to indicate that you oppose the parole of inmate Louis Belvin, #H33133, and mail to the following address:
California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison
Attention: Classification and Parole Representative/Lifer Desk
900 Quebec Avenue
Corcoran, California 93212
We will never forget.
There they go again!
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 01/07/2010 @ 04:31 PM
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco wasted little time before giving us its first curious – if not outrageous – decision of 2010.
After closing out 2009 with its controversial Taser decision (see our blog post of December 30 below), the court this week overturned Washington State’s ban on voting by convicted felons. Why? Well, according to the Ninth Circuit, the criminal justice system in Washington discriminates against minorities at every level of the criminal justice system: arrest, bail, prosecution and sentencing. Ever dependable, the oft-reversed Judge Stephen Reinhardt was one of the two justices ruling in favor of the convicted felons. Read more about the ruling here
Now, you might think that this was the result of a hard-fought legal case in the lower district court – but you would be wrong. In actuality, there was no trial on the merits of the statistics offered up by the felons. The dissenting judge accurately characterized the ruling as a summary judgment for the felons that effectively settled the case on appeal.
The 2-1 decision is the first by an appeals court to overturn a state's prohibition on voting by felons, which exists in different versions in every state except Maine and Vermont. A state appeals court in San Francisco upheld California's voting law last year. Three other federal appeals courts have ruled that the Voting Rights Act does not apply to bans on voting by felons.
The good news is that the State of Washington is going to appeal the decision, either to the entire Ninth Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court. We are hoping for the U.S. Supreme Court, because Reinhardt’s name attached to any ruling is a red flag indicator that legal analysis is lacking – with a good chance of a 9-0 reversal by the Supreme Court.
Closing out 2009 on a high note
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 12/31/2009 @ 12:00 PM
For our final blog posting of 2009, we would be remiss if we did not recognize and congratulate the members of the LAPPL for their significant contributions in the reduction in L.A. crime rates. Thanks to their dedication and professionalism, LA is a safer city today than it has been in decades.
This was the seventh consecutive year in which the rate of serious crimes has declined in L.A. Through Saturday, violent crimes, such as homicide, rape and robbery, fell about 10% compared with the same period last year, while burglary and other property crimes declined 8%, according to LAPD figures.
All of this was accomplished in a challenging environment of double-digit unemployment and a recession some would say challenges the Great Depression. It also ran counter to less favorable crime statistics reported in surrounding jurisdictions including Long Beach, Santa Monica and Orange County.
In the media this week, several criminologists justifiably credited LAPD officers for the crime rate reductions. Among them were Richard B. Rosenfeld, president of the American Society of Criminology, and George Kelling, a leading criminal justice scholar at Rutgers University. We thank them for giving LAPD officers independent recognition for a job well done.
LA Times reported: “Kelling and Rosenfeld emphasized that much of the credit for the extended decline in Los Angeles belongs to the LAPD, which has continued to refine crime-fighting strategies and strengthen ties with community groups in neighborhoods where it was once viewed with distrust and hostility.”
Rosenfeld hastened to add that our ability keep up the gains depends on whether elected officials manage to continue to fund the Department at levels that allow LAPD to maintain the ranks and strategies. "Smart policing is not cheap," he said. "Whether it will continue to succeed depends on whether communities can afford it."
That’s our challenge in 2010: To keep public safety as the top priority in Los Angeles. Having solid results to show for the efforts of LAPD officers in 2009 puts us in a good position to keep the pressure on and prevail in the upcoming year.
Happy New Year to all.
The Ninth Circuit's year-end 'gift' to law enforcement
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 12/30/2009 @ 11:55 AM
Stun guns like this Taser X26 are supported by law enforcement. (Photo: Herb Swanson / AP)
On the heels of an appalling district court decision overturning the California law banning the possession of body armor by violent felons, another court decision has us scratching our heads in disbelief.
This time it was a Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel, essentially ruling that unless an officer is actually under physical attack, he/she cannot use a Taser to subdue a suspect. And, for good measure, these starry-eyed jurists, who probably have never been in a physical fight in their lives, opined that police officers should not fear irrational suspects defying officer commands as long as the suspect stays 15 feet from the officer.
As every street cop knows, any suspect within 15 feet who is actively resisting verbal commands is a threat to officer safety.
If a suspect complies with an officer’s commands, the use of force or a weapon is unnecessary. When a suspect fails to comply with verbal commands, it means the situation is rapidly escalating and some form of force will be required to gain compliance.
Non-lethal force is the safest and best way to obtain the needed compliance. Non-lethal force instruments are designed to avoid injury to both officers and suspects by swiftly incapacitating the suspect. Stand-off instruments such as Tasers ensure officer safety. Inhibiting officers from using the Taser option puts them, suspects and innocent bystanders in greater danger.
About the only positive thing we can find in the opinion is that Judge Stephen Reinhardt, one of the authors of this decision, was recently reversed 9-0 by the U.S. Supreme Court in a death penalty case where, unbelievably, he was found to have fabricated facts in his opinion. We can only hope that either the Ninth Circuit en banc, or the U.S. Supreme Court, reverses yet another terrible ruling by Reinhardt.
The perfect storm for a public safety crisis
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 12/22/2009 @ 12:10 PM
On February 28, 1997, Emil Matasareanu (left) and Larry Phillips Jr. (right) robbed a bank in North Hollywood and triggered one of the most notorious crime shootouts in history. Heavily armored, the two were able to withstand an estimated 650 rounds from police for 44 minutes, while responding with over 1,000 rounds, before being killed. The incident led to a state law banning possession of body armor by anyone with a violent felony conviction.
“Criminals are packing more heat,” proclaimed a USA Today headline of December 16th. The story – based on a survey by the Police Executive Research Forum – confirmed the trend many law enforcement professions have witnessed in recent years: Criminals are increasingly choosing high-powered firearms as their weapons of choice.
Little did we know when we read that story the added significance and urgency it would take on within the same week, when the 2nd District Court of Appeals in Los Angeles overturned a 1998 California law that bans possession of body armor by anyone with a violent felony conviction. Incredibly, the court ruled the law unconstitutional because supposedly the average person wouldn't be able to decipher which types of bulletproof vests are prohibited. As articulated in our press release “Police officers in danger because of court ruling,” the LAPPL is dismayed and outraged by the court's decision.
The origin of this completely common-sense law was a pair of high-profile cases in California in the 1990s – the killing of San Francisco Police Officer James Guelff, murdered by a robber wearing full body armor, and the infamous North Hollywood shootout that saw 11 LAPD officers and six civilians wounded during a prolonged exchange of gunfire with two bank robbers wearing head-to-toe assembled body armor.
Nearly 40% of police departments surveyed in the USA Today article reported an uptick in the use of assault weapons. In addition, half reported increases in the use of 9mm, .40-caliber and 10mm handguns in crimes. USA Today said the data offered one of the broadest indications of officers' concerns about the armed threat from criminals involved in murder, assault and other weapons-related offenses.
Now factor in the pending early release of tens of thousands of inmates from state prisons and we have the ingredients of a public safety crisis of unprecedented proportions. It is a somber and disturbing way to end 2009, and it heightens our concern over what police officers will face on the job in 2010.
What's needed now is bold and swift action by public officials to ensure appropriate laws are in place and enforced, and criminals remain in prison to complete their sentences.
We have requested that Attorney General Brown immediately appeal the 2nd District Court’s decision and will be carefully watching other cases that affect law enforcement job safety – in what is already a dangerous profession, we can’t hand criminals the tools they need to protect themselves while attacking our officers.
Misguided federal priorities hurt law enforcement
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 12/15/2009 @ 11:38 AM
California is being especially hard hit by cuts to an important federal program that reimburses state and local governments for the cost of jailing criminal illegal immigrants. The annual appropriations bill recently agreed to by the U.S. House and Senate reduces funding for the State Criminal Assistance Program by more than 18 percent.
This is a prime example of misguided government priorities. At a time when billions of our tax dollars are being diverted to bailout and stimulus programs with dubious results, Congress cuts a program with an obvious public benefit – housing criminals who should not be on the streets (and who wouldn’t even be in this country if the feds were protecting the integrity of our borders). This program should have been expanded, especially at a time when California and other border states are facing severe budget pressures. Indeed, a strong argument can be made for the federal government picking up the entire cost of incarcerating undocumented criminal immigrants – estimated at $1 billion a year in California alone – since state and local governments are not making federal immigration policy and are not responsible for securing the border.
The reductions to this already underfunded program increases costs to local governments across the country, at a time when they are already struggling from reduced revenues. Such a burden could ultimately cost jobs in local law enforcement agencies and will impact local public safety.
Nearly 25 percent of LA County’s inmates are undocumented immigrants, costing the county about $95 million a year. Last year, the federal government reimbursed LA County just $15 million and this year the reimbursement will be cut to about $12 million. Statewide, California will take an estimated $70 million hit, further worsening the state budget crisis. And we know what happens when the state has to cut its budget: County and cities see proportionate cuts in the monies they receive from the state.
In recent weeks, state officials and local congressmen Jerry Lewis and Howard P. Buck McKeon lobbied to increase aid to the states for the program. Sadly, their efforts failed.
We were hoping to see California begin to cash in on its purported increased clout in Washington this year. That didn’t happen on this issue and we are hard pressed to understand why.
Now would be a good time for the California Congressional delegation to regroup and figure out how to be more effective on critical issues that could help our state and local governments through tough times.
System failure: One release, three murders
By LAPPL Board of Directors on 12/11/2009 @ 10:54 PM
(Photo: LA Times)
When LAPD officer responded to a call in Venice Tuesday night, they found Eun Kang, a 38-year-old woman who was four months pregnant with twins, stabbed to death, and the alleged attacker, a 22-year-old man, standing in her apartment.
The man they arrested, Boneetio Kentro Washington, has been charged with three counts of capital murder with the special circumstances of multiple murders, murder during a rape and murder during a burglary, in addition to separate rape charges. At 11:30 a.m. this morning, civil rights leader Earl Ofari Hutchinson and others will pay tribute to Ms. Kang, and call on parole and probation officials to toughen their procedures on the release of criminals deemed mentally incompetent who have been convicted of serious felony crimes.
“The alleged assailant of Ms. Kang was a former convicted felon with serious mental problems,” says Earl Ofari Hutchinson, President of Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable, and Eddie Jones, President of the Los Angeles Civil Rights Association, in a statement released prior their news conference in Venice this morning. “Yet, he was released. State officials must immediately re-examine their policies on the release of convicted felons with serious mental challenges.”
The LAPPL applauds Hutchinson and Jones for condemning lax probation and parole policies and decisions that pose a clear and present threat to public safety in our city. We again urge officials to use all available means to halt the early release of inmates from state prisons beginning in 2010.
Los Angeles Times reporters Andrew Blankstein and Robert Faturechi today recounted Washington’s criminal background and the probation that allowed him move freely about Los Angeles neighborhoods.
Washington had previous arrests for burglary and trespassing in Santa Monica and Los Angeles and misdemeanor trespassing arrests in Rhode Island and North Carolina. But nothing in his past appeared to show a predisposition to the kind of violence that occurred in the Venice slaying, according to sources familiar with the case who asked not to be identified because the investigation was continuing.
Court records show that Washington previously pleaded no contest to one count of residential burglary that was committed in Los Angeles in December 2008. The case was delayed after a doctor testified that Washington was not mentally competent to stand trial. Washington was committed to Patton State Hospital in San Bernardino County on July 7, 2009.
On Sept. 18, Washington returned to court with a certification from the facility that he was mentally cabable of standing trial.
Boneetio Kentro Washington is suspected of raping and fatally stabbing Eun Kang Tuesday night in Venice. (Photo: LA Times)
He pleaded no contest to first-degree residential burglary and was placed on formal probation before his release from custody for previous time served and credit for work and good behavior.
Sadly, this murder just proves again the case we have been making for months now: the budget-driven decision to provide early releases to criminals has, and will continue, to result in tragedy.
We call upon the community to speak out to our political leadership regarding these continued public safety failures and put a stop to any plans to a mass release of convicted felons from our state prisons.
Currently reading page 7 of 14.
