In the days since the conclusion of the Doyle v. Schultz labor hearing, our Eyes have gone in overload with the flooding of astonishing revelations and apparent violations of law by APD personnel. Compounding these issues, Chief Schultz's faithful propagandist the Albuquerque Journal's Jeff Proctor, spun the hearing into a forum by which the "FBI Gets Excessive Force Case" when in fact the headline should have read "APD Violates Federal Law."
You see whenever a police officers is hauled into IA for an administrative investigation, they are REQUIRED to answer questions put forward to them by the department. This is how it is, and that is why they are called compelled statements. If an officer refuses to answer any questions the department can fire them simply for those reasons. However, there are some safeguards protecting the officers. They get to bring two representatives if they so desire. And they have what are called "Garrity protections." These protections come from the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case, Garrity v. New Jersey, where the court held that compelled statements that subject officers to criminal prosecutions are unconstitutional and illegal.
So when an officer is interviewed in IA, they assert their Garrity rights by reading a statement and then proceed with answering questions knowing that their answers CANNOT be used against them in a criminal prosecution and because these answers (statements) are privileged. The investigating department CANNOT release the statements without the employee's explicit permission.
Now when Officer Doyle and Woolever were interviewed, they invoked their Garrity Rights and then proceeded to answer questions over the course of many interviews with IA Sergeant Jason Peck. However it was disclosed in this week's hearing that IA provided the FBI with copies of the Doyle and Woolever's IA files including the content of their interviews!
To be clear, it seems: At the direction of Chief Schultz, APD released and provided protected IA information to the FBI concerning an internal administrative matter involving two of its officers.
In other words, for all officers who now go into IA to give compelled statements, you are doing so under false representations made to you. Even though you will assert your Garrity rights, your statements are at risk because under Chief Schultz, despite federal law protections; Chief Schultz will violate those laws as he desires as he did with Officers Doyle and Woolever.
And despite what "reporter" Jeff Proctor states, the FBI HAD the file, they did not recently GET it. One would think such an "award-winning" writer as Mr. Proctor would want to ensure accuracy in his headlines and not mislead readers...
Lastly, when officers go into IA, they are provided with a "Garrity Statement." Our Eyes tell us there is no specific "Garrity Statement" and that there are many interpretations available. The statement below is one forwarded to us that is much stronger in language and is suggested what you use to read on the record before answering any questions:
1. I am being questioned as part of an investigation by this agency into potential violations of department rules and regulations, or for my fitness for duty. This investigation concerns (Identify the particular elements being investigated):
2. I have invoked my Miranda rights on the grounds that I might incriminate myself in a criminal matter.
3. I have been granted use immunity. No answer given by me, nor evidence derived from the answer, may be used against me in any criminal proceeding, except for perjury or false swearing.
4. I understand that I must now answer questions specifically, directly and narrowly related to the performance of my official duties or my fitness for office.
5. If I refuse to answer, I may be subject to discipline for that refusal which can result in my dismissal from this agency.
6. Anything I say may be used against me in any subsequent department charges.
7. I have the right to consult with a representative of my collective bargaining unit, or another representative of my choice, and have him or her present during the interview.
Our Eyes also tell us that APD lawyer Kathy Levy, failed to present any argument that made sense or was consistent with statements by Chief Schultz as to why Officers Doyle and Woolever were fired. Imagine that; more federal law violations by a sitting major-city police chief and continued inaccuracy in reporting by the local paper...
The Piercing Truth
This is right from the dictionary and seems to describe Albuquerque, Berry and Schultz. Fascism (f ash ,izem) noun An authoritarian right wing system of government and/or social organization. (in general use) extreme right wing, authoritarian, chauvinistic and/or intolerant views or practices. Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one group over another, national, ethnic, especially social strata or monetarily; a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader, and a strong demagogic approach. Compliments of one of our Eyes