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:
GARRITY WARNING
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...
18 comments:
So what? I work in the private sector, so I don't get Garrity protections at my job. If I annoy my employer, he will fire me. I don't have "due process". I don't expect it. Cops should refuse to answer any questions that could possibly incriminate them. I support that right to the utmost. But they shouldn't get special privileges protecting their jobs for that. I don't. Why should they?
The journal got one thing right when the quoted Damato as saying that Schultz tried to throw Doyle under the bus to buy his way out of a DOJ investigation, except it isn't about the shootings, or use of force. It's about what Schultz and his corrupt cohorts have been doing all these years. You see, when the feds come in, it isn't a narrow pinpointed focus. They cast a wide net and Schultz knows his lies coverups, doctoring of everything from reports to fudging numbers, retaliation and coercion will come spilling out like a sliced bag of frijoles. He also knows that when it comes to the feds, no one will lie for him like they constantly do in the three ring district and civil court circuses. And the feds are not going to tolerate having smoke blown up their asses. Schultz and his cowards are terrified of a federal investigation. He says they are welcome, but DOES everything he can to keep them out. It is so transparent in his motives, it is embarrassing. Schultz is such a stupid novice when it comes to being inconspicuous about his motives that one could just laugh if it wasn't so criminally enraging.
Good Article Eye.
Hey Mike,
Were you brought up to always worry about what everyone else gets instead of what is right and what is wrong? I would say to your situation that you should have rights. I would say that you should not just be fired for pissing off your boss. That would bother me if I saw someone unjustly booted from a job when they have a family to support.
BUT people like you sound off because you have some ax to grind with cops, or some other personal issue, and you sound like a big mouthed rat baby that just got caught doing something you weren't supposed to be doing, along with a group of others, except you were the only one who got caught. Now you want to know why everyone else didn't get caught and punished. Really? You used to rarely see this a long time ago. But it is the norm now because society is nothing but a bunch of pussies. Thanks for shedding light on the exact problem APD is facing. Why don'y you apply for police chief. You would fit in perfectly. Maybe you'll take your ball and go home now too???
I am going to enjoy seeing the results of those with this mentality, and the kinder and gentler love posse filling the ranks of APD and other PD's across the country when the shit hits the fan in this world. It's going to be sad seeing cops not show up for work, deserting their posts, quitting and letting shit fall apart because they didn't take the job for the reason's a real cop does. They were taught and selected by the best. Then you'll really have a reason to hate them.
Why don't you join the academy. I hear they just let you join now. I hear PT is optional. They have tea and krimpets between classes. They jump rope, skip, have poetry readings, talk about their feelings, do their hair. Give foot rubs, take naps, think about use of force, visualize tense situations and ponder the meaning of life. All of this within the safe confines of their padded playpen with their civilian den mother. Oh yea, No more desks, It's sofas now. Yep. they sit on sofas for class. And yea. class is optional too. Can't beat that.
To Mike Moya. The reason private sector employees do not have the safety nets (so to speak) is that public employees work for the public and are more at risk of being targeted for something as simple as not smiling at a customer, in other words for petty reasons we get complained about. And it's not just the cops. Every complaint from A. to Z is acted on by supervisors. And it is very common to have a citizen get a grudge against a public employee for reasons only they can know. From bus drivers to librarians the public can stalk us, can make false allegations, etc.and it has to be investigated. Because we are paid by taxpayers we are under a microscope but we have rights too and that's what Garrity provides. You're paid by private dollars so the money guys who pay you it's their money so they fire at will.
Mr Moya or whoever you are...did you not read the article? Its standard practice for public employers (as opposed to PRIVATE employers) to require employees to answer I questions. If you refuse, even incriminating ones, you can be fired. The balance to deal with this is simple: compelled statements can't be used against you in criminal matters. They are protected by law. So when Apd releases these statements as they did, they broke federal law. And you do have protections, your employer cannot fire you for being a male hispanic.
you missed one - "I do not consent to the Albuquerque Police Department or the City of Albuquerque releasing any IA investigation or interviews concerning me in any manner to the media."
Think about it.
Gee, add this with crime scene tampering and cell phone camera picture taking and one would think we're dealing with the Juarez PD....
So with all this endless unethical and illegal behavior its GOT to be true that Schultz has shit on Berry or Perry. No other thing justifies keeping this jackass criminal around. I'm still looking for the 40+ FIs we have...
This has been an on going practice at apd for years. Doyle is not the first victim and wont be the last. I do recall some Narc Detectives getting accused of raping a C
i. They were escorted to the FBI by APD 5th floor to give statements. Lopez you and
kim
holland remember that storry dont you.
ref 9:59....goddamn it..that's a really good point...27ng it now....
@0944, I think its a given but yeah that's true too.
Mike, you are a piece of work. You don't expect due process? I think that may be up there with one of the all time best of the most idiotic things that I have ever heard a US citizen say. You are a US citizen? Right?
Mike Moya aka Team Schultz propaganda information officer. After all, that is all APD PIO's are.
Oh yeah those 2 Narcs were investigated for raping a CI which was ALL TOTALLY FALSE and the Department knew it... Those 2 detectives were hard working guys that were wrongfully accused and we all know that CI's are always full of shit... They are always willing to drop a dime when its them facing prison time. But when they aren't they keep all the shit to themselves until they need a GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD... Judge Murdoch was another perfect example of a CI gone BAD....
Its best you just leave Buckner alone, now that Gary Barboa is retired he is the NEW untouchable one.
No I don't believe Buckner was with APD during that 27. He was still with NMSP. Barboa is retiring??????
W havent scratched the surface on Murdoch. That wll costs the APD prob millions. Everyone kmows who the CI is and she wont be around to testify. 34 Sandy should call in sick at every hearing. He walking aroyund like a badass but he gonna be making headlines with all his lies. He already cant testify in Federal Court, its all coming.
I hope Murdoch rips these guys to pieces. They arrested him at his office for a dog and pony show. That was bullshit. If it were any of the other fair haired political cronies, they would have let him turn himself in, but like a few other cases where schultz and feist needed a fireworks display to take the heat off their worthless asses, they grandstanded this example of failed and disgusting police work. Everyone involved in that shakedown should lose their jobs.
DOJ,
Look at this case. Schultz used these officers to divert attention away from himself. He and his IA and criminal investigators fabricated lies and lied at the arbitration of these officers. The IA sergeant lied under oath. You will find out that these officers did the right thing and schultz conducted a corrupt investigation. Witnesses were threatened by the administration and the officers were wrongfully terminated. Then you will find out that schultz called everyone he could in a desperate attempt to have someone back his illegal and dirty play.
Post a Comment