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

Jun 28, 2015

Eye On Albuquerque Welcomes Dr. Ginger to Albuquerque

Welcome to Albuquerque

Dr. Ginger
June 29, 2015
Greetings Dr. Ginger,
The Eye On Albuquerque wishes to welcome you to Albuquerque. We understand you have assembled a “team” for the Albuquerque Police Department and you and the Mayor’s and DOJ’s lawyers have agreed the City of Albuquerque will pay you approximately $4,500,000 to review and report on the City’s compliance with the Settlement Agreement. Some of the City Councilors recently questioned whether they could get a better deal, but here you are and $4.5M is how much we’re paying you. You have informed the City you’ve produced over 300 pages of plans for monitoring and enforcing the Agreement, and all are looking forward to having those documents as soon as possible.

Introducing The Eye

We also need to introduce ourselves, since you don’t have any local team members and might not be fully aware of what we’ve been doing or what our plans are, now you and your team are here. You see, our Eyes are already “monitoring” the City of Albuquerque. And our Eyes are already focused on a kind of “community outreach” that is directly connected to the community, with readers who respond with their own opinions, ideas, and facts. We have a genuinely responsive community with a potential that has only begun to be realized.
To our Eyes; APD policies, practices, procedures, politics, and issues are the topics of primary importance. We believe the corruption, ethical and legal violations, and even the much discussed “systemic deficiencies“ in City government have been and are ripe for exposure. We oppose further delay. We share your concern and interest in what will happen to our City and to the Albuquerque Police Department under the agreement between the City’s lawyers and the DOJ’s lawyers. We believe changes have to happen right now, not over the next four years or more.
We invite you to go back and review our earlier posts and comments. Our Eyes have often been the only ones monitoring and reporting about APD, Taser contracts, ineffective leadership and training, and all sorts of other issues. No matter what you do or how much you’re paid; we fully intend to keep doing this work – exposing corruption, seeking truth, telling the stories about what we know and learn, and most important, providing an open forum for public discussion of important facts and issues. The Eye On Albuquerque is a nonprofit BlogSpot. 

Hard Work?
Looking at the overall picture, we really don’t understand why you have given all of the community the impression your work here with APD should be considered ‘that’ difficult or why you Dr. Ginger, should be paid so much or need to employ so many team members. As we said, we’ve been unofficially “monitoring” APD for years, and there’s nothing ‘that’ hard about it. 

What makes it hard for us is Mayor RJ Berry, Rob Perry, and maybe a few jealous media people who are always attacking instead of helping us, always trying to punish instead of recognizing us, and who have done everything in their power to force the closure of the Eye On Albuquerque. You and your team, of course, have no such enemies. People yearn for justice, and are generally happy to tell their stories; documents and data are generally available. The hard part is finding someone to listen who is honest and can do something about it. 

No Pay; Delay?
As reported by one of our TV stations and then in the Albuquerque Journal, you told people attending a public meeting last week that the City Council’s failure to approve your pay was holding up your report, delaying it by around three months. We hope you did not intend to excuse the City’s delays in complying with the express terms of the Settlement Agreement.  We also hope it is NOT your intention to delay the enforcement of the settlement in order to leverage an astronomical amount of money for the services you will be required to perform under the settlement agreement. We don’t plan on making excuses or waiting for someone to give us millions of dollars before we start writing about what’s wrong. And from what we’re hearing, compliance with the Settlement Agreement is almost nonexistent, compliance issues are growing rather than being resolved, and transparency is completely lacking. 

Finally, we have to say it: we’re all working towards the same goal, but some are getting paid a lot better than others. You’re a professional with a 9-member team, getting $4.5M for four years of monitoring, and this is only one of the projects you’re working on; we get nothing and work on our own time without pay. This creates inequalities and no, we are not asking to be paid. We are merely pointing out issues such as now when we’re all waiting for the lawyers, the judges, and the City officials who we’ve elected and appointed to start doing their jobs, start earning their pay, and start cleaning up the City and its police department. As you can see; when we see something that is wrong or gives the appearance of impropriety we will call it like it is. The settlement agreement is about ethics and morality; you need to set the example and step up to the plate.

So we do welcome you, Dr. Ginger, and your team of professional monitors. And we’re going to be looking very carefully at what you and the team says and does, just as we expect you will be watching us and listening to what we have to say. Please let us know when you’re ready to get started. 

The Eye on Albuquerque

Jun 22, 2015

How does the Media Pick and Choose?

In a recent story carried by KOB 4 (READ IT HERE) the media picks and chooses how they wish to put a “spin” on a story for their ratings benefit.  They selected to bash an APD officer who enjoys praise as a “terrific employee” and on the other hand paints APD and City leaders as victims.

How is it that APD, who is now under Federal control, the victim? How is it that ex-chief Schultz is facing criminal indictments, the victim?  How is it that droves of top brass have fled in fear of the collapse of APD, now the victims?  How is it that Richard J. Berry who has lead the City of Albuquerque to be one of the worst City’s in the United States of America for crime, now the victim?  The fact is; APD Administration and the City leaders are not the victims; they are the offending parties.  This is not hearsay these are facts.
The opening statement of the story states, “…a blog used to disparage the Albuquerque Police Department and city leaders…” the facts don't lie; APD Administration and City leaders have failed the community and the Eye On Albuquerque has called them out on their devilish deeds. How does this become disparaging? Do the job you were hired to do, do it right and do it morally correct and you will never hear anything from the Eye On Albuquerque.
 The second paragraph of the story states, “…operating under the screen name "Stealth" to write hateful, embarrassing and often untrue posts on the website ‘Eye on Albuquerque.’” There is nothing hateful about the truth.  If an APD Administrator or City leader gets embarrassed for conducting themselves or City business unethically; they deserve to be embarrassed.  As for the “untrue” statement; please back it up with facts.  The Eye On Albuquerque does not post a story until they have two different and separate sources to verify what has been stated.  Our stories have stood the test of time and time has shown and proven; our stories are and have been true. Simply stated here our critics; put up or shut.
 By telling the truth the Eye On Albuquerque has never:
  • Diminished public trust and confidence in APD
  • Personally attacked APD's leadership and city leaders
  • Lowered morale at APD and used bad judgment
  • Used information learned while on duty against APD
However, these are the legitimate and Bona-Fide charges against APD Administrators and City Leaders. This action against Roberto isn’t personally motivated or a personal attack?  The hope was to silence the “Whistle Blower.”
 Now that the facts are straight; ask the DOJ why they took over the APD by a forced Federal court action?
 One final thought on this story. The Eye has been told APD Administrators and City Leaders solicited assistance from the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI).  How is that APD Administrators and City leaders managed to get the FBI involved in an employment action but they can’t get the FBI involved in solving a rape or murder?  If this does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt the City will stop at literally nothing to silence their critics; nothing will.  The ADP Administrators and City leaders who sought assistance from the FBI should be prosecuted for gross negligence.  The DOJ should now focus their attention on why the Federal Bureau of Investigations would waste valuable resource on an employment action.
 PS- Here is a question that should be asked about the hearing officer, Pete Camacho.  It is clear to us Camacho was unsure in his own decision stating: "I find [Roberto] did commit acts that indicate a lack of moral character that would adversely affect her ability to exercise the duties of a certified law enforcement officer.”  Read what he was thinking and expressed in his opinion; “…did commit acts that indicate a lack of moral character…” We must ask; what does Camacho mean by “indicates?”  If Mr. Camacho was given clear and convincing evidence the statement should have stated: "I find [Roberto] did commit acts that exhibited a lack of moral character that would adversely affect her ability to exercise the duties of a certified law enforcement officer.”  The word indicates of a suggestive nature and is not believable.  Since the hearing Officer, Pete Camacho is unsure of his own opinion, did someone “grease the wheels” like Schultz did for Tazer?
 And yes, the Eye On Albuquerque is alive, well and very active.

Jun 21, 2015

Jun 1, 2015

You Do NOT have the right to remain SILENT

As a community we are all grieving the loss of Rio Rancho Police Officer Gregg Benner.  The cause of death was an unprovoked, premeditated and malice act of a known murderer. This is now murder number two for this offender.  The current, District Court Judge Christina J. Jaramillo who allowed this murderer to wonder our streets freely has stated she does not comment on cases. Our thoughts here at the Eye are; Judge Jaramillo DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT.

Here is the difference.  The average person did not pursue a “public” life which affords them certain rights such as the right to remain silent.  When a person such as Judge Jaramillo decides to pursue a political public life; their life becomes an open book and they lose certain rights that the rest of the private public are afforded.

Christina J. Jaramillo started out as a very liberal Public Defender employed by the New Mexico’s Public Defender’s Office.  After several years as a liberal attorney who fought avidly to allow the criminals to slither in our streets she was appointed by a liberal Governor, Big Billy Richardson.  Is the picture starting to come together?

Jaramillo has any defendant’s full history at her finger tips literally.  She could have easily pulled it up on her State of New Mexico issued computer that sits on-top of her bench.  Or she could have instructed her courtroom clerk to pull it.  Knowing the severity of the charges why didn’t Jaramillo order a PSA (Pre-Sentence Report)?  This is a common practice among competent judges.

Remember when President Clinton stated it was none of anybody’s business when he had an affair while in office?  He sought election and the public elected him; at that point he no longer had a “right to remain silent.”  The same is applicable to Jaramillo; she sought the appointment to a judgeship, and ran for election thereafter to which the public voted her into office.  At that point she no longer had a “right to remain silent.”

The action of Judge Christina J. Jaramillo is nothing short of calculated. Our Eyes tell us Jaramillo, as a matter of common practice, continued cases all the times because she did not want to go to trial.  Why?  Because it was too late in the day or she had to get home.  Was it this blunder which caused Officer Benner’s life? Was this a result of a lazy judge who was trying to avoid a trail?

Perhaps we the people need to start changing the laws and make the judges accountable. Did you know coppers, firefighters and ambulance/medical personnel must take random drug tests? Judges don't. If a public servant J walks; they are disciplined.  Judges don't. If there is anything questionable a public servant does they are subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination as well as criminal and civil prosecution.  Judges are completely unaccountable for any of their action.

What would happen if a judge had to do the same amount of time as an offender because the judge released a criminal without conducting due diligence and who goes back out and commits another crime?  We are thinking the judges, such as, Jaramillo would start doing due diligence. Otherwise judges like Jaramillo would be facing the death penalty or life in prison.