Fascism, that is.
In a nutshell, the same officer that ordered the spying was in charge of it's IA investigation, which was presented to the Public Safety commision the other day...
Just because these creeps get found out and exposed doesn't mean that it isn't fascistic... They'll thug a couple of extra 'street people' over the next year or so to even out the score.
Background: Courtesy KMUD Radio, Garberville California, and the Free Speech Radio News Network: http://snipurl.com/lhv4
It's wonderful living in 'Progressive (big 'P') Santa Cruz. SOoo corrupt... so... Obvious (big 'O').
Santa Cruz Sentinel:
February 15, 2006
Police chief say city rushed department on internal investigation By Shanna mccord Sentinel staff writer
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2006/February/15/local/stories/01local.htm
SANTA CRUZ — The Police Department says it shouldn't be blamed for a "flawed" report on recent undercover activities because it was rushed into the report by top city leaders.
A report on why undercover officers were necessary at community planning meetings for a New Year's Eve parade was sharply criticized Monday by an independent auditor. Among the auditor's top concerns was that the investigation into two undercover incidents last fall was conducted by the same officer who ordered the undercover activities, noting a conflict of interest.
Facing mounting criticism for the report, and already suffering in the public's eye for alleged "spying" on community meetings, Police Chief Howard Skerry sought to defend his department Tuesday.
Skerry said he was ordered in January to deliver an internal investigation on the undercover operation as quickly as possible without regard to staffing problems. Because a deputy chief is necessary to perform the task and only one was available at the time, Skerry said he had no choice but to allow Deputy Chief Kevin Vogel, the same officer who made the undercover assignment, to perform the internal investigation.
"My preference, absolutely, was to wait for Deputy Chief Patty Sapone to handle it," Skerry said. "We were reacting to what our direction was; it was not a preferred option."
Sapone, the only other deputy chief, was on a three-week vacation at the time.
City Manager Dick Wilson, who praised the police report Friday when it was released but changed his opinion after the auditor's criticism, said the City Council wanted the report done as quickly as possible. Wilson said he didn't realize the Police Department's staffing quandary and wasn't aware of the extent of Vogel's involvement in the undercover operations.
He admitted the city's "extraordinary effort" to deliver a "fast and responsive" investigation backfired.
"With the wisdom of hindsight," Wilson said Tuesday, "we should have said to those on the council and in the community pressing for a fast investigation, 'Sorry, we can't do one.' "
Community members and parade organizers have lambasted police, saying their First Amendment rights were trampled by the undercover surveillance.
Skerry said his department did the best it could with the limited time frame, and Vogel was asked to put together a statement of facts rather than draw any conclusions.
Vogel's report indicated the department was within its right to go undercover in seeking information about a community group that had openly opposed following city requirements for a special event downtown on a night that is notorious for potentially violent behavior.
Vogel said in the report that the information gathered from the undercover officers proved "invaluable" in how police handled New Year's Eve downtown.
A new report from police auditor Bob Aaronson of Palo Alto, who said he plans to question how and why Vogel reached his decision to send undercover officers to the parade planning meetings, is expected in 30 days.
Contact Shanna McCord at smccord at santacruzsentinel.com. You can find this story online at: http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2006/February/15/local/stories/01local.htm
#33#