Chaos and confusion: Standing in the footsteps of Christoper Dorner and his victims 5 years later2/4/2018 https://www.ocregister.com/2018/02/03/chaos-and-confusion-standing-in-the-footsteps-of-christoper-dorner-and-his-victims-5-years-later/
0 Comments
https://www.dailynews.com/2018/02/04/man-dies-while-being-taken-into-custody-by-deputies-in-lake-los-angeles/
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-drop-20180203-htmlstory.html hen Capt. Tia Morris turned 50, after about three decades in the Los Angeles Police Department, she became eligible to retire with nearly 90% of her salary.
But like many cops and firefighters in her position, the decision to keep working was a financial no-brainer, thanks to a program that allowed her to nearly double her pay by keeping her salary while also collecting her pension. A month after Morris entered the program, her husband, a detective, joined too. Their combined income for four years in the Deferred Retirement Option Plan was just shy of $2 million, city payroll records show. But the city didn’t benefit much from the Morrises’ experience: They both filed claims for carpal tunnel syndrome and other cumulative ailments about halfway through the program. She spent nearly two years on disability and sick leave; he missed more than two years, according to a Times analysis of city payroll data. The couple spent at least some of their paid time off recovering at their condo in Cabo San Lucas and starting a family theater production company with their daughter, according to Tia Morris’ Facebook posts and her self-published autobiography. They declined to comment for this story. The Morrises are far from alone. In fact, they’re among hundreds of Los Angeles police and firefighters who have turned the DROP program — which has doled out more than $1.6 billion in extra pension payments since its inception in 2002 — into an extended leave at nearly twice the pay, a Times investigation has found. Former Police Capt. Daryl Russell, who collected $1.5 million over five years in the program, missed nearly three of those years because of pain from a bad knee, carpal tunnel and multiple injuries he claimed he suffered after falling out of an office chair. “It was defective,” Russell said of the chair during a recent interview. “I believe the screws underneath came out.” Former firefighter Thomas Futterer, an avid runner who lives in Long Beach, hurt a knee “misstepping off the fire truck,” three weeks after entering DROP, according to city records. The injury kept him off the job for almost a full year. Less than two months after the knee injury, a Tom Futterer from Long Beach crossed the finish line of a half-marathon in Portland, Ore., in a brisk 2:05:23, according to race results posted online. Only one Tom Futterer lives in Long Beach, according to public records. Futterer did not respond to repeated requests for comment. His attorneys, Roger Cognata and Robert Sherwin, refused to confirm whether Futterer had run the half-marathon in Oregon. Big money, questionable resultsCity officials say they have never studied the amount of disability and sick time taken by DROP participants, but a Times review of thousands of pages of workers’ compensation files and tens of millions of computerized payroll and pension records from July 2008 to July 2017 found:
But it wasn’t envisioned as a program to retain experienced employees, said Jeffrey Yates, the city’s retirement administrator. In fact, the goal was the opposite: to discourage older employees from staying so long that they limited upward mobility for younger workers. And it had a two-year time limit. Since then, versions of the program have been adopted by dozens of states, counties and cities across the country. The details vary — some have short terms to encourage early retirement, others have long terms to retain experience — but the central appeal for employees is constant: two large checks instead of one. Allowing employees to take long stretches of paid time off while in DROP runs counter to Los Angeles city leaders’ stated rationale for the program, which was to keep experienced and savvy veterans in firehouses and police precincts serving the public and mentoring new recruits. Firefighter Tom Futterer finishes a half-marathon in Los Angeles in 2010. Marathon-photos.com‘That was a mistake’The Los Angeles police union proposed the program to former Mayor Richard Riordan in 2000 when senior officers were retiring early or leaving for other jobs in the wake of the Rampart scandal, which exposed widespread corruption within the department. Voters approved a 2001 ballot measure that promised “no additional cost to the city” to create the program. Since then, roughly 5,000 of the city’s public safety officers have joined DROP, which allows them to collect their salary and pension simultaneously for up to five years at the end of their careers. In 2016, officers exiting the program had been paid an average of $434,000 in extra pension payments, according to a Times analysis of Los Angeles Police and Fire Pension fund data. Asked about the program last year, Riordan said: “Oh, yeah, that was a mistake.” Riordan said he supported DROP to appease the police union during a tumultuous period in city politics, but that it had been dogged by rumors of abuse from the beginning. Told that nearly half of all DROP participants who entered the program had subsequently gone out on disability leaves, Riordan, now 87, said he remembered hearing the number was even higher. “Either way, it’s total fraud.” The Times reviewed thousands of pages of workers’ compensation records for police and firefighters who took disability leaves while in DROP. None of the injuries described in those files was the immediate result of intense action, such as running into a burning building or confronting a combative suspect. Instead, the injuries claimed by program participants, who must be 50 years old with 25 years of experience, were for ailments that afflict aging bodies regardless of profession: cumulative trauma to knees and backs, high blood pressure, cancer and carpal tunnel syndrome — all of which, under state law, are presumed to be job-related for police and firefighters. City officials acknowledged that taking long leaves at the end of careers to treat nagging injuries is an ingrained part of the culture. “Historically, police and firefighters have always waited until they’re close to retirement to go out and fix all their aches and pains,” said Maritta Aspen, who is in charge of employee relations for the city administrative officer. Asked whether it makes sense to pay them double while they take time off to do that, Aspen said, “Obviously, that wasn’t the intent. It was to have them working for a longer period of time, to extend their careers.” Former LAPD Sgt. Gregory Renner was paid almost $1.2 million for his five years in DROP. He missed nearly three of those years on disability and sick leave, payroll records show. Before Renner entered the program in 2011, he had filed at least 15 workers’ compensation claims for injuries including sore knees, wrists and shoulders, high blood pressure, ulcers, a tumor on his bladder, a hernia and a sharp pain he felt in his left shoulder while lifting books overhead. Renner said his most painful injury occurred during the 1992 riots when a looter threw a video cassette recorder at him, damaging his elbow. He left the field for a desk job in the mid-90s. Renner’s injuries have cost the city more than $2 million, city records show. City officials concede that, aside from making sure an employee meets the age and experience requirements, there is no screening of applicants before accepting them into DROP. And once in the program, there is no mechanism to suspend the extra pension payments no matter how long an employee is unable to work. “When you come in to sign up for DROP, you have to be on active duty, but then the following day you could trip on a ladder, or whatever it might be, and you could be out until the day you exit,” said Raymond Ciranna, general manager of Los Angeles Fire and Police Pensions, which administers the program. Assistant Police Chief Jorge Villegas, who joined the Deferred Retirement Option Plan in 2015 and could walk away with nearly $900,000 in extra pension pay. Mel Melcon / Los Angeles TimesDifficult to change the rulesSenior Los Angeles Fire Department officials — many of whom are in DROP and stand to collect high six-figure payments from the program — declined to comment for this story. Assistant Police Chief Jorge Villegas, who joined DROP in 2015 and could walk away with nearly $900,000 in extra pension pay at the end, said any change to the rules would require careful deliberation. “I think that’s something that has to be negotiated with the various unions,” Villegas said. Asked whether the department should be able to prevent employees with poor attendance because of a long history of injury claims from entering the program, Villegas said, “I think we cannot be discriminatory.” Villegas has not taken any time off for injuries since joining DROP, city records show. When most Los Angeles taxpayers reach the standard retirement age, 65, they face a stark choice: keep working and collecting their paychecks or quit and start collecting Social Security, which replaces only a small fraction of annual wages for most people. When city firefighters or police officers reach their retirement age, 50, the choices are far better. They can keep working for a paycheck, they can retire with up to 90% of their salary in pension and city-subsidized health insurance for life, or they can enter DROP. For many, the choice is easy. If they choose DROP, they keep working and collecting their paychecks for up to five years while their pension checks are deposited into a special account. They don’t get any more pension credit for the time they spend in DROP — pensions typically increase with every extra year worked — but the city guarantees 5% interest on the money in the account. The city also adds annual cost-of-living raises to the pension checks to make sure they keep pace with inflation. When the employee quits working and exits the DROP program, the paychecks stop, the pension continues and the money in the account is transferred to the employee. Of the 2,583 cops and firefighters who entered the program between July 1, 2008, and July 1, 2017, 860 have collected more than $1 million in combined salary and pension payments during their tenure in DROP, The Times found. Thirty-one have collected more than $2 million. Because pension payments that begin early are usually a bit smaller, union leaders argue the cost to the employer is offset over time. But in recent years, a growing number of jurisdictions have abandoned or drastically scaled back DROP programs because the math doesn’t work. Former Police Capt. Daryl Russell collected $1.5 million over five years in the DROP program. Kirk McKoy / Los Angeles TimesOther cities dropping DROPInstead of saving money, or remaining “cost-neutral,” the programs lead to ballooning pension costs and accusations that employees are simply double-dipping. In Alabama, a statewide DROP was discontinued in 2011 after reports that some of the top beneficiaries were high-level administrators, lobbyists and football coaches. San Diego closed its DROP to new employees in 2005 after officials decided it was ineffective and too costly. Despite the backlash against the cost of the programs, there has been little public scrutiny of employees taking long stretches of paid injury time while also collecting dual checks. The Times contacted officials and reviewed policies in roughly a dozen jurisdictions with DROP programs around the country and found none that examined the frequency of long injury leaves. San Francisco was the only jurisdiction The Times found that implemented a simple rule to prevent them: Any officers who received temporary disability payments would have their pension payments suspended until they became fit for duty again. When they returned to work, the payments would be reinstated. Micki Callahan, director of San Francisco's Department of Human Resources, said the provision was introduced to prevent abuse. “Isn't it wasteful to spend this money for people who aren't even at work?" Even with that provision, officials in San Francisco found the DROP program too expensive and discontinued it within three years. One incentive for cops and firefighters to file a workers’ comp claim, rather than use their health insurance, is that their salaries are exempt from federal and state income tax while they’re out on disability leave for a job-related injury. That means they take home substantially more of their salary while they’re home recovering than they would if they went to work. If they wait until they’re in DROP to take off a few months — or a year, or two — they receive pension checks on top of the tax-free salary. The downside of the workers’ comp system, according to interviews with DROP participants, is the difficulty getting the city to approve ongoing medical treatment for cumulative injuries, especially if an employee claims several of them. Claims adjusters working for the city are particularly slow to approve significant surgeries, such as knee replacements, employees said. They try to save money by encouraging employees to try weight loss, physical therapy and cortisone injections first, even if the employee’s personal doctor has recommended surgery. The delays cost the city money, employees argue, because they end up on disability leave longer. Tia Morris' retirement announcement in The Thin Blue Line shows her in running gear with her husband and daughter in director's chairs, a nod to the new family business. Los Angeles Police Protective League‘That last year was about me’All that time away from the job has another negative impact, according to employees who have been through it: lower self-esteem. “I hated it,” Renner said of the nearly three years he spent off duty waiting for, and recovering from, treatment for his bad back, sore knees and an injured thumb while he was in DROP. “You feel like a worthless piece of trash.” Between salary and pension, the city paid Renner more than $650,000 for time off while he was in the DROP program, The Times analysis found. Russell, the former police captain, said he would have loved to return for light duty during his nearly three years off, but his superiors never called to offer him that chance. LAPD officials disputed that account, saying they have a policy of contacting employees who are out sick or injured every seven days, and that Russell was contacted at least 84 times. Villegas said Russell should not have needed any special accommodation because “the captain’s job is a desk job. Certainly you can come back to answer phones and respond to emails if you want to.” While it’s unlikely the department would bother pursuing charges years after the fact, Russell’s suggestion that he would’ve returned if contacted “may be evidence of criminal fraud,” Villegas said, because it implies Russell was actually able to work. “He’s suggesting that he’s healed if we would have called him,” Villegas said. Russell’s time off began when he tore his right biceps reaching for a cooler in his garage before a Super Bowl party in 2012. That wasn’t a work-related injury, but while recovering from surgery the pain spread. “I suddenly start having trouble with my wrists … just out of the blue,” Russell said. He was found to have carpal tunnel syndrome and had additional surgery. After a long stretch recovering from that, he returned to the office only to have the chair collapse beneath him. He wound up on the floor with a reinjured wrist and a newly injured back, Russell said. For each workplace injury, police and firefighters are allowed up to 364 days of injury leave. As he recovered from his fall from the chair, Russell sought treatment for cumulative trauma to his knee. The city was slow to approve surgery to fix the problem, Russell said, so he never returned to work. “That last year was about me,” Russell said. “It was about taking care of myself.” The city paid him more than $830,000 for his time off during DROP, according to The Times’ analysis. In her self-published autobiography, “Mama’s Curse”, former LAPD Capt. Tia Morris describes her 2006 diagnosis of breast cancer — the disease that killed her mother — and the months of successful treatment that followed. She also writes about her sense of betrayal five years later when she was passed over for promotion in the Van Nuys division — a little more than a year after she entered DROP. Percy Morris' retirement announcement in The Thin Blue Line, an LAPD union magazine, highlights his affection for the Mexican resort town where he and his wife bought a timeshare and spent time recovering from the injuries that kept them from work while in DROP. Los Angeles Police Protective League“I felt defeated and irrelevant, so I was done for once and for all with the LAPD,” she wrote. Instead of simply retiring with her pension and city-paid health insurance, however, Morris remained in DROP and started taking long disability leaves for injuries she said she had accumulated during decades on the force — collecting her salary and pension all the while. She filed workers’ comp claims for carpal tunnel in both hands, pain in her neck, a sore elbow, a sore shoulder, a sore knee and a Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection she claimed she’d contracted from filthy conditions at the department’s Southwest Division. Of her carpal tunnel treatment in February 2012, she wrote, “I wasn’t happy about having surgery but I was happy to be away from work.” With the exception of a few workdays in June 2012, she remained on injury leave until September 2013, when she retired, city records show. The city paid her nearly $470,000 for the time off in DROP, The Times’ analysis found. Her husband, Percy Morris, filed claims for carpal tunnel, MRSA and a back injury while in DROP. He was paid about $476,000 for the more than two years he took off during the program, The Times found. The injuries prevented the couple from doing their desk jobs at the LAPD — hers was administrative, he spent at least half his time typing reports — but they were far from idle. Percy and Tia Morris on the beach in Cabo San Lucas. Photo posted to Tia's Facebook page on July 23, 2012, while, according to city records, they both were in DROP and Percy was on injury leave. Tia Morris / FacebookPostcard from Cabo San LucasPhotos posted to Tia Morris’ Facebook profile while they were both in DROP and Percy Morris was on injury leave show the couple embracing on the beach in Cabo San Lucas, where they bought a timeshare. In her autobiography, Tia writes about starting the theater production company shortly after entering DROP. They staged plays and produced films written and directed by their daughter, pitching in with everything from renting theaters and furnishing sets to baking cookies to sell to audiences. It was all “perfect for our transition from law enforcement to a much happier place,” Tia wrote. It was important, however, to make sure the hours she spent working for the family business did not overlap with hours she otherwise would have been scheduled to work at the LAPD. “I did not want any work comp fraud issues,” she wrote, “so I was letter of the law.” Since the program’s inception, not a single DROP participant has been charged with workers’ compensation fraud, court records show. [email protected] Twitter: @JackDolanLAT [email protected] Twitter: @GGarciaRoberts [email protected] Twitter: @ryanvmenezes Jack Dolan CONTACT Jack Dolan is an investigative reporter for the Los Angeles Times. A winner of several national investigative reporting awards, he was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in 2001 for a series revealing the doctors with the worst disciplinary histories in the country, using records the federal government sought to keep secret. He began his newspaper career at the Hartford Courant in Connecticut, where he grew up, and worked at the Miami Herald before coming to The Times. Gus Garcia-Roberts CONTACT Gus Garcia-Roberts joined the Los Angeles Times as an investigative reporter in May 2017. Previously a reporter at Newsday in Long Island, N.Y., he was a part of the investigative team whose Ryan Menezes CONTACT Ryan Menezes joined the Los Angeles Times in 2013. He primarily conducts analyses for reporting projects as a hand with the Data Desk while writing about a multitude of topics. Occasionally, he will post scripts written in R or Python to GitHub. Ryan studied statistics at UCLA, where he also wrote editorials and covered various sports for the student newspaper in between games of pick-up basketball. COMMENTS (108) LATEST NEWS Steve SoboroffPresident Los Angeles Police Commission email Commissioner Steve Soboroff was appointed to the Board of Police Commissioners by Mayor Eric Garcetti in August of 2013. At that time, he was elected President of the Los Angeles Police Commission by his fellow Police Commissioners. After serving the maximum of two consecutive years as President, he was elected Vice President in 2015. Commissioner Soboroff has long been known as a business leader and public servant who brings people together to get positive results. He is past Chairman and CEO of Playa Vista, and current Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Weingart Foundation. He is a senior fellow at the UCLA School of Public Policy, a member of the Board of Councilors to the USC School of Public Policy, and the Chairman of the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at LMU. He is a member of the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment Commission. Commissioner Soboroff was the Senior Advisor to the California Science Center in its project with NASA to bring to, and permanently exhibit the Space Shuttle Endeavour in, Los Angeles. He is Chairman of the Maccabiah Games "Committee of 18" and is the world's foremost collector of typewriters that were previously owned by famous individuals. Commissioner Soboroff is the Chairperson of the Leavey Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University. He is also a Senior Fellow and member of the Advisory Board at UCLA's Luskin School of Public Affairs and is a member of the Board of Councilors at the USC Price School of Public Policy. He served as Senior Advisor to Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, and was Chair of the $2.4 billion LAUSD Bond Citizens' Oversight Committee that made safety and other improvements to over 700 schools. Commissioner Soboroff was the driving force behind bringing Staples Center to Los Angeles and helped spearhead the Alameda Corridor Project, and he finished within 3% in the 2001 mayoral primary election in Los Angeles. Commissioner Soboroff served as President of the Los Angeles Recreation and Parks Commission has a strong track record for creating, improving and protecting open space and park land for city residents. He served as president of the L.A. Recreation and Parks Commission from 1995 to 2001, reinvigorating the city's park system to better meet the recreational needs of the people of Los Angeles. Mayor Villaraigosa dedicated the SOBOROFF SPORTS FIELD complex adjacent to the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum in Exposition Park, and the STEVE SOBOROFF COURT PARK opened in 2011 in Playa Vista. Active in Big Brothers since 1968, Commissioner Soboroff currently sits as a member of the Board of Governors of Big Brothers/Big Sisters of Greater Los Angeles. He has lectured and/or taught at UCLA, USC, Stanford, UC Berkeley, University of Arizona and Loyola Marymount University and volunteers his time to mentor several university students annually. Commissioner Soboroff resides in Pacific Palisades with his wife Patti and they have five children. http://www.lapdonline.org/police_commission/content_basic_view/1069 Police commission Steve Soboroff's Comments on Retirement of Chief BeckLos Angeles - First, I want to thank Chief Beck for his forty years of service to the LAPD and City of Los Angeles, the last eight years as our Chief of Police. Under his leadership he has helped to make the LAPD the preeminent law enforcement agency in the world. His focus on community policing has resulted in creating, maintaining and expanding the great relationships the Department has with the diverse communities of Los Angeles. The many successes in programs that have been implemented under his leadership will serve as a testimony to his skill as a leader. I appreciate his desire to remain as the Chief of Police until his successor is selected for a smooth transition in leadership of the Department. I will have more to say about the Chief, his service to the City and the process to select his successor in the coming weeks. I have appointed myself and Vice-President Matthew Johnson as the sub-committee to work with the General Manager of the Personnel Department to fulfill the recruitment process as outlined in the City Charter. Office of the Executive DirectorThe Board’s full-time staff is managed by an Executive Director who answers directly to the Board, and is responsible for the coordination of the Commission’s agenda and managing the functions of the Executive Office. The Executive Director is the Board’s liaison to the Office of the Chief of Police and Police Department. The Executive Director also represents the Commission at various meetings and events. The Executive Director is Richard M. Tefank.Advocates Unit
When a permitted business or individual is accused of violating Commission rules or legal statutes and the investigation sustains the complaint, the Advocates Unit of the Executive Office prepares the case and holds an administrative hearing before an independent Hearing Examiner. The case is handled in a manner similar to a criminal proceeding, with testimony and cross examination of witnesses, with the Advocates staff acting as prosecutors for the Department. The decisions of the Hearing Examiners are reviewed by the Police Permit Review Panel, which is also composed of five citizens appointed by the Mayor. The Panel members rule on disciplinary permit matters and alarm permit revocations, and approve the routine issuance of new police permits. Community Policing Liaison The Community Policing Liaison was established at the behest of the Los Angeles City Council in 1996. This position is responsible for the oversight and coordination of all community policing-related activities, thus affirming that the City Council and the Board of Police Commissioners’ interests, goals, ideas and input on community policing are communicated regularly to Department staff, elected officials, community groups and other related entities. The Liaison ensures that the community policing philosophy is consistent with the implementation of the Christopher Commission recommendations and Strategic Plan. Alarm Section Directory Telephone Hours: 8:00 am – 5:00 pm Monday – Friday (except holidays) Phone Number: Alarm Section 213-996-1200 FAX Number: Alarm Section 213-486-5270 Notice: City Law requires an Alarm Permit. Click here to obtain one Introduction History Problem Alarm Users Permits Fees and Penalties Alarm School (for Permitted Alarm System Users Only) Appeals Collections Misdemeanor Program Alarm Companies Permit Requirement Requesting Dispatch Excessive False Alarms Enhanced Verification 7-Day Soak Period Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Permits False Alarms Other Questions Resources (PDF – downloadable documents) Key Provisions of the Burglar Alarm Ordinance [PDF] Alarm Ordinance Brochure Office of Finance – Branch Locations and Hours Burglar Alarm Dispatch Policy Alarm Ordinance – LAMC 103.206 15 Ways to Eliminate False Alarms Web Links Office of Finance, Alarm Unit Los Angeles Superior Court – Small Claims Advisor State of California, Department of Consumer Affairs Personnel Services Unit The Board is responsible for a number of labor and employment law matters, including grievances, discrimination, and sexual harassment complaint investigations. These matters often present policy implications that may result in modifications to employment policies, procedures, or practices. The Board monitors the Department’s progress in achieving hiring and promotional goals in compliance with consent decrees, or voluntary employment goals. Additionally, the Board oversees the advancement of civilianization efforts to ensure the optimum utilization of sworn personnel. Discrimination Unit The Discrimination Unit, or Office of Discrimination and Complaints, is responsible for the investigation of all discrimination and harassment complaints in accordance with City and Department policies, and the tenants of employment discrimination law. The Unit heightens awareness and reduces the incidence of harassment and discrimination in the Department; monitors the number, progress and resolution of complaints, keeps the Board informed of situations and cases that may have policy implications. In all cases, complainants will receive responsive, supportive treatment, and be informed of the status of their case to the extent allowed by due process considerations. http://sixthamendment.org/how-public-defenders-struggle-with-ethical-blindness/ Pleading the Sixth: Do psychological factors force public defenders to rationalize sub-par performance in the face of excessive caseloads? And are these unconscious phenomena responsible for the failure to institutionalize caseload controls? These are just a few of the questions 6AC’s David Carroll explores with former public defender and current New England Law Professor, Tigran Eldred.
The National Association for Public Defense (NAPD) has triggered a critical debate as to whether public defenders with excessive caseloads can provide quality representation to their clients. (See articles by Andre Vitale and John Gross here, here and here.) Citing Professor Norman Lefstein’s exhaustive study, Securing Reasonable Caseloads: Ethics and Law in Public Defense, Professor Gross notes that psychological and organizational factors can “create an environment where excessive caseloads are regarded as normal.” These are themes that former public defender and current New England Law professor, Tigran Eldred, has explored in great detail in his seminal work Prescriptions for Ethical Blindness: Improving Advocacy for Indigent Defendants in Criminal Cases [65 Rutgers L. Rev. 333 (2013)]. The Sixth Amendment Center (6AC) encourages all defense providers and criminal justice stakeholders to read Professor Eldred’s full article. In an effort to further the debate, I sat down with Professor Eldred to explore the psychology of excessive caseloads. David Carroll: Can you give our readers a brief overview of what you mean by the term “ethical blindness”? Tigran Eldred: The central thesis of my work is that defense lawyers, like everyone, are influenced by a number of psychological factors (called “cognitive biases and heuristics”) that, under certain conditions, make it hard for them to appreciate their own limitations. The result, I believe, is that many lawyers with excessive caseloads simply do not realize when they are providing subpar performance to their clients. DC: Okay – let’s try to unpack this for our readers. Are you saying that the demands of excessive caseloads force public defenders into making quick decisions about cases everyday that that they themselves may not be consciously aware of? TE: That’s basically it. And, the scientific support for this comes from the world of “behavioral ethics.” In particular, three psychological factors are relevant to the excessive caseload discussion. First, we all experience what is known as “confirmation bias.” This is the tendency in all of us to seek out, interpret and remember information in a manner that supports our pre-existing beliefs. The second and related concept is “motivated reasoning.” Not only do we seek to confirm our pre-existing beliefs, but also we do so to reach conclusions that we prefer. Third, because of our general desire to think well of ourselves, we tend to experience an “overconfidence bias,” including the tendency to overestimate our abilities to act competently and ethically when confronted with difficult dilemmas. All of three of these factors occur unconsciously. We are tricked into believing that our choices are reasoned, even when often they are not. Our brains convince us our quickest decisions are solely the result of conscious and rational deliberation. But all the while we are blissfully unaware of how our pre-existing views, desires and self-conception can influence the judgments and decisions that we make. DC: So, we need some context here. Can you explain these theories within the specific debate of how public defenders respond to excessive caseloads? TE: Certainly. I agree with Professor Gross that defenders who have too much work often have only one option: to triage cases. Structurally, they are forced into focusing limited resources on a percentage of cases at the expense of many others – and on those cases that don’t get the same level of focus or resources, you wind up with an assembly line of quick plea dispositions. When this type of triage occurs, the psychological phenomena I have described can be expected to exert significant influence. For example, by starting with the premise that most cases will need to be disposed of quickly, lawyers will likely engage in confirmatory and motivated reasoning, unconsciously seeking reasons to justify this pre-determined conclusion. This can happen in a number of ways. For example, the lawyer might overestimate the strength of the evidence against the client or underestimate the value of additional investigation. Acts of omission, as Professor Gross notes, can have a profound effect on a case. When the lawyer fails to seek exculpatory material, to interview witnesses or to visit a crime scene – or fails to engage in many other forms of advocacy for a client – the lawyer is essentially confirming the pre-existing belief that no additional work for the client will be helpful. DC: In studying indigent defense services all across the country, I continually encounter public defenders that tell me that I should not be so dismissive of early resolution courts because they often result in favorable decisions to defendants. TE: Right, they’re playing the percentages. While in many instances it may be true that the best course of action is a quick plea bargain, it is also true that in many instances it is not. There is a significant chance that the decision to forgo additional work for the client is the product of the type of fast thinking I have described. And then, after the fact the process become self-fulfilling. The lawyer has decided that a quick plea is appropriate without further investigation. So the client is advised to take the plea quickly and the lawyer, laboring under the illusion that the decision was solely the product of rational deliberation, remains convinced of the propriety of the decision — unaware of the subtle psychological forces that conspire to influence the lawyer’s behavior. DC: So are you saying that lawyers with excessive caseloads can never act in their client’s best interests? TE: Not at all. To be sure, many lawyers provide excellent representation much of the time, despite almost always toiling under extremely difficult working conditions. This includes appropriately advising whenever a plea bargain is the best option. But the right to counsel is a right of the individual client. It is not constitutionally acceptable for public defenders to give great representation to 70% of their clients and fall short of the mark in 30% of the cases. It is not constitutional to provide excellent representation in only the most serious or high-profile cases and underperform in less serious cases. My point is that in the cases where lawyers provide subpar performance, the lawyers involved are likely to be fooling themselves into believing that adequate representation has been provided when it has not. DC: I agree. I have been to too many jurisdictions in too many states where public defense providers believe that it is better for clients to receive limited representation from the primary provider than representation by a conflict attorney, and use that as a justification for triaged justice. It comes off as some sort of “Superman” complex, which I guess is the definition of the “overconfidence bias.” Would you agree? TE: Yes. Everyone should be wary when they find themselves believing that they can handle a difficult situation better than most others. There are many other psychological aspects to this story too. A big one is the powerful psychological role that supervisors can play by dissuading subordinate lawyers from protesting excessive caseloads. Likewise, the informal norms that exist in many courthouses to discourage defense lawyers from slowing down the speedy disposition of cases have significant psychological effect. The routinization of the plea bargaining process, the ambiguity of the rules that govern lawyer behavior and the heavy cognitive load placed on lawyers because of excessive caseloads also are relevant. DC: So what is the answer to ethical blindness? TE: This is where the latest post by Mr. Vitale is so critical to the discussion. He suggests that indigent defense reform must occur on three fronts: system-building, public advocacy and culture change. I agree all three are critical to overcoming ethical blindness. Public defenders must work in systems that insulate them from undue political and judicial interference. Without structural independence there is little hope that public defenders can overcome these issues alone. That is why the work of your organization, the Sixth Amendment Center, is so important. It often takes an outsider’s perspective to see the ineffective representation stemming from carrying too many cases at once. Rather than focusing on public defense providers, you work with policymakers and criminal justice stakeholders to create systems that can take root and flourish. But it can also be a group of outsiders that force a jurisdiction to look at these issues through litigation, like the American Civil Liberties Union. DC: Thanks for the kind words. This is probably a good point to publicly acknowledge and thank you for the role New England Law|Boston has played in building partnerships between the 6AC and Boston-area law schools. However, the 6AC has always understood that system-building is only part of the answer. An indigent defense system is only as strong as the people in it. That is why the 6AC is openly supportive of public and private funding for organizations like the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Gideon’s Promise, the National Juvenile Defender Center and the National Association for Public Defense that provide everything from skills training to client-centered culture change. TE: Yes, that is it. As I state in my article, if lawyers learn to recognize their own ethical limitations, they will be better positioned to resist representing clients for whom they cannot provide competent representation. For example, ethically aware lawyers may start engaging in the type conduct required by the ABA Formal Ethics Opinion to withdraw from cases or refuse new appointments when cases become excessive. So they need systemic independence, outside review and culture change to invoke their independence when it comes to excessive caseloads. DC: And what about public advocacy? TE: I think we are all indebted to NAPD for creating a forum for this type of debate to flourish. Only by exposing and discussing these psychological underpinnings is there hope to overcome them. ‹ ABA clarifies caseload standards for South Carolina prosecutors Georgia consent decree requires competent counsel for children and adults › Posted in Pleading the Sixth Tagged with: caseloads & workloads, ethical duties, independence, standards - system, Tigran Eldred Search for: explains what you've just read in the news, providing historical, legal, and standards-based context to our nation's ongoing efforts to provide a meaningful right to counsel. Receive Email Notification Want to receive an email notification whenever we add a Pleading the Sixthpost? Please sign up using the form below. Sign up now!
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Worst-case-scenario-Defending-child-molester-a-2919122.php For 26 years, Carl Spieckerman has represented the underbelly of society, but it took Curtis Dean Anderson -- the Vallejo kidnapper and molester of an 8- year-old girl -- to test his resolve.
As the notorious case went to trial last month, the whole Bay Area was watching. TV cameras mobbed the hallways of the courthouse and Spieckerman's client made proud confessions from his jail cell to the press. Anonymous women left Spieckerman nasty voice-mail messages saying he was worse than a pedophile for representing Anderson. "Bad things happen to people like you," said one message "People like me?" Spieckerman thought. The words echoed in his mind. After years representing destitute people assigned to him by the court in murder, burglary, drug and domestic violence cases, Spieckerman was accustomed to feeling misunderstood. Spieckerman, 57, is regarded by his fellow attorneys in Solano County as a straight-shooter. He's a workhorse who has 12 trials on his calendar in the next four months. When he's not overworked, he worries he's losing his edge. He's not flamboyant or theatrical, but takes pride in the times he has whittled away at the prosecution to win acquittals. Judges often turn to him with their toughest, least glamorous cases -- people accused of murders, defendants who've fired multiple attorneys, and unruly people like Anderson, who nobody else wants and who won't follow their attorney's advice. The stocky attorney wears a grey beard, round eye-glasses, and collar- length hair brushed back from his temples. His light blue eyes are surrounded by deep shadows and his broad forehead is criss-crossed with wrinkles. Private-practice defense attorneys have a sometimes unfair reputation for chasing ambulances, but most must hustle for private clients because that's usually where the money is. "It's a very difficult business, quite honestly," said Solano County Conflict Defender Dane Besneatte, who used to have his own practice. "(You're) having to make people pay and trying to collect money and (do) the business end of it." While most attorneys' caseload include perhaps 10 to 20 percent court- appointed cases, the vast majority of Spieckerman's cases are assigned to him by the court because the public defender has a conflict of interest. For most court-appointed cases, Spieckerman earns $55 an hour, sometimes more in tough cases or for particularly ornery clients. Until about 10 years ago, Spieckerman used to accept a wider range of cases, including divorce and child custody disputes. But he tired of parents calling him at 8 a.m. Monday morning to complain their spouse delivered their child home 15 minutes late. He hadn't the inclination to hustle for clients and decided his heart was in criminal defense. He likes the mental challenge and when he wins a case, it's a professional victory. "That's what you live for, that rush. You feel great," Speickerman said. Ever since Spieckerman was a young man and an Army sergeant derisively ordered Spieckerman and the other "college boys" to empty the toilet bowls and clean them, Spieckerman has been his own boss. He graduated from the night law school at John F. Kennedy University in Walnut Creek and two years later opened his own practice a block from the Vallejo courthouse. Spieckerman visits his clients in jail most weekends, although once in awhile he'll go camping by himself. Sometimes he cooks for relaxation, but most evenings, his wife says, he pores over case files at home. Spieckerman works in a utilitarian second floor office in a non-descript stucco building, with white walls, a brown carpet and basic padded metal chairs. His wife helps him out, often working 60 hour weeks, but he doesn't have a secretary or other staff. His bread and butter are clients like a young man recently charged with three felonies in a trailer-park burglary. Spieckerman shook his head when the man was late to his own preliminary hearing. But ultimately the judge ruled there wasn't enough evidence to hold him for two of the alleged felonies. "They're just these dumb kids, hanging around and drinking," said Spieckerman. Spieckerman refused his wife's request to drop Anderson's case. And when one of his step-daughters asked why he couldn't just "throw" the case -- that is, not present an aggressive defense -- he said that was impossible. Spieckerman had invested his adult life in a principle, and Anderson was going to get the best he had to offer."People say you've got to believe in the defendant before you work as hard for them. I don't believe that," said Spieckerman. "You still try to do the best you can because that's your duty, both to your client and society and the concept of justice," he said. Spieckerman approached defending Anderson as he has other tough cases. "Sometimes you're pretty much check-mated from the time you start. You make sure whatever evidence there is, you get it in front of them (the jury)." he said. Spieckerman read in police reports that the 8-year-old girl's friends had said she wanted to run away. When Spieckerman asked the little girl on the witness stand if that was true, she denied it. That was the basis for his defense. Spieckerman said he never set out to prove the girl wanted to go with Anderson, but he wanted to show she was capable of not telling the truth, and that not every detail of her story was necessarily accurate. His cross-examination of the girl was fairly mild, but during his closing statements when she wasn't in court, he accused her of lying. Spieckerman didn't expect to get Anderson acquitted of all charges, but he hoped he could shave the sentence down from 250 years in prison to 70 or 80. In part, it was a matter of professional pride. The public, however, thought his argument was abhorrent. "Who is the real sociopath; Carl Spieckerman (the lawyer) or the child molester Curtis Anderson?" one woman wrote to the Chronicle. "Some day Carl Spieckerman will have to answer for this and I would suspect he will rue the day." The trial was an especially tough week for Spieckerman. Fellow defense attorneys Dan Russo and Amy Morton sent him flowers with a card: "You're our hero." "I think a lot of lawyers would have been so consumed with the contempt that the general public felt," said Russo. "(Spieckerman) always gets the worst cases and the most difficult defendants and it would be easy to just be going through the motions and my experience with Carl is he doesn't just go through the motions." Stephanie Kahalekulu says she privately cursed Spieckerman during the trial. "After I heard Spieckerman, I thought how can you do this? How can you defend this person? He may get off. He may be let free," said Kahalekulu. Now, Kahalekulu said she harbors no grudge against Spieckerman. "One thing I appreciated about Spieckerman was that he did not torment (the little girl)," she said. Solano County Deputy District Attorney Donna Stashyn has faced Spieckerman in a number of cases, including Anderson's. She said he's respected by prosecutors as well. "In a case like this, someone's gotta represent him and all you can hope for is it's a good, fair attorney and I think that's what Mr. Spieckerman is," she said. Representing Anderson was the toughest thing Spieckerman has done professionally. His family ultimately showed their support by sitting through parts of the trial. His son, Damian Spieckerman, said he is proud of his father. "I think he represents his clients well and I think he has a good heart. " said Damian Spieckerman. "I think it's really hard and sad for him to walk around and know that so many people look at him and don't see any of that." Spieckerman, 57, is regarded by his fellow attorneys in Solano County as a straight-shooter. He's a workhorse who has 12 trials on his calendar in the next four months. When he's not overworked, he worries he's losing his edge. He's not flamboyant or theatrical, but takes pride in the times he has whittled away at the prosecution to win acquittals.Judges often turn to him with their toughest, least glamorous cases -- people accused of murders, defendants who've fired multiple attorneys, and unruly people like Anderson, who nobody else wants and who won't follow their attorney's advice. The stocky attorney wears a grey beard, round eye-glasses, and collar- length hair brushed back from his temples. His light blue eyes are surrounded by deep shadows and his broad forehead is criss-crossed with wrinkles. Private-practice defense attorneys have a sometimes unfair reputation for chasing ambulances, but most must hustle for private clients because that's usually where the money is. "It's a very difficult business, quite honestly," said Solano County Conflict Defender Dane Besneatte, who used to have his own practice. "(You're) having to make people pay and trying to collect money and (do) the business end of it." While most attorneys' caseload include perhaps 10 to 20 percent court- appointed cases, the vast majority of Spieckerman's cases are assigned to him by the court because the public defender has a conflict of interest. For most court-appointed cases, Spieckerman earns $55 an hour, sometimes more in tough cases or for particularly ornery clients. Until about 10 years ago, Spieckerman used to accept a wider range of cases, including divorce and child custody disputes. But he tired of parents calling him at 8 a.m. Monday morning to complain their spouse delivered their child home 15 minutes late. He hadn't the inclination to hustle for clients and decided his heart was in criminal defense. He likes the mental challenge and when he wins a case, it's a professional victory. "That's what you live for, that rush. You feel great," Speickerman said. Ever since Spieckerman was a young man and an Army sergeant derisively ordered Spieckerman and the other "college boys" to empty the toilet bowls and clean them, Spieckerman has been his own boss. He graduated from the night law school at John F. Kennedy University in Walnut Creek and two years later opened his own practice a block from the Vallejo courthouse. Spieckerman visits his clients in jail most weekends, although once in awhile he'll go camping by himself. Sometimes he cooks for relaxation, but most evenings, his wife says, he pores over case files at home. Spieckerman works in a utilitarian second floor office in a non-descript stucco building, with white walls, a brown carpet and basic padded metal chairs. His wife helps him out, often working 60 hour weeks, but he doesn't have a secretary or other staff. His bread and butter are clients like a young man recently charged with three felonies in a trailer-park burglary. Spieckerman shook his head when the man was late to his own preliminary hearing. But ultimately the judge ruled there wasn't enough evidence to hold him for two of the alleged felonies. "They're just these dumb kids, hanging around and drinking," said Spieckerman. Spieckerman refused his wife's request to drop Anderson's case. And when one of his step-daughters asked why he couldn't just "throw" the case -- that is, not present an aggressive defense -- he said that was impossible. Spieckerman had invested his adult life in a principle, and Anderson was going to get the best he had to offer."People say you've got to believe in the defendant before you work as hard for them. I don't believe that," said Spieckerman. "You still try to do the best you can because that's your duty, both to your client and society and the concept of justice," he said. Spieckerman approached defending Anderson as he has other tough cases. "Sometimes you're pretty much check-mated from the time you start. You make sure whatever evidence there is, you get it in front of them (the jury)." he said. Spieckerman read in police reports that the 8-year-old girl's friends had said she wanted to run away. When Spieckerman asked the little girl on the witness stand if that was true, she denied it. That was the basis for his defense. Spieckerman said he never set out to prove the girl wanted to go with Anderson, but he wanted to show she was capable of not telling the truth, and that not every detail of her story was necessarily accurate. His cross-examination of the girl was fairly mild, but during his closing statements when she wasn't in court, he accused her of lying. Spieckerman didn't expect to get Anderson acquitted of all charges, but he hoped he could shave the sentence down from 250 years in prison to 70 or 80. In part, it was a matter of professional pride. The public, however, thought his argument was abhorrent. "Who is the real sociopath; Carl Spieckerman (the lawyer) or the child molester Curtis Anderson?" one woman wrote to the Chronicle. "Some day Carl Spieckerman will have to answer for this and I would suspect he will rue the day." The trial was an especially tough week for Spieckerman. Fellow defense attorneys Dan Russo and Amy Morton sent him flowers with a card: "You're our hero." "I think a lot of lawyers would have been so consumed with the contempt that the general public felt," said Russo. "(Spieckerman) always gets the worst cases and the most difficult defendants and it would be easy to just be going through the motions and my experience with Carl is he doesn't just go through the motions." Stephanie Kahalekulu says she privately cursed Spieckerman during the trial. "After I heard Spieckerman, I thought how can you do this? How can you defend this person? He may get off. He may be let free," said Kahalekulu. Now, Kahalekulu said she harbors no grudge against Spieckerman. "One thing I appreciated about Spieckerman was that he did not torment (the little girl)," she said. Solano County Deputy District Attorney Donna Stashyn has faced Spieckerman in a number of cases, including Anderson's. She said he's respected by prosecutors as well. "In a case like this, someone's gotta represent him and all you can hope for is it's a good, fair attorney and I think that's what Mr. Spieckerman is," she said. Representing Anderson was the toughest thing Spieckerman has done professionally. His family ultimately showed their support by sitting through parts of the trial. His son, Damian Spieckerman, said he is proud of his father. "I think he represents his clients well and I think he has a good heart. " said Damian Spieckerman. "I think it's really hard and sad for him to walk around and know that so many people look at him and don't see any of that." by Los Angeles Police Department on January 19, 2018 After serving the City of Los Angeles for more than four decades, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck announced his retirement, marking the end of his illustrious career. "Serving the citizens of Los Angeles for over 40 years has been the honor of a lifetime. Leading the men and women of the LAPD -my family- has been a privilege I never thought I’d be worthy of. Today, I am announcing my retirement effective June 27th of this year." Charlie Beck said in a statement. You can view Chief Beck's full announcement at bit.ly/2DlEDlp https://www.facebook.com/lapdhq/videos/2022323824463150/
https://www.dailynews.com/2018/01/24/no-charges-filed-against-lapd-officer-who-fired-gun-during-scuffle-with-anaheim-teens/ t 10:42 amSANTA ANA – An off-duty LAPD officer “endangered the safety” of a group of Anaheim juveniles in a neighborhood scuffle nearly a year ago, but there isn’t enough evidence to charge him with a crime, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office announced on Wednesday.
The confrontation between Kevin Ferguson and a 13-year-old boy on Feb. 21, 2017 quickly drew widespread attention after videos of the altercation spread across social media. The videos show Ferguson struggling with the teenagers before discharging his handgun into the ground. It isn’t clear in the video if Ferguson fired the weapon on purpose. The shot appeared to go downward, and no one was struck. (Warning: Foul language in video) Fight between juveniles and off-duty LAPD officer who fired gun in Anaheim caught on tape OC Register Two different views of a fight between juveniles and off-duty LAPD officer who fired gun in Anaheim OC Register Police have said the confrontation began over ongoing issues with teenagers walking across the officer’s property at his home in the 1600 block of West Palais Road, near Euclid Street. Anaheim police previously indicated that the off-duty officer apparently confronted the boy and tried to detain him after believing the juvenile made threats to shoot him. A teenager who witnessed the incident has said it may have been a misunderstanding. “The little kid said, ‘I’m going to sue you,’ and then the guy thought he said, ‘I’m going to shoot you,’ “ a teenager who said he witnessed the incident has said. “That’s when he started grabbing the little kid.” It is unclear whether Ferguson identified himself to the teens as an officer. However, Anaheim police have said that voices can be heard on a video debating whether he was an officer, which suggests he had indeed IDed himself. The Los Angeles Police Department was conducting its own internal investigation into Ferguson’s actions. The Anaheim Police Department spend several hundred hours during its investigation of the case, which it handed over to the District Attorney’s Office in June. Officers did more than 90 interviews, viewed various videos and collected other evidence, ending up with more than 400 pages in reports and about 70 CDs and DVDs. This story is developing. |