Forums >
Off-Topic Discussion >
L.A. County Sheriff Loses Photographer's Document
On July 2, 2015, I submitted a written request for the transcript of a 9-1-1 call, on a Los Angeles County form, personally handed to me by the Lancaster Watch Commander at his Front Desk, at his office on the northwest corner of Lancaster Boulevard and Sierra Highway. The Deputy at the Front Desk in whose hands I placed my formal request, when I asked him how long it should take before I received the transcript, instead of answering my question, told me what I already knew - that "they could call me." I already knew that because I had written my name and cell phone number on the form. Today, not having received any notification from the police, I returned to the same Front Desk before 7 a.m. No one seemed to be on duty. Eventually, a prison guard came and attended two other people, but ignored me, leaving me standing there at the Front Desk for perhaps another five or ten minutes. Finally, Deputy Burchett appeared to ask what I needed. I informed him that I was checking up on the request I had submitted to another Deputy at that Front Desk a week ago, and would be happy to submit another such written request if that one had been misplaced. Deputy Burchett asked me for my name and looked in various files and in-boxes all around the Front Desk area. While doing so, and failing to discover my request, he informed me that "qualified desk personnel" aren't usually there until 8 a.m., so he didn't know what they would have done with my request. Which implies that at least some of the Deputies who work the Front Desk are unqualified to work at the Front Desk while they are working at Front Desk anyway. It also implies that the L.A. County Deputies don't know what the Chain of Custody is for a formal, written request for the transcript of a 9-1-1 call; otherwise, Deputy Burchett would have known exactly where to look and or who to ask for my request. Which begs the question: What else do unqualified personnel do at certain times on certain days, for the L.A. County Sheriff's Department? Are there times when unqualified personnel take 9-1-1 calls, and dispatch Deptuties who are unqualified to respond to 9-1-1 calls, to respond to 9-1-1 calls? Was the Deputy who responded to the 9-1-1 call about me photographing my wife on our front lawn June 30, 2015 qualified to do so? Was the dispatcher who dispatched him qualified to do so? Was the 9-1-1 Operator who took the call qualified to do so? Is anyone at the L.A. County Sheriff's Department qualified to accept and process my formal request for the transcript of the 9-1-1 call without misplacing it? I will return to the Watch Commander's Front Desk tomorrow, at approximately 8 a.m., and if there aren't any "qualified desk personnel" there to process my request for the transcript, I will be having another word with the Watch Commander, and I will tell him to tighten his Front Desk's "shot group." Jul 09 15 08:58 am Link I'm very proud to see my tax dollars were well spent on your military training to take such decisive action. I'm not sure what word you are going to share with the watch commander, but you have given yourself enough time to pick a good one. Please keep us updated on this compelling situation. Jul 09 15 09:47 am Link William Mortensen Vaughan wrote: lots of police departments started to use "volunteers" to fill in for "non-emergency" positions in all kinds of cities. typically for desk and low priority work. there have been even security/deputy types in patrol cars to help stranded motorists, responding to complaints here abouts. it takes some of the pressure off the man power requirements. unfortunately, office forms and filing does not belong in the "vital job" category. normally, you should have kept a copy of the form before handing it over. William Mortensen Vaughan wrote: 911 operators typically do require special training to assist in medical advice and knowing the correct sequence of questions that must be asked for certain types of calls. that is vital. most of the problems from 911 have been overloaded systems or staffing levels, but i can't see any system using "unqualified" 911 operators. Jul 09 15 11:57 am Link LeonardG Photography wrote: That is no excuse. There are laws and policies that must be followed when a citizen makes a request for information from a law enforcement agency. It makes no difference who the staff member is, the laws and policy must still be followed. Jul 09 15 12:20 pm Link What are the odds that the sheriff doesn't want that info out of his office, and he and his staff are doing their best to ignore you in the hope you'll go away? Jul 09 15 01:17 pm Link Are you willing to pay more local tax (sales, property, whatever) so that your local police department is able to hire more staff to handle requests like yours? If not, where do you suggest the local police & fire departments get the extra money needed for faster service? I'm also curious -- what is your expectation about how long you will need to wait for the requested information? Finally, you can always talk to a lawyer & see if you can subpoena the appropriate information using more reliable processes. Of course, you may have to pay for that. Jul 09 15 01:29 pm Link I've experienced the same, while at their front desk (or by phone to have mailed to you) a Freedom of Information Act request form if they refuse to had over the transcript within 20 days. take the name/badge number of any person you speak to and = case / incident number of said 911 call. report the incident of negligence to your local 'Dept of Justice Professional Standards Unit' (and) the Sheriffs own Internal Affairs *again, make sure to take the name/badge number of any officer you contact or are referred to ~ they don't like it when their held personally accountable. call and recall and record the calls (tell them your call is being recorded on your end) because you can damn well be assured it is on their end already. ...unfortunately, it appears that Law Enforcement of late has been evading liability for what they are paid to do, its a job they get well paid for, if they can't fulfill such a important and vital post and it responsabilities, they should be terminated. The reason behind the FOIC ~ is to let them know you're serious, and you can file a petition with the court if they still fail to comply after 30 days (and basis for a tort claim against their Dept) ~ and with the names and badge numbers = each incident of misconduct or dereliction of duty goes on their permanent record. In your case = it sounds like they are trying to intentionally hide something. (which sadly, is not unusual) Jul 09 15 01:51 pm Link William Mortensen Vaughan wrote: I'm curious. What is it you hope to accomplish with gaining the transcript of the 911 call? Will it help you in a court case? Are you hoping to find out who called to report you so that you can seek revenge? What is it exactly that you want to do with this information? Jul 09 15 01:53 pm Link I'm wondering why the OP hasn't gone to the press with this instead of MM... Jul 09 15 02:01 pm Link They are probably trying to figure out if they are going to charge you with a crime. That way when you pick up the report, they can arrest you at the same time, or issue you a citation. You did admit that you were shooting commercially on your front lawn. Did you have a permit? Is your property zoned for that? Do you have a license to run your photography business out of your home? Does your wife have a license to run her business out of your home? Jul 09 15 02:07 pm Link I don't make any judgement as to wisdom of pursuing this, but since you are in California, so CA laws govern. You should submit a Public Records Act request. In writing. The public records act provides, in part: (c) Each agency, upon a request for a copy of records, shall, within 10 days from receipt of the request, determ ine whether the request, in whole or in part, seeks copies of disclosable public records in the possession of the agency and shall promptly notify the person making the request of the determination and the reasons therefor. In unusual circumstances, the time limit prescribed in this section may be extended by written notice by the head of the agency or his or her designee to the person making the request, setting forth the reasons for the extension and the date on which a determination is expected to be dispatched. No notice shall specify a date that would result in an extension for more than 14 days. When the agency dispatches the determination, and if the agency determines that the request seeks disclosable public records, the agency shall state the estimated date and time when the records will be made available. As used in this section, “unusual circumstances” means the following, but only to the extent reasonably necessary to the proper processing of the particular request. you can find the rest at http://ag.ca.gov/publications/public_records_act.pdf Jul 09 15 02:14 pm Link MoRina wrote: With a head full of steam....I am going down to that police station and tell on myself...no matter what happens. Jul 09 15 02:17 pm Link matt-h2 wrote: And by that I mean send them a letter (perhaps certified, return receipt requested), to their headquarters. Perhaps attn: public records act requests. Jul 09 15 02:20 pm Link DOUGLASFOTOS wrote: Again, I am not advising the OP to pursue this course, but there are generally penalties in the law if an agency retaliates against someone who is simply seeking information. Most smart agencies would not drum up the sorts of charges MoRina postulates, because they, at least, usually don't want bad publicity. Jul 09 15 02:23 pm Link Here is why I think he should get the 911 transcript. It will show if the neighbor gave any false information to the police in the 911 call. I don't know about California, but in Texas, it is illegal to give false information to police. The 911 transcript would clear up what exactly the police were told. Jul 09 15 02:33 pm Link Evan Hiltunen wrote: I realize you find everything I've done in the past eight years compelling. It's creepy, but I knew what I was getting into when I got online. Jul 09 15 02:51 pm Link LeonardG Photography wrote: It's a short form. I don't mind going to their office every day and filling another one out for them as many times as it takes. I realized when I gave them the form, it would probably disappear. Their losing it is exactly what I expected them to do. Having a Deputy - not a volunteer - a full-fledged, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy admit to my face that he was unqualified to do the job he was doing actually shocked me. Jul 09 15 02:59 pm Link Managing Light wrote: That's what my wife, Libertad Green thinks. I disagree. I've looked into these men's eyes, and all I see so far is bumbling incompetence. Jul 09 15 03:01 pm Link Looknsee Photography wrote: This is California. It's a Blue State. It's not a deep, dark secret that the Democratic, dope-smoking liberals have mismanaged their tax revenue and natural resources until they've run this State into the ground. Actually, I just double-checked Rich States, Poor States Jul 09 15 03:10 pm Link Patrick Walberg wrote: I intend to take further action, depending on what the transcript says, if I even get one. If the police admit no such call was made, I intend to sue them. If they prove they received a call making false allegations, such as me having my wife pose at knife- or gun-point, I intend to sue the caller for slander and wrongful endangerment. If the call should have been dismissed, because it merely states that "an old man was photographing a 16-yr.-old girl," I intend to sue the police. Jul 09 15 03:20 pm Link JQuest wrote: We have told to other forms of "the press" besides ModelMayhem; a couple have shared our story: Jul 09 15 03:29 pm Link MoRina wrote: Yeah, [tongue in cheek] they're too busy eating donuts to actually come to my door. Jul 09 15 03:33 pm Link |