‘Sometimes I feel like, somebody’s waaaatching me….’

Seems like a lot of people might want to start singing that tune, after checking out this court depo from late August.

Wonder what they’re worried about– or trying to do? The city spent a lot of money on this useless fishing trip. Their only sneaks are in management.

EXAMINATION
BY MR. MICHAELS:

Q. Good morning, Mr. Rodriguez. We’re here to
resume your deposition.
A. Good morning.
Q. You are, again, under oath, and everything that
was explained at the outset of the deposition about the
procedure still applies.
Do you remember those instructions, or would you
like me to repeat them?
A. I remember them.
Q. Okay. Is there any reason that you cannot give
your most complete and accurate testimony today?
A. No, sir.
Q. Has there been any change in your medications
since the time that you previously told us what they
were?
A. No, sir.
Q. Are you familiar with a blog called
“Semichorus”?
A. Yes, sir.
JUDGE WAYNE: Semi- -
MR. MICHAELS: Semichorus; S-e-m-i-c-h-o-u-r- -
-o-r-u-s, I should say.
JUDGE WAYNE: Okay.
Q. BY MR. MICHAELS: Do you read that blog at all?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you read it regularly?
A. No.
Q. Do you know who operates the blog?
A. No.
Q. Have you had any communications with anyone -
strike that.
Have you posted any — any comments on that
blog?
A. No.
Q. Do you know of anyone who has posted any
comments on that blog?
A. Yes.
Q. Who?
A. I think -
Can I explain?
JUDGE WAYNE: Sure.
Q. BY MR. MICHAELS: Apparently so.
A. When I’ve — when I’ve looked on the blog, at
the times that I’ve looked at it, they use aliases. So I
don’t know who those people are. But in the past, there
have been people who have actually placed their names on
there.
Now, here’s the problem. I don’t know if when
they’ve placed their names — for instance, one time
somebody claiming to be Officer Kerry Schilf from the
Burbank Police Department placed a comment on there. But
I don’t know — there’s no way of knowing if whether or
not that was, in fact, Officer Kerry Schilf.
So I’ve seen names on there. I’ve actually seen
names being placed on there. But I believe aside from
Officer Kerry Schilf and Peter Musurlian — he’s one
of the — he’s like a press person for the City of
Burbank — I don’t believe anyone has ever used their
real name on there.
Q. Do you know who the real people are behind any
of the pseudonyms that post on that blog?
A. No, sir.
(Sotto voce discussion between Mr. Gresen and the
witness.)
Q. BY MR. MICHAELS: Okay. Do you know anything
about the person who posts on that blog under the name
“Going Nuts”?
A. No.
Q. Do you know anything about the person who posts
on that — on the blog under the name “Dixie Flyer”?
A. Again, on the blog itself, I have read on there
that people are asserting that “Dixie Flyer” is a
gentleman that frequents the city council by the name
of -
Q. Mike Nolan?
A. Yes, sir.
JUDGE WAYNE: I’m sorry. I didn’t hear it.
MR. MICHAELS: Mike Nolan.
JUDGE WAYNE: That makes sense. Mike Nolan, “Dixie
Flyer.”
Q. BY MR. MICHAELS: Okay. Have you ever spoken to
Mr. Nolan?
A. Never.
Q. All right. Do you know anything about a person
who goes — who posts on that blog under the name
“Masked”?
A. No.
Q. What about the name “Brian”?
A. No.
Q. “Burbanker”?
A. No.
Q. “Andrew”?
A. No.
Q. “Charles 11″?
A. No.
Q. Is “Charles 11″ a unit designation used within
the Burbank Police Department?
A. I don’t believe so.
Q. What about the name “Citizen Cane”?
A. No.
Q. Okay. And what about “Burbank Watchdog”?
A. No.
Q. Did you — did you see the link on that blog to
a videotape online of portions of Detective Parrinello’s
deposition?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you have in your personal possession, not
your attorney’s, a copy of the videotape of Detective
Parrinello’s deposition?
A. No.
Q. Have you ever had in your personal possession a
copy of Detective Parrinello’s videotape?
A. No.
Q. To your knowledge, have any of your coplaintiffs
had in their personal possession a copy of that
videotape?
A. No.
Q. To your knowledge, has anyone except for the
attorneys in this case had a — and whoever it is who
controls that — that YouTube site, had in their
possession a copy of Detective Parrinello’s videotape?
A. No.
Q. Do you have any information as to how Detective
Parrinello’s videotaped deposition came to be in the
possession of the person who posted it on the Internet?
A. No.
Q. To your knowledge, have any of your coplaintiffs
had any communications with the person who operates the
Semichorus blog?
A. No.
Q. When you saw the link to the videotape of
Detective Parrinello’s deposition, did you watch it?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you watch it in its entirety?
A. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen it in its
entirety.
Q. No. I mean the — what was on the — what was
on the Internet. Not the entire videotape of the
deposition, but the portion that was on — what was
posted on the Internet, part of which was Detective
Parrinello’s videotaped deposition and part of which was
an audio recording.
A. I’ve never seen the entire thing.
Q. The entire deposition or the entire posting on
the Internet?
A. The entire posting on the Internet.
Q. All right. How much of it did you watch?
A. Probably about five minutes of it.
Q. Okay. Did you take any steps to tell anyone
else about the posting?
A. Yes.
Q. About the — well, I’ll refer to the — to the
Internet videotape as the — as the — as the videotape
posting.
Okay?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. What steps did you take to encourage
other — or I’m sorry.
What steps did you take to communicate to others
to — that they should watch that posting?
A. I told my attorneys.
Q. I’m not asking about your attorneys.
Anyone else?
A. I believe I’ve told — when I saw it — and I
can’t remember who it was that told me it was on there,
because I was called and told it was on there.
Q. You were called by someone other than your
attorneys?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you remember who?
A. I cannot.
Q. Okay.
A. And I know I told the other plaintiffs in the
case to look at it.
Q. And did you tell anyone else to look at it?
A. Not that I recollect.
Q. What about Steve Bellow?
A. I believe I did -
Q. Anyone else?
A. — tell Steve Bellow.
Anyone I would have told would have been law
enforcement related.
Q. Well, that’s a lot of people. You know a lot of
people in law enforcement.
So can you recall anyone else?
A. Let’s see. So it would have been, to the best
of my recollection, Cindy Guillen, Steve Karagiosian -
and I’m — I don’t want to speculate here because I’m not
sure I told every single one of these people. But that’s
to the best of my recollection.
Elfego Rodriguez, Cindy Guillen, Steve
Karagiosian, Jamal Childs, members of the Gunn family.
Q. Would those be Tina and Neil, Jr.?
A. Yes.
Q. Anyone else?
A. I believe I told Chris Topalovich, who is — who
is the half-brother of Neil Gunn. You’ve mentioned Steve
Bellow. I can’t recollect right now telling anybody
else. Oh, I told — I told Chip Rombach. He’s a retiree
from the police department.
Q. As is Steve Bellow?
A. Yes.
Q. Anyone else you can think of?
A. Not that comes to me now, sir.
Q. Why did you tell Mr. Rombach about it?
A. I thought he’d be interested. He’s been
following what’s been happening.
Q. How do you know that?
A. Because I speak to him.
Q. Okay. Do you speak to him about the case?
A. No. Not in particular about the case, but in
particular about what’s been going on on the blog and
things like that he’s asked me about.
Q. What can you recall of your discussions with
Mr. Rombach about what’s been going on on the blog?
A. A few things initially. There was some things
that were being very derogatory and lies that were being
told about me on the blog. And I — I can’t even
remember who it was last year who first alerted me to
that blog and that my name was being, you know, lambasted
on there. And for that reason -
Well, I — in answering your question, I’m
sorry, I can’t remember all the things I’ve discussed
with — with Chip Rombach regarding things on that blog.
Q. Do you remember what you discussed with him on
the subject of the posting — the video posting regarding
Detective Parrinello’s deposition?
A. That was simply it. You know, I told him, “Hey,
you might want to take a look at the blog and what’s on
there.”
He knew that I had stopped looking at it because
I just — I want to — I didn’t care to look at it
anymore. But somebody alerted me to that — to it being
on there. I can’t remember who that person was. It was
one of the people, I think, I believe I mentioned who
called me and told me. And — and I told these other
people.
Q. Okay. Now, with respect to Mr. Rombach, did -
did he have — did he communicate back -
Well, when you told him he might want to look at
it, did you do that by verbal communication, or did you
send him some sort of electronic, written communication?
A. No. Verbal communication.
Q. So was it in person or on the phone?
A. I can’t remember.
Q. Do you remember him saying anything about -
well, to the effect of, “Well, what is it? Why should I
look at that?”
A. I told him what it was.
Q. Okay. Did he ask you any questions?
A. Not that I remember.
Q. Did he ask you anything about — did he ask you
whether you had been present at the deposition?
A. I don’t — I don’t believe so. I don’t remember
whether he asked me that or not.
Q. Did he ask you anything about the audio
recording that purports to be of Detective Parrinello?
A. I believe he did.
Q. What did he ask you?
A. I believe there was some sort of speculation,
you know, in that conversation that Neil Gunn had
recorded that statement.
Q. Chip Rombach speculated that Neil Gunn had
recorded the conversation, or you did, or both of you?
A.I can’t remember.
Q. What else did you and he discuss about the -
Let me just define a term, if I might. Rather
than saying “the audiotape recording which purports to be
of Detective Parrinello” each time, can I just refer to
that as “the Parrinello recording,” and you’ll know what
I’m referring to?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Was there any other question about — or
discussion of the Parrinello recording with Mr. Rombach?
A. Not that I remember.
Q. Did you have any discussion of the Parrinello
recording with Steve Bellow?
A. No.
Q. Did you have any discussion of the Parrinello
recording with any of your coplaintiffs?
A. Not that I recall.
There is one other person.
Q. Yes.
A. Bill Taylor. I don’t know if I mentioned him
before.
Q. You did not. So thank you for adding that.
Did you have any discussion of the Parrinello
recording with him in the context of discussing the post?
A. No. Not that I remember.
Q. So you talked about the Internet post, which
included the deposition and the Parrinello recording,
with each of your coplaintiffs, but nobody raised the
subject of the Parrinello recording that was on the post;
is that correct?
A. No. I can’t remember whether they did or not.
Q. Okay. When you saw the post, had you ever heard
the Parrinello recording before?
A. No.
Q. So that was the first time that you heard it?
A. No. I’m sorry. I thought you were referring to
the deposition.
Q. No.
A. You’re talking about the actual recording?
Q. When I say “the Parrinello recording,” I’m
talking about that audio recording that purports to be
statements made by Mike Parrinello during a conversation
he had with you on April 15, 2009.
Do you know the — the recording I’m referring
to?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. It is interspersed with the Parrinello
videotaped deposition segments on that Internet post;
right?
A. Correct.
Q. And you watched portions of that Internet post?
A. Correct.
Q. And you heard some of the Parrinello audio
recording?
A. Yes.

What Burbank was doing here was trying to use their civil attorney to perform a criminal-type interview about the bloggers they don’t like. They wanted Rodriguez to identify people under oath, which he wouldn’t be in the position of knowing about anyway.

How this factors into the discrimination lawsuits we can’t figure out. But Barlow and Co. can’t drag residents down there and interrogate them about their free speech (yet), or what they know, so they do the next best thing– which is to spend big taxpayer $$ to grill a guy who is suing them for something else and try to get him to name names in front of a judge.

Chilled, anyone?