Release the tape

 

Our council members need to act immediately and direct their city manager to officially order the city attorney to release the full audio recording of last week’s events. For the city to refuse to do so only proves that they have something to hide.

Other agencies release their tapes, and most even have video recordings of their officers’ interactions. (No wonder Burbank doesn’t this equipment installed yet, eh?) That’s why we see them on TV. So what could the City of Burbank be afraid of here?

The Leader today basically reprinted most of the official BPD press release. Let’s see if and where it doesn’t make sense:

After the boy interrupted him with “inflammatory dialogue,” the officer decided to “deescalate” the situation by returning the driver’s license to the mother with a warning instead of a citation, Losacco said.

The officer then asked the teenager to put his seatbelt on. He reportedly responded that he would only do so when the officer walked away. When the officer stepped back, the boy put on his seatbelt.

OK, fair enough. This was also straight from the BPD release. But then there was a paragraph break that immediately led to this passage:

According to police, sometime after the boy put his seatbelt on, he removed it and told the officer he was going to “fight him right now,” kicking the car door open into the officer’s knees. He then reportedly dared the officer to call for backup while his mother tried to keep him in the car.

Hold on. What happened in between? What do they mean by “sometime after the boy put his seatbelt on”? How long? Hadn’t the officer already ended the transaction?

The audio tape would tell us exactly what transpired, and/or why there was such a sudden change of heart in the kid — if indeed there was one.

Eventually he got out of the car, police said, took off his sweatshirt and approached the officer in a fighting stance, telling the officer to pepper spray him.

Eventually? Again, did the cop do anything that led to this new action? Did he change his mind about the ticket, thus escalating the situation?

The officer used pepper spray, but it didn’t have an effect on the teenager, who then punched the officer multiple times, knocking off his glasses, Losacco said. At that point, the officer shot him with a Taser and handcuffed him.

Wait a minute. How can pepper spray not have an effect on someone? This we don’t believe. Was the kid on PCP? And if the officer had his glasses knocked off etc. then how was he immediately able to tase the kid?

The kid’s still punching away, or did he eventually stop and get tased anyway for contempt of cop?

No, something in the scenario is being left out. The official police account also does NOT state the following:

Nevarez, a single mother of three, said that her 14-year-old daughter was also pepper-sprayed, and her 3-year-old niece was also in the car. Police said the teenage girl got out of the car during her brother’s confrontation with police and was struck by residual pepper spray.

That’s a new one. Where did the Leader get this info?

The incident was captured on the officer’s audio recorder, but police on Friday declined to release the recording.

Sorry, but it’s not up to the police to decide;  it’s up to the civilians. So what are they hiding?

What are they afraid of revealing? And do we have a real city council going on here, or just an elected advisory board?

In other words, where’s the leadership? It’s not like Burbank doesn’t have a history of playing fast and loose about its police. Historically, these civilians have never inspired much confidence in this area.

 

 

Advertisements

26 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

26 responses to “Release the tape

  1. Slim

    They will HAVE to provide it to the defense when the time comes. They can’t talk about it and not turn it over to his lawyer.

  2. Anonymous 3

    Seeing ghosts again, eh?

    I feel for the kid, but I doubt the officer did anything wrong.

  3. Anonymous 3

    You expect the recording to be clear and crisp and unambiguous?

    It’s not a TV cop show. Bet you much of it is indecipherable.

    But your basic point, that it should be released, is valid.

    I doubt the CM has the authority to order the CA to do anything. I think they are peers.

    • Anonymous

      I’m still trying to find all of the pro-autistic kid comments on any of the threads in the City of Burbank group. As far as I can tell (and I read the original post by the mother after the incident and its comments), nearly every commenter has called for his and her head, alleging that she is out to extort “their” tax money. This includes the sweetheart resident who suggested that BPD take him “behind the court” after the trial for some justice.

      • Burbank Bill

        Initially the Facebook comments were all on the mothers side, 99% .. Then BPD puts out the statement, and they literally all shifted to side with the cops. The mothers lawyer also told her not to,post anymore. It was comical. They won’t release the tapes, any sooner than the romancing the bean bathroom dump tape. Lol

        • Anonymous 241

          Nowhere near that. I was following and reading as it unfolded and while many were upset/shocked/outraged, few were overtly supportive. Most were “this is awful” “sorry this happened” but few really taking her side. However, there was a complete about face from neutrality and sympathy for all involved to outright rage and blind allegiance to the cop’s side of things. Simply because the police department released a statement, her word was valueless and her intentions ill meaning. Her son immediately became a an uncontrollable danger that could’ve killed burbank citizens, she became a fraud fleecing us of our tax dollars, his autism became “autism…if he really is autistic” and then there were the dozens or so moms who chimed in saying that they have children who “get out of hand” but they would never attack a cop, including, a story about a mother letting her Down syndrome kid sit in jail for attempting to steal vending machine change (to purchase a fan with).

          • semichorus

            People are nuts when it comes to the police now. It’s scary. Achtung indeed.

            Keep in mind too that much of this stuff is being deliberately planted. I know for a fact that the city spent a tremendous amount of money on opposition research during the police mess and with the funding buried deep within their attorneys budgets so that they could keep it all hidden. One of their big tactics was to both spread around slanderous nonsense about the critics and plant phony commentary wherever they could.

            I don’t trust anything about that “We Love Burbank So Much!” Facebook site. It was set up by design to be an apologist for the established order. It is glorious though that it’s become such a sleaze pit of classic Burbank bigotry and intolerance, and so quickly.

        • Anonymous 3

          There is no tape from romancing the bean’s bathroom.

          How gross would it be to have a video camera in the bathroom?

          Sheese. Talk about seeing ghosts.

          And there still are plenty of pro-kid comments on the fb page.

          • semichorus

            The tape was of the “suspect” leaving.

            If there is a tape of the inside of the bathroom, the proprietor is invading her customers’ privacy under the law. Which could be why it’s not being released to anyone.

            She has a long and cozy history with the BPD, so the notion that they could be helping her out here does not surprise me.

      • Anonymous 3

        If you don’t see them then you aren’t looking.

  4. Charles

    Thanks folks for letting her dangle for hours.
    The vapors must have set in again, or pungent pot smoke.

  5. Anonymous

    Well, I tried to get a recording released to me a while back and was told it wasn’t going to happen.

  6. Cricket

    I spoke with some ranking officers at bpd. They want to release the tape, but the department is precluded from doing so. They referenced a welfare and institutions code that basically forbids the dept from disclosing the tape because a minor is involved.

    Seems to me the tape is going to back up the department’s version of the events. They seem pretty steadfast in their position, which common sense dictates they can back up with the tape. I’m sure the tape will be disclosed to the family and the attorney as part of discovery in the criminal case (and/or as part of any civil litigation). Once the family has the tape, they should release it publicly. Anyone know how long the dept has to give the tape to the kid’s attorney of criminal charges as filed?

  7. Cricket

    Reference CA Welfare & Institutions Code 827.9

    In short order one would surmise the tape will be shared with the family and or attorney, whether it be as part of criminal discovery or civil suit the family states it is filing. If the pd doesn’t share the tape for whatever reason, wouldn’t that be grounds for dismissal of the criminal case or an issue in the civil trial? Hopefully the family and attorney release the tape once they get it, again assuming they get it.

    • semichorus

      827 also says that once there’s a felony conviction the information on a minor can be released to the public. The Court can also release the tape right now after a hearing/petition, and the name of the minor need not be revealed even if the tape is.

  8. Cricket

    So the PD can’t release the tape right now? That’s the way I read your comment. Like I said, I hear they want to release it, but can’t because of the welfare code referenced above.

Leave a Reply- (comments take a while to appear)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s