Hearing a knock at the Motel 6 door, a prostitute wearing a black catsuit answered, $20 bills stashed in her cleavage. In the bathroom, Sunnyvale police officers found a veteran Menlo Park police detective wearing nothing.
End of his career? Nope.
Officer Jeffrey Vasquez, 48, returned to duty in the Menlo Park Police Department late last year, following an internal affairs investigation triggered by the bust. He had also been charged with misdemeanor solicitation by the Santa Clara County District Attorney. What internal sanctions he faced remains unknown; the state's confidentiality laws prevent discovery of penalties levied by his employer.
The leak
Under California law, internal affairs investigations -- even the fact that an investigation has occurred -- are confidential personnel matters. So are complaints of misconduct and police disciplinary records.
But the investigation came to light anyway more than a year later. On Oct. 17, 2012, Menlo Park City Manager Alex McIntyre sat talking about city business with his predecessor, Glen Rojas, at a communal table near the bar at the Menlo Hub, a Menlo Park restaurant. Their conversation carried to an Almanac reporter sitting at the other end of the same table.
Part of their discussion involved the city's binding arbitration policy, invoked when a police officer appeals a disciplinary penalty after failing to convince city management to reverse it. Apparently the city "lost royally" during arbitration, McIntyre said, forcing Menlo Park to reinstate the officer. The city manager said he told the council that paying the officer to leave instead of returning to work would be "a million dollar check."
He expressed frustration that some members of the City Council wanted to discuss the matter publicly despite regulations prohibiting disclosure.
Without naming Officer Vasquez, the city manager mentioned the officer's length of service and gender. Only two current officers matched the description; a painstaking search of employment data, police logs and court records led the Almanac to a Santa Clara County Superior Court file that detailed the case against the officer.
"You overheard a conversation between two colleagues," McIntyre told the Almanac during an interview in January. He said he didn't remember precisely what he said at the Hub, and stated that it's not unusual for a city manager to consult his predecessor.
As for the case itself: "(City Attorney) Bill McClure said I can't say anything."
Officer Vasquez told the Almanac he'd been ordered not to talk about it by the interim police chief. At an hourly rate of $52.40, his annual base wage is approximately $109,004. Should he retire at age 50 with at least 25 years of service, he'd receive 75 percent of his final salary as a pension; that increases to 90 percent if he retires after 30 years.
The officer's attorney did not respond to requests for comment. Neither did Bryan Roberts, who was serving as Menlo Park police chief at the time of the incident.
The motel
Jeffrey Vasquez jeopardized his 24-year career with the Menlo Park Police Department when he went to the wrong place at the wrong time on Feb. 18, 2011.
According to court documents, a Sunnyvale police officer acting on a tip was watching a motel room for signs of 32-year-old Natalia Ramirez, who had two outstanding bench warrants. He knocked on the door. Once inside, the officer asked Ramirez what was going on.
"She replied that it was what it looked like. I asked her if it was prostitution, she replied by saying yes," the police report stated. Her male companion did not reveal himself as a fellow law enforcement officer until a check of his driver's license alerted the Sunnyvale police that he was.
Detective Vasquez was in Sunnyvale to serve a subpoena related to a Menlo Park sexual assault case, he told the officers, "and this was not the first time he had solicited a prostitute for sex," according to the filing. Upon learning that the target of the subpoena wouldn't be home until later, the report states the detective said, "I had an hour to kill" so he called "My Redbook," a site listing local escorts and their phone numbers.
Ramirez confirmed that she advertised on Redbook and said that Detective Vasquez had called her, asking to come over later, according to the Sunnyvale police report. She didn't remember what name he had used.
The Menlo Park police officer "admitted that he was there for sex" and that he had found her on Redbook. They hadn't engaged in sexual activity before Sunnyvale police arrived or discussed specific prices or services, according to the report.
Asked why he didn't immediately identify himself as a police officer, Detective Vasquez reportedly responded, "I don't want to be a dick and ask for preferential treatment."
Senior officers from Sunnyvale and Menlo Park arrived on the scene after a series of calls -- standard procedure when an incident involves a fellow officer, according to law enforcement sources. Capt. Carl Rushmeyer of Sunnyvale showed up, then Watch Commander Tim Brackett and Sgt. Matt Bacon of Internal Affairs, both from Menlo Park.
Ramirez, who has a criminal record for drug possession and prostitution, was arrested on the bench warrants. The report noted that Sunnyvale police turned a "distraught" Detective Vasquez over to his Menlo Park colleagues and forwarded the case to the district attorney.
Charged with misdemeanor solicitation, Officer Vasquez hired Redwood City attorney William Rapoport to handle the case and pleaded not guilty in June 2011.
A month later -- on July 11 -- the prosecution asked to dismiss the case. The problem? Prosecutors were notified the day of Ramirez's trial that the officer who had interviewed her was unavailable to testify. According to Deputy District Attorney Rob Baker, who supervised the case, the officer was caring for his wife as she endured a life-threatening medical crisis. A Sunnyvale officer confirmed the circumstances related to the dismissal to the Almanac and said his department had hoped the case could have gone forward.
"I wanted to prosecute the case, that's the reason we charged it," Baker said. "But in light of the (misdemeanor) charges, we didn't feel it appropriate to force the cop to come to court when his wife was going through something that serious."
Losing a key witness left the case against both Ramirez and Officer Vasquez dead in the water. "We couldn't prove the case against the cop because the (officer) who actually observed him in the room with the prostitute wasn't available," Baker said.
The court would regard the confessions recorded in the police report as inadmissible hearsay, he explained, without the testimony of the officer who took the statement.
Compounding their dilemma, Ramirez had not waived her time to a speedy trial. Baker said, "We literally had to go to trial on that day or within 10 days."
His team looked for workaround strategies to no avail. They concluded that ultimately they weren't going to be able to use Ramirez's statement. "What's the jury going to think when the primary officer doesn't show up to testify? If I was to dismiss the case against her, his defense attorney would then know we couldn't prove the case against him," Baker said. A pre-trial conference for the charge against Officer Vasquez had been set for the same day as Ramirez's trial.
In the end they asked the court to dismiss the case for lack of evidence. "With misdemeanors, you only get one bite at the apple. The case gets dismissed, and that's it," Baker said. "Had this been felony conduct, we could have dismissed and then refiled it."
The ties that bind
The dismissal of the criminal case sheds some light on how Officer Vasquez was able to return to duty. The city of Menlo Park's administrative mechanisms also contributed to his reinstatement.
Personnel procedures separate criminal proceedings from administrative hearings, according to the city's human resources director, Gina Donnelly. "You have to be careful not to impede a criminal investigation," she said.
As with all other city employees that the Almanac questioned about the case, Donnelly said she couldn't talk about Vasquez and could answer only general questions about the disciplinary process.
"An employer can't take disciplinary action based solely on an arrest. It depends on what they're arrested for, if there's a nexus to their employment and whether there's a conviction. All city employees are held to a very high ethical standard, and police officers are held to an even higher standard."
The standard of proof for an administrative hearing is lower than that for a criminal trial. "It's 'more likely than not,' similar to the standard in a civil case," Donnelly said, as opposed to "beyond a reasonable doubt" in a criminal case. But while court proceedings generate public records, administrative hearings don't.
Three levels of discipline exist: a letter of reprimand, suspension, and the most serious, dismissal. An officer may appeal the decision within the department and then to the city manager, Donnelly said. If challenged again, the case goes to binding arbitration.
Binding arbitration is written into the city's contract with the police unions, according to City Attorney Bill McClure. The contract spells out the steps: The union and city first try to agree on an arbitrator. If they don't, the State Mediation & Conciliation Service supplies a list of five names, and the union and the city take turns eliminating names until one remains; that person then serves as arbitrator.
No single set of guidelines applies to the criteria an arbitrator uses to reach a decision, Donnelly said.
The contract states: "The award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding." In other words, that person can overrule whatever disciplinary decision the city made.
Many jurisdictions in California, including San Jose and Palo Alto, use binding arbitration. Sources familiar with the process said it makes removing a problem police officer nearly impossible.
Credibility under oath
How does a troubled past affect an officer's future credibility in court? In 1963 the U.S. Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland ruled that prosecutors must disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense, including misconduct by a police officer who might be called as a witness in a case if that misconduct could discredit or impeach the officer's testimony.
As in other jurisdictions, San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said his office keeps a "Brady list" of police officers charged or convicted of an offense, and discloses that information to the defense when the officer will testify while facing charges or serving probation. He said some crimes, such as misdemeanor drunk driving, allow the removal of the officer from the list after he completes probation.
Other crimes, such as a moral turpitude offense or one related to credibility, such as filing a false report, keeps the officer on the list in perpetuity. The Brady list is not public record; the information "is accessible only to our attorneys in handling their cases," Wagstaffe said.
A police officer charged with soliciting a prostitute may not make the list. Wagstaffe said that case law considers solicitation by the prostitute as an act of moral turpitude, but wasn't sure whether that held true for the john. "Doesn't seem like it should be different, but the law is a strange thing in so many distinctions it draws."
The district attorney, having never seen a case on that point, said the question would require some research.
Comments
Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jan 15, 2013 at 9:25 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 9:25 am
There are no winners in this mess.
Los Altos
on Jan 15, 2013 at 9:29 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 9:29 am
Excellent reporting.
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 15, 2013 at 9:29 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 9:29 am
This is why we need local journalism. We need to know how our taxpayer dollars are spent, and sometimes it is downright shocking. Shame on this guy and shame on the corrupt "system" in place here. I guess laws are only for "some" of us.
Greenmeadow
on Jan 15, 2013 at 9:30 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 9:30 am
I just HATE when that happens.
another community
on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:13 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:13 am
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
Palo Alto High School
on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:39 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:39 am
Hey, loosen up, "neighbor." People make mistakes; he only hurt himself. He has already donated his life by having a career in law enforcement. [Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.
another community
on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:51 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:51 am
Palo Alto no longer uses binding arbitration. On November 8, 2011, Palo Alto voters approved Measure D to repeal Article V of the Palo Alto Charter in its entirety, eliminating the requirement that public safety employee disputes be resolved by binding interest arbitration.
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 15, 2013 at 11:08 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 11:08 am
> People make mistakes; he only hurt himself.
Not very much, it would seem from this article.
> He has already donated his life by having a career in
> law enforcement
Pooleeezzzeee .. Poorly educated Police Officers are now paid more than company presidents, and they also have for-life pensions that will make them multi-millionaires in retirement. What job can you point to that compensates people as well as this?
The crime statistics pretty much point out that police don’t stop crime from happening. They might, on occasion, figure out who committed a crime, and make a sound enough case to secure a conviction. But that's about it.
---
What’s really troubling is how the police have managed to secure enough “rights” that they can commit crimes without expecting to be treated like other people. There is just no transparency in the police function in most places. They have created a wall around themselves that gives them the right to not have to admit that officers have committed crimes, or even deny it—unless the proof is incontrovertible.
The example of the officer in Palo Alto who was arrested for a DUI (perhaps even involving an accident). It was almost impossible to get the Palo Alto Police to even admit that the event occurred. In that case, the arrest was in another jurisdiction, so there were no local police involved—until the matter was considered by Internal Affairs. Even then, they were not forthcoming about what the decision process was for evaluating improper/illegal activities of policemen who were off-duty (in this case).
The Daily News has recently reported a similar problem with a DUI involving a Los Altos police office, who was seemingly on-duty. It would not be hard to believe that within a ten mile radius, we have three different police departments with three different sets of standards—none of which are available to the public for review, and general vetting.
This lack of transparency would seem to be getting worse, not better.
Menlo Park
on Jan 15, 2013 at 11:14 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 11:14 am
According to an interview with Palo Alto Police Chief Dennis Burns, binding arbitration is still available as an option.
Sandy
another community
on Jan 15, 2013 at 11:25 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 11:25 am
The ghosts of our Calvinist Founding hypocrites still keep us in an outdated moral code and with a virtual State religion. The problem here is criminalizing victimless behavior. We need State licensed sex workers who are required to get both education about safe practices and, regular health checkups.
If a cop wants to get laid, its no one's business but his/her (and their family's) business.
Meadow Park
on Jan 15, 2013 at 11:57 am
on Jan 15, 2013 at 11:57 am
What a complete waste of tax - payers monies. If this policeman has such sexual needs then let him enjoy the same, because at the end of the day whom did he actually hurt and infect?
In future tell your police force to get on and fight the real criminals and mind their own business.
another community
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:07 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:07 pm
Was the officer on the taxpayer-paid clock at $52 and hour while with the prostitute? That to me is much more troubling and unethical than simply patronizing a willing member of the world's oldest profession. I'm surprised the article made no mention of that issue. Seems like he would get fired or disciplined no differently than if he were caught in a movie theater while on duty.
Menlo Park
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:09 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:09 pm
This is not a moral or a religious issue. It is a question of LAW. Prostitution is illegal in California. Cops are supposed to uphold the law. They are also supposed to be working during hours for which they are paid from taxpayer dollars. They are frequently witnesses in court when other people break the law. Breaking the law themselves impacts their credibility. There have been similar problems in San Mateo County but he employees are teflon coated. At present there are laws for the plebs and get home free cards for public "servants." Also, what does consorting with prostitutes by police officers say with respect to their state of mind in protecting women's rights? If this officer has to pay for it, he must not have what it takes.
Registered user
Mountain View
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:15 pm
Registered user
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:15 pm
This is disappointing on many levels.
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:15 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:15 pm
Argue from whatever viewpoint you'd like, but I'd like to reiterate that this guy was on government time $$$$$$$$$$$ --
>>> "Detective Vasquez was in Sunnyvale to serve a subpoena related to a Menlo Park sexual assault case, he told the officers, "and this was not the first time he had solicited a prostitute for sex," according to the filing. Upon learning that the target of the subpoena wouldn't be home until later, the report states the detective said, "I had an hour to kill" so he called "My Redbook," a site listing local escorts and their phone numbers."
He had an hour to kill? This makes it legitimate? No. It does not. Shame.
Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:20 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:20 pm
The line at the beginning of the article: "an internal affairs investigation triggered by the bust" -- are we referring to the bust decorated with $20 bills?
Menlo Park
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:29 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:29 pm
that is such b.s its a cop so they do anything to whipe his hands clean strip him of his badge and let that corrupted department start over man not cool he deserves to go to jail just like if it was any other citizen getting in nookie
Registered user
Palo Alto High School
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:41 pm
Registered user
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:41 pm
Haha, Alex!
@Joe: This cop was not risking the lives of the general public he has been employed to guard. He was not driving DUI which endangers the public.
This guy is handsome. Wonder why he had to pay someone for it. Gals love men in uniform. [Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
Palo Verde
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:56 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:56 pm
Odd. In every other journalism about a bust, the word "alleged" appears in every sentence. Unless convicted, isn't this man innocent in the eyes of the law? The fact that he wasn't convicted had nothing to do with his occupation.
Crescent Park
on Jan 15, 2013 at 1:06 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 1:06 pm
I have to say, I don't understand the reasoning here. The fact that he is being kept on says to me that he is not the only one and in fact there is some major corruption going on somewhere hidden that we cannot see. When the law is so complex that it can be derailed by something so trivial - the law is an ass.
By the way, look at that guy's picture, he just looks dishonest.
Menlo Park
on Jan 15, 2013 at 1:20 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 1:20 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
South of Midtown
on Jan 15, 2013 at 1:47 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 1:47 pm
What about the participation in an illegal activity do Menlo Park officials not understand?
In Los Altos, a police officer on a mobile device (cell phone?) rear ended a woman parked at a stop sign last summer, totaling her car and sending her to the hospital.
The LAPD, City Staff & City Council covered it up for months, until the Daily Post uncovered & reported details after the woman sued for damages. How's that for not taking responsibility, thinking law enforcement & the City is above the law?
Anyone paid to uphold our laws can't break the same laws, abusing his/her power, without consequence. This officer made his choice - he needs to be ousted.
What other laws has he broken? Does he give out tickets, like candy, for California stops, while winking at police & fireman buddies that do the same thing or worse?! We need men/women with integrity. Demand it, or they're out.
Palo Alto High School
on Jan 15, 2013 at 2:26 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 2:26 pm
It's always so interesting how people can criticize others yet no one is perfect. I am not religious but I do believe that no one is perfect and that's why these things happen. A shame that y'all can't just thank the man for protecting us for 20 years and realize a police officer is not Superman yet he is putting his life on the line for strangers.
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
another community
on Jan 15, 2013 at 2:45 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 2:45 pm
"I don't want to be a dick and ask for preferential treatment."
And yet, that is what he gotby being alowed ti stay on the force.
Same thing happened to two high rankng San Mateo County Sheriff's. (Munks & Bolanos)
Web Link
South of Midtown
on Jan 15, 2013 at 2:53 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 2:53 pm
Rolling eyes: I agree that no one is perfect. But are you saying ALL people in law enforcement have no integrity? Do you think we must accept men like this one, or go unprotected? Or do you think no one in our entire community has enough integrity to fill the job held by this officer? If so, that's cynical.
I think many others with integrity live in and around our community. Men and women that can protect us equally or better, since they would not wink at their police and firemen buddies, while at the same time being hard-nosed with average hard-working citizens, mercilessly given them tickets for say, a California stop. We pay consequences, so should they. Hold public servants accountable, and now.
Palo Alto High School
on Jan 15, 2013 at 3:56 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 3:56 pm
Prostitution = illegal: I am not sure that police offices have applicants standing in line, knocking on their doors. In addition, we are surrounded by people without integrity in white collar management and who's policing them? Can't catch and crucify everyone. If this guy were on meth during the job, I would expect him to be fired, but he did not harm society nor is he a threat to society. I say, let him get off.
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 15, 2013 at 4:42 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 4:42 pm
To a few of you --
How about we try our best to be grown ups while we discuss this story?
Thank you.
East Palo Alto
on Jan 15, 2013 at 6:08 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 6:08 pm
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
I mentioned this on The Almanac thread - but doesn't anyone care that a official was talking about this in public, right near a reporter? Does he get disciplined?
another community
on Jan 15, 2013 at 7:28 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 7:28 pm
I've met Officer Vasquez before, he was a nice guy
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:34 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:34 pm
Hmmm - Yes, I agree with you. Alex M. should be disciplined. Neither Rojas or Alex M. are too bright - and they were selected by the Council. So I guess the Council isn't too bright either.
What this case shows is really the power of the police union - that they send in their best lawyers to represent their members. That is not the case for the other non-police unions. As a matter of fact, employees represented by SEIU are in the worst shape - and much of this is because of the long time damage made by the former HR manager Glen Kramer - the extreme double dipper after 40 years of service. So the police are not the only ones who abuse. City government is corrupt on many levels.
another community
on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:57 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:57 pm
Oh come on! Who hasn't been caught at one time or another in a motel with a hooker in a cat suit? ;-)
East Palo Alto
on Jan 15, 2013 at 11:33 pm
on Jan 15, 2013 at 11:33 pm
Now I feel for the guy - he's all over the evening news, including his photo. He says he's divorced; if he is single, he hurt himself & hopefully no one else w/this. I am glad he didn't lose his job - he has a lot of years in & has a decent rep on the job. I am glad also Catwoman didn't get into trouble. I'm hoping she's not a trafficked person w/a nasty pimp; maybe I am naive. Meow!
Since he wasn't convicted of a crime, he doesn't lose his job - but locals will remember this for a long time.
Govt is corrupt - what are the chances we'll hear anything about McIntyre getting into trouble? I figure, you know, unless his bosses or someone in the know blabs in public near a reporter, we might not ever know if he got into trouble. He may not have committed a crime, but his blabbing has had bigger ramifications than Vasquez's behavior.
Crescent Park
on Jan 16, 2013 at 2:24 am
on Jan 16, 2013 at 2:24 am
The more I think about this the bigger rip-off of the public it is. We don't even bother to fire a cop who is with a prostitute while on-duty ... is there something in the water in Menlo Park that I'm lucky enough not to be drinking?
What has this guy been up to? Are these interactions with prostitutes regular, maybe they yield profit, maybe for others? I mean this guy was not just - not thinking, because 6 or 7 layers of warnings should have been going off in his head and he deliberately shut them them all down ... doesn't that imply something about the guy's character?
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 16, 2013 at 9:04 am
on Jan 16, 2013 at 9:04 am
Wow, am I the only one who thinks the implications of this are really scary for the families of police officers and court witnesses?....
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 16, 2013 at 9:53 am
on Jan 16, 2013 at 9:53 am
Hmmm - I agree with you again. Believe me, McIntyre is no saint. He is a very devious and elf-centered person with questionable morals based on his actions - the intent of which, is not always obvious to the Council (or maybe the Council doesn't care). Just how do these "public servants" get selected seems questionable too. Perhaps these "management types" should also get probation just like everyone else.
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 16, 2013 at 10:08 am
on Jan 16, 2013 at 10:08 am
> The contract states: "The award of the arbitrator shall be
> final and binding." In other words, that person can overrule
> whatever disciplinary decision the city made.
This is really absurd, and makes a sham out of the whole discipline process—particularly if the various unions end up being able to pick (or buy) the arbiter. And no doubt, all of the proceedings are secret, so the public has no way to determine whether the arbiter is remotely biased, or not.
Yuk!!
College Terrace
on Jan 16, 2013 at 1:28 pm
on Jan 16, 2013 at 1:28 pm
This affects law enforcement and public safety. The officer "patronizes" a hooker while on duty (paid by taxpayers). If Catwoman decides to ply her trade in Menlo Park, and the officer goes to arrest her, she could threaten to expose him as a client, so he would just let her set up shop.
Also, sometimes hookers or their pimps rob customers. If this officer had been robbed, would the police have gone after the robbers? But not the john/officer?
Menlo Park
on Jan 16, 2013 at 1:32 pm
on Jan 16, 2013 at 1:32 pm
my comments:
1. He should'ha had a V8
3. Or spend a little more time in the local Starbucks.
4. What I want to know is, what happened to Ms. Rodriguez? I bet she never gets a speeding ticket in Menlo Park....unlike me
5. In the future, I am going to be very attentive to the name of any Menlo Park police officer I run across. (yes ladies and gentlemen, we'll be watching you....)
7. The officer in question might want to change his name to Smith.
8. In any event, hang in there Officer Vasquez -- this will be old news in 2 weeks. But I hope you've learned your lesson
9. My sympathies to anyone involved in this case, including Ms. Sandy Brundage, the person who wrote the article and put her byline up there.....
Community Center
on Jan 16, 2013 at 1:45 pm
on Jan 16, 2013 at 1:45 pm
His new assignment will be an Undercover Agent!
Menlo Park
on Jan 16, 2013 at 4:20 pm
on Jan 16, 2013 at 4:20 pm
instead of putting a 'do not disturb' sign at the door,
she should have hung a sign that said, "beat it, we're closed"!!
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 16, 2013 at 10:16 pm
on Jan 16, 2013 at 10:16 pm
We shouldn't pay police officers who break the law, and we certainly shouldn't pay them generously. Yes, they risk their lives, but so do soldiers in Afganistan, and soldiers don't make very much money, and their retirement benefits aren't nearly as generous. Taxpayers are being taken advantage of, and police should obey the laws they are supposed to enforce.
Midtown
on Jan 16, 2013 at 10:37 pm
on Jan 16, 2013 at 10:37 pm
Actually a police officer comes way down the list of dangerous occupations about 17th-according to the bureau of labor statistics
Fishermen, miners-even tree trimmers are far more dangers occupations.
another community
on Jan 17, 2013 at 12:47 am
on Jan 17, 2013 at 12:47 am
The Menlo Park POA only endorsed one candidate for city council this past year... Kelly Fergusson, who chose not to be interviews by the DA's investigator during her own criminal investigation. This is not a low standard, this is corruption. Vasquez, Brackett and Bacon can no longer be trusted to protect and serve the community.
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 17, 2013 at 12:32 pm
on Jan 17, 2013 at 12:32 pm
> the prosecution asked to dismiss the case. The problem? Prosecutors
> were notified the day of Ramirez's trial that the officer who had
> interviewed her was unavailable to testify. According to
> Deputy District Attorney Rob Baker, who supervised the case,
> the officer was caring for his wife as she endured a
> life-threatening medical crisis
Interesting. The article does not quote any law enforcement officials (or the Das) that the officer in question was on some sort of leave, and as such, could not be expected to appear in Court. Nor does anyone associated with this case identify where the wife is located (hospital, nursing home, residence, in/out-of town). Is the officer drawing salary? And just how long would it take for him to testify at this trial? Would it have been impossible for the DA’s Office to pay for a nurse for a couple of days to relieve the officer so that he could testify? It’s hard to believe that the Officer was really as unavailable as the DA’s Office makes out—particularly since it meant convicting a Menlo Park Police Officer.
Keep in mind that this is the same DA’s office that recently was chastised by a trial judge for not properly Marandizing a murder suspect—whose attorney subsequently got him off the murder charge.
Another example of a corrupt government in action.
Adobe-Meadow
on Jan 19, 2013 at 6:27 am
on Jan 19, 2013 at 6:27 am
So how do we refer to this guy when we see him in the field?
Officer Hourly?
Officer 2 Guns?
Officer John?
If he made detective we could call him Tricky Dick.
No, let call him what he is. Officer Imminent Transfer. I'm sure they are encouraging him to leave and reinstated him so he can at least work somewhere else(which I think is fair bty, considering the "crime")
I can't see him being able to do his job very well in MP anymore, so they'll let him learn from his mistakes in a new town.
Greater Miranda
on Jan 21, 2013 at 5:18 am
on Jan 21, 2013 at 5:18 am
Wow. Just wow. What country am I in?
Midtown
on Jan 21, 2013 at 10:29 pm
on Jan 21, 2013 at 10:29 pm
Tight Em UP! NOW!!!
But I do value our officers.
Mountain View
on Apr 9, 2013 at 8:30 pm
on Apr 9, 2013 at 8:30 pm
I saw Sunnyvale police smash a suspects head into the hood of their cruiser after he had handcuffs on. Ughhh, I think that's police brutality- they get away with anything they think they can.