This is spot on.
The PAPD has become less transparent in other ways under Chief Jonsens leadership as heard Monday night.

Our City Council must lead to ensure Jonsen stops and reverses his predilection, not just with encryption, but in the many other ways he is shutting down transparency.

This radio encryption measure and the official explanation behind it is ostensible...in other words, it has nothing to do with ensuring better police work or productivity.

It is merely a means of cloud-covering various police improprieties that the department does not want the general public and media to be further aware of.

Examples include (1) police brutality, (2) racist, misogynistic and homophobic commentaries, (3) wrongful detainment, (4) racial profiling, and (5) questionable shootings.

The chief is simply protecting his officers so they can embellish and lie on their police reports which in turn, absolves the city of any potential lawsuits.

So the PACC vote count will be simple from the standpoint of who supports this measure and who is against it.

There is absolutely no middle ground on this issue.

And anyone who actually believes that criminals are sitting by their scanners and actively plotting crimes based on various police radio transmissions are either (1) incredibly naive, (2) avid TV viewers and fans of 'Cops' or, (3) all of the above.

The police are a reactive force. They do do not prevent crime per se, they respond to suspected crime oftentimes taking whatever measures they see fit, regardless of legalities.

Thus, full accountability for their actions is critical, from police body cams to radio communications.

And far too often, it is a civilian account that lends truth to what actually occured via their cellphone videos.

Now why is that? Most likely because law enforcement does not want the public to know what actually transpired, especially if the officer was doing something wrong or illegal.

A civilian police force made-up of community residents would eliminate a lot of police-related improprieties.

The police are a reactive force. They do do not prevent crime per se, they respond to suspected crime taking whatever measures they see fit.

Thus, full accountability for their actions is critical, from police body cams to radio communications.

And far too often, it is a civilian account that lends truth to what actually occured via their cellphone videos.

Now why is that? Most likely because law enforcement does not want the public to know what actually transpired, especially if the officer was doing something wrong or illegal.

A civilian police force made-up of community residents would eliminate a lot of police-related improprieties because law enforcement would then have to answer to one's fellow residents and neighbors.

This is not a time to opt for secrecy over transparency. The Police Chief was hired by the Palo Alto City Manager and his hiring was approved by the Palo Alto City Council. The Palo Alto City Council needs to answer the question whether this is the right person to lead the Palo Alto Police Dept at this time in history.

Diana Diamond:

What does the Minneapolis Police Dept/George Floyd case have to do with PAPD? What are you trying to insinuate here?

You said, "Jonsen imposed a new encryption policy on Jan. 6 without public or city council knowledge." The PAPD encrypted their police radio transmissions by order of the DOJ. Police transmissions are encrypted for the safety of police officers and victims because BAD GUYS listen to police transmissions all the time!

You said, "Yes, he (Chief Jonsen) wanted to keep his new self-imposed encryption policy intact." Again, it wasn't "his new self-imposed encryption policy", it was by order of the DOJ. ​

Eliminating the public communications slot was a smart budget move; the person in that slot had no experience or background in law enforcement.

You tried to make it sound like the PAPD was being unreasonable by asking people to fill out a form with the information they wanted. Police departments across the nation use this same format.

You said, "Bravo to the questions and suggestions from Mayor Tom DuBois and Vice Mayor Pat Burt on Monday. They seemed truly concerned with what was happening, as did Council member Greer Stone, and their suggestions for what to do next were good ones." Really? What are you insinuating here? What, specifically, did DuBois, Burt, and Stone say? You don't provide us that information.

I have a question for you: Why are you trying to paint such a bad picture of the PAPD? These men and women put their lives on the line for you every single day. Have you ever worked in police work? If not, I suggest you sign up for a job in law enforcement to get the whole picture of what the field of law enforcement is all about.

Your article is filled with insinuations and suppositions about PAPD, and boils down to nothing more than biased and irresponsible reporting, in my opinion. You have no credibility with me.

[Post removed.]

To protect and better serve the public, law enforcement should not be overly scrutinized by excessive watchdog advocacies.

Accidental police shootings and killings will occur from time to time and it simply comes with the territory.

No different than an occasional bad haircut and we must never lose sight of the big picture which is to get criminals off the streets.

The preservation of traditional American society is dependent on this consideration.

* The preservation of traditional American society is dependent on this consideration.


The preservation of what?

The police harassing citizens and shooting randomly at people of color will preserve traditional American values?

And to go unchecked via closed-off radio communications?

Then the only safe places in town will be a Winchell's or a Krispy Kreme outlet.

Thank you for this, Ms.Diamond. I have a growing concern about both Shikada and Jonsen that took root when the unnecessary curfew was imposed on the city last year. I don't doubt that PAPD does good work but I think it important that the public demand good, fair leadership and transparency from both the City Manager and the Chief of Police because they set the standard that their subordinates follow.

About calling 911:
Did you ask for a rapid response?
Did you understand that privacy was assured with encrypted communication?