| Author | Post |
|---|
sv_libertarian
State Researcher
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | Olympia, WA |
| Posts: | 2784 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 03:51 am |
|
I finally heard back from Lt. Holmes (new IA guy at OPD) regarding my stop of last december.
Here is a transcript...
Dear Mr. Coffman,
On December 12, 2007 you filed a complaint with the Olympia Police Department alleging Officer O'Neill acted inappropriately during a contact he had with you while you were "open carrying" a firearm in the downtown Olympia area. A formal inquiry has been completed into this matter and I would to (sic) take this opportunity to inform you of the findings.
Allegation # 1: Officer O'Neill forced you to carry your handgun concealed rather than in the "open carry" position.
The dispostion for this allegation is Sustained; meaningthe investigation revealed facts to support the allegation. This finding is based on, while Officer O'Neill did ot physically coerce you to conceal your firearm, your feeling that you didn't have the choice to "open carry" your firearm developed from the Officer's comments.
Allegation #2: Officer O'Neill conducted himself in a hostile manner.
The dispostion for this allegation is Exonerated; meaning the investigation shows Officer O'Neill's actions to be justified, lawful and proper. This finding is based on Officer O'Neill asserting his authority to establish and maintain control under the circumstances presenting immediate officer safety concerns.
Allegation # 3: Officer O'Neill failed to follow the Departmental Instructive relating to "open Carry". (sic) The dispostion for this allegation is No Finding; meaning the investigator could not conclude wheter Officer O'Neill failed to follow the Instructive based on available information.
This report has been reviewed by Chief Gary Michel and Commander Tor Bjornstad, who is the Commander of the Division Officer O'Neill is currently assigned, and they agree with the findings.
Remainder is standard boiler plate about the complaint process and about an inclosed survey.
The letter is signed
Sincerely,
Ray Holmes, Lietenant
Office of Professional Standards
Olympia Police Department
Last edited on Fri May 9th, 2008 03:51 am by sv_libertarian
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 03:57 am |
|
sv_libertarian wrote: I finally heard back from Lt. Holmes (new IA guy at OPD) regarding my stop of last december.
I can't recall the details of the encounter or complaint.
Does this response fit the complaint?
Also, I don't see anything about whether or what corrective actions were taken on the officer or the department to ensure against it happening again.
|
sv_libertarian
State Researcher
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | Olympia, WA |
| Posts: | 2784 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 04:01 am |
|
Citizen wrote: I can't recall the details of the encounter or complaint.
Does this response fit the complaint?
Also, I don't see anything about whether or what corrective actions were taken on the officer or the department to ensure against it happening again.
Yes this fits the complaint. And no I have no idea about corrective actions, but I have been told by an officer that the entire department has been trained on OC issues now and I should no longer have a problem OCing...
Will see. Third detainment/disarm/gun returned unloaded in packpack most likely will mean a lawsuit.
Personally I think there won't be anymore problems...
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 04:04 am |
|
| Oh, was this the series that involved Lt. Wilson?
|
sv_libertarian
State Researcher
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | Olympia, WA |
| Posts: | 2784 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 04:07 am |
|
Initially yes. He no longer heads up Professional Accountibility, which is why this was signed off by Lt. Holmes. Lt. Wilson moved to a different post, the Lt.'s rotate duties it seems.
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 04:10 am |
|
sv_libertarian wrote: SNIP Initially yes.
Good. That means I'm not quite ready for Geritol just yet. 
|
Bear 45/70
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 05:51 am |
|
Sounds to me like they white washed it and O'Neill walked on what he did, which was wrong from the word go. The second incident proves that O'Neill was hostile, but they ignore that. A white wash was what I would expect from OPD anyway.
|
sv_libertarian
State Researcher
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | Olympia, WA |
| Posts: | 2784 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 05:57 am |
|
Bear 45/70 wrote: Sounds to me like they white washed it and O'Neill walked on what he did, which was wrong from the word go. The second incident proves that O'Neill was hostile, but they ignore that. A white wash was what I would expect from OPD anyway. I was disapointed with the letter, at the very least if they are upholding any of my complaints, I feel an apology is in order. Also, if they can uphold my first complaint, why can't they uphold the third? I'll talk to Randy about this whole thing and see what he says.
Meanwhile, some advances have been made.
I imagine I can get a look at O'Neill's public record and see if any corrective action was taken...
Honestly right now, I am hoping I get left alone. I'm not going to quick OCing, so I hope I quit getting disarmed and embaressed in public for breaking no laws. With any sort of luck the recent training on OC should work. My big worry is dispatch as they have a nasty habit of just passing along "man with a gun" and no info.
OTOH, they should be able to drive by me and figure out if I am breaking the law.
|
Dave The Welder
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 06:32 am |
|
This is why I carry a voice recorder.
|
sv_libertarian
State Researcher
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | Olympia, WA |
| Posts: | 2784 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 06:48 am |
|
Dave The Welder wrote: This is why I carry a voice recorder.
I don't think a voice recorder would have helped in this situation. They agreed I was improperly told to conceal my weapon. No surprise there. What really grinds my gears is they couldn't figure out if Officer O'Neill didn't follow the training directive... this is after Lt. Wilson described to me what he considered an ideal OC stop, which this was far from it.
The question is how far do I want to push this, and to what end? Right now I have a decent relationship with OPD. They don't bother me and I don't sue them  (joking here)
Seriously, they seem to have mellowed out a lot on the subject of OC. I think any problem so much isn't the rank and file (not after training anyhow) but rather the folks pulling the strings.
There are cops, and then there are the city lawyers and admin, and I'll bet dollars to donuts they went over this very carefully in an attempt to make sure they wouldn't open themselves up to any more liablity, and hoping I would take what was offered to me and leave it alone.
The fact of the matter is I could launch a lawsuit against the city of Olympia, and also file several civil suits, and probably win them all or get them settled out of court. I don't want to, which is why I have been taking this as mellow as possible.
If the high muckity mucks in the city and OPD want to play games and whitewash stuff, or not even apologize for what they do admit was wrongdoing, then I have to ask myself if it is worth my time to deal with trying to squeeze some more stuff from them regarding this complaint, or just keep going about my business. They have been put on notice by Randy Loun, and that should be enough to make any police department try and keep out of his way. I'm going to keep going about my business and OC as I see fit. If I get detained, disarmed and hassled again, well I'm willing to take this to the next level.
Terry was violated, various rights were violated, all in the name of not knowing how to deal with a guy reading a book and OCing, or just walking down the street drinking tea. I think they know how to deal with OC. This is the limit though, and that has been made plain to them.
I for one just wish to get along with OPD. Nearly every officer I have met have proven to be decent folk. I can't say much about Beckwell, I've never spoken to him, just had his gun drawn behind me... I spoke with O'Neill a couple of months after the stop and we had a decent conversation, bs'd and shook hands. I'll chalk this whole mess up to lack of training, which is not the fault of the individual officers.
However there has been a directive issued, and every officer has been formally trained. There should be no more excuses.
As far as the shortcomings of this response go, I think it is important to remember this comes from people way up on the totem pole, not the rank and file. Higher ups are often more politician than cops unfortunately...
At any rate I do believe there will be no more problems with lawful OC in Oly.
EDIT: Clarified statements to make sense
Last edited on Fri May 9th, 2008 07:33 am by sv_libertarian
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 02:32 pm |
|
Don't focus too much on what they say.
Focus on what they do.
Even if they claim it never happened, the word will get around not to bother the OC'ers. It might take a lawsuit to get it into a few of the harder heads, but regardless of what they say, they know what the deal is.
|
Mainsail
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 03:05 pm |
|
sv_libertarian wrote: Dave The Welder wrote: This is why I carry a voice recorder.
...and I'll bet dollars to donuts they went over this very carefully in an attempt to make sure they wouldn't open themselves up to any more liablity, and hoping I would take what was offered to me and leave it alone.
Allegation # 1: Officer O'Neill forced you to carry your handgun concealed rather than in the "open carry" position.
The dispostion for this allegation is Sustained; meaningthe investigation revealed facts to support the allegation. This finding is based on, while Officer O'Neill did ot physically coerce you to conceal your firearm, your feeling that you didn't have the choice to "open carry" your firearm developed from the Officer's comments.
They admitted he committed a ‘color of law’ violation (compelling you to conceal) which is pretty serious. I’d be willing to bet that internally it’s worded so as to be ambiguous; IOW it was all a big misunderstanding (on your part) that you felt you had to conceal.
I do agree that for now we should be happy that it’s all led to better education, and that a lawsuit would be more appropriate for the next time they do this. That was my goal in Tacoma; it took some time but seems to have worked out.
Last edited on Fri May 9th, 2008 03:07 pm by Mainsail
|
Bear 45/70
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 04:41 pm |
|
sv_libertarian wrote: Dave The Welder wrote: This is why I carry a voice recorder.
I don't think a voice recorder would have helped in this situation. They agreed I was improperly told to conceal my weapon. No surprise there. What really grinds my gears is they couldn't figure out if Officer O'Neill didn't follow the training directive... this is after Lt. Wilson described to me what he considered an ideal OC stop, which this was far from it.
The question is how far do I want to push this, and to what end? Right now I have a decent relationship with OPD. They don't bother me and I don't sue them (joking here)
Seriously, they seem to have mellowed out a lot on the subject of OC. I think any problem so much isn't the rank and file (not after training anyhow) but rather the folks pulling the strings.
There are cops, and then there are the city lawyers and admin, and I'll bet dollars to donuts they went over this very carefully in an attempt to make sure they wouldn't open themselves up to any more liablity, and hoping I would take what was offered to me and leave it alone.
The fact of the matter is I could launch a lawsuit against the city of Olympia, and also file several civil suits, and probably win them all or get them settled out of court. I don't want to, which is why I have been taking this as mellow as possible.
If the high muckity mucks in the city and OPD want to play games and whitewash stuff, or not even apologize for what they do admit was wrongdoing, then I have to ask myself if it is worth my time to deal with trying to squeeze some more stuff from them regarding this complaint, or just keep going about my business. They have been put on notice by Randy Loun, and that should be enough to make any police department try and keep out of his way. I'm going to keep going about my business and OC as I see fit. If I get detained, disarmed and hassled again, well I'm willing to take this to the next level.
Terry was violated, various rights were violated, all in the name of not knowing how to deal with a guy reading a book and OCing, or just walking down the street drinking tea. I think they know how to deal with OC. This is the limit though, and that has been made plain to them.
I for one just wish to get along with OPD. Nearly every officer I have met have proven to be decent folk. I can't say much about Beckwell, I've never spoken to him, just had his gun drawn behind me... I spoke with O'Neill a couple of months after the stop and we had a decent conversation, bs'd and shook hands. I'll chalk this whole mess up to lack of training, which is not the fault of the individual officers.
However there has been a directive issued, and every officer has been formally trained. There should be no more excuses.
As far as the shortcomings of this response go, I think it is important to remember this comes from people way up on the totem pole, not the rank and file. Higher ups are often more politician than cops unfortunately...
At any rate I do believe there will be no more problems with lawful OC in Oly.
EDIT: Clarified statements to make sense
I would bet money that the response is as good as it is because of your lawyer's letter. I also feel that the training stuff is in response to the lawyer's letter too. Otherwise you would have gotten buttcuss from them.
|
Current time is 10:31 am | |
|
|
|
