Comments Needed! - OC Register Editorial - The Sheriff's New Lapdog

[Nightingale]

Editorial: The Sheriff's new lap dog - Office of Independent Review fails the test

Friday, May 15, 2009
The Orange County Register
Comments 0| Recommend 0

We were among the loudest voices calling for the creation of the Office of Independent Review, an independent body that would oversee internal investigations into the Orange County Sheriff's Department. The idea for the office was floated amid the reign of Sheriff Mike Carona, whose corrupt activities eventually led to his federal witness-tampering conviction and sentencing to a 5 ½-year prison term. The board selected the OIR concept over a more controversial civilian oversight panel. Given the John Chamberlain jail murder, and the disturbing way the department covered up investigations into that horrific 2006 event, it's easy to understand why the county Board of Supervisors added another oversight layer.

Yet the OIR has issued its first prominent report and we are far from satisfied by its results. The OIR's Director, Stephen Connolly, examined the sheriff's controversial handling of Board of Supervisors meetings where the sheriff's efforts to revoke gun permits were the focus of debate. From a public-policy perspective, Sheriff Sandra Hutchens and her command staff badly mishandled the meetings. At the Nov. 18, 2008 board hearing, Assistant Sheriff Mike Hillmann and other top staff traded unprofessional and demeaning text and e-mail messages to each other where they mocked gun-rights supporters and members of the public on their department-issued devices.

That contemptuous attitude expressed itself more fully at the Jan. 13 meeting. A group of 26 deputies patrolled the meeting and they specifically targeted for questioning and even searched members of the gun-rights group that were there to voice their concerns during the public comment period. The department believed that there might be a protest with unloaded weapons, which they used to justify their heavy-handed approach. A deputy who manned the security cameras even zoomed in on a supervisor's notes during the meeting, and then the sheriff refused at first to release the security tapes.

It was a comedy of errors and reflective of a mindset that was, at the least, disrespectful of the public and of civil liberties. The OIR, which has offices within the sheriff's department, looked at the matter and offered what amounted to an 11-page defense of the sheriff's department. Regarding the offensive messages, the OIR agreed that "At best, they constituted an egregious misuse of county property, and at worst they were hurtful to individual people and hostile to the process itself." Yet Mr. Connolly supported the sheriff's internal response and investigation and praised the new departmental policy on such messages.

The OIR also defended the sheriff's overbearing security presence, arguing that there was a reasonable need for the security. The report made light of the allegations of aggressive behavior by the SWAT members at the board meeting and basically avoided the core issues with bureaucratic excuse-making: "It is admittedly difficult to balance security and other values with perfect precision." The report called for bland solutions such as "better communication." It also blamed the spying on "experimental zooming," which is one of the most artfully written excuses we've read in a while.

Supervisor John Moorlach, whose office often defends the sheriff, liked the report, but we agree with two other supervisors. Said Chris Norby: "The report sounds more like an apology for what the Sheriff's Department was doing." Pat Bates got it right also: "I expected Steve to offer more of a one-man grand jury. I just thought that he spent a lot of time giving [the sheriff's]rationale for [the problems], and that's not what I expected."

It's too bad that a serious watchdog is, in this case, nothing but a lap dog.

[Don Retired Officer]

Where is the independent part of this report??

[Nightingale]

That's what I was wondering!

[Harry Carry]

Originally Posted by Don Retired Officer

Where is the independent part of this report??

There is none. This is just another LA crony whose appointment Sheriff Hutchens engineered, and who is now running interference for her erratic and secretive behavior.

[Poogsdad]

Commented and recommended.

Thanks,

Poogsdad

[Diamond Jim]

Commented and recommended.

It is ALWAYS a pleasure to read Poogsdad comments. A real wordsmith!

[RickD6023]

Independent in title only.

San Berdoo is going through a huge disgrace of cronyism, and fraud by an elected official (or maybe more than one). Perhaps we could loan OC our independent investigator? His investigation resulted in a 57 page report that made no apologies.

[Barky]

Why is LA County the only source for candidates? Let me guess.....

[Barky]

posted.

[safe carry]

Posted.