Passing the Baton

[UPDATE Below]

The Rest of the Story...

That's what I'd like to know.

All that was in the Thursday, November 7, 2013, Times-Standard newspaper was this picture and it's caption. Here's what it says:

New Eureka Police Chief Andy Mills, left, and outgoing Chief Murl Harpham smile after Mills  was sworn in at the Adorni Center on Wednesday afternoon. Nearly all EPD officers and staff were on hand while Humboldt County Sheriff's deputies patrolled the city during the short event Mills thanked Harpham and the city officials and addressed his assembled force. (Emphasis mine)

There he stands, all spiffy in his new uniform. Actually he has about as much authority and legitimacy as Chief Garr Nielsen had as long as Murl Harpham and David Tyson are still around.

What did he say to his assembled force? Knowing what he had to say, should give everyone a fair idea what kind of a police force we should expect. Is he going to carry on enforcing Harpham's policies? The way he's grinning, I wonder if he hasn't already stacked the deck. There's blood on that baton.

So, how about it Times-Standard, what did  he say?

---

[UPDATE: Saturday, November 9, 2013] 
 It looks like I'm not the only one interested in more information about what we can expect from the EPD. More of the same or something new?

Here's a Letter to the Editor:

New chief warrants more coverage
Thank you for publishing a front page picture of the police chief change of command ceremony ("Passing the baton," Times-Standard, Nov. 7, Page A1). I was very disappointed that you did not have an accompanying story, including the script of the new police chief's remarks. It was an important ceremony for our community and I am sure your readers would have appreciated more coverage of the ceremony. -Minnie Wolf, Eureka

---

I know I would.

--Joe 

Worth The Cost?

You tell me.

Every decent, law-abiding citizen in Eureka, if not Humboldt County, should be offended and OUTRAGED - Murl Harpham's ingratiating nonsense not withstanding. Are we in Iraq or Afghanistan where everyone is suspected of being a terrorist or a terrorist supporter? What's next? An Abrams tank? I wouldn't be surprised if they were already using drones.

The priority here is obvious and it has nothing to do with policing a peaceful civilian population. This is a flagrant, in-your-face accusation of violent criminal intent against everyone. The police already operate like a Special Forces Commando Unit now. Just look at how the Federal Government has co-oped the police with their variation called SWAT. Almost everything they do requires escalating violence into the mix. When was the last time anyone can recall the police confronting a gang of marijuana growers protecting their gardens armed with heavy weapons and RPGs (Rocked-Propelled Grenades). What does the Times-Standard newspaper say about the monstrosity? It is a "mine resistant, ambush protected vehicle-known as an MRAP." Violence pours out of that vehicle's every pore.

The priority here is police protection at whatever cost, when it should be protecting the general population at every cost. Have you had to call of the EPD for assistance in some matter or report a crime lately? You take your life in your own hands when you do. It seems like everyone that does not wear a badge and carry a gun is either treated like a suspect or a violent criminal. Bringing this military monstrosity into Eureka couldn't make that statement anymore vivid and real if they wanted. Murl Harpham's "Tough Cop" philosophy is carried to an extreme. Is this the symbol of the new Eureka Police Department?

-Joe

Bring On The Rubber-Stamp

Tomorrows the day!

I wonder how many people in Eureka believe they had some say in the choice and the hiring of the new Eureka Police Chief?

According to Lorna Rodriguez for the Times-Standard newspaper: "The Eureka City Council on Tuesday (tomorrow) will vote on approving the hiring of Eureka's new police chief."

She continues: "San Diego Police Department Capt. Andrew G. Mills is expected to start leading the Eureka Police Department on Nov. 4, according to a staff report. He will be paid $142,500 annually."

"The city has searched for a new chief since June 2011, when former City Manager David Tyson fired Garr Nielsen without cause. Nielsen was popular with the public, but met strong resistance from some within the department."

The last police chief, the one before and after Murl Harpham "was popular with the public, but met strong resistance from some within the department." That should tell you something about this new guy, specially when Murl Harpham gives his blessings. I'd say he deserves what he gets and so do the people of Euraka.

-Joe

SEE the Tough Cop

Click to enlarge and read.

The Eureka Police Department's “olive branch of peace” is called Vex.


Eureka Police Chief Murl Harpham, in a recent letter to the Times-Standard titled: “Preserving law and order, enforcing the laws, protecting and serving all citizens” said,

“If there are drug dealers in your neighborhood, we will build a case against them, and get them off the streets. When there is gunfire or a dangerous person in your neighborhood and citizens are in fear, we will respond. This, at times, has caused criticism. When dealing with disruptive people, we always first extend an olive branch of peace. Unfortunately, sometimes this does not work, and we have to become tough. No one likes a tough cop until they need one, then they want the toughest cop around.” (070711) [Emphasis added]

In the above quote, Chief Harpham identifies two types of people that are of paramount interest to him and his EPD officers: “drug dealers” and “dangerous” (of the type potentially involving guns, i.e., “gunfire”) causing "citizens" to be in "fear" or afraid. He then identifies a third type of person: “disruptive people.” That category is broad and expansive and can include just about anything. More importantly, since past EPD handling of such “disruptive people” has caused some “criticism,” to ease everyone's minds, he specifies the steps or priorities his officer's will follow when dealing with such people. First, they are to extend an “olive branch of peace.” Second, when that does not work, they “become tough.” At the time he provided these assurances, this Report made some observations listed below. Our interest was in seeing what is actually done - how he and the EPD defined his words by actions.

The question remains, does this incident, as reported, meet his priorities? The words "disruptive," “olive branch of peace” and “become tough” are rather ambiguous, to say the least, unless you take him at his word and look at the conduct history of the EPD. Today, we have the following episode to compare. So, compare what the newspaper said "according to officers on the scene and scanner traffic, neighbors called police stating that three suspicious men were inside a garage to the rear of a residence." On it's face, if three or even one "suspicious" person was in my garage, it's my hope my neighbor's would call. The question, however, is: What makes someone look "suspicious"? Suspicious enough to be held or "detained" at gunpoint when they posed NO threat nor were they guilty of committing any crime? I realize the officers didn't know that at the time, but then NEITHER did the person calling in. Is "detained" the newspaper's fancy word for ARRESTED since they were released on the scene?

So, the "olive branch of peace" is to confront someone going about his or her lawful business, neither bothering nor threatening anyone, at the point of a gun? That situation is a hair's breadth away from someone being dead should that person immediately not accept the "olive branch of peace" pointing at his or her head.

Reading the account, they find after the arrest a 70 year old man that had a “felony drug-related warrant” and clearly posed NO threat to anyone; simply wanting to be left alone. His immediate failure to comply as commanded, however, apparently posed enough of a threat to someone that he was threatened with “the tough cop” VEX. Hiding in the back of a closet where he has to “crawl out” sounds like someone that just wants to be left alone and maybe not found. Either way, we know some history now. We also know that Vex is one tough cop.

I'm not sure about the Times-Standard's reporting. The number of people accounted for in this situation varies since the paper says there were three people in the garage, one ran away, but three people were held a gun point and detained. Then there's the use of the word “barricade” while hiding in “a closet,” but gave himself up when “Vex discovered him.” What are we really talking about here? He closed the door, maybe even locked it, then went and hid in a closet?

So, what did this incident teach us? It's the picture that really says it all.

--Joe

Lessons in how NOT to support your local police

[UPDATE Below]
Recently Eureka Chief of Police Murl Harpham wrote an open letter to the citizens of Eureka requesting their continuing support in the wake of the recent firing of Chief Garr Nielsen. You can read what he says here in the Times-Standard newspaper: "Preserving law and order, enforcing the laws and protecting and serving all citizens."

This Report posted some observations on what he said in support of his goals and objectives. A quick check of letters to the Times-Standard Editor and you will not find where anyone openly or publicly supports Murl Harpham's request for cooperation. He stated quite clearly his and the department's position regarding the political issues involved in the firing: “There are no politics with law enforcement. We simply preserve law and order, enforce the laws and protect and serve all the citizens of our town.” Our suggestion is, take him at his word, give him and the EPD all the opportunity they need to keep and enforce his words. NOTICE! He clearly made the distinction: He and his fellow police officers ONLY "preserve," and "enforce law and order." They are NOT THE LAW, regardless of how they might think or how they act. They are simpley "protectors" and "servants" -- Protectors of the people and servants of the law.

Too bad people like Bob Williams, John Chiv, Sanna Jane Fase, among the many vociferous bloggers staking out their positions, who clearly did not heed Chief Harpham's request for unity and support. “In my opinion,” (the first three words uttered by Bob Williams, T-S July 13, 2011) that define and are followed by the vitriolic words of "worthless opinions" fomenting and inciting the very conduct, divisions, and hatred that delegitimize both the Eureka City Council, their City Manager and Police Department. All the newspaper does printing these garbage opinions is entrench and solidify the ever growing rift between neighbors. Those I call the Ideological Morons that believe they're gods and the Thinking Dummies that are afraid to take a deep breath. [Emphasis added]

You can well understand Chief Harpham's desire for the community to back and support his efforts to transcend through this interim period until a new police chief is hired, specially when you consider the rancor caused by the way the new City Council terminated the previous police chief. Specially, when they told everyone that was surprised and upset by their actions to flat go to hell when they wanted to know why. The problem with people like Bob Williams ("former EPD officer and retired CHP sergeant who resides in Fortuna") is that their way was un-American and anti-Democratic that produced a failed social system – in other words, for all their self-righteous authority, they did not get the job done. That, however, never seems to keep them from trying to continue justifying their abject failure.

Williams fancifully concludes, "It is my hope that the next Eureka Police Chief is a person of reason, logic and inclusion. A leader who is a morale builder and, by his or her personality, commands respect." Bob Williams, had he practiced what he preaches, would never ever write such a letter let alone send it out to the newspaper for the public to read, if he actually met any of his standards or truly supported the best interests of Murl Harpham or the EPD. His "bogus" words condemn him, expose his motives and identify his intent.

Everyone would be better served if Bob Williams kept his worthless, disrespectful opinions to himself. Short of that, he can keep them in Fortuna, where HE lives. Apparently, Fortuna deserves these kinds of people. We have enough of them living in Eureka.

---

[UPDATE :: Thursday, 21, 2011]

The Times-Standard published yesterday a My Word commentary by a local Eureka resident, Barry Ross, titled: “Dialogue takes more than telling people to go away over differing opinion.” Here Barry Ross takes exception to the “opinion piece” written and published in the paper by John Chiv and Bob Williams.

Barry Ross makes the following observation:

“I may be naïve, but I have understood over the course of my life that people in any given community differ in their visions of its future, what changes may be beneficial to the community, and ways to implement such changes as may be agreed upon. This takes dialogue -- I may wish to know why you have some view or other, not only that you have it.” [Emphasis added]

“May be naïve”? I would say at the very least, considering the tone of his commentary, just a little. Regardless, he does touch on the core issue causing the problem, i.e., “I may wish to know why you have some view or other.” Here Barry Ross assumes these people think or believe as he does; that their interests are the same as his, even though they expound different conclusions derived from a different ideology or philosophy. He assumes their motivating interests are guided by what's most “beneficial to the community.” If that were true, they would be all inclusive, because that is what a “community” is. They clearly are not. People like Linda Atkins and Barry Ross possess absolutely NO standing with these people. For any meaningful “exchange of ideas or opinions on a particular issue” requires recognition and acceptance of each other as equal individuals. If not, then there absolutely cannot be any kind of relationship leading to an amicable or “collegial” dialogue. Believe me, John Chiv and Bob Williams clearly understand their position in this matter. Their actions speak to that truth.

When you consider the major betrayal Barack Obama is perpetrating, the time for dialogue is over.

---

--Joe