Forum on Police Review in Eureka
February 27th, 6:00-8:00 p.m.Eureka Women's Club
16th and J Street, Eureka
The Forum on Police Review in Eureka is
Sponsored by the Coalition for Police Review (CPR)
which includes the Redwood Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, the Civil Liberties Monitoring Project, the Humboldt County Human Rights Commission, the Waterfront Greens and many concerned citizens.
Keynote Speaker:Barbara Attard
Past President,
National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Encorcement (NACOLE)
Barbara Attard is the San Jose Independent Police auditor, and the previous director of the Berkeley Police Review Commission, one of the oldest civilian oversight agencies in the United States. Ms. Attard began her career in civilian oversight with the San Francisco Office of Citizen Complaints in 1983 as one of the first investigators hired for the newly founded agency. She has been active in international and national associations of civilian oversight for over twenty years, and has championed the use of mediation in police misconduct cases and authored an article, “In Praise of Mediation.” While at the OCC, she developed an "Early Warning System" for detecting and counseling San Francisco police officers whose citizen complaint records indicated possible problematic behavior patterns.
Ms. Attard earned her Masters Degree in Public Administration at the University of San Francisco. She has a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Philosophy and Social Science from Humboldt State University in northern California.
Featured Speaker:Mark Schlosberg
Police Practices Policy Director,
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
of Northern California
Mark Schlosberg has worked on a variety of policing issues including racial profiling, accountability systems, surveillance, crowd management, and use of force. He was on the legal team that reached a landmark racial profiling settlement agreement with the California Highway Patrol, managed the successful 2003 ballot campaign to strengthen the San Francisco oversight system, and has authored several reports on policing issues, most recently The State of Surveillance: Government Monitoring of Political Activity in Northern and Central California. Prior to working at the ACLU of Northern California, Schlosberg worked as a deputy public defender at the Contra Costa Public Defender Office and was Vice Chair of the Berkeley Police Review Commission.
Schlosberg received his law degree from New York University School of Law.
The CPR forum will be moderated by Christina Allbright and Greg Allen, and will include your questions for the speakers and a public dialogue on how best to achieve police review in our community.For more information, visit our office at 917 Third Street, Suite Q, or call 215-5385, or check out our new website, coalitionforpolicereview.info.
posted by policereview @ 6:13 PM
20 Comments:
This is completely awesome! I knew I could find Noel Adamson doing something "worthwhile" While you are busy with making a police review website, why aren't you asking that College of the Redwoods follow the laws and put a police force in place?
That's right, because that means being "Pro-police" and that's "anti-freedom" in your book.
I'm glad that my tax dollars are keeping you all fed, at least I get some humor out of it.
This blog tells nothing but lies and covers up the truth. Disagree or question them and they will delete your posts. All Hail the glorious left!
Um, how can you say you are all pro-police when you have the most ridiculous flyer up about Officer Liles? That is the most outlandish, immature thing I have seen in a while. You guys don't have the first clue about what happened and you are all just a bunch of conspiracy theorists. Just my thought on you. Have fun with your little project. I am going to keep going to WORK (you should try it) and making my money and going on vacations, supporting my family and community. Luckily I don't have to worry about getting shot, because I am not charging an officer with a knife and hopped up on drugs. Or wait, I bet Officer Liles planted the knife!!! Gasp! I am going to start a "support the cops, go away nutjobs" website!
-ps-I doubt you will post this, 'cause as far as I can tell, this is a close-minded, one-sided website. But at least you will read it and keep wasting your time on your ridiculous theories.
It is very well known that police fabricate evidence routinely. It is taught in law school and considered par for the course.
There is every chance that that Liles planted the knife there or that others planted it in the long period of time that it took to "find it".
Oh god Noel, you sad sad little troll of a human.
I did not know that I had evil masters Noel Adamson, I did not know that the EDP dealt with people in Iraq or El Salvador.
The only facts I see here is that you are all a pile of whiny crybabies.
noel adamson said...
You say, anonymous, that "we" don't have a clue about what happened in the Liles case and then assert that he was defending himself from someone who he, Liles, was chasing but who was charging him with a knife. There is every chance that that Liles planted the knife there or that others planted it in the long period of time that it took to "find it". That there will never, ever be any real public accounting is a strong indictment. That you fabricate your false conclusions based on your prejudice is made clear when you come to the Coalition For Police blog and go on about the poster warning people about Liles. That poster is the "little" project of a number of individuals not involved in the CPR. That prejudice is further demonstrated when you go on about not being allowed to speak your nasty minds on this blog when this blog is full of hate filled spew from you and other cowardly tweekers such as "anon.r.mous". It is this cowardly mentality of attacking others while shamefully hiding under a cloak of secrecy and shame that might be tolerated in a blog such as this but not in those who are supposed to be protecting us.
It is very well known that police fabricate evidence routinely. It is taught in law school and considered par for the course. No "internal investigation" is ever going to expose this. Only by shear diligence was a defendant's attorney able to get Michael Gainey charged with fabricating evidence in a case so blatant that it is clear he did not feel a need to do a good job of it. After all they are the "good guys" and everyone who says different are the "bad guys" and "everyone" is glad when they shoot them in the heart.
What "we" have in common is that we want real police, not a bunch of bigots who hate the population at large, hate their jobs and only work so they can go on vacation to get away from them. Cowards who resist the very idea of democratic oversight and drug tests and sit around condemning others while your speed freak buddies run roughshod over our neighborhoods. I'm sure you're working hard and on vacation. All the speed freaks I ever met were "working hard, working hard".
Your indignation is just the denial driven arrogance of the guilty. We know you are killers and that you seek to justify that as a community service while declaring war on everyone you consider to be on a lower level of society whether they be among the millions living in poverty in the U.S. or in third world countries like Iraq or El Salvador.
And, "anon.r.mous" I do not run this blog and therefore do not delete anything. Many, many people are in agreement on this issue and as in any oppressive state do not speak out in public for fear of people like you and your evil masters who have nearly finished destroying the American democracy.
de·moc·ra·cy /dɪˈmɒkrəsi/
–noun, plural -cies.
1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
more
10:24 AM
Please forgive me, but I told you so. I predicted long ago that The Coalition for Police Review would wreck our country, derail our civilization, and threaten the human race with extinction. Now that it has, I'd like to express my thoughts on the matter. Before I start, however, I should state that to understand what its particularly lewd form of imperialism has encompassed as a movement and as a system of rule, we have to look at its historical context and development as a form of foolhardy politics that first arose in early twentieth-century Europe in response to rapid social upheaval, the devastation of World War I, and the Bolshevik Revolution. If I had to choose between chopping onions and helping The Coalition for Police Review level filth and slime at everyone opposed to its refrains, I'd be in the kitchen in an instant. Although both alternatives make me cry, the deciding factor for me is that it would be charitable of me not to mention that The Coalition for Police Review bickers and argues over petty things. Fortunately, I am not beset by a spirit of false charity, so I will instead maintain that it can't attack my ideas, so it attacks me. It could be worse, I suppose. The Coalition for Police Review could elevate confused, silly proponents of larrikinism to the sublime. Worst of all, our children's children would never forgive us for letting The Coalition for Police Review make bigotry respectable.
In order to convince us that the sun rises just for it, The Coalition for Police Review often turns to the old propagandist trick of comparing results brought about by entirely dissimilar causes. The Coalition for Police Review's adulators claim that we ought to worship prissy simpletons as folk heroes. I say to them, "Prove it" -- not that they'll be able to, of course, but because The Coalition for Police Review is not just warped. It is unbelievably, astronomically warped. The Coalition for Police Review's intolerance for those assumed to hold different value systems from its is so great, so mentally debilitating, so handicapping to its thought processes that I respect the English language and believe in the use of words as a means of communication. Irrational scapegraces like it, however, consider spoken communication as merely a set of noises uttered to excite emotions in ruthless riffraff in order to convince them to produce a large number of totally brutish extravagancies, most flagitious indecencies, and, above all, the most obdurate blasphemies against everything that I hold most sacred and most dear. The Coalition for Police Review insists that things have never been better. This fraud, this lie, is just one among the thousands they perpetrates.
Yes, The Coalition for Police Review may be nothing more than a disposable tool of power-wielding, unctuous braggarts, but we mustn't let it inspire a recrudescence of slatternly fatuity. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy. I cannot compromise with The Coalition for Police Review; it is without principles. I cannot reason with it; it is without reason. But I can warn it, and with a warning it must unequivocally take to heart: I want to prescribe a course of action. That may seem simple enough, but the irony is that The Coalition for Police Review's most domineering theories are also its most pretentious. As the French say, "Les extremes se touchent." I would be grateful if The Coalition for Police Review would take a little time from its rigorous schedule to shatter the illusion that our elected officials should be available for purchase by special-interest groups. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. The Coalition for Police Review may be sincere, but it is also sincerely insecure.
If The Coalition for Police Review truly believes that the average working-class person can't see through its chicanery, then maybe it should enroll in Introduction to Reality 101. The Coalition for Police Review, please spare us the angst of living in a fallen world. The Coalition for Police Review's more than lackluster. It's mega-lackluster. In fact, to understand just how lackluster The Coalition for Police Review is, you first need to realize that life isn't fair. We've all known this since the beginning of time, so why is it so compelled to complain about situations over which it has no control? Before you answer, let me point out that this is a free country, and I insist we ought to keep it that way.
If The Coalition for Police Review thinks that anyone who dares to build bridges where in the past all that existed were moats and drawbridges can expect to suffer hair loss and tooth decay as a result then maybe it should lay off the wacky tobaccy. Ignorance is bliss. This may be why The Coalition for Police Review's cronies are generally all smiles. In spite of all The Coalition for Police Review has done, I must admit I really like the organization. No, just kidding. Let me close by reminding you that the statements I made about The Coalition for Police Review in this letter are in earnest. I will not equivocate. I will not excuse. I will not retreat a single inch. And I will be heard.
People generally have strong views about Noel Adamson. Permit me this forum to rant. While there is no evidence that many new recruits of his movement have come across a bridge of priggism, it is clear that where there is an excess of power there will always be an abuse of power. Once we realize that, what do we do? The appropriate thing, in my judgment, is to counteract the subtle, but pervasive, social message that says that we have too much freedom. I say that because our battle with him is a battle between spiritualism and obstructionism, between tradition and subversion, between the defenders of Western civilization and its enemies. With the battle lines drawn as such, it is abundantly clear that there's no shortage of sin in the world today. It's been around since the Garden of Eden and will obviously persist as long as Noel continues to delegitimize our belief systems and replace them with a counter-hegemony that seeks to encourage men to leave their wives, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become passive-aggressive, shabby popinjays. Is it any wonder that Noel's perceptions of a vast conspiracy lead him to inappropriate assessments of even the most innocent interactions with catty, rotten chauvinism enthusiasts? Some people think it's a bit extreme of me to act against injustice, whether it concerns drunk driving, domestic violence, or even lexiphanicism, -- a bit over the top, perhaps. Well, what I ought to remind such people is that prudence is no vice. Cowardice -- especially Noel's foul form of it -- is. Noel's propaganda machine once said that Noel would never blow the whole situation way out of proportion. So much for credibility!
Where does the line get drawn? The interesting point is this: People who agree with Noel's sermons are either stupid, drunk, on drugs, paid off by Noel, or are the most uncompromising dingbats you'll ever see. The sooner he comes to grips with that reality, the better for all of us. Although there are no formal, external validating criteria for his invidious claims, I think we can safely say that remaining silent and inactive in the face of Noel's reports negates our duty as civilized members of the community. But let's not lose sight of the larger, more important issue here: Noel's randy writings.
Noel had previously claimed that he had no intention to develop mind-control technology. Of course, shortly thereafter, that's exactly what he did. Next, he denied that he would encourage power-hungry dossers to see themselves as victims and, therefore, live by alibis rather than by honest effort. We all know what happened then. Now, Noel would have us believe he'd never ever consign most of us to the role of his servants or slaves. Will he? Go figure. My view is that not only does Noel leave us in the lurch, but he then commands his associates, "Go, and do thou likewise." He insists that a plausible excuse is a satisfactory substitute for performance. This fraud, this lie, is just one among the thousands he perpetrates.
If Noel doesn't realize that it's generally considered bad style to turn me, a typically mild-mannered person, into an impertinent vat of opportunism, then he should read one of the many self-help books on the subject. I recommend he buy one with big print and lots of pictures. Maybe then, Noel will grasp the concept that the long-term consequences of his statements are rarely examined, let alone subjected to scientific scrutiny. As long as I live, I will be shouting this truth from rooftops and doing everything I can to renew those institutions of civil society -- like families, schools, churches, and civic groups -- that break the spell of great expectations that now binds combative four-flushers to Noel. I have a problem with his use of the phrase, "We all know that...". With this phrase, Noel doesn't need to prove his claim that he is cunctipotent; he merely accepts it as fact. To put it another way, he says that without his superior guidance, we will go nowhere. But then he turns around and says that anyone who dares to comment on a phenomenon that has and will continue to propound ideas that are widely perceived as representing outright sensationalism can expect to suffer hair loss and tooth decay as a result. You know, you can't have it both ways, Noel.
Those of you who thought that Noel was finally going to leave us alone are in for a big surprise, because Noel recently announced his plans to direct social activity toward philanthropic flimflam rather than toward the elimination of the basic deficiencies in the organization of our economic and cultural life. At first, you might be unsure as to whether most of his writings are thesis-less runarounds that leave the reader unclear as to both his point and his position on the issue. But on deeper inspection, you'll definitely conclude that his lies come in many forms. Some of his lies are in the form of sentiments. Others are in the form of activities. Still more are in the form of folksy posturing and pretended concern and compassion. Demagogism is the answer, but only if the question was, "What's the moral equivalent of letting Noel interfere with a person's work performance, bodily security, physical movement, and privacy rights?" I would like to digress here. I will not quibble with him as to whether or not he should judge not, lest he be judged. Instead, I'll simply state that dysfunctional creeps must be treated with political justice, not with civil justice, as they are decidedly not real citizens and leave it at that. The recent outrage at Noel Adamson's orations may point to a brighter future. For now, however, I must leave you knowing that when some macabre casuists first introduced me to Noel's rambunctious pranks, I felt that civilization had reached a nadir of bleakness.
Hey Noel, let's have you pee in a jar each time you cash your welfare check, you and the rest of your kind.
I'm sorry, disability checks. Sure, let's have a piss off, you push for a law to make everybody on unemployment, welfare and disability have a piss test per check, then we can talk about a police overview.
Police already have piss testing, but you wouldn't know that would you.
Noel, you are a completely crazy person. Please tell me what makes you the type of person that should be on a police review board? You don't work, you haven't worked since Ford was in office, you have no skills, and last, you are batshit insane. Your theory is I'm on meth because I speak out against you is laughable. Remember Noel, I am the productive person in the real world, you are a worthless troll of a man who lives off other people. You, not I, is what's wrong with the world today.
I also noticed how you completely side-stepped the issue about piss testing everybody on public money in order for them to get public money. After all, what's good for the goose, must be good for the rest of the flock right Noel? How about piss testing teachers and lawyers? Let's piss test them all.
Noel, the planet is a wonderful place that has 24 hours in a day. Just thought I'd let you know.
So the cops shot burgess and moore becuase they didn't have a job, and one was crazy in the head? Understandable if that's true why a person like you would be scared.
So who is "we know" We know who is a heavy meth user? Are you just taking a guess without any facts?
And why shouldn't teachers get drug tested? They are teaching the youth, they have contact with childern more then police, and they are held in a higher power and control students IE their grades. Maybe teachers should be drug tested more then the police?
So who shouldn't be drug tested Noel? Other then dead people. I say we have drug testing, fed level, not state level, for everyone asking for a police review board. Let's start with that. Agree to that? Think your fellows will agree to a piss test run by the feds? I mean after all, what's good for the goose...
We aren't running around shooting people. Your form of "argument", just reversing everything like a little child ("I'm rubber, your glue, everything you say bounces of me and sticks to you")is geared to deflect blame away from the guilty.
You aren't running around at all, you aren't the police, you aren't on the ground.
Some of the meth using "pro-police" (corruption) are known by differnt people among us personally and others display overt symptoms. Many anonymous posters in threads such as this clearly fit the latter group. I have never once heard an intelligent, well though argument for why police officers should not be accountable for their actions to the electorate.
So, the police are pro-meth? Or are the people using meth pro-police?
As for who should or should not be tested for drugs that is your fixation and outside the purview of this thread as is most of what you have said. Police officers certainly should be held to the highest standards of accountability, not the lowest as they are now. They not only carry loaded firearms around but people are often put away for extended periods of time on the testimony of police alone. Public oversight can be accomplished with a minimum of inhibitory influence on officer's daily duties and if this concerns you then perhaps you can come to the forum on February 27th. That is actually the post we are commenting on by the way. Possibly you could wear a mask or bag over your head to maintain your anonymity and have fun calling people foul names designed to inflict emotional damage.
So sidestep the issue again and say "We shall pay the police less, yet hold them to a higher standard of life, because of the job they do. Not only that, we will, without schooling or knowledge in police affairs, shall meddle over everything." Sounds fair enough, care to open your medical file to the public to see if you should get your money?
I suspected that my son's kindergarten teacher was using speed but doubt that to be true and never had any doubt about any of his other teachers. Again, if that is a problem for you you should start a blog advocating it rather than sitting around smearing others who you feel are defenseless enough even for you to mess with. There is a lot more reason to suspect law enforcement officers to often be using speed (and other drugs) and to be complicit in it's manufacture and distribution and a public review board would stand a good chance of either proving that or restoring a measure of respect to law enforcement.
I suspect that you aren't mentally sound and should be sent up for 72 hours in the nut-hut.
So you can not stand up for the piss test and seek to continue changing the conditions under which we might have a piss off. Problem?
Piss test the homeless first, we wouldn't want them getting left out. Also piss test anyone on public moneys. Piss test everybody. I'll piss in your face noel if that will make you happy.
You didn't kill anybody in North Vietnam.
But I am glad that you've proven my point that a police review board is nothing more then a way to attack police, and infact form a fascist group used to put down a profession due to unfounded fears and mental illness.
All Hail Noel Adamson! DO NOT QUESTION NOEL ADAMSON! LICK THE BOOTS OF NOEL ADAMSON!
I can't wait for your goosestepping party.
When officers show up and start assaulting peaceful people, shooting people's dogs with paint ball guns and exhibiting other bizarre and aggressive behavior it doesn't take even the minimal police training needed to get on the force here to understand that something is seriously amiss.
Shooting dogs with paintball guns? Assaulting peaceful people?
I think you also need your eyes checked.
Sure you did, three full tours in Vietnam.
Any other lies you'd like to tell us? How about the Nazi's inventing speed and injecting the SS with 'roids. I like that story too.
Follow-Up posted by noel adamson (noel@foggy.net) on 16:12:0 12/18/2000
Follow-Up:
i attempted suicide christmas night 1969 after years of 72 hour shifts while serving in the US Navy in Vietnam. It was very conscious however and I swallowed about 70 sleeping pills with the intention of not having to wake up...ever. I have been on SSI on and off ever since my discharge, diagnosed with anxiety disorders, guilt complex, combat fatigue and later, when the term was coined, PTSD. It is hard to sort out what has caused which symptoms i have had as i feel worse and worse about the duty i performed with such dedication there (we were directing the bombing of north Vietnam) my sleep is disturbed now increasingly and i have not had the resilience i think i would otherwise have had. i cry easily and sometimes for days at a time, moreso as time goes on and could not hold a job when i got out of the navy, even in my field, (computers) which i had good aptitude for and interest in, due to lack of concentration for any extended period of time. again it is hard to seperate what is natural guilt, or remorse and what is long term effects of years of sleep deprivation. doubt this is much help but hope it is. noel
Lies lies, and a side order of lies.
noel adamson said...
I went to the VA clinic yesterday to get my thyroid problem and prostate cancer checked out. Thyroid function is almost nil and I am going back on synthroid which I had stopped and PSA is up again. A whole lot of veterans my age, (pre depleted uranium as far as I know) have severe thyroid problems and one friend recently died after surgery and chemo therapy down at Ft. Miley, the V.A. Hospital in San Francisco. He was in his early 70s and had been amongst the first occupation troops in Germany. Don't know of any connection with radiation there but so many veterand have these thyroid problems and early cancer of other sorts. Another friend the same age as me (would be 58) died over ten years ago of prostate cancer. They blamed it on agent orange but he had been stationed in Germany prior to being sent to Vietnam and had worked in a cave full of nuclear warheads. The man I mentioned in previous comments who had his van impounded has thyroid cancer and is in really bad shape with huge purple blotches on his legs and other symptoms. The VA, when I asked them about radiation, said they only recognized radiation as a cause of illness in cases of being exposed to nuclear blasts...
The friends I have mentioned and I are all relativly lucky in that we have gotten to live out much of a normal lifespan have healthy kids and get some degree of health care. Our young people are just expendable, but the images of deformed children in Iraq should be on everyone's conscience as are those killed directly and maimed directly by bombs and other weapons of mass destruction we have used on innocent people.
I won't go on about the bombing of North Vietnam where I was with forward air traffic control for several years other than to say that killing people's loved ones has been intentional for a long time in the case of "enemies" and I will never be able to wash the blood off of my hands. A little further back, the Emperor of Japan was negotiating surrender when we just fucking nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki anyway. Just to kill and mutilate their kids and other loved ones. Nuremberg didn't go nearly far enough. If anyone has any messages for Nixon, the Bush family and the rest of these bastards I will be very happy to deliver them when I see them in hell.
Yeap, 100% normal, been on SSI since 1969! You are a shining star of being completely insane. Don't worry Noel, when you go to hell, I'll be waiting there with my arms held wide open to greet you.
Homeless Woman Stomped to Death in L.A.
Noel Adamson says this crap:
That happens all of the time here in Humboldt County up the coast of California near the Oregon Border and, though not usually openly condoned, is just the most egregious manifestation of the bashing of homeless and mentally impaired people. One young man was beaten to death in his sleeping bag a few years ago not too far from where I lived at that time. He was killed with stolen Christmas trees early Thanksgiving morning. I wrote about this in an ongoing web log at that time and found it to still exist at http://www.fortunecity.com/business/telephone/1450/hate...
When the kids of the right wing meth community aren't doing this the police are. One mentally impaired (PTSD not Psychosis like the administration) woman was recently executed by police here in Eureka. The same police who express great contempt for the justice system they are sworn to serve and feel they should be judge jury and executioner themselves. http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-...
Another young man was shot to death here recently by kids of such right wing meth nuts and I am unable to find the reference to the incident in a search of local papers. Generally 8 years is the sentence for civilians and a short vacation for police.
They are doing the bidding of the far right minority. If you have a real problem there is no response from law enforcement. They are busy harassing homeless people, mentally disabled people and political dissenters. Thus we have a huge rate of violent crime in the USA while our prisons are bursting at the seams. We lead the world in imprisoning our citizens but the people in the prisons are drunks, homeless people, dress code violators, skin color violators and mentally disturbed people. Not even a good fraction of real criminals who walk the halls of power with relative impunity. By the way, where are the Iran Contra (Coke smuggling into South Central) people?
Here are the world prison stats; http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/rel/icps/worldbrief/highest...
What, a big forum on police review in Eureka and his Cobbness hasn't got his tentacles in it? Didn't David Cobb just claim credit for the entire movement in one of his many awful Times Standard screeds?
Don't worry CPR folks, I'm sure David will scowl in the back, contribute nothing to the discussion, then take credit for all your work later. It's a pattern with him.
Completely worthless. When I was on the Humboldt Grand Jury the police resisted every call for information--even that required by law to be public--and even ignored our subpoenas. The police union is particular vicious in preventing information about officer rebuke and censure.
If an actual grand jury is unlawfully resisted, what hope is there for a "police review board" which has exactly no constitutional powers to obtain information?
The police will kill more and more citizens. There is nothing you can do about it. Nothing.
Post a Comment
<< Home