THE SAGA OF CARLY CORTRIGHT… (PART TWO)

I decided to cover the Cortright Saga early because it provides a good picture of how the Condon/Straub control of SPD sent the Department on an even faster tailspin downward. That tailspin will continue if those individuals recently promoted to the rank of Major, all of whom are and were Straub toadies, are allowed to remain in their current positions.

 

A Little Background Regarding Kris Cappel:

https://examplepro.me/2016/03/02/answering-some-questions/

 

 

I will preface this story by stating I am not a personal friend of Carly Cortright and only know her by reputation as well as meeting with her on two occasions to obtain SPD data when I was doing a volunteer stint for AmeriCorps focusing on the retention of Rogers High School Students. She has an impeccable reputation within SPD and her assistance with the AmeriCorps Retention Project was outstanding. So when I learned that she was in a battle with Straub over his spending and the Golden Goose Fund I knew it was just a matter of time before Straub would get rid of her, the same way he had gotten rid of people who stood in his way while in Indianapolis and White Plains. The information regarding exactly how Straub handled people in his previous failures was of course provided to Addy Hatch of the SR in 2013 but even though the SR had the information regarding Straub’s past employee practices and knew Cortright had been transferred out of SPD regarding budget issues they were either incapable of putting 2 + 2 together or any stories about Cortright were spiked somewhere along the line.

I don’t know how many times without going through my documentation I warned the Media and City Council members of the Cortright/Budget/Golden Goose Fund problems but needless to say there were many.

https://examplepro.me/2015/10/31/boy-is-this-embarrassing/

https://examplepro.me/2016/02/04/officer-tim-schwering-the-golden-goose-fund-furniture-gate-the-culture-continues/

https://examplepro.me/2015/11/01/you-are-one-confused-jeremiah/

 

I should note that I have had a number of discussions with other reporters on how to approach the Cortright/Golden Goose Fund story most notably Mitch Ryals from the Inlander, who are doing a really good job of covering the various dramas, on how to prepare a PRR that would encompass the data needed to look into the expenditures. I explained to Mitch that it would be one hell of a project for a reporter to take on and he would not be able to get via PRR all of the documents necessary to actually reconcile expenditures. I also told him that the Spokane City Council are the people that should be demanding an audit, which is ever so true from reading not only the Cortright statement, but others as well. I also explained to Mitch the importance of getting Cortright to talk, something I told the City Council long, long ago.

Mitch was able to get Carly Cortright to finally open up a bit, and was the only one that ever made the attempt that I am aware of.

 

http://www.inlander.com/spokane/cop-culture/Content?oid=2631527

https://examplepro.me/2015/12/10/the-inlander-is-making-the-review-look-even-worse/

https://examplepro.me/2015/12/17/how-can-you-tell-when-you-have-been-blown-off/ (Teaser)

 

Before I get to Carly Cortright’s statement there are a few things which need pointing out. The statements released to the public are not corrected and signed under the penalty of perjury even though there is a separate perjury affirmation and correction sheet. The transcripts do not contain a recorded perjury affirmation (Something I have discussed before regarding formal statements) which should be standard investigative practice for a number of reasons including situations where the subject of the statement refuses to return, correct, and affirm. Experienced investigators know you must also document each and every attempt to get the individual in to correct and affirm the statement, if they refuse you have the individuals voice on tape making the perjury affirmation, which provides great evidence in court, and when the investigator is on the witness stand. Hopefully all individuals in this case were provided the opportunity to correct and affirm their formal statements.

 

There are a number of mistakes in the transcripts but just so you know Cortright wasn’t referring to an “AutoZone” case… rather Otto Zehm case.

 

In Cappel’s “Summary Report”, she Summarizes the “The Investigation Scope”;

____________________________________

  1. Complaints against Chief Straub That Were Known to the Condon Administration.
  2. The Facts and Circumstances of Carly Cortright’s Transfer to City Hall in October 2013.
  3. The Facts and Circumstances of Monique Cotton’s Transfer to Parks in May 2015.
  4. Whether the Cortright and Cotton Transfers Were Consistent with City Policies.
  5. The Facts and Circumstances That Led to Chief Straub’s Resignation.
  6. The Facts and Circumstances of the City’s November 13 and November 24, 2015 Responses to the Spokesman-Review’s August 18, 2015 Public Records Request.
  7. Carly Cortright’s December 2015 Discrimination Complaint.
  8. Whether the City’s Policies and Procedures for Investigating Sexual Harassment Complaints Were Followed in Connection with Ms. Cotton’s Complaint.
  9. Summary of Seabold Group’s Recommendations Regarding the City’s Sexual Harassment Policies and Procedures.

______________________________

 

Even though the issues involving the Golden Goose Fund were clearly within the “Investigation Scope” and that it was one of the primary reasons Cortright was “disappeared” it was not Investigated by Cappel.

_____________________________________

43 Ms. Cortright said she also raised issues with Ms. Muramatsu about how the Chief wanted to use seizure funds. Ms. Muramatsu concluded that the Chief’s spending was an appropriate use of those funds. (Cortright Tr. 40-41). We did not independently investigate this issue.

_________________________________________

 

For folks that don’t know who Ms. Muramatsu is, she is the SPD legal advisor who has the responsibility to advise SPD on legal issues. To be clear her job is to provide legal advice to SPD, and not PROTECT SPD or follow their whims. SPD has had a “Legal Advisor” since back when I was on the job, some were cops and members of the Bar. I sat through a lot of meetings with those folks and the meetings DID NOT involve… “How do we cover our ass?”.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2013/may/31/officials-mum-on-cop-let-felon-off/

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2014/aug/27/in-the-sordid-wake-of-the-bikini-clad-prosecutor/

https://examplepro.me/2016/01/12/nepotism-and-cronyismalive-and-well/

I won’t get into the Body Camera issue again regarding Muramatsu, the articles above should provide some perspective. I will note however Ms. Muramatsu is on the list of folks who “declined to participate”, and were never forced to because Condon refused to invoke Garrity. Note that Muramatsu, Dalton, and Steinolfson are still OUR employees and could be forced to provide statements under Garrity should Mayor Condon decide not to further obstruct an investigation. The City Council could also subpoena them, granted they would very likely either claim a privilege or stand on the Fifth Amendment, however not doing so leaves the door completely open for any Mayor under our “Strong Mayor” form of government to do whatever the hell they want without fear of accountability. Obviously you won’t be able to utilize the CC’s Administrative Subpoena Power to force the people who have left Spokane to comply with a Subpoena, however a few of those still around besides, OUR EMPLOYEES, could be subpoenaed, refuse and risk a Bar Complaint.

 

____________________________________________

There were several important witnesses who declined to participate in the investigation.

They include:

  • Frank Straub
  • Monique Cotton
  • Nancy Isserlis
  • Erin Jacobson
  • Pat Dalton
  • Mary Muramatsu
  • Meghann Steinolfson
  • Selby Smith

_________________________________________

This statement in Cappel’s report is critical to understand:

Finally, our factual findings are based on a “preponderance of evidence” standard, which means that based on the credible evidence gathered during the investigation, it is “more likely than not” that a particular event occurred or did not occur as alleged.

The “preponderance of evidence” standard is the standard used in almost every law enforcement agency throughout the Nation, but one glaring exception is the Spokane Police Department who depending upon who you are utilize the higher standard of “Clear and Convincing Evidence”.

The reason it is important to understand the difference is because the SPD standard of “Clear and Convincing Evidence” is utilized arbitrarily depending upon who you are and whether or not you are willing to conform to the Condon/Sanders agenda. The Furniture-gate/Captain Arleth case is a perfect example of just that.

 

It is interesting note regarding Furniture-gate is that the case went to mediation and the Mayor and Teresa Sanders’, I will do anything to keep my job surrogates, Craig Meidl and Meghann Steinolfson refused to dismiss the finding of Rick Dobrow who was acting directly for Condon and Sanders. That should give you somewhat of a clue as to what is going on at City Hall and SPD, especially when you look at the recent promotions to Major of other very inexperienced pliable individuals. Interesting… is it not…that Meghann Steinolfson declined to participate in the Cappel “Investigation”.

 

I feel it is always good to demonstrate how favoritism plays a role in IA cases, and there are many SPD IA cases that reek of favoritism or the reverse. One of my favorites as far as contrasts are concerned is the way Mayor Condon handled the Steroid Case of Straub’s friends, Golden Boy and Golden Girl, Mel and Lydia Taylor. Some of you may remember the efforts made by then Director of Strategic Initiatives Tim Schwering to hide the Taylor IA Case from public scrutiny. I had to do a PRR with both the City and County to get the damn thing. You can read the links below to get a feel for what I’m referring to. Schwering you might recall was gifted by Mayor Condon, at our expense and even though he failed the SPD Civil Service Exam, with a free trip to the State Law Enforcement Academy, and a job as a probationary SPD Patrolman. Schwering has always wanted to be a cop so Condon granted his wish, and if you read the statements from the Cappel investigation there may be a clue why Schwering got his wish.

 

https://examplepro.me/2015/12/16/straub-steriods-and-the-spd/

https://examplepro.me/2016/03/02/so-it-is-a-big-secretbut-why/

https://examplepro.me/2016/03/08/prr-update-lydia-mell-taylor/

https://examplepro.me/2016/03/22/dont-blame-me/

https://examplepro.me/2016/04/03/a-conversation-with-interim-chief-meidl-and-major-justin-lundgrepart-one/

https://examplepro.me/2016/05/11/the-cops-threat/

https://examplepro.me/2016/06/19/the-beginning-of-something-goodlets-hope-sobut-it-took-a-while/

 

 

 

 

Of course no one had any trouble whatsoever getting the Furniture-gate IA Case.

***Just so you folks know SPD still has not put the IA Cases back up on Tim Schwering’s IA Website, which is now Major Justin Lundgren’s Website, even though the Use of Force Commission and Cops/DOJ touted what a great job it was for SPD to do so.

 

As we got into the investigation, we learned that there were at least 34 (possibly more) public records requests, resulting in the production of many thousands of pages of records, that were potentially encompassed within the original scope. Such an undertaking would have consumed the investigation budget and likely much, much more. Accordingly, at the investigator’s recommendation, the Committee agreed to limit the inquiry to the documents that were produced on November 13, 2015, and November 24, 2015, in response to a records request filed by the Spokesman-Review on August 18, 2015.

***Yes folks there are thousands of pages of documents in my possession…but what the hell…I’m not charging $250.00 an hour plus expenses… so not to worry.

 

I now want to get into the Carly Cortright to an extent but with some hold backs for possible litigation.

 

With respect to all of the statements in this case, at this point, I don’t find any evidence that the statements were compelled under Garrity v New Jersey it appears they were all done voluntarily. When I learned that some of OUR employees were not willing to cooperate in the Cappel I emailed a suggestion to the City Council on March 9th, 2016 that they formally request Mayor Condon invoke Garrity forcing OUR employees to cooperate. Because they were unfamiliar with Garrity after explaining it to them I suggested that they consult their legal counsel, which they did, on March 11th, 2016 I was informed that my suggestion had been “acted upon”. During that email interaction, because I had considerable information regarding the case I correctly predicted that Mayor Condon would refuse to invoke Garrity, even though doing so would not only speed the investigative process but would also eliminate the need for subpoenaing witnesses. It was far too risky for him to have people talk so in my mind his refusal was a given.

https://examplepro.me/2016/03/12/now-what-will-the-mayor-do/

http://www.inlander.com/Bloglander/archives/2016/03/18/stuckart-asks-mayor-to-compel-participation-in-the-straub-investigation

 

I have already heard the rumblings… so for any of you folks that have their panties in a wad over me offering suggestions to the CC as far as the Cappel Investigation is concerned, LET ME BE PERFECTLY CLEAR, it isn’t the first time I have offered suggestions, or been sought out for suggestions because of my background and experience, and it won’t be the last. As a Citizen of Spokane and as a Citizen/Journalist I have every right to make suggestions and will continue to do so. Another area where I offered suggestions that were followed was the SPD Body Camera Issues and I’m glad I did at least it got the legal ball rolling.

 

 

Cortright Statement:

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/910210d5-df1c-4d3f-acc2-9d62eea9e8b9

 

 

But that is part of the problem is, if you briefed him, it’s not clear if he wasn’t briefing Straub, but then you would get in trouble for not having told Straub. So then I started reporting to Straub, and then Craig would get upset that I was telling him. It was very unclear who, technically, I was supposed to be reporting to.

***This of course was a problem throughout Straub’s tenure, what makes it even worse is that the problem still exists and is worse having been exacerbated with the temporary hiring of Condon Crony Jim McDevitt and lowering the standards necessary to become an SPD Major.

 

Around March, the chief started to become impatient. Some things weren’t changing quickly enough for him, which I was always found very ironic, because as a person has a Ph.D, he should realize that you need time to have things in place before you can measure here was the baseline, here’s where we’re at right now, two months isn’t enough time to see significant change. His major number one mandate is, we need to bring down crime. You know, nothing else matters. We have to bring down the crime numbers.

And so we would do that, but it’s like, but now we don’t know which system is working because you’ve overlapped them. You don’t know what you’re measuring.

 

***I have explained over and over how that was accomplished so there in no sense in doing it again here.

https://examplepro.me/2015/10/31/boy-is-this-embarrassing/

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2015/oct/30/candidate-fact-check-has-crime-really-fallen-under/

I mean, Straub would, “You’re not doing this. We need to work faster. We need to, you know, stay ahead of everybody else. You know, we’ve got to keep council off beat. You know, we have to –“

He was quite upset, during a budget presentation, that people didn’t have the answers, and so he was basically caught off foot by the council, and we got chewed out the next day, that we needed to know all that, that we always needed to know them — know the answers so they couldn’t catch us that way again.

*** The translation for “off beat” in law enforcement vernacular is “in the dark” …just so you know.

Yeah. That’s when a lot of the, right, bad things started happening. One of his favorite — and he would do this — I mean, numerous times. We’ve all seen it – where he would make references to, “Let’s us take out and measure,” and then he’d slam his forearm down on the table in an apparent reference to measuring penis size.

Yeah. We would just flop his arm out, so we’d take them out and measure.

Oh, he’d say, “Let’s take them out and measure.” I mean, it was — and then flop it down like he was graphically trying to display slapping his penis down on the table.

 

***I’m not going to comment much on this, other than to make note that obviously it took a while for Cappel to grasp what Cortright was saying.

 

Yeah, ’13. And I don’t — I don’t remember the context. It, obviously, probably had to do something with budget, which is why I was brought along. So we rode from the Public Safety Building here at City Hall, which isn’t that far. I rode in the car with him. After the meeting was over and we got back and drove off, we were crossing the Post Street Bridge, and he made a comment to me along the lines of, “Well, that was just like we went and masturbated each other.” And I just remember sitting there like, this is so weird. I don’t know you well enough to have you make that kind of comment. And I still remember that after all this time, because I joke about it with one of my friends. I’m like, I felt like asking, “Do you need a tissue?” I mean, I just — I didn’t know how to respond, it was so weird. And he clearly meant it as a joke, I’m trying to be friendly with you. But again, it was that same — that’s just really inappropriate from a boss, and I’ve known you three months. I mean, it’s weird.

 

*** Carl Cortright admits in her statement that her long association with law enforcement has kind of made her a potty mouth which is par for the course for the vast majority of women entering that environment, but simply being a potty mouth doesn’t eliminate one from being the victim of a hostile work environment, or sexual harassment for that matter. Potty mouth or not it appears someone needs to help Carl with what Straub may have been leading up to with the comment she alludes to in her statement.

After she reads this she may understand what it could have been, assuming Lynds statements are true

 

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/b55c6a35-3c9e-4322-abf7-03d7c9a91a8b

 

Keep in mind that the link above are NOTES from an interview on 4/29/2016 and took place after the Lynds formal statement on 3/15/2016. The reason the second interview took place was because during the Teresa Sanders statement on 4/27/2016 the issue of an affair between Cotton and Straub came up. (More on this later.)

So that was Monique, Brad, and myself. I believe both Craig and Joe were on vacation. But he specifically said, “Executive staff, I want you to meet now.” So we step into the room. He closes the door and yells. I mean, turns bright red. And I’ll never forget it because I’ve never had a boss speak to me in such a horrible manner. I mean, it was just — and he yelled at us and said, “If either one of you ever disrespect another member of this command staff ever again, I will fire you –” and he pointed at me – and then “I’ll demote you,” pointed at Brad, and then said, “If you don’t believe me, call Indianapolis, because I’m a real cocksucker,” and then stormed out of the office. And from that moment on, I was — I’m like, he’s going to fire me. I mean, it’s pretty evident that he hates me; that, you know, I came in for — ironically, it didn’t last very long — for about the next week just pretty sure that I was going to get fired at any moment.

*** Well the fact is that shortly after Condon hired Straub some of us retired cop folks did our research and did call several people in Indianapolis as well as White Plains and NYC and were able to easily determine that Straub was in fact “a real cocksucker” we of coursed passed that info on to the CC and the SR.

 

So he wanted to bring it here to Spokane. So we had gotten got a proposal from the company that does it, and I want to say it was around $75,000. With city budget rules, anything over $50,000 needs to go to council for approval, and really, anything over — I can’t remember the limits now — 15,000, 10,000 — are supposed to go out for RFPs. A good steward, so the city’s money. So we canceled source contracts, but you have to justify why. So he wanted that done. I had to come up with funding for it. He really wanted to use — and we didn’t have a lot of extra money. I mean, our general fund money almost all goes to paying for cops. We have some grant money, and then the rest of our money comes from seizure and forfeiture. The seizure and forfeiture money has a lot of strict regulation on it, that it can only be used towards drug enforcement.

 

Right. So and that was — we had some pretty significant cases at that point time, that that was our fairly large — and I don’t remember the exact amount, but we had a hundred thousand or so in there. I mean, it was pretty substantial. And we’ve always used it traditionally to fund our SWAT team for new equipment, and there’s an nexus there to drug enforcement or anything for the gang and drug units.

 

So he really wanted to spend the money on that with this YPI program, with, you know, it’s keeping kids out of gangs, so it’s going to keep them out of drugs. Like, okay. I mean, there’s kind of a link there, but — so that’s what we were going to do. Accounting was like, no, we don’t feel comfortable doing that. We’re going to get audited, and we can’t show that clear link. And then our purchasing department said, no, you can’t do a sole source. You need to put this out for an RFP, which, of course, takes time. So I came back and told him that.

 

Yes. So I would come back and relay that information. Like, okay, I’ll get going on RFP so we can do this. We’ll have to find some other way to fund it. And then, again, we’d get the lecture of, what do you mean, that’s stupid, just go do a sole source. I can’t do a sole source. They won’t let me. I mean, it was just this constant, like, really? I really believed that he thought I was purposely just saying no because I wanted to. We did end up putting it out to RFP. I think we ended up talking to our legal advisor, who decided that the link there was close enough that we’d be able to justify using the seizure money. So that, kind of, full process happened.

*** You might want to ask yourself why Mary Muramatsu refused/declined to participate in the investigation? Could it be that someone might ask her exactly what the “nexus” is between Frank Straub’s buddies at YPI and the laws governing forfeiture expenditures? Of course I would also be asking why we are spending thousands of dollars out of the forfeiture funds for legal fees when we have a City Attorney’s Office, among a multitude of other questions I would have for her.

https://examplepro.me/2015/12/11/the-embarrassment-continueson-and-on/

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2014/may/10/police-youth-consultant-accused-of-getting-into/

https://examplepro.me/2016/05/11/the-cops-threat/ 

 

Yeah. Which, again, I think it was $8,000 a person. And I remember saying that, you know, I’m like he’s — he’s going to get rid of me. And my family, my friends were all, “He’s spending $8,000 on you for leadership training. He can’t quite possibly dislike you as much as you think he does.”

***Straub all the time he was here was spending one hell of a lot of money on un-necessary travel and training. The question is where did the money come from? You might recall that Straub told the Use of Force Commission that he was spending all this money on travel and training in order to eliminate the need for the infamous “Culture Audit”. The exchange between Straub and Earl Martin during one of Straub’s presentations before them was nothing short of hilarious.

 

Yep. He knew who he was hiring. His name is Tim Schwering, S-c-h-w-e-r-i-n-g.

*** Yes, he sure did and so did Mayor Condon.

https://examplepro.me/2016/01/11/yes-they-would-have-kicked-me-out/

https://examplepro.me/2016/01/19/new-spd-officer-tim-schwering/

https://examplepro.me/2016/02/04/officer-tim-schwering-the-golden-goose-fund-furniture-gate-the-culture-continues/

 

You know, we’ve got this vacant position so we can fund it. And, you know, can someone please fill out the — the, like, the council briefing sheet that we need to do. At that time is when I found out the salary range for this new position, which was titled Deputy Director of Strategic Initiatives, which was to be in charge of the department’s seizure, so civil assets, and he was hiring a gentleman from the federal defender’s office who had experience with fraud and seizures.

 

*** That was the public narrative but not the truth Carly.

So, again, it was sort of a slap in the face, at that point in time, that here we are hiring this new man who is going to make the same amount of pay as I am with less responsibility. He was given a take-home car, because, in theory, he’d be out doing I don’t know what. You know, I — I wouldn’t have taken a take-home car. I mean, I’m single. It would have been a pain in the butt to try to juggle two cars. But it was never offered to me. It was never suggested that I needed a take-home car. I was down at City Hall weekly for meetings driving my own car.

 

*** Carly…Carly…Carly… don’t you understand that special cronies get special treatment in this Administration, and especially those with dirt?

 

 

No. The only difference would be the rush on when it was done. We had met Tim before we went to Boston. I mean, he had met him somewhere, and he thought Tim was, quite frankly, the bee’s knees. And so he was interested in bringing him on board. I think what’s different — and maybe not different. I think, again, it was another one of these we’re going to create a job description to fit the person we want to hire instead of what I believe is the correct method of, I’m going to create a job description, then go find the right person.

 

*** Yes Carly Straub met Schwering and his wife at one of those fancy “Big Wig Parties” and just created a job for him, that is the way it works in this City Administration.

Metro Party 1

Metro Party 2

https://spokanepublishing.wordpress.com/2008/06/01/spokane-metro-magazines-launch-party-at-the-fox/

 

 

In October of 2013, after I was moved out and they reorganized, he developed a new position for Tim, which basically took over all of the functions I previously had, plus the Internal Affairs department, and that new position afforded him an $18,000 raise.

 

***Well of course…. that is the way it works!

 

 

You know, I mean, she’s complicit to that extent. And that’s her job as the HR director, to make the department heads happy. They want this job spec, I’ll go make it for you.

***It is imperative for any Mayor of questionable ethics to have a Director of Human Resources who is “complicit” in creating jobs for pliable cronies to protect their rear end, and that was exactly the case with Heather Lowe and Condon/Sanders it is no wonder Heather Lowe split town for San Clemente Calif. The complicity continues with the redefining of the rank of Major and dropping the 3 year in grade requirement down to 2 years in order to get people in power positions who Condon, Sanders, McDevitt, and Meidl feel will protect their back ends.

 

http://www.inlander.com/Bloglander/archives/2016/07/13/email-from-retired-spokane-cop-details-problematic-promotions-rift-among-top-brass

 

 

I may return later to Carly Cortright’s statement but as I stated earlier I have hold backs.

 

All of you can read her statement and draw your own conclusions, however I feel her statement provides a pretty good picture of what was and is going on at City Hall and SPD.

 

What happened to Carly Cortright was not only corrupt but also a tremendous waste of a very talented Law Enforcement asset, which given the way things are going may never be recovered.

 

 

 

I REPORT YOU DECIDE!!!

 

INVESTIGATION??? WELL…NOT REALLY (PART ONE)

DISSECTING THE CAPPEL “INVESTIGATION” WILL BE DIVIDED INTO SEVERAL PARTS AND WE WILL START HERE:

 

The Investigative Summary of Kris Cappel which was released to the public is just that a Summary and not an Investigative Report so until I have a chance to review in detail all of transcripts of the interviews I’m limited. Most of those transcripts have been posted on the City Website with the exception of four which apparently aren’t really transcripts from recorded interviews rather are “transcribed from handwritten notes into typed notes” which is of course is problematic.

 

One important note regarding the Interviews/Statements is that Perjury Affirmations are NOT included in the recordings and they should be. The Perjury Affirmations and Correction Documents are not completed nor signed.

Just a quick look at the interviews/statements already documents exactly what I have been saying for years and some very important issues are not even mentioned in Cappel’s Summary.

 

So why is my name mentioned a number of times in the Cappel report and why the hell am I involved?

Breen Mention 0

Breen Mention 1

Breen Mention 2

Breen Mention 3

 

If you notice in the last image above Ms. Cappel makes this statement regarding my PRR “which closely mirrored, but was even broader than Deshais’”. The truth is my PRR was in fact considerably more specific in the very important area of text messages to and from City and Private cellphones used for City Business consistent with the Nissen v Pierce County Case, something no one else had requested and I’m still battling the City about. With respect to my PRR being “even broader than Deshais’” , yes it was, but because this isn’t my first Rodeo, it was crafted in a way that it was broad but not broad enough to allow the City to claim it was too broad. You have to be careful in that area as Ms. Cappel knows, or at least should know.

 

So why was I lucky enough to get all the attention from Nancy Isserlis and the City Attorney’s Office…because they knew I knew, as did the Mayor.

 

Some of you who follow me know that the reason I’m here is because the Spokesman Review has not done the job they are ethically obligated to do with Mayor Condon as well as the SPD. Much of the information contained in the Cappel investigation was provided to the SR by myself and others over several years, however even though the documentation and sources were available to them they sat on it. As I have noted in previous stories Addy Hatch of the SR was supplied with a volume of well documented evidence of the type of behavior now again documented in Cappel’s report in Straub’s past stops back in November of 2015. Hatch told the individual providing the documentation she was going to assign the story to Jonathan Brundt when he returned from maternity leave, the story was of course never run nor has Hatch ever challenged or denied my stories regarding this, simply because she can’t as the evidence is well documented.

 

Folks that follow me also know that one of the reasons I’m up to my neck in this is because of this anonymous letter I received seeking my help.

Letter 001

Envelope 001

 

 

There will be lots more to come. I will likely start with the Carly Cortright saga and statement in my next story because I have reported on her story long ago when she was transferred and the fact that, yes… it was her integrity regarding Straub’s expenditures from the “Golden Goose Fund” that caused her transfer, long before Cotton. If the City Council doesn’t read her interview/statement and take the necessary action the Golden Goose Game will continue. Here is just one of many.

https://examplepro.me/2015/11/01/you-are-one-confused-jeremiah/

 

NO SUBPOENAS’ NECESSARY…RIGHT???

 

 

 

I REPORT YOU DECIDE!!!!

HERE WE GO AGAIN!!!!

 

Same old…same old….

 

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2016/jul/14/three-men-named-finalists-to-be-next-spokane-polic/

 

 

The SR story above is far from media vetting of the three finalists for Spokane’s Chief of Police. I find it interesting that Jonathan Brundt is the lead reporter in the story. If you recall, I have reported that in November of 2013 Addy Hatch of the Spokesman Review was provided a complete package of data and information regarding Frank Straub. The information she was supplied was compiled by individuals who know how to obtain information from a multitude of open and closed sources. When Addy Hatch was provided the information she told the individual providing it that she had assigned the story on Straub to Jonathan Brundt who would write it when he returned from maternity leave. The sordid story of Frank Straub was, as you know, never written, and I wonder IF that story had been written, and was done properly, it would have demonstrated a history of behavior that lead to him getting booted for the third time in a City where he had control of law enforcement and whether we would be in the predicament we are today.

 

Let’s be clear not one of the three candidates has had a proper vetting at this point. IA files on each individual have not been reviewed, litigations against the three have not been reviewed, LexisNexis searches and reviews have not been done, the results of independent investigations/reviews have not been studied, contacts have not been made with individuals who may have negative information…and on and on.

 

It is important to understand that all of these individuals have sought Chief of Police Positions other than Spokane, without success. The same was true for Frank Straub, when he ended up in the “City of the Mayor’s Choice”.

 

If the process below looks familiar…that is because it is primarily the same as was the phony process to pick Frank Straub.

 

__________________________________

Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 3:35 p.m.

Spokane Mayor David Condon has named a selection committee to work with the executive recruiting firm to narrow the list of 31 candidates to be Spokane’s next police chief.

The selection committee will work with Strategic Government Resources to identify a list of semifinalists by June 1. SGR has begun its review and evaluation of applicants, which the firm will present to the selection committee. Members of the selection committee are as follows:

 

 

  • Breean Beggs, City Council member
  • Gabe Cabellero, Police Leadership Advisory Committee member
  • Shon Davis, Bishop and Overseer of Kingdom Fellowship Church Alliance and president of the Police & Faith Leaders Alliance
  • Rick Dobrow, former interim Spokane Police Chief
  • Ken Hohenberg, Kennewick Police Chief
  • Lori Kinnear, City Council member and chair of the Public Safety Committee
  • Bart Logue, interim Police Ombudsman
  • Gloria Ochoa-Bruck, City Director of Multicultural Affairs
  • Theresa Sanders, City Administrator

Semifinalists will be given 20 days to submit responses to a written questionnaire and a recorded interview answering questions prepared by SGR. That information will be used to narrow the pool to a list of finalists by July 1. Finalists will be interviewed in July by members of separate community panels.

 

 

 

Questions for the finalists

Police Advisory Committee Chairwoman Joan Butler will facilitate the public interview of the police chief finalists, according to a city news release. Questions from the public can be submitted in advance to policechiefsearch@spokanecity.org or in writing at the public interview. The event will start at 4:30 p.m. Wednesday at the West Central Community Center with a reception. The interview will start at 5:30 p.m.

 

http://www.inlander.com/Bloglander/archives/2016/02/11/mcdevitt-resigns-from-police-leadership-committee-during-heated-meeting

 

_____________________________________

Any of the 31 applicants for the position without any doubt would have studied and researched each individual on Mayor Condon’s stacked selection committee and would know exactly what to say and how to say it in order to impress the committee, hell it would be a walk in the park for any candidate to say exactly the right things in their interviews, only a real dope wouldn’t.

 

As an example, allow me to take, who some believe is the front runner, Robert Lehner. Lehner has of course been around the block so he knows what to say and how to say it to impress some members of the committee. After his research he would know to say, as he has in the past, that law enforcement needs to demilitarize, which in my view is true to an extent, but it is easily said when you are looking for a job and the question is what is his record in that area? Not that great as far as I’m concerned, especially when I review his handling of a case when one of his Elk Grove Officers shot a handcuffed, unarmed suspect in the back of a patrol car with an AR-15. The officer was cleared by the prosecutor, and in a subsequent civil litigation, however as near as I can tell Lehner did nothing to change or review the use of rifles in the Elk Grove PD. Some might ask me since the officer was cleared what is the big deal Breen? My answer is simple read the damn Use of Force Commission Report and the COPS/DOJ Report, see what they say about SPD’s use of rifles and any dope would get my drift.

 

http://www.egcitizen.com/articles/2015/12/01/news/doc565502da1b9a9637882761.txt

 

 

Since as everyone in Spokane knows the sexual conduct of SPD cops has come up over and over again, including one currently charged with rape so one would wonder how Lehner has handled cop rapes in the past…Not very well apparently.

 

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/e6638408-7a1c-41b3-abf4-f04aa3989fdb

 

 

There is of course considerably more info out there including Robert Lehner’s time at the Tucson Police Department, where he also took a shot at their Chief’s job.

 

Who has the ultimate choice as to who is the next Chief of the Spokane Police Department, and who before making the final decision should do some extreme vetting? IT IS THE CITY COUNCIL FOLKS!!!

 

The question is; “Will They?”

 

They didn’t last time, even though they were warned by very knowledgeable people.

http://www.amberwaldref.org/why-i-voted-to-confirm-frank-straub-as-spokanes-next-police-chief-9102012-council-meeting-recap/

 

“tough questions”????   Okay Amber if you say so!!

 

There is of course speculation out there that given the set-up going on now at SPD and reported here:

 

http://www.inlander.com/Bloglander/archives/2016/07/13/email-from-retired-spokane-cop-details-problematic-promotions-rift-among-top-brass

 

That the right Condon/McDevitt people are in place to continue the culture at SPD they created until the end of Condon’s term and we might not ever have a new SPD Chief until he is gone. Who knows but not beyond the realm of possibility.

 

 

I REPORT YOU DECIDE!!!!