More Dan Hughes Failure

Well, it might have happened like this...

It’s not easy to do damage control when you keep inviting more questions that you are pretending to answer. Of course when you are dealing with the incurious stooges at the OC Register maybe you believe you’re getting away with it.

The latest episode in the FPD PR campaign is an attempt by Acting Chief Dan Hughes to deflect criticism by acknowledging the error of letting his cops watch the  Kelly Thomas murder video before writing their reports, a thing he finally admits he’s never heard of before.

Hughes said he argued against letting the officers watch the tape, in part because civilians suspected of misconduct would not be given the same opportunity. He said he did not think it was illegal or unethical, but did fear it would erode public trust in the investigation. “That was a mistake from our department,” he said.

Here we see Danny Boy defending himself: he argued with some unnamed somebody, somewhere, somehow, against letting the killers watch the video, but we are meant to believe that he was overruled. But by whom? Chief Sellers wasn’t there. Was he contacted? He was Hughes’ only boss. Was it a fellow captain? If so what was that man’s name? Lou Ponsi doesn’t seem to be very curious. Of course there is the very real possibility that Hughes is just lying to protect himself well after the fact. And notice that the mistake was made by “the department” an entity that can’t be disciplined.

Eleven months after the fact Hughes would have us believe he was oh, so concerned about the severity of the incident. And yet we now know that last fall, many weeks after Hughes had seen the video and heard the audio, he was insinuating to protesters that the after they actually viewed the video their outrage would be mollified. Hmm.

The rest of the story is just a pathetic attempt to take credit for the investigation and ultimate prosecution of Ramos and Cicinelli. Read this tripe and try not to barf:

But even as the officers collected their thoughts, crime-scene technicians and detectives were picking over the scene of the bloody confrontation with Kelly Thomas as if it had been an officer-involved shooting, Hughes said. The criminal case now facing two of those officers, he said, was built in large part on the police work done by their own department.

And more:

But, he said, it was Fullerton police work that put Fullerton police officers in criminal court. He pointed to the words of District Attorney Tony Rackauckas: “They went to the scene, they preserved the evidence, they did all the things they were supposed to do.”

A video of the confrontation spliced with audio from the officers’ recordings, produced by the Fullerton police, was the centerpiece of a recent preliminary hearing for Ramos and Cicinelli. They were ordered to stand trial, Ramos on charges of second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter, Cicinelli on charges of involuntary manslaughter and excessive force.

“It doesn’t matter who the defendants are,” Hughes said. “We are part of the prosecution team.”

Oh, brother, what a load of unadulterated bullshit passed along by the compliant scribes at the Register. Nobody “picked over” anything. We’ve already shown pictures of cops trampling all over the crime scene, and as far as collecting evidence is concerned, the only things collected were the cell phones and camera film of witnesses who happened to record the murder. The idea of the FPD investigating itself is utterly comical.

And, ultimately it’s still all about “poor communication,” really. Not much worse than a little bad luck if you think about it.

“I don’t believe there was any intention at all to mislead our community,” Hughes said. But, he added, “we should have did a better job” of communicating – a common theme in his account of the aftermath of Kelly Thomas’ death. In the future, he said, he and his top commanders will handle public communication duties during major incidents.

The department, he said, “did a very poor job of communicating to the community.”

Unfortunately the slug who was tasked with public communication, and who failed so dismally either through incompetence or malice, was actually just promoted a few weeks ago. What’s that Dan, we can’t hear you?

Finally, I would be remiss if I didn’t point out just a couple of the of the other instances of biased writing by the pathetic little fool, Ponsi. We have seen the obnoxious description of the cops “collecting their thoughts” as opposed to, say, “getting their stories straight.” You can’t note how Thomas is described as “rangy” a term that is certainly more threatening than “skinny,” because this has now been removed out of the post. But there is still the utterly objectionable use of the phrase: “As the confrontation escalated,” a literary device meant to deflect responsibility for the crime from the cops Ramos and Wolfe to some unknown cosmic force. Things just happen.

152 Replies to “More Dan Hughes Failure”

  1. Between a new council and the FBI, you can bet Hughes has already typed his resignation up with a “date uncertain” for Felz’s use.

  2. Civilians? Are we an occupied country? I thought we were citizens and they were municipal employees, not members of the armed forces. Maybe he has already read the NDAA-yeah that’s it and he thinks he has a special place in its implementation. Maybe he knows something we don’t. After all we are just “civilians”.

  3. He’s such a liar and Felz needs to start getting rid of people starting from the top. The small tv? you mean the 42inch flat screen in the watch commanders office? The sad part is the union president who supports this rhetoric . Worked out good for them though; all got promoted…. SMH

  4. NO NO NO, when the time is right, Hughes will be suffering from hypertention,high blood pressure and some other medical issues and will retire accordingly.

    “gather my thoughts” YES nice misrepresentation.

    “get our story’s straight”, yep that is closer to the accurate perception.

    Don’t forget Hughes was driving to the scene 15 minutes after being called. Did he miss the sit down among the officers at the station?

    BUT, BUT, wait. If the Hughes supporters wish to speak up, then consider this.

    If Hughes was on top of his game, he would have learned from the PREVIOUS scandals that have been discussed right here about communication with the public on the Rincon case alone.

    YOU BET Hughes is eluding to Sellers over ruled him if not the same night of the incident, or shortly there after. IF HE IS TELLING TRUTH???

    Why don’t Hughes just come out and call Sellers a POS?

    I think if he does, SOMEONE is going to call BS on Hughes.

    Thanks Lou Ponsi for the comprehensive spewing of limited propoganda on behalf of Hughes.


    1. Laura’s Law will do nothing but empower a faceless judge to force big pharma drugs down peoples throats and throw them in padded rooms.


      Can we think outside the box for once? God help us.

  5. Holy Moley. What a whitewashed butt covering!

    Hughes knew about this from the start. Only now is he forced to start pointing fingers internally because he probably knows the next shoe is about to drop.

    I wonder whether other cops will start contradicting his storyline about personally opposing the cops viewing the video while writing their reports?

    And Hughes indicated in this interview that early hospital assessments indicated that one cop suffered broken ribs. Who asserted this, Chief Hughes? Why would hospital personnel communicate information that was medically untrue??? Are you saying that the folks at the hospital were unable to competently read an xray printout??? Please expound on your comment, Chief Hughes.

    This is the point where it starts to get interesting. I sense fright. When people get scared they start doing and saying stupid things that come back to bite them later.

    Stay tuned.

  6. Oh, and now that Sellers is long gone with an airtight pension – watch Hughes start to make him the ‘fall guy’. They have to blame someone and it makes sense to blame someone who can’t be held accountable now.

    These clowns are way too transparent! 🙂

      1. That becomes a ‘he said he said’ matter.

        Why would Sellers care if the City of Fullerton gets pummeled with a $10M lawsuit judgment or settlement? I have no idea where his place of residence is – but chances are it’s not even in Fullerton. If the jury finds Sellers liable – who would pay for it??? Sellers or the Fullerton taxpayers???

        Let’s get real here.

          1. When’s the last time a cop has been held personally liable for his civil actions that you know of? The taxpayer ALWAYS pays civil penalties for the cops sins. You know that. So why would Sellers care what happens in a civil courtroom? Do you think they’re going to ding his pension? Let’s talk reality just for a second.

            1. Actually JustUs, there have been a few cases, but like you said the taxpayers picked up the tab anyways.

              Now I understand there are motions that can be made to where personal liability MUST be payed out of ones pocket, and cannot be payed by the public entity.

              Will that happen in this case, unknown.

              But if it ever does, it will send shiffers down the spines of cops and police administrators.

              1. “Will that happen in this case, unknown”

                Anti, my question to you is: Name one recent (last 10 years) Orange County civil case where a cop was forced to pay a judgment or settlement out of pocket for his civil violations.

                So why would it happen in this case?

          1. oh you mean the contact initiated by Hughes but his name is conveniently left out of everything, including the lawsuit and the police report???? hmmmm

            1. Can you explain this? Left off the police report – ok, that might be “convenient.” But why would he be left out of the lawsuit if he initiated contact? What motive would Clarke or his attorneys have in leaving Hughes out of their suit? Unless he is testifying against someone else?

          2. “Sellers is being sued both individually and as a peace officer in that one”

            Name one recent (last 10 years) case in Orange County where a cop had to pay a civil judgment or settlement for his own violations?

            Good luck.

  7. Expect to see some others start to break from the ranks- because somewhere the heat is getting turned up.

    1. The result of the heat he is receiving. There are others involved who have a lot of explaining to do.

    2. Could be peanut!! Could be.

      But is it because of what really happened, or because Hughes is trying to save his own bacon?

      It’s always difficult to REALLY know when your not behind the scenes.

      But if a “disgruntled” employee comes forth, it could be ugly for many.

      I mean we have many trolls here who suggest the cops are getting the shaft for no good reason because Kelly was a piece of garbage.


      Then those same cops should be pissed at DA Rack and NOW Hughes for throwing their brothers under the bus.

      ANYONE seen, or will we see cops from FPD protesting this openly??

      Maybe Captain RI will tell us there is a LONG range plan to go after the DA and now Hughes for his decisions.

      I’ll be patient.

      1. “ANYONE seen, or will we see cops from FPD protesting this openly??”

        The only time I see cops protesting is when their contract is undergoing the collective bargaining process.

        When’s the last time you saw good cops protest bad cops???

        Makes you wonder if there are any good cops out there, huh???

        1. NEVER seen good cops protest bad cops.

          Have seen cops protest bad MANAGEMENT decisions and flaky Chief of Police who have no spine, or get caught double talking everyone.

          Case in point, Tahesha Miller shooting Riverside PD.

          Chief said he was supporting his officers, turned around a few hours later, threw those cops under the bus.

          30 plus cops shaved their heads in protest, showed up at the City Council meeting to protest the Chiefs actions.

          Bottom line, seldom to protest.

          A few votes of NO CONFIDENCE from unions to the Chiefs.

          Seldom become public information.

          1. Good police are afraid of the police unions who protect their pensions & who also protect bad police.

      2. Who is pissed at TRack and Hughes..Start with the original about throwing who under the bus.

  8. Is the Orange County Grand Jury involved in any of these investigations?
    The OCGJ should be looking at the possible complicity of relations among elected officals(3) and the FPD.
    I will not believe there isn’t or hasn’t been covert communications since 05 July 2011.
    This glove fits!

  9. I’m the OC Register reporter who actually wrote this; Lou helped in the reporting but the writing is mine. I made it clear throughout the story that this was Hughes’ account of what happened, nothing more. I said the officers were collecting their thoughts because they were writing out statements, with time to think about what they were writing, rather than giving live interviews. I initially described Kelly as rangy because it means skinny; a commentator correctly pointed out that it also implies tall, so I changed it to shirtless; Hughes himself pointed out in his termination letter to Cicinelli that the fact that Kelly was shirtless indicated that he was unarmed, so I thought that was more relevant. I’m happy to talk to anyone about the story; you can reach me directly at 714-704-3777. — Doug

    1. Doug,
      At a time when most OC Register reporters are relying on bloggers to crack stories, I appreciate you posting here. It gives the impression that you actually give a sh!t about what you report and why.

      Now, go crack Ponsi and that polished turd Whiting upside the head with an L.A. Times!

    2. Doug, as a reporter do you always believe everything you’re told by an interviewee? Have you ever heard of the concept called “probing” during an interview? If something said doesn’t make sense do you ever consider questioning it? The author of this FFFF article and some posters ask some pretty pointed questions. There are holes in your story so wide I could drive a truck through it. Care to respond???

    3. Doug, that was a sad excuse for an article. Parroting what you are told is lame. Why do you deem Hughes’ self-serving account newsworthy?

      Did it not occur to you to find out who Hughes was supposedly arguing with about the cops watching the video? Was it Sellers? Was it Hamilton? Was it McKinley?

      Did it not occur to you to inquire how come, if he screwed up so badly did Goodrich get promoted a few months later?

      When Hughes bragged about treating cops and “civilians” equally as part of the prosecutorial team, did it not occur to you to ask about why Kenton Hampton assaulted, arrested, and then lied under oath about Veth Mam – an innocent man completely cleared by video evidence? By the way, Goodrich made up a story for that one, too. It’ll cost us taxpayers plenty.

      1. As a matter of fact, Doug and Lou, have you bothered to get public records requests on anything regarding Kelly Thomas prior to an interview/article?

    4. I agree with many of the others. We all want to know who signed off on the Fullerton-6 watching the video. Do your job. Go back and ask Hugo who it was that insisted the cops review it.

  10. So what happened prior to the Kelly Thomas case? All those issues including Rincon, the DAR smasher, the guy whose face was smashed by 4 or more FPD boots, the Veth Mam case, etc Capt 28 years on the FPD? I can’t help but think that Kelly may have not been killed if someone on the force would have communicated openly about these. Anyone.

  11. In response to #6,

    I think “thinking outside the box” got us into the mess in the first place. Letting Kelly wander around and ignoring his father’s pleas to help him didn’t exactly have a happy ending.

    Maybe, like SQS, you think socks are the answer.

    And no, Laura’s Law does not force Kelly into a padded room. It puts him on a outpatient treatment plan and compels the county to ensure he receives treatment.

    Read the law, and get a clue.

  12. I want to add one follow-up. It’s a fair question to ask why we would do a story based on Hughes’ account. He’s the acting chief now and was the patrol captain that night, so we thought it was important to get his account on the record.

    1. Doug a VERY LIMITED account, VERY limited account.

      One might call that nothing but a tease and just creates more questions.

      Hughes keeps turning on the water faucet and letting a little water run now and again to those hundreds of thirsty citizens.

      If this is some professional PR strategy, it sucks, someone should ask for a refund.

    2. Doug, your story was pathetically and I suspect deliberately incomplete.

      You are supposed to be a reporter for a major publication. You should be better than that.

      Please stop making excuses. Reporters are paid to get to the BOTTOM of the story. You are paid to DIG. Anyone can take notes.

    3. The reason Hughes is admitting the complete screw up is to avoid it being categorized as a cover-up. Only problem is that Hughes is about 10 months too late.

      Hughes will be jumping ship, named in several lawsuits, and never have to pay a penny. He will retire and live out his days on his massive pension, and the royalties from his book deal that you didn’t hear about yet. He has several real estate investments, one is quite palatial. When Hughes goes in a few months, expect newly pinned Captain Jones to take over as acting chief.

      At the rate we’re going, last week’s corporal stands to be next year’s chief! Welcome to Fullerton!

    1. That’s been asked since day one- its gonna be interesting to see what happens there.

          1. no he retired and Hughes hired him back as a “consultant” to work all cold cases(both of them, lol)

  13. Good one English Major. That’s exactly what needed to be written about that article. Mind you, it should have a giant footnote, *, that goes something like this: Thanks to the second part of the Gennaco report (that only Hughes can read) and the “good writers” of the OCR, the Chief came to the conclusion to want to wipe the slate clean and be able to move on getting paid lots of money including pensions from this city for FPD.

    Which begs the questions, 1) What does the Gennaco report part 2 say? 2) how much of the second part of the Gennaco report(that only Hughes can read) is Chief Hughes following?

    In the end, this is nothing but damage control and the resolution that follows. At first, it’s denial of any wrong doing/blame the victim. Then it’s damage control (Gennaco report) and now with the firing of the officers involved comes resolution. I just hope for some more resolution to come and it’s not over yet.

  14. It will be interesting to see if the negligent hiring and retention law is played at some point by Mardirossian.

  15. Someone should track down the guy who broke in to Hughes’ personal vehicle a couple years back. Hughes had the guy arrested 3x for the same crime; once when he got caught, then hughes released him bcuz the suspect said he would retrieve the gun but he told Highes to F off once released , 2nd when they did a search warrant on his home but didn’t find a gun, then third when they got his cell phone and it had a pic of the gun…WTF?!?! I’ve heard of double jeopardy but triple jeopardy??

  16. Well according to the facebook site supporting Sellers, he was the first to call for an investigation of Thomas’ murder. And according to Hughes he was trying his darndest to make sure the officers were investigated properly, but was getting resistance from some unidentified source. Does anyone believe this nonsense? If there had been no civilian video or pictures taken in the hospital by Ron Thomas, as well as, an effort by Tony Bushala and other concerned citizens to expose the murder, this thing would have been swept under the rug and all six officers would still be on the streets. How sad to see a willingness to protect your own interfere with common sense and regard for a human life.

    1. well said, sellers took the fall but two greedy captains who wanted to be chief next threw him under the bus quick. And who suggested sellers go on medical leave ???? drum roll….. Pat McKinley

  17. Calling all rank and file Fullerton police!

    Tired of seeing your chiefs jump ship with full pensions while throwing your brothers under the bus?

    Tired of seeing all you have worked for trashed because of a corrupt system and corrupt politicians?

    Tired of being hated by the local community despite your best efforts to serve and protect them?

    Call Garolaw! Garo Mardirossian: 323-653-6311

    Call Tony Rackaukaus! (714) 834-3600

    Contact Friends of Fullerton’s Future at [email protected]

    Or email The Fullertonista at [email protected]

    1. Most aren’t paid to think critically. They are mobile secretaries who take good notes and follow orders coming from the Editor’s office. That’s the anatomy of a news reporter in 2012.

  18. It doesn’t matter who the defendants are, Hughes said, We are part of the prosecution team…What a piece of shit. Goes to show you what side he is on.

    1. Hopefully he is on the side of the law, which would put him on all sides. FPD mentality of “sides” being cops vs. everyone else is a big part of the problem here.

      1. Just like you want justice for Kelly, I want the truth be told. I want justice for Ramos and Cicinelli. We are all on this blog for a reason , now you know mine.

              1. > I really blew that one…you say they won’t

                Step daddy helped you to post that Cincinelli?

        1. That’s fine with me. Thus far many of your comments have been short and without specifics.

  19. Please put July 5th, 6th, and 7th on your calendar. July 5th is of course the one year anniversary of Kelly’s death. There will be a special event at the transportation center where it happened in the evening. July 6th is the Art-Walk. Many artists are creating special paintings that will be sold at this great event. All proceeds are going to the Kelly Thomas Memorial Foundation. On the 7th will be the second annual KTMF benefit Concert/Food and Clothing drive. Last year was a big success. If you live out of Orange County, this will be a good reason to take a few days off and join us. There is more info to follow. The bands that we are looking at are said to be in high demand and are very popular. All three events will be in down town Fullerton.

  20. Doug,

    You need to ask Capt. Hughes who decided to allow the officers to view the tape before writing the reports if it was not him. Wasn’t he in charge that night? I am surprised that a reporter would allow him to make such a vague statement that everyone else seems to have immediately identified as suspect without following up on it. And why was this story released on a Friday just before a holiday weekend?

      1. call him on his cell phone 412-7124…Hell go visit his home in Yorba Linda. it’s the only one that didn’t burn down during the fire bcuz he dispatched FPD cops and fireman to protect his home

    1. RA according to reports, Hughes was the Patrol Division Captain. Hughes said he was on the move 15 minutes after getting the call from the on duty watch commander.

      Going by the chain of command only, Hughes would have been the first notified.

  21. Well its nice to know that Fullerton PD ACTING chief Hughes is hoping to become the new chief. That is the only reason for this public relations pablum served up by the OC Register.
    You know when the recall succeeds, its doubtful that the new City Councilmembers will want Hughes and he will go back to being Cpt. Hughes!
    Same goes for Felz, the city manager. Of course, the three jurassic eggs gave Felz a one year extension and contract with one year pay for getting terminated! This whole mess is gonna cost Fullerton taxpayers a huge amount of money. Where is it gonna come from?

    1. Where is it gonna come from?

      Roads and infrastructure of course and when someone is killed by a sinkhole created by a dilapidated water pipe, the tax payers will just spend a little extra paying off the family.

        1. Sandra Hutchens could be the new chief and Jim Amormino could be the next spokesperson.

          I’d rather look at Jim’s busted up mouth over Lorraine Jones Parker’s face.

  22. “Unfortunately the slug who was tasked with public communication, and who failed so dismally either through incompetence or malice, was actually just promoted a few weeks ago. What’s that Dan, we can’t hear you?”

    And there you have it. Andrew Goodrich fails his way to the top.

      1. Goodrich did not fail at all. He lied and lied and lied and was promoted for his disinformation campaign. He is not the Lieutenant in charge of donuts!


    For those HONEST FPD cops who do not trust your union, or it’s lawyers, are tired of the corruption or game playing, pay attention.

    The lawyers who represent the FPD UNION Silver,Hadden&Silver are pro management lawyers who WILL NOT throw the FPD brass under the bus, NO MATTER what is going on.

    Some of you might already know that.

    Yes Michael Schwartz will represent Jay Cincinelli and give him a good defense to keep him out of prison if possible. It will stop after that.

    Schwartz nor any of his associates will ATTACK and point a finger at Hughes or others for ANY MISCONDUCT they may be involved in.

    If there is a culture of corruption within FPD, and it clearly appears there is, Silver,Hadden&Silver won’t be the ones to expose it. PROVEN fact in other associations.

    Those of you who are thinking about blowing the whistle on ANYTHING but know if you do, you will be retaliated against, CONSIDER this.

    If you go to Silver,Hadden&Silver to discuss anything going on within FPD, YOU will be ratted out at somepoint.

    Not sure if your union mandates you to have Silver,Hadden&Silver for representation on ALL FPD issues, if they do, NOT GOOD!!!!

    But if you come under fire for whatever reason, whether union member or not, but need an attorney who WILL stop at nothing to defend you call this law firm.

    They are PORAC contracted attorneys who’s track record for calling BS on management is second to none.

    The Law Firm of:

    Lackie,Dammeier & McGill.
    367 North Second Avenue
    Upland, Ca 91786.

    Phone number (909) 985-4003

    Ask to speak with Saku Ethir who is a partner in this law firm.

    Saku represented 3 of the cops in the Rampart Scandal that LAPD management attempted to throw under the bus. She won on behalf of all 3 cops. Just one of her many victory’s under fire.

    Even if you have to pay out of pocket for their representation, it’s MUCH cheaper than Silver,Hadden&Silver.

    It does not matter who you are, or your rank within FPD.

    Before you do anything speak with these folks.

    Have your facts and evidence together when you speak with these folks.

    It won’t take them days or months to figure out if you have a case or decide to assist you if you decide to “blow the whistle”.

    I will repeat this post from time to time.

    Government Code 3303(I) allows you to pick a representative of YOUR choice. Your union contract does NOT set aside this law under POBR.

    If you don’t scream and hollar, you’ll get stuck with a corrupt lawyer.

    1. someone already tried to do that but the union hogs didn’t approve it. LDF called the union prez and he wouldn’t even return a phone call. No cop is gonna pay a retainer fee. Do it conditionally and I’ll get u 25 cops(at least)

      1. Thanks LDF for that RED FLAG as to the FPD union.

        When I speak of out of pocket expense it would be for those who are not union members, whoever they might be if any.

        One can recoup their money at some point.

        OKAY on the 25 cops thing, CLASS action potential, interesting.

        So I suggest this.

        Whoever is talkin the most, QUIETLY go see these lawyers and lay out what you got to them.

        See what they say, and what advise they give.

        It won’t cost you a dime.

        When I saw the union donations to the 3 Amigos, that told me what I already thought.

        Whatever anyone is thinking, get your ducks in a row before anyone pulls the pin on the grenade.

        If that does not work, go see the Thomas family attorney and see what he can do.

        BUT, get something going, don’t wait until after the fireworks start.

        1. In addition LDF, for non union members or those wishing to get LDF type coverage and not be stuck with attorneys you don’t want or trust because the union is in bed with the crooks.

          Try contacting the Faternal Order of Police. Talk with them.

          Their LDF coverage might be much cheaper than what your paying now. You have good coverage 24/7 too.

          Google California FOP to locate an office near you, give them a call.

  24. There ought to be someone pay for that little stunt of letting the Fullerton-Six review the video. Someone is responsible. Someone should be fired and indicted. Even if it isn’t technically illegal, they should find something to indict. Call me crazy, I think it’s pure and simple evidence tampering.

      1. > For the 100 times.

        Cincinelli for the 100 times you are brain damaged. You should have been wiping tables at burger king. You do not belong anywhere near a gun.

        1. Policy was not violated. It was done because the brass knew these offices fucked up! Officers are never allowed to view video unless dash cam, which FPD does not have anymore . FPD is way out of their league with the handling of this. Officers are still not allowed to talk about the incident without the threat of an IA.

      2. John, you understand the appearance of impropriety?

        Like someone said, the citizens giving statments to investigators were not shown the video to “gather their thoughts”.

        They had to state what they saw and what they heard, nothing more.

        The cops are suppose to be able to complete reports without reviewing evidence during a round table meeting.

        Forget about the criminal aspects of the problem.

        How about the administrative “use of force” investigation?

        Let’s take this up a notch.

        Cops number 5 and 6 arriving on scene who might not have KNOWN the circumstances about what happen prior to the officer needs assistance call going out, WELL hell, they do now after watching the video.

        SO it will be hard for them to claim ignorance when they are asked, after watching the video do you agree on how the situation was handled prior to your arrival?

        If they didn’t sit around and watch the video TOGETHER there are things they can honestly say, I was not there in the first few minutes of this incident, I did not know whether Kelly assaulted my fellow officers.

        Any cop with half a brain who wants to respond to a cluster and jump in the fray when there is plenty of help on scene, MIGHT be sticking his neck out when it is not needed.

        The let’s all SIT DOWN together and go over all this has always been a red flag on getting our story’s straight.

        Don’t try and suggest that watching the video together is NO BIG deal just because their is no specific policy in place.

        1. Should have said citizens were not shown the video because investigators would not want to influence their statements ONE way or ANOTHER.

          Now that the video is out, if those witnesses change their story, THEIR testimony can be impeached.

          Cops are no different and their story’s will differ too.

          Don’t freakin influence their statements when you know damn good and well someone is going to call foul, JUST like is being done right now.

    1. Even having the advantage of watching the tape there is no way to justify many of their actions and whatever weak account they produced will be turned against them in court by any competent assistant DA. This review of the tape that everyone is up in arms about just may come back to bite them bigtime.

      1. There is no way to justify them watching that tape, period. I’m as furious about the tape watching as anything else… and rightly so. Why is it forbidden to disclose evidence to a criminal, unless, of course, the criminal happens to be a cop? Why do we have a justice systems which favours criminal if they happen to be cops? This may not bother you but I’m smokin’.

        1. Today was ” I am pissed off cause the officers watched the video” let’s see what tomorrow will be.

  25. Cruel lies from Fullerton police dept., Fullerton city council, Fullerton “civil rights activists” , members of Fullerton’s municipal government

  26. will somebody just fire all their asses and hire Sheriffs for pete’s sake? think of all the money we’d save. After all, we may be having to pay another million or some to someone else that sues the city.

      1. > when you call 911, be prepared to wait a good 20 mins

        Hey cincinelli do you have any stats to back this up?

      2. What a crock of crap. I’ve lived in South Orange County for 25 years and have always has Orange County Sheriff Dept. It does not take 20 minutes for a response.

        1. You must call them all the time. They probably know you by name. “Oh, there’s that asshole calling again”.

          1. Be nice, you’ll be pleading for a job with the OCSD when they take FPD over in 2014

  27. Hey, John Doe is correct. POLICY was not broken when they viewed the video.
    However this will be used against the indicted officers at both the criminal and civil trial. In addition, the civil trial can show manipulation of evidence and hold THE CITY accountable. That just means more $$$ down the drain. Like I said earlier, Fullerton taxpayers are really on the hook.

  28. John Doe :
    For the 100 times. Policy was not broken when they viewed the video.

    Since you seem to be knowledgeable about police policy, for what purpose would it be police policy to allow criminal police officers the opportunity to review evidence before writing their report? The only valid purpose I can think of would be circumnavigate justice. Can you think of a better reason? It’s not like they are writing about something that occurred a long time ago… they are writing their reports within hours of the actual event! If it’s bad police work to allow other criminals to review evidence, why is it not bad police work to allow these 6 punks to review it? It sounds like a double standard justice system to me… better known as corruption.

    1. Policy and ethics/morals aren’t always the same; ethics/morals would say “DON’T VIEW THE VIDEO BUT RELY ON YOUR MEMORY” (in order to be fully honest about what happened) – policy may say viewing the video is proper.

      If Hughes and others don’t “get” the difference, that is a truly sad commentary, and the POLICY should be changed. Unless there is some case law out there – Greg Diamond, you listening? – that says officers and others shown in a video of their actions that result in injuries or death CANNOT view that video, it may be a moot point from a legal perspective.

      Still not “right”!

    2. There is a term for it-
      It’s called covering your ass and the City’s ass-
      You can’t blame them for doing it if it legal

  29. Hot Roasting Cop Balls :

    John Doe :
    For the 100 times. Policy was not broken when they viewed the video.

    Since you seem to be knowledgeable about police policy, for what purpose would it be police policy to allow criminal police officers the opportunity to review evidence before writing their report?

    Um…. Accuracy?

    1. Exactly! If you need to lie, accuracy is VERY important. If you need to know how to form an accurate lie, so as not to conflict with the accuracy of the video, that would be a reason.

      You’re still avoiding the question… Why is it bad form for other people accused of crimes to review evidence before making a statement but perfectly acceptable for cops???

      1. You’re making assumptions that:
        1. The police reports contain lies.
        2. The officers were aware that they broke a law.
        3. They were trying to cover something up.

        1. What anyone assumes is irrelevant to my question. In fact, my question does not necessarily particular to the Kelly case. If you want to make the assumption that this was no big deal. It was routine police work. They had no notion they ever broke the law. There was nothing to cover up. Fine. Then why were these officers so stressed about “getting it right”? You can’t have it both ways. If it was no big deal, they don’t need to watch the video. They shouldn’t need to watch the video anyway… it had just happened, right?

          #2 is just stupid. They knew they beat a guy within an inch of his life. Yeah, I think that’s pretty safe assumption that they knew they were in some hot water. #3 follows #2. Of course these officers are going to want to do what they can to avoid a jam. Wouldn’t you? Wouldn’t anyone? I never assumed #1 and whether the police report are true or false has nothing to do with the impropriety of reviewing video before writing their “stories”. It’s the opportunity to lie that is at issue, not actually lying.

  30. To quote Hughes: “we should have did a better job” of communicating…

    Huh? Where’d this guy learn English? Certainly not from English Major.

    1. Where is it written that you have to have an IQ equivalent to room temperature to be a police chief?

      The only requirement I know of is the willingness to sell your soul.

  31. Even Rackaukas said at the original press conference that it was wrong for the cops to view the video as they wrote their reports.

    So if Rackaukas opposed it you know it has to be bottom of the scum bucket bad.

  32. John Doe I join you for justice for the officers involved, however, with a chief like Hughes and a politically motivated District Attorney and his assistant Kang Schroeder, it does not look good for them.

    Kang Schroeder was acting very strangely at the pre-lim with her sign language. Did she think no one saw her?

    1. I disagree. Its the jury that has to decide beyond a reasonable doubt. I think potential jurors will see the whole picture. Orange County is the best place to have a trial.They are anti prosecution.

  33. AntiCorruptionUnit :
    Actually JustUs, there have been a few cases, but like you said the taxpayers picked up the tab anyways.
    Now I understand there are motions that can be made to where personal liability MUST be payed out of ones pocket, and cannot be payed by the public entity.
    Will that happen in this case, unknown.
    But if it ever does, it will send shiffers down the spines of cops and police administrators.


  34. Cold Chillin’ Cop Balls :
    You’re making assumptions that:
    1. The police reports contain lies.
    2. The officers were aware that they broke a law.
    3. They were trying to cover something up.


  35. G.D.E.E. :
    To quote Hughes: “we should have did a better job” of communicating…
    Huh? Where’d this guy learn English? Certainly not from English Major.


  36. Hot Roasting Cop Balls :
    It’s the opportunity to lie that is at issue, not actually lying.

    No, it’s whether they *actually* lied or attempted to coverup with knowledge of a crime that is at issue. The opportunity to do so doesn’t matter.

    A good police officer will strive to make sure his report is as accurate as possible. If video of an event is available, why would you not review it while writing the report? Witness recollection, including police officers, of stressful “oh shit” events is somewhat unreliable and conflicting by its very nature. Just look at the stories now coming out on the unreliable memories of the Travon Martin/George Zimmerman witnesses. If the FPD officers had not viewed the video while writing the report, I guarantee you that you would have six conflicting reports, probably none of which would be 100% consistent with the video, not necessarily due to any sort of willful intent. If video didn’t exist and you had six conflicting reports, then you would likely be claiming that the officers were all lying as evidenced by the inconsistent statements, when in actuality it might just be poor recollection of a stressful event. A police report should be accurate documentation of what happened, not a memory test. In *most* cases, juries never see the police reports anyway.

    1. I think the real problem is not so much that an individual officer reviewed the video for purposes of clarification, it’s that all of the officers involved were allowed to view and discuss the video together before submitting their official reports.

      Imagine if the shoe was on the other foot and the six suspects had just robbed a bank together.

      Before they decide to speak with investigators, they ask and are allowed to review the bank’s CCTV security video to make sure that their statements are consistent due to a stressful event like robbing a bank.

      1. Right on Fullerton Lover, shall we say a double standard in light of all that has happened.

        1. Yes double standard for sure. Happens everyday. Bad guys are put in rooms and allowed to talk about what they did and get their stories straight. They are put in cars and allowed to do the same. Happens all the time. We record their discussions too. 🙂

          Then we let them watch a video of what they did and also record their reactions and allow them to explain what they did. Pretty sweet.


          1. I wonder if the FPD or FBI thought to record the officers discussions or reactions during or after their review of the video?

    2. CCCB I guess if we could compare those 6 reports to the video, then we could see if your theory is correct or not.

      Until that happens and I doubt that it ever will, the debate on allowing 6 cops to sit down together and review the video will be a topic of debate.

      But because all 6 went back to work for a month like nothing happened, then the implosion within does not assist your theory either, since ALL 6 now have issues with at least 3 facing termination.

      We have the DA and NOW Dan Hughes suggesting that was NOT a good idea in the first place.

      One thing that is fair to say, their getting together DID NOT help them in anyway.

      We don’t know if any of the administrative charges against any of the 6 involved, deal with that issue either.

      As you know criminal charges and administrative charges my vary with seperate and distinct purposes.

      Witness statements vary all the time. You don’t exclude those in an investigation looking for the majority that say the same thing or close, and throw the others aside.

      I am sure Officer Hampton in the Meth case thought his report was accurate when he claimed Meth assaulted him.

      Unfortunately the video in the matter was contrary to everything Hampton said.

      We all know the results of that incident.

      I am sure it would be just and outrageous assumption to think anyone within FPD would want to make the same mistake Hampton did AGAIN!!!!

      Even those who might believe your analogy in light of ALL the other issues of lying,cheating,stealing and cover ups, involving FPD, the majority of readers won’t by your theory especially as it pertains to FPD.

      1. ACU are you saying all 6 went back to work for a month like nothing happened? Or just saying that because that’s what FFfF people like to say? That’s what I thought. You got caught in the BS yourself. See?

        You also know more than anyone that if every cop stop or major incident was video taped, the video would never match up to the cops actions 100%. Which if you or JFA or any of the other 10 FfFF locals analyzed it would say the cops are liers and should be fired. Just part of being human. Same with witnesses and victims. Court trials rely on those human errors all the time to attempt proving some type of innocence.

  37. Fullerton Lover :
    I think the real problem is not so much that an individual officer reviewed the video for purposes of clarification, it’s that all of the officers involved were allowed to view and discuss the video together before submitting their official reports.
    Imagine if the shoe was on the other foot and the six suspects had just robbed a bank together.
    Before they decide to speak with investigators, they ask and are allowed to review the bank’s CCTV security video to make sure that their statements are consistent due to a stressful event like robbing a bank.

    And this is certainly a valid argument in a use of force situation that results in death. Not so much the review of the video, but possible collusion among officers. It still doesn’t necessarily mean that the FPD officers lied in the reports and were attempting to cover up. Your bank robbery argument also makes the assumption that all of the officers were aware a crime had been committed.

  38. I was just looking for an criminal analogy where I thought a camera might have captured the crime.

    I guess that you could actually make a legal argument that the officers were in fact aware that a serious crime had been committed, when they all witnessed Ciccinelli’s flagrant excessive use of force when he started using the butt end of the Taser like a hammer at least 8 times on Kelly’s forehead.

    They also “sealed the deal” on their complicity in my eyes anyway when they all heard Ciccinelli bragging afterwords that he smashed Kelly’s face to hell.

    1. FL you need not look for additional answers, your comments and concerns are reasonable and spot on.

      Whoever the first person was that got a copy of that video and watched it, KNEW there was going to be a problem at some point. SHOULD have known is beyond a reasonable expectation.

      It’s fair to say you had 6 cops, 1 Lieutenant, Dan Hughes, and how ever many detectives at the station within a couple hours of the incident, and who knows who else.

      Between all those brilliant and experienced minds assembled, NO ONE is willing to openly admit, they KNEW it was going to hit the fan sooner than later.

      They really knew EVERYONE was going to be answering to others when Kelly died.

      So even if watching the video wasn’t an issue for some, when you put all the other FACTS that have come forth, there was a concerted effort on it’s FACE to downplay and find justification in some way for Kelly’s death.

      The little comments Dan Hughes has elluded to are starting to clearly confirm that.

      Hughes is just grapling with the fact that it’s ALL going to come out eventually.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *