Category: Transparency

Posted onBad Cop

Fullerton Officer Paez Charged with Filming up 16yo Student’s Skirt

by 53 Comments on Fullerton Officer Paez Charged with Filming up 16yo Student’s Skirt
Jose Paez (left) with his former Captain Tom Oliveras. Both have been charged with crimes in the last year.

Former Fullerton Police Department School Resource Officer Jose Anthony Paez has been charged with a misdemeanor.

From the District Attorney’s Press Release:

FORMER FULLERTON POLICE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER CHARGED FOR VIDEOTAPING UP HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT’S SKIRT

SANTA ANA, Calif. – A former Fullerton Police Department school resource officer has been charged with secretly photographing and videotaping up the skirt of a 16-year-old high school student.

The Fullerton Police Department initiated an internal investigation into accusations that Officer Jose Anthony Paez was acting inappropriately while on duty. The investigation spanned the last five years of the officer’s on-duty interaction with the public.

The internal investigation revealed several photos and video clips taken on Paez’ personal cell phone in November 2017 that were shot up the skirt of a 16-year-old high school student while Paez was conducting a police investigation on school grounds.

Paez stopped working for the Fullerton Police Department in May 2019. The Fullerton Police Department referred the case to the District Attorney’s Office for criminal prosecution.

“As the elected District Attorney, I am charged with judging the conduct of police officers,” said Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer. “Law enforcement officers are entrusted with a tremendous amount of authority and trust. The actions this officer engaged in betrayed that trust and preyed on the very people he was charged with protecting.”

Paez is scheduled to be arraigned on October 2, 2019 at the North Justice Center in Fullerton. He faces a maximum of one year in the Orange County Jail if convicted.

Deputy District Attorney Laila Nikaien is prosecuting the case.

A quick phone call to the DA’s office reveals that Paez is being charged with PC 647(j)(2):

“(2) A person who uses a concealed camcorder, motion picture camera, or photographic camera of any type, to secretly videotape, film, photograph, or record by electronic means, another identifiable person under or through the clothing being worn by that other person, for the purpose of viewing the body of, or the undergarments worn by, that other person, without the consent or knowledge of that other person, with the intent to arouse, appeal to, or gratify the lust, passions, or sexual desires of that person and invade the privacy of that other person, under circumstances in which the other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. For the purposes of this paragraph, “identifiable” means capable of identification, or capable of being recognized, meaning that someone could identify or recognize the victim, including the victim herself or himself. It does not require the victim’s identity to actually be established.”

The DA’s office seems to essentially be charging him with peeping when there are questions of possession of child pornography in the audit conducted by Fullerton Police.

The Fullerton Police Department issued a Press Release written to show how awesome they are and how committed to openness and accountability they are – despite have little to no details in the release itself.

The closest we get to details is as follows:

“When the criminal investigation concluded, Fullerton detectives requested the Orange County District Attorney’s Office to review the case for filing criminal charges against Officer Paez, whose employment with the Department ended in May 2019.”

Notice how as don’t even get to know if Paez was allowed to resign or if he was fired. The Press Release then goes on to extoll the unearned virtues of FPD:

“We are committed to being first to hold accountable those within our organization who do not meet the high standards we set for ourselves. That is exactly what happened in this case.”

This is the same city/department that worked out a settlement agreement with an officer to expunge Internal Investigations into her conduct specifically to bypass disclosure laws.

That settlement agreement, and this story about officer Paez are two of the things we wrote about a couple of months ago are some of the stories that led to the City of Fullerton threatening us with prosecution for telling you things we think you have a right to know about but they want kept quiet.

Prepare for City Manager Ken Domer, Police Chief Bob Dunn and the entire council and school board to keep you in the dark as this “ongoing case” works through the system. The city has yet to even give us a date for when Paez left the force or who’s phone the child pornography that FPD found in their audit was on – Paez’s personal one or his department issued phone. Nor have they explained why an officer had student sexts and underage pornography on any device so easily accessed.

Is this just another case of a badge giving somebody a slap on the wrist when a civilian would have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law?

Read More
Posted onBad Cops

Cicinelli Got $1K to Hide Out in Arizona

by 21 Comments on Cicinelli Got $1K to Hide Out in Arizona

Back in 2012, after Fullerton Officers beat Kelly Thomas to death. In the aftermath, that is still ongoing today as former Officers Cicinelli and Wolfe continue to fight their terminations, the Cicinelli family asked for close to $1k in order to hide out in his parent’s house in Arizona.

 

Cincinelli Living Expenses

 

“We have recently been asked by one of our police officers involved in
the Kelly Thomas incident if the possibility still exists for
reimbursement of extra living expenses incurred in August following the
publication of their home addresses on a local blog.  I believe I had
conversations with Alan about this expense being reimbursable under this
policy.  As I recalled, our discussion was that certain expenses would
be allowable if they met the “reasonableness” test and clearly were
additional living expenses.
At the time, none of the officers asked for reimbursement.  We now have
one indicating that he did incur additional expenses in the weeks
following the publication of his home address when he relocated his
family.  He originally was inclined to not seek reimbursement, but now
wishes to do so.
Please advise whether you are in a position to consider such a claim
and, if so, what you will need to review to evaluate whether any
expenses are reimburseable.”
This request was received by Human Resources Director Gretchen Beatty, who we figured should have laughed it off, and then paid out to Cicinelli.
Cincinelli Living Expenses Approved
“We will reimburse the expense.  Can you just confirm that the amount being sought is 969.31 and the check should be made payable to Jay Cincinelli and mailed to [redacted].”
The excuse was that somebody doxed Cicinelli but the truth is that somebody ran a public Google search and posted comments around the internet of information readily found on said internet. Hardly an excuse to shell out more money to a guy who just smashed somebody’s face in.
Or as one City Staffer put it:
Jason Rosanne
“Maybe he should have thought about all this before he beat a man to death…..”
Read More
Posted onBehind Closed Doors

Fullerton Wants State to Help Fight Marijuana

by 24 Comments on Fullerton Wants State to Help Fight Marijuana

Here in Fullerton, where our downtown is essentially wall-to-wall bars with hundreds of DUIs a year as a result, we don’t take alcoholism or drinking and driving very seriously.

Sure we hand out awards to the officers with the most DUI arrests but when it comes to the over-serving or other bad behaviors by bars we don’t just turn a blind eye, as a city we change the laws on the books to make it easier for those bad bars to operate. Hell, Jennifer Fitzgerald is so blind on the issue that she’s on record blaming “pre-gaming” in the parking structures for the problems.

You can get drunk and kill a 6yo in her front yard and Fullerton’s Staff and Council will yawn at the DUI culture they’ve created. That’s not fair – they won’t just yawn. They’ll actively spend the next year making the DUI factory in downtown worse.

But weed? Now that’s a problem that Fullerton is willing to tackle.

Fullerton City Manager Domer and Chief of Police Dunn want help from the State of California to crack down on “black market marijuana retailers” despite the city council steadfastly refusing to allow legal dispensaries to exist in the city.

State Help Weed

My City Manager forwarded me an article from the OCR..

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/08/28/state-begins-crackdown-on-black-market-marijuana-retailers-starting-in-costa-mesa/

He’s curious how you were able to get the state to assist you.  Any insight you can share would be greatly appreciated.

In 2016 the voters of CA approved Prop 64 for legal marijuana with 57% of the vote, even 52% of OC voters voted yes on Prop 64. Even Fullerton was pro-weed with a 51% Yes vote.

Fullerton Prop 64

Fullerton Weed 2016

Despite the vote, the Fullerton City Council has refused to allow a single dispensary anywhere in Fullerton. They won’t zone any industrial or commercial areas for legal weed leaving sellers in non-compliance.

You can run an illegal venue at the airport, refuse to put in mandated fire sprinklers in the largest nightclub in downtown, run a bar without the legal permits and so much more and the city is more than happy to let you get away with it. But weed? Oh man, that’s a sin too far and a sin that might cut into the profit margins of the bustling bar and fight scene.

This is substantially no different than Measure W, where 60% of voters voted against the development of Coyote Hills and the council is going to do it anyways. Welcome to Fullerton where your vote counts as long as we like the way you vote.

Read More
Posted onBehind Closed Doors

Ken Domer’s Arrogance Peaks Through his Emails

by 2 Comments on Ken Domer’s Arrogance Peaks Through his Emails

City Manager Ken Domer really is just another petty bureaucrat who doesn’t want people to know the truth. When our own Joshua Ferguson put in a record’s request asking for emails about this very blog and his own self, the city worked to limit the scope but not before throwing some shade his way.

Either Ken Domer is ignorant regarding how boolean searches work or he’s just being petty and mocking Joshua’s attempt at thoroughness.

Joshua Boolean

“Ivy, I know Josh, or Joshua, or Josh Ferguson, of Joshua Ferguson, stated no timeframe –”

I guess if you assume your messages will never be made public you’re free to be arrogant and condescending about those members of the public you don’t favor.

Read More
Posted onBehind Closed Doors

Hanger 21 is Still Illegally Operating at the Airport

by 14 Comments on Hanger 21 is Still Illegally Operating at the Airport

Back in 2017 the city of Fullerton kicked Air Combat USA out of the airport and after a legally questionable bid process the city leased the hanger to a company called Hanger 21. We covered this briefly HERE and HERE.

Here’s some of the backstory from the City Manager himself:

Domer Hanger 21 PL

“The problem is that regardless of the lease term, it is the use that is non-conforming.  However, what is the remedy for a non-conforming use?  Cessation of the use, which could happen if the PL amendment is not approved or the lease is not.”

Realizing that the city had approved a bid for a business that wasn’t legally allowed to operate, the city swung into action to fix the problem. The remedy was for Fullerton’s City Council to chang the municipal code in an effort to make Hanger 21’s then-illegal use conform to local law.

And because this is Fullerton – they failed spectacularly.

On December 05, 2017 the city council approved Hanger 21’s lease AND then on March 20, 2018 they changed the zoning at the airport.

PL Zone Change 2018

“H. Other similar public facilities, commercial amenities, and special events on City-owned property when in conformance with the purpose of this zone and approved by the City Council.”

Read that and then think about the timeline because the city didn’t and hasn’t. I’ll point out the obvious problem:

“and approved by the City Council”.

The City Council cannot legally be said to have approved Hangar 21’s usage since they haven’t visited the issue since the municipal zoning change. This is a cart before the horse problem with the council just assuming that they’ve de facto approved Hangar 21’s lease and use through the zone change but that’s an ex post facto problem and is quite an illegal interpretation.

Score another blunder for Jones and Mayer.

Here we sit a year and four months later and the council has YET to fix this problem.

This is another case of city staff, consultants, attorneys and the city council being incompetent and hoping nobody catches on which of course has led to the city being sued.

Read More
Posted onBehind Closed Doors

Follow the Bouncing Bureaucracy

by 1 Comment on Follow the Bouncing Bureaucracy

One of the biggest problems with government is that it’s slow to react and generally stupid in those reactions. This is largely because governments are run by incompetent bureaucrats who refuse to learn lessons from their own mistakes.

Let’s look at some complaints lodged against city appointed commissioners and how the city reacted to those complaints to see how the rules in government changed depending on the person involved.

First up is a complaint against our own Joshua Ferguson by city manager assistant Nicole Bernard. She apparently got mad at the posting of an anonymous complaint  against her.

She asked the city to compel Joshua to remove the post and the lawyer the city used to look into it came back with a big fat no can do: (more…)

Read More
Posted onAbout Us

Why Keep Threatening Us?

by 6 Comments on Why Keep Threatening Us?

For every problem that isn’t a nail, there’s a moron ready to swing a hammer.

20 Days ago FFFF got another threatening letter from the City that said if we don’t stop reporting news and telling the public the truth about what’s actually happening in their town, apparently there will be consequences.

We told them to kick rocks.

What really strikes us as odd is how hard the city works to solve real problems v make work problems.

If they’re willing to go after local journalists connected to a blog that city employees routinely insist that no one reads, one can’t help but wonder what wrath the city brings down on real problems.

Can we assume that the city also takes things like life safety issues impacting the public, police brutality and sexual misconduct, wasted tax dollars, theft by employees, recklass or perhaps drunk driving by employees, or total disregard for budget discipline, public trust, and basic fairness as seriously as they take shutting down transparency?

Oh wait, we don’t need to assume anything as we know exactly what kind of resources the city spends on those problems. None.

We know because we broke and covered those stories.

Maybe that’s what this is about. Maybe the City is tired of having a group of “chronic malcontents” embarrass them by telling the truth. (more…)

Read More
Posted onAbout Us

Our Response to the City of Fullerton

by 5 Comments on Our Response to the City of Fullerton

Kick Rocks

For those of you watching, waiting and counting the days – today is 20 days since we published the second cease and desist letter we received from the City of Fullerton concerning our reporting on local matters of public interest.

20 days is significant as that was the deadline the city gave us for their laundry list of demands.

While we wait to see if the city is going to follow through with their threats we will continue to keep on keeping on.

For now though, feel free to read our response to the City of Fullerton [PDF HERE]: (more…)

Read More
Posted onAbout Us

Breaking News: Fullerton Threatens Local Blog – Again

by 47 Comments on Breaking News: Fullerton Threatens Local Blog – Again

The city is threatening to sue us… again.

Let’s have a look at the newest letter from the city (PDF HERE) before getting into why this is happening:

Dear Ms. Aviles:

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

As legal counsel for the City of Fullerton, I write, pursuant to California Government Code section 6204 et seq., to notify you, as legal counsel to the owner(s) and/or operator(s) of the Friends for Fullerton’s Future (FFFF) blog, that the City of Fullerton has reasonable grounds to believe that owner(s) and/or operator(s) of the FFFF blog are in unlawful possession of records belonging to the City of Fullerton. The records were taken and used by FFFF blog owner(s) and/or operator(s) without the City’s authorization and fall within the definition of “record” under California Government Code Section 6204(a)(2), as well as the definition of “public records” under California Government Code § 6252(e), and are described as follows:

Any and all records obtained from the City of Fullerton’s Dropbox account (https://cityoffullerton.com/outbox) that were not directly provided by the City to Joshua Ferguson or any of FFFF’s agents or associates through an emailed link, including, but not limited to, records contained in a folder named “prl 919 – Josh Ferguson.”

Therefore, pursuant to Govemmentt Code section 6204, within twenty (20) calendar days of receiving this notice, the owner(s) and/or operator(s) of the Friends for Fullerton’s Future blog are hereby directed to either:

  1. (1)  Return the above-referenced records to the City of Fullerton, as previously requested; or
  2. (2)  Respond in writing and declare why the above-referenced records do not belong to the City of Fullerton. Ifthe owner(s) and/or operator(s) of the Friends for Fullerton’s Future blog do not deliver the above-described records, or do not respond adequately to this notice and its demand within the required time, we will immediately thereafter petition the Superior Court of Orange County for an order requiring the return of these records.

We further note that the FFFF blog has posted many of the confidential City documents after receipt of our office’s June 13, 2019 cease-and-desist email. (A copy of that email is enclosed herein). Many, if not all, of the confidential City records posted to the FFFF blog are explicitly exempted from disclosure under the California Public Records Act, would not have been provided to Mr. Ferguson or FFFF agents or associates in response to a Public Records Act request, and could only have been obtained without the City’s express authorization. Such records posted to the FFFF blog are confidential and exempt from disclosure pursuant to the following authorities:

  • “Preliminary drafts, notes, or interagency or intra-agency memoranda that are not retained by the public agency in the ordinary course of business, if the public interest in withholding those records clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure.” Cal. Gov’t Code § 6254(a);
  • “Records pertaining to pending litigation to which the public agency is a party, or to claims made pursuant to Division 3.6 (commencing with Section 810), until the pending litigation or claim has been finally adjudicated or otherwise settled.” Cal. Gov’t Code § 6254(b);
  • “Personnel, medical, or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” Cal. Gov’t Code § 6254(c);
  • Law enforcement investigative records. Cal. Gov’t Code § 6254(f); and
  • “Records, the disclosure of which is exempted or prohibited pursuant to federal or state law, including, but not limited to, provisions of the Evidence Code relating to privilege.” Cal. Gov’t Code § 6254(k), which includes the following privileges:

o Attorney-client privileged records. Cal. Evid. Code 950 et seq.; Roberts v. City of Palmdale, 5 Cal. 4th 363 (1993);

o Attorney work product. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2018.010 et seq.;
o Peace officer personnel records. Cal. Penal Code § 832.7 et seq.; and o Confidential closed session information. Cal. Gov’t Code § 54963.

FFFF’s unauthorized access and misuse of the City’s clearly privileged and exempted documents constitute a violation of California Penal Code section 502, which grants civil remedies (including compensatory damages, attorney’s fees and potential punitive damages) to any persons or entities injured by any violations thereof. See Cal. Pen. Code § 502(c), (e).

As such, unless FFFF complies with the demands set forth in the City’s June 13, 2019 cease and desist letter within 24 hours, the City will have no choice but to pursue all criminal and civil remedies available to it under the law.

Bruce A. Lindsay

Fullerton Cease and Desist 2 Page 01 Fullerton Cease and Desist 2 Page 02

What is this all about?

For those in the cheap seats we at Friends For Fullerton’s Future broke news story after new story by publishing documents that the city didn’t want disclosed and tying those documents to local events and items of public interest. Those stories include, but are not limited to:

The city settling with a police officer to sidestep disclosure laws regarding police misconduct.

The results of a Body Worn Camera audit for a School Resource Police Officer who had, what appears to be, child pornography on his (or perhaps department issued) cell phone.

An insurance payout for an accident that destroyed a city vehicle.

Likely fraud by city employees costing over $50,000 worth of waste/theft.

Possible Accounting fraud within the city budget used to hide salary costs.

A city council member specifically targeting one businesses.

Massive Police Overtime abuse that went on for 6 years.

Evidence that the city is lying and violating the California Public Records Act.

And more, and more, and more, and more, and more, and more, and more and more.

In short, they’re mad that we’re doing what journalists are supposed to do daily. We’re using information to piece together stories in order to inform the public.

These latest threats are meant to serve as a chilling effect to silence people who would dare impugn the character of Fullerton with facts the city wants obscured. I’m hesitant to head to city hall or go to council meetings lately knowing that the city is targeting me personally for the use of free speech on this news site / blog. And that’s really the point of these types of threats – to silence dissenters.

How will we respond to this latest salvo by the city? I reckon we’ll confer with our legal counsel and act accordingly.

Read More