ReportWire

Tag: encounter

  • San Bernardino man arrested after he protested immigration officer shooting at his truck

    [ad_1]

    Francisco Longoria, a San Bernardino man who was driving his truck when a masked U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer shot at it, has been arrested and charged by federal authorities. They allege he assaulted immigration officers during the incident.

    In a statement, Longoria’s attorneys said Homeland Security Investigations agents arrived at the Longoria household at 4:18 a.m. Thursday, with an armored personnel carrier, a type of military vehicle, and deployed more than a dozen “fully armed and armored” agents to swarm the home, breaking the locks on his gate. An agent called out to Longoria to come out, using a bullhorn, as agents stood at each door and pointed their rifles at the door and at the occupants inside, the attorneys said.

    “These are the type of tactics reserved for dangerous criminals such as violent gang members, drug lords, and terrorists,” the attorneys said. “It was clearly intended to intimidate and punish Mr. Longoria and his family for daring to speak out about their attempted murder by ICE and CBP agents on August 16th.”

    On that day, federal immigration officers stopped Longoria in San Bernardino. During the encounter, Longoria, who was in his truck with his 18-year-old son and 23-year-old son-in-law, feared for his safety and drove off after masked officers shattered his car window, his attorneys said.

    Department of Homeland Security officials have said officers were injured during the encounter when Longoria tried to “run them down.” Longoria’s attorneys dispute their client injured the officers or attempted to hit them, and earlier this week they called for an investigation of the shooting.

    On Friday morning, the U.S. attorney’s office confirmed that Homeland Security Investigations agents arrested Longoria the day before. Word of his arrest was earlier reported by the San Bernardino Sun.

    Ciaran McEvoy, spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles, said Longoria made an initial appearance before a U.S. District Court judge in Riverside, and is set to be arraigned on Sept. 30. The federal magistrate judge ordered him released on a $5,000 bond.

    Longoria was being held at the San Bernardino County jail, in custody of the U.S. Marshals Service, as of Thursday afternoon, McEvoy said in an email.

    “Since Longoria is an illegal alien, ICE has a detainer on him,” he said. Longoria’s attorneys said their client was transferred into Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody as of Friday.

    An unnamed Department of Homeland Security spokesperson confirmed federal agents arrested Longoria at his home.

    “CBP and ICE remain committed to enforcing the law, protecting officers, and keeping dangerous criminals off America’s streets — even as local officials in California undermine those efforts,” the official said.

    According to a criminal complaint submitted by a Homeland Security Investigations agent, whose name is redacted, Longoria is facing a charge of assault on a federal officer with a deadly/dangerous weapon.

    In the complaint, the agent, who interviewed the officers who stopped Longoria, said the officers had stopped Longoria’s GMC pickup truck to conduct “an immigration check.” Two of them were ICE officers and the other two were CBP officers.

    The complaint states that the officers were identifiable by their visible clothing marked with “police.”

    After they stopped Longoria’s truck, the complaint states, he refused to comply with the demands to turn off his vehicle and roll down the window. One of the CBP officers, identified as J.C., decided to break the window after Longoria refused the commands, and was allegedly struck by the driver’s door on his left elbow and left calf. The passenger side window was also shattered by agents during the encounter.

    Another CBP officer was allegedly struck by the front bumper/fender of the truck on his right leg. “The Truck kept pushing Officer S.T., and Officer S.T. shot at the Truck, afraid for his life,” according to the complaint.

    Longoria’s attorneys had previously released surveillance video of the incident, which appears to dispute a key claim by Homeland Security — that Longoria drove his truck toward officers and injured them.

    In the surveillance video, the moment Longoria drives away, officers on both sides of the truck remain in sight of the video, and they then pile into their vehicles and pursue Longoria’s truck down a side street.

    After Longoria drove off, the family called 911. While San Bernardino police were questioning Longoria, the immigration officers arrived, and family members identified the one they believed had shot at the truck.

    At the initial court appearance, the judge questioned the assistant U.S. attorney prosecuting the case, Cory Burleson, about the government’s claim that it was conducting an “immigration check,” a term he couldn’t clarify when asked by the court, according to Longoria’s attorneys. Burleson also claimed Longoria was stopped due to a traffic violation, but couldn’t identify the violation, his attorneys said. When the judge asked Burleson to identify the alleged injuries of the officers, Burleson said he was “not aware of any injuries,” Longoria’s attorneys said.

    Longoria’s attorneys said their client was granted bond, but because of the ICE hold, has since been transferred into ICE custody, which they believe is the “true purpose of this false and baseless charge.”

    “No reasonable prosecutor could believe that a conviction would be secured against Mr. Longoria for the August 16th stop, when every video supports Mr. Longoria’s version of events and directly contradicts DHS’ story,” his attorneys said. “Yet [the Department of Justice] will not drop the charges; it has been their practice during this Administration to pursue charges based on unsubstantiated and false affidavits in order to arrest individuals and then turn them over to ICE.”

    His attorneys said they intend to continue advocating for Longoria, his son and son-in-law.

    “We are in contact with local and State authorities and are encouraging a state investigation and criminal charges against the ICE/CBP agents,” the attorneys said.

    This article is part of The Times’ equity reporting initiative, funded by the James Irvine Foundation, exploring the challenges facing low-income workers and the efforts being made to address California’s economic divide.

    [ad_2]

    Melissa Gomez

    Source link

  • Gov. Gavin Newsom goes viral for ‘shoplifting’ at Target

    Gov. Gavin Newsom goes viral for ‘shoplifting’ at Target

    [ad_1]

    Gov. Gavin Newsom has gone viral for shoplifting at Target. Well, sort of.

    The governor didn’t actually steal anything. But as he tells it, he did witness someone blatantly walking out of a Sacramento-area store with an armload of stolen stuff, presumably right in front of his own intimidating-looking security detail. And when Newsom asked why no one was taking action, the clerk told him it was the governor’s fault.

    Newsom has made it too easy to steal, he said the clerk told him — before realizing who he was and freaking out.

    Newsom, who was Christmas shopping with one of his children at the time, said he was outraged. It’s just not true, he said he told the clerk. California has the tenth-toughest laws against retail theft in the nation, he lectured — in a way that must have seemed super weird until she deduced his identity.

    “I said: ‘Why didn’t you stop him?’ ” Newsom said he asked the clerk.

    “She goes, ’Oh, the governor’ ” — he broke off — “swear to God, true story, on my mom’s grave.” He added that the clerk had the temerity to tell him: “The governor lowered the threshold, there’s no accountability. … We don’t stop them because of the governor.”

    Newsom told the story this week to a group of mayors from around the state who had gathered on Zoom for a news conference on his mental health initiative, Proposition 1. He and the mayors were chatting among themselves while waiting for San Francisco’s London Breed and San Diego’s Todd Gloria to log on. After relating the anecdote, the governor added that he hoped the two mayors weren’t the only ones not yet signed into the Zoom. “Hopefully, all the reporters weren’t on,” he said.

    Too late. The exchange, posted on X (formerly known as Twitter) and then picked up by television and print outlets around the state, quickly went viral — catnip in the heated debate about retail theft and Proposition 47, which reduced some thefts and drug offenses to misdemeanors to reduce mass incarceration. Some critics have blamed Proposition 47 for the rise in thefts.

    Newsom himself came out last month calling for legislation to crack down on “professional thieves” without amending Proposition 47, noting that one of the wine stores he owns in San Francisco was robbed at least three times in 2021. He pointed out that Texas’ threshold for felony theft is among those that is higher than California’s.

    But those points did little to calm the viral story. The chairwoman of the state Republican Party, Jessica Millan Patterson, quickly jumped into the fray, writing on X: “Shout-out to this store clerk for saying to the governor’s face what every Californian has wanted to say: that he and his radical @CA_Dem buddies are to blame for CA’s surging crime. Sadly, Newsom still didn’t seem to take the hint.”

    Newsom’s office declined to identify which Target the encounter occurred at, to keep the media from mobbing the store. They did say the encounter took place in the Sacramento area, around Christmastime, while the governor was shopping with one of his children.

    The exchange, the governor said, ended with an attempt at a photo-op.

    As the governor was explaining how strict California’s retail theft laws actually are, the clerk, he said, “looks at me, twice. She freaks out. She calls everyone over, wants to take photos.”

    “I said, no, I’m not taking a photo,” Newsom said. “We’re having a conversation. Where’s your manager? How are you blaming the governor?”

    He added: “Why am I spending $380? Everyone can walk the hell right out.”



    [ad_2]

    Jessica Garrison

    Source link

  • LAPD officers involved in Keenan Anderson death found out of policy

    LAPD officers involved in Keenan Anderson death found out of policy

    [ad_1]

    Several Los Angeles police officers broke with department policy in the arrest of Keenan Anderson, whose death after a traffic stop in January reignited debates about the suitability of police for dealing with people in distress, the Police Commission ruled.

    Although not unanimous, the commission Tuesday found that officers deviated from LAPD policy on multiple occasions when they restrained and shocked the 31-year-old teacher and father with a Taser while trying to take him into custody.

    The civilian oversight panel generally agreed with the conclusions of LAPD Chief Michel Moore and an internal department review board, which itself was split on several policy questions.

    Moore and police commissioners concluded that one of the officers continued to use a stun gun on Anderson, a Black man, even after he no longer posed an immediate threat. Moore and the commission also ruled that, whether inadvertently or not, two of the officers did not have cause to hold Anderson down by the neck. Under the department’s policy, such contact to a person’s neck is considered deadly force.

    Anderson’s case garnered international attention, in part because he was a cousin of Patrisse Cullors, a co-founder of the Black Lives Matter Global Network. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass strongly condemned the incident, which happened weeks after she took office and sparked calls for changes to police policies related to traffic enforcement and the use of stun guns.

    It also added kindling to a fiery debate about how police interact with people in crisis, after a string of high-profile deadly encounters in recent years.

    Veteran civil rights attorney Carl Douglas, who filed a wrongful death lawsuit on behalf of Anderson’s family, called Tuesday’s ruling a rare but welcome decision from an oversight body he said too often signs off on police misbehavior. The finding was “one small step toward justice,” he said.

    “However, we are mindful that this fight is not over. The city is going to be defended vigorously by the city attorney as they do in virtually every case,” Douglas said Wednesday, pointing out that the city has already filed motions denying any responsibility for Anderson’s death. “We are heartened that the commission saw the decision to Taser Mr. Anderson as an abomination. They don’t call it an abomination, but I can.”

    What the body camera footage captured was the lack of training for officers on when Taser use is appropriate, Douglas said, adding that officers often misinterpret a person squirming as a form of resistance that justifies the device’s use.

    Douglas joined about two dozen activists and members of Anderson’s family who held a press conference before Tuesday’s Police Commission meeting, demanding the officers involved be held accountable. Afterward, the group appealed directly to the commissioners in what became an emotionally-charged meeting.

    The commission’s ruling was denounced by the Los Angeles Police Protective League, which represents the city’s rank-and-file officers.

    “We strongly disagree with these politically influenced findings, each responding officer acted responsibly in dealing with Mr. Anderson who was high on cocaine and ran into traffic after fleeing a car accident he caused,” the League’s board of directors said in a statement to The Times Wednesday.

    “The coroner confirmed he was not tased(SIC) but rather drive-stunned when he refused to follow simple directions while in the middle of a busy street, the board wrote. “Mr. Anderson and Mr. Anderson alone was responsible for what occurred.”

    The encounter that ended with Anderson’s death began sometime before 3:30 p.m. on Jan. 3, when Joshua Coombs, a motorcyle officer assigned to the West Traffic Division, responded to what the LAPD referred to at the time as a “felony hit-and-run” car crash at Venice and Lincoln boulevards.

    Coombs encountered Anderson darting on foot through traffic in apparent distress and ordered Anderson to sit on a nearby street corner. Anderson complied for some time, but then took off running, yelling that he was fearful for his safety.

    Coombs followed after him, as did officers Jaime Fuentes and Rasheen Ford, who had seen the incident unfold as they drove past in their department squad car. The officers eventually caught up to Anderson and pinned him to the ground, as he resisted their efforts to put him on his stomach and handcuff him. They were eventually joined by two other officers, Christopher Walters and Stephen Feldman.

    The commission reviewed the case during a closed-door session of its regular meeting, which was was briefly interrupted when president Erroll Southers ordered the room cleared because of disruptions in the audience.

    Much of the criticism of the police response centered on Fuentes discharging his Taser six times in the span of 42 seconds. But Moore ruled, and the commission agreed, that officer Fuentes’ first four deployments of the stun gun were within policy.

    However, a department force review board faulted Fuentes for his final two Taser uses, delivered as other officers used their body weight and arm holds to control Anderson. Fuentes, a patrol officer in Pacific Division, told internal investigators that he used the so-called drive stun function, in which the device is pressed directly against someone’s skin rather than fired from a distance, to prevent the incident from escalating further. Fuentes said he continued shocking Anderson because he wouldn’t stop resisting.

    The ruling wasn’t unanimous. The majority of the board said that, although Anderson was still pulling away from the officers, he didn’t present a threat to them and appeared instead to be starting to comply with their commands.

    The majority noted that Fuentes admitted in his department interview to using the drive-stun mode for pain compliance, against department policy, and said it would have preferred that he had reassessed the situation and switched “to a different force option after the third TASER deployment.”

    Several board members argued that the first four stuns were in compliance because the officers believed they could still be harmed due to Anderson’s continued resistance.

    Moore wrote in his report that, in making his decision, he considered that “Anderson was violently resisting the officers’ attempts to take him into custody.”

    “I noted the use of the TASER to be effective in assisting officers to take control of Anderson,” Moore wrote. “As it pertains to TASER activation five and six, I opined the officers had sufficient control of Anderson and that his level of resistance, while still ongoing, did not justify the use of a TASER as a reasonable force option.”

    During the final activation, Fuentes told investigators that he saw Anderson tense up, which he interpreted as an attempt to prevent officers from handcuffing him.

    Anderson was taken to an area hospital, where he later died.

    Last month, the department announced it would soon start testing out a new generation of Tasers with greater range that would preclude officers from having to use higher levels of force against uncooperative people. The eventual switch to the next-generation Taser 10 model comes on the heels of changes in the department’s Taser policy, including barring officers from using the drive stun function.

    The officers’ tactical decisions were scrutinized almost from the onset. Anderson’s family, some elected officials and police watchdogs decried what they saw as an overly aggressive response by police against someone who was disoriented and needed care after being involved in a traffic collision.

    Several policing experts who reviewed video for The Times of the Jan. 3 incident — from cameras worn by officers — previously said the amount of force used by the officers seemed excessive given Anderson’s actions and that their tactics appeared haphazard.

    An autopsy by the L.A. County coroner’s office later identified an enlarged heart and cocaine use as the causes of death, and did not rule it a homicide. Whether his death was natural, an accident or a homicide remains undetermined, according to the coroner’s website. Anderson’s family has disputed the report’s findings, contending that it deflected blame from the police.

    During their investigation, detectives from the LAPD’s force investigations division slowed down footage of the encounter and counted nine times in which officers Fuentes and Ford made contact with Anderson’s neck during the struggle. Both officers denied applying pressure or otherwise restricting Anderson’s ability to breathe.

    At one point in a video of the encounter, Anderson is lying on the pavement and struggling with officers when he yelled out, “They are trying to kill me. Kilo tried to kill me.” After being told to stop struggling, video showed Ford’s right hand on the side of Anderson’s jaw, with his thumb apparently near Anderson’s neck, the report says.

    With a 3 to 2 vote, commissioners also found fault with officers for failing to put Anderson “in a recovery position as soon as practical.”

    After days of mounting public pressure, Moore took the rare step of releasing additional footage from the encounter, which showed a distraught Anderson crying out for help as multiple officers held him down. Eventually, he washandcuffed and hobbled at his ankles before paramedics take him away. He later died at a hospital.

    Anderson’s death also galvanized a push for removing police from responding to minor traffic collisions, as well as to stop them from pulling over motorists for traffic violations, arguing that communities of color have historically borne the brunt of such enforcement. Instead, they said, such tasks could be handled by unarmed civilians.

    Melina Abdullah, co-founder of Black Lives Matter Los Angeles and a professor at Cal State L.A., said she was heartened by the commission’s ruling, even if it was a somewhat hollow “victory” since it wouldn’t bring Anderson back.

    “Justice for Keenan Anderson would mean that he were there to raise his child, that he was there to continue to be a model for his brothers, that he was there to be a model teacher,” said Abdullah. “But justice in his name looks like accountability, making sure that the cops who killed him are held accountable.”

    [ad_2]

    Libor Jany, Richard Winton

    Source link