Entries Tagged 'SFPD' ↓

What’s going on with the Christopher Bruce ‘Living Man’ case?

You have probably noticed as I have there has been very little media about the case, in fact there has been little information about how it went from a $50K bond to no money at all.

As we both know, there is TWO sides to every story, here is his side. He goes into a good explanation about the charges against him, etc., and his trial date of October 15th.

He also posts some interesting YouTube videos of his arrest (he filmed it). There are four videos, but the one below (before they tear off the door of his apartment) is the best one.

Also, just for reference since he doesn’t bring it up, the SFPO he is talking about in the post, Sean Kooistra, is the brother of the city attorney, Stacy Kooistra.

SFPO admits to wanting to stop Burgess for ‘Running his mouth’

I’m still trying to find in SF city charter or SD law where ‘Running your mouth’ is against the law. Officer also admits that the traffic incident investigation was done before they tackled Burgess.

SFPD receive care package

Misinformation being spread about Friday’s incident

I have watched the video of Mark Burgress being arrested several times, and there seems to be a lot of misinformation about what is actually in the video. We all know Mark was a cussing moron, that’s apparent. We also know that a judge could find him guilty of disorderly conduct (if police can actually prove he was interfering in their investigation), but some people, including Belfrage are trying to say there are other things happening in the video that are not.

For instance he said Mark was preventing the police investigation of the traffic accident. I didn’t see that. He was standing on a public sidewalk cussing, and they were actually about ready to leave the site before arresting him. Not once did I ever see Mark walk into the scene and try to physically interfere.

He also said they were questioning him, watch the video, they were trying to grab him even though they had no reason to. There is a difference between keeping a safe distance and questioning someone and trying to detain them. At no point did Mark ‘threaten’ the police with violence or with a weapon.

Belfrage also says that you should always follow police instructions. Not the case. While police have a right to ask bystanders questions, you have a right to NOT answer the question. Immediately after asking Mark a question they try to detain him before he can answer. Refusing to answer a question, as Mark did, is not a reason to arrest or detain someone. Mark actually asks them why they are trying to grab him, they have no response.

While we can certainly DEBATE the incident, let’s debate it on what actually happened in the video.

A Sioux Falls Constitutional Lesson on the 1st Amendment

While I don’t recommend anyone tell the police to ‘F’ck Off’ while they are working on a traffic issue, it is perfectly legal to do so as long as the person isn’t interfering in their work. The person in the video below did say some ‘mean’ things, but he wasn’t interfering with the traffic investigation. He was also on a public sidewalk. In fact the PD were about to leave when they decided to attack him.

I keep telling the city a big 1st Amendment case is coming, if not several, and they are really screwed on this one. This is why they should all have body cameras, because these kind of arrests would start going away once officers start getting fired.

The first video is the incident (lots of cussing BTW) and the second video is the cameraman asking the PD what happened.

UPDATE: SFPD layout plan tonight at community meeting

I watched the meeting tonight online, there were great questions and good answers. WATCH REPLAY.

I think the officers present did their best to lay out a plan. I also understand that it is these officer’s jobs to have a plan and explain it to the public. But many in attendance were wondering where the Police Chief and Mayor were? The peeps I talked to who were there said they didn’t see them. Even if they would have been sitting in the audience, their presence would have been appreciated.

Say what you will about former Mayor Bowlcut and Bucktooth, but you damn well know he would have been there . . . of course he would have never had the meeting because he blamed increased crime on increased population.

There was over 300 people at the event. All councilors were present except Selberg and Brekke.

Does the SFPD have a morale issue?

As we know the police department has been shafted on the past two union negotiations. Also take into account they have an enormous lack of leadership and the rising drug problem in Sioux Falls and you are setting the department up for a perfect storm of low morale.

It’s difficult to blame it entirely on Chief Burns or the mayor, they are just continuing the trend. Disrespect for the SFPD goes back decades and mostly because of the city administrator.

Mayor Bowlcut & Bucktooth & Chief Barthel totally ignored our rising drug crime problem blaming it on ‘population growth’. While population growth does contribute, why is the crime rate rising faster then the population?

I believe a new concentration on public safety needs to be a high priority for the TenHaken administration (he is ultimately responsible for managing the department, not the city council, they only authorize funding).

The first thing that needs to happen is getting rid of some of the top officials that keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Secondly, extensive training in civil rights, diversity, sensitivity and criminal justice needs to occur with the officers, and like the SFFD they need to get on a fitness program.

Look at any successful police department around the world, and you will see the same thing, competent leadership. It’s time our SFPD is compensated fairly for their work and have new leadership.

It’s time the SFPD equips all officers with body cams

We have seen the video. If someone would not have privately recorded it, it would probably have been swept under the rug. I guess we can speculate all we want, but at first glance I have two questions? Why didn’t the officer use his stun gun instead and why did he kick him? Even a well drained dog can do the wrong thing, I guess I don’t blame the dog, but I’m wondering if kicking someone is protocol. I would think not. Mr. Ites is no angel, he has a rap sheet a mile long, force had to be used, but the officer had options.

This is why the police force needs to do two things ASAP;

• Equip all officers with body cams (this protects the officer and the public from being wrongfully accused)

• Have a REAL internal affairs department

Right now they just investigate ‘internally’. Well how do you think that will turn out? An independent review needs to be done to see if the officers followed procedure. The dog could have mutilated the man, bitten internal organs or even worse caused a serious infection (that could still happen). Unleashing the dog should have been last resort.

I’m also concerned that the officer had to actually pull the dog off of him. Is the dog properly trained to heel when told? It didn’t look like it.

I have many concerns about this and hope the truth comes out, but I’m not going to hold my breath at this point.

2018 SFPD Annual Report

Lots of nice pictures, and one page of stats (page 39) Full Doc: 2018-Police-Annual-Report

Click to Enlarge

Sioux Falls Crime Stats broken up into regions