PDA

View Full Version : " (OC) Sheriff officials emails show combative views toward gun activists"


active_shooter
02-02-2009, 10:06 PM
Sorry if this has been posted:

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/sheriff-hutchens-meeting-2297673-activists-county

Sheriff officials emails show combative views toward gun activists
A series of emails detail sheriffs' officials disparaging activists and county supervisors protesting new gun policies.
BY NORBERTO SANTANA JR. AND TONY SAAVEDRA
The Orange County Register
Comments 41 | Recommend 12

Transcripts of text messages sent by Orange County sheriff's officials during a November 2008 Board of Supervisors meeting shows the law enforcement leaders using their cell phones to ridicule activists and even supervisors during a public hearing on gun permit policies.

The messages, obtained under a public records request by a group named Ordinary California Citizens Concerned with Safety, reveal a combative tone by sheriff's command staff toward the activists. Some county supervisors questioned whether that defensiveness triggered the large security presence that met activists when they returned to a January meeting seeking to again criticize Sheriff Sandra Hutchens' gun policies.

"We are locked in mortal battle…It is ugly. We will survive however," wrote Assistant Sheriff Mike Hillmann as he sat in the audience at 1:17 pm during the November 18 board meeting.

Hillmann, a former LAPD deputy chief recruited by Hutchens to help reform Orange County's troubled department, made fun of County Supervisor Janet Nguyen – a vocal critic of Hutchen's CCW policies. Hillmann texted: "I hope Janet has a pet she can call a friend."

Nguyen said she was shocked by the tone of the texts and was having her staff review more than 300 pages of the messages.

"It clearly shows the attitude that's over at that department. It shows no respect," Nguyen said. "It shows clearly they have no respect for us as a governing body, much less the residents."

Sheriff Sandra Hutchens apologized for what she called the unprofessional conduct of staff members, but stressed the opinions revealed by the text messages had nothing to do with the increased security at the next board meeting. Hutchens added that she appreciated the input from those who disagree with her concealed weapons policies.

"Clearly, I do not condone comments that were made on the emails and I have admonished those that participated in that as being unprofessional conduct and I do not expect that to occur again," Hutchens said. She said the department policy is that agency-issued blackberries are to be used for business only.

By the next meeting on gun permit issues on January 13, gun activists were confronted by a very different boardroom.

Large placards in the front lobby read, "No Firearms allowed." Responding to a series of unspecified threats, numerous plainclothes investigators and uniformed SWAT deputies were out in full force. Activists wearing green buttons that read CCW said they felt intimidated as they approached the dais to offer comments. Three people wearing green buttons were questioned but no one was detained and no firearms were confiscated.

Supervisor Chris Norby said the texts gave credence to accusations that sheriff's officials increased security at the next meeting to stifle opposition.

"I think they were surprised, taken aback (by the Nov. 18 meeting) and when they thought it was going to be repeated, they treated that as a security issue," Norby said.

He also said the text messages raises questions about the command staff.

"It sounds like there is a serious control issue there," Norby said. "These are her top deputies that advise her and (they are texting) at county expense and on county equipment and they are belittling the public."

During the Nov. 18 meeting, hundreds of concealed weapons activists showed up to let supervisors know they opposed the new policies adopted by Hutchens. After taking office, Hutchens announced she would tighten the permit policies relaxed during the tenure of former Sheriff Mike Carona.

That has triggered a fierce backlash by activists, the National Rifle Association and even the board of supervisors.

During the November hearing, one by one, a row of activists took to the microphone at the board of supervisors and told Hutchens that her policies were unfair and a bad fit for a county known as Republican and pro-second Amendment. The meeting lasted hours and by the end, most county supervisors had joined in criticizing. Hutchens' approach to the gun permits.

The emails released to the activist group highlight how uncomfortable Sheriff's officials were at the hearing.

Shortly after 2 pm, at the November meeting, R.J. Morris, a CCW activist who had applied for a gun permit, got up to offer his critique.

Sheriff's officials immediately cyber-insulted Morris, who wears a bow tie and tinted glasses, through a series of text messages.

"Is that Elton John?" wrote department spokesman Damon Micalizzi.

One secretary sent Hillmann a message, "That guy that is up speaking now is CREEPY!! Nice hair and nice bow tie."

Hillmann replied, "That is the new investigator and gang officer attire."

Morris, 56, who is a airline transport pilot, said he was "shocked" at the lack of professionalism in the email communications. The North Tustin resident was also deeply hurt given the fact that he has expressed interest in helping the department upgrade its air squadron.

"It makes me feel embarrassed that I've supported the sheriff," said Morris. "It makes me look like a fool."

Morris, who was among the most neutral of department critics on the gun policy issue, insists that "just because we're at odds with the administration, it in no means degrades our appreciation to the men and women who serve."

Nevertheless, assistant sheriff Hillmann, toward the end of a long hearing, texted an agent with the FBI: "This has been unbelievable. Am ready to stick a pencil in my eye."

Although the text messages showed a defensiveness among high-level sheriff's officials, Hutchens said she does not see the department as being engaged in combat with the CCW advocates.

"I don't see them as enemies. I see it as a healthy debate," Hutchens said. "If anybody needs to be listening it's me."

Sam
02-02-2009, 10:23 PM
I know very little of the situation down there, but it sounds like the Board of Supervisors have a good idea of what's what down there. Good luck!

Stormfeather
02-02-2009, 10:29 PM
I can see folks losing their jobs, or at the very least, getting a letter of censure/reprimand over this. They probally didnt expect this stuff to be mae public!

JeffM
02-02-2009, 10:32 PM
I can see folks losing their jobs, or at the very least, getting a letter of censure/reprimand over this. They probally didnt expect this stuff to be mae public!

I doubt that it will go that far, especially when the boss shares the same sentiments. "Reprimands" will let the department save a little face, but not really punish the behavior.

Echidin
02-02-2009, 10:33 PM
"I don't see them as enemies. I see it as a healthy debate," Hutchens said. "If anybody needs to be listening it's me."

And yet you clearly are NOT listening. Both Hutchens and Hillmann absolutely need to be ousted. What other place of business would this kind of utter lack of respect and professionalism fly? What a disgrace.

BigDogatPlay
02-02-2009, 10:40 PM
If one of the agency second in commands was acting that unprofessionally he really needs to go someplace else. Maybe to be COP in a city within a state that has shall issue.

Then watch his knickers get in a wad.

psssniper
02-02-2009, 10:53 PM
This administration shows an utter contempt for the law abiding average guy. Why? Because Mr average citizen wants to carry a concealed weapon :confused: I will stop here because I have been drinking a bit and what would come next wouldn't be pretty...................... We need to find 2010's candidate for sheriff and get the ball rolling on Hutchens defeat

12gauge12
02-02-2009, 10:56 PM
WOW! Busted! There should be some suspensions for sure on this one.

BillCA
02-02-2009, 11:43 PM
Supervisor Chris Norby said the texts gave credence to accusations that sheriff's officials increased security at the next meeting to stifle opposition.
Sufficient cause, IMO, for the board to revoke Hutchen's appointment and fire Hillmann.

Whenever the police powers use their presence to intimidate those in opposition to its goals we are on the edge of losing our form of republican democracy. It is 3rd world countries that put their bully-men into civic meetings to quash dissent and identify citizens for "lessons" later, not America.

I would hope that the board has issued a clear message to Hutchens that they won't tolerate that kind of police behavior again. Nor the unprofessional conduct. But, were I the head of the council, I'd be asking if others were in favor of a no-confidence vote on the Sheriff and her assistant.

Hutchens is free to investigate any person holding an O.C. CCW permit and revoke that permit if her staff finds any evidence of corrupt influence involved in obtaining the permit. That's the way the system is supposed to work. Unfortunately, Hutchens and her Geheim Staatspolizei[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geheime_Staatspolizei) mentality seems to demand that these people prove they didn't do something instead.

JerryM
02-03-2009, 12:37 AM
How pathetic.

I lived under a military dictatorship, and this is nothing but Banana Republic behavior.

Next thing you know, these jerks are going to wear brown shirts.

To intimidate the population by the use of police force in matters of citizens' constitutional rights is nothing more than totalitarian bullsh*t.

I am amazed and also ashamed that this is happening in the country that I love and swore to defend.

I wonder what qualifies as a domestic enemy, under the oath I swore to obey.

Insulting and pathetic.

HCz
02-03-2009, 12:56 AM
Pathetic doesn't describe it well. Hillman should be fired, and Hutchinson better resign.

SteveH
02-03-2009, 2:04 AM
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/sheriff-hutchens-meeting-2297673-activists-county

Does RJ Morris really look like "Elton John"?

Tarn_Helm
02-03-2009, 6:14 AM
And yet you clearly are NOT listening. Both Hutchens and Hillmann absolutely need to be ousted. What other place of business would this kind of utter lack of respect and professionalism fly? What a disgrace.

+1

If the perspective of utter contempt and condescension toward law-abiding, taxpaying citizens were instead only confined to the criminals, I might not feel insulted by the tone of those communications.

But the comments made to and about the law-abiding, taxpaying citizens show that those employees of ours regard us as nothing more than insects.

Their ridicule of us--for now completely powerless against them--reminds me of the kind of kids who would mock the "retarded" kids at school, who were completely powerless.

Those comments are sick and wrong.

I wonder how funny they would think it all was if the topic of the meeting was the following question: "SHOULD OCSD DEPUTIES BE ALLOWED TO CARRY FIREARMS WHILE ON PATROL?"

These guys forget that in some countries law enforcement officers are required to do their job unarmed.

It would be very interesting indeed to see the looks on their faces if a motion were put forward to require that OCSD deputies go around the county unarmed.

It is unfortunate that no one seems to have used the seat belt analogy to clarify why we want to be legally allowed to carry a concealed, loaded firearm for purposes of lawful self-defense.

We wear a seatbelt every day not because we are "afraid" or "living in fear" of getting in an accident.

Most of us go years without any accidents.

We wear a seatbelt every day because we are safer if we do than if we don't--it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

The same goes for lawful concealed carry for purposes of lawful self-defense: it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

That is all.

For us, the carrying of a concealed, loaded firearm for purposes of lawful self-defense is a safety procedure exactly analogous to strapping on a seat belt--nothing more and nothing less.

It is unfortunate that some members of OCSD look down on the law-abiding, taxpaying citizens who pay their salaries.

Their contempt for us naturally raises the suspicion that this attitude is the shared but unspoken attitude harbored by the rest of the OCSD toward the law-abiding, taxpaying citizens who pay their salaries.

Supervisor Moorlach has a great deal of impatience with OCSD arrogance; he might make an effective ally in the CCW cause . . . just a thought.

:patriot:

Sig226
02-03-2009, 6:24 AM
What does this woman have to do to get removed from her post?!

Of course I will get labeled as a "LEO basher", but I think the records from the last two FIOA requests show what we peon citizens already know-- LEO in general treat us as if we are subjects to be herded and nothing more.

It is the few that don't fall into that line of thinking that are the exceptions---not the other way around. Oddly, we have a disproportionate amount of those exceptions on CalGuns.net and I'm very happy to be able to say that.

Incorporation... Incorporation...Incorporation. :thumbsup:

tango-52
02-03-2009, 6:27 AM
+1000 on everything up until here:

+1

Supervisor Moorlach has a great deal of impatience with OCSD arrogance; he might make an effective ally in the CCW cause . . . just a thought.

:patriot:

Moorlach has been one of her biggest supporters, and still is. He is playing the Flying Monkey to her Wicked Witch of the West. His Chief of Staff was the one who prepared a big PowerPoint presentation for the Nov 18th meeting (where these e-mails were generated), which was designed to bolster the Sheriff's anti-CCW position. He is the one who compared CCWers to rednecks with rifle racks in their pickups. Clearly, he is no friend of lawful gun owners.

Tarn_Helm
02-03-2009, 7:08 AM
+1000 on everything up until here:



Moorlach has been one of her biggest supporters, and still is. He is playing the Flying Monkey to her Wicked Witch of the West. His Chief of Staff was the one who prepared a big PowerPoint presentation for the Nov 18th meeting (where these e-mails were generated), which was designed to bolster the Sheriff's anti-CCW position. He is the one who compared CCWers to rednecks with rifle racks in their pickups. Clearly, he is no friend of lawful gun owners.

That's unfortunate.

It is too bad that we cannot swing him to the CCW cause.

He seems to have a lot of enthusiasm for locking horns with OCSD.

But if he is Hutchens' slave, then we'd might as well forget it.

She has no concept of the meaning of the Second Amendment or of the human right it bespeaks.

Oh well, we'll need to make allies elsewhere.

Onward and upward!:taz:

tango-52
02-03-2009, 7:15 AM
Norby and Ngyuen are definitely on the side of gun owners, especially since OCCCWS discovered that the Sheriff was spying on them in the BOS meeting. Campbell and Bates lean strongly toward our side. Moorlach is no longer the Chairman, Bates is now. It is only going to get increasingly painful for the Sheriff to appear before the BOS as more and more is discovered through OCCCWS' PRARs.

torsf
02-03-2009, 7:30 AM
They sound like a 'select militia' that the founding fathers feared...

the_donald_
02-03-2009, 7:40 AM
Here's a link to the actual e-mail snapshots of their blackberry communications.

http://www.occcws.com/?p=542

Utterly disgusting.

dfletcher
02-03-2009, 8:12 AM
What does this woman have to do to get removed from her post?!

Of course I will get labeled as a "LEO basher", but I think the records from the last two FIOA requests show what we peon citizens already know-- LEO in general treat us as if we are subjects to be herded and nothing more.

It is the few that don't fall into that line of thinking that are the exceptions---not the other way around. Oddly, we have a disproportionate amount of those exceptions on CalGuns.net and I'm very happy to be able to say that.

Incorporation... Incorporation...Incorporation. :thumbsup:

I don't think that's the case at all. In my estimation there is a great difference between the "big city" chiefs - politicians in uniform - and the real cops doing real LE work.

I'm up north so she doesn't have an impact, but whatever happened to at least having the common decency to behave for a while on your new job. Get settled a bit before letting the people who hired you know what a pain in the butt you can be?

Mute
02-03-2009, 8:18 AM
No one, who demonstrated the attitude towards the public that this group has, should be in any kind of position which gives them authority over others. They need to be at the very least suspended without pay, if not fired.

valleyguy
02-03-2009, 8:32 AM
The sense of entitlement by the OCSO is pretty shocking. Do they not realize who they work for? It's the people, not just the county government. All of those elected folks know who butters their bread, and know how to play the game -- apparently Hutchens is in way over her head, and knows nothing about politics. I'm also questioning her credentials at this point, and wondering how much affirmative action (which is still legal in public safety, as anyone who has applied for a PD or FD job knows) played a part in the rise of her career.

nick
02-03-2009, 8:52 AM
She just comes from LAPD, and shares their leadership's general attitude. The difference is that L.A. County supervisors and L.A. City Hall actually encourage such attitudes.

valleyguy
02-03-2009, 9:27 AM
She just comes from LAPD, and shares their leadership's general attitude. The difference is that L.A. County supervisors and L.A. City Hall actually encourage such attitudes.

If it was just her, that would be one thing, but her whole staff, all from different backgrounds, were doing the same thing. There's definitely an attitude of "us vs. them" in her organization's culture (or at least for her staff), rather than "What can we do for the community?" Funny to think that they are antagonizing some of the folks who pay the most taxes (like that airline pilot they called "elton john") and are some of the most law abiding and community-minded. It's going to be a real short term for her.

Bruce
02-03-2009, 9:30 AM
What did they expect? They hired an ex Los angeles Sheriff's Department employee. One of Leroy Baca's people. Hillman was a big muckity-muck in LAPD SWAT. Those clowns think there God's chosen few. It only underscores the need for "Shall-Issue" in California. Something we won't get as long as gun owners don't vote for their guns.

Bruce
02-03-2009, 9:40 AM
If one of the agency second in commands was acting that unprofessionally he really needs to go someplace else. Maybe to be COP in a city within a state that has shall issue.

Then watch his knickers get in a wad.



That happened once. An LAPD captain got hired as CoP in a city in Vermont. When he found out that there was no CCW required in Vermont, he asked the city to pass an ordinance banning concealed carry. They fired him.:thumbsup:

QuarterBoreGunner
02-03-2009, 9:49 AM
merged two threads.
Please continue.

CAL.BAR
02-03-2009, 9:50 AM
I seem to recall a post a while back where the question was "are cops anti-gun?" or at least "are cops against citizens RTKBA?" And we had a great many write in and say that no no the rank and file under the figure heads are all for it (or words to that affect). Well, here it is. Cops (not just the figureheads and department chiefs) are NOT on our side. THEY have THEIRS. THEY have THEIR guns. Why in the world would THEY want US to have the same power?

Earlier in this post someone wrote and asked how the cops would like it if they had to patrol unarmed. Never mind that hyperbole, what about having them turn in their guns at the end of the day? How many of THEM would be willing to go home unarmed and worry about defending their families unarmed (just like THEY want US to do)

If you don't think it's US vs. THEM just read some of these e-mails.

Matt C
02-03-2009, 10:00 AM
All that and LASD/LAPD still make them look like patron saints of the NRA.

MolonLabe2008
02-03-2009, 10:12 AM
It is bad enough we have to fight this crap at the local level, now we are going to be fighting this crap at the Federal level with Eric Holder being confirmed as AG.

SwissFluCase
02-03-2009, 10:17 AM
The ultimate goal is to put so much pressure on all of the bad players involved that they have no choice to resign in order to save their careers. The time for civil discourse is over, and your goal here is to make every step of the process as painful as possible, and drag their names through the media at every step.

The higher the tension level the more successful you will be at causing Sandra to say "the **** with this, I'm out of here".

I speak from experience here.

I remember, I have a very important phone call to make to someone... ;) We had an illness last week and I was out.

Regards,


SwissFluCase

.454
02-03-2009, 10:21 AM
Doing my best to spread the word (http://transsylvaniaphoenix.blogspot.com/2009/02/vigilant-citizens-in-action-o-c-gun.html).
2000+ page visitors since I posted the story, 2 hours 21 minutes ago

OCCCWS
02-03-2009, 10:27 AM
As one of the individuals associated with OCCCWS responsible for analyzing the messages received via our PRA, I can share a few facts:

Over 300 pages of 'messages' were received. 95% was garbage attachments.

OCSD provided NO responsive messages from the inbox or outbox of Sheriff Hutchens. Only two messages bearing her name were even provided, both as parts of a reply chain from another OCSD employee.

OCSD brass were messaging as they desperately tried to whip up some community support for her position, reporting to each other that two individuals had made contact and would like to speak to the BOS.

OCSD employees messages each other about the confidential good cause of a stalker victim.

OCCCWS has filed a follow up PRA request instructing OCSD to 'check again' as to the requested communications. We expect to report back when those documents do/don't arrive.

The type of behavior seen in these messages, and in a larger sense by the wholesale witholding of public information (the sheriff's e-mails, the security footage from the 1-13 BOS meeting), is why it is imperative that as many people as possible show up at the 2-10 BOS meeting and speak out against this behavior in a respectful, but forceful, manner.

nick
02-03-2009, 10:27 AM
I seem to recall a post a while back where the question was "are cops anti-gun?" or at least "are cops against citizens RTKBA?" And we had a great many write in and say that no no the rank and file under the figure heads are all for it (or words to that affect). Well, here it is. Cops (not just the figureheads and department chiefs) are NOT on our side. THEY have THEIRS. THEY have THEIR guns. Why in the world would THEY want US to have the same power?

Earlier in this post someone wrote and asked how the cops would like it if they had to patrol unarmed. Never mind that hyperbole, what about having them turn in their guns at the end of the day? How many of THEM would be willing to go home unarmed and worry about defending their families unarmed (just like THEY want US to do)

If you don't think it's US vs. THEM just read some of these e-mails.

We're still talking about the top cops, i.e. politicians here. Not to mention many of them coming from L.A. County and promoting the same culture. We have more cops on this board than that :)

skateboarder74
02-03-2009, 10:28 AM
+1

If the perspective of utter contempt and condescension toward law-abiding, taxpaying citizens were instead only confined to the criminals, I might not feel insulted by the tone of those communications.

But the comments made to and about the law-abiding, taxpaying citizens show that those employees of ours regard us as nothing more than insects.

Their ridicule of us--for now completely powerless against them--reminds me of the kind of kids who would mock the "retarded" kids at school, who were completely powerless.

Those comments are sick and wrong.

I wonder how funny they would think it all was if the topic of the meeting was the following question: "SHOULD OCSD DEPUTIES BE ALLOWED TO CARRY FIREARMS WHILE ON PATROL?"

These guys forget that in some countries law enforcement officers are required to do their job unarmed.

It would be very interesting indeed to see the looks on their faces if a motion were put forward to require that OCSD deputies go around the county unarmed.

It is unfortunate that no one seems to have used the seat belt analogy to clarify why we want to be legally allowed to carry a concealed, loaded firearm for purposes of lawful self-defense.

We wear a seatbelt every day not because we are "afraid" or "living in fear" of getting in an accident.

Most of us go years without any accidents.

We wear a seatbelt every day because we are safer if we do than if we don't--it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

The same goes for lawful concealed carry for purposes of lawful self-defense: it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

That is all.

For us, the carrying of a concealed, loaded firearm for purposes of lawful self-defense is a safety procedure exactly analogous to strapping on a seat belt--nothing more and nothing less.

It is unfortunate that some members of OCSD look down on the law-abiding, taxpaying citizens who pay their salaries.

Their contempt for us naturally raises the suspicion that this attitude is the shared but unspoken attitude harbored by the rest of the OCSD toward the law-abiding, taxpaying citizens who pay their salaries.

Supervisor Moorlach has a great deal of impatience with OCSD arrogance; he might make an effective ally in the CCW cause . . . just a thought.

:patriot:

I could not agree more
Except for "Supervisor Moorlach has a great deal of impatience with OCSD arrogance; he might make an effective ally in the CCW cause . . . just a thought"

fairfaxjim
02-03-2009, 10:55 AM
There is nothing suprising in the OCSO's senior staff behavior. It is revolting, unprofessional, and indicates how stupid with power they have gotten to let it get out in the open, but definitely not suprising. OC and LA have become the poster children for LE administrations that mirror the absolutely arrogant and holier than thou mindset of the political demogogues that give them their jobs and budgets, hence give them their power.

They sound like a 'select militia' that the founding fathers feared...

That's exactly what many of the CA (and other) metropolitan LE agencies have become. The politicians that have created these monsters then use them as scapegoats for their inability to solve the crime and gang and any other problem (pick one) that they have promised to unequivocally solve in return for our votes.

And as for the belief that most of the rank and file LEO's are actually pro 2A, pro civilian gun ownership, pro civilian gun posession, I firmly believe that that is you father's LEO on the street, and a few of those left from that generation. It is not the current generation that was trained and have only served under this type of administration and command structure. They have been firmly trained that civilians with guns are dangerous to their survival - period!

As for Sherif Hutchens and her command staff, the only crime or mistake they will be called for will be that of the stupidity of arousing the masses against them and their political masters. Think for a bit about what the result would have been is she had instead of announcing profoundly and jumping on her CCW reform with both feet, simply and very quietly began reviewing a few CCW's at a time, waiting for expirations to deny renewals without any fanfare, and basically used some simple common sense in this matter. I seriously doubt that we would be aware of her actions even now, and the BOS would certainly not have her in their sights - there would have been no hue and cry yet, they would not have been made to look like they had lost control of the SO.

The real scary part of all of this is that they (LE Chiefs, Sheriffs, and their command staffs) so firmly believe in their power over the citizens that they are stupid drunk with it. So drunk with it that they fear no consequences for their actions, and then fail to even realize how inappropriate their actions really are.

SwissFluCase
02-03-2009, 11:04 AM
Hi Jim,

We should talk sometime. I had a run in some years ago with a certain town council that started acting like this... :D

Regards,


SwissFluCase

Python2
02-03-2009, 11:09 AM
I could not agree more
Except for "Supervisor Moorlach has a great deal of impatience with OCSD arrogance; he might make an effective ally in the CCW cause . . . just a thought"

Yes, Moorlach is literally in bed with Hutchens. He is just CYA'ng himself now.

nick
02-03-2009, 11:18 AM
There is nothing suprising in the OCSO's senior staff behavior. It is revolting, unprofessional, and indicates how stupid with power they have gotten to let it get out in the open, but definitely not suprising. OC and LA have become the poster children for LE administrations that mirror the absolutely arrogant and holier than thou mindset of the political demogogues that give them their jobs and budgets, hence give them their power.



That's exactly what many of the CA (and other) metropolitan LE agencies have become. The politicians that have created these monsters then use them as scapegoats for their inability to solve the crime and gang and any other problem (pick one) that they have promised to unequivocally solve in return for our votes.

And as for the belief that most of the rank and file LEO's are actually pro 2A, pro civilian gun ownership, pro civilian gun posession, I firmly believe that that is you father's LEO on the street, and a few of those left from that generation. It is not the current generation that was trained and have only served under this type of administration and command structure. They have been firmly trained that civilians with guns are dangerous to their survival - period!

As for Sherif Hutchens and her command staff, the only crime or mistake they will be called for will be that of the stupidity of arousing the masses against them and their political masters. Think for a bit about what the result would have been is she had instead of announcing profoundly and jumping on her CCW reform with both feet, simply and very quietly began reviewing a few CCW's at a time, waiting for expirations to deny renewals without any fanfare, and basically used some simple common sense in this matter. I seriously doubt that we would be aware of her actions even now, and the BOS would certainly not have her in their sights - there would have been no hue and cry yet, they would not have been made to look like they had lost control of the SO.

The real scary part of all of this is that they (LE Chiefs, Sheriffs, and their command staffs) so firmly believe in their power over the citizens that they are stupid drunk with it. So drunk with it that they fear no consequences for their actions, and then fail to even realize how inappropriate their actions really are.

Makes sense.

SteveH
02-03-2009, 11:52 AM
Gallows humor is not something you expect from Administrators.

SteveH
02-03-2009, 11:54 AM
She just comes from LAPD, and shares their leadership's general attitude. The difference is that L.A. County supervisors and L.A. City Hall actually encourage such attitudes.


There is a running joke among OC Conservatives that the Orange county Sheriffs department has become "The Orange County diversion of LAPD"

SteveH
02-03-2009, 11:55 AM
As one of the individuals associated with OCCCWS responsible for analyzing the messages received via our PRA, I can share a few facts:

Over 300 pages of 'messages' were received. 95% was garbage attachments.

OCSD provided NO responsive messages from the inbox or outbox of Sheriff Hutchens. Only two messages bearing her name were even provided, both as parts of a reply chain from another OCSD employee.

OCSD brass were messaging as they desperately tried to whip up some community support for her position, reporting to each other that two individuals had made contact and would like to speak to the BOS.

OCSD employees messages each other about the confidential good cause of a stalker victim.

OCCCWS has filed a follow up PRA request instructing OCSD to 'check again' as to the requested communications. We expect to report back when those documents do/don't arrive.

The type of behavior seen in these messages, and in a larger sense by the wholesale witholding of public information (the sheriff's e-mails, the security footage from the 1-13 BOS meeting), is why it is imperative that as many people as possible show up at the 2-10 BOS meeting and speak out against this behavior in a respectful, but forceful, manner.

When will we see the phone logs of the BOS county phones?

GMONEY
02-03-2009, 1:11 PM
Can we seriously peition to have her removed?

RomanDad
02-03-2009, 2:09 PM
That happened once. An LAPD captain got hired as CoP in a city in Vermont. When he found out that there was no CCW required in Vermont, he asked the city to pass an ordinance banning concealed carry. They fired him.:thumbsup:

Theres a good precedent.

OCCCWS
02-03-2009, 2:14 PM
When will we see the phone logs of the BOS county phones?

There are further PRA requests in process. With the stonewalling we face, each request is taking upwards of a month (10 days + 14 day extension + weekends).

In addition, Sheriff Hutchens has been working in secret to have the DOJ change their database software so that she may 'expire' CCWs before the date printed on them, despite there being no statutory power in Penal Code which allows this. We have proof of this from another PRA.

RomanDad
02-03-2009, 2:20 PM
Can we seriously peition to have her removed?

Our options are:

1. We vote her out in 2010. That requires A). A VIABLE Candidate. B) The Political pounding we've been inflicting on her CONTINUE and C). A year and a half of time and money to make it all happen come June of 2010.

2. We can have her recalled. That requires that we get tens of thousands of petitions signed to get a recall election on the ballot. Its costly (very Costly) probably prohibitively so, but not impossible.

3. She resigns. This can be acheived by keeping the presure up, with the PRAS the BAD PRESS, THE PRESSURE ON THE BOS and TO CONTINUE TO WRITE LETTERS TO THE BOS, THE OCSD, THE PRESS AND ANYBODY ELSE WHO WILL LISTEN DEMANDING HER RESIGNATION.

If you want to be a part of this. If you're tired of the BS on the subject. If youre tired of seeing your fellow citizens bullied by the keystone cops, JOIN US!

If you HAVENT been to a BOS meeting, COME ON THE 10th. Speak... Be respectful and professional but demand her resignation and the resignations of Hillman and Scott.

If you haven't written a letter, WRITE ONE... NOW... Be respectful and profesional but demand her resignation, and the resignation of Hillman and Scott.

If you haven't made a phone call, MAKE ONE NOW... Be respectful and professional but demand her resignation and the resignations of Hillman and Scott.

MOST OF ALL... GET INVOLVED.... DON'T SIT BACK AND WATCH... I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO PROUD AS I WAS ON NOVEMBER 18th... Trust me... if you care about these issues, this is the one of front lines, and you'll be glad you got involved.

DVSmith
02-03-2009, 3:11 PM
Our options are:

1. We vote her out in 2010. That requires A). A VIABLE Candidate. B) The Political pounding we've been inflicting on her CONTINUE and C). A year and a half of time and money to make it all happen come June of 2010.

2. We can have her recalled. That requires that we get tens of thousands of petitions signed to get a recall election on the ballot. Its costly (very Costly) probably prohibitively so, but not impossible.

3. She resigns. This can be acheived by keeping the presure up, with the PRAS the BAD PRESS, THE PRESSURE ON THE BOS and TO CONTINUE TO WRITE LETTERS TO THE BOS, THE OCSD, THE PRESS AND ANYBODY ELSE WHO WILL LISTEN DEMANDING HER RESIGNATION.

If you want to be a part of this. If you're tired of the BS on the subject. If youre tired of seeing your fellow citizens bullied by the keystone cops, JOIN US!

If you HAVENT been to a BOS meeting, COME ON THE 10th. Speak... Be respectful and professional but demand her resignation and the resignations of Hillman and Scott.

If you haven't written a letter, WRITE ONE... NOW... Be respectful and profesional but demand her resignation, and the resignation of Hillman and Scott.

If you haven't made a phone call, MAKE ONE NOW... Be respectful and professional but demand her resignation and the resignations of Hillman and Scott.

MOST OF ALL... GET INVOLVED.... DON'T SIT BACK AND WATCH... I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO PROUD AS I WAS ON NOVEMBER 18th... Trust me... if you care about these issues, this is the one of front lines, and you'll be glad you got involved.

What he said!

DDT
02-03-2009, 3:16 PM
Is there any way to have the BOS remove her or force her to accept "X" good cause? Can they write a law stating that "Personal Self Defense" is to be considered "Good Cause?" I guess what I am wondering is if they can constrain her discretion?

Cypren
02-03-2009, 3:36 PM
Is there any way to have the BOS remove her or force her to accept "X" good cause? Can they write a law stating that "Personal Self Defense" is to be considered "Good Cause?" I guess what I am wondering is if they can constrain her discretion?

My understanding is that they can issue a "directive" which is legally non-binding but expresses the Board's intent. I believe they already did so following the Nov. 18 meeting, and she's basically flipped them the bird. I do not believe they have the ability to fire her or force her to resign, as Sheriff (in Orange County's case, Sheriff-Coroner as per California Goverment Code 24300 and County Ordinance 1-2-118) is a "core" elected county office (GC 24009(a)) that was only appointed via special circumstances in this instance (as provided for in GC 24006). No provision is made for the Board having second thoughts -- only the return of the resigning officer (GC 24006(a)) or the expiration of his term of office (GC 24006(b)) ends the appointment.

Edit: One more note: Sheriff's discretion for "good cause" issuance is provided by PC 12050(a)(1)(A) -- state law -- not county law, so it can't be constrained or pre-empted by a county ordinance, unfortunately. :(

_Odin_
02-03-2009, 3:50 PM
terrible

SmokinMr2
02-03-2009, 3:55 PM
My understanding is that they can issue a "directive" which is legally non-binding but expresses the Board's intent. I believe they already did so following the Nov. 18 meeting, and she's basically flipped them the bird. I do not believe they have the ability to fire her or force her to resign, as Sheriff (in Orange County's case, Sheriff-Coroner as per California Goverment Code 24300 and County Ordinance 1-2-118) is a "core" elected county office (GC 24009(a)) that was only appointed via special circumstances in this instance (as provided for in GC 24006). No provision is made for the Board having second thoughts -- only the return of the resigning officer (GC 24006(a)) or the expiration of his term of office (GC 24006(b)) ends the appointment.

Edit: One more note: Sheriff's discretion for "good cause" issuance is provided by PC 12050(a)(1)(A) -- state law -- not county law, so it can't be constrained or pre-empted by a county ordinance, unfortunately. :(

It's a shame the BOS can't expire her term early like she's doing with CCW permits...

madjack956
02-03-2009, 4:13 PM
I think he should follow through with the pencil in the eye idea....

RomanDad
02-03-2009, 4:16 PM
My understanding is that they can issue a "directive" which is legally non-binding but expresses the Board's intent. I believe they already did so following the Nov. 18 meeting, and she's basically flipped them the bird. I do not believe they have the ability to fire her or force her to resign, as Sheriff (in Orange County's case, Sheriff-Coroner as per California Goverment Code 24300 and County Ordinance 1-2-118) is a "core" elected county office (GC 24009(a)) that was only appointed via special circumstances in this instance (as provided for in GC 24006). No provision is made for the Board having second thoughts -- only the return of the resigning officer (GC 24006(a)) or the expiration of his term of office (GC 24006(b)) ends the appointment.

Edit: One more note: Sheriff's discretion for "good cause" issuance is provided by PC 12050(a)(1)(A) -- state law -- not county law, so it can't be constrained or pre-empted by a county ordinance, unfortunately. :(


Actually.... There is another way.... :whistling:

HCz
02-03-2009, 4:22 PM
Our options are:
A). A VIABLE Candidate.

Where's Bill Hunt...:(

GuyW
02-03-2009, 4:30 PM
The sense of entitlement by the OCSO is pretty shocking. Do they not realize who they work for? It's the people, not just the county government.

In theory.

But after years of interacting with government employees, I can assure you that they see the "city" (or whichever) as "daddy" with the $$ (their's).

Many are willing to lie, steal, and cheat to protect "daddy" (this is not an exageration)....including (and maybe especially) LEO.

...my experience...yours may vary...

My judgement is, put a mic in any police station in CA, and you'll hear the same $%^&.
.

Cypren
02-03-2009, 4:36 PM
Actually.... There is another way.... :whistling:

I was referring to direct actions the Board of Supervisors could take. If you're referring to a recall vote, then yes, that's entirely possible and would give the BoS a vacancy into which they would appoint a new sheriff. Unfortunately, recalls are exceptionally expensive to orchestrate and require thousands of committed supporters, neither of which I'm confident we can muster in the OC 2A community. I would be absolutely delighted to be proven wrong on that point.

If I'm mistaken and you weren't referring to a recall, then I'd love to hear about other angles I hadn't considered.

Python2
02-03-2009, 4:37 PM
Actually.... There is another way.... :whistling:

God I hope you are right RD.

GuyW
02-03-2009, 4:37 PM
Our options are:

1. We vote her out in 2010. That requires A). A VIABLE Candidate....

It requires ONE viable candidate that everyone gets behind at once....and we ignore any other vote-splitters brought in to defeat the movement...

.

DDT
02-03-2009, 7:14 PM
My understanding is that they can issue a "directive" which is legally non-binding but expresses the Board's intent. I believe they already did so following the Nov. 18 meeting, and she's basically flipped them the bird. I do not believe they have the ability to fire her or force her to resign, as Sheriff (in Orange County's case, Sheriff-Coroner as per California Goverment Code 24300 and County Ordinance 1-2-118) is a "core" elected county office (GC 24009(a)) that was only appointed via special circumstances in this instance (as provided for in GC 24006). No provision is made for the Board having second thoughts -- only the return of the resigning officer (GC 24006(a)) or the expiration of his term of office (GC 24006(b)) ends the appointment.

Edit: One more note: Sheriff's discretion for "good cause" issuance is provided by PC 12050(a)(1)(A) -- state law -- not county law, so it can't be constrained or pre-empted by a county ordinance, unfortunately. :(

Any chance the BoS could pass an ordinance that pulls her personal immunity in the case of a denied applicant later being the victim of a violent crime? I'm thinking of Van de Kamp v. Goldstein which SCOTUS heard last month. Apparently it is much easier to piece immunity in relation to administrative duties than enforcement duties (at least wrt DAs) Naturally SCOTUS hasn't decided yet but the ordinance itself might well put the fear of god into her, especially if it is clear the County won't pay for her defense.

Another possibility is that they could de-fund her command staff and her own pay (if legal) unless "self-defense" is considered good cause. He who holds the purse strings.

They could make her life miserable.

Kid Stanislaus
02-03-2009, 7:27 PM
So just WHY is the BOS sitting on its collective backside and doing NOTHING to bring about a change of policy on the part of the sheriff? Did they not appoint her? Can they not remove her from office and put in somebody who understands the 2nd Amendment?

bigstick61
02-03-2009, 7:33 PM
Can the BoS make an amendment to the county equivalent of the constitution which gives them the power to impeach the sheriff or to fire sheriffs appointed by themselves instead of elected?

DDT
02-03-2009, 8:09 PM
So just WHY is the BOS sitting on its collective backside and doing NOTHING to bring about a change of policy on the part of the sheriff? Did they not appoint her? Can they not remove her from office and put in somebody who understands the 2nd Amendment?

I think this is the question of the day. Clearly they can't fire the Sheriff in an ordinary situation as it is an elected position. Can they appoint a different sheriff if she hasn't been elected to the position?

Shotgun Man
02-03-2009, 8:13 PM
My understanding is that they can issue a "directive" which is legally non-binding but expresses the Board's intent. I believe they already did so following the Nov. 18 meeting, and she's basically flipped them the bird. I do not believe they have the ability to fire her or force her to resign, as Sheriff (in Orange County's case, Sheriff-Coroner as per California Goverment Code 24300 and County Ordinance 1-2-118) is a "core" elected county office (GC 24009(a)) that was only appointed via special circumstances in this instance (as provided for in GC 24006). No provision is made for the Board having second thoughts -- only the return of the resigning officer (GC 24006(a)) or the expiration of his term of office (GC 24006(b)) ends the appointment.

Edit: One more note: Sheriff's discretion for "good cause" issuance is provided by PC 12050(a)(1)(A) -- state law -- not county law, so it can't be constrained or pre-empted by a county ordinance, unfortunately. :(

Can Carona come back if he gets probation and no additional jail time on his federal case?

DDT
02-03-2009, 8:15 PM
Can Carona come back if he gets probation and no additional jail time on his federal case?

No, but he can run for Mayor of D.C.

falawful
02-03-2009, 9:05 PM
Can she be nailed for PRAR violations?

I agree that the conduct of OCSD is unacceptable, but as for the 'Elton John' bits, that probably is kinda funny you know.

7x57
02-03-2009, 9:17 PM
No, but he can run for Mayor of D.C.

Ahem. Are there *any* crimes that would disqualify you for being mayor of that national disgrace?

7x57

Cypren
02-03-2009, 9:26 PM
So just WHY is the BOS sitting on its collective backside and doing NOTHING to bring about a change of policy on the part of the sheriff? Did they not appoint her? Can they not remove her from office and put in somebody who understands the 2nd Amendment?

See my post here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=1986183&postcount=49) for the legal explanation. The Board has the power to appoint an officership in a vacancy; they do not have the power to remove a serving officer regardless of whether the officer was elected or appointed.

Can the BoS make an amendment to the county equivalent of the constitution which gives them the power to impeach the sheriff or to fire sheriffs appointed by themselves instead of elected?

No. The office of county sheriff is established by California Government Code 24000(b). Modification of the election, appointment or termination procedures of the office would require changing state codes, not county codes.

Can Carona come back if he gets probation and no additional jail time on his federal case?

I took a quick look through the Government Code and couldn't find anything disqualifying about having a federal criminal conviction for county office... which is surprising and also disturbing. I hope it's just because I'm not looking in the right places.

Can she be nailed for PRAR violations?

I wouldn't be surprised if she could be accused or indicted of federal civil liberties violations or of PRA violations. A conviction on civil liberties violations seems extremely far-fetched; Hutchens' politics are far more like those at the state level than the rest of the county's, so in my (completely uninformed armchair analyst) view there's a very low likelihood that the attorney general, who would have to prosecute, would do so. PRA seems more likely, but I'm not sure what the penalties would be; I'd expect an administrative slap on the wrist at the most.

Incidentally, I was speaking to a colleague tonight about this issue and he mentioned that he's pretty sure that an appointed official to an elected post cannot be removed in a recall election; only an elected official can be. I haven't checked the code to verify it. If he's right, she can only be removed by the attorney general.

Ahem. Are there *any* crimes that would disqualify you for being mayor of that national disgrace?

Aggravated insult to the Democratic Party in the first degree?

DDT
02-03-2009, 9:58 PM
Ahem. Are there *any* crimes that would disqualify you for being mayor of that national disgrace?
Aggravated insult to the Democratic Party in the first degree?

Is membership in the Republican party a subset of "aggravated insult" or a different offense?

Cypren
02-03-2009, 10:09 PM
Is membership in the Republican party a subset of "aggravated insult" or a different offense?

Don't they prosecute that under "heresy?"

nobody_special
02-03-2009, 10:26 PM
Incidentally, I was speaking to a colleague tonight about this issue and he mentioned that he's pretty sure that an appointed official to an elected post cannot be removed in a recall election; only an elected official can be. I haven't checked the code to verify it. If he's right, she can only be removed by the attorney general.
That is somewhat disturbing; a non-elected official in a position of considerable power, accountable to almost nobody...

Cypren
02-03-2009, 10:34 PM
That is somewhat disturbing; a non-elected official in a position of considerable power, accountable to almost nobody...

Which is why the Board of Supervisors should probably have considered her history and politics more carefully before appointing her. (Hey, in my mind, being command staff in any Los Angeles law enforcement agency should be an immediate disqualifier -- I'd be hard pressed to come up with a more corrupt, power-mad county, and I have a hard time believing anyone can rise as high as she did there without being part of the problem.) But I think a couple of them were swooning over the prospect of acclaim from certain groups for appointing "Orange County's first female sheriff" and didn't look very deeply beyond that. :mad:

nick
02-03-2009, 10:40 PM
Which is why the Board of Supervisors should probably have considered her history and politics more carefully before appointing her. (Hey, in my mind, being command staff in any Los Angeles law enforcement agency should be an immediate disqualifier -- I'd be hard pressed to come up with a more corrupt, power-mad county, and I have a hard time believing anyone can rise as high as she did there without being part of the problem.) But I think a couple of them were swooning over the prospect of acclaim from certain groups for appointing "Orange County's first female sheriff" and didn't look very deeply beyond that. :mad:

Sounds like you're quite familiar with Los Angeles County. Do you live here? :)

Cypren
02-03-2009, 10:45 PM
Sounds like you're quite familiar with Los Angeles County. Do you live here? :)

No, thank god. <hyperbole>I live in Orange County... which I used to consider quite tolerable (for any place in the People's Republic of Kalifornia, that is) but which is rapidly becoming less so thanks to Hutchens' apparent determination to annex us for Overlord Baca.</hyperbole> My friend who got me back into shooting (after about a fifteen-year hiatus) lives in Redondo Beach, so I get to hear about all the fun.

GMONEY
02-03-2009, 10:46 PM
Our options are:

1. We vote her out in 2010. That requires A). A VIABLE Candidate. B) The Political pounding we've been inflicting on her CONTINUE and C). A year and a half of time and money to make it all happen come June of 2010.

2. We can have her recalled. That requires that we get tens of thousands of petitions signed to get a recall election on the ballot. Its costly (very Costly) probably prohibitively so, but not impossible.

3. She resigns. This can be acheived by keeping the presure up, with the PRAS the BAD PRESS, THE PRESSURE ON THE BOS and TO CONTINUE TO WRITE LETTERS TO THE BOS, THE OCSD, THE PRESS AND ANYBODY ELSE WHO WILL LISTEN DEMANDING HER RESIGNATION.

If you want to be a part of this. If you're tired of the BS on the subject. If youre tired of seeing your fellow citizens bullied by the keystone cops, JOIN US!

If you HAVENT been to a BOS meeting, COME ON THE 10th. Speak... Be respectful and professional but demand her resignation and the resignations of Hillman and Scott.

If you haven't written a letter, WRITE ONE... NOW... Be respectful and profesional but demand her resignation, and the resignation of Hillman and Scott.

If you haven't made a phone call, MAKE ONE NOW... Be respectful and professional but demand her resignation and the resignations of Hillman and Scott.

MOST OF ALL... GET INVOLVED.... DON'T SIT BACK AND WATCH... I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO PROUD AS I WAS ON NOVEMBER 18th... Trust me... if you care about these issues, this is the one of front lines, and you'll be glad you got involved.

Please post numbers and emails that we can start with...

nick
02-03-2009, 10:51 PM
Please post numbers and emails that we can start with...

+1. I can make some time.

Doheny
02-03-2009, 11:14 PM
Please post numbers and emails that we can start with...

Here you go. If everyone could write and call it would leave a nice impression (all numbers and email addresses are public information if that's a concern of anyones.)

Pat Bates PatBates@ocgov.com 714.834.3350
Bill Campell Bill.Campbell@ocgov.com 714.834.3330
Chris Norby Chris.Norby@ocgov.com 714.834.3440
Janet Nguyen Janet.Nguyen@ocgov.com 714.834.3110
John Moorlach John.Moorlach@ocgov.com 714.834.3220

aileron
02-04-2009, 6:28 AM
That is somewhat disturbing; a non-elected official in a position of considerable power, accountable to almost nobody...

And because she has probably figured that out.... the question becomes; what will she do now?

RomanDad
02-04-2009, 12:15 PM
God I hope you are right RD.

When have I ever been wrong? :D

RomanDad
02-04-2009, 12:16 PM
Can Carona come back if he gets probation and no additional jail time on his federal case?

No. He is a convicted felon. He is barred from the position... And really.... We dont want him back....

There are other candidates that get mentioned in sort of Kneejerk response on gun boards when this issue comes up... Having studied the situation, they carry their own baggage. So, I'm not convinced they are viable either.... Viability is not a measure of one's agreement with my politics... Viability is a measure of their chance of getting elected.

We have yet to learn the name of the person who will replace her. But I KNOW they are out there somewhere. When that person comes forward, and they meet certain thresholds regarding their backgrounds, experience and policies, they will get our support.... We have become a strong enough force that WE dont need to beg somebody to run and plead with them to keep their promises once they win and dont need us anymore.... Candidates will be coming to US to get our backing, and THATS how it should work.

Cypren
02-04-2009, 12:36 PM
No. He is a convicted felon. He is barred from the position... And really.... We dont want him back....

No argument at all that he's not wanted. Can you provide a citation for why he's ineligible? I was looking through the Government Code to answer some questions yesterday and couldn't find anything about federal convictions barring a person from serving for elected state office. I suspect (hope?) I'm just looking in the wrong place, but would love to know where the right place is.

We have become a strong enough force that WE dont need to beg somebody to run and plead with them to keep their promises once they win and dont need us anymore.... Candidates will be coming to US to get our backing, and THATS how it should work.

I'm not entirely confident about that. Even Norby, who has arguably been our biggest supporter on the Board, has said that it would have been fine if she had just let everyone's permit expire while refusing to renew any or issue new ones. She's dug herself into a hole by being defiant, but her initial proposition -- and the one with which we all seem to disagree most strongly, that civilians simply shouldn't be armed -- seems to be well-received, or at least not contested, by people who are being painted as our "supporters" in County politics. I'm not convinced that any replacement wouldn't be just as bad or worse for our rights, but just more patient about their approach.

Pride goes before a fall -- and right now, I see an awful lot of pride in the 2A community over how the sheriff keeps shooting herself in the foot.

DDT
02-04-2009, 12:42 PM
the sheriff keeps shooting herself in the foot.

Perhaps she should be disallowed from carrying. Perhaps her assistant sheriff should too since he did threaten to commit grievous bodily harm to himself with a pencil.

Cypren
02-04-2009, 1:03 PM
Perhaps she should be disallowed from carrying. Perhaps her assistant sheriff should too since he did threaten to commit grievous bodily harm to himself with a pencil.

Don't forget his threat to take a hostage! ;)

DDT
02-04-2009, 1:10 PM
Don't forget his threat to take a hostage! ;)

Definitely sounds like a 72 hour hold.

GuyW
02-04-2009, 3:13 PM
See my post [URL="http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=1986183&postcount=49"]

I wouldn't be surprised if she could be accused or indicted of federal civil liberties violations or of PRA violations.....PRA seems more likely, but I'm not sure what the penalties would be; I'd expect an administrative slap on the wrist at the most.


I think PRA law has "private Attorneys General" clause that pays winning private attorneys from the offender's pocket...
.

yellowfin
02-04-2009, 3:18 PM
What's this I read about her secretly meeting with the DOJ admins to change the database software to allow changing expiration dates? As in opening up the possibility for ANY COUNTY to do this?!?! :mad:

tango-52
02-04-2009, 3:19 PM
I think PRAs have "private Attorneys General" clause that pays winning private attorneys from the offender's pocket...
.

After reviewing the video and finding that the information requested in the PRAR was not protected, an independent Judge has the option of awarding the costs for legal fees to the injured party, in this case OCCCWS.

GMONEY
02-04-2009, 3:24 PM
Seriously something is not right with this lady... I think she needs another psych eval. She will be committing political suicide with all of this blowing up in her face. She keeps digging herself in deeper. Can anyone explain this?

yellowfin
02-04-2009, 3:32 PM
Explanation? 90%+ incumbent reelection in this state, so nothing to fear.

GuyW
02-04-2009, 3:48 PM
Explanation? 90%+ incumbent reelection in this state, so nothing to fear.

Sheriffs are more like 100%. That's why, when there's a Sheriff's race without an incumbent, we need to be busy...
.

.

Doggboy
02-04-2009, 4:07 PM
The reason? A general attitude of being above the law. It is an attitude shared by most LEOs in my experience. Now I am not trying to LEO bash here and I apologize to the LEOs on this board who seem to be upstanding people. Still, the reality is when the police are allowed to live their lives talking down to people every day, and essentially doing what they want with no repercussions, they develope a god complex, and I think it is be being clearly illustrated here.

OCCCWS
02-04-2009, 4:40 PM
Incumbency will help little when we're through with her. She's in a death spiral. And it's only going to get worse.

Cypren
02-04-2009, 4:53 PM
Incumbency will help little when we're through with her. She's in a death spiral. And it's only going to get worse.

Just please take care that we don't win this battle and lose the war. We could easily get her out, only to have the Board "fix the problem" by appointing a new sheriff (like Santa Ana Chief of Police Paul Walters, who Norby endorsed the other day) who simply has a no-issue policy like LA but is patient enough to let the existing permits expire. Hutchens is most definitely a problem, but she is much more emblematic of the typical CLEO view on CCW than Carona was. And I'm not convinced that we've shown nearly enough numbers to scare the politicians into believing that we can jeopardize their re-election efforts.

This is not just a battle to allow the existing permit holders to finish out their terms, it's also to allow them to renew -- and for new applicants to get permits without having to have a near-death experience to show "good cause."

SgtDinosaur
02-04-2009, 5:03 PM
And I'm not convinced that we've shown nearly enough numbers to scare the politicians into believing that we can jeopardize their re-election efforts.

Obviously not. The legislature is still very anti-2A.

GuyW
02-04-2009, 5:24 PM
And I'm not convinced that we've shown nearly enough numbers to scare the politicians into believing that we can jeopardize their re-election efforts.


Unless the issue in dispute is one for which the pol is willing to fall on the sword, their typical standard is not "Do they have the numbers to beat me in an up-n-down vote?", its "Are they going to complicate my life by making opposing candidates more viable and greater threats to my re-election and possibly tipping the scales?".
.

RomanDad
02-04-2009, 7:41 PM
No argument at all that he's not wanted. Can you provide a citation for why he's ineligible? I was looking through the Government Code to answer some questions yesterday and couldn't find anything about federal convictions barring a person from serving for elected state office. I suspect (hope?) I'm just looking in the wrong place, but would love to know where the right place is.


Short answer: The felony means he loses his POST certification, which is a requirement for the job.

IAmASensFan
02-05-2009, 12:40 AM
I can see folks losing their jobs, or at the very least, getting a letter of censure/reprimand over this. They probally didnt expect this stuff to be mae public!

Not Friggin Likely.

All appologies that have come forward have been to Ngyuin only, or half assed...basically saying "I am sorry Hillman was a *****, but if OCCCWS hadn't done a PRA..."

IAmASensFan
02-05-2009, 12:42 AM
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/sheriff-hutchens-meeting-2297673-activists-county

Does RJ Morris really look like "Elton John"?

Not at all...Elton is much fatter and speaks with a British Accent.

RJ, you know I love you, brother! :D

IAmASensFan
02-05-2009, 12:51 AM
+1000 on everything up until here:



Moorlach has been one of her biggest supporters, and still is. He is playing the Flying Monkey to her Wicked Witch of the West. His Chief of Staff was the one who prepared a big PowerPoint presentation for the Nov 18th meeting (where these e-mails were generated), which was designed to bolster the Sheriff's anti-CCW position. He is the one who compared CCWers to rednecks with rifle racks in their pickups. Clearly, he is no friend of lawful gun owners.

Although, Moorlach is trying to distance himself now...Mario's been curiously quiet recently, and at the last meeting, he made a lot of faces and body language...but was silent...

I think Moorlach is realizing that this is his political time bomb now, too...he's backpeddaling and distancing himself from Hutchens...the only one who remains silent on the matter is Campbell. Time to work on him...

Moorlach is not Hutchens slave, but reality is sinking in. She lied...and he constantly asks questions to cover his ***. "Have I not told you several times in the past that this is not the most pro-active way to approach this?"

No...Moorlach will cave to voter pressure. Norbys choice of Walters would have been just as bad (I hope he is reading this to measure the writing on the wall), if not worse. I appreciate his constant support on this, but would feel better if he publicly stated a shall issue stance. Ngyun (pardon my spelling, but after 4 pints, your name is really hard to correctly spell) didn't understand the issue, and now seems to be fully supportive. Frankly, she is the one I initially had the least hope for, but she proved me wrong. Love you, Janet, go see Kathy (Kathy@Firearms-Training.info) at AKI Security...she's a constituent, and I am sure she'd love to take you shooting some day! Bates...I had high hopes for, but she seems to have sold out or something...she is too quiet on the issue...too bad, she is my rep, she won't be getting my vote unless she takes a public stand on the issue.


Just please take care that we don't win this battle and lose the war. We could easily get her out, only to have the Board "fix the problem" by appointing a new sheriff (like Santa Ana Chief of Police Paul Walters, who Norby endorsed the other day) who simply has a no-issue policy like LA but is patient enough to let the existing permits expire.

We will work on informing him. I seriously doubt that Norby would do anything to encure the wrath of Occcws at this point...he has seen just how cautious, and tactically sound, they can be.

IAmASensFan
02-05-2009, 1:06 AM
She just comes from LAPD, and shares their leadership's general attitude. The difference is that L.A. County supervisors and L.A. City Hall actually encourage such attitudes.

When I questioned the origin of her anti ccw attitudes, and recounted the issuance policy of LASO, her reaction was as if she was made to listen to a fingernail scraping across a blackboard.

I was sad, yet satisfied, all at once.

Ngyuen attacking her in support of my points was icing on the cake.

nhanson
02-05-2009, 4:16 PM
With her activities on CCW, inappropriate security behavior; it strikes me that she is breaking the law, as some have pointed out, which makes this a ripe complaint to the Orange Count Grand Jury for investigation. Coupled with the invasion of privacy, profiling, harassment of citizens without cause; I wonder how many civil rights violations she has racked up? I think her organization is far more corrupted than Corona's........Anyway, how else we can get outside pressure put on the OCSO?

Update....Here is the link to the Grand Jury complaint forms and process http://www.ocgrandjury.org/instructions.asp

If any of our more legally incline could pen something, we could all independently file a complaint..... hundreds or thousands of complaints will get attention. Complaint can not be about the CCW policy, only the violations of law and civil rights she and her cronies has perpetrated.

GunSlut
02-05-2009, 9:52 PM
Please do not file yet. As soon as that happens a investigation is opened. Then all PRAR responses stop. No more dirt can be gotten, and there is lots more.

Barry Badrinath
02-05-2009, 11:06 PM
Bates...I had high hopes for, but she seems to have sold out or something...she is too quiet on the issue...too bad, she is my rep, she won't be getting my vote unless she takes a public stand on the issue.

Don't forget about the connection between Supe Bates, the Sheriff, and Ron Cedillos. I think she is just working the room at this point and being careful not to step on her connections.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/carona-cedillos-hutchens-2070490-sheriff-never