May 11, 2008

Dallas SWAT

Until yesterday I had never viewed any of A&E's Dallas SWAT reality show. Last night I caught about 15 minutes of one episode. This 1/4 hour of television showed much of what is wrong with law enforcement. Here is what went down on Dallas SWAT.

Home Invasion Search
The SWAT team was preparing to arrest a woman on an outstanding drug warrant. The house was known to have children inside. SWAT members formulated a plan to rip the door off the house and storm the residence.

A&E showed only a few minutes of home invasion raid preparation. SWAT members discuss how best to rip the door off, where Alpha/Brave/Charlie team should be, and what to do when they find the kinds. No one proposes that maybe, just maybe, ripping the door off house full of children and sending a militarized police force is not the best idea.

Most people I know eventually leave their residence. Why not just wait for this suspect to leave then arrest her? This wait and arrest approach is not as ecxiting as the Rainbow Six approach. But why create a dangerous situation where none exists? Yet another example of the shift from Peace Officers to Law Enforcement. It appears that having a SWAT team obligates SWAT home invasion raids.

A Better Use for SWAT
I also caught an appropriate use of the Dallas SWAT team. A man was in his apartment and threatening to kill himself. He had a gun and may have shot at officers (I missed the beginning). The police used tear gas, and sent in a team to apprehend a disturbed and violent man. Stopping those who pose an immediate threat to the public is a much better strategy than creating threats by storming houses.


Johnny Baker- Cosmic Irony Strikes Back

Finally, the show also contained a segment of Officer Johnny Baker and his love of motorcycle riding. Officer Baker spoke about how much he enjoyed the rush of dangerous SWAT work.

What escaped Officer Baker at that moment was the cosmic irony of his alleged enjoyment of commercial sex services.
Officer Baker was later fired. Consensual crime enforcement giveth Officer Baker a job, consensual crime enforcement taketh away.

April 29, 2008

Dallas Sheriff Allows Armed Robbery To Protect Snitch

Today's DMN has a shocking story. Dallas Auto Theft Task Force agents knew that one of their snitches was going to rob a tractor trailer with $1m in cigarettes. The police, not wanting to ruin their important investigation, told no one.

This robbery took place in Waxahachie, in Ellis County. From DMN-


When several men broke into a Waxahachie truck terminal last October, tied up a security guard at gun point and crashed a semi-trailer loaded with $1 million in cigarettes through the front gate, they didn’t know one of them was a snitch for the Dallas County Sheriff’s Department.

A sheriff’s detective who was in contact with the informant that night said he didn’t know the crime would turn into an armed robbery. But the informant was surprised to be arrested months later, saying the detective knew for weeks what he was planning.

The Sheriff’s Department launched an internal investigation of its auto theft task force after local police officers complained that the detective hid key information from them to protect his informant.

That investigation cleared task force officers of any wrongdoing..

Task force detectives knew days in advance that the truck heist was going down at the Celadon trucking terminal in Waxahachie. They did not intervene and, in fact, weren’t even at the scene.

The investigation cleared task force officers of any wrongdoing. Why am I not suprised?

What would motivate law enforcement to allow crime? Bureaucrats are predictabty self interested actors. Government always acts to serve its own interest, not those of the public. This Auto Task Force wanted to bust a car theft ring, not prevent armed robberies.

Snitches are a disgusting reality of law enforcement. They pollute the integrity of the system. Snitches are most prevelant in drug cases. Someday Texas will ban police collusion with criminals. Until then, don't count on the Dallas Sheriff to protect you from their snitches.
Make sure a read the whole article for a great quote by
Grit's own Scott Henson.
It's good to see that Mr. Henson is recognized as the expert on Texas snitches. Way to go Scott!

Finally, thanks to Terrence who pointed out this was a trailer robbery, not an armored car heist. I got my google reader stories mixed up. Sorry for any confusion.

April 23, 2008

Ferris Police and the I-45 Speed Trap

I live in Ennis and frequently take Interstate 45 North to Dallas. There is never less than 2 police cars hiding between State Highway 34 and Interstate 20 looking for speeders. Most often these cops lurk on bridges and on ramps hiding from unsuspecting motorists.

On I-45 The speed limit goes from 65 to 60 in various spots. However, if you travel less than 70 you will be frequently passed by traffic. It is obvious that the Speed Limit on I-45 has no basis in promoting safety or in driver reality. There is nothing dangerous about driving 75 on I-45. Not that I would ever intentionally break our State's divinely inspired traffic laws.

I blogged earlier that I wanted to use open records to highlight the I-45 speed trap and the shameless money grab by local municipalities. I often see Garrett, Palmer, and/or Ferris police on I-45.

However, I lacked the time and energy to handle more open records work. Luckily, the Ellis County Observer did all the open records work for me.

Here is the Ferris Speed Trap by the numbers.
Ferris Texas- Population 2,157
Ferris Municipal Court Revenues per month 2008- $60,333
Citations Per Month 2008- 408.

A town of 2,100 generates $60k a month by writing 400 tickets a month. In Texas ticket quotas are supposed to be illegal. However, any government agency (including police) that can generate revenue will be exploited. It's much easier for politicians to raise money through traffic tickets rather than by taxing residents. Instead of getting visitors, business, or residents to come to Ferris they have chosen to use the power of government to steal money from drivers.

April 14, 2008

RateMyCop.com Interview- Gino Sesto

RateMyCop.com lets citizens rate and review police officers. Some Texas prosecutors don't like the idea. I think it's great. Police have a troubled history of policiing themselves. More information helps everyone. RMC could prevent future Tulias from happening.

Here is an interview with founder Gino Sesto.

1. Name/Background/Resume
Gino Sesto. 37yrs old, living in Culver City, CA. 15+ year Advertising background.

2. How did RMC get started?
Having a dinner with a good friend 7 or 8 months ago, and the topic turned to traffic tickets. We spoke about our experiences for at least a half hour. It dawned on me the next day that there is a website here. People all have experiences with officers, both good and bad. The best part is they remember them like it happened just yesterday. After doing some research and realizing I could get lists of names from the departments themselves we decided to make the site. We mailed over 1,000 requests to departments around the country and received over 500 back. I learned that over 40,000,000 traffic tickets are given out every year. On each traffic ticket there is a line for the officer to fill out. His/Her name and id number. Aha! That’s what we need. People keep those tickets for at least 6 months, so the data is there, and certainly the users are there. Everyone has an opinion on those tickets, and they usually tell all their immediate friends about the ticket.

3. Would RMC be possible without open records laws?
Absolutely, the open record laws only allowed us to seed the “kitty”. Without the 140k names that we have now, the press wouldn’t have bothered with us, but eventually the users would have grown the database to that point. Just 5 days ago we launched the ability for users to add to our database, and we have already had over 400 names submitted. Getting the names from the police departments only got the website to grow faster than it would have without the names

Continue reading "RateMyCop.com Interview- Gino Sesto" »

April 9, 2008

Texas DWI Officer Training- Don't Learn Too Much

Texas trains DWI officers with the NHTSA Standardized Field Sobriety Student Testing Manual. The NHTSA SFST Manual is the national standard for DWI enforcement. Every DWI defense lawyer should own a copy.

The manual includes, inter alia, training on how an officer should testify in court. DWI officers are professional witnesses, trained and paid to speak in court. Some of the manual's tips are pretty mundane; read the police report beforehand, listen carefully, take your time, speak clearly. Not too exiting.

Training Officers To Be Ignorant
Good propaganda demands blind adherence to principle. In our case officers are taught to never question "the studies" or the breath test machine.

Here is how the manual instructs officers to answer questions about the breath test machine, the Intoxilyzer 5000.

From the manual

You are not required to know, and in fact know nothing, about the Intoxilyzer 5000, or your jurisdiction breath test instrument, its internal workings or anything other than how to operate it and take a breath sample from a defendant.... Never testify to its internal workings, or the defense attorney will discredit you and make you out to be a "thinks-he-knows-it-all who really knows nothing

A typical breath test room contains the officer and the DWI suspect. That means NO ONE in the breath machine room knows how the Intoxilyzer works!! Another reason why you should have the right to counsel before bac testing.

What is worse in the encouragement of officers to not learn anything about the breath machine. What other profession would encourage ignorance? What is NHTSA afraid of? Maybe that the officers would read this, or this, or this.

Here is some more gold on NHTSA validation studies.

Be sure the officer is aware that NHTSA has done validation studies, and the SFST is considered very useful in determining whether or not is driving while intoxicated. The officer doesn't need to know the number, or care, because in this case, this defendant was impaired.

First of all, these studies have not been validated. Here is a great breakdown of the "studies" that "validate" the garbage SFST science.

For detecting innnocent drivers SFST's score as low as 7%! We certainly wouldn't officers to know that would we? They might lose the moral certainty required for subjective mass arrests. Officers shouldn't take time to learn about what they are doing. After all in your case, you are impaired.

March 31, 2008

Dallas Police vs. Latino Nightclub Bouncers

Dallas Police teamed up with federal ICE agents to raid Latino nightclubs over the weekend. 50 illegal immigrants were arrested. It is unclear if any had a record. 4 guns were recovered.

What were these illegal immigrants doing that posed such a threat to Dallasites? Working... as security guards... at nightclubs. Hit the xeno panic alarm!! Mexicans are coming to take our bouncer jobs!! Mr. Watkins proudly sums up the operation with this quote-

"Hopefully, this operation will help us send a message that we will not tolerate the falsification of documents for undocumented aliens under the guise of providing security," Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins said.

Of all the messages government tries to send that has to be one of the most confusing. The real message seems to be even "progressive" politicians will seek PR stunt victories over the politically powerless.

Craig, here is a message from Wikipedia. Dallas ranks number 1 for violent crime among large US cities. I doubt that illegal immigrant bouncer raids are going to reverse that trend.

A lot of good things have come out of the Craig Watkins administration. From innocence projects to smart on crime tactics his tenure has a been a welcome change. Is it troubling to see Mr. Watkins on board with the current xeno hysteria.

On a side note- I believe that free trade is a plus for society. Goods and labor should not be artificially impeded by government. Immigration is only a problem because our federal government created an artificial barrier. The fear of illegal immigration is great for ratings and votes. However, we betray our own country's heritage when we deny opportunity and freedom to immigrants.

March 30, 2008

Austin Drug Dog Expert- Victory Story

Drug dog expert Steven Nicely helped to defeat a possession case in Nebraska. Based on Nicely's testimony the court found a drug dog to not be reliable. Steven was kind enough to grant me an interview.

1. Tell us about the case.
Case involved a dog team from the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office Ne, in which approximately 10 pounds of cocaine was seized. The vehicle was stopped because the officer/dog handler believed some defect with its temporary plate. Handler spent over 30 minutes interviewing the driver and passenger before deploying the dog. This was not necessary the entire incident could have been complete in less than 10 minutes after contact with the driver.

2. What did you notice about the dog/handler behavior?
When the dog completed one pass around the vehicle the handler by excessive tapping directed the dog’s attention to the right rear area of the van the dog sniffed intently and tried to walk away. The handler immediately pulled the dog back and forced it to again sniff the area; the dog sniffed again and tried to leave. The dog is pulled back a third time sniffed and tried to leave the handler put his knee against the vehicle preventing the dog from leaving, pulled up on the leash and caused the dog to sit. The handler said the dog had responded revealing the presence of drugs.

3. Were these training or performance problems?
Both, training affect performance directly. The handler performed the way he was trained. Until recently, trainers for departments were never seriously challenged.

4. Can officers make drug dogs falsely indicate the presence of narcotics?
Yes, it can be done intentionally and unintentionally. Look up Clever Hans.

5. How can you tell the difference between a valid indication, and an officer induced indication of narcotics?
In this case it was very obvious, but in most cases it is very difficult. One must be aware of elements that occur before the search took place. A key element is comparing times when it can be confirmed the handler hand information prior to the search that increased suspicion and compare that with search/response/actual find ratio. Do not include claims of residual, the officer smelled drugs, or a roadside confession they cannot be confirmed. Other things to consider is the entire picture of the team’s performance break it down into times the dog was required to provided PC for a search and compare search/response/actual find ratios. The unconscious cues are the most difficult convince the judge they occurred. A ground work about “Clever Hans” should be laid to educate the judge on subconscious we humans can barely see if see at all. Dogs are predominately body language communicators, and lean to read the handler’s body language which can also include leash handling, breathing, and eye contact just to name a few.

6. Finally, what do criminal defense lawyers need to know when evaluating a drug dog performance?
Is the dog trained and tested in such a fashion that one would reasonably believe the dog will only reveal the presence or absences of drugs, a contraband item. (see US V PLACE)

March 27, 2008

Dallas Police Ticket Scandal- 3 Fired

The Dallas Police Ticket Scandal finally reached a conclusion with the firing of three officers and the suspension of one. The officers wrote false information on tickets. These tickets turned into warrants which led to the arrest of innocent defendants.

What was the police officer's defense? Those falsely arrested were poor.

"None of these charges merit termination at all,'' {Attorney] David Schiller said. "These are excellent officers who were out there every day working with the lowest common denominator ... in an area that needed enforcement."

My question- Why are no criminal charges being pursued? If we know the police filed false government documents they should be prosecuted. Craig Watkins could do a lot worse than spend time prosecuting corrupt police.

This is why we need the right to privacy, the right to not be stopped without cause, or the right to not be arrested on Class C misdemeanors- because without freedom we have no protection against government criminals.

March 5, 2008

East Dallas- When The Police Fail, Install Cameras

The Dallas Observer has a good story on the success of private security cameras installed in an East Dallas neighborhood. Richland Park estates has a voluntary neighborhood watch program that pays for the maintenance of a video monitoring system. This program has reduced crime dramatically.

These residents already send thousands of dollars in taxes to the Dallas police each year. Why are private security cameras necessary?

Opportunity Costs are really real
I keep saying that opportunity costs are real. Every drug arrest, poker raid, speed trap etc- keeps the police from preventing real crime. If these East Dallas residents could choose law enforcement priorities they would probably ask for more home invasion robbery prevention, and less pot and poker arrests.

State vs. Private Crime Prevention
This is a classic case of an unresponsive government agency failing to meet the needs of the citizenry. Crime prevention is a service. The Dallas Police are the government providers of crime prevention. DPD has their own priorities- fighting the drug war, writing tickets, poker prevention etc. This agenda is formed through the political process. Those without political power can not influence how the police disperse law enforcement resources. Political minority and individual demands for law enforcement are ignored. Ergo, East Dallas residents turn to the market to solve their problems.

What happens when the citizens gain the political power to manipulate the police agenda? In cities like Seattle, Portland, Oakland, and Denver the voters made marijuana arrests the "lowest law enforcement priority."

Dallas citizens needs a more responsive police department. Neighborhoods should be free to choose how their tax dollars are spent. Until then, we have citizens paying twice for crime prevention.


March 4, 2008

Plano Police DWI Scandal- The Offense Report

A quick recap- Tray Boswell was arrested by the Plano Police for Driving While Intoxicated. Tray's Attorney, Don Tittle, overcame Texas' incredibly limited discovery laws to find out that the arresting officers had been in contact with Tray's ex wife before, during, and after the arrest of Mr. Boswell.

Here is the Tray Boswell DWI Case Report. Sadly, it looks like all other police reports. I wonder how many of these phony DWI cases are never detected?

Pre Text Stops
Pre Text stops in Texas are legal. What is a pre text stop? If a cops wants to search or arrest you, but can not get a warrant, she is allowed to follow you while you drive until you commit any traffic violation. Then the officer may search, arrest, etc.

No other benign act does more to destory your rights than driving. In Texas, you can be arrested for almost any class C misdemeanor (even though class C misdemeanor do NOT allow incarceration as a punishment). Tray was pulled over for not having a front license plate.

What the camera doesn't see
Notice the police alleged the front license plate was missing. Why? Probably because you can't see it on the video. Ergo, for Tray to suppress this stop you would have a situation where the police say one thing, Tray says another, and the judge decides. Guess how that turns out?

HGN
Tray "failed" the HGN. The Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus is a great tool for corrupt officers.Why? Because the state can argue it is "science" and because the jurors can not see the suspect's eyes on video.

Other Allegations
Slurred Speech, Odor of an Alcoholic Beverage, Swaying, Blood Shot eyes, thick tounged speech. These are in the vast majority of DWI offense reports. None of them are viewable on camera.

February 22, 2008

Lessons from Cops

Watching Cops can be a good exercise for criminal defense attorneys. Search and seizure, confessions, probable cause all come in to play. I was channel surfing and caught a gun arrest.

Here is what happened- 3 passengers in a car. 2 males, and one female. I didn't quit catch where everyone was sitting. The police find a gun in the glove box. I don't remember the jurisdiction, however it was clear that there was no 2nd amendment right to carry in your car. The police are looking to pin this gun on somebody and make an arrest.

Male 1- Asks for an attorney. The police say "he asked for a lawyer, he isn't cooperating."
Male 2- Talks to the police. M2 states he doesn't know anything about a gun, he has no idea whose car it is, or who these people are.
Female- Talks to the police. Female states that she is M2's girlfriend. Female also states that the gun belongs to M1. F tells the police that M1 pulled the gun out when they were pulled over, and put it in the glove box.

The police know have three suspects. M1 asked for an attorney and hasn't said anything. M2 is either lying, or stupid. Female is snitching but her credibility is hampered by her relationship with M2.

Who do the police arrest? The suspect who "isn't cooperating"- M1. That's right, even though M2 lied, he is obviously more credible than someone who would ask for an attorney. They don't even consider Female a suspect, after all, she snitched.

The result- M2 and Female are let go. M1 (who still hasn't said a word) is arrested on a gun charge.

Lessons- Cops trust snitches. Cops think you are a criminal if you "don't cooperate." And the prisoner's dillema is real (game theory exists).

February 11, 2008

Dallas Police/TABC- Tax Dollars for Lap Dances and Beer

I recently filed an open records request seeking information on undercover TABC activity at strip clubs. I asked for information on all such operations in Dallas County. Not be left out of wasting tax dollars, the Dallas Police also conduct undercover strip club operations.
I received a large stack of papers and CD with more documents. After a quick glance here are some observations.

Purchase of Evidence

TABC spends a lot of tax money on beer and lapdances. They document this waste on "purchase of evidence" reports.
Here is a POE report from Dallas for two weeks in May. It shows no less than 9 lapdances and 14 beers purchased in two days! This undercover work appears to be more of a government subsidy for strip clubs than actual law enforcement.

Keeping You Safe From....?
According to Wikipedia, Dallas had the highest violent crime rate in the US from 1999-2005. Dallas has over 700 unsolved murder dating back to 1990. Where should Dallas Police spend their time? At Strip Clubs!!!
Let's look at a Dallas Police Department undercover investigation of "Lipstick" a club on Harry Hines. This investigation took place between August and November 07. What dangerous criminal activitiy did DPD uncover?
Solicitation of Drinks- Allegedly, employees at Lipsticks asked the undercover officers to buy them drinks. Texas has a law forbidding bar employees from soliciting drinks. It is good to see that Dallas Police are tackling this threat head on.
Permitting Public Lewdness- Allegedly, the "VIP" section of Lipstick was a hot bed of "lewd" activity. However, the undercover cops do not really tell us what is going. Here is an example-
"The suspect... violated state public lewdness statutes by making unlawful sexual contact with the undercover officer."
Not a lot of details on this "unlawful sexual contact". I can only imagine the danger this officer must have faced.
Prostitution-
It seems as though Texas' ban on commercial sex has not eliminated the demand. No suprise there. Prohibition never eliminates demand, it only changes who the suppliers are. However, is the threat so great we must turn cops into tricks/Johns?
From the Incident Report-
Undercover Officer- "What can I get for a $100? Can I get a f--- and a b--- j--?"
What can "I" get? These are tax dollars. This officer should be asking what can "we" get.
A Better Solution If you are concerned about prostitution, unlawful solicitation of drinks, or public lewdness at strip clubs I have a suggestion- Don't go to a strip club. If this officer had not solicited sexual services there would not have been any crime. Even if he did there would not be any victim.
Consensual crime enforcement makes us all less safe.

Opportunity costs are real. Officers who are getting lap dances are not investigating robberies, murders etc.

February 4, 2008

Texas DWI Law- Prohibition on Taking Specimen If Person Refuses

§ 724.013. PROHIBITION ON TAKING SPECIMEN IF PERSON REFUSES; EXCEPTION. Except as provided by Section 724.012(b), a specimen may not be taken if a person refuses to submit to the taking of a specimen designated by a peace officer.

This is part of the "implied consent" chapter of the Texas Trasnportation Code. Unless you are in a car accident with serious injuries (724.012b) this Prohibition on Taking Specimen applies. Notice how their is now exception for fill in the blank search warrants signed by "cooperative judges."

Now, pretend you are on the Court of Criminal Appeals. Here are the facts.

A defendant has been arrested for DWI and refused to give a blood sample. There has been no injury accident. Officer Friendly gets a warrant and forcibly removes defendant's blood. Defendants argues that this search violates 724.013 and the 4th Amendment and should be suppressed.

COCA Ruling- To dissalow these forced blood draws "results in giving DWI suspects more protection than other criminal suspects---an absurd result."

That sentence says a lot about COCA, the 4th Amendment and criminal justice in Texas. COCA judges find it absurd to give DWI suspects more protection even if the law is clear and unambiguous. Absurd- their word, not mine.

Judicial Activism Cuts Both Ways
Conservatives often decry "judicial activism" for issues like gay marriage.Yet this police state judicial activism is ignored by the same conservative pundits.

COCA ignored the plain meaning of the statute. The legislature could have put in an exception in the law for warrants, and didn't. So, an appellate court made new law and ignored the "strict constructionism" so often praised in conservative circles.

January 22, 2008

Austin Police- Warrantless Surveillance in 2 Sentences, or less

The City of Austin finally turned over their records on the Austin PD/Austin Energy Warrantless surveillance program. To recap, Austin PD has a deal with Austin that gives Austin PD access to customer electricity usage information. I filed an open records request for information on the program. Austin PD fought the request by asking for an AG opinion. The AG ruled for disclosure. Today I received the materials from the City of Austin Law Department.

What I Received
I received a list of email addresses for city employees (I'm not really sure why), the Austin Police's customer service agreement with Austin Energy (to provide electricity, not customer info), and a copy of the Austin PD Organized Crime Division Operation Procedure Manual.

The Procedure Manual is eight pages long. The city redacted all but two sentences. The still sent me 8 pages though, with a nice big "redacted- not responsive" stamped on each page to highlight their power of non disclosure.

The Two Sentences
Here is what the City of Austin fought to keep secret. Here is the information that would "endanger officer safety" if released. Drum roll..........................

"Assigned Personnel will use investigative techniques to include.....
F. Check utilities at reported location."


Tax Dollars At Work?
That's it. Austin PD, though the City of Austin Law Department, wasted tax dollars to fight the release of those two sentences. The City told the Attorney General that releasing those two sentences would "endanger officer safety." Is anyone else insulted by such fraudulent arguments? The City of Austin's Law Department is making a mockery of open records and law enforcement such sorry arguments.

No Program Exists
Sometimes what you don't find in an open records request is as important as what you do find. In this Austin PD has no program for this warrantless surveillance. Their is no oversight, no reporting of searches, no suspicion needed to search, nothing. Austin PD has unfettered access to your personal information with no policy as to how, when, or why the information can be accessed.

If an officer is getting divorced and wants to check his spouse's utility bill then he can. Want to see if you neighbor's house is energy efficient? Call Austin PD. Law enforcement discretion rarely goes without abuse, even seemingly benign powers like utility bill searches.

January 17, 2008

Texas DPS DWI Quota

DWI is a danger to liberty because Officers have unlimited discretion to subjectively decide you are "intoxicated." Combined with SFST junk science and you have a recipe for injustice.

What could make that situation even worse for the citizens of Texas? DWI arrest quotas. Austin DPS troopers operating under just such a system. These officers received memos stating that they had to make a minimum number of DWI arrests annualy.

What's wrong with quotas? Cops chasing a number of arrests, and given wide discretion to interpret "intoxication" will arrest the innocent and spin the evidence.

I shudder to think how many innocent drivers were arrested so DPS troopers could meet their quota. I guarantee these innocent drivers all had "bloodshot and glassy eyes, slurred speech, and the odor of an alcoholic beverage" and that they all "failed" the HGN.

Texas is supposed to have laws against law enforcement quotas. However, I'm sure no one involved in this scandal will face any charges.

January 16, 2008

Open Records 1, Austin PD 0

Austin Energy Warrantless Surveillance To recap- Austin Police and Austin Energy have an agreement that allows for warrantless surveillance of consumer electricity bills. Austin PD uses this information to search for marijuana growing operations sans warrant.

Request
I filed an open records request with Austin PD and asked for internal policies, inter alia. I received this information, however other records were not disclosed. Austin PD sought an.. wait for it... Attorney General Opinion to avoid disclosure. ACLU Texas also filed a request for the same information.

Victory Today I received the AG opinion. The Attorney General rightfully denied Austin PD's attempts to keep this information from the public. Austin PD argued that if the public knew more about the warrantless surveillance program it would endanger "officer safety." However, Austin PD failed to demonstrate how releasing information would endanger officers.

Your Tax Dollars At Work
Cities pay a lot for law firms to handle open records requests. In my expereience the firms just throw out unsubstantiated boiler plate arguments. Simply handing over the information would save cities thousands in billable hours.

Page 3/5 got merged together. Here is the opinion-


Labels: ,

January 8, 2008