Open Mike for City Workers

$500 could buy the city a couple or 3 digital recording devices and an hour or two for a local expert to setup and teach the city clerk how to upload MP3 file recordings to the city website.

Does anybody remember Richard Nixon and his missing eighteen minutes? I submit again, how will we know what we hear or read is a COMPLETE record? And what bars them from shady actions behind closed doors outside the meetings?

I’ve been considering this. I’ve always been a bit loose on what exactly I do and will continue to be so although I doubt it would be that hard for any to figure out more or less what I do if not exactly who I work for given my comments here. I never exactly lie but I have misdirected at times for fear of something I say here being used against me at work because I know for a fact that some at work DO READ comments at this site. The internet is only sort of anonymous.

I could spill a lot of specific dirt, nonething earth shattering like Mason, but just wastes of money etc. But to be honest I’m not sure I want to. For one thing, if I get specific then that angers the people I’m specific about. If they suspect who I am they retaliate. And most people aren’t dumb enough to retaliate directly. They do things like what they did to the library whistleblower - change job assignments to something unpleasant. Nail them to wall because one day they were one minute late. Micromanage them. Etc.

For another, I have little faith my spilling would change things for the better. If anything I suspect it would make it worse. It would do nothing to the problem and make it worse for those of us who weren’t doing anything wrong. If whistleblowing leads to a budget cut that might mean jobs and benefits - cuts always come there first. If I KNEW that spilling would only affect the bad things going on then I’d be more inclined to do so. But people usually tend to take a all or nothing approach. They are all bad, its all being mismanaged, etc. I truly believe that most of my coworkers are honest hardworking people. Like any profession there are going to be bad apples but they are a minority and its how we deal with them that should count. But few see it that way, most people see one bad person and assume they are all bad. And its just some at the top who I think are mismanaging things. I fear that spilling would hurt the good people rather than the bad.

I’ll consider further.

I was thinking afterwards of the MP3 record. I think it’s great and an easy technology to use, but we still need a written record. I can scan a written document much faster than an audio recording, and am much more likely to scan a written record than listening to a boring thing like city business (my opinion). Plus, I can search for keywords in the written document. Plus, then the written notes can jive against the MP3 recordings.

Why doesn’t the city just hire more of those court reporters to record the council and committee minutes? They are fast, professional, and ready to step into this extra work.

I think you guys are overly concerned with the meeting minutes. The meetings are open to the public — and people are prersent for each meeting. I am sure that no super secret dastardly deeds are being openly discussed. If there are such deeds they are being talked about behind closed doors. You either trust your elected officials or you don’t. As long as we have human beings in positions of power and authority — we will have issues. As responsible citizens, we just have to stay involved and keep our eye on things… Chiasm is right though — its not the primary powers in the city that can be (or usually are) the problem. Its the Directors of certain Departments — and people just below that level where serious problems can fester for years without being seen. I worked for Idaho Falls City for almost 20 years. I never saw corruption persay — but I did see the good ol’ boy network alive and well — taking care of its own and letting the hammer down once in a while on those not a mwember of that infamous organization.

I don’t think that there aren’t big enough problems to report. I think we got off on this tangent of discussing the problem in general because of my first posting. Sorry. I know everyone who writes here knows about problems, but I think many of us are afraid, and understandably so. I personally know of criminal cases where evidence has been destroyed, perjury has been committed, theft of property from criminal defendants by law enforcement, the wrong individual has been charged for a crime, etc. Explain to me how you want this disclosed via this site and I will consider if I want to “report” it.

The attorney general has been contacted but they cannot investigate unless they are “invited” in by the prosecutor. Now, if you were the prosecutor, would you invite them in?

The good thing about the written word is getting your say in without interruption. The bad thing is the inability to get someone’s tone. I would hope, Guest, that you’re tone was not one of sarcasm, suggesting that I should be willing to sacrifice my job to do something about what’s happening. My job is not in any jeopardy. I have, however, risked my very life to try and protect some of the individuals (you say criminals) who have been caught up in this web of corruption. It is happening, and the evidence is a matter of public record. One just has to wander down to the courthouse and ask for the right files. Since the prosecutor has approved the prosecution by his deputies of these cases, he will never agree to have the attorney general conduct an investigation. Civilly and maybe criminally, he could be held personally accountable for their actions, even for those cases he didn’t know about. The buck stops at his desk and he knows it. There are several people who are seeking a way around the necessity of his approval.

i wore the badge there for over 15 years. Never — for any reason would I have let the crimes you describe go just for my job. Jobs are easy to come by. I have a much better one now. I left for reasons nearly as disturbing as those you describe. If you truely have information about those types of activities — you and I both know there are ways to get it handled.

Inside Observer, that’s a great question. The reason I posted this information is more because of the mass media reporters who check in here daily (I see you even if I don’t say anything!)

If specific information or even hints are dropped about where to look, I have no doubt at least four local bloodhounds would be sniffing out the case immediately. They have the inside contacts and resources to find the information if they are tipped off in the general direction.

Another reason to post this is almost a challenge. If anyone knows something significant, it’s time to put up or shut up, because I want my hometown to heal!

If there is really corruption still here, now is the time we have momentum to root it out. If anyone has information, find a way to state it in a manner that our local reporters reading it will know where to investigate.

Otherwise, we have to assume there is no mass corruption in Idaho Falls (at least for the time being) and we can hopefully heal and trust our city officials and move onto more constructive activities again.

There is a case where a senior official at the Bonneville County Sheriff’s Office left a threatening message on a young woman’s voice mail. When the young woman did not do what the officer wanted, he set up a situation where she was arrested with some of her friends after an illegal traffic stop. (The message has been copied and will be presented in court.) The prosecutor’s office is well aware that the defendant was threatened by the officer, they heard the tape, but has chosen to ignore it. The officer was asked about it but has replied that he doesn’t recollect making the call. LOL! This young woman’s attorney has appeared in court twice to ask for an order from the judge that the prosecutor’s office be ordered to release discovery to him. The judge has refused to issue the order. Every attempt to acquire the information through discovery or subpoena has been headed off by the prosecutor. What information they have released has been tampered with. The latest court filing states that 18 minutes of videotape that was provided by the Sheriff’s Dept were deleted. Shades of Richard Nixon? He didn’t get away with it. Why should the officer be allowed to? At least half of what the attorney has asked for has been withheld. The law requires that a defendant be given discovery. The prosecutors just don’t care. The judge is aware that the prosecutors are refusing to hand over the discovery but has scheduled this case to go to trial next week anyway. The defendant cannot prepare a defense without it. This would be an illegal proceeding and the judge and prosecutor know it. There is another hearing tomorrow morning, Friday, at 9:30 in St. Clair’s court where the prosecutor has asked the court to order sanctions against the defense attorney for trying to obtain the discovery through subpoena since the prosecution won’t hand it over. The defense attorney has filed another motion asking the court to order the release of the discovery. So, in this case, we have a sheriff’s deputy threatening someone, we have a prosecutor refusing to hand over discovery as mandated by law, and a judge who is ordering a defendant brought to an illegal trial anyway. There is also strong indications in the police report that the officer who arrested these individuals lied in his report and maybe even planted evidence. If he repeats these lies during trial, that’s perjury. The problem with proving it is that the sheriff’s department or the prosecutor’s office has deleted the evidence from the videotape and the prosecutor is fighting to prevent the verifying documents that the defense attorney has subpoenaed from being released. He actually wants the attorney fined/jailed for even asking for it!
How’s that? It will be interesting to see if any one of you fine folk show up to watch.

Reading between the lines of IO’s last post.

My speculation - there isn’t much to defend the defendant on so they are playing attack the police. A tried and trued and frequently successful tactic by defense attorneys.

Could a smidgeon of what he claims this deputy did be true? Perhaps but I’d be highly doubtful that it really went down as described. There are bad cops out there but few are going to risk their careers over something like planting evidence. Police know that few of their cases are going result in convictions anyway so why would they risk their careers, homes, and families over something like that. When police go bad its usually because they lose control and use excessive force or its thefts. Planting evidence to get revenge is very rare. Of course it has happened somewhere (most everything has happened somewhere) but that doesn’t mean its common.

I personally know nothing of this case so I could be wrong.

One thing in America that is very true the last fifteen years is that police are considered guilty even if proven innocent. Its fashionable to accuse the police of all kinds of misconduct and many people will believe it. And of course its page one if a police officer is accused and usually page 12, if even reported, if they are exonerated. And even if exonerated many start yelling coverup. Look at the Rigby cop who recently was “accused” of having sex on duty with a woman whose husband he arrested. Even after it was proved he couldn’t possibly have done it (witnesses had him somewhere else when it supposedly happened) some were still claiming he did it. And media coverage claiming he did it was much greater than that saying he didn’t.

A third thing, I keep thinking of things to say.

No details were given on the “alleged threat.” Most curious.

Was this a real threat like:

1. I’m going to come beat you up.
2. I’m going to rape your children.
3. I’m going to kill you.

Or was this a threat like:

1. You sold drugs to an undercover officer / CI. You can either now become a CI yourself or we will arrest you and take you to jail.

2. Tell us what you know about this crime or we are going to charge you for that marijuana pipe on your dresser.

3. If you don’t cooperate in the investigation your going to regret it. Now this one could be taken several ways - some threatening and some not. Obviously, eye of the beholder and intent matters.

Obviously the first examples are real threats and clearly out of line and if an officer made that type of threat then nail him to the wall. But the second examples are also clearly “threats” by the definition of threat yet I’m not seeing a problem.

Not many cops would be stupid enough to leave a “thretening message” of the severe variety on someones messaging machine. The problem that I have is when people start making all of these horrendous claims of police corruption — and then make excuses why they cannot (or will not) report them. When the police commit crimes for real — people jump at the chance to deal with it — including good cops.

Well, this certainly doesn’t address the bad cop threatening employee situation. But, it’s an observation I wondered if others had shared.

I noticed on your #20bpost, Joe, of this thread that you talked ahout media checking this site out. Just curious if anyone read what I did in the 07/20 PR in the City and County column usually reserved for issues and agendas of the I.F., and sometimes Ammon,city council meetings?

Per chance you missed it, here’s what I remember being so different. I can’t recall reading an article about CITY DEPARTMENT MEETINGS Previously. Have any of you? The column told us where each department was having their meetings for the next week, the location, the time and the Department Director’s name. I don’t ever recall seeing the times and dates of some of these meetings. It would be great if citizens attended.

I remember reading about the “bored CEOs ” and company execs who felt like they had little to get up for in the mornings. I wish some of these people would consider attending a few of these planning or other departmental meetings! It would be superb if they did a follow up piece here.

What do the rest of you think?

Also, besides the PR, what other media do think T

Well seems like there must not be too much corruption in Idaho Falls — as this string pretty much died…. I can honestly say — I worked in Idaho Falls for many years — “retired” from the police department. I just didn’t see any corruption. I never saw an illegal or imprproer search — I never saw any abuse of force — I don’t remember hearing about any cases that were dismissed because of illegal police activity at all. Its a fact. I did HEAR about one rogue cop who apparently did some illegal searches — and man have I got a sdtory to tell about that one! No time now though… But I never saw any of that — just heard about it. If I had seen anything out of line I would have reported it… There is corruption anywhere that you have a large enough number of people. But as cities go — Idaho Falls is probab;y one of the “cleaner” cities. But still with its problems. Does anyone remember the big police scandal from the 50’s” The night shift cops were actually burglarizing homes while people were gone on vacation — they (cops) were using the “vacation watch list” to know which places to hit. Some even went to prison over that one….

To clarify what I said about illegal searches and cases thrown out.

Cops have to make decisions in the field based on circumstances that vary wildly from situation to situation. And they often don’t have time to consult a law book for several days to consider the thousands of applicable court cases and precedents. Anytime an arrest is made the cop is making a judgement call based on good faith. Sometimes though its later found that the drugs that were found were seized due to an improper search.

Example (and one that happens all the time). Car is pulled over for speeding. Driver is drunk or suspended or has a warrant or whatever. Point is he gets arrested. Legally, and this has been upheld by the Supreme Court, the cops can now search the car and any containers in the car without a warrant and without consent - its called search incident to arrest. But lets say there is a passenger in the car. Can the cops now search that passenger’s purse? Sometimes they do and they find drugs. And sometimes the passenger challenges said search and sometimes its thrown out as an illegal search and sometimes its upheld - it all depends on the variables of the given case and there are far too many to talk about here without writing a novel.

Thats just one example though where the cops could make a good faith arrest and later have a prosecutor or judge say - nope, illegal search and throw it all out.

There is a reason why there are thousands of court decisions that come down each and every year on criminal cases. Circumstances vary wildly and its nigh impossible for police, especially when they are in the field having to make split second decisions, to fully analyze the particulars and decide if there is a conflict with all ten thousand applicable court cases. Lawyers have hours and days to toss it about. Police don’t. And the courts are generally understanding of this and allow the police to slide on a lot of these things as long as they police were acting in good faith, without malice, and the violation was not too egregious.

And I fully believe that about 99.9% of people who get arrested are guilty. Whether that can be proved or not is another matter. We all know Michael Jackson molested children and that OJ killed Nicole. But it couldn’t be proved. Doesn’t mean they didn’t do it though. Real life isn’t Matlock where innocent people are always getting arrested on put on trial. It does happen occasionally but rarely. But not around here.

Hey, a real city issue here. I was given this to pass on and I don’t know anyone this could directly affect so here goes. Also, I’m merely regurgitating what was explained to me so I can’t testify as to the complete accuracy of this although I’ve heard similar from other city employees I know. Here goes.

There is apparently an enormous amount of money being flushed away at the city garage. The city has its own privately run garage used to service city vehicles - everything from police cars, to fire engines, to snowplows, to loaders, etc.

On the surface this probably sounds like a good idea and I thought so too as I thought it probably would be cheaper to repair your own things rather than send them out.

However, apparently the garage is a huge money loser for the city. In order to keep the garage afloat the garage charges something like $50.00 for an oil change. If an oil change is that overpriced I can’t imagine what its like for more serious things. Granted its just one city department paying another but at some point all that money did come from taxpayers.

Its also pretty well known that if you take your vehicle there to have something fixed there is a good chance the garage will break something else on your car requiring a longer stay. Or the garage will claim to fix something but not actually do so. Or they’ll plain just scew it up.

Examples of screw ups given to me were of a police car that was taken there for an oil change. The mechanic drained the oil but forgot to put new oil in. Another car was taken and the mechanic forgot to screw the bolt on the pan on tightly and all the oil dumped out in the parking lot the city building. A car that was taken up to have the battery changed and it was kept overnight (since we all know how long it takes to change a battery). Mysteriously aliens or someone came in during the night and somehow caused all the fluids inside the car to dump all over the garage necessitating the car stay there while they replaced several faulty pans. I was also told that quite often taken there to get new batteries when the old ones fail, this is apparently very common in the police cars due to all the electrical stuff being run, and the garage does nothing but charge the battery and that only lasts a week or so and then the car is right back up there. The garage gets lots of repeat billings to city departments and city employees waste a lot of man hours trying to get their cars running.

So do I understand that since 99.9 percent of “them” are guilty, civil rights are irrelevant? If we let the police “slide” a little here and a little there, will there be anything left? What’s the point of having laws if we just want to “slide” on them anyway? Or should we just fire up Ol’ Sparky as soon as “they’re” arrested? Guess that would save us a bundle on prison/jail space, wouldn’t it? Actually it would save us a real bundle on the justice system all around. Why not just dispense with the arraignment, probable cause, discovery, warrants, trial, the jury, even the judge? It sounds like our police are so infallible they should act as judge, jury and executioner.

I thought we believed that it was better to let 12 guilty men go free than to allow one innocent man to be sent to prison. Or are we saying that looks good on paper, but we don’t want to practice it in real life because 99.9 percent of “them” are guilty anyway? Gawd! I hope no one I know ever ends up being the 0.1 percent! In a population the size of Idaho Falls that means 50 innocent people could be arrested, tried and convicted. A lot of blame is going to the defense attorney and the “criminal” - who I learned in elementary school was INNOCENT until proven guilty in a court of law. Not every defense attorney is trying to get his client off on some trumped up defense. Most of them, good and bad, do try and make sure that the defendant’s rights aren’t violated. In a big way, that’s the real point of being a defense attorney, defending everyone’s rights, not just the criminal’s. If we allow “their” rights to be violated, what about “our” rights? What makes “us” different from “them”? After we’ve reached the point of door-to-door searches (we’re not far from that now), are we going to be happy with a “oops, sorry ma’am” when they’re done tearing our house or car apart and haven’t found anything? When they knock down your door or pull you over with your grandkids in the car, are you going to ask to see the warrant and hope to heaven that the cop did his job first? By the book? Or are you going to be okay when they tell you they want to “slide” a little because 99.9 percent of “them” are guilty.

You said cases are being dismissed all the time here because of these illegal searches and arrests. Wouldn’t the police have learned the right way to do it by now? Split second decisions are made in the rare life-threatening situations. Not all their work is “split-second”. In the case of an arrest or a search, I would think they would have more than a “split-second” to decide if they really had probable cause. Heaven forbid they should hold off while they got a warrant! That just wouldn’t do, now would it? Oh, that’s right. I forgot, they’re infallible. Sorry.

Writers said they would jump if they thought there was any chance that a cop might be crooked or might be threatening people or otherwise acting inappropriately. So what did we learn in court last Friday when we jumped? Was it the police, the defense attorney, the prosecutor, the judge or the criminal who was causing the problems in this case?

I have a number of interesting stories to tell about the “Good ‘Ol Boy Network” and just amazing things in general that happend in Idaho Falls over the years. I didn’t witness this one — before my time — but I heard this first hand from people that were there: Back many years ago — probably the 70’s I would imagine — maybe late 60’s a police officer was having a family problem and was involved in a heated arguement with his wife. Sonmeone called the police and City Officers responded. The home t5hat they were responding to was the home of a fellow officer who they knoew well. Once the Officers knocked on the door, the door flew open and there stood the off duty policeman — with a gun pointed at the responding officers. The repsonding officers dove off of the porch just as the shot was fired. One Responding Officer in particular was nearly hit, but made it out of the way just in time. No one was arrested for this. It was hush hushed and pushed aside. The shooter was later promoted to Sergeant within the Police Department, and years later was elected Sheriff of a local county (not the current Sheriff!!) Now once again — no names listed here — and I did not see it happen. But it was well known — talked about almost as “legend” and i heard it from the fine fellow who was nearly shot. I have several stories like these…. History in any small town can be very interesting….

One thing further. Didn’t Livesey say in his press report that if they had wanted to cover this Mason thing up, they could have done so without breaking a sweat? I would suggest that means he knows how easy it is to cover things up.

Inside Observer,

Your putting a lot of words in my mouth that I never said. Especially concerning the 18 minutes video. I said before and I’ll say again, I know nothing about the case.

What I have said and I’ll say again is that you have been very vague with the details. You imply a lot and don’t specify much. Which makes one curious as to why.

How about some specifics. No more VAGUE stories about alleged threats. Lets hear word for word what this threat was so we can judge for ourselves. Lets hear what these people were actually arrested for. You claim they were illegaly arrested. Lets hear what the charges are and lets here the story behind the arrest - not just some VAGUE assertion that the cop engineered the arrest.

And should Jimmie Caudle get a medal? Actually maybe he should. But does that mean that he shouldn’t be in prison given his record and his crimes. Heck no. Jimmie Caudle got off easy as well given his record.

Chiasm,
If I were to provide more details, it would disclose my identity, which is something I cannot do. You may be fine with that, but I am not. What’s your problem with having gone down to the courthouse to find out for yourself. You could have heard the threat for yourself, you could have heard the prosecutor trying to defend the missing videotape, and found out for yourself what they were charged with. Maybe what I’ll do is tell you when the next hearing is scheduled and you can try again.
As for putting words in your mouth, I don’t think I am. You are quite obvious in your defense of EVERY police officer and your condemnation of every person who is arrested. You said yourself you believe they’re guilty and that cops wouldn’t put their futures at stake by crossing the line. I have seen too much to agree with that statement. Innocent people are arrested, guilty people are illegally AND improperly arrested and some cops do cross the line, for unknown reasons. I wish this weren’t true, but it is.