CCA Reflects: Citywide Policy Making Deserves Public Discussion

This story is reprinted from

After reading please consider signing the online petition here! It is very important this case be tried and NOT settled!

CCA Reflects: Citywide Policy Making Deserves Public Discussion

Published Thursday, February 28, 2019

Since last summer, CCA and our coalition of social service providers and civic leaders have been active on the Mitchell v. City of Los Angeles (Mitchell) case, advocating for our position that Downtown should not be given different standards than the rest of the city. You may remember from our letter to the City and CCA Reflects piece that we have serious concerns with the approach that was taken with this case.

The Council’s Homelessness and Poverty Committee has held three closed session discussions on this case, and there were more than 100 speakers who spoke during public comment at these hearings, demonstrating the high pubic interest in this issue. Because the discussions were conducted in closed session and kept confidential, the public has not learned whether the City plans on settling the case — including possible settlement terms — or taking the case to trial. At the last committee meeting in February, the Committee ultimately moved the matter to City Council without a recommendation.

The full Council will be deliberating on this issue in March. Our coalition has made significant progress, but we still have many concerns that need to be considered.

The Council must look at Mitchell comprehensively and assess the impacts a settlement would have on not only Downtown, but the entire city. L.A. has been mired in a cycle of lawsuits that has dictated the City’s policy on homelessness. Our coalition’s approach is about fighting that cycle. These lawsuits not only tie the City’s hands in making policy, but undermine the work that the Council and voters have done to address homelessness. The significant work on Proposition HHH, Measure H, “A Bridge Home” and the revision of LAMC 56.11 are all threatened.

Downtown is the area with the most homeless housing and services, and therefore the area with the greatest need for a fair and reasonable limit on personal goods in public areas. If Mitchell is settled with no limit on personal goods in the area with the most homeless resources and residents, it is unreasonable to believe that any other part of the city would be able to have more restrictive standards. Mitchell will establish the baseline for the entire city and that is why we feel strongly that settling Mitchell with no limits on personal goods except for specific bulky items would be much worse for the City than actually losing at trial. If the City loses at trial, there is always the ability to appeal. If the City settles the case, the only way to change the settlement terms is to return to the plaintiffs and seek agreement. This is important to consider when using taxpayer dollars to fund litigation, especially when the plaintiffs have a proven track record of maintaining the most rigid position despite circumstances changing.

The City Council and the City Attorney have the ability to hire outside counsel to assist with Mitchell and related litigation including LAMC 56.11, “A Bridge Home”, Cooley v. City of L.A.and the revision of LAMC 41.18, and we recommend that they do so. These are very complex matters that require a tremendous amount of time from City staff, and we believe having additional resources will be beneficial to the City, providing a complete picture on how these items relate to one another.

When discussing settlement terms, we ask the Council to consider the following:

-We should presume any settlement terms for one area would become citywide. This occurred with Lavan v. City of L.A. We need a solution that works for the entire city.

-Any time limits in a settlement will not work. It will be impossible to shift back once a standard has been set as evidenced by Jones v. City of L.A.

-Any settlement terms need to be consistent with city policies already in place.

Most importantly, because discussions have been kept confidential, we are greatly concerned that the public has not had the ability to learn about the potential citywide implications of a proposed settlement of the Mitchell case. To that point, we ask the Council to consider releasing a draft of the settlement terms to allow the public to weigh in before taking official action. We believe this will elevate the public discourse on this important citywide policy matter and provide transparency while increasing accountability.

Since the Mitchell injunction was issued in 2016, we have seen the conditions in Downtown steadily worsen. Piles of belongings entangled with trash and debris are common sights, creating unhealthy conditions. We firmly believe that every individual — especially the most vulnerable — is entitled to the full benefit of the U.S. Constitution’s protections. We know that the injunction has created serious public health implications in the area and applying a reasonable limit on personal goods will help create healthier conditions while still providing individuals with the Constitution’s protections. We are pleased that the full Council will soon be deliberating over this citywide policy issue, and we hope they act on our significant concerns and recommendations.

Recent News to Learn More About Mitchell:

-Councilmember Buscaino discussed Mitchell on Dr. Drew Midday Live. Listen to his part on Episode 2/12 – 12pm and go to 23:50 in the episode.

-Susan Shelley, a columnist for the Southern California News Group, wrote an opinion story on Mitchell for the L.A. Daily News.

Santa Sleigh Schedule 2018 – A Day Late & Dollar Short


Eggnog anyone?

So yeah LAPD Pacific must have sent the memo for this into the wormhole cause even their Facebook didn’t have it… and the first run was last night so sorry folks, going to have to hustle in traffic with the kids to one of the upcoming locations… but it IS WORTH IT!!! Map for all this nonsense below courtesy of web based documents from Pacific Division developed during the Jurrasic Period.

These Stop Times can vary 15 to 30 minutes cause this is LA and traffic is a lump of coal in your stocking, and it is on fire..

Please listen for sirens, music and flashing police lights.
We are loud! Tell your neighbors so no one is alarmed.
What will appear?   Santa on an LAPD Sleigh!

Santa will stop for pictures. Bring your camera.

(The Sleigh will not be out if it is raining!)
Additional information call your Senior Lead Officer or
Pacific Community Relations Office at (310) 202-4524

Here we go:

Monday December 3rd — Westchester and Playa del Rey

Sorry – that show is over. #dunzo

Tuesday December 4th — Westchester

4PM – 5962 W 75th St.
4:45PM – 7835 Goddard Ave.
5:30PM – 4821 W. 63rd St.
6:45PM – 8937 Fleetwing Ave.
7:45PM – 888Earhart Ave.

Wednesday December 5th – Palms

2PM – 3724 Cardiff Ave (Niko’s Pre-School)
3PM – 3535 Overland Ave (Golden Manor Independent Living Home)
5PM – N/W Corner of Vinton Ave (Fire Station #43)
5:45PM – Clover Elementary School
6:45 PM – 3500 Greenfield Ave

Monday December 10th – Mar Vista

3:00 PM – Short Ave Elementary School
4:00 PM – Braddock Elementary School
5:00 PM – Mar Vista Gardens Boys and Girls Club
6:00 PM – Slauson Park / Mar Vista Family Center
7:00 PM – Mesmer/Beatrice Garden (Northwest corner)
8:00 PM – North Park between Marcasel Ave and East Blvd

Tuesday December 12 – Del Rey

4:00 PM – 12814 Maxella Ave (Short Elementary)
5:30 PM – Playa Vista (Concert Park)
7:30 PM – Oxford Triangle (Thatcher Ave at Howard St)
8:00 PM – Kenyon Ave and Louise Ave

Wednesday December 13 – Penmar

3:30 PM – Penmar Park (Lake west of Walgrove)
4:15 PM – 2103 Walnut Ave
5:00 PM – St. Andrew’s Church (National Blvd and Federal Avenue)
5:45 PM – 3236 Purdue Ave
6:30 PM – 3270 Granville (Between Indianapolis and Rose)
7:15 PM – 11900 Victoria Avenue (Mid-Block)
8:00 PM – 3412 Keeshan Dr



LA City Attorney Sneaking Meeting Regarding Homeless Settlement To Avoid Public Comment – Act Fast Or Endure The Nightmare…

This is a huge deal, which is why I am making this post… you are about to be screwed at the direction of the LA City Attorney who is sneaking around to force through an issue so egregious – it will impact everyone who lives in LA in a way that is just incomprehensible. You need to freak out over this and light up the phone of your Council office NOW. I hate saying it but you need to…

So YOUR City Attorney is trying to settle a lawsuit without deposing the plaintiffs or the defendants in a case that will upend all efforts of citizens and voters in The City of LA regarding homeless issues. BTW the plaintiff is The City of Los Angeles and the 3 LA City Police Officers involved have not been interviewed at ALL. The LA City Attorney is supposed to represent & defend The City – and instead for whatever sneaky reason he is going out of his way to try and slip this by you, me, the press and everyone else and it is a seriously bad situation.

He has chosen NOT to properly represent The City and the 3 police officers in this case. The body camera video has not been reviewed – and he has played a shell game with the dates for a hearing of this case in an obvious effort to thwart public comment and force through an option that will not only wind up having The City of Los Angeles pay even MORE MONEY to Attorney Carol Sobel – but will result in an agreement that will completely SCREW over anyone that lives, uses or walks on any sidewalk in Los Angeles.

Important points to understand:

1. That this is not just about skid Row boundaries. Constitutional rights extend all sidewalks so eventually there will be more litigation on other side walks across the city of Los Angeles. Costing the city more money, than already with the LAVAN & JONES settlements.

2. Taxpayers have committed w HHH & H, the City has offered numerous programs, $$ to support homeless relief – housing, shelter, and services. It’s very late in the game, but we should not allow the public right of way to be handed over to private citizens before we see sufficient beds in place.

3. What *SHOULD* happen is not to settle but to fight this – all the way to the supreme court if necessary. This is not about “stuff” it’s about people. People are dying on our sidewalks…

Also to put this in as a special meeting with the agenda just posted just now – is an affront to the democratic process which allows all people no matter who they are to have a voice. Per the Brown act – only 24 hours notice for “special meetings” is allowed for posting meeting and agenda info. The question is, is this an emergency??? Why the “special meeting” if not to prevent public comment? They have scheduled and rescheduled several times now – but now they are pushing the settlement and there is no legitimate reason for this course of action…. read & weep … bit GO TO THE MEETING!!!

Info sent to us regarding issue:

Mitchell vs. City of Los Angeles at

Homelessness & Poverty Committee

The Homelessness & Poverty Committee is scheduled to discuss Mitchell vs. City of Los Angeles on September 7 at 9 am.

City Attorney Mike Feuer will be providing the first official briefing of the case to this committee in closed session, and there will be opportunity for public comment before the discussion. Your voice is critical and we need your support. It is important that our elected officials hear our thoughts on this issue that will have serious implications for Downtown and the city. If you are able to provide public comment, please be on time.

Mitchell vs. City of Los Angeles could eliminate any limit on the amount of personal property that a person can have on the sidewalk. The current injunction issued in 2016 only applies to Downtown, specifically from Spring to Alameda and 3rd to 8th Streets, and this could be made permanent through a settlement agreement.

The City has the following options: settle the Mitchell case in accordance with the current injunction, enter into a citywide settlement or go to trial. We are asking the City to go to trial and not settle on terms that treat Downtown differently and would decrease the quality of life for the homeless population in Downtown.

Important points to convey to elected representatives:

• Mitchell effectively eliminates the 60-gallon limit on personal goods only for Downtown (this limit is established in LA Municipal Code 56.11 – Storage of Personal Goods).

• Eliminating the 60-gallon limit will result in further densification of the Downtown homeless population and make it more challenging to provide housing, services and facilities to meet the current need.

• The rise in tents and personal goods on the sidewalks is a direct result of Mitchell. We are very concerned that this prevents people from seeking services or reconciling with family or significant others by making life on the sidewalk permanent.

• This should not be the standard for our homeless neighbors. We can do better by providing housing. If the City were to settle Mitchell with the current terms, this standard could become permanent.

• We are very concerned that permanently eliminating this standard in one neighborhood of Los Angeles is unconstitutional and would set the City up for litigation in other neighborhoods.

• We also believe a Downtown settlement would continue the over-concentration of homeless individuals, services and housing in Downtown, and ultimately further decrease the quality of life for the current homeless population in Downtown that needs individualized treatment and care to live safely and reenter society.

If you are unable to attend the meeting, we encourage you to voice your opinion by contacting the Homelessness & Poverty Committee members by phone or with a letter. The members are Councilmembers Bonin, Harris-Dawson, Huizar, Price and Rodriguez. Please let us know if you need assistance.

City Hall, Council Chambers

Room 340

200 N. Spring St.

Los Angeles, CA 90012

If you would like to join us at the committee meeting or want more info, please contact Shawn Bratton at

Redmond O’Neal (Farrah’s son) Goes on Wicked Venice Crime Spree

June 8, 2018                                                                                                              NR18160dm


Pacific Area Crime Spree


Venice: Robbery detectives from the Los Angeles Police Department’s Pacific Area investigated a violent crime spree that occurred in the Venice Beach and Palms neighborhoods.

Beginning on or about May 2, 2018, a male White suspect with red hair and distinct tattoos randomly attacked five men in unprovoked confrontations. Two of the five men were seriously injured. These crimes were believed to have been committed by the same suspect. On May 8, Redmond James O’Neal was arrested for an armed robbery after he was identified as the suspect in a 7-Eleven Store robbery. After O’Neal’s arrest, the violent crime spree ended and Pacific Area robbery detectives found O’Neal to strongly match the description of the suspect in these crimes. Evidence and eye witness identifications linked O’Neal to the violent crime spree.


On June 8, 2018, Pacific Area robbery detectives presented their findings to the District Attorney’s Office, Los Angeles Airport Branch, who filed one count of Attempted Murder, two counts of Assault with a Deadly Weapon, one count of Criminal Threats, one count of Brandishing a Knife and one count of Battery. O’Neal remains in the custody of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.

  • On May 2, 2018, around 8:00 p.m., a male White suspect with red hair and distinct tattoos came upon a male White victim on Overland Avenue and Woodbine Street in the Palms neighborhood of Los Angeles. The suspect became angry after the victim appeared to look at him. The suspect then punched the victim and armed himself with a glass bottle. The suspect unsuccessfully tried to strike the victim with the broken glass bottle and fled the scene. The victim sustained minor injuries to his face.


  • On May 3, 2018, around 3:30 a.m., a male White suspect with red hair, and reddish blonde facial hair, came upon a male White victim as he was exiting a convenience store in the 3400 block of Overland Avenue. The victim engaged the suspect in conversation. The suspect became angry and repeatedly punched the victim in his head and threw him to the ground. The suspect then fled the scene. The victim sustained minor injuries to his head.


  • On May 4, 2018, around 5:00 p.m., a male White suspect with red hair was walking near the Venice Beach Boardwalk on Speedway Avenue at Rose Avenue. A male White victim looked at the suspect, at which time, the suspect stabbed him with a knife. Initially, the victim thought that the suspect had merely “punched” him in the back. However, once paramedics arrived, the paramedics discovered that the victim had sustained a serious stab wound to the left side of his body.


  • On May 4, 2018, around 8:30 p.m., a male White victim was walking to his car on 4th Avenue from Rose Avenue. At 8:45 p.m., several people found the victim laying in a pool of blood with obvious stab wounds to his face and upper body. Nearby video surveillance captured a male White suspect walking away from the scene shortly after the victim was found lying on the sidewalk. The victim sustained significant and serious stab wounds and cuts to his face, neck, and upper body.


On May 5, 2018, around 4:00 p.m., a male White suspect with red hair and distinct tattoos became belligerent inside a coffee shop at Pacific Avenue and Windward Avenue. A male White employee confronted the suspect, at which time an argument ensued. The suspect became angry and brandished a folding knife. The suspect lunged, jabbed and threatened to harm the employee with the knife. The suspect then fled the scene.

Redmond James O’Neal is a 33-year-old male White with distinct tattoos, red hair and blue eyes. He stands approximately 5 feet 11 inches tall and weighs 175 pounds.


Anyone with information, or who may have witnessed these crimes, are urged to contact Pacific Area Robbery Detective L. Jurado at 310-482-6369, or Detective C. Carias at 310-482-6372. During non-business hours or on weekends, calls should be directed to 1-877-LAPD-24-7

(1-877-527-3247). Anyone wishing to remain anonymous should call the LA Regional Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-TIPS (800-222-8477) or go directly to Tipsters may also visit, and click on “Anonymous Web Tips” under the “Get Involved-Crime Stoppers” menu to submit an onlinetip. Lastly, tipsters may also download the “P3 Tips” mobile application and select the LA Regional Crime Stoppers as their local program.


LAPD Command Staff Directive = F-You Beachgoers. Be A Victim Because We Won’t Respond To The Sand.

I live in Los Angeles in the area patrolled by LAPD Pacific Division known as Venice Beach.

Here are a few things I have learned from living here…

Venice is supposedly the 2nd largest tourist attraction in southern California after Disneyland. One of the two has a budget. I’ll let you guess.

Of the entire Pacific Division area which includes Mar Vista, Del Rey, Playa del Rey, Palms, Marina Del Rey, Westchester…. jam all those neighborhoods together and guess where the majority of the crime happens? VENICE BEACH. So, of the whole division, Venice is the focal point that drives the majority of the crime stats for the entire area. Great. We’ll come back to that.

Like other divisions of the LAPD, our police officers drive cruisers. Unlike other divisions, some of ours are specially designed to drive on the sand. Quick reminder: “the sand” includes that special area known as “the beach” where all that crime happens.

Here’s another Fun Fact: People in cars are known to get into car accidents. Police sometimes get into car accidents. Luckily, when the police get into an accident in a City car, the LAPD doesn’t put an end to them driving cars anymore. BUT, in Venice last year officers ran over a person laying in the sand. (She wasn’t hurt badly at all, and she refused medical treatment after an initial assessment.) But after that event a member of the command staff immediately stopped our officers from driving on the sand “until they evaluated and assessed the situation and determined if more training was needed”.

Now, that wasn’t the first time LAPD has run over someone in the sand. I’m not going to get into the details, but based on perspective, line of sight, and a material that gives the visual illusion of looking the same despite vast irregularities in the terrain…. it is an easy thing to do. It is just a byproduct of sand being sand which can hide a person laying down completely from just a few feet away. That characteristic doesn’t just apply to LAPD officers…it applies to everyone.

Also, LAPD is not the only city or county agency that drives on the sand. Beaches & Harbors, Lifeguards, Sanitation, Rec & Parks, lots of agencies drive on the sand. Guess what, every agency has run over someone laying in the sand. Sometimes its not so bad, sometimes its REALLY BAD. It has happened in the past. It will happen in the future. Similarly, people who drive cars …. anywhere … tend to get into accidents too. So its safe to say that if you are driving a car, and are a police officer or not… accidents are going to happen. Not because of a lack of training or gross negligence or whatever… it’s just people + cars = accidents. Its true. Look it up.

But lets get back to the beach.

When word got out last fall that LAPD wasn’t going to drive on the sand… guess where all the robbers, burglars, thieves and scoundrels went after committing a crime? Yep. The sand. At first LAPD would call lifeguards to drive them out to meet a victim or go after a suspect… but then the FD was like F that – why should we be put in harms way when that isn’t our job, its the po-lice job. Then for every crime including ADW, people brandishing guns where the perps ran to the sand… LAPD would call an airship… which would only respond if available and if able.  That also takes time…. the whole thing was a mess… so the cops just gave up on the whole thing, and only went on the sand to walk someone that was easy to put in custody back up to the beach… which is still pretty time consuming. Supposedly if there was some “crazy circumstance” that required officers to drive on the sand… a supervisor could run it up the flagpole for approval. But nobody is going to request that because (A) it is stupid (B) colossal waste of time (C) it isn’t remotely practical and (D) why ask to do something that if it happens for any reason to go sideways … your ass is going to get tagged with the blame. So whats easier? Just do nothing. Check.

Heres another thing about “the sand”. Ever been down to the beach during the summer? People aren’t dispersed in equi-distant squares each occupying a specified space… they are jam packed all over the sand. Lots of em. People. You know… the ones that both commit and are victims of that stuff called crime that happens a lot in that super popular area called Venice Beach.

Well, two weeks ago I heard now that it is summer and a decision needs to be made about driving on the sand… that the same command staff genius waved his mighty badge and hath set forth that the decision is that LAPD will never drive on the sand again.

Yep. That’s right people. “The Sand” … that giant area of City of Los Angeles property that encompasses 4 RD areas will no longer be patrolled by, or accessed by the Los Angeles Police Department by a vehicle. So, if you are a victim of a crime on the sand, which happens a hell of a lot more often that a person getting run over by any agency vehicle on the sand… I guess you can just go suck it because LAPD isn’t going to respond.

I can’t imagine a scenario where LAPD would tell the officers of a Division “Hey, RD 1402…. don’t drive there, patrol there or respond to calls for service there. Just… I dunno… figure something else out. ” I’m pretty sure that would never fly, but that is exactly what has just happened in Venice Beach.

This whole area… which is only accessible in any reasonable fashion by first responders or in an urgent situation via specialized vehicle, which LAPD has and has used like all the other agencies for decades… eh…. I guess people who are victims of crime can… go to the station and make a report? Or maybe call the front desk and wait for it to ring and ring and ring before someone picks up the receiver and hangs up. Is that effective police tactics? Is that what you would expect to be told as a victim? Well what do you think is going to happen when every cracked out bike stealing person with bad intentions learns if they haven’t already that LAPD won’t patrol on the sand at all.. so go ahead and rob somebody at knifepoint there because the cops won’t show up and you’ll probably get away with it. A lot.

Here’s something else you learn about the beach when you live here for a while. One of the most common crimes is drinking in public on the sand. TONS of people do it. You probably have. LAPD officers cruise the jam packed sand, and stop in a nice visible spot of thousands of people and take time dumping out the booze of people drinking on the sand for all to see, and write them a ticket. You know what that does? It actually stops or slows down a lot of other people doing the same thing. And what does that do?

After a long hot day in the sun… a lot of people are a lot less drunk when they leave the beach. They get into less fights. There is less drunk driving….less bad decision making and the amount of crime that doesn’t happen as a byproduct of everyone getting wasted on the sand all day is actually really significant.


So neighbors who walk along the sand in the morning, joggers that zip down to the beach for a run along the ocean…every other sucker who decides to pay a visit to the 2nd largest tourist attraction next to Disneyland…. enjoy you visit to Venice Beach this year…. see you on the crime stat sheet.

Took the area of the sand that LAPD used to patrol by vehicle and overlaid the exact area over other areas of the division. Would it be acceptable to have LAPD not patrol those areas at all?

Chick who was run over by LAPD and refused medical attention after being evaluated by FD at scene.

New LAPD Beach Policy Cripples Response

Lost foriegn tourist asks LAPD Beach unit for directions on the sand.

On Monday just past noon, a radio call was broadcast for a stabbing on the Venice Boardwalk.  The third stabbing in as many days. The suspect fled, and the victim ran towards the ocean, leaving a bloody trail on the boardwalk heading towards the sand. The officers that responded asked for a Beach capable unit to search for the victim. A strange request… as there is typically always one unit available to respond on the sand. Dispatch responded that no Beach capable units were available. The officers then requested a lifeguard to pick them up and drive them on the sand to search for the victim. Standard protocol for almost all City & County agencies is that they don’t respond into a “hot zone”, or an active crime zone until law enforcement has cleared the scene for safety. This includes City & County fire department personnel – which includes lifeguards. It took more than ten minutes from the time of the stabbing to get a response, and another ten to fifteen minutes before a lifeguard could arrive to pick up LAPD and drive them on the sand to look for the victim….. the victim of a stabbing that was bleeding. By the time lifeguards responded, reports were coming in about the victim walking on the sand several blocks from the crime scene by Rose and Ocean Front Walk. Over a half an hour later an ambulance was called for the victim. A half an hour – for the victim of a stabbing. My question was, why no LAPD Beach units?

Several LA City and County agencies have restricted access to drive on the beach, including LA County Lifeguards, Beaches and Harbors, Recreation & Parks, LA Sanitation and LAPD. Driving on the sand requires specialized vehicles, and each agency employs training for personnel that drive vehicles on the sand. The beach has uneven terrain with varying obstacles, and just like on paved streets accidents happen. Each year, each agency reports accidents on the sand involving City and County vehicles.

A few weeks ago LAPD accidentally struck a beachgoer on the sand. The victim was not seriously hurt, but the resulting video went viral. Apparently an uninformed member of the LAPD brass was questioned about the training that Beach officers receive for driving on the sand. The result of that senior command staff member, (reportedly a Deputy Chief on the oil slick out the door) not knowing the answer  resulted in all LAPD Beach capable units being banned from driving on the sand until further notice. This astonished me. The ability for LAPD to respond on the sand is critical – from boats that run aground at night, to the myriad of crimes that happen on the sand, and suspects that flee towards the water in hopes of evading capture. Coupled with standard safety protocol of other agencies staying away from any crime scene until cleared by law enforcement – prohibiting LAPD from being able to drive on the sand is an astonishingly stupid move – especially as a knee-jerk, arrogant reaction of an uninformed Deputy Chief.

All LAPD Beach units go through extensive training. On the sand, just as on normal roads accidents happen – but each officer assigned to the beach is trained specifically on all vehicles that are capable of driving on the sand. The summer loanees from other divisions also go through a full training not only on sand capable vehicles, but on the unique law enforcement issues specific to Venice.

I had heard the drum circles the past several Sundays were out of control – and there was a stabbing at the drum circle this past Sunday. The next day – another stabbing with the victim fleeing to the sand – not to mention the weekly missing children, overdoses, and people who bring booze, weed and BBQ’s out on the sand. Those are all law enforcement issues, and don’t include the stolen property and drunks that decide to get into physical fights with lifeguards. So if you plan on enjoying the sand and our beautiful beach – hope you don’t become the victim of a crime. Despite the seriousness of the call and any level of injury – you may be in for a long wait for officers to walk out to your location on the sand.

Fatal Shooting – Venice & Lucielle

Last night just after 8:30 p.m. A help call came out by LAPD for shots fired with a victim down at the 800 block of Venice Bl. Officers engaged two men having an arguement – initiated contact and a shooting occurred wounding the suspect who was transported to the hospital. Several residents reported the gunfire.

Folks that live nearby reported via twitter that the man was a former Marine, and possibly was armed with a rifle. Per news there may have been a roommate dispute with one shooting the other, who was transported to the hospital and succumbed to his injuries. Getting more details ….. 

and UPDATE – apparently it was an OIS – roommate dispute. Officers arrived at scene during altercation and shooting occurred- victim died and was apparently armed when officers made contact. 

Police Video: Your Input Is Requested, And Needed Before May 7th

When I heard that public opinion was being sought regarding police video and body cameras, I was extremely interested… but unfortunately the myriad of news stories and massive press coverage didn’t point to the online survey. #FAIL !


You can also upload independent comments here.

Thanks to our local Venice Beach Senior Lead Officer Roberts, we were linked up with the folks from NYU and UCLA Law that organized the survey and who are doing an extensive research study on the issue. They also developed this video which addresses many of the concerns and issues regarding police incident video.

Community Input on the LAPD’s Video Policy

What should happen if a police officer’s body-worn camera records an officer-involved shooting or other serious use of force incident? Should the video be made public? And if so, when?

The Los Angeles Police Commission is developing a new policy on the release of video footage after such incidents.

The Los Angeles Police Commission Wants Your Input

The Los Angeles Police Commission wants to make sure that its new policy is responsive to community concerns. It has asked the Policing Project at New York University School of Law to gather public input on what the policy should be. The Policing Project will work with professors and students at UCLA School of Law and UC Irvine School of Law to get input from the community and report back to the Commission.

Learn More About the Pros and Cons of Releasing Video

In deciding whether and when to release video after an officer-involved shooting, there are many factors to consider. To learn more, watch the video below, or read a brief fact sheet about some of the tradeoffs involved.

There are also several community forums scheduled on the topic before the survey response period closes on May 7th. They are:

Thursday, April 20, 2017, 6:30PM

ONE Generation Senior Enrichment Center, 18255 Victory Blvd., Los Angeles (map)

Saturday, April 22, 2017, 2:00 PM:

Pico House, 424 N. Main St., Los Angeles (map)

Wednesday, May 3, 2017, 6:30 PM:

Location TBA, South Bureau

Web Statistics