Rambling With a Point

Below are some thoughts that may seem unrelated, but I will try to tie them together in a coherent manner later on.

When we first moved back home again in 1979, after a few years I became sort of bored.  Our daughters had all “flown the nest”, so life for me was pretty dull.  I read the usual yearly request for citizens who might be interested to apply for the County Grand Jury, so I applied, and was accepted.  During the year we were given a potential criminal case to review.  The issue was a shooting in Reservoir Canyon, north of the City of San Luis Obispo where three homeless men were camping.  Three or four young men from SLO went up the Canyon one night and began firing their weapons near the homeless camp.  One bullet ricocheted off a rock and struck one of the homeless men in the head, and he died.  We were given the case to determine whether it was Murder One, Two, or Voluntary or Involuntary Manslaughter.  We were given a whoop-de-do lecture about how this was a secret procedure, we were not to discuss it with anyone including our spouses (yeah, like that wouldn’t happen), and we were sworn to secrecy even that we had been given the case.  I drove home a little later than usual that night, walking in our house to the KSBY 6:00 PM News and a picture of the room to the Grand Jury on the screen, and the news that the Reservoir Canyon shooting had been given to the Grand Jury!!  After much testimony, but not being allowed to visit the site where the shooting occurred, we came to the decision of Murder Two.  What shocked me was the shock on the face of everyone from the judge on down.  They had not expected that decision, and actually we had to wait while the powers that be had to have new papers drawn up with a new verdict.  We were never told what verdict they thought we had come up with!!  Later, my law enforcement daughter and I visited the site, and we could see why we weren’t allowed.  It was obvious that the decision we had come to was closer to a correct one than what someone in the government center wanted.

One of the things that really intrigue me, as a former elected official who was actually a pretty lousy politician, is how people will comment in my hearing how all politicians are corrupt.  It actually happens more frequently than one imagines.  It never seems to occur to the speaker that he or she has just called me, by definition a politician, corrupt.  I used to take these comments personally, but overtime I have come to realize that it says more about the speaker than it does me.  I also recognize that a whole lot of politicians are corrupt, but that it is no more just to paint all elected officials with the same brush than any other group.

On another matter, while I was in office I carpooled with my Legislative Assistant, Richard Macedo, because he lived in Cambria and it seemed pretty stupid to me to drive almost right past his front door and not car pool.  For us it worked out well because we could spend the 45 minutes or so it took to drive from his front door to the Government Center gearing up for the day, and on the way home, discussing what went right, and what we could have done better.  It also gave me the opportunity to explain to him why I had made, or would be making, policy decisions that he either didn’t understand completely or actually disagreed with.  When not discussing those things, however, Richard would frequently go over what he had learned in a safe driving course (or courses) he had taken in his past.  Even though at the time I would become a tad exasperated, which I never let on to him because he was driving, his words stuck in my brain, and recently when my husband and I were not injured in an accident on Highway One, Richards’s words echoing in my brain caused me to make decisions that very likely saved our lives.

All of this ties into what has occurred in Ferguson, MO, and its aftermath.  I know from my experience that not all District Attorneys are people of integrity, but that most of them are.  I know from my experience that some politicians are corrupt, but that most of them are not.  And I really know because of my family and friends in law enforcement that not all people in law enforcement are “racist jack-booted thugs”, as my daughter the ex-law enforcement officer was called after an incident in San Francisco where she was a police officer.  The San Francisco Chronicle had her name and that of 7 other officers involved in the incident all over the front pages, but when the officers, including my daughter were cleared of any wrong-doing, there was a tiny 3 inch article on a back page announcing that.  I also know some officers are “racist jack-booted thugs”.  I know from experience that a well-run department which requires qualified personnel results in well-trained officers and have a lot fewer complaints and down-right trouble than a sloppy department, and that the “thugs” are not tolerated.  Look at the professionalism of a department when making a determination about the conduct of an officer.

The point of all of this rambling is stop blaming every police officer you see for what some rogue officer from a lousy department someplace else did.  What the Federal Attorney General wants to do is the correct course.  Investigate what law enforcement does that is correct, and if a department is not complying, straighten them out.  Further, make available to all officers body cameras and audio recording devices, if necessary.  I know from experience that patrol car cameras have been very effective in providing accurate records of what actually occurred between the officer and public, and in some instances have cleared the officers.  There is data indicating that body cameras are a very good addition to the gear the officers carries.

We also need to make sure that cities and counties across this nation have the tax dollars to train, train, and train again officers in what to do in the few seconds in which a violent incident can occur.  There is no time to think, only respond with what is in your brain in those split second decisions.  To cut funding to law enforcement for training at the local level is beyond stupid, in my opinion. 

Because of my experience with people making blanket statements about politicians, I know a shadow of what people in law enforcement must feel.  I must add, however, that I have never had PTSD problems from my years in politics, nor have I ever had nightmares from what I have personally experienced, as so many people in law enforcement have had.  My plea is, please recognize that the officer on the street, by and large, does have your best interests at heart, and vote for elected officials who recognize the importance of enough funding for their training.  I, for one, salute them.