09-05-2007, 05:34 PM
Gentlemen,
Please excuse me for writing under a pseudonym, however, the current culture in this department seriously discourages the excersizing of one's first amendment rights. Especially, when the subject matter is disparaging to the administration.
First, before I begin writing my thoughts, Mr. Fernandez, I take umbrage with your description of the lazy and rogue officers as personally as well as professionally insulting. Between serving in the military and as a Police Officer, I have spent the last 22 years, my entire adult life, serving my fellow man, country, and community. I am extremely proud of my service, as are my brothers and sisters in arms are of theirs.
Yesterday, a vote was cast by the rank and file of this department concerning your management of this police department. You act surprised by the outcome , however, I find you to be disingenuous, no surprise there. Then again, how would you know what the true status of the officers are when you are rarely, if ever, actually present.
I can not recall any other chief of this department who has been as frequently absent as you. While you are constantly traveling, promoting yourself, the department has been inexorably disintegrating.
Your greatest mistake was allowing Frank Fernandez to have so much control over the day to day adminstration of the department.
Prior to being elevated to the Deputy Chief position, he was an inexperienced and unproven lieutenant. He utterly lacked the requisite skills needed to manage such a large department.
Even after several management courses, including at least one at Harvard, he continues to lack the capabilities to be an effective leader.
Let us review a few of his mistakes.
Recently, during a Police Involved Shooting, Mr. Fernandez responded to the scene, which in and of itself, is his right. However, once he began to issue orders, he actively injected himself in an ongoing investigation. Taking a role in it's execution.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but among his duties, he chairs the firearm review board, whose function is to review facts presented by internal affairs and determine whether any Departmental Orders were violated, and if so, to recommend discipline.
Please explain, how is one to believe that he would or could remain objective and impartial, as to an investigation in which he took an active role.
This is a classic violation of the Chinese Wall doctrine. The purpose of it being to maintain a seperation between the investigative and administrative bodies in order ensure that an employees rights are upheld. Unfortunately, employee rights are not a major priority to Mr. Fernandez.
Let's look at another Fernandez decision.
It seems, that he has decided that it would be an excellent idea to have NRO's conduct a Post Homicide Analysis. In short, these are concurrent investigations into open homicides. Let's look at just some of the problems here.
1. Any report issued by the NRO's are official documents and therefore subject to discovery.
2. There are several reasons why investigators perform their duties in certain manners, most notably to ensure the safety of witnesses but among other things, to protect the integrity of the case.
3. Should a witness make one statement in the privacy of the station, away from any other witnesses, but makes a different statement to an NRO asking him questions out in public, where God knows who may be listening or watching, you have just succeeded in discrediting that witness on the stand.
4. The photographs which these NRO's are taking of crime scenes do not take into account the fact that they may not accurately depict the scene as it was during the investigation. This will also lead to defense attorneys having the ability to completely discredit physical evidence.
In short, there are an infinite set of issues which Mr. Fernandez's decision has created.
Any attorney will explain the myriad of legal issues regarding this plan.
Which brings me to one of Mr. Fernandezs greatest faults and why his decisions are such failures. He lacks the ability to be sufficiently self critical. Because of his arrogance and his self imposed delusion of infallibillity, he makes decisions without considering the ramifications. he lacks the ability to attack his own theories, probing them for faults or weaknesses.
He has failed to realize that issuing policies which are not thouroughly researched have dire consequences for the administration, in both criminal and civil court, but also affect officer safety as well as the safety of the public we serve.
You have stated that less officers have received discipline than in previous adminstrations. Allow me to present a very easily verifiable theory as to the reason. It is quite simple actually, the current mentalilty of the officers at large is not to engage violent criminals in order to avoid finding themselves in a situation where violent action on their part may be required.
This is not to say that officers are in fear of the offenders, but they are apprehensive as to the reaction of this administration. It is the perception of the rank and file, due directly to Fernandez, that should they find themselves in a postion where action is required on their part, be it a Control of Persons to Deadly Force, that the officer is going to be held accountable for the actions of the offender.
This is a dangerous career field where we understand and accept the fact that we may find ourselves in life threatening situations. We acknowledge this fact yet, we shoulder this responsibility in order that the public be protected from these offenders. This is the career we have chosen and dedicate our lives to.
Because of Fernandez's displays of arrogance, ineptitude and disdain, the public finds itself in the unenviable postion that it's police officers, who are suppossed to protect them are distracted from their primary duties.
Mind you, this will lead to one of two situations. Either crime will become rampant and out of control, which in truth we are not far from now. Or it will lead to a culture of vigilantism. Who could blame a civilian for taking action themselves if the police won't do it for them?
These criminal elements have become emboldened and are currently at the point where they have absolutely no trepidation at engaging officers, with the firm belief that doing so will have no repercussions.
The Lexus issue is a stain on your career which, quite frankly, you lied about. Dishonesty is a death knell in our chosen profession. But the even greater liability to your future is your deputy chief.
Please excuse me for writing under a pseudonym, however, the current culture in this department seriously discourages the excersizing of one's first amendment rights. Especially, when the subject matter is disparaging to the administration.
First, before I begin writing my thoughts, Mr. Fernandez, I take umbrage with your description of the lazy and rogue officers as personally as well as professionally insulting. Between serving in the military and as a Police Officer, I have spent the last 22 years, my entire adult life, serving my fellow man, country, and community. I am extremely proud of my service, as are my brothers and sisters in arms are of theirs.
Yesterday, a vote was cast by the rank and file of this department concerning your management of this police department. You act surprised by the outcome , however, I find you to be disingenuous, no surprise there. Then again, how would you know what the true status of the officers are when you are rarely, if ever, actually present.
I can not recall any other chief of this department who has been as frequently absent as you. While you are constantly traveling, promoting yourself, the department has been inexorably disintegrating.
Your greatest mistake was allowing Frank Fernandez to have so much control over the day to day adminstration of the department.
Prior to being elevated to the Deputy Chief position, he was an inexperienced and unproven lieutenant. He utterly lacked the requisite skills needed to manage such a large department.
Even after several management courses, including at least one at Harvard, he continues to lack the capabilities to be an effective leader.
Let us review a few of his mistakes.
Recently, during a Police Involved Shooting, Mr. Fernandez responded to the scene, which in and of itself, is his right. However, once he began to issue orders, he actively injected himself in an ongoing investigation. Taking a role in it's execution.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but among his duties, he chairs the firearm review board, whose function is to review facts presented by internal affairs and determine whether any Departmental Orders were violated, and if so, to recommend discipline.
Please explain, how is one to believe that he would or could remain objective and impartial, as to an investigation in which he took an active role.
This is a classic violation of the Chinese Wall doctrine. The purpose of it being to maintain a seperation between the investigative and administrative bodies in order ensure that an employees rights are upheld. Unfortunately, employee rights are not a major priority to Mr. Fernandez.
Let's look at another Fernandez decision.
It seems, that he has decided that it would be an excellent idea to have NRO's conduct a Post Homicide Analysis. In short, these are concurrent investigations into open homicides. Let's look at just some of the problems here.
1. Any report issued by the NRO's are official documents and therefore subject to discovery.
2. There are several reasons why investigators perform their duties in certain manners, most notably to ensure the safety of witnesses but among other things, to protect the integrity of the case.
3. Should a witness make one statement in the privacy of the station, away from any other witnesses, but makes a different statement to an NRO asking him questions out in public, where God knows who may be listening or watching, you have just succeeded in discrediting that witness on the stand.
4. The photographs which these NRO's are taking of crime scenes do not take into account the fact that they may not accurately depict the scene as it was during the investigation. This will also lead to defense attorneys having the ability to completely discredit physical evidence.
In short, there are an infinite set of issues which Mr. Fernandez's decision has created.
Any attorney will explain the myriad of legal issues regarding this plan.
Which brings me to one of Mr. Fernandezs greatest faults and why his decisions are such failures. He lacks the ability to be sufficiently self critical. Because of his arrogance and his self imposed delusion of infallibillity, he makes decisions without considering the ramifications. he lacks the ability to attack his own theories, probing them for faults or weaknesses.
He has failed to realize that issuing policies which are not thouroughly researched have dire consequences for the administration, in both criminal and civil court, but also affect officer safety as well as the safety of the public we serve.
You have stated that less officers have received discipline than in previous adminstrations. Allow me to present a very easily verifiable theory as to the reason. It is quite simple actually, the current mentalilty of the officers at large is not to engage violent criminals in order to avoid finding themselves in a situation where violent action on their part may be required.
This is not to say that officers are in fear of the offenders, but they are apprehensive as to the reaction of this administration. It is the perception of the rank and file, due directly to Fernandez, that should they find themselves in a postion where action is required on their part, be it a Control of Persons to Deadly Force, that the officer is going to be held accountable for the actions of the offender.
This is a dangerous career field where we understand and accept the fact that we may find ourselves in life threatening situations. We acknowledge this fact yet, we shoulder this responsibility in order that the public be protected from these offenders. This is the career we have chosen and dedicate our lives to.
Because of Fernandez's displays of arrogance, ineptitude and disdain, the public finds itself in the unenviable postion that it's police officers, who are suppossed to protect them are distracted from their primary duties.
Mind you, this will lead to one of two situations. Either crime will become rampant and out of control, which in truth we are not far from now. Or it will lead to a culture of vigilantism. Who could blame a civilian for taking action themselves if the police won't do it for them?
These criminal elements have become emboldened and are currently at the point where they have absolutely no trepidation at engaging officers, with the firm belief that doing so will have no repercussions.
The Lexus issue is a stain on your career which, quite frankly, you lied about. Dishonesty is a death knell in our chosen profession. But the even greater liability to your future is your deputy chief.