Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/38408277/Citizen-s-Complaint-concerning-Palm-Springs-Chief-of-Police-Dominguez
Timestamp: 2017-12-13 13:26:04
Document Index: 671283346

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 832', '§ 832', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 701', '§ 701', '§ 2', '§ 5400', '§ 3305', '§ 2', 'art 1', '§ 832']

Citizen’s Complaint concerning Palm Springs Chief of Police Dominguez | Conflict Of Interest | Police
Description: Palm Springs police chief accused of homophobia
Palm Springs police chief accused of homophobia
The Petersen Law Firm, A Law Corporation (949) 335-1300 Fax: (714) 850-0274
From: Gregory G. Petersen, Esq. Date: September 11, 2010 Re: Citizen’s Complaint concerning Chief of Police Dominguez
I am filing this Citizen’s Complaint pursuant to California Penal Code § 832.5, as a citizen, against Chief of Police, David Dominguez, for engaging in unethical, unlawful, and potentially criminal conduct, including his abuse of authority, retaliation and intimidation of persons, both inside and outside the police department, with regard to his efforts to conceal his personal misconduct at the Warm Sands vice operation conducted in the summer of 2009. This information personally known to him, concerning the actions at the investigation should have been disclosed by him in a properly administered internal investigation. It was not. You are the person now responsible for compliance with the requirements of Penal Code § 832.5 in this matter since the Chief of Police has, after being confronted, admitted he is a proper suspect and of the investigation. Accordingly with the requirements imposed on you as the City Manager of Palm Springs, it is now your duty to investigate this matter pursuant to Palm Springs Municipal Code § 2.08.010 (Ordinance No.116, § 2(a)-(b)). This provides that you ensure that all the city’s laws and ordinances are enforced and to discipline and dismiss the chief of police. While the retained counsel used to act as the City Attorney can assist you, the Charter and the Municipal Code place this duty at your door. The facts are as follows: During the Warm Sands vice Operation in the summer of 2009, Chief Dominguez was in the undercover vehicle during the surveillance on the evening of the 19th, seated between the video camera operator and the suspects engaged in
that Mc Erlain is not likely to make any finding that would harm his fellow command officer and friend. Simply put, I am alleging that he did so in order that he may cover up his own culpability in the matters under investigation. In taking the actions noted above, the Chief of Police has: 1. Violated the Palm Springs City Charter § 701(e)-(f), Personnel Rules and Policies, by failing to properly make promotions from eligibility lists and instead passing over personnel for arbitrary and retaliatory motivations; violated § 701(h) by failing to ensure that employees in the Police Department are evaluated fairly at regular intervals; 2. Violated the Memorandum of Understanding by and between PSPOA and the City of Palm Springs by failing to make promotions according to the rankings on the eligibility list established by competitive examination; 3. 4. 5. Violated the Palm Springs Municipal Code § 2.08.010 (Ordinance Violated California Government Code §§ 5400 and 5401, which Violated California Government Code § 3305, which provides that No.116, § 2(a) by violating the law; require the accurate keeping of records pertaining to government activities; “[n]o public safety officer shall have any comment adverse to his interest…used for any personnel purposes by his employer, without the public safety officer having first read and signed the instrument containing the adverse comment,” by making adverse decisions against promotion based on information not previously provided to officers in his department; 6. Withheld exculpatory evidence known to exonerate a peace officer, by failing to disclose that, during the Warm Sands vice operation in the summer of 2009, he was present on the occasion when certain comments were made about the subjects under surveillance and, in fact, that he initiated the conversation in which statements were made about the subjects. Since then, Chief Dominguez has acted maliciously, dishonestly, and unlawfully by failing to disclose facts known personally to him, as a witness to, and active participant in, the same conduct for which he has now caused subordinate officers to be investigated; 7. In doing the acts above, he abused his authority in order to protect his own reputation, conceal his wrongdoing, and deny the truth that he, Chief Dominguez, made the statements above in connection with the subjects under surveillance in Warm Sands in the summer of 2009;
In making statements in the community, City Council included, he has
made at least four sets of his version of what occurred there, all of which were false statements on what happened; and 8. In doing the acts above, Chief Dominguez failed to disclose information he is legally and ethically obligated to disclose. THEREFORE, as a result of this conduct, I hereby request the City Manager to: a. surveillance; b. Disqualify Ed Mc Erlain from participating in the investigation of the Warm Sands incident because he has a conflict of interest as a former colleague and personal friend of Chief Dominguez, and therefore lacks the necessary impartiality to ensure that a full and fair investigation is conducted, because his appointment is tainted with a conflict of interest, violates the rules and regulations of the department as well as the MMBA; and c. Shut down any further investigation of officers in connection with the Warm Sands incident until there is a neutral fact-finder appointed agreed upon by the PSPOA and the City Management. As to the immunity of any person involved in this matter under the California Tort Claims Act please note the following excepts this conduct from any claim that it was protected government action: 820.21. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, the civil immunity of juvenile court social workers, child protection workers, and other public employees authorized to initiate or conduct investigations or proceedings pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 200) of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code shall not extend to any of the following, if committed with malice: (1) Perjury. (2) Fabrication of evidence. (3) Failure to disclose known exculpatory evidence. (4) Obtaining testimony by duress, as defined in Section 1569 of the Civil Code, fraud, as defined in either Section 1572 or Section 1573 of Disqualify the Chief of Police from receiving any reports or other
information related to the investigation of comments made during the Warm Sands
the Civil Code, or undue influence, as defined in Section 1575 of the Civil Code. (b) As used in this section, "malice" means conduct that is intended by the person described in subdivision (a) to cause injury to the plaintiff or despicable conduct that is carried on by the person described in subdivision (a) with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others. Pursuant to California Penal Code § 832.5 please provide the determination in this matter as allowed by law to me.