Thursday, May 31, 2007

Now he's "updating" the use of force policy

County keeps safety on DA rifle request
After the meeting (between Gallegos, his Chief Investigator Mike Hislop, Assistant District Attorney Wes Keat, Assistant County Counsel Wendy Chaitin and Risk Manager Kim Kerr) Wednesday, Hislop delivered a copy of the district attorney's use of force policy to the Times-Standard. The paper had asked Gallegos for the policy through a California Public Records Act request on May 18, after Gallegos said the document was not public and refused to turn over a copy.

Gallegos said in an e-mail that he forwarded the request to Hislop, who was on vacation last week.

Hislop said he receive the paper's request on his Blackberry on the way back from Baja California. Hislop said he had already finished working on the policy before the Times-Standard requested it, and has since given it to county counsel for analysis.
”This is still under review,” Hislop said.

Bringing policies up to date 06/01/2007 The Times-Standard
The office of the Humboldt County district attorney made public its “use of force” policy this week, after initially claiming it was not a public document. It was a good decision. Such a policy provides guidelines for use of force to reduce indecision in a crisis situation. Plus, as the California Peace Officers' Association says, it helps create public confidence in law enforcement.

We also feel a sense of assurance that the county, before giving its approval for the district attorney to buy investigators eight AR-15 assault rifles, is asking for an updating and modernization of the use of force policy, and that Chief Investigator Mike Hislop is planning to ramp up weapons training for his people from once a year to four times a year.

The rationale for making sure that investigators have state-of-the-art equipment, including weapons, is sound. In a county such as ours, with a lot of wild remote corners hiding Mexican cartel pot farms and meth labs, officers should be ready for surprises.

But it's important that, in its policy update, the district attorney's office view its role as investigators and not enforcers. They're not Lone Rangers, and have plenty of trained backup to support them.

Comments at TS

But the Times Standard did not print the policy?

Further UPDATE:
On Thursday, I received a call from Gallegos' Chief Investigator, Mike Hislop. He asked about the Public Records Act Request (CAST), if I had gotten what I asked for. I said no, and explained that I had gotten 2/3 of one of the 6 items on the list, and that it looked like I was going to have to resubmit it, since it doesn't seem to me that meeting agendas, minutes and attendance sheets are "evidenciary" in nature, among other things. He seemed to agree. The end result of the conversation was promising. Perhaps there is a possibility that the DA's Office will comply with the request and put an end to the game-playing. I will keep you 'updated.'


  1. Fine. Update away. Let's see the old policy, which is also public, so we can compare and judge the changes.

    As if there was any policy before.

    If you claim you are updating something which does not exist, is that a lie?

  2. Wow!!!, sorry this is off topic but would you look at the Shasta County DA press Release page?

    Ok back to this topic... I find it interesting that Hislop is sucking this guys... ok i'll keep it g-rated but come on... he was gone and it was being modified, but it was done before TS requested it, but they still can't get it until it's approved?

    Again, WOW.

  3. The problem with shooting from the hip,not following standard managment proceedures,or just fabricating answeres as needed is that it doesn't work. One can never remember what was done or what story was told. Just tell the truth. If you don't have a policy or an updated policy just say so. Then ask for the items to be approved when the conditions are met. It's done all the time. Without all the f#*%*#g headaches.

  4. Yes, but why lie about it?

  5. Lying is what some people do, like breathing.

  6. Rose you were doing so good! I guess its common for relapses though. Keep trying!

  7. When you can't intelligently defend your position you say something stupid. Or you just lie. You are consistant.

  8. It is apparent to me there was no "use of force" policy, if there was it would have been a snap to e-mail or fax a copy. Maybe there was at one time but they (paulie and mikey) couldn't find it? Who knows. It would be nice to see the before and after!?!!!!! Or have the Grand Jury ask the investigators (under oath) about the policy.. if they have seen it BEFORE, if they are given a copy of it, if they have agreed or signed a document saying they know and understand it?

    It appears that Gallegos is lying again and has selected Mr. Hislop to fall on his sword to protect King Paulie. Not surprising.

    PVG doesn't have the moral fiber to tell the truth. Remember the plagiarism ! That is just a window to his character.

    Shame on PVG, shame on Mike Hislop, and shame on anyone that voted for gallegos during the last electiion.

    keep it up Rose, you and your facts worry them.

  9. WOW ! I did look at the Shasta County DA's office press release page! Pretty impressive and informative. Maybe the Humboldt DA's office should have such a page? Of course they can't do that. Such information, or lack there of, would expose gallegos and crew for the collosal failure that they are. Of course I'm not talking about anyone employed by the DA's Office BEFORE gallegos took over.

  10. What the hell is Hislop doing in Baja on vacation. He hasn't even been in the office for 5 months. What the hell else isn't being done in that office by bums who are feeding off of the county trough.

  11. Robin Shelley6/03/2007 8:14 PM

    This is an excellent question, 4:16. Hope you get an answer!

  12. Ahh shucks 4:16/8:14, dont get your panties in a dither just because Hislop took a vacation that was more than likely planned since before he got to the DA's office.

    Not trying to defend the DA here, but for pete's sakes, are you jealous that you havent had a vacation yourself?


  13. Oh get with it 8:25! People usually don't get vacations the first year they work. Generally, they have to WORK to get the time off. I agree with 4:16 that this is another example of feeding off of the public trough. Tell me, at your last job did you take two weeks off for baja during your first 4 months at work. Hardly! And I don't know anyone else either other than political hacks who do this.

    Where do you get the bull that this was a pre-planned vacation. Are you Hislop? I can tell you that most folk if they did have a vacation planned generally cancel it under the circumstances until they earn the time off.

    And no - I don't vacation a lot. In the private section, my friend, often people don't get paid vacations.

  14. What is with you 8:25? Sorry, I think that someone ought to work more than a couple of months before taking a vacation on the county dole.

  15. A good point made by Ed Denson on Eric's blog (Gallegos "use of force" policy): ED Denson said...
    "It is hard to see why the DA investigators, who are not crime scene first responders, would need guns at all, much less assault rifles. Presumably if they were called upon to be backup of police officers in a situation where guns were required, guns could be supplied.

    Am I mistaken in thinking that the DA's resources are spent on bolstering existing cases rather than creating new ones? How can the DA's office retain any objectivity about charging decisions if its people are involved in the arrests?"

  16. Rose! Don't be fooled by Hislop. He's a snake and he's hissing a song he thinks you'll like. You may get the records you requested, but don't forget about the hoops you had to unnecessarily jump through.

    Hislop has the charm of a snake-oil salesman. Watch it though.... he'd just as soon slap or punch a woman then take orders from her.

  17. Oh, I am not forgetting. I figure the longer it takes me to get them, the more they feel they have to hide. Why else put up all the BS roadblocks.

    So far they are digging the hole deeper. By law they had 10 days to respond, either with the records, or with a request for an extension of time - or the reasons for denying the request.

    The DA did not comply. Instead he used County Counsel to throw up another roadblock, after the 10 days had expired.

    Mine is not the only one he is playing games with. It is a liability for the County.


Comments are open, but moderated, for the time-being. Good luck.