Pleasanton council to discuss community policing action plan | Town Square | PleasantonWeekly.com |

Town Square

Post a New Topic

Pleasanton council to discuss community policing action plan

Original post made on Jul 13, 2020

The City Council is scheduled to begin the conversation on police reform in Pleasanton on Tuesday evening by reviewing the proposed action plan for guiding future public meetings and decision-making.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Sunday, July 12, 2020, 8:41 PM

Comments (85)

22 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 13, 2020 at 12:01 pm

With three deaths in this community, I hope there is a serious conversation about de-escalation. I also hope there is work toward getting police oversight.


9 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jul 13, 2020 at 12:28 pm

I agree with you Kathleen. I’ll always defend the right of an officer to defend themselves when attacked, and with the recent events I agree the scope of life preservation needs to be elevated even in these instances where officers were threatened.

In addition to the community oversight (ie review of good/bad encounters via video footage of all encounters) I also hope we address the Union which limits the ability of the departments to remove the poor performing officers.


16 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 13, 2020 at 1:02 pm

Sanctity of life—all people involved.


46 people like this
Posted by Linda Kelly
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 13, 2020 at 1:58 pm

The three deaths were precipitated by the behaviors of the deceased, all three tragedies were thoroughly vetted by the police themselves as well as the County District Attorney's Office, and none of the officers were charged with any wrong-doing. Police reports have been reported on in the media, and in the most recent, high-profile case, 3 body cam videos are available on Youtube. None indicate failure to attempt de-escalation nor undue force being applied. There has been no lack of transparency, and these 3 incidents have occurred over a period of 5 years.
The Police Policy Manual is available for download online, all 731 pages that are well indexed so anyone can read exactly what training policies and requirements for ongoing training are. We must remember the murderous behaviors on the part of officers didn't happen here, but in large cities,some of which have experienced corruption in their departments for a long time.

We must use caution and not jump on the bandwagon of defunding and demolishing a department that has been exemplary in its performance, meeting our needs just because of outrage in other places. Discourse and listening is always a good thing, and improvements may be in order, but we must remember we are not those places.


25 people like this
Posted by Vote4safety
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 13, 2020 at 2:34 pm

So this Pleasanton Counsel wants to be responsible for tanking our home values. That’s what happens when you weaken or defund Police- increase in crime, and decrease in confidence the Pleasanton Police will have the resources to stop everyday crimes- that they do while putting their OWN LIFE on the line for us and our homes and businesses. You will own this Each and Everyone of you City Counsel Members that votes against our police, and our citizens safety and security. We will not forget who you are and what you do. In the meantime the rest of us will thank our Amazing Police department and express our gratitude to them when we see them!


19 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jul 13, 2020 at 2:38 pm

I disagree with defunding. That’s dumb.

And I agree those officers did nothing wrong in today’s requirements.

I think what Kathleen is alluding to, and I’ve changed my tune, is that increasing the expectation around preservation of life (for instance in those instances) is what should be discussed


39 people like this
Posted by Dan S
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jul 13, 2020 at 2:54 pm

Linda Kelly said it well. There were three deaths over 5 years and the officers were exonerated. Compared to several nearby cities that's incredibly good. We have an exceptionally safe city, and one reason why is well performing police who are enabled to do their job. When people do stupid things that lead to their death, like pointing a gun at a cop, it makes no sense to suggest that the cops should try to de-escalate while under attack.

We should concentrate on fixing what is broken. Our Police department is not broken.


15 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 13, 2020 at 6:55 pm

You have three cases where police were excused on criminal charges, which is all that the DA looks at. The first case was settled before it went to court; the second case no one filed that I’m aware of; the third case is still at the beginning nearly two years later. This does not forgive the involved police. The actions of people who are suffering demands de-escalation.

We need oversight; we need de-escalation. Sanctity of all lives—the people stopped and the police.


27 people like this
Posted by Olorin
a resident of Val Vista
on Jul 13, 2020 at 8:09 pm

"Attacks on the police is an old communist tactic to eliminate law enforcement. The Bolsheviks successfully unleashed widespread attacks on police in the run up to the October Revolution."....Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

And make not mistake about it, we are under attack by the communists funded by CCP and the Soros family.


10 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jul 13, 2020 at 8:27 pm

The previous comment has no relevancy with the current discussion in Pleasanton California.


20 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 13, 2020 at 9:55 pm

@ Kathleen Ruegsegger wrote “This does not forgive the involved police.“

Pretty harsh statement there. Sounds like you’ve already convicted the involved police of murder and/or manslaughter in your mind. Or did you really mean to say “absolve”?


25 people like this
Posted by Linda Kelly
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 13, 2020 at 11:10 pm

No one respects the sanctity of life more than a Pleasanton police officer. De-escalation is first and foremost in the mind of officers responding to calls for service, and don't you think for even a moment that any officer responding to a call for service does so with the intent to take a life. There is a reason that out of more than 6,000 calls for service in a year's time only 11 of those resulted in "use of force". A major factor is the application of de-escalation techniques employed by the responding officers.
The 2015 case involved a young man who had broken into a business, was behaving in an irrational manner, hurling objects at police, and was unresponsive to their attempts to calm him.
The 2nd case involved a man who had been on an alcoholic binge, spent some of the night in jail sobering up, and was inappropriately sent home, where he threatened his wife and daughter who hid in the house, terrified, then approached officers with a weapon that appeared to be a rifle. Did you really expect that officer to say," gee, can I see that gun?" to determine whether it was a lethal weapon aimed right at him? De-escalation techniques had failed.
And the third, perhaps saddest of the incidents involved a man who had been diagnosed with mental illness, chose not to take his prescribed medications, instead became addicted to illegal drugs which were found in his autopsy to be a factor in his death. Criminal charges were not filed against the officers, the parents, absolutely fraught with grief, found themselves unable to accept their son's death, seeking a place for the blame, are now in civil litigation against the city and the police department. Because of the pandemic affecting us all, court actions have been placed on hold, exacerbating the genuine and understandable grief of the family and further delaying their healing.
Enter the national tragedy of a man murdered by a police officer in a far away city, shown over and over and over on nationwide television and the internet, brought police brutality to the forefront of what is wrong in America.
That wasn't our police department, and we must regain our equilibrium and realize those clear and simple facts.

The DA looks at criminal behavior because that's what the DA is supposed to do.

The first case was settled because the family knew to do otherwise would be a losing proposition. The second one had no suit because the family knew it was not warranted. The third has had angst amplified by those who have their own issues with police exploiting the tragedy to influence the court of public opinion into action against the police. That is a new tragedy all on its own.


6 people like this
Posted by fackchecker
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 7:31 am

vote4safety, let's be clear- [portion removed because it contained wording that can be misconstrued.] Not surprising, councilmember Testa is the 3rd person listed as endorsing Brown for Mayor. Consider that when voting for our next mayor! The other 3 councilmembers seem to be interested in review of policies and training but haven't shown any interest in defunding the police, thankfully. Most of us, including me, consider Pleasanton a safe community and want to see it kept that way!


13 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 8:51 am

Linda, I don’t know if you watched the videos available on this newspaper. Or whether you read the cases as noted by the DA. All three men were suffering from psychotic episodes—one because of a serious head injury. In that case, there was also alcohol and a bee bee gun. Had the police backed away and watched these people, they may all be alive today. In the third case, the man was in a wrap and said he couldn’t breathe. Of all the officers there, one standing around talking about ice cream, no one did a thing to secure his safety. Why?

factchecker, defunding is an unfortunate word choice. It is really about shifting some of the funds to caring for those who need extra help.

Wombat, forgiveness is more personal, but I am not convicting anyone. The officer in the first case is gone from PPD. The officer in the second case, I assume he is still on PPD. The third case is headed to court at some point.

More broadly, time and distance are important. We need better de-escalation training. We need PPD oversight. We do not need to lose another person.


7 people like this
Posted by fackchecker
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 10:04 am

Kathleen,

the video showed a wrap around Jacob Bauer's legs--not his chest. Not sure how that effected his breathing.

As best i can find on the city website, the police budget is 85 to 90% funding for personnel--officers, dispatchers, etc. (I hope the city will break out the police budget including what programs it funds as part of this discussion.) Shifting funds from the budget means eliminating officers on the street as i hope we can all agree that dispatchers cann't be eliminated. Eliminating officers sounds like defunding the police to me.


17 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 14, 2020 at 10:24 am

@Kathleen Ruegsegger wrote "Had the police backed away and watched these people, they may all be alive today."

Kathleen, did you really seriously think about and vet your own ideas about this approach? I seem to recall that in the Jacob Bauer case (the guy who was high on meth and smashing glass bottles at a supermarket) that you wrote that the PPD should have just backed off and let him walk home. Is that correct? If so, don't you see any dangers to the public with that approach?


9 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 10:40 am

No, I’m sorry, I don’t. The police were to follow him home.


3 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 10:51 am

[Removed for namecalling]


21 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 10:56 am

By the way. For the sane people that recognize the fine work being done by our police department, please fill out a speaker card and give the council your perspective tomorrow. Kathleen and Julie Testa’s crusade against the police department is tearing the community apart. Their lunacy will result in lawlessness and unnecessary death, as seen in Seattle’s CHAZ zone, where numerous people were senselessly murdered due to the ideas being proposed by these lunatics. Make your voices in support of our police be heard!


9 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 10:56 am

Estil had a head injury. Time and distance may have helped. And maybe the results would have been the same. But we will never know for certain.


16 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 10:59 am

Or it may have resulted in him murdering his wife and daughter. I’m glad we’ll never know.


13 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 10:59 am

I support our police. I am not advocating for anything more than a better way to address the needs of those in mental distress. You need to calm down urmomz.


20 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 11:04 am

Kathleen. Every time you post on here you are smearing the fine work of our police department. The arguments you make are not based in fact and are reckless with the lives of our officers. I will not calm down when someone is advocating lawlessness and is dragging the names of good people through the mud for some self serving virtue signaling.


15 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 14, 2020 at 11:06 am

@Kathleen Ruegsegger

The police should have just followed a person who was apparently high on drugs home so that he could just “sleep off” his condition. But what about the possibility that someone like that who was high on meth could do something impulsive and irrational? You want to put the burden and blame for any impulsive, irrational act that the guy performs and ends up maiming or killing someone on the police? Here’s just one scenario: The guy quietly walks back to his apartment and goes inside it and closes his door. The police wait outside. The guy then goes over to his gas stove, turns on the gas burners and blows out the flames so his apartment fills with gas. He then lights a match, blowing up his apartment as well as nearby apartments. A dozen people are killed, including women, toddlers, and infants. Who are you going to blame?

And don’t just try to counter by saying that the police should just turn off the gas to his apartment before he goes back to it, because if you do that you miss the point. You have no way of anticipating all of the possible methods of mayhem that a creative, suicidal mind can come up with. You don’t know if he might have a portable propane gas tank in his apartment that he may use for BBQ on his patio. You don’t know what guns and knives he may have in his apartment. You know nothing about what he may do because you would have let the situation get out of your control.


18 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 11:13 am

Time and distance may have helped? Rofl.

His family literally called the police in terror reporting he was accessing a gun and they feared for their lives. When the police contacted Estill, he put a gun in their face. They police literally created “time and distance” by retreating out of the yard to the driveway. Estill followed them out and pointed another weapon at them, then was shot.

What more could you possibly want Kathleen? Do you want the police to just sacrifice their lives on the alter of “deescalation” and mental illness?


14 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 14, 2020 at 11:14 am

Urmomz wrote “ Or it may have resulted in him (Estil) murdering his wife and daughter. I’m glad we’ll never know.”

True. As I recall, they were cowering in a room in the house out of fear for their lives when the guy was outside charging at the police. I don’t think that even Kathleen would suggest that the police should have just backed away and let him go back into his house.


13 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 11:14 am

urmomz, I haven’t used names of officers; haven’t indicated anything other than time and distance.

wombat, time and distance doesn’t mean he had to be secured or allowed to leave.


13 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 11:18 am

Wombat and urmomz, I’m going to let this rest for a while so you can say your piece(s). Never said the police should leave any of these men.


12 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 11:51 am

That sounds like a yes, you would prefer the police sacrifice their lives in the name of deescalation than protect their lives from violent criminals who may possibly be mentally ill. I’m guessing the police could do without your “support”.


23 people like this
Posted by Linda Kelly
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 12:04 pm

Kathleen, yes, I did watch all the videos, and I watched with an eye toward seeing the things you keep repeating. I saw none of them. I saw the initial approach as Officer Chin approached Jacob and asked him a number of questions in a quiet, calm manner. No punching, shoving, threatening motions, just asking questions to verify his identification and residence. Remember, they didn't just happen upon him as someone walking down the street. Employees from Raley's had reported his actions of aggression inside the store, and they needed to investigate. An important de-escalation technique is to call the subject by his/her given name. They can be heard repeatedly urging him to be calm and hold still. One can be heard remarking they needed to be careful because they didn't want to hurt his wrist.
His response was screaming at the top of his lungs...so loudly that the officer's microphone could only pick it up as static. Had they "backed away" there was a very real possibility he would have grabbed one of their guns from its holster or dashed right into traffic on busy Sunol Blvd, causing a crash or himself to be hit by a car. Let him walk home? In that state of mind? A psychotic episode is just that. An episode of erratic, unpredictable behavior that places everyone around in jeapordy of injury. Police policy would certainly not condone "just letting him walk home" for goodness sake!
So far as the man with a weapon opening a garage door and advancing toward officers with a weapon aimed at them, would you really want them to just let him keep coming toward them? Think, "Oh, he's just having an episode, it'll be over in a moment or two".Seriously?
And the first incident, erratic behavior again, jumping up onto and running over the tops of vintage vehicles in a building he had entered by breaking out a plate glass window, failure to respond to officers' calls to stop, picking up and throwing a heavy object. Just back away? You can't possibly believe that would have been proper action on the part of officers.
Mental issues need careful handling, yes, but diagnosis and treatment are where the first flaw lies. Direct your efforts toward that goal, not toward the police who are duty-bound to protect the citizenry.
I suggest you watch the video again, and see for yourself one of the officers being treated for minor injuries sustained while trying to subdue Jacob. Try to understand he was high on meth, self-administered instead of medication he was supposed to be taking. Yes, his parents did try, but nothing short of locking him in his room could have prevented the events that day. The failure lay not with police action, but with the lack of effective mental health services in the state and county. Mount an effort against reforming the system that fails the most vulnerable among us. Stop blaming the police for societies failing.


7 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 12:31 pm

What Linda said.


17 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 1:11 pm

People in mental crisis don’t need to die, nor do the officers confronting them. There are efforts to work with the state when an adult is in crisis. However, it still involves local police.

Tell me why other cities have not had any deaths?


4 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 1:35 pm

Which cities specifically? In general, it’s some combination of a larger percentage of people who don’t violently assault the police, less illicit drug use, and statistical variance.


16 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 5:39 pm

Or police who know how to handle the mentally ill.


11 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 5:53 pm

As expected, you don’t have an example of this magical city where police are able to deescalate dangerous violent criminals who maybe possibly could potentially have a mental illness without the need for force. Once again, you besmirch the police who are doing a noble job about how they could do better with vague claims that fall apart with just an ounce of scrutiny.

Since you have this amazing plan Kathleen, why don’t you sign up at the police department and show them how it’s done?

Or better yet, run for office. Oh wait, you did and came in last.

For all the non-Karen’s out there, please contact the city council and let them know you appreciate the fine work the police department is doing. Don’t let Julie Testa and her [removed] followers set us down a path that jeopardizes public safety in the name of virtue signaling.


8 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jul 14, 2020 at 6:29 pm

I have been a long time supporter of the Pleasanton Police officers Association with hundreds of my dollars donated to that organization over the years.

I appreciate Kathleen standing in here with her commentary and opinion, with the courage she has against the venomous, anonymous posters, that do not have the courage to identify themselves.

Anonymous posters have no courage and hide themselves behind their bizarre darkness that they exit in, while having absolutely no credibility.


9 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 6:46 pm

Berkeley is one. Does it matter?


9 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 14, 2020 at 7:41 pm

So Berkeley is the standard, great.

From their own public statistics, Berkeley and Pleasanton each respond to approximately 70,000 calls annually. Berkeley was involved in 3 deadly force incidents over the past 10 years. Pleasanton was involved in 2 (3 if you want to count a guy that overdosed). Berkeley averages 32.4 uses of force per year while Pleasanton averages 28.75.

Being that Pleasanton is outperforming Berkeley in every available metric, I’m sure you’ll admit Pleasanton pd is doing great, right Kathleen????

Or, let me guess, now you’ll move the goalposts again.


10 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 10:44 pm

Berkeley hasn’t killed a mentally ill person since 2012 I believe.


17 people like this
Posted by Linda Kelly
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 14, 2020 at 11:42 pm

I wouldn't dream of walking on the streets of Berkeley alone at night. Probably not even with someone. You're taking 3 tragic incidents and selecting one piece (mentally ill) of a very complicated string of events (off prescribed medication and high on illegal drugs) and turning it into a story greatly distanced from reality in order to fit your personal agenda.
Why not question how the illegal drugs were acquired? Why not question why the medical community didn't see to it the mental illness was better monitored? Why not question why the mentally ill were out on the streets and committing vandalism?
Your focus is solely on the police did a bad thing, which is simply incorrect, but it fits your agenda. And it is just plain wrong.


15 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 15, 2020 at 3:02 am

Ah, so now an 8 year stretch is now the goal. Prior to the 2015 shooting, pleasanton hadn’t killed anyone since 2000 (a 15 year stretch). Perhaps we should rewind all the crisis intervention, deescalation, mental health, and other progressive training they have received since 2015. That will bring us back to the golden age of 2000-2014, when pleasanton was the beacon of perfection you’re looking for [removed]??? I’m sure you would love how the police handled things 20 years ago, when they totally cared about deescalation and mental health (they didn’t), right???

Once again, you’re arguing your feelings about how you hate the police without any basis to support those feelings. I’m truly sorry you are filled with so much hate for our police. I hope you are able to find peace somehow, but I promise that peace will not come from besmirching the good people at our police department. Maybe take up yoga or something.


12 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 15, 2020 at 8:06 am

Linda, What was done prior to the stop did not warrant a man’s death.

urmomz, I am not sure where you are getting that I hate the police. I am seeking change for better outcomes.


16 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 15, 2020 at 9:13 am

Facts seem not to penetrate some people. JACOB BAUER DIED OF A DRUG OVERDOSE. HE HAD WELL OVER A LETHAL DOSE OF METHAMPHETAMINE IN HIS SYSTEM. HE WAS NOT KILLED BY THE POLICE.


8 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 15, 2020 at 11:02 am

It so much more complicated than that. No need to shout.

Here is Berkeley: Web Link

There are things we can do better, and should.


16 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 15, 2020 at 2:14 pm

Kathleen, you seem to be focused on the police killing mentally ill people. The reality is there are exactly ZERO cases of Pleasanton pd killing a mentally ill person.

Bauer had a diagnosed mental illness, but died of a drug overdose. That is a fact.

Estill had some type of head injury (a head injury is NOT a mental illness). He was treated and evaluated by experts (arranged by the police) and determined to be fit to release. He had no mental illness diagnosis. That is a fact.

There is no public information indicating Deming was mentally ill. That is a fact. I’m sure you would not be so irresponsible as to ignore the APA’s ethical prohibition on diagnosing people with mental illnesses without a professional evaluation.

The truth is, you’re fighting against something that has no basis in reality. Pleasanton PD has killed ZERO mentally ill people. Despite this fact, you and Julie Testa are dragging the police department through the mud to make yourselves feel good. As always, shame on you.


15 people like this
Posted by Flightops
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 15, 2020 at 5:05 pm

Thank you PPD for all the good work you do and for keeping our city safe, I would also not walk around Berkeley at night alone and a few of the other surrounding cities because I have enough sense to know which cities are safe and where the “troublemakers” frequent.
Lifetime resident of Ptown and I like it just the way it is!!!


6 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 15, 2020 at 7:17 pm

urmomz, We aren’t going to agree about the facts. We aren’t going to agree on much about these people.


4 people like this
Posted by Carl
a resident of Stoneridge
on Jul 15, 2020 at 8:10 pm

@Kathleen
I swore that I would never engage in another conversation with you on policing since we are in complete disagreement on how to police. You have never taken a class or become post certified on police enforcement tactics yet you are ready to preach your opinion based on nothing but your personal feelings. Let me present a scenario for you so we can get a true feeling for your thoughts;

A lady is walking from the Firehouse Theater on Railroad Ave after a show and is confronted by a man with a knife who forces her into some bushes in Wayside Park. The man then rapes her, beats her with his fists then severely cuts her with the knife. As the man exits the bushes another man sees him with the bloody knife, looks into the bushes and sees a lady on the ground covered in blood. The second man flags down a PPD Officer who is driving bye and points at the man walking away in the blue sweat shit, red hat and yellow shorts and said he came out of the bushes with a bloody knife and there is a lady on the ground covered in blood. The officer calls for a back up unit and puts out he description of the suspect before he checks on the lady, who is in bad shape so he calls for medical transport. As the second officer approaches the scene he sees a man matching the description walking away from the scene on Division St approaching Main St. As the officer exits his vehicle he notes that the suspect is known to the police due to numerous arrests and tells the suspect that he needs to talk with him. The suspect, in a not so polite way, tells the officer he has nothing to discuss with him. The officer tells the suspect that they need to talk and begins to approach the suspect at which time the suspect pulls a knife from his back pocket and advances on the officer while cursing him. The officer draws his weapon and tells the suspect to stop but he keeps coming forward and the officer fires striking the suspect 3 times. The suspect later dies and the lady he attacked recovers from her injuries but is traumatized by the incident for life.

Now it is 2 days later and the family claims that the man (their son) who committed this crime was diagnosed with schizophrenia 5 years ago and must have been having a bad day. He really wasn't himself that night and the officers overreacted. He really was such a sweet boy when he took his meds.

My question is, under your theory should the officer have let the suspect go on his way and tried to arrest him at a later date when he wasn't having a mental episode or did the officer perform his duties to protect society? Would the officer have been negligent if he had let the suspect just walk away and the suspect committed another crime?

It's not a trick question.


3 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 15, 2020 at 9:14 pm

You’re right Kathleen, we are not going to agree and it is for one simple reason. You cannot muster a single consistent argument, fact, or statistic to back up your allegations against the police department. In spite of overwhelming evidence demonstrating your feelings about the police department are not based on any coherent fact pattern, you are unwilling to budge from your hate.

Best of luck to you. I hope you are able to resolve your hatred without continuing to smear finer people than you.


6 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 15, 2020 at 10:45 pm

First Carl, no one else was involved in the first and third cases, just two men. The second case did involve two family members and the man was at his home. He was injured and perhaps still under the influence. In all these cases, time and distance could have saved their lives. I know this because of the bondsman that was allowed to sit in the basement of a house. He eventually surrendered.

There is no hate urmomz, no matter how often you say it. I would like time and distance used and independent oversight of PPD. It isn’t too much to ask.


4 people like this
Posted by Carl
a resident of Stoneridge
on Jul 16, 2020 at 12:42 am

Kathleen - The scenario I wrote was completely hypothetical, it does not represent in anyway any case that has ever occurred in Pleasanton. I just asked you to determine if the officer in this case acted as you think he should have? Is there a point where the officer has the right to take a life? Really, it is a simple question to answer but I guess you can't bring yourself to answer it. No matter, I think most people know what you would think.

I would like to point out that there is not an officer alive that gets out of bed in the morning and over a cup of coffee says "gee, I think I'll go out and shoot someone today". I'll bet the reason the officer that shot Deming is not on the job today is because it just tore him apart that he had to take a life. I commend the officers that go out everyday to protect our city and do what they are trained to do knowing that Kathleen Ruegsegger will be Monday morning quarterbacking them on some blog after they have made a split second decision that may end a persons life. As I've suggested before, you should walk in their shoes in the world that they walk in before you criticize them.


7 people like this
Posted by Linda Kelly
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 16, 2020 at 12:59 am

Apples and oranges, Kathleen. A 55-year-old man safely isolated in the basement of an otherwise empty house, no weapons and surrounded by police presented little threat to either the officers or any other people. Those same police you insist are untrained in de-escalation made the judgment call to monitor him until he finally surrendered two days later. It was a good call, and his life was saved. The key words were "no threat to the community".

Very different from a man running over the tops of vintage automobiles after having broken into the building, hurling heavy objects at officers, breaking windows, suddenly trying to make a break for it out the back door. Wee hours of the night, business area with a grocery store and other shops would be opening soon with innocent civilians placed in danger.

Even more different from a man fresh out of jail whose wife and daughter had been threatened and locked themselves in the bathroom to keep away, still under the influence of alcohol, history of violent behavior toward the wife, emerging from a garage known to have guns and ammunition, pointing a weapon at officers and refusing to stop advancing toward officers, a very real threat to not only his 2 family members, but also 3 officers and neighbors in a quiet residential neighborhood.

Still different from a man entering a grocery store filled with shoppers and employees, heaving liquor bottles to the floor, picking up and throwing a grocery cart before storming out of the store. Overweight,untoward strength resulting from a lethal amount of illegal drugs in his system, whose own family had sought help from PPD only day earlier because they knew his behavior was becoming increasingly erratic. Middle of the day, busy shopping center, refusal to cooperate, distinct threat to others nearby. Lethal weapons were not deployed, attempts at calming him failed, struggled so hard officers sustained minor injuries themselves in their attempts to subdue him.

You've just shown an example of the excellent training and techniques employed by this department in correctly assessing the situation and responding appropriately. You have inadvertently proved not your argument but ours. Thanks.


4 people like this
Posted by Bryant Annenberg
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 16, 2020 at 8:10 am

People should listen to the comments made by the Attorney representing the Bauer family during the meeting.

I am sure that she has more (and accurate) information regarding what happened than anyone posting.

I'll conclude by saying that the information provided to the media by the PPD seems to be mostly fiction.

Bry


2 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 11:14 am

The person who is quite literally being paid to shill is who you consider the most accurate source of information? I bet you bought what Sarah sanders was selling too.


6 people like this
Posted by Carl
a resident of Stoneridge
on Jul 16, 2020 at 11:15 am

@Bryant
There you go again. Why would you put any credence into anything that the lawyer representing a victims family has to say. I agree that she has more information than anyone commenting on this forum, however, she is PAID by the family to represent them, not put out information that would hurt their case. Her job is to work the potential juror pool to be sympathetic to her clients. She wants public opinion on their side so of course she will present alternatives that may or may not be fact but will make them look like victims. If she has a second autopsy performed is it really from a neutral third party? Of course not, the doctor is paid for by the family so they come in with a slightly different conclusion to bolster their case.

Remember that when you look at a case objectively the facts are very stubborn, they never change.


6 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 16, 2020 at 11:44 am

The facts are stubborn. The fact is, he could still be alive, with the least amount of effort.


6 people like this
Posted by Bryant Annenberg
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 16, 2020 at 12:42 pm

@Carl, Urmonz, Linda Kelly and other like minded...

So you don't think the City has hired outside counsel to represent them? As well as the autopsy performed by a contractor (a Doctor based in Bakersfield) to the Alameda County Sheriff Coroner?

You don’t think the City and its Police have issued press releases to get public opinion on their side?

They all are getting paid to please their customers.

It is reprehensible that in all of these deaths, you place 100% of the blame on the victim. Furthermore you back your conclusions up by referencing a DA report, making the false statement that the DA report states that the Police did nothing wrong. No where in the DA report(s) is that stated or even implied....but the media, PW included, always prints the headline "Police cleared of any wrongdoing in death of ******"

These headlines are on the edge of Jounalistic ethics .

But make no doubt, media, including the PW is not unbiased, and has every reason but put forward the narrative by government authorities...only to be swallowed cheeringly by a gullible public.

Don’t you remember the slogan “question authority”

I’ll come right to the point…

You three are no better than people who blame women who are raped.

If only she hadn’t worn such a low cut shirt…
If only she hadn’t come on to him….
If only she didn’t drink too much and pass out….

Or any number of a number of “blame the victim” excuses.

People like you are firmly in the camp of supporting the actions of the Stanford swimmer who raped a girl while she was passed out, and got a hand-slap sentence from the judge.

Make no mistake, Police are not so different than Brock Allen Turner….Always blaming the victim to justify their actions.

The public was outraged, and re-called the Judge in a vote.

3 people have been killed by the PPD since 2015, and none of you seem to have a problem with that.

Well I do


4 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 12:57 pm

I think I finally understand. Bryant and Kathleen are unable to see police officers as human. They are incapable of seeing police officers as being victimized by someone violently assaulting them or threatening their life by repeatedly pointing a firearm at them. In their minds, the police are always dehumanized, even when they are protecting themselves from violent criminals. Pretty sure the inability to empathize with other human beings is a hallmark of psychopathy.


4 people like this
Posted by Bryant Annenberg
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 16, 2020 at 1:02 pm

the only victims in this discussion are:

John Deming Jr.
Shannon Estil
Jacob Bauer


4 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 1:06 pm

Lol, as I said...

Apparently the officer who was violently assaulted by Deming, suffering a career ending injury was not a victim of anything at all.

Apparently the officer who had a gun stuck in his face twice was not a victim of anything at all.

Finally the core issue driving the rage comes out, the dehumanization of police officers.


4 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 16, 2020 at 1:16 pm

The officer did not sustain a career ending injury. Read the DA’s report and the interviews.


4 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 1:36 pm

Yes, Kathleen he did. He is receiving a pension from the city (as available on transparent california) which began shortly after the shooting. As he was not old enough to retire, by process of elimination you can confirm this is a medical retirement, confirming a career ending injury.

I’m sure you will stick to your guns, but once again you are wrong.


3 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 1:50 pm

Not to mention, the DAs report clearly identifies numerous career threatening injuries, including 4 torn lower back disks and a torn meniscus.

Get out of here with your blatant lies.


1 person likes this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 16, 2020 at 2:34 pm

“ . . . by process of elimination you can confirm this is a medical retirement . . . “

Nope.


3 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 2:45 pm

Yeah, he suffered at least 5 career threatening injuries and began receiving a pension under circumstances that only exist for medical retirements and you can’t even admit it was a career ending injury. Give me a break Kathleen, you can’t be that [self removed to save Pleasanton weekly staff the trouble].


3 people like this
Posted by Carl
a resident of Stoneridge
on Jul 16, 2020 at 2:57 pm

@Bryant - Kathleen
You are correct, I have no problem with the 3 deaths that you talk about. You call them victims, I call them perpetrators. They all had or were committing a crime when they came into contact with the police. You and Kathleen live in La La Land. In the real world there are bad people that just don't care about your well being. Some day you will be wronged by one of these people and that will be your reality check.

That's it for me, I said I should never get into a blog discussion with the two of you were facts are not relevant. As usual Kathleen never answered my question. Perhaps Bryant will take a stab at answering it.

Have a great day.


Like this comment
Posted by Bryant Annenberg
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 16, 2020 at 4:17 pm

@Carl

I briefly answer your scenario.

I’ll first remind you that we in the USA, where individuals have rights.

The key point of inflection in your scenario is when your Officer does not respect the person’s rights granted under the 5th amendment of the constitution. The person says he doesn’t want to talk, but the Officer ignores his request and makes a forceful attempt to make the person talk....and then things become deadly.

Aren’t police trained to handle a situation where one chooses not to speak?

Apparently not, since Jacob Bauer was attacked by 11 PPD because he didn’t answer their question.

Last time I was in the zPPD lobby, a framed list states that individuals constitutional rights will be respected.

Another problem with your scenario is probable cause...just because a person is known by police and may have been convicted in the past does not rise to the level of probable cause...maybe there are other probable causes to stop the person, but , but, regrettably, courts have allowed almost anything to be considered probable cause.

Lastly, in your scenario, the Officer seems to have already made the decision that this person is guilty of rape. In your scenario , the witness who alerts the PPD only to what he saw, a man exiting the bushes (I agree, suspicious, and I would myself call 911)

I refer you back to the Brock Allen Turner case, Where the stories told by Brock Turner, are very different from alleged by the DA.

Everyone, is innocent until proven guilty . The Officer in your scenario seems to have forgotten this.

To divert , no charges are brought against the Officer, PPD doesn’t take any disciplinary action against the Officer, and worse, the Officer is hailed as a hero by the community for taking a rapist off the streets.

As I said, innocent until proven guilty.

So let’s analyze your Officer’s actions:

Failed to preserve 5Th amendment right.
Failed to allow due process
Failed to allow to be judged by peers
Failed right to Life, Liberty, happiness
Was implicitly biased
And in the end, was Judge, Jury, & executioner of an innocent man.

Now to throw it back at you... how would you answer your scenario, without violating any of this man’s rights?

Hopefully, this type of scenario you have put forward is what Pleasanton will be addressing in reviewing PPD policy.

This Country has reached a tipping point, and after 10,000 people have been killed by Law enforcement over the past 10 years....the public...79% has said enough is enough ...time for a change.

You’re obviously in the 21%


Like this comment
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 4:27 pm

Meant to say that AP computer science was not offered through FLEX, but it is offered through hybrid learning.


2 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 4:28 pm

Ignore that, I posted in the wrong place.


5 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 5:29 pm

Oh Bryant, you poor thing. You clearly have a less than working understanding of the constitution and Supreme Court decisions.

In Carl’s scenario, you have a reliable citizen informant reporting a man exiting a bush carrying a bloody knife and an injured woman in the bush. The reliable citizen informant notifies the police, who verify a crime appears to have occurred. The reliable citizen informant identifies the probable suspect he saw leaving the scene of the crime. That suspect is then contacted by another officer.

As there is probable cause to believe a crime occurred (injured woman, man carrying bloody knife leaving the exact area where the injured woman was) and probable cause to believe the suspect was involved in that crime (he matched the description and was positively identified by the reliable citizen informant), the officer has the authority to detain the suspect to investigate his involvement (Terry v Ohio) and would also have sufficient cause to search the suspect (terry v Ohio).

The officer tells the suspect “I need to talk to you.” The fifth amendment protects a person from making incriminating statements, it does not protect a person from having the police talk TO them. The officer in this case did nothing to force the individual to say anything, as you claim, he merely said HE needs to talk TO the suspect. This is absolutely permissible under the 5th amendment. The officer in this case was attempting to detain the suspect, as authorized by Terry.

Our suspect then produces a knife (further solidifying the reasonable suspicion to detain him under terry) and advances on the officer, posing a deadly threat. Our officer again attempts to detain the suspect by telling him to stop. When the suspect does not, the officer effects a seizure of the person by shooting him. This is a textbook self defense shooting and is authorized by graham v Connor, Tennessee v garner, and about a million other cases.

Your due process, 5th amendment, jury of peers, and dozens of other arguments have been made by attorneys much smarter than you and they have all failed. I’m sorry the constitution is not what you seem to think it is, but you should really familiarize yourself with what the law is and has been for 50 some years now. I can also promise you that no amount of whining, crying, protesting, or rioting is going to cause the Supreme Court to overrule terry, graham, or garner.


4 people like this
Posted by Carl
a resident of Stoneridge
on Jul 16, 2020 at 5:30 pm

@ Bryant
I didn't read your complete posting since it is obvious you don't know the law and you want to make up your own scenario. In my scenario the witness points to the man walking away as the person who exited the bushes and the officer put out a description of the suspect when he calls for back up. The responding officer sees a person who matches the description (height, weight, clothing...) and makes contact. At this point the officer has reasonable cause to detain the suspect to determine if he is involved in the incident. I never said he was going to ask him his name. As I stated the suspect is known to law enforcement due to numerous prior contacts with the police.

OK, I'm going to stop there. Go take a class on enforcement tactics and the law concerning what you call your 5th amendment rights.

I don't think I'm in the minority in Pleasanton.

Have a nice evening.


3 people like this
Posted by Linda Kelly
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 16, 2020 at 5:32 pm

Okay, now I guess it's my turn. Bryant, you clearly have a negative view of the city and police department. Some people feel that way, you have a right to it. I[m guessing you don't think much of newspaper journalists, either, your perogative. Some of have glasses half-full, others half-empty.

I take great exception to your assertion that you know my opinions regarding placing blame on victims. You don't know me, have never met me and have no right to make a judgment call on my attitude toward mistreatment of young women or abuse of women of any age. It doesn't belong in this conversation in the first place, and you couldn't be more mistaken. The Brock Turner travesty of justice has no bearing on this topic of corrupt police action in Pleasanton. Bringing it up falls in the category of when you're losing an argument, change the argument. Deflection isn't gonna cut it, Bry.

You've accused me of blaming young Deming, Mr. Esil, and Jacob Bauer for their own deaths. I have not, did not, nor do I believe that for an instant.

Something triggered young Deming into violent behavior. I can't speak to what it was, as I haven't studied the reports as some here apparently have done. I only can say something went seriously wrong in his thinking or he wouldn't have broken into the building, refused commands to stop, and lunged at an officer. Rational people simply do not behave thusly. It is tragic, no argument here, but actions trigger reactions, in this case it proved deadly for him.
I strongly disagree there are only 3 victims. The Deming family are all victims here, not of police brutality or murder, but of a string of circumstances none of us is privy to. And as it turns out the entire PPD are victims, because those circumstances have triggered all manner of accusations against them.

If you think Mrs. Estill and her daughter aren't victims, you are insensitive to the ravages of spousal abuse. Those days immediately preceding the event that triggered her husbands death must have been terrifying, to say nothing of what she must have felt to cower in the bathroom on the phone with police dispatch. It is well-documented that he was having an adverse reaction to alcohol, and again his judgment was wholly impaired for him to open his garage door, aim a weapon at officers, advancing toward them, and refusing to drop the weapon when cautioned. Holding him in a jail cell overnight didn't calm him, but sent him into further frenzied and more irrational behavior. Now we have him, hiw wife and daughter, 3 resonding officers and the management arm of the department all victims of the circumstances surrounding his death.

And lastly, there is Jacob, whose parents and sister, family and friends all are deeply and irreparably harmed by the circumstances surrounding his death, with multiple factors playing a role in what happened that day. The grocery employees who had to clean up the mess he made in the store. The shoppers who feared, at least momentarily, for their own safety, the few bystanders who gathered as police worked to gain control so he could be transported by the paramedics who weren't able to lift him onto the gurney without assistance because of his size.

The officers tried to work quickly so he could be transported to hospital, but were hindered because his demons were in charge of his behavior, again influenced by substances he shouldn't have been taking.
Where did he gain access to the drug? He couldn't have been addicted without somebody selling it to him. Blame, if it must be assigned, lies with that source. Work to stop it as diligently as you're working to criticize the three of us for not only acknowledging the tragedies while not assigning blame, but searching for ways to prevent it from happening again.

I and my neighbors as well as others I know have experienced the ability of officers to de-escalate a potential harmful situation, and will speak to their professionalism and humanism at any opportunity. They are not perfect, and as fiercely as I will defend their actions if I feel it's challenged wrongly, I will equally forcefully make them aware when they get it wrong.






4 people like this
Posted by Carl
a resident of Stoneridge
on Jul 16, 2020 at 5:40 pm

@urmomz
I appreciate your response to the scenario that I presented. You went into much more detail in your explanation than I was willing to write since I'm afraid that the people that it is intended for won't understand it.


Like this comment
Posted by Bryant Annenberg
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 16, 2020 at 5:52 pm

@LK, Urmonz, Carl & other like minded in the 21%

In Carl’s scenario, an innocent man is killed.

Since when are members of the general public “reliable citizens “

Remember the recent Hayward death when Police arrived about 2 men arguing? 1 man had known mental illness. The Police arrive, the “reliable “ citizen yells “he’s got a knife “ and the first responders pump 20 rounds into him.....no knife was found.


Like this comment
Posted by Bryant Annenberg
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 16, 2020 at 5:54 pm

@LK

Why are you afraid to walk in Berkeley?


Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 16, 2020 at 6:07 pm

@Carl (and others), I didn’t respond to the scenario because it isn’t important to the discussion. It still isn’t.

We need time and distance; we need police oversight. These are not intrusions into lives of those employed by PPD. They can keep their jobs; they can be retrained in de-escalation. This is not too much to ask.


1 person likes this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 6:09 pm

“Since when are members of the general public “reliable citizens ““

Since at least 1983 in People v Kershaw.


Like this comment
Posted by Bryant Annenberg
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 16, 2020 at 6:14 pm

[removed]

In your posts, you warp statements to fit your own narrative.

We’re all impressed by referencing court cases.

But not only are you a vile and insulting person, without the guts to expose who you really are, you’re just plan wrong ALL the time.

Take the scenario Carl laid out....the Officer says to the suspect WE need to talk.

As I pointed out, this was apparently not acceptable to the Officer, so he chooses to escalate.

As I said, regardless of what may be visible at the moment, innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

5th amendment protections.
Even the cop in this class says “Never talk to the Police”

Web Link


Like this comment
Posted by Bryant Annenberg
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 16, 2020 at 6:24 pm

@LK

Thanks for validating my point of blaming the victim.

Those who ended up dead.

You did it perfectly in your last post:

Deming would still be alive if he had just not broken into the car dealership.

Estil would still be alive if he wasn’t a wife beater

Bauer would still be alive if he wasn’t so overweight.

Yup, every person is dead based upon their own actions
Great Job PPD. (Sarcasm)


7 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 6:30 pm

“Why are you afraid to walk in Berkeley?”

Maybe because Berkeley has more than 5x the violent crime rate of Pleasanton? I know your utopia is where violent criminals walk the streets while the police do nothing, but rational people prefer not to walk around in violent neighborhoods.


4 people like this
Posted by urmomz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2020 at 6:32 pm

Yeah, Bryant, my bad for supporting my arguments with facts and references and stuff. I guess I should just cite my feels instead.


Like this comment
Posted by Bryant Annenberg
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 16, 2020 at 6:34 pm

@KR

Aren’t they already trained in de-escalation?

According to the PPD policy manual, as well as the 21st Century document, PPD states that their employees have extensive training in de-escalation.

And let’s not forget those 8 green checks they’ve posted on their Facebook page.

During the meeting on 7/14/2020 numerous speakers brought up “will the policy match the culture “


3 people like this
Posted by Linda Kelly
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 16, 2020 at 6:46 pm

Once more, a thread intended to have legitimate, valid discourse has been reduced to name-calling, irrational meanness. It's unfortunate, but I'm not being goaded into playing your game. I consider John Bauer, Jacob's father, a friend of mine. Judging from a recent email from him, he feels the same about me. His grief is palpable, and is evident even in a virtual setting without video. Your crass, rude, and deplorable conversation is demeaning to anyone who enters an exchange with you. You're so not worth the effort.


2 people like this
Posted by Carl
a resident of Stoneridge
on Jul 16, 2020 at 6:54 pm

They need to pull the plug on this thread.


5 people like this
Posted by Gina Channell, Publisher
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 16, 2020 at 7:36 pm

I agree. This thread has run its course and will be closed.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Get fact-based reporting on the COVID-19 crisis sent to your inbox daily.

Solving a big problem in the basement on 2nd Street in Livermore
By Tim Hunt | 15 comments | 1,890 views

Couples: Are you Committed to your Vows or Dysfunction?
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 1,770 views