REDACTED-DO NOT COpy

Anderson incident. indicated that he was not conducting . any investigation of the bomb threat

Ms. Anita Grant, County Counsel
Anita Grant, County Counsel for the County of Lake, was interviewed and confirmed she contacted Sheriff Rivero via her cell phone. Ms. Grant observed the evacuation process went smoothly and she was complimentary of the Sheriffs action and the request for a bomb dog. Ms. Grant reviewed her response to the bomb threat (a direct call to Sheriff Rivero) and conceded in the future it V(Dutd'be more appropriate to call 9-1-1 in order to place the emergency within the f411 ,pu~iewof the dispat~~1t$. A call to 9-1-1 would have generated several response ",(J'aw enforcement ~n;d;;".j eemergency services agencies that could have been de' d if the party wh~\c~'Geived the call did not pass on correct information.'
<'

Protocols -Debriefings

.. £'$

As a result of the courthouse ev .tlabi.on, it was determl at the County of Lake does not have well defined pro ~or a courthous,~; ation. When the bomb threat was received, a call v!'c ced to Sheriff R~€~:1ather than 9-1-1. A review of all protocols reqarding toper procedures'ar.tP methods for an evacuation should be conducted by law",: ment and emer~y m~dical personnel. .
¥

\e;

.....,.,.'

"40"'''/ ,.
1~

-,,_.

~

~.

'\J,?i,.

The even~s at the C;;;.@lhouse.did not lea~., nf ~lor informal com~laint by the Lakeport Pol~ce D'e~artme'}t against ~h ~Ive:,? ~@Ii _ Lake County Shen~'s Department. Chief RatSJ!Jlus oke wl~b' enff ~IV~'"'' and asked that a debnefing be held about tl<:1 ~iden\."f· ",,"I"'age'tGJ.l~:f6 UP~?t~~~ir n:u~ual aid/bomb threat . protocols. Th.. nt J?r()tGl~ols~nd 1~11'utual al"d.,PQllcles within the county are outdated and in need"f\-sjgnificJ:llPt~'i~pdatin,g::'\~$Heriff ~,i,Y:€!1.® expressed a willingness to work with the La~ -: olic - fr t~rtme*'_t~r.C0·rder~\ed~velop proper protocols and procedures.
, . ~:f'

y.··

o",~ ..~:.

cond ambul

'~e

United Stafes.lirF9f~.~e R-9

,,~

;0

~d('

ens

closeEl;Jh1atemergency medical personnel were alerted sta~afn~~" near the courthouse in case of an emergency. 1 y medi®a,(,!Staffwas alerted and available, a review should be ' ull a,~ rocedure can be implemented for the area hospital, \Crew.~ .._ her law enforcement agencies.

.

,

tf""V

Out of an ~.u'~dance of caution, Sheriff Rivero requested a bomb sniffing dog be detailed to the courthouse in order to conduct a more thorough search of the premises. A K-9 crew arrived from Travis Air Force Base approximately ninety minutes after the incident was reported. The bomb sniffing dog failed to detect any explosive devices and

1

DSA Report

8

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this report are confidential and protected pursuant to the "Attorney-Client" privilege. No portion of this report shall be reviewed, copied, duplicated, saved. electronically stored. forwarded or otherwise transmitted to any third party without the express written permissicn of County Counsel, County of Lake

REDACTED-DO NOT COpy
staff was permitted to return to the building without any further delays.

Lakeport Fire Department
The Lakeport Fire Department was notified of the incident at 9:27 and advised there was a Code Ten at the courthouse. The fire department advised the Lake County Sheriffs dispatcher that they were going to stage at the fire house. A prior dispatch contact at 9:25:44 stated that "fire already knew about it" which was an indication the fire department was aware as early as 9:25 of the incident at the courthouse. One dispatcher was recorded on a dispatch tape that the Lakeport F Department called her about the .incident. Case Analysts

<,

(~"'"

t::>;k;~!;,::::,,>,r

"'-;;. ",F

The investigation of the bomb threat identifie<::f;a·t~as of concern r~£l'a:r€i'i'ng roper p communication and protocols for bomb threats altth~rL-ake County Cou{thO'l.Jse. However, the actions taken by Sheriff Riverognd'!t'he Sheriffs Departrneht, resulted in an immediate and safe evacuation of all cOy~P.6,f;use personneL,Jhe 'Sheriff's Department controlled security at the L~J~~"()ounty Courthouse,f?n$::rsecurity operated under ~he directio~ an.d control ~f She1Glrf~~~1i~ero. L~k ~~t;P'oli~~ Chief did not take The exception to Sheriff Rivero's actlon~uf\mdlcated a des! ~!5e ~otlfled more promp.tly of a bomb threat so that he couldft ~r-filperlydeploy staff sist with the event. Sheriff "" Rivero and his staff exercise riate caution w "Sheriff Rivero decided to maintain a radio silence in 0 prevent any p ~. acti'V"ftion of an incendiary device.

Recommenda~ons
1.

:::> ~~
'II\. ~

.

»:

~.Q"\ 9 (;0

The La .L icfe~Qepartme,', ake ~ty Sheriff's Department, emergency medi ers0J.J,1 the LaL\~~~ Fire tment and local hospital staff should ..m:t r revie~ prot~bQ~(Jnd pr ,liD. res necessary for the safe evacuation of . rsonnel ~r~~~(he Lll{~\>l)-ounty house.
!'

flP·

(,}>k~1n i~1;0r!$'S',la{en!(1H2cement shoul~ have a clear understanding of ""'_,r thE:;)"Jil'~trflcatl~~'s~~Q)be glyeFl",te'emergency medical personnel and local law ~o'Fceme,~t~~Ifl·the~v,~:~t of an emergency, it would be necessary to ensure fe andts~ift pass "9,s",offall emergency vehicles to and from the courthouse. Plans'sh~t:f1d be d toped to ensure appropriate exit routes are defined for eme~§erfcy p~ el. 3. The Lake Rolice Department and the Lake County Sheriff's Department should conduct a debriefing of the incident to ensure both agencies will continue to act in concert during any emergency response. A report should be prepared of the debriefing and distributed to both agencies for their review and comments.

,:p,.,.

.[.

_J\

,!tle,,~:~e·~~ ~!

(!5,"F.~~.~",

'~

~l'~#""

~

.'.

:~.

~:

~

"

9
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this report are confidential and protected pursuant to the "Attorney-Cltenr' privilege. No portion of this report shall be reviewed, copied, duplicated. saved, electronically stored, forwarded or otherwise transmitted to any third party without the express written permission of County Counsel. County of Lake

REDACTED-DO NOT COpy
4. 5. Staff within the Lake County Courthouse should be trained that in the event of any emergency, their first call should be to 9-1-1. The Lake County Sheriff's staff should develop a policy and procedure to route . any call for service through their dispatch center to ensure a proper distribution and notification of an event. Any policy or procedure would exclude sensitive or confidential investigations that must be kept off air for officer safety or event security.

10
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this report are confidential and protected pursuant 10 Ihe "Attcrney-Client" privilege. No portion of this report shall be reviewed, copied, duplicated, saved, electronically stored, forwarded or otherwise Iransmitted to any third party without the express written permission of County Counsel, County of Lake

REDACTED-DO NOT COpy
II. LAKE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY INVESTIGATORS ACCESSING LAKE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT RIMS DATA
Between January 1,2011 and April 12, 2011, there were allegations that Lake Co~n!y District Attorney's Office Inv.esti~ators inappropriately accessed the CORI (Criminal Offender Record Information) databases under the control of the Lake County Sheriff's Department. The California Penal code states that CORI information be released after the "need to know" and "right to know" requirements have been met. The California Department of Justice is responsible to audit CQg:l"~ompliance. In compliance with CORI regulations, the Lake County Sheriff's"~e:p~rtment maintained and managed CORI records which included CAD inclden s, crime reports(a(rest and booking information, booking photographs, and ot imlnal offenderJ o1-q,"l:ltion (in an electronic format). The electronic database u y the Lake Counteiriff's Department (RIMS) is also known as a Record 1(11 Ion Manageme2 em. In order to access the system, a user must use a-rf roved login 'e", d password. Access was permitted at various levels to di ",~tlaw enforceme encies and those levels were assigned by the Lake County .S~~. 's Department..* .
~ ~
.
.

~.'

History

<t.. ~

Prior to January 1, 2011l:,t" " embers of the t~\k ounty District Attorney's Office Investigation Unit wft}'e~' . iously employecJ".,~s~ispatchersfor the Lake County Sheriff's Department. While" mbers of the LaKe,,~:ountyS,.n'yriff's Department, the four investigators had a partLs:bl:~9'r'1'level of access tG'ttRe~-RIMS4!faf1tli>ases. When the Lake County District Attorn€i\S""Offige,,\1iredthe ir;:lVEfs,tiga!PJ~fh~'-vV passwords and login credentials were i~~~eltby t~~'~~)~ke COi~:~t~;8herift;,s q~partment to the investigators because their lev@l(qff cc~ss was eXf\eyl~a to b~ af"a''''differentlevel. Despite the a issuance of ,§/'<iredern,ti~I~'};the QJstrr~tAttorneyr.,JT1lvestigators were able to maintain their form ,.i-aenfa'i \a'TId acp ""'.,he datae~afe'~as if they had th~ sam~ level of access. ~f\. ke ~y She epart:r;lt'employee. The four investigators from the L .., "'ou rict At s offi' re still considered part-time dispatchers for tpe C heriftsli." art~ that status enabled them to maintain their r'0.,~ ac~r eR 'ataba~e

r

5'

; etime,t(een Depart ntJ,e -a. that database s~st . '-.#

~ary and March 2011, the Lake County Sheriff's tsfrlct Attorney investigators allegedly accessed the RIMS Lake County Sheriff's Department login codes. The Lake

mation (CORI)--Information that is collected as the result of an arrest and that is stored in a summary format that included: • California Department of Justice rap sheets; intelligence and other criminal offender files • Department of Justice computerized criminal history system printouts (CHS); and • FBI or other states' rap sheets.

11
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this report are confidential and protected pursuant to the "Attorney-Client" privilege. No portion of this report shall be reviewed. copied, duplicated. saved. electronically stored, forwarded or otherwise transmitted to any third party without the express written permission of County Counsel. County 01 Lake

REDACTED-DO NOT COpy
County Sheriff's Department initiated an investigation of the practices of the four District Attorney investigators and found 4,984 records were accessed, viewed, printed or managed by the District Attorney investigators. The level of activity by the District Attorney investigators meant that over seventy (70) working days, each investigator would have accessed the system approximately eighteen times per day. Lake County Sheriff's Department learned that District Attorney investigators were using login access to the RIMS system using old passwords that gave those investigators access to more information than they would have been authorized to receive as District Attorney investigators. It was discovered that records were reviewed, printed, and some information was updated (address and contact information). It '4'~S determined that this access and any records modifications were not authorized b~{tAf~ake County Sh"ftriff's Department and violated CORI regulations. ". ("'-;'''''' f~';'<¥
~~~ !~~_dl ·~:~_\>~I")

. The Lake County Sheriff had a strained relation'S:hrlYwith the District ,~ttoF~ey's Office during the first several months of 2011 and ,!~'@;~'heriffwas conc~r:f1e.:d,,,that the District Attorney's Office inappropriately used thei('10'girl credentlalsjo apGess information about pending investigations witt}_i,[i~th;e"Sheriff's Deparfm·enfthat should not have been released to the District Attorney" {I?~cause of these c.,oJlce\rns,Sheriff Rivero suspended access to the entire RIMS sy,;.~teJm the District At tM'i,feyinvestigators until for a complete investigation could be con!()j1!J,~fed. \ Interviews #,,<,\,1
4< \,

~ 8F~

""",~...."",,:'~

-,

""

~ .. "\
~~

1.
2. 4.

Lake County Sheri Lake County Sherl Lake County Dl~~
'.~ %#'

•ta.OtBnant Brian Marti ... '"1 .,.. ......~\ .'epartment Capt mes ~al1,an At~~~ey Don A'p~ no. ~

i

\#'

_

Lt. Brian MartlFl." ~

The oi. ga1tQr\"»( allege appropparl~~cess to the RIMS files included an ~ntervi~w~~ , leu " Bria\t, .;in. Ltt'(~in be~ame aware of the alleged. lnapp:q~Q'ate ~se" d'glns ~,*~.;o' r.lct l},tt_Q~Qey Investigators ~rom staff, Lt. Martin e~J?I(lnied thara a e COU4i1ty"Sherlff~.s"'D15patcher as permitted greater access to w ~:he~fff{s De,; r.Jlfen!;.d~t ~an~{~AiI'r>1'~estigator. Lt. Martin s~ate.dthat he was , unswar spe:CI~" emptlo'rhgNen to the Lake County District Attorney's Office to perms 'inve§'H§~\t6rs tQ,Lt~ their credentials as a dispatcher when they were perfor . d;;!.ti@·s~i~r"the 9'i'~!iG~)At~orney's Offi,ce. A?cording to Lt. Martin, the number of searchestco~eh:fcted b%~'bl;;le District Attorney Investigators appeared to be greater than what he wo~;I;Q\,"'liavee~e'e~ted and he expressed concerns about the possible misuse of login credentials.cJJ

<:tt l~

er ", ' ...... ~,'"," '

~VJ

\""'). y~ ~

~,~

"", '","

C ~,
J1

'

Captain James Bauman Captain James Bauman was made aware of the alleged inappropriate 12
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this report are confidential and protected pursuant to the "Attorney-Client" privilege, No portion of this report shall be reviewed, copied, duplicated, saved, electronically stored, forwarded or otherwise transmitted to any third party without the express written permission of County Counsel, County of Lake

use of the

REDACTED-DO NOT COpy
login credentials by the District Attorney investigators and he indicated the Sheriff's Department took steps to ensure that District Attorney investigators were only given access to appropriate data within their specific authorization level. During our investigation, we learned that the Lake County District Attorney investigators obtained copies of phone and radio traffic from the Sheriff's Department that were related to ongoing investigations conducted as part of our inquiries. Lt. Martin and Captain Bauman were advised that the District Attorney's Office was conducting some type of "criminal investigation" and it accessed the audio files of the Lake County Sheriff's Department. The Lake County Sheriff's Department administration was unaware that the District Attorney's Office accessed the audio files and took ption to the District Attorn.ey's Office obtain~ng the materials without ~aking a fo(prl"a. quest for the \t. materials from the Shenff. The Lake County Shenffs Deg~nient was concerned.. :qt m the District Attorney's office inappropriately accessed t ··~)fIY1Sdatabase to", 01l\~'LJtt C a criminal investigation without proper authorization or nt of the Lake Sheriff's Department. .'

q~~,tl

As a result of the investigation by the L ' ounty Sheriff's '~~ment, a decision was made by Sheriff Rivero that a~0rnd all requests fQ~(re2brdsfrom the District Attorney's Office would be route~tm'Ough Captain Baurdla~: Captain Bauman assumed the duties of monitoring the"",~~ft~~'se lnformation {o"'.fi'eDistrict Attorney's of Office to ensure the District Attorn~y:s Office only recelv'"l:tterial it is authorized to receive for its criminal prosecuti2mf):" ""'~

,,/" "f.,,""

'\

;;if

District Attorney Don
~)

Anp~!~ci'n
{~"'M~~;·

'. ~'i{""~;'~,~(

s

M"

~~.~~.- . . .~_

erson was ~o~iewedl "'\cf~ised us that the District 'aL)ffairt"~~ " I ation regarding the conduct Son ~ssr§J,l#ed investigation to his Chief the rele.·:" a. • w, h:" .' -, exception to the restrictions placed on erJ1if:s Department. Mr. Anderson explained that Mect, he was involved in a dispute with the

13
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this report are confidential and protected pursuant to the "Attorney-Client" privilege. No portion of this report shalt be reviewed, copied, duplicated, saved, electronicalty stored. forwarded or otherwise transmitted to any third party without the express written permission of County Counsel, County of Lake

REDACTED-DO NOT COpy
Sheriff Rivero and District Attorney Anderson attempted to meet and confer to work out the logistics of a resolution. Unfortunately, neither Sheriff Rivero nor District Attorney Anderson were able to meet. The final meeting scheduled between Sheriff Rivero and District Attorney Anderson was cancelled by Mr. Anderson. Mr. Anderson complained that within five minutes after he canceled his second meeting with Sheriff Rivero, he received a notice that his District Attorney investigators' access to the RIMS system was terminated. Mr. Anderson believed the decision to terminate the RIMS access by Sheriff Rivero was retaliatory and not based on evidence of inappropriate use of the RIMS records. .,' :..,.,,;~,.;"_",,-'.;..

DA Chief Investigator Craig vVoodsworth - Attempted Irt~~iew ,t
'I;

As part of our investigation, we attempted to in ew District Attorn~)t:~, ief Investigator Craig Woodsworth. When District Atto nderson was in~e~4twed, he directed us to Mr. Woodsworth to obtain additioj ation aboll1~~f;,'~'i'Strict Attorney's Investigation. Shortly thereafter, a ~ail was receivecr'fl;<5~Mr. Anderson in which he advised that Mr. Woodsworth not particiPate~nt!~~nvestigation process. ~,. '4:."",,'"

Case Analysis

• ;;;. '\:,

~

0"

.

As of July 25, 2011, ther~~as evidence to SU,~Ii?e;'rt conclusion that some a records accessed using S~ ".~~Department pas~,9f~s were altered by District Attorney investigators. T is no credible e~We,~& tha'~'ilges to some of the RIMS records were authorit'e~~ re8Jesentatives..,.q·f~(rte Lak ty Sheriffs Department. The evidence demonstrated, t~'F;re La . €.Q)nty 1#>1'5t torney investigators used credentials issue hem a~,aJl(e C· .,. her;(ff'~i,spatchers and the level of access of a Lake.Co~lt1t~.~~ riU:~I5»~~artr;r:e~ patcp~~as at a higher I.evel than a Lake County DlsJrfQ~AttorD~Y;IlS1yestig 19'E" lJnfortunfalely, we were not given access to the Lake istri .'; ";s.0rney ., )igatorrt~:<tetermine their rationale for using crede witho oper alrJi ation:,J<I\1e evidence supported a finding that Sheriff ~e; acti0i.~o uspe"~~ ileg ""'~'fle District Attorney investigators' use of the ilM. sYt~~~:S app ~rte urnfii ,. time as the Sheriff could meet to discuss the rii"atfer wilfb;l'tlil~Dis rney. \iJ~l riff Rivero immediately established a protocol for Distri.. ,t,tefhey nel tfi~cess the .RI~S system. Recommendations below specif Jfy sug~ eS .frand the District Attorney to reach agreement on protocols farTh. e of t MS database. 'liflere is"'~. k of credible evidence to support a finding that Sheriff Ri.vero's actions {S)t~ct use of the RIM.S ~atabase was retaliat?ry ~ecause of a failure to meet a . nfer between the District Attorney and Shenff Rivero. The evidence disclosed the Sheriff's Department was aware of possible inappropriate use of the RIMS system and initiated an informal investigation before Sheriff Rivero withdrew access to the Lake County District Attorney's Office.

q

>

14
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this report are confidential and protected pursuant to the "Attorney-Client" privilege. No portion of this report shall be reviewed. copied, duplicated, saved. electronically stored. torwarded or otherwise transmitted to any third party without the express written permission of County Counsel, County of Lake

REDACTED-DO NOT COpy
District Attorney Anderson advised that his office would conduct its own internal investigation of the RIMS system allegations. No information was received from District Attorney Anderson to our offices about the results of his investigation.
Recommendations

1.

The Lake County District Attorney and the Lake County Sheriff should meet and confer to develop a plan to audit or review RIMS records accessed by District Attorney investigators between January 1, 2011 and Apr" ,2011. If the investigation determines the District Attorney investig '~r~ iolated theiraccess rights, then appropriate disciplinary action shouldb by the Lake Cow'hty' District Attorney's Office. J

n

2.

The Lake County District Attorney and the"Lal'I<e,,::County Sheriff shotll'cl"alsowork cooperatively to reach an agreement onp'Fqp(:rr-accessto login,r$C0,rlis. The District Attorney does not have a right_t6the'records Access'Is-provlded as a convenience to that department from ~.~.~ ake County SQE3jriff.' L

.~

"

."

-~:~.~~

r~:'~~<~

-, .~~~~~-:

3.

4.

The Lake County Sheriff shoul'til"G.pn'CIuct investi an f part-time dispatchers to determine if those dispat ~ erNcted outside th e of their employment by accessing records using" County Sheriff's "" artment login when they were not on duty anq,.n0T Ing on behalf of tQ'~Sheriff's Department. If the Lake County Sheri '~rmined the part-til1'l,,?<j3'1\patch~rs misused their login cod~s, those cod., . uld be remove<~.1t~""tfppro ") disciplinary action taken against the par1~ dl~:tchers. " .J !k V"~ County Go I a d 'flle Ellstri ~ not the~'i~ t y's ffic data ?e, ac empl s. . rictAttorney modified the internal res oto<;9'I·· IS de:' ent, th~s7 protocols should. b~ shared ounf nSel}lJ.;] e La,ke,Soonty Sheriff s Department. It ISImportant <,,, t a /~' ai level,.0.fttrcfhspar,e'l'1pJ'"lexist between the Sheriff's Department and ~J:~..;; ount)$)c2i~:trict A,:ttor9'e1's Office regarding access and use of protected m€iieflifl1with';' ~-\tMeJRIMS dtata,oases.

,

='",4.$<

';"

e Pe
.,,-t?~~"

~CllifornlChpe Code Section 11075 a : "As used in this article, "criminal offender rec9fel4d~ation" means records and data compiled by criminal justice agencies for purfJpse~ of identifying criminal offenders and of maintElining as to each such offender a sum'titafy of arrests, pretrial proceedings, the nature and disposition of criminal charges, sentencing, incarceration, rehabilitation, and release. (b) Such information shaff be restricted to that which is recorded as the result of an arrest, detention, or other initiation of criminal proceedings or of any consequent proceedings related thereto. California Penal Code Section §11076: "Criminal offender record information shaff be disseminated, whether directly or through any intermediary, only to such agencies as are,

i

15
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this report are confidential and protected pursuant to tile "Attorney-Client" privilege. No portion of this report shall be reviewed. copied, duplicated. saved, electronically stored. forwarded or otherwise transmitted to any third party without the express written permission of County Counsel, County of Lake

REDACTED-DO NOT COpy
or may subsequently be, authorized access to such records by statute. California Penal Code Section §11077: "The Attorney General is responsible for the security of criminal offender record information. To this end, he or she shall: (a) Establish regulations to assure the security of criminal offender record information from unauthorized access and disclosures by individuals and public and private agencies at all levels of operation in this state. (b) Establish regulations to assure that this information is disseminated only in situations in which it is demonstrably required for the performance of an agency's or official's functions. (c) Coordinate these activities with those of any interstate systems for the exchange of criminal offender record information. (d) Cause to be initiated for employees of all agencies that maintain, recei r are eligible to maintain or receive, criminal offender record information a continui ational program i the proper use and control of criminal offender record Inter, ' (e) Establish reg as he or she finds appropriate to carry out his or he ~ ns under this article California Penal Code Section §11078: Each a . aIding or receivin offender record information in a computerized s shall maintain, for s ioo as is found by the Attorney General to .be appr?pri, />. Isting of the agencief1 ich it has released or communicated such Informatlo"7rt~ :J . .(""*. . California Penal Code Section §11079(($),)1'17e Attorney Geaer. 1Y't;onduct inquiries and investigations as he or she finds ·priate to carry out func s under this article. The Attorney General may for this e direct any agenc ding a tribal court or tribal child welfare agency of a tTt/b consortium of tribe 'as entered into an agreement with the state pur'S't!I~t Section 10553.1 effare and Institutions Code, that maintains, or h'·· rec~ived,?r that i~ ~/{PitJ. aintain or receiv~ crimina! offender records to prgd! r inspection statlstlcElf.ct.aa, reports, and other information concerning the stora .e;"qp issemination of criminal dffender record information. Each agency is eutnoriz :d'directed to providejl:J,.at,§j_ata, epotts, and other information. (b) e r Notwithstanding,;~'A '0 her law, any entity qe'S,dribe&in spfJQivision(a) that fails to comply with the requjreifje s of this section shC:}lfq,ase'acces§:1:Q~ct~fJ1inal offender record informatiOti"if1'aLiftaineg by the DepartIJ1eqtbf Justic;e,;{fti!!.il correction of the noncompliance . 1nd" . IS d emons tr,'J.~. . .;),'''\ ' . "»". ~ "'. '2 "...=. '." '(\",/ '" Calif, -fa Penal (J)ode,,section'!.J'1iJff1. NoBoinrj;tinthis article shall be construed to auf ' acce~q, of 8'ny pers iJ:Yublic n~o individual criminal offender record tion les»..such acce is otheuthorized bylaw. orniaa I Code .S-;'otioh 111/4 ny person authorized by law to receive a "'cord· ~i~lcjmatio ~ d fro .,," rd who knowingly furnishes the record to a perso: ' aJ'ISnot zed to {i c5~ the record or information is guilty of a 'J}isde '. nor. €at'iforma P.en9C;;ode S.e.c 11143: Any person, except those specifically referred ;, Sec '0 • of th{Evi ce Code, who, knowing he is not authorized by law to or informal! n obtained from a record, knowingly buys, receives, or e reQ~fi.g::r information is guilty of a misdemeanor.

c~

~l

16
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this report are confidential and protected pursuant to the "Attorney-Client" privilege. No portion of this report shall be reviewed. copied, duplicatec. saved, electronically stored. fcrwarded or otherwise transmitted to any third party without the express written permission of County Counsel. County of Lake

REDACTED-DO NOT COpy

III.

VAGOS AND HELL'S ANGELS INCIDENT - MAY 14, 2011

We conducted an inquiry into an incident that took place on May 14, 2011 in the City of Lakeport At that time, a well known motorcycle gang "The Vagos" were in the City of Lakeport. The Vagos were known to law enforcement agencies within Lake County and they had been identified as an outlaw motorcycle club by the Federal Bureau of Investigations, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and F~;~~'Qrms, nd the a California ~ttor~ey General's Office. Similarly, the Hell's An~~ls~.rJotorCycie club ~d also been Identified as an outlaw motorcycle club by Fed,.erjfi'I;t;,5tate and local lavr'· ... ~i' enforcement. To be characterized as an outlaw motorc,,~I'e:cfub, a determiQa~i'OD, as .. ~ made that members of those groups were involved in,fl]e;gal activity includiq~\;;E'r;6ducing, transporting and distributing illegal drugs, extortion ~tJ, money laundeJfl'l9',;",violent crimes, theft, witness intimidation, and weapon . ns. The Vag. ~pY,ef;Hell's Angels are competing outlaw motorcycle gan law enforcernei aware that a meeting between the Hell's Angels and the, ros could very Ii result in violent attacks that could endanger the particiP~a,~s\4n the assaults, a

a

a\

of Lake County.

. .. ~

...._ ~

A b:ief review of nationa4~~rted incidents in~"baited that as late as December 9, 2010, eight members of a . motorcycle gan ere arrested because of a brawl with the Hell's Angels mota gang. The inci at a local beach in Bull Head <?ity and ~harges i~'.' rioting and p~ ting . iminal street gang. The Phoenix New Times re·Q'I$-cgr.;tied 911 Septembe " 010 ell's Angels and the \(agos rival m?tor5X,cleltree:t g~~ eng~, a g~1ib~at ~ In which fifty shots were fired. The pollce,..~E(p;e~of!r,~h'al",j,n·clde~~. uo~~d""as~aytng !he Angels and the V~gos street gang w~re...:~reatlf;tgfa\~~'pathf?fte,t:ror andfd;~structlon for Innocent bystanders In the aftermath." A'en thie~ifi.lQi:Oent sta.lJe9,~witne,ss:~s~reported to police that "they watched as the "H~ ng~I,~is~9t the ¥aQcQfo'rnem~t;?e(~:While cruising up and down the streets on their t}i ~." RivefsJ'€!J'Cour:J~~~€)'i'Strict Attqrney Rob Pacheco characterized Vagos ..,. . ''; "'-.'k "'. ri)o§.m,/ as /"'" . g'an "e~~~efTiethr~e{'t~:·,·tO enforcement officers and were notorious law ~Qrt~rng 19'" te ,oe:.iafetrag~frties .... " The FBI has been quoted as calling the V'a'gos a {1f.l!J ss C' organ~a,tfbn" and of manufacturing incendiary devices, inclu bo~·. ~:...".\

f)'s

~i

pri0r(fo fVI'a~ 14, Vagos gan~r"Fl'l~mbe't: motorcycle gang/i~e" because of the p~s~ect known consequence to

()'

'".'1t'~~the Lakeport Police Department had' information that a
attacked by a group of "prospects" from the Hell's Angels ssault in April 2011 was a concern to local law enforcement of retaliation for such an assault. Retaliation after attacks is a law enforcement agencies.

~~,

On May 14, 2011, a group of Vagos motorcycle gang members arrived in Lakeport in a manner that caused law enforcement to believe the Vagos might engage

17
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of Ihis report are confidential and protected pursuant to the "Attorney-Client" privilege. No portion of this report shall be reviewed. copied, duplicated. saved. electronically' stored. forwarded or otherwise transmitted to any third party without the express written pennission of County Counsel. County of Lake

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful