Denver Diner Case: Charlie Garcia Deposition

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 47
EXHIBIT 17

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Case No. 11-cv-2394-WJM-CBS ____________________________________________________ DEPOSITION OF CHARLIE GARCIA April 5, 2012 ____________________________________________________ ANA ALICIA ORTEGA, KELLY BOREN, KRISTAL CARRILLO, SHARELLE C. THOMAS, Plaintiffs, vs. THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, a municipality, OFFICER RICKY NIXON, in his individual and official capacity, OFFICER KEVIN DEVINE, in his individual and official capacity, OFFICER JOHN DOE ONE, Denver Police Department Internal Affairs Bureau, OFFICER JOHN DOE TWO, Denver Police Department Internal Affairs Bureau Police Officer, in his/her individual and official capacity, Defendants. ____________________________________________________ APPEARANCES: RATHOD MOHAMEDBHAI By Qusair Mohamedbhai, Esq. Siddhartha H. Rathod, Esq. 1518 Blake Street Denver, Colorado 80202 Appearing on behalf of Plaintiffs SENTER GOLDFARB & RICE, LLC By Thomas R. Rice, Esq. 1700 Broadway, Suite 1700 Denver, Colorado 80290 Appearing on behalf of City and County of Denver
3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Exhibit 27 Department Order of Disciplinary 84 Action re Nixon, 4/11/11 Pursuant to Notice and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the deposition of CHARLIE GARCIA, called by Plaintiffs, was taken on Thursday, April 5, 2012, commencing at 9:09 a.m., at 1518 Blake Street, Denver, Colorado, before Barbara J. Castillo, Registered Merit Reporter, Certified Realtime Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of Colorado. INDEX EXAMINATION MR. MOHAMEDBHAI MR. REYNOLDS MR. RICE MR. MOHAMEDBHAI MR. RICE EXHIBIT PAGE 5 140 155 166 177
DESCRIPTION INITIAL REFERENCE
Exhibit 75 Report prepared by Montgomery, 118 3/16/12 PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS Exhibit 24 Memo from Quinones to Battista, 83 1/19/11
2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 APPEARANCES CONTINUED: BRUNO COLIN JEWELL & LOWE PC By Brian Reynolds, Esq. 1999 Broadway, Suite 3100 Denver, Colorado 80202 Appearing on behalf of Defendants Ricky Nixon and Kevin Devine
1 2 3 4 5 Exhibit 41 Force Science News article 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Notes 17 Notes 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 128 9 Exhibit 69 Memo from White to Devine, 3/21/12 PRODUCTION REQUEST(S): 140 Exhibit 52 Memo from O'Neill to Internal 139 Affairs, 7/12/09 Exhibit 67 Citizen Oversight Board, a Year 98 in Review, 2011 Exhibit 44 Respondent-Appellant's Response 138 in Opposition to Petitioners-Appellees' Motion to Enforce Hearing Officer Panel's Decision and Order 130 I N D E X (Continued) Exhibit 33 CUFFS II Reporting listing for 135 Devine Exhibit 37 E-mail from Rosenthal to 138 Malatesta, 3/3/11
Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying Denver (303) 296-0017 Boulder (303) 443-0433 Colorado Springs (719) 635-8328 Greeley (970) 356-3306

7
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 enforced local rule that says that if there is a rule pending -- or question pending -- excuse me -- you must answer the question before you can break. A That's fine. I have given everyone notice. I have a luncheon at Denver Athletic Club at noon and I'm glad to come back after that. Q Okay. So you need to get out of here what, about 11:45? A Between 11:30 and 11:45. Q And then how long does the luncheon go? A 1:30. Q We should be able to accommodate that. The next rule is I never want to know about attorney/client privileged communications. Sometimes questions may inadvertently tread into those types of areas. If they do, please let me know, let your attorney know, and we'll figure that out. Okay? A Sure. Q Are you under the influence of any medications that would prevent you from conducting your deposition today? A No, sir. Q Are you under the influence of any drugs or alcohol that would prevent you from being able to testify truthfully today?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
PROCEEDINGS CHARLIE GARCIA, being first duly sworn in the above cause, was examined and testified as follows: EXAMINATION BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Q Mr. Garcia, could you please state your name and spell your first and last name for the record. A Charles Garcia, C-h-a-r-l-e-s, G-a-r-c-i-a. Q You are the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, Mr. Garcia? A I am. Q If I call you Manager Garcia throughout this deposition, would you find that to be somehow offensive or inappropriate? A No. Denver police officers still do to this day when I see them on the street, so . . . Q Manager Garcia, have you ever had your deposition taken before? A No. Q In 30 some years of being an attorney you've never had your depo taken? A The only time I've ever even been in a
6
deposition is I clerked for John Breit when I was in law school and I would sit through depositions with John. Q All right. Well, it's not terribly different than the court work that you have obviously done extensive work in, but there are some basic rules of a deposition that may not be intuitive. The entire purpose of a depo is to build the record. And so it's very important that we not speak over each other. So I would ask that you allow me to finish my question before you complete your -- or start your answer and I'll do the same. All right? A Okay. Q The next very important rule of a depo is that you answer audibly. Uh-huhs, shakes of the heads and things like that just cannot be accurately transcribed. If I catch you doing that, I may prompt you for a yes, is that a no, and that's simply intended to clarify the record and in no way meant to be rude or anything like that. Okay? A Sure. Q Breaks are done by collective decision, and you are the most important person, so if at any time you need a break, just let me know. I almost immediately honor that request. There is a lightly
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A No, sir. Q Do you have an understanding of why you are here to give your testimony? A I believe so. Q What is the subject matter in this morning's deposition? A My understanding is there is a pending lawsuit by four young ladies who were the subject of interaction between them and the Denver Police Department at the Denver Diner, a lawsuit brought by them against both Officers Nixon and Devine and the City and County of Denver. Q Have you had a chance to read the complaint in this matter? A I have not. Q What documents did you review in preparation for your deposition today? A Nothing other than all of the documents that were contained in the exhibits that were used at the Civil Service hearing in this matter, which is the entire IAB file in this matter together with my own file, which I have returned all of my file -- IAB file to the city attorney's office. I retained only a handful of documents from my own copies that were separate and apart from

11
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 confirmation process. It's an appointment by the mayor. I don't believe it required council confirmation. I don't remember. I don't think that it did. Q Could you describe the appointment process to become the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver. A Appointed by the mayor, sworn in by Chief County Court Judge Marcucci. That was pretty much it. Q Is the -- strike that. Does the city council for the City and County of Denver influence the appointment for the manager of safety position? A Influence? Q Yes. A Not to my knowledge. Q Let me ask a better question. Does Denver city council have any say in who becomes the manager of safety? A By ordinance, I don't believe so. Q Is the manager of safety position controlled by ordinance or city charter? A I believe it's by ordinance. I'd have to go back and look. I have it at home. That's another document I have. I have the actual -- I believe it's
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
the IAB file that were part and parcel of that file, and I also -- I have taken the opportunity to review very briefly the transcript of my testimony at the Civil Service hearing as well as some report written by some expert hired by you folks. I think that's everything I looked at. Q You said that you have documents in your own possession that were different than the IAB file. A Just my handwritten notes. Q What types of notes were those regarding? A Only a page or two, just rough notes, just in my review of those IAB files and my meetings with Officer Nixon and Officer Devine as well as notes that I wrote on -- in particular, I remember notes that I wrote on -- there were two significant memorandums prepared in connection with this case. One was Chief Quinones' response to a request by the Independent Monitor, and I wrote in the margins and made notes on that particular document. Q Would you have a problem giving that to the city attorney's office so they can review whether or not they're going to disclose that information? A Subject to review by my counsel, no. Q What time period were you the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver?
10
12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ordinance. Q You were appointed by Mayor Vidal to be the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A Correct. Q What other roles and responsibilities for the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A Primarily the oversight of the police department, fire department, sheriff's department, in addition to that community corrections, the Denver Police Department cadet program. 911 is another handful of minor things that fall under the manager of safety that I'd have to actually look, budget, those types of things. Primarily it's the oversight of the three public safety departments. Q What are the qualifications required to be the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A I believe by ordinance, I don't think there are any. Q What types of questions were asked of you during your interview by Mayor Vidal for the position of manager of safety for the City and County of Denver?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A Roughly March, April, May, June, July of 2011. I say roughly because I'd have to go back -- I think I was actually sworn in -- I'd have to look at a calendar, but I think it was March 16th. But I believe I actually met with Mayor Vidal and agreed to take the position on March 4th and began reviewing files, not in this case, but in another case before March 16th, and I can't remember my effective date. It was July something that I actually resigned. Q How does one become the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A Hard work. I was actually called by Mayor Vidal's office. Actually, it was -- I had applied for the Citizen Oversight Board and was scheduled to be interviewed for the Citizen Oversight Board on that same day by the mayor, and the interview changed, and instead of being interviewed for the Citizen Oversight Board, I was requested to take the job of manager of safety, so a bit of a coincidence, but that's how it happened. Q Could you describe the confirmation process to become the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver. A I don't believe that there was a

13
15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A Basically my background in public safety and my thoughts on the discipline process. That was really the crux of the discussion. It was fairly obvious that there were some major cases pending. We didn't go into the details of those cases, but it was obvious that there were at that time, this case being one of them. Q What is your background in public safety? A Public defender for roughly 25 years, head of the public defender's office in Denver for seven of those years. I am still an adjunct professor of law at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law teaching trial practice, criminal procedure, and advanced criminal law. I was on the original Criminal Justice Commission back during the Owens administration. I have been on the Colorado Criminal and Juvenile Justice Commission for some time, and I've been on the Denver Crime Prevention and Control Commission since its inception to include being the chair for the two years prior to becoming manager of safety. I'd have to look back at my resume. I was a policy advisor to Governor Hickenlooper on public safety. I was actually his transition co-chair for public safety, a lot of duties associated with my
14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
frequently, a lot about their policies and procedures, but I think more importantly the credibility issues that go around with any witnesses that you become uniquely familiar with, which in this case was the Denver Police Department. Q Are public defenders antagonistic to law enforcement? A You'd have to define antagonistic and in what role. I'll try to answer it and you can tell me if I -Q No. Let me ask a better question. A Go ahead. Q Are public defenders adverse to law enforcement? A I would hope not. I think if a police officer is doing his job, he welcomes the role of the public defender; if not, he's probably adverse. Q Why would a police officer welcome the role of a public defender if they are doing their job correctly? A I think they understand the role of the public defender, which is to seek justice, and if an officer is doing his job, he's doing the exact same thing, so they're actually performing very similar roles.
16
Q In your career, how many police reports do you think you've read? A I don't know how many thousands. Thousands. The average felony attorney in Denver carries roughly a hundred cases on an average annual basis, so over 25 years that's, what, 25,000 or so. Q I have you under oath here. Was Siddhartha a good public defender? A Huh? Q Was Siddhartha a good public defender? And you are under oath. MR. RICE: You're really asking him this on the record? I know you're joking. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: I am joking. MR. RICE: Good. If you want to ask him off the record, I don't have a problem with that. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Tom, it was an attempt of levity, but obviously it was -MR. RICE: Levity is fine, but not on the record. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Does one need to have a background in law enforcement to be the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A It's not a requirement. As a matter of fact, the job of manager of safety is to be a citizen
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
duties as head of public defender's office. I have been on the Denver Community Corrections Board in Denver. I was there for seven years. I've been on the Governor's Advisory Council to community corrections. I was appointed to that early on in Governor Ritter's administration. I'm sure there are several others. That's most of them. Q Can you describe your experiences with law enforcement while you were the head of the public defender's office in -- for Denver County. A Obviously the bulk of it was cross-examining Denver police officers through motions hearings and trials, meeting with officers off the record in discussions about pending cases, things, you know, of that nature. I spent a lot of time with the crime lab. I meet with them frequently in preparation for trial, reviewing cases, working on cases. Actually, in my role as public defender that was probably the bulk of it. Q What knowledge and experience do you gain when you cross-examine police officers that assisted you to be the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A Well, I think I learned a lot about their training, which becomes subject of cross-examination

17
19
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
oversight, so I personally would hope that we don't have people who have spent their career as law enforcement officers in the position of manager of safety. Q Why is citizen oversight important for law enforcement? A You know, we can go back to the very basics of the rule of law. You know, to me the rule of law is extremely important and it's very basic, and its very basic premise is that those who enact and enforce our law should be subject to those laws. Pretty basic premise. And I don't think you want sort of the sheep policing the sheep, you know, or the wolves policing the wolves. Okay. I think it requires someone with an independent approach to looking at the issues that are involved, and I think it takes someone that has some experience in the area of public safety, my preference that it be from a legal perspective. I think the choice of Justice Martinez -I hope it proves out to be true as a good example. But I don't think that -- I think there is enough process within the police department, law enforcement enforcing rules on other law enforcement officers,
18
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
the rules. Okay. Is there contempt in these? Q No. Just his contempt. A Thank you. Go ahead. I'm sorry. Q Strike that. New question. Manager Garcia, why did you get rid of the Disciplinary Review Board as part of the disciplinary review process of the Denver Police Department? A Let me back up and say I did that in conjunction with Chief Whitman. One of the largest concerns with the disciplinary process at DPD is the length of time it takes to get a case through the entire procedure and to finalize discipline in cases. DRB was one of the areas that I saw that could be eliminated. It was established by Mayor Webb, and when it was established, there was no Citizen Oversight Board or Office of Independent Monitor, and so it seemed to make some sense at that time, but once we established the Office of Independent Monitor and the Citizen Oversight Board, it was a duplication of efforts. It also had inherent problems, as I saw. It is alleged to be a big confidential hearing. Officers of the Denver Police Department enjoy going out and speaking about it in public and even to the
20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
but you need something outside of that to provide protection to our citizens. You know, one of the things that we need to always make sure of is in checks and balances that you have a system set up so that the citizens actually have some voice in how they're being policed. Now, they can do that through their elected officials, but the elected officials also need to have the power to appoint people like the manager of safety to carry out those protections. And in Denver, we have the Citizen Oversight Board, the Independent Monitor. I personally did away with the DRB because -- and this is not answering your question directly, so I'll stop, but . . . Q What is the DRB -- let me ask a better question. A Mind just took a blank. It's review -discipline review board, yeah. Q Let me ask a better question. Why did you get rid of the Disciplinary Review Board for the Denver -A The Disciplinary Review Board -Q Sir -A Again, spoke over your question. Broke
press -- Nick Rogers being a prime example -- which I always felt was a violation of the rules of the DRB, but there didn't seem to be any consequences for violating those rules, so it was misused. And I'll be honest with you. If you go back and look at the history of the voting of the DRB, a prime example is those cases wherein the direct supervisors in a district would recommend discipline, find specifications to be sustained, that sustained specification would also be sustained by the district commander, by the division commander, by the chief of police and yet the Denver -- or the DRB would not sustain it. It became pretty much practice that they seemed to not sustain anything, so it became a very invaluable tool in the disciplinary process, because there was no relevance to anybody else's decisions. You know, I've been asked by the Civil Service Commission about my review process, and I looked heavily at the recommendations that came before me all the way up through the police, and I honored those recommendations. And I'll be honest with you. I did not honor those of DRB, because to me they were of no value, so it was a very time consuming process which did nothing for the citizens

21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of the City and County of Denver. And to be very honest, their recommendations were never, almost never in agreement with anyone from the very basic first line supervisors in DPD all the way through the manager of safety. Q What was it about the DRB that -A I'd have to -- sorry. Go ahead. Q Sorry. A I know where you're going. Go ahead. Q Oftentimes you will and that's usually because we talk slow and things like that. So what was it about the DRB that caused it to be such an ineffective mechanism to meaningfully discipline law enforcement officers? A My personal beliefs? Q Well, based on your experience and observations as the manager -- former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, what was it about the disciplinary review board that caused it to be ineffective to discipline law enforcement officers? A The procedures and the makeup of the board. There were officers on the board, and I think the officers that were part of DRB, together with the
23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 public with their statements. They do things like blue flu. There are a lot of tactics that they can use to try to intimidate the public in general, city council, the mayor, and I think they try to do it and they do it to some extent effectively. Q And when you took office of the manager of safety in approximately March of 2011, did you see this culture of intimidation, as you just described? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) I'll re-ask the question again, but I should have gone through this in the beginning. You're going to hear objections to form and foundation a lot. There's no judge to rule on these objections. So basically we lodge these objections, and then if it becomes relevant later on, we wrangle with the judge after the fact. So unless you're told specifically not to answer a question, you need to answer the question. A lot of times form, foundation questions are just misstatements or things like that, but he's preserving issues for later on. Okay. So I'll ask the question again. A Let me start -Q Let me ask the question again, sir. 24
22
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
fact that officers -- not only officers involved, but other officers who would come testify before DRB intimidated others on the board. I think that Nick Rogers was a prime example. You know, the Denver Police union, the PPA, Police Protective Association, they were there all the time. And I believe they would intimidate the people on that board with the things that they said to the board in their testimony before the DRB. Q How did the police union and other police officers of the Denver Police Department intimidate those officers that sat on the Disciplinary Review Board? A I don't believe they had to intimidate the other police officers that were sitting on there. I'm concerned about the civilians that were sitting on there that were intimidated. Q Can you explain that further, sir? A I have always been and will always be extremely concerned about the power of the Police Protective Association, Denver Police union, and the weight that it carries with not only DRB but with the Civil Service Commission. And I think that they intimidate both. And I think they do it by not only going
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A Go ahead. Q Manager Garcia, when you took that office in March of 2011, did you observe this culture of intimidation by the police union and Police Protective Association on the disciplinary review process? MR. RICE: Same objection. Go ahead and answer. A You know, I actually got a phone call from Nick Rogers one time, wanted me to come talk to their board. And when I told him that at that time I wanted to meet individually with the officers by going out to the districts and actually seeing them face-to-face before I met with his union board, he specifically said to me, you're not man enough to meet with us. That's the kind of culture I learned to expect from people like Nick Rogers. It was a bullying technique, and I don't take well to bullying. So un- -- and I'll be honest with you. I told Nick Rogers, after he went on and told the press that -- I believe it was Officer Estrada and Briggle should not have been fired and that their cases would be overturned by Civil Service, I said to him, in the parking lot after meeting with his district, District

25
27
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
2, I don't care, Nick, if you shoot yourself in the foot and I don't care if you shoot the union in the foot, but as long as I'm around, I don't want you shooting the Denver Police Department in the foot because I care about this department. And he said, what do you mean? I said, well, when you go to the press and every time I fire somebody you tell them that Civil Service is going to overturn it, that sends a clear message that discipline means nothing in this police force. And if you don't think these guys should have been fired -- and he said, let me correct. He said, I never said Briggle shouldn't be fired. I said, yes, you did. He said no, I didn't. I said, I have your quote in my briefcase. Would you care to see it? Well, that's not what I meant. I said, well, what you say and what you mean to me is one and the same. So that's the sort of relationship I had. And I can tell you that it was a clear understanding, and I was told this -- and I didn't have to be told this. Nick Rogers went on the news every time I fired an officer and said Civil Service will overturn this and they will be reinstated. And you know what, to a large extent he's been exactly right so far. And so -- and, again, I think that is the
26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
department when I was there. He's a statistician. And he would go and follow those numbers and try -and they have graphs that follow the number of officer initiated contacts, and we look and see what happens when officers get fired. And we look specifically at what happened when I took over and what happened with officer initiated contacts. And there was a correlation between officers getting fired and officer initiated contacts. Q Was there a report written about this? A Report. I don't remember a report. I think there were perhaps -- I know I've seen the graphs. There may have been an e-mail or something to that effect that went along with it. I know that there were discussions between senior administration within DPD and district commanders about it. An official report, I don't remember any sort of official report, at least not during my tenure. And I do -- I forgot. I do want to go back and just clear up one thing. I do not care to use the term "culture" as it relates to the Denver Police Department. Q Would the term "subculture" be more accurate? A No. I don't like it. There are bad
28
result of the fact that that union has a lot of money, carries a lot of power. And in speaking with officers on the street each and every day, I think they're bothered by it. I think there are -- a very, very large percentage of the Denver Police Department are good cops and should be commended for the work that they do, and I think they are intimidated by the union. Q What is the blue flu? Strike that. New question. What is the blue flu? A Officers not being happy with something that has taken place within the organization decide that they will either cut back on coming to work or -- what we have done studies on is the number of contacts that police make. Officer initiated contacts are the ones that we really look at the most. Those are -You know, there are different contacts police make. If you call 911, the police show up. That's not an officer initiated contact. If an officer stops you on the street because he feels that you're doing something wrong or just to say hello, that's an officer initiated contact. You know, one of the things that we had -Evinger -- David Eddinger worked in the -- in my
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
people and there are bad people in every department. I don't care whether it be the police or any other department, but I don't see it as indicative of the department itself. I really -- I will always stand by the fact that the Denver Police Department, I believe, is a good police department, and I believed that in the 25 years I was a public defender. I really did. I believed that there were some bad cops, and I still do, but I don't see that as a department. Q Does Denver have a problem with terminating the employment of its bad police officers? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. A You'd have to define problem. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Does the disciplinary process lend itself to effectively being able to terminate bad police officers within the Denver Police Department? A No. Q Why not? A Because largely Civil Service. It is a known fact and has been known for a very long time that if you fire a police officer, the chances are

29
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 very, very, very good that they will be reinstated by the Civil Service Commission. And the Denver police officers know this. And as long as they continue to believe it, they will continue to know that they cannot be fired and will act accordingly. And I firmly believe until you fix what's going on with the Civil Service Commission, you're going to always have bad police officers that should not be on the force. And I think if you were to sit down and interview every police officer in the Denver Police Department, they will tell you that there were officers that were fired, have been reinstated by the Civil Service Commission who they personally do not believe should be on the Denver Police Department. So if you want an answer, that's my answer. That if you want to start fixing the problem, you start with Civil Service. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: I'm going to take a brief break, sir. I'm just going to make a copy of this document and we'll be right back. Okay? (Recess from 9:49 to 9:54 a.m.) Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Manager Garcia, when you assumed the position of manager of safety for the City and County of Denver in approximately March of 2011, what particular challenges did you face
31
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
So I still had cases that were pre matrix that actually crossed my desk, but the most daunting part was trying to learn the disciplinary handbook and the matrix and really try to understand it. I think that alone was the most difficult task I faced. Q Is the matrix an efficient method to discipline law enforcement officers? A I think it's very good. I think it's a tremendous product. Like any product, it will need to be continually modified. We were modifying it as I was there. We actually came up with modifications as a result of the sheriffs, because the sheriffs used the DPD model in putting together their matrix and their disciplinary handbook, and in so doing, they identified a few things that they tweaked and changed before they did theirs, and it was actually -- I looked at some of those changes they had made and went back and we made some changes while I was there to the disciplinary matrix handbook. But I think it's a wonderful tool. I think that what we had with years of comparables was antiquated at best. Al did an example when officers say, well, you know, 20 years ago an officer could do this and you took away his shoe brush and now you want to give me a suspension, my answer was, yeah.
32
When I started practicing criminal law, first-degree murder carried 20 years. Should that mean that first-degree murder today should carry 20 years? No. The laws have changed. And so I think what the matrix did was to say, you know what, no, we are not going to look and say if this is what we did 20 years ago, that ought to be what we do today. It's insanity. And what the matrix did was brought to the forefront that we need to move forward and we need to have a disciplinary system that is based on today's world, reflects today's best practices, and I think they did a darn good job. Q As the former manager of safety, did you experience a resistance to change by the Denver Police Department? A To change the matrix or to change? Q To change generally. A To change? Q To change generally. So let me ask the question again. As the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you experience a resistance to change by the Denver Police Department? MR. RICE: Just object to the form of the question. Go ahead.
30
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
concerning the Denver Police Department? A There were a lot of disciplinary cases that were coming to my desk and the deadlines are pretty unrealistic. I have 15 days for the manager of safety to rule on those cases. Pretty overwhelming. So, you know, I had that. I also had, again, the sheriff's department, the fire department. We were also -- had just instituted the disciplinary matrix in the sheriff's department and were attempting to get it going in the fire department, although that kind of got sidetracked by the fire union, but -- so there were other things that were pending in addition to the discipline cases that required a significant amount of the manager's time. And one of the things that I think was a little bit difficult was the fact that there had been -- Al LaCabe had been manager for seven years and spent the bulk of his time putting together the matrix and the disciplinary handbook that accompanies the matrix, but it really hadn't been utilized, because it only applied to those cases that actually the -- a date of the allegation or the alleged offense happened subsequent to the institution of the matrix.

33
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Yeah. That's so difficult because it's so broad. I can tell you that the people that I dealt with directly were the top of the administration. Was there a reluctance in any way by Chief Whitman? No. By Deputy Chief Quinones? No. Deputy Chief Battista? No. Deputy Chief Lamb? No. Division Chief Klee? No. Commander Burbach? No. All of the people that I dealt with at the top of the administration welcomed the matrix and welcomed the disciplinary system. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) What were your observations about the length of time a disciplinary case took to get to your desk as the manager of safety? A Insanity. You know, as I said to people in the administration, first-degree murder has to be tried within six months unless somebody gets a judge to grant a continuance. And I never could understand how we could try a first-degree murder in six months but you couldn't handle a police disciplinary case in two years. So I had some serious concerns. Q What is the effect of a slow disciplinary review process to actually combating bad police officers within the Denver Police Department? A It's a tough answer. You know, one of the
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
35
the internal discipline process to say, I don't remember, that was five months ago. And I just would go, you've got to be kidding me. So, you know, there's a lot of reasons it's bad from a disciplinary standpoint, and it needs to be fixed. Q As a former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you observe any issues with fellow officers failing to report the improper conduct of their colleagues within the Denver Police Department? A Complete failure to report, no. Q Let me ask a better question. As a former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you observe a failure to report excessive force by fellow officers on their colleagues within the Denver Police Department? A Failure to adequately describe or fully report, yes. Q What is the blue code of silence? A Blue shield. All I've got to do is watch Blue Bloods. They talked about it last week. It is basically watching out for one another, but it's gone to an extreme, I think. You know, watching out for one another, I think, is huge in the Denver Police Department. You have to. That's what it's about.
34
36
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 If cops don't take care of other cops, you've got a problem. They need to be there for each other. But when it comes to failure to report, not fully report, hedge, whatever the case may be to help protect another officer's job, that's what I refer to as a deceptive act. Q Did you observe the blue shield occurring within the Denver Police Department when you were the manager of safety? A Only with the cases that I actually ordered discipline on. Q Approximately how many cases were you involved in for disciplinary review during your time as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A I can't remember even what I testified to last time, so counsel across the table is going to -MR. REYNOLDS: 30. A -- say I can't remember. Yeah. Roughly. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Let me ask the question again. A 30. Roughly 30, I think. Q As the former manager of safety, approximately how many disciplinary cases were you involved in that involved the Denver Police
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
things that you learn in -- drug court is a good example. Immediate sanctions work best. You know, I mean, it comes with training children and dogs. You know, you don't punish them for something they did two weeks ago. You know, immediacy is relevant. Now, you're not going to get immediacy in disciplining police officers, but two years is insanity. There's always sort of a saying, you know, in the defense arena, a murder case is like fine wine. It only gets better with time. There's a reason for that saying. Okay. People's memories fade. You know, hopefully if there's any press, that's kinds of gone away. You know, there's all these -- and which is maybe good, because I don't think the press is helpful at all. But, you know, one of the things that really bothered me was you get officers who go, I don't remember, it was so long ago. And I go, well, it's DPD's fault that it was so long ago, so don't sit here and tell me that you can't remember because it was so long ago, because I was a defense attorney and I'll tell you I've had an officer on the stand on a murder case that was two years old and he remembered every second of everything he did. But it became a very, very easy excuse in

37
39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ended up with a sustained specification for misleading statements, if I remember correctly. That was the only one where I remember seeing where there was an officer not charged or at least a specification having been brought around either misleading statements or deceptive acts relating to an excessive force case. And I'll be honest with you. Had I felt strongly that there was an officer involved in any of these cases who I felt was hiding the ball in trying to protect another officer to the extent that I felt it was obvious and it could have been proven, I would have raised it, and I didn't. Q Was there an unwritten policy that you learned during your time as the manager of safety as it related to use of force reports? MR. RICE: Is that your question? Object to form. Go ahead. You can answer if understand the question. A I think I know where you're going. I think this came up actually at the Civil Service. MR. RICE: If you understand the question, answer. If not, don't. A Yeah. There was -- and I have the actual -- the police rules were actually amended to address 40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the issue, but there was a sort of unwritten policy -- and I'll be honest with you. It would be hard for me to tell you exactly where I learned this, but there was an unwritten policy that if you had an excessive force report it should be accompanied by some charge, i.e., resisting arrest, interference, something of that nature -- and I have somewhere -- I think at home -- I'm fairly certain the rule that was written -- I think it was in 2011 actually addressing that issue, but yes, there was sort of an unwritten rule that an excessive force report should be accompanied by some allegation of criminal wrongdoing. MR. RICE: You say excessive force report. Did you mean that? THE DEPONENT: When an officer prepares an excessive force report. MR. RICE: You mean use of force? THE DEPONENT: Use of force. I'm sorry. MR. RICE: I thought you did misspeak. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) You said that you had something at home regarding this? A Yeah. There was -- and I think it's -why do I keep thinking 115. I don't know why 115 rings a -- I'd have to go back and look.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Department? A Probably 30. Q And in those 30 cases that you reviewed or were a part of, did you observe a pattern of the blue shield? A Only those -- let me think this through. Other than those involving excessive force, possibly one other. Q What was the other case that you observed the blue shield? A There was some concern on Lemmons -- what was his -- I don't even remember what he was, captain, detective. He was the officer that ran into the telephone pole on his motorcycle off duty. The majority of the officers were very clear that they smelled a strong odor of alcohol on his breath. I felt that there were others that were involved that were reluctant to sort of bury their own and come forward and be honest. I can't prove it. Nothing that would have ever led to even a misleading report much less a deceptive act, but a sense that I felt that there may have been those that were reluctant. But all in all, I think the officers that were involved testified -- that did testify testified
38
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
truthfully. The ones particularly that went to the emergency room and smelled the odor of alcohol on his breath were, I thought, courageous in coming forward and saying that they would have actually found him to be under the influence and would have charged him with under the influence. But that was the only one that I did have some doubts about other than the excessive force cases. Q You read my mind. As the former manager of safety, when you were reviewing excessive force cases, did you observe a pattern of officers failing to report or failing to fully report fellow Denver police officers' use of excessive force? A I did. Q Did you observe a failure to discipline officers who failed to report other officers' use of excessive force? A You'd have to almost give me specifics. I tell you that is such a difficult question. If I had seen where an officer -- the only example I can give you is in the DeHerrera case, Sparks and Murr. There was -- I think it was a sergeant, Gilmour. Is that his name? Who had not been originally part of the investigation, but when it went back for reinvestigation, his name popped up and he actually

41
43
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 videotaped events that happened in LoDo. In this particular case some of the most egregious actions were against Ms. Thomas, and no charges were ever filed against Ms. Thomas, if my memory serves me correct. That would have bothered me if charges had been filed against her. I think they were filed against, let's see, Boren. That was not appropriate, in my mind. You know, I'm a firm believer that's always for a jury to decide, but I don't think that they were appropriate in that case. There may be more of a question as it relates to Ms. Perez and Ms. Carrillo. I think the charges that were filed against her related to what happened more inside the restaurant, if I remember correctly, which was never disclosed on video. So of the two that were on the video, to just give you the yin and the yang sort of, Boren, I believe, should have never been charged with anything. Perez, maybe. Tough call. Q Did you observe any conduct by Ms. Carrillo outside the Denver Diner that would have justified -A I don't believe so. Q Let me ask the question again. As the former manager of safety reviewing the Denver Diner
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Q Would you mind -A If you write me a note -- as counsel across the table remembers, I have a very poor memory, so if you write me a note, I will find it. Q What concerned you, as the former manager of safety, when you observed use of force reports that were often accompanied by a charge of criminal behavior? A That was not -- just because there's one or the other didn't. You know, you need to look and say was there actually a basis for the charging of whatever offense was charged. There was a case which actually ended up being the Ciempa/O'Neill case which was one of my all time favorites where the officer who was dealing with an intoxicated individual either dropped or hit or -- I don't know. It was so unclear from the videos that there was really nothing that could have been sustained against the officer in terms of excessive force, and I agreed with that. But perhaps it was a good idea that the officer at least have a conversation with his command and maybe some additional training just in case anything had gone wrong there. But I don't believe that they cited the individual on that case, so that's one for you to look at and go, okay, I don't
42
44
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 incident, did you observe any conduct by Ms. Carrillo outside the Denver Diner that would have justified the filing of charges against her? A Not in my mind. Q What are the consequences of officers failing to report or failing to fully report fellow DPD officer use of excessive force? A The consequences are laid out in the disciplinary handbook and the matrix. Misleading statements and deceptive acts. I don't know what more you want. Q What are the consequences on the culture of the Denver Police Department when officers fail to report or fail to fully report other officers use of excessive force? MR. RICE: Can I hear that question again? (Last question was read.) MR. RICE: I object to the form. Go ahead. A Again, I'm not going to use "culture." I just -- I don't like the word. I just don't think it's an appropriate term in what I saw in the operations of the Denver Police Department. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Do you resist the word "culture" because it paints too broad of a brush
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
think there was an excessive force -- or use of force report filed in that case, but there also, I don't believe, was an accompanying criminal charge. So it was kind of a good example of what could happen, but yet it somehow rose to the level of internal investigation, which pleased me. And I thought it was handled appropriately until Ciempa/O'Neill got ahold of it. But that was -- you know, again, I think what you have to do is you have to go and look at the actual facts of the case and you would have to determine in your own mind was the actual case filed against the individual simply a way of covering for the use of force and to provide some basis for sort of justifying the use of force or was it filed because the person actually violated some ordinance or some statute. Q Did you observe, as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, officers would file baseless charges against an individual in order to justify or hide their own misconduct? A Tough to say. I think -- I'm trying to remember. I don't know that charges were ever even filed against -- I think charges were filed in the DeHerrera case, but I think they were actually related to actions that took place prior to the

45
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 on an otherwise good organization? A That's only reason, major reason, yeah. Q So you prefer to use the terms "particular bad officers," "bad apples," that type of thing? A Yeah. Or I will say that it sends a message to DPD. If disciplinary -- if excessive force is not disciplined appropriately, it sends a message to the Denver Police Department that it will not be dealt with in a manner which results in officers respecting the rules that are set out in the disciplinary handbook. Q As the manager of safety, is it important to control what widespread messages are sent to the Denver Police Department when it comes to discipline issues? A Absolutely. Q Why is it important to control the message that is sent through the disciplinary process as the manager of safety for other law enforcement? A For the same reason it's done in the entire criminal justice system. It's a deterrent. You know, we in -- discipline in Denver Police Department is no different than discipline in any other system. It has its purpose. It has its purpose as punishment and it has its purpose as a
47
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
more at those meetings. And then I also talked to a lot of officers just on the street. I actually went out with officers on patrols on several occasions. So I think I got a pretty good handle on what was being said, and I think that officers saw, at least for a time period, that there were consequences for their actions, and I think they took it to heart. My concern is that the moment they saw Civil Service overturn those, they went back to saying Nick was right, no consequences. Q A slow disciplinary process is also problematic because it does not act as a deterrent for other use of force by officers, correct? A Not necessarily. I think once the matrix is in place, once you start to establish what the rules really are and that there will be consequences for violation of those rules, the length of time becomes less important in terms of establishing a message. I think once the message is there, it makes a -- you know, it's just like the seven years that it took to put the matrix together. How could you establish the message. You know, to say we're working on a matrix, do you guys get it? Until they saw the matrix actually in application and actual
48
46
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 deterrent. Q Did the disciplinary process of the Denver Police Department, based on your experiences as the manager of safety, effectively deter other law enforcement officers' bad conduct? A Re-ask, please. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Can I have it read back -- or let me read the question. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Does the disciplinary process of the Denver Police Department, based on your observations as the former manager of safety, effectively deter other officers' bad conduct? A But for Civil Service, I believe it would have, and I believe to some extent it did even while I was there. And I say that because I was able to have discussions. I met with every district in the Denver Police Department with the exception of District 1. I was never invited by Doug Stevens. Every other commander invited me out to their districts, and I went only if invited. So I met with all of them, including the gang unit, including traffic. I met with every unit and division and district with the exception of one. And usually on the average 50 officers or
discipline resulting from that matrix, it was just a matrix. Q Based on your observations and experiences as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, does Denver have a problem with officers reporting other officers' use of force? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. Also object as asked and answered. Go ahead. A You know, in general my answer is no. And Fitzgibbons is a good example. Fitzgibbons' fellow officers -- Fitzgibbons pulled out an AR-15 that he bought on the street basically and shot an innocent bystander with unauthorized ammunition and unauthorized weapon and there was not an officer there that wasn't willing to step forward and say bad, bad cop and you deserve to be gone. So to say that officers don't -- and are there cases out there where officers have had excessive force and did not step forward and say anything? I don't know. There's only one that I know of that concerned me greatly, and I can't talk about it because I never dealt with it, and that was Landau. Q Why were you not involved in the Landau

49
51
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Denver Police Department's operations? A You know, with CORA, they've got more access than people should have or ever expect. I don't know. I saw more CORA requests in the six months in there than I ever want to see in the rest of my life. If it was there, unless it was part of an ongoing investigation, it was given. And I was part of that and I can tell you we did not play hide the ball. Q Why is the Independent Monitor part of the problem for the disciplinary process of Denver police officers? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. THE DEPONENT: I'm sorry? MR. RICE: Go ahead and answer. A You know, there was -- the Independent Monitor, I thought, overstepped his bounds on occasion. The Independent Monitor, I don't believe, by ordinance, is to become part of the disciplinary process. And what I thought happened on Richard Rosenthal was he interjected himself into the disciplinary process on occasion, frequently in trying to order what specifications should be heard or even additional investigation to be done as
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
disciplinary review process? A Got stuck in the office of the Independent Monitor. I tried to -- one of the things that I did was I very early on started looking at the issue of cases languishing throughout the disciplinary process, and I got a report every week from IAB. I got two reports actually, one from IAB and one from the chief. The chief's was the sham report, which is what it's referred to, which basically tells me what officers have been assigned to desk duty or whatever, sort of internal disciplinary matters that have been handled that would never otherwise hit my desk. But as manager of safety, I think you need to know what's going on within your department, so I requested that and received that, also the report from IAB every week telling me every case that was a disciplinary issue and where it was, how old it was, et cetera, et cetera, big, thick printout I got every week. And I would go through and I would look at old cases and I would inquire as to why those cases were still around. And Landau ended up -- at one point was declined even by the Independent Monitor, and then for some reason was reinvestigated, and then the Independent Monitor wanted additional
50
investigation done and ended up -- I tried to get it moved along and I could never get it past the Independent Monitor. So it was still there when I left. And I'll be frankly honest. That's another one of the problems with the system in terms of cases languishing is the Independent Monitor. Q Did you in your time as the manager of safety ever have difficulty obtaining information from the Denver Police Department? A No. Q As the former manager of safety, did you ever see issues with transparency and the Denver Police Department as it related to the public? A You'd have to -- I guess I don't know your question -- I don't understand your question. Q Did you observe any issues with secrecy and the disciplinary process when it came to the Denver Police Department? A No. MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. A No. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Did the public have access to enough information in order to assess the
52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 opposed to waiting for the product. I'll give you an example -MR. RICE: Wait. Just a second. Just so you understand, Mr. Garcia, we have objected on the basis of delivery of process privilege to specific case advices, recommendations and evaluations done by the office of Independent Monitor as per the ordinance. And so what I'm asking you to do is not speak to specific cases on that basis. All right? THE DEPONENT: That's fine. A I can tell you that I was concerned when the Independent Monitor would raise the issue of additional specifications being added at any point during the disciplinary process. My belief of the way the system works is that the manager of safety receives the report after the chief's hearing with all recommendations from every level of the police department internally from the initial supervisor all the way up through the chain of command and also receives the recommendations of the Independent Monitor. And then I believe it's the duty of the manager of safety to then say based on the recommendations of the Independent Monitor, I believe that the Denver Police Department should have

53
55
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
considered Specification A, B, C, or D, which was not considered, and the manager of safety can then say, I'm going to on my own consider those specifications or can send it back, and can send it back for simply addressing those specifications with no further investigation, send it back for further investigation as to the existing specifications, or a combination of both. And I believe that's the way the procedure should work. I think it would help in moving the process along and would be -- end up with actually a better result in the long run. Q So if I'm understanding you, sir, you think it would be more efficient for the Independent Monitor to have a parallel investigation along with internal affairs? A Independent investigation, not necessarily parallel. Independent investigation in terms of -the Independent Monitor has a lot of power and a pretty good budget and actually more than the manager of safety does. And so they are able to -- they sit in on the chief's hearing and they sit in on the investigations that they wish to. And so it's very easy for them to go through the entire IAB file. They can go out and actually interview
54
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Q When I say the term "command review process" of the disciplinary matter, what does that mean to you? A You know, it depends, because -- and I say it depends because disciplinary processes begin in different ways. Someone can complain to the police. They can complain to the Independent Monitor. They can complain to the manager of safety. They can complain to the mayor, city council. There are numerous ways that an investigation can be initiated. But the process, once that the allegation has been made, is basically that the investigation is done at the local level. I say local level. It's district level by an immediate supervisor. As in this case, it eventually went through -- I think it was Dilley who was the commander at District 6 at the time, but it began actually with lieutenants within the district. That's normal, normal procedure. So it goes through those levels, and then it eventually goes to a division chief. And after a division chief, it goes through the actual chief of police before it gets to the manager of safety's office. Q Based on your observations and experiences as the former manager of safety, did you have any
56
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
witnesses independently if they care to. And if they believe based on their investigation, again, that additional specifications should be added -specifications should be added or that additional investigation should be done, they can make that recommendation to the manager of safety. And I believe that's the way it should be done and not to up -- sort of hold up the investigation as it's going through the disciplinary process at every point with what could be done after the fact. If the disciplinary process moved a little more rapidly, then I think it would be the manager of safety's responsibility to take that information and say, you know what, I believe the Independent Monitor has a very, very good sense of what's going on here and I understand his or her concerns, I agree with them, and I am requesting additional investigation and here's what it is, or I disagree with the Independent Monitor and I think the issue has been resolved and I don't need further investigation. Q As the former manager of safety, you saw the roles and responsibilities of the Independent Monitor to be important, correct? A I saw the role as authorized by the ordinance to be important. I saw it as being abused.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
concerns about the district level review process of excessive force matters? A I did. Q Could you explain to me what your concerns were as the former manager of safety based on your observations and experiences of the district level review of the -- officers' uses of excessive force? A I believe that the crux of the problem is an understanding of the definition of excessive force. It's difficult for me. And I testified to this at the Civil Service hearing in not only this case but other cases, but this particular in particular. My view of excessive force is as a citizen, which it should be as the manager of safety, but also you need to have some understanding of, before you begin to institute discipline, the training and the rules and regulations of the Denver Police Department. And I really felt it incumbent upon me to rely upon people that I learned to trust to help me through sort of those discussions. And this is a prime example. Chief Quinones, I thought, did an excellent job in this case in reviewing the excessive force and found excessive force as to both officers even though it

57 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 had not been found at the district level. That concerned me greatly. District 6 is a tough district. It covers probably the toughest district in Denver. And I think that if the same standards that were set by Chief Quinones had been set by Commander Dilley, excessive force would have been found at the district level in this case, and it should have been. Q Did you find a pattern beyond the Denver Diner case when you were the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver of a reluctance of command level review to find violations of excessive force? A No. And you can't go there. And here's another problem. The way we handle discipline in DPD is just beyond me. Your level of discipline review is not based on where you were at the time the act was committed necessarily but where you happen to be at the time the investigation is being done. You know, Ciempa and O'Neill always just amazed me because they were in District 6 at the time of the alleged actions in your case, but both were transferred out. One went to DIA and the other went to -- I don't even remember where. So Captain Gallagher handled one because he was at DIA. He had 58
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 nothing to do with District 6, zero. Whoever came up with that logic, it's beyond me. It seems to me that you would handle the investigation where the officer was when the allegation began, because who knows the officer better than the people where he worked. Right. So I never saw that there was any sort of general pattern of any particular -- what I saw was differing definitions of excessive force, and that is -- that makes it very difficult. And, you know, in my position, I needed to very quickly sort of get a sense of who I felt I could really rely on. And when it came to excessive force and when it came to a lot of things, Chief Quinones was somebody that I really learned to respect very quickly and learned to respect his opinion as being both honest, well thought out, and also willing to sit down and a talk about it. So I really relied very heavily on his sort of ideas of excessive force. But to say that there's just this general -- I can't go that far. Q Why were there different definitions of excessive force by the various district command review processes that reviewed excessive force disciplinary matters in the Denver Police Department? A You know, I guess my answer is I really
59
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
wish I knew the answer. Why? I mean, I can give you all sorts of crazy opinions that I've come up with on my own, but to tell you why there are different definitions, I'd have to do a long-term study. I haven't done one, so . . . Q As a former manager of safety of the Denver Police -- strike that. As the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, what conclusions did you draw as to why there were different definitions of excessive force being used across the board by DPD -A Let me give you my personal opinion. Acceptance of past practices, which were certainly not best practices. I firmly believed that the summer of '93 caused the Denver Police Department to begin some pretty heavy handed tactics to try to clean up the gang problem in Denver. And to a large extent a lot of the officers that came out of that period of time continue to use those heavy handed practices in situations where they weren't warranted. I'll be very honest with you. I think that one of the changes Chief White is addressing is really looking to the sergeants to start carrying a load in the Denver Police Department. People don't realize that the first line of supervision in DPD is
60
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
the sergeants, and they are the key, in my estimation, as to the quality of the officers on the street much more than the lieutenants or even the division commanders, because they are the ones who are first in line. You know, who gets called to a use of force case? The sergeant. So, you know, those are the guys that really need to be trained not only in what is the definition of excessive force, but more importantly how do we write the reports. The training of how to write reports on use of force need to be really, really cranked up, and I think that -Again, I hope and I believe that that's going to be one of the real focuses of both Justice Martinez as well as Chief White for the future, is to focus on the training not only of the use of force, but as important, if not more important -- and the reason I say more important on the writing of the use of force reports is if officers knew what was really required of them when they were to write the report, what was to be included in the report, it would go a long way, I hope, in their understanding of what's expected of them. Q As the former manager of safety for the Denver -- strike that. As the former manager of

61
63
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and that they relied heavily on people in the chain of command and law enforcement and their recommendation, none of which was to terminate these officers, because they are the ones who know the right thing to do. What amazed me was at the same time they disregarded Chief Quinones recommendations for excessive force, an officer who spent his entire career doing this, and in my estimation is the best there is at being able to define excessive force. So I was -- it gets back to my concerns with Civil Service. You know, we disregard the manager of safety because he doesn't know what he's doing and we're going to rely on those in command who know what they're doing and on the next specification we're going to ignore them too. So when you figure that one out, you let me know. Q Why has the -- strike that. Based on your observations and experiences as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, what was it about the system that prevented the discipline of officers who used heavy handed tactics? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
safety for the City and County of Denver, what training deficiencies did you observe concerning use of force reporting and use of force report writing? A You know, I'll be honest. I have never gone back and looked at the training for the preparation of a use of force report, but I've looked at use of force reports, and they are very, very poorly written, extremely poorly written, and I associate that with poor training. And, again, based on my discussions with people such as Chief Quinones, who also believed that that was a huge issue, was the training on the preparation of those reports, I think that's what leads me -- I've never seen their training, never sat in on their training. I don't know exactly how they're trained, but I do know that the reports -you know, it's like if somebody in law school hands me a paper that's just poorly written. I don't know, but I have an assumption that whoever taught them that course may not have gotten across the message. It could just be a really bad student, but I don't think so. I think, you know, if you see that use of force reports are not being well written, then why not start with let's try to train people on how to do
62
64
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
it right. Is it going to be successful? Who knows. Q Based on your observations as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, why were heavy handed police tactics not eliminated from the Denver Police Department? A Why were they not eliminated? Because we hadn't fired the cops three years ago or at least -I shouldn't say fired. We need to understand one thing very, very clear. Unless an officer causes serious bodily injury or death to someone, they're not going to get fired for excessive force on their first offense. All of the terminations that resulted in my tenure, which were excessive force, were for deceptive act, not for excessive force. So let me be careful when I say firing cops. I should have said disciplining the cops appropriately. And I'll give you an example in this case which goes back to the Civil Service. In this case, the opinion of the Civil Service Board, as I understand it in my brief reading of it, was that the deceptive act was not sustained because I'm a knucklehead, that I didn't have any law enforcement experience, that I was new on the job, because I was an ex-public defender, because I was a crossing guard
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A Nothing prevented the discipline. We did it. The Civil Service comes in and undoes it. In this particular case, I agreed with the recommendations of the Denver Police Department and Chief Quinones, so I couldn't have asked for more, so we did it. As far as I'm concerned, in this case the disagreement really between me and the Denver Police Department in this particular case only came down to the deceptive act. And Chief Quinones and I, you know -- I still, you know, if somebody said, who do you want to be your cop, he'd be it. But do we disagree on deceptive act? We do in this particular case. We do. We disagree. And there's always going to be the little lie, big lie question. Lying between this misleading statement -- 112.1 and 112.2 is going to drive me, my successor, Alex's successor crazy. You know, it is so subjective. It really is. So that's where we disagree, was on the deceptive act, and that was it. On excessive force, I agreed with Chief Quinones wholeheartedly, and that was based on what I saw on the video and what I, as a civilian with many years of experience as a public defender, which Civil Service seemed to hold against

65
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 me, but be it as it may, I'm not still quite sure what they held against Chief Quinones. Q As the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you observe lesser discipline when there were cases without video? A I didn't have an excessive force case without a video. The only excessive force case I know that was out there was Landau without a video. There was one other I'm trying to think of. Maybe I've forgotten. I have a horrible memory. I don't think so. Q Were there failures to discipline officers based on your observations as the former manager of safety when there was no video? MR. REYNOLDS: Object to the form. A Again, I don't -- I never had an excessive force case without a video, so . . . Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Does the fact that you did not have an excessive force case without a video tell you anything about the discipline of officers when there was no video? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question, calls for speculation. Go ahead. A No. Because I know there's one out there without a video that's pending, so somebody is
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
67
Q All the excessive force cases you reviewed while a manager of safety for the City and County of Denver involved a video? A As far as I remember. I'd have to go back and look. If you have one that I did that was not on video, you need to remind me because I don't remember. The only -- you know, the cases and I'll tell you were Sparks and Murr, Nixon and Devine -and what was his name -- Johnson when was the officer down on the 16th Street Mall. I think it was Johnson that was on video. The other officers were Estrada, Briggle, and Fitzgibbons, so those were not excessive force cases. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: All right. Let's take a five-minute break. (Recess from 11:01 to 11:10 a.m.) MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: All right. We're back on the record. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Manager Garcia, as the former manager of safety, why is it important for Denver police officers to be honest? A Well, rule of law is the basics, but more importantly it was actually because they -- you know, I'll give you a couple of reasons that hit me personally. When I started my job, I consulted a lot
66
68
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
looking at it. You know -- and I'll tell you if a case -- if somebody files a complaint -- the Ciempa/O'Neill case is a good example. The citizen that was involved in this case never filed a complaint, ever, but it hit my radar only because of Ciempa and O'Neill. But it was dealt with through the disciplinary process internally, and because of Ciempa and O'Neill, I got to see it, and what I saw was I thought that what the people did internally and having it never reach the manager of safety's desk was appropriate. The Independent Monitor felt the same way. If a citizen complains, it hits the Independent Monitor's desk. I don't care if it never reaches the manager of safety's desk. The only reason that I know about cases that never reached the manager of safety's desk is because I got that weekly report from IAB. So if a citizen complained about excessive force, it had to be dealt with and it hit the Independent Monitor desk. One way or another it always hit his desk. Q Of all the excessive force cases you reviewed, only one was not captured on video? A I didn't do any. The only one I know of -- and I never reviewed it -- was Landau.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
of the time a lot with my son, who's with Protective Bank of Wisconsin, and he and I were talking one night and he said, well, how can you put an officer on the stand to testify in a case, in any case, if you know he's not an honest cop. I said, well, that's a pretty simple answer. But when I was going through the matrix, I talked to Al LaCabe a lot about the deceptive act and the level of penalty for deceptive act and the rationale, because I wasn't around for the seven years in putting this together. So I told you earlier on that the most difficult task I had was trying to read and understand the disciplinary handbook and the matrix. And my understanding through LaCabe of the thought that went behind it was that if you really want to address the issue of excessive force, you begin with honesty, that if officers are held to a level of reporting which is honest that that will lead to them being better cops in the things that they do, which is -- seems to be commons sense, that if you're going to be honest about what you do out there on the street, then maybe what you do out on the street is a little better. So I think it's extremely important not

69
71
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 question. Go ahead and answer. A No. I thought we did. I thought we effectively disciplined those officers up to my level. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Let me ask a -based on your observations and experiences as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you observe a tolerance by the Civil Service Commission for officers who engaged in dishonesty? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. A Yes. I don't believe that the Civil Service hearing officers have any concept of a deceptive act. And I will give you what I saw as the most glaring example. We had Officer Estrada who admitted that he lied both in internal inves- -well, to his supervisors and to IAB, admitted that he lied, and the Civil Service Hearing Board somehow decided that what he lied about was not central to the investigation because the car that was the subject of the investigation turned out not to be the car that was involved in the hit and run and, therefore, his lie just didn't matter. And I'll tell you if I've ever seen
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
only because, you know, they finally got around to -they now provide a list to the district attorneys through the district attorney's office, to defense counsel on an ongoing basis of all officers who have been found, through the disciplinary process, to have been dishonest so that it's then subject to cross-examination if those officers ever testify in any case. So -- but, you know, that's the sort of legal reason. You know, you can't put a lying cop on the stand, which to me doesn't require a lot of conversation. It's just common sense, but also it's broader than that, and that is why would you want lying people anywhere and particularly in your police force. And it goes back to why would you have people who enforce laws not following the laws. And lying to me is breaking a law, so dishonesty is a violation of the rules and will not be tolerated. Pretty simple concept to me, but I'll give you an example. I called Al one day and I said, I have an officer's case in front of me whom I'm about to discipline because he feigned illness. He called in and said, I'm sick, and they found out that he was lying. And I said, so I'm looking at some, you
70
72
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
know, fairly significant discipline for, you know, what we all did in school. Right. I called in sick one time as a student to go to a Yankees game, so, you know -- but I said to Al, so why? And he said because it's dishonesty, and that's really what we're trying to focus on. We really want to focus on honest cops. That's what we need to have. And he was right. And it got me to a position in working in making changes to the matrix later on and really thinking through discourtesy leads to lying and lying leads to excessive force. So, you know, you can have excessive force as long as you're not truthful about it. So just in terms of that -- now, it goes much deeper than that. You can have a deceptive act that has nothing to do with excessive force. So I just think honesty is one of the core values that you expect from all professions, but certainly from the people who enforce the laws. Q Based on your observations and experiences as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you observe any issues with failure to discipline officers who engaged in dishonest conduct? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
anything that bothered me as a citizen of the City and County of Denver more, nothing. To reinstate that officer to say, yes, he lied and he lied -- not only did he lie, he lied to his supervisors, he lied to internal affairs, he admitted he lied to them, but it just doesn't matter because it turns out that the actual car that was being investigated that was the crux of his lie turned out to not have been involved in the actual hit and run. I thought to myself, you've got to be kidding me. So a cop can lie on a murder case, but if we got the wrong suspect, it's okay. Well, that means we can convict the wrong suspect and it's okay. I mean, that's the logic it got me to. A cop can go in and testify to a murder trial and convict a man because of those lies and it turns out later that he wasn't the guy who committed the murder, it was somebody else, well, then the lie is okay because it was the wrong guy. Where that logic takes me, it just escapes me. And this is the same Civil Service Board who heard these cases -- this case -- well, they haven't heard DeHerrera yet, but it's the same hearing officers. And when they decide, you know -- their most recent one is, you know, Lemmons, who has

73
75
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the way from the very, very beginning. There was no one who did not recommend a termination of Estrada, except the Civil Service. So certainly not across the board. In this case, in other cases -- a very good example is DeHerrera, Sparks and Murr. I terminated both officers for deceptive act. The chain of command recommended one of the two. So that was a good example of those -- there are those that can agree to disagree. So in this particular case I disagreed with both officers, so I think there's no general. You can't give a general answer. And I think Estrada is a good example. There was nobody -- and this is what really bothers me about Civil Service. That's another prime example. Estrada -- everybody in the police department believed he should be fired. There was not one person of that said this was not a deceptive act, not one, except Civil Service. So how you can have a Civil Service Board -- you know, we have a Citizen Oversight Board and a Citizen Oversight Board together with the Independent Monitor believe he should be fired, is my understanding. The entire police force, every recommendation I got coming up through the police
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
nothing to do with lying, but he was just a little drunk when he hit the telephone pole. I thought a little drunk. That's kind of like this little lie stuff. You know, I'm sorry, but I grew up where a lie is a lie, and this idea of the lie was a little lie or it didn't matter, it just escapes me. They do not get the concept that if you lie, you lie, and if that Officer Estrada ever got on a stand in a court of law, it would be pathetic that the Denver Police Department would have the nerve to ever have him testify knowing that he is an admitted liar in an internal investigation. That tells me what Civil Service is about when it comes to deceptive act. They don't believe it, and they never will. Q Based on your experiences and observations as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, what effect does the Civil Service Commission rulings have on the rest of the Denver Police Department when they tolerate dishonest conduct? A After Estrada, it's very clear in my belief that the Denver Police Department now believes that there is no such thing as discipline for lying. MR. RICE: Did you mean Denver Police
74
Department? THE DEPONENT: Huh? MR. RICE: Did you mean to say Denver Police Department? THE DEPONENT: Denver Police Department. MR. RICE: All right. THE DEPONENT: What did I say? Denver Police Department. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Well, let me ask now -MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Did he say Denver Police Department? Can I have my question read back, please. (Last question was read.) A I believe it sends a message to the Denver Police Department that there will not be consequences for lying as a Denver police officer. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Based on your observations and experiences as a former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you see a failure or reluctance to discipline officers who engaged in dishonest conduct by district level review? A Not across the board. Estrada is a good example. Everybody recommended his termination all
76
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
force and every cop I've ever talked to wanted that man off the force, because they did not want a person like that wearing their uniform. They were disgraced by what he did. Yet Civil Service seemed to think he's the kind of guy we want to have on our street. So when you get the citizens of the City and County of Denver to understand that logic, I would really appreciate if you bring it back to me because the Citizen Oversight -- because the Civil Service Hearing Board has disgraced the citizens of the City and County of Denver and they've put this cop back on the street even though everybody in the police force said he needs to go. Q Well, isn't it true that you don't adequately enforce the rules and regulations of the disciplinary guides, but that's what the Civil Service Commission does? A You know, I -- I'm one of those who -- you know, I always blame myself for most of the things that happen in the world. And I really look back and say, was it my fault that the Civil Service Board reinstated these guys? Was it something I did in the way I wrote my order? Was it something I testified to? You know, was it my fault? Maybe I wasn't doing my job. I will always do that.

77
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 You know, I've never done a trial that I didn't go home and say, Christ, if I would have done this differently, if I would have asked this question, if I would not have asked that question, if I had given this in my closing argument. That's my life. Okay. So I will always question whether or not I did all that I could have done. I think I did. I did my best, but I firmly believe that the Civil Service Hearing Board -- now, the Commission has not heard these cases yet, so I can only say that if they uphold the hearing board I will feel the same way about the Commission that I do about the hearing board, that they are not serving the citizens of the City and County of Denver. If you were to put Estrada on trial in front of the entire citizenry of the City and County of Denver, as a lawyer who has done this my entire career, they would have voted to fire him. Q Is there something broken about the actual rules and procedures of the Denver disciplinary guide that lends itself to the Civil Service Commission being able to do basically anything they want to do in any given case? A I don't think they understand it. You know, I'll keep going back to Estrada, because if you
79
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
now, you may get put in law (sic) for not breaking the law because you might be innocent, but at least you were alleged to have violated a law. But somehow the Civil Service Hearing Board decided he ended up in jail without breaking any laws. Now, you figure that one out. So it's the way that they decide to interpret the matrix and the disciplinary handbook. They do it, in my estimation, with a view towards we get to make our own laws and we get to define deceptive act, we can define laws in whatever way we see fit. Because their definition in the Briggle case is just absolutely amazing. Now, they went ahead and terminated him for conduct prejudicial, which is astounding to me because people would say to me when I began the job, you know, you should add conduct prejudicial. And I would say, why. And they'd say, because the Civil Service Commission may not hold -- agree with you on the underlying, so you've always got that as a backup. And I said no, that's not the way I do business. Okay. You know, cops were very, very honest with me about some things. And conduct prejudicial was always my favorite. It's referred to
80
78
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
can pick up that discipline handbook and read the definition of deceptive act -- I'll give you another example. Briggle. Briggle was another amazing -you know, all you need to do is somebody, I would hope some day -- and I don't talk to the news, but you can -- publish these rulings. Briggle, who was found in contempt of court by a judge in Weld County for basically disregarding the rules set out by the Court in regards to his divorce proceedings, put in jail for contempt of court, and I terminated him for breaking the law and for conduct prejudicial. The hearing board decided that contempt of court wasn't breaking the law, that there wasn't like a criminal statute -- or you have to read the decision to even try to understand where these people were coming from. It's being appealed. Everybody I've talked to, again, including everybody in the police force, city attorneys and the Independent Monitor all believe that there was a violation of the law. You do not the get put in jail if you didn't break the law, last time I checked. I'm not quite sure. You guys do this for a living, so you can check. But I don't know that you get put in law --
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
as careless driving. If you can't prove the underlying offense, speeding, crossing the line, yellow line, whatever, and you're in an accident, charge careless driving because there had to be careless driving otherwise you never would have been in the accident. Right? That's sort of their belief on conduct prejudicial, and to a large extent it is. It's a catchall. There are places where I think it is appropriate, but in this particular case, I felt it was appropriate and so I did charge conduct prejudicial, and they upheld his termination on conduct prejudicial, but not for breaking the law. So those people who were telling me you should always put conduct prejudicial in, they're probably right, because I'm learning the hard way. Again, it goes back if I could have this to do over again, maybe I should have charged conduct prejudicial in this case. Q Based on your experiences and observations as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, besides the Civil Service Commission, what else was broken in terms of disciplining Denver police officers? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the

81
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 question. Go ahead and answer. A Broken is not a term that I'm able to sort of point at. I can tell you again, the people that I dealt with primarily, whether it be Whitman, any of the other chiefs that I mentioned earlier, I really respected them. I really -- if you say broken, it certainly was not that. Did we disagree? Yeah. They come from a long line of tradition. The rules have changed. It's hard to change. It's hard for me to change. I'm an old guy, so I get it. Broken, no. I see a thing. Changes need to be made to the Citizen Oversight Board. I think some of the changes that Chief White has already put in place with IAB, very, very effective, although I tell you I respect Burbach. I think Burbach did a good job. But some of the things that Chief Klee, now Commander Klee, and Chief White have done already are going, I think, I hope, a long way to fixing some of the issues. But broken, if it was broken we would be looking like New Orleans right now. I don't -- I wouldn't use the word "broken." Q Based on your experience as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, does the Civil Service commissioner rulings on dishonesty affect other officers' reporting of
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
83
what Civil Service does. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Manager Garcia, it's 11:35. I want you to be able to make your appointment at noon. THE DEPONENT: I appreciate it. (Lunch recess from 11:36 to 1:45 p.m.) Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Manager Garcia, I'll remind you that you're still under oath. A Thank you. Q Did you have a chance to review Chief Quinones's report and recommendations in this matter? A Many times. Q Did you have a chance to review it prior to your deposition today? A Yes. I looked at it yesterday. Q I'm not going to ask you to -- for memory and recitation of it, so I'm going to let you use these documents, if necessary, to answer some of my questions. A Okay. Q So if you could turn your attention to -A Go ahead. Q -- Exhibit 24, which is in the white binder in front of you. A Okay.
82
84
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q And I believe Exhibit 27 as well in front of you may assist in answering the next series of questions. Okay? A Okay. Q I'll just do some record cleanup. Manager Garcia, I'm showing you Exhibit 27, which is Bates labeled Defendant Officers 0206 through -- it's not in order, so let me strike that, start again. Manager Garcia, I'm showing you Exhibit 27 which out of order is Exhibit -- strike that. I'm showing you Exhibit 27, which is Defendant Officers 200 through 2000 -A 210. Q 210. Could you please identify this document, please. A This is the order which I issued in this matter on April 11. For some reason this is only as to Ricky Nixon, I believe. There's Devine. The orders I issued in both Nixon and Devine in this matter, yes, along with the addendum to each. Q And I'm showing you what's been marked as Exhibit 24, which is Bates labeled Defendant Officers 157 through 168 for identification. A Yes. That is Chief Quinones's report to Deputy Chief Battista dated January 19 as it relates
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
dishonest conduct? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. A Yeah. It's hard to say what affects an officer's performance. I think if you read the decision as in this one, it tells us -- you know, I -- it's just like reading a Supreme Court decision. Does that tell a criminal, kind of give them guidelines on how to be better at their crimes? I don't know that a lot of criminals read Supreme Court decisions. I could be wrong, but I don't think so. Do a lot of officers read the opinions that Civil Service is handing out? I don't know. I doubt it. How does the message get there? I don't know. When I read the decision of Civil Service in this case when they say manager of safety has no memory, so why should cops, I think it kind of gives a signal that forgetting is a really good answer. So I think you read the opinion and if you read the opinion and you believe that that message goes back to the officers on the street, a problem? Yes. A problem for who? It's a problem for the bad officer. If the officer was not already a bad officer, not a problem. A cop is not -- who was a good cop is not going to become a bad cop because of

85
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to Nixon and Devine in this matter. Q In terms of inappropriate force, what did you find to be inappropriate about Officer Nixon's conduct as it related to the Denver Diner incident? A Without trying to sit here and read this -- Nixon you asked about? Q Yes, sir. A Nixon was -Q I'm going to re-ask the question. Okay. Just to -A Okay. Sure. Q Based on your review of the matter, as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, what did you determine to be inappropriate about the force used by Officer Nixon in regards to the Denver Diner incident? A Officer Nixon, might have been his Macing of Ms. Perez, his Macing of Ms. Thomas, the crowd, his treatment of Ms. Carrillo, and his treatment of Ms. Perez. So I'd have to go back, to be honest with you, and have to look -- look at the individual actions, but the Macing of Ms. Perez was when she was already in custody, in my estimation, and on the ground on her knees when she was being Maced. She was under, my belief, the custody of Officer Devine
87
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
question. Was the takedown of Ms. Ortega and Ms. Carrillo by Officer Nixon a close call when you determined it to be inappropriate force? A No. Q Based on your review of the matter as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, what force by Officer Kevin Devine did you find to be inappropriate related to the Denver Diner incident? A His actions as it related to Ms. Thomas, Ms. Boren, his use of the nightstick. I think those are the ones -- the major ones that I remember. Q Did you find Officer Devine's pulling of Ms. Thomas away from the group of individuals in front of the Denver Diner to be inappropriate use of force? A I did. Q Was this even a close call, in your mind? A No. In my mind and in agreement with the major concern, and this was based also on discussions I had individually with Chief Quinones, was that had Devine not done that and escalated the matter we probably wouldn't all be sitting here today. Q Based on your review of the matter as the former manager of safety for the City and County of
88
86
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
at the time. And then the spraying of the crowd and then his forcing of Ms. Perez to the ground as well as Ms. Carrillo. And I'm trying to think. I think that's it. Q Did you find the striking of Officer Nixon to Ms. Carrillo with a closed fist on the face to be inappropriate? A I'm sorry, the punch in the face, yes. And that was included in Chief Quinones's report. That was one of, I believe, if I remember correctly, his biggest concerns. Q Was the determination that Officer Nixon used inappropriate force on Ms. Carrillo when he punched her in the face, was that a close call, in your opinion? A No. Q When Officer Nixon took Ms. Carrillo and Ms. Ortega to the ground -- strike that. Let me give you some context about Perez and Ortega. A Sure. Q You may know this but -A Ms. Perez is Ms. Ortega. Q Yes. So it's been a point of some confusion with the people that reviewed this on the outside. I just want to make that clear. New
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Denver, what conduct of Officer Nixon's did you determine to be dishonest? A Again, I'm not going to try to do this from memory. I would need to go through -- I'll tell you what I did, the same thing that I testified to at the Civil Service hearing, was I watched the video. I watched the video several times and then went back and watched the video and I watched the video each time after I watched it probably at least three times. Then I went back and watched from the perspective of everybody involved. So I watched it from the perspective of Ms. Perez. Then I watched it from the perspective of Ms. Thomas, then for Ms. Carrillo, then for Ms. Boren, then for Officer Nixon more than once, then for Officer Devine more than once. So based on that, then I sat and looked at the reports that were filed. I looked at the testimony given to IAB. And then I went -- the last thing I did was to compare the report that Chief Quinones reviewed in preparation of his report, which was IAB, and went line by line and made my determination based on the review of all of those documents, but a lot of the notes, as I referred to earlier, were based on my review of Chief Quinones's report.

89
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Based on your review of the matter as the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, what conduct of Officer Devine did you find to be dishonest? A Same answer. And what I testified to is -- mine is -- I felt my role -- and, again, I could be wrong, but I still feel that my role as the manager of safety was much like that of a judge sitting in a trial to the bench. And so I had a finding of guilt and I didn't feel that I really was required to sit there and find 22 examples of guilt. What I basically found was that I believe both officers', Nixon and Devine, statements and testimony were an attempt on their part to cover up their actions based on the videos that I saw. Q Were you satisfied with District 6 investigation of this matter, which was Lieutenant Ciempa, then Commander Dilley's review and then Chief Klee's review? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. A If you could -Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Mr. Rice -A I know you said Ciempa, and I'm sorry, I don't know who you said.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
91
recommendation, either Ciempa or Dilley. Q Did you find the recommendations of Lieutenant Ciempa and Commander Dilley to be biased? A Be biased in what way? Q Did you find the recommendations of Lieutenant Ciempa and Commander Dilley to be based in favor of law enforcement officers? A I hesitate because it's a difficult question. I'll deal with them separately. Ciempa, because of another case, I know had a disdain for IAB, and so -- and their treatment of reviewing excessive force cases, and in my opinion, it became clear through that case that there was a bias on behalf of Lieutenant Ciempa as it related to investigations of excessive force in District 6. Absent that separate investigation, I am not sure that I could have said it was biased or just poor work. And Klee was gone. Commander Klee was gone by the time I took over. And I knew Commander Klee from my dealings with her when we started the Denver drug court back in 1994. I did a lot of work with her in the District 6 community, specifically Capitol Hill neighborhood in working with the neighborhood and establishing drug court. So that
90
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Mr. Rice's objection is well taken. It's not an investigation. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Were you satisfied with District 6's recommendations in this matter, which was Lieutenant Ciempa, Commander Dilley and Chief Klee? A Well, Chief Klee is a division chief, so she's not specifically District 6. Q Okay. I'm going to try this again. Did you review Lieutenant Ciempa's recommendations in this matter? A I did. Q Were you satisfied with Lieutenant Ciempa's recommendations in this matter as it related to the Denver Diner incident? A No. Q Why not? A Again, I felt that hadn't properly addressed either the issues of excessive force or deceptive act, and I believe that the issue -- and I will keep going back to this because the issue of excessive force. Not only did I disagree with his position, Lieutenant Ciempa's, and which was confirmed by Commander Dilley, but Chief Quinones also felt that they did not arrive at the proper
92
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 was my knowledge of Commander Dilley. And my respect for her as a commander at that time is I felt she was doing a good job, but, again, I was looking in from the outside, but -- so I will not say that her findings in this case as it related to excessive force or deceptive act were necessarily biased, but certainly, in my estimation, reflected sort of an old time attitude that officers can be a little heavy handed, which I disagree with. And they were in this case, but obviously Commander Dilley felt that their actions were appropriate. Q Did Lieutenant Ciempa's review and recommendations of the Denver Diner incident fall under what we characterized previously as the blue shield? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. A My personal opinion based on the information I have, knowing Lieutenant Ciempa, yes. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Based on your observations of -- strike that. Based on your observations and experience during your time as the safety manager for the City and County of Denver, can you explain your observations of the old time attitude that officers can be a little heavy handed?

93
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 You have to repeat that. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Could you repeat that question, please. (Last question was read.) MR. RICE: Object to the form. Go ahead and answer. A Again, the same concern I expressed earlier, that there were officers that I believe and still I believe that their actions as it relates to citizens -- I'll tell you what the attitude I believe is, which is -- and, again, this is limited to the officers that I know, that I have dealt with, that I have disciplined. But that their attitude is the citizens of the City and County of Denver are protected by us and us alone and we'll take care of the problems. In other words, why leave it up to the courts. Why leave it up to a bunch of attorneys. We'll take care of it. And that's kind of way I believe they try to mete out justice. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) During your time as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you have any concerns about the failure of the criminal prosecution of police officers who engaged in misconduct? A
95
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Yes, sir. Q Strike that. New question. Based on your question as a criminal defense attorney for nearly 25 years, would there have been criminal charges filed if you observed what you observed on the HALO video and it had been a citizen that punched Kristal Carrillo in the face when in handcuffs? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. A The question is would I have filed? Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) That wasn't my precise question. But would it have been your experience that criminal charges would have been filed -- let me ask the question again. Based on your experience as being a criminal defense attorney for 25 years, in your experience, would criminal charges have been filed if Officer Nixon was not an officer but, in fact, was a citizen based on what you observed on the HALO video? MR. RICE: Same objection. A Yeah. Man hitting a woman in that situation, yes. Man hitting a woman in that situation with a closed fist to the face, yes. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Did you have concerns about the criminal investigation that was
94
96
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A Concern, but it's a concern I've always had. But, again, I did it long enough. I know. It's a tough standard. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is very much a different standard than what we have in these discipline cases, and I think the role of a prosecutor becomes very tough when they are putting on trial a Denver police officer with the citizens of the City and County of Denver. I think it becomes very tough. I've always had concerns and I've expressed this to people many times, that my personal belief is that if the Denver District Attorney's Office were as zealous in prosecuting officers who are alleged of misconduct as they are rapists and murderers, it would make me a very happy person. I don't believe that that's true that they are. Do I disagree sometimes when they say we did not file this case, we declined to file this case because we do not believe that we can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? That's questioning their ethical standards as required by the ABA, and I'm not going to go that far. Q Based on your experience as a criminal defense attorney for nearly -- 25 years; is that correct?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
performed in this matter? Let me ask another question. Did you have any concerns about the criminal investigation into the conduct of Officers Nixon and Devine as it related to the Denver Diner incident? A I was not privy to their investigation, so -- but am I critical of it? No. Again -- again -let me clarify. Do I believe that charges could have been filed? Yes. Do I believe that they would have been successful in the prosecution? I'm not sure. And that's what I'm saying, is that if a prosecutor's role is to only file the case when he believes he can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, that's a tougher question than do I believe that charges should have been filed. Q Are you aware that it was IAB investigator Shanna Clark that conducted the investigation into the potential criminal conduct of Officers Nixon and Devine? A I believe that's correct. Q Are you aware that all statements that she received from Officers Nixon and Devine during the course of her criminal investigation were post Garrity? A Other than reports -- written reports, I

97
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 believe that's correct. Q Are you aware that in her presentation of this case to the district attorneys office she did not present the statements of Officers Nixon or Devine? A I don't believe I was aware of that. Q Does it concern you as the manager of safety at the time of this matter that the IAB investigator had a dual role of criminal investigator? A No. MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. A It does not concern me because as manager of safety, I'm not -- my role was not to oversee the district attorney's office, nor was it to in any way interfere or have any part of their investigation. So as my role as manager of safety, a different question then how I might feel about it personally. In my role as manager of safety, not my concern. I think the record needs to be clear. The district attorney is an elected official, not under the control of the manager of safety or the mayor of the City and County of Denver. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) How DPD conducts its
99
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Q And I'd like to ask you some questions about this. A Okay. Q I'm going to ask you to read two -- you can just skim them and if you need to read them in greater detail to answer questions, let me know -- 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8. A Okay. Q And I can probably break it down and see if you can -A I would hope so. Q See if we can avoid you having to read it. MR. RICE: Do you want him to read it or ask questions? MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: I'm going to ask questions. And if he needs to read it, he can absolutely take some time. MR. RICE: Because you're calling out six or some items. You're going to go back to them individually now? MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: I am. MR. RICE: Okay. Good. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Based on your observations and experiences as the former safety manager for the City and County of Denver, did you
100
98
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
investigation of citizen complaints is your concern as a safety manager? A I'm sorry. Q How the Denver Police Department conducts its investigation of criminal matters is your concern as a manager of safety? A Again, individual officers. 25 years of watching DPD investigate cases, most of my cases I'd hate to say they did a pretty good job. So were there cases where I felt that they did not do a good job? Yeah. 25 years, I would hope there were. And I'm sure that I told juries that there were a lot more than that because every time I found a deficiency, I always had 12 people I could tell about it and I never was reluctant to do so, so . . . Q I'd like to turn your attention to Exhibit 67. A Okay. Q Have you ever read this document before as manager of safety? A I did quite a while ago. Whenever it came out. I don't remember when that was. Q I'd like to turn your attention to Page COB-8 in Exhibit 67. A Okay.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
have concerns about the decreased quality of DPD internal affairs investigations? A Let's separate them. Quality versus decreased quality. I can't testify to decreased quality because I don't know what went on before I got there, so I can only talk about the six months I was there. It's kind of hard to have a decrease in six months. So do you want to ask me just about my thoughts about the quality? That's a different question. Q All right. Fair enough. I'll ask the question again. Manager Garcia, during your time as the safety manager for the City and County of Denver, did you have any concerns about the quality of DPD internal affairs investigations? A I did. Q Could you tell us what those concerns were. A I met -- I met with Commander Burbach a lot, but I actually sat down and met with all of the officers in IAB. And I began the conversation with having everybody go around the table and introducing themselves and more specifically telling me where they came from in DPD, how long they had been at IAB,

101
103
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
how long they planned to be around IAB, and what they really wanted to do. And with a couple of exceptions most had been there under six months. And almost all of them wanted nothing more than to get back to wherever it was they came from. And we talked about the fact that every television program I watch IAB is this group of guys that just can't figure out how to tie their shoes and they never get anything right and all they do is just screw up the police department. I didn't find that to be true. What I did find -- and one of the suggestions that I made was some serious training on directing cross-examination, because when you listen to some of their examinations of IAB, helpful leading questions are abundant, which really bothers somebody that does what I do. So -- but it was and it is being addressed now with bringing in 12 sergeants who want to be there, that are being hand picked by Commander Klee, so in the right direction. So I thought there were inadequacies in, again, the dedication to wanting to be there. I am a firm believer that you do things well because you have a mission and you care about what you're doing,
102
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
that they asked the questions to try to cover up? If it was, it was pretty poorly done. Q Did you find any attempts by IAB supervisors or the Denver chief of police to address training deficiencies as it related to IAB investigators in the asking of leading or suggesting questions? A I know I talked to Commander Burbach about it, and he was certainly open. And I think they even had something, if I remember correctly, sort of on their radar about training of the officers as it related to questioning during the investigation, and I suggested groups like NIDA and other groups that would probably almost step in and do it for free. I don't know if anything has been done in that area. I hope it is. They certainly were not telling me to go away and shut up. I think Commander Burbach understood it and cared about it. Did it get fixed while I was there? No. Q Based on your observations and experiences as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you find that Internal Affairs Bureau officers used helpful or leading questions for lay witnesses? A I did, but again -- okay. The answer is I
104
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
and you're not going to have that sort of passion if you are sort of forced to be there. So that's the main concern, was how they handled their actual examination during the hearings as opposed to their examination of the facts, reports, those sort of things. And I will tell you I certainly didn't see any intentional attempt by any of them to mislead the manager of safety to cover for a cop. Q The Citizen Oversight Board, as found in Exhibit 67, COB-8 notes that the Office of the Independent Monitor has found an increased in IAB investigators asking leading and suggestive questions that appear to be designed to guide officers and/or witnesses to give answers that will lead to lesser discipline or no discipline at all for the subject officers. Did you observe that during your time as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A You know, I don't give them that much credit. I think it was just sloppy examination. Again, you know, cops like cops. You know what, defense attorneys like defense attorneys. That's the world we live in. But was there an intent in the way
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
did, but I'll give the same answer. They just don't know how to do it. Nobody has ever talked to them. I don't think any one of IAB's officers has ever had one minute's training in the examination of a witness other than what they learned as police officers and not as IAB officers, which is kind of a sad state of affairs, so . . . Q On Exhibit 67, Page COB-8, the Citizen Oversight Board notes a recommendation of the Office of the Independent Monitor that states, quote, a reluctance by DPD to investigate or bring allegations of inappropriate force and/or lying despite the fact that it may be appropriate to do so. Based upon your observations and experience as the safety manager for the City and County of Denver, did you observe such conduct? A No. And I will tell you Citizen Oversight Board statements to me are nothing but an affirmation of everything that the Independent Monitor did. I don't believe I've seen anyplace since I was involved where the Citizen Oversight Board ever challenged anything the Independent Monitor did, and that's something that needs to be fixed as well. And where the Independent Monitor got this information, I have no idea.

105
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Do you disagree with everything -A I disagree. Everything, no. You want to go line by line? I'm telling you that a reluctance by DPD to investigate or bring allegations of inappropriate force despite the fact -- that's a pretty broad allegation. Until somebody brings me a case or some facts, I don't agree. Q Wasn't the Landau case precisely that? A Don't know. I haven't been given an opportunity to see the Landau case. For all I know IAB could be all over it and be the best investigation you've ever seen. I don't know. Q Well, the Landau case was originally declined, correct? A That's my understanding. I know about -as much about the Landau case as everybody who's seen his picture on television, not much more. I was not subject to and did not want to know because it was part of a civil suit at the time, and until it hit my desk I had no need to know and I kept it that way. Q Well, let's look at officer -- I'd like to turn your attention to Exhibit 67, Page COB-8 under Paragraph 2, Subsection F, quote, a tendency by IAB and DPD senior staff to, at times, reflectively assume that the credibility of the officers is
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
107
Q In Lieutenant Ciempa's review of the Denver Diner incident in his recommendations, didn't you find that he assumed that Officers Nixon and Devine were more credible than the citizen and complainants in this matter? A I believe he did. MR. RICE: Object to the last question as asked and answered. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) As the former safety manager for the City and County of Denver, did you find that there was a code of silence regarding officer misconduct? MR. RICE: Object to that as asked and answered. Go ahead. A As to the Denver Police Department as a whole, I can't say. Do I believe in this particular case that Officers Nixon and Devine were trying to cover for themselves and for one another? Yes. I don't remember what LaCabe -- Al LaCabe's statement was, was it the case that he just testified to recently. But his concern about sort of the code of silence within the Denver Police Department -- he's got seven years more experience at it than I did, but I think he was on the right track. It's something to be concerned about, but I think
106
108
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it's something to be concerned about whenever you have a police force, but I will always go back to I do not believe it is prevalent. I believe that there are many officers in the Denver Police Department who would, if they saw another officer do something that deserved to be reported, would report it and I would hope that that's true. Q I'm going to show you Time Index 1:49:25 through 1:49:33 of the Denver Diner video. (Video was played.) Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Manager Garcia, have you had a chance to observe Time Index 1:49:25 through 1:49:33 of the Denver Diner video? A I have. Q Approximately how many officers were standing around and possibly observing Officer Nixon's use of force on Ms. Ortega and Ms. Carrillo? A I think there were about a half dozen. Q And prior to their IAB interviews, how many officers reported the use of force by Officer Nixon on Ms. Carrillo and Ms. Ortega? A To my knowledge, none. Q As the form manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, is that acceptable?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
superior to that of citizen complainants and witnesses regardless of any underlying motivation to lie or illogic in an office's version of an event. Based on your observations as the safety manager in reviewing the Denver Diner case, didn't that occur here? A That what? Q Subsection -A That IAB what? Took preference to the officers' statements over the witnesses' statements? Q (Counsel nodded head.) A You know, here's my position. I told you before I saw my role as that similar to a judge doing a bench trial. Bring me the evidence. IAB doesn't issue a recommendation, so I'm looking to them for facts, not opinions. And so I take what I get from them, which is witness statements, interviews. And, again, are they the best evidence? No. But that I see -- I mean, because what he's saying -- and I don't know. A tendency to assume the credibility of officers is superior. I never asked for their opinions, so I never said, do you believe this witness is more credible than this witness. I don't remember that being part of what I did.

109
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A I think it again goes back to the training. Is it acceptable to me? No. Q Did you at any time ask for additional investigation into why the officers who are at the scene observing Officer Nixon fail to report Officer Nixon's excessive force use on Ms. Carrillo and Ms. Ortega? A No. MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead. A No. First, I didn't need them to tell me anything to see what I saw in the video. And, secondly, their failure to file any sort of reports I did not deem would ever rise to the level of sustaining a specification as to those officers. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Could it not have been a training issue nonetheless, regardless of whether it rises to a disciplinary matter? A And that's what the total training about use of force reports is about, and that's why one of the things we talked about is that there needs to be training on the use of force reports. These officers should be trained that in these particular situations they should all be filing reports. That is my understanding of the current
111
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A It goes back to the definition. And if every one of those officers standing there believes that what he is doing is appropriate, I'm sorry, but that's the problem. Q Manager Garcia, can you can look at this and say that, oh, I don't know if this is appropriate or not so -A No. But you know what, three members of the Civil Service Hearing Board looked at it and said it is just dandy. So I don't know why you expect these cops to know any different unless you train them to do so. You want to train somebody, train the Civil Service Commission. If they don't see it, come on. I mean, you want a blue shield, paint it over their Civil Service. Q Based on your knowledge, has Denver ever conducted training as to when officers should or should not report other officers' use of force? A They do train. I have never -- again, I think I testified earlier I've never been any part of and don't know exactly what their training is. All I know is that we have had discussions that one of the things that needs to be done in DPD is training, particularly sergeants on the use of force. I think I testified earlier sergeants are
112
to be called on use of force, so they are the first line of supervision that should be there to say, okay, what went on here. And they are the ones that need to be talking to these officers and say, what happened here. Q Didn't Sergeant O'Neill review this matter and find that there was absolutely nothing wrong in his use of force report? A Sergeant O'Neill was also part of the attempt to surreptitiously report IAB because of his disdain for IAB and their treatment of excessive force, so I wouldn't have expected him to do anything in this case. Q Yet he was permitted to complete the excessive force report of the Denver Diner incident, correct? MR. REYNOLDS: Object to form. A Yeah. That was his job. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Sergeant O'Neill was permitted to complete the use of force report as it related to the Denver Diner incident, right? A That's what I just said. That was his job. Q Well, isn't this a problem that a sergeant like Sergeant O'Neill is involved in use of force
110
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 way that operations is designed, is it is those officers who use force are required to file the reports, not necessarily an officer who observes use of force. And, again, it gets to even a bigger problem, which is even if it is required, then whose judgment is it that determines whether or not that's excessive force? Is it the officer's and do they have a duty then to make those kinds of determinations? You know, I was shocked when I actually read the unemployment insurance. I think it was -- I think it was -- wherever I read Devine had said -after I had testified that Devine told me that the use of Mace, in his mind, was never appropriate. I read somewhere that he's now saying that that's not what he said. He said it wasn't for him because he has allergies. That's the first time I ever heard he had allergies. So, you know, trying to get other officers to report what they see is a training issue, that's a serious training issue and needs to be addressed. Q Isn't the blue code of silence alive and well in the Denver Diner incident, based on your view of the matter and observing Time Index 1:49:25 through 1:49:33?

113
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 reports at all? MR. REYNOLDS: Object to form. A Huge problem. Sergeant O'Neill, in my estimation, needs more training than any of these guys could ever imagine. But, again, go and look at the case of Ciempa and O'Neill, and according to the Citizen Oversight Board, they really didn't do much wrong at all -- or not Citizen Oversight Board, the Civil Service Hearing Board panel. You know, and I'm going to keep harping on this because I don't know if maybe anybody gets it, but as long as you've got a commission and hearing officers that tell people like Ciempa and O'Neill that going after IAB is just dandy, you're never going to fix the problem. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Is Lieutenant Ciempa the appropriate officer to do recommendations for District 6 after receiving the IAB case file related to the Denver Diner incident? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. A Absolutely not. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Isn't this a deficiency in the District 6 command staff to allow officers like Lieutenant Ciempa and Sergeant O'Neill
115
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Q I'd like to turn your attention to Paragraph 8 found on COB-10 of Exhibit 67. A Okay. Q Based on your experience and observations as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you find that there was a lack of putting officers on administrative or desk jobs during the pendency of a serious disciplinary matters? A I'm trying to remember where these officers were, and honestly I don't remember where these officers were. They were not on administrative leave. And, frankly, I don't remember where they were assigned. I apologize, but I don't. I don't remember where they were assigned. I know they were both in uniform when they came to see me. Q Was Officer Nixon put on a desk job or administrative leave during the pendency of the Alexander Landau investigation? A He was not on administrative leave, if memory serves me correctly, but I don't know where he was assigned. To be honest with you, I don't remember where he was assigned. He was not down at the desk as many officers who were being disciplined at headquarters, but I don't know exactly where he was assigned.
116
114
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to be involved in such serious matters such as the recommendations in the Denver Diner incident? MR. REYNOLDS: Object to form. A In my opinion, yes. You need to understand one thing and that is that I don't believe -- and I have to go back and look at the timing that the Ciempa/O'Neill case was around when this happened, so I don't know -- at least it had not -Ciempa and O'Neill, to my knowledge, had never been on even the manager of safety's radar at the time this happened. I was unique. They were on my radar because their case was there when I started. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Let's talk about this -A And, by the way, they have been transferred from District 6 as a result of that case. Q By "they," you mean Lieutenant Ciempa -A Ciempa. Q -- and -A Sergeant O'Neill. Q And by "they," you mean Lieutenant Ciempa and Sergeant O'Neill have now been transferred out of District 6? A They were transferred as a result of the investigation into their IAB case.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Q I'd like to turn your attention to Time Index 1:49:52 to 1:49:56, and I'd like you to pay attention to Officer Nixon and Ms. Ortega and as she's pushed onto the ground and her head and her making contact with Ms. Thomas's legs. A I'm sorry. The question was? MR. RICE: He says he wants you to pay attention to that. He hasn't asked a question yet. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) All right. Manager Garcia, have you had a opportunity to review Time Index 1:49:52 through 1:49:56? A I have. Q Was this use of force as seen in that time index of Officer Nixon pushing Ms. Ortega into Ms. Thomas reviewed by you when you reviewed the Denver Diner matter? A It was. Q Did you find this to be inappropriate force? A Of the takedown and the grabbing her by the neck, yes. Q Is this even a close call for you, pushing a restrained prisoner into another restrained prisoner? A Not even close.

117
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q In any world whatsoever could this be appropriate conduct for law enforcement? MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. It's argumentative. Go ahead. A Not in any police department that I'd want to be associated with, no. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) And how many officers have observed this conduct of Officer Nixon pushing the head of Ms. Ortega into the shins of Ms. Carrillo? A I see at least -MR. REYNOLDS: Object to form and foundation. Sorry. Go ahead. A I see at least a couple observing. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) And did any officers cut any paper on this use of force by Officer Nixon onto Ms. Ortega and Ms. Thomas? A They did not. Q Doesn't there appear to be an officer just feet away looking directly into the use of force of Officer Nixon onto Ms. Ortega and Ms. Thomas? A Yes. Q This could have been potentially deadly force had Ms. Ortega's head hit the concrete, correct?
119
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A Yes. Q Did you review this report in preparation of your deposition today? A I reviewed it very quickly, kind of skimmed it. Q What was your opinion about the report based your skimming of it? MR. RICE: You're asking for this witness' opinions of an expert opinion report? MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Yes. MR. RICE: On what basis do you get to ask that question? He's not endorsed as an expert. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Okay. MR. RICE: Seriously I want to know what basis, because I may want to file a protective order on this. You're asking a lay witness you called here to testify to facts to opine about your paid expert's report. Is that what you're asking? MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Yes. MR. RICE: Okay. I'm not going to let him answer that and I'll move for a protective order. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Okay. MR. RICE: You give me a basis upon which you can ask that question. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: It's just a foundational
120
118
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. RICE: Object to the form of the question. Go ahead and answer. A That calls for more speculation than I've ever been called on to take, so, as soon as I get my medical license in neurology, I'll give you a call. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) This is Exhibit -no, I don't think it's 75. Yes, it is 75. MR. RICE: I missed it. You said 75? MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Yes, sir. MR. RICE: Okay. I thought it was just me that had the first page that was screwed up. Maybe we can get a clean copy of these things one of these days. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: It's just a few words, I think, that are hidden. MR. RICE: I know, but it would just be nice to get a clean copy of it. It looks like it was just how it got scanned or something. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: We can go off the record. (A discussion was held off the record.) Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Manager Garcia, I've handed you what's been marked as Exhibit 75, and this is a report of an expert endorsed by the plaintiffs in the Denver Diner incident concerning this matter.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
question. MR. RICE: Foundation to what? MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: For the questions I'm going to ask him about it. MR. RICE: Okay. If you want to ask him factual questions, I don't have any problem with that, but if you're going to ask him for expert opinions, I'm objecting to that. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: You know I'm not asking for an expert -MR. RICE: Well, you're asking to offer his opinions about an expert opinion report. I don't know what that is. The only way it could be admissible is if it was Rule 702 testimony, and this man is not endorsed to provide Rule 702 opinions by anybody, you included. I might add for the record that I've said move to protective order because that's what local Rule 30 says we should do if we're going to have a witness not respond to a question, but given Magistrate/Judge Schaffer's procedures, I think it's incumbent upon me first to seek an informal consultation -MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: I'll withdraw the question.

121
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. RICE: Huh? MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: I'll withdraw the question. MR. RICE: Fair enough. Thank you. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Could you turn to attention to Page 32 of Exhibit 75, and could you review the statement of Manager Al LaCabe that he made to the Civil Service hearing on December 1, 2011, as represented in this document. A Which piece are you talking about? Q It's the italics block. A The italics. Okay. I have to break it down. I don't like the word "subculture." He's talking about -- I don't know -- I take this out of context with everything else he's saying because it starts off with, you've heard all the evidence, and it's part of that subculture. I don't know what subculture he's talking about. It's an issue nationwide. I don't know what issue. You know, I have a guess, but I'm not here to guess. I saw many times -MR. RICE: So what's the question? THE DEPONENT: Yeah. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: All right. MR. RICE: I don't even know if there was
123
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 What I can tell you is that I've known Al LaCabe for over 30 years and worked with him when he was a rookie and I was a rookie. He was a DA. I was public defender. And have always respected Al, and I think that his seven years of working with the Denver Police Department he probably has a much better grasp on what he believes the overall department looks like than I do. Q Did you resign your appointment as the manager of safety? A I did. Q Why did you resign your appointment as a manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A I had originally said that I was going to only serve under Mayor Vidal, and I stayed a little bit longer than that. My agreement with Mayor Vidal was that I was going to serve during his term, and I never reached any agreement with Mayor Hancock. I did have discussions with his transition team at one point, but the person I had discussions with left the transition team prior to my departure. Q Were the discussions you had with Mayor Hancock's transition team concerning your remaining as the manager of safety? A What? I'm sorry.
122
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 one. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: There wasn't. THE DEPONENT: Okay. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) As found on Page 32 of Exhibit 75, there's a quote attributed to former safety manager Al LaCabe. A Yes. Q Speaking about the reluctance of officers to come forward in subculture and that kind of topic. Okay. A Uh-huh. Q Based on your observations as a former safety manager as well, did you also see a reluctance of officers to come forward as part of a subculture? A Yes and no. Yes, in this case. No, in the case of Officer Lemmons. No, in the case of Officer Fitzgibbons. Yes, in Sparks and Murr. If you want to limit it to just my time as a manager of safety, you've got a limited number of cases. So out of the 30 cases that I may have done, much less than half of that had anything to do with deceptive acts or officers covering for one another in any way, so difficult -- a difficult question in terms -- and that's why I'm reluctant to talk about a culture or subculture.
124
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q What were the discussions you had with Mayor Hancock's transition team concerning your remaining as the manager of safety? A If I would consider staying on. Q Were you asked to stay on? A Not by the mayor. Q Who asked you to stay on as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A John Huggins. Q Who is John Huggins? A John Huggins. I don't know. Huggins is -- I don't know what John is. John was the leader of the transition team for Mayor Hancock. Q Was there any pressure for you to resign your appointment as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A Absolutely not an iota, never, not once. Q I'd like to turn your attention to Page 31 of Exhibit 75. A Okay. Q And I'd like to go through some of the points that Chief Daniel Montgomery makes concerning the Denver Police Department. A I'm sorry, who is this by? Oh, Montgomery. Okay.

125
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Do you know who Chief Dan Montgomery is? A I don't. I don't know him personally. Q The former chief of the Westminster department. A Yeah. That's all I know. I think I -- I may have met him on a -- had meetings with several -Grace Robinson in Arapahoe, Dan Oats in Aurora, Bill Kilpatrick up in Golden, the sheriff up in Boulder. I can never remember his name. MR. RICE: Epp. A Yeah. And some other officers during my tenure, and he may have been in one of our meetings, but I'm not sure. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Chief Dan Montgomery notes, based on his review of numerous and various documents, that -- his words of why the cowboy subculture exists and flourishes within the Denver Police Department. And he says, "One, internal affairs investigations that are long and drawn out breed an attitude within the cowboy subculture that the police administration really does not care about dealing seriously with alleged police misconduct, and it breeds an attitude of contempt among the good officers." During your tenure as the manager of
127 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 record. Manager Garcia, did you ever meet with Officers Nixon or Devine related to your investigation of the Denver Diner incident? A I did. Q Did you ask for a statement from Officers Nixon or Devine related to your investigation? A No. Q Did you -- tell me about the meeting you had with Officers Nixon and Devine. A Very brief. I instituted a rule that I actually told Mr. Bruno about, that if an officer was summoned to my office by me, he could bring his attorney or her attorney, but if they wanted to see me, they had to come alone. That was my rule. So I didn't ask either of them to come see me. They both asked to come see me, and so they came alone, and it was just basically to hear what they had to say. Q How long was the meeting with Officers Nixon and Devine? A Not long, less an half hour each. Q Did you meet with them individually or did you meet with them together? A Individually. Q Did you explain to them the charges that 128
126
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 safety for the City and County of Denver, did you have any observations or experiences as chief Montgomery states about long and drawn out internal affairs investigations and their effects? A One, I don't believe in the word "subculture." Two, I don't know what he means by cowboy. I've told you what I believe, which is I believe that there is a feeling that a line between them and us, being the police and criminals, is a line that can be solved by the Denver Police Department with many of the officers. And whether or not their attitude has anything to do with the length of investigations, I'm not sure. I have no evidence to tell me. I've never had an officer say, you know, I'm a cowboy because I know it takes so long for these things to get through. That's insanity. So wherever he came up with that conclusion, I'm not quite sure. So without knowing what his basis is for that, I can't tell you that. I can tell you simply that I think the investigation process takes too long. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Let's take a break. (Recess from 3:07 to 3:20 p.m.) Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) We're back on the
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
you were considering -A No. They knew. Q What was said by Officer Nixon during the meeting with you concerning the Denver Diner incident? A I think Nixon was concerned that IAB was out to get him. He didn't feel that any of the allegations or specifications were appropriate, that he was simply doing his job. Pretty much that was it. I have notes from the conversation, like one page. I don't know. I'd have to look at them, but I don't remember that there was anything significant. Q Does anything of consequence jump out at you today concerning meeting with Officer Devine regarding the Denver Diner incident? A Only the comment that he did not believe the use of Mace was ever appropriate. That was the one that always just stuck in my mind. Q Would you be willing, sir, to turn over your notes to your counsel for him -A Sure. Q -- to review whether they can be disclosed or not? A Sure. Q Thank you.

129
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Sends me a note. MR. RICE: Just send me a note, Q, and then I'll collect what you have asked for and make decisions. Okay? MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Okay. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Did you find any inconsistencies or dishonesty when you were interviewing Officers Nixon or Devine? A No. Q Did they give you any explanation for any omissions in their report for memory issues? A No. Again, I did not question them. I simply -- they wanted to see me. I said fine and I allowed them to come in and tell me what it was they wanted to tell me. I did not in any way design it or intend it to be an interrogation. I didn't Garrity them, nothing. Q Based on your review of the matter as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, you consider aggravating and mitigating circumstances to every event, correct? A Yes. Q Did Officer Nixon suggest to you as a mitigation that he experienced memory issues because the Denver Diner incident was such a high stress A
131
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Defendant Officers -A I believe -- and I will not say that I am absolutely positive, but I believe this is the same article that one of the two officers -- and, again, I believe it was Nixon gave to me. And I do believe I have it. I believe I kept it. I don't remember it being the one on Page 130, which is Unique New Force Science. Q When did Officer Nixon present you with this article concerning memory or HALO matters? A The day of my interview, which was maybe the day or two days before my termination order. Q What other documents did Officer Nixon or Devine present to you during your meeting with them? A I seem to remember there was one that had to do with HALO cameras, sort of what they don't show. I don't remember. I would have to pull it. I believe I still have it. Q Do you have these documents related to the Denver Diner incident in one place, and that includes your notes and any notations you might have made on -A That's difficult to say, because my son the cop is coming out in June, and we have one of our spare rooms in our home in Denver became the
130
132
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
event? A I don't believe he ever termed that as a mitigating. He may have talked about -- I know he talked about -- I'm going to look at my notes. I believe it was Nixon who talked about the studies that had been done and maybe gave me -- I think I have two articles about memory under stress. I think one of them was even mentioned in your expert's report. One was, I think, was on memory -- if I remember correctly -- counsel across the table will testify to my lack of memory -- but if I remember correctly, I think one was on HALO cameras. Q Let's see if I can assist you. Could you turn to Exhibit 41. A Aha. Q Manager Garcia, I'm showing you what's been marked as Exhibit 41, which has been Bates labeled Defendant Officers 1119 through 1141. Can you identify these documents, sir? A I don't know that I can identify the document. It's for Science News, an article about stress and memory, and -Q Prior to your deposition today, have you ever seen Exhibit 41, which is Bates labeled
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
repository of every one of these notebooks on every one of these cases, and gradually over time I've managed to get everything back to the city attorney's office. And so I finally think I've reached a place where I can reclaim my room, and I actually one day this week, I think -- what is today? Thursday. I think it was Tuesday, Monday or Tuesday, began going through some of that stuff, and I believe I might have seen these articles. And the reason I'm hesitating is I do have some of the things on Nixon and Devine, but whether or not they're all together, I'm not sure. I did not -- I was just throwing things in a box. Q Have you destroyed any documents concerning the Denver -A No, sir. Everything I've ever had on this case I either have or I have given it to the city attorney's office. Q Did you find Officer Nixon's claims that he had memory issues concerning the Denver Diner incident to be credible? MR. REYNOLDS: Object to form. A No. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Why not? A What concerns me -- and I've expressed

133
135
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 want to see blanket policy. Again, I think it needs to be a case by case analysis. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Manager Garcia, could you turn your attention to Exhibit 33 and the third page of the document, which is Bates labeled Defendant Officers 0220. A Okay. Q During your time as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, did you have an opportunity to review law enforcement officers CUFFS II reports as it related to their complaint summaries and disciplinary histories? A I did. Q As found on -- I'd like to turn your attention, sir, to 0219 and 0220. A Okay. Q As found on Exhibit 33, Bates numbers Defendant Officers 0219 through 0220, was there anything concerning to you about Officer Nixon's informal and formal complaint summaries? A In and of just the report, no. Q Do you consider this to be a high number of citizen informal or formal complaints? MR. REYNOLDS: Object to form. A I think no, because, you know, one of the
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
this to police officers when I've gone out and talked to them in the districts. I'm always amazed that I spent 20 odd years cross-examining officers who have the best memories of any human beings I've ever seen on the face of the earth until it becomes their own discipline, and then the memories seem to be faulty. And I've just never been able to reconcile the two. And I can't tell you the number of times I've cross-examined officers about their memory in stressful situations and they are pretty good about testifying about why stress doesn't affect them, but I'm sure defense lawyers would love to have these articles. I'm sure they do. Q Did you consider the Denver Diner incident to be a high stress situation when you reviewed it as the manager of safety for the City and County of Denver? A No. Q As the former manager of safety for the City and County of Denver, is it appropriate to put officers who are being investigated for excessive force on administrative leave or desk duty? A Investigated for -- I don't believe so. You know, I'm a pretty firm believer in innocent until proven guilty. You know, I think it's a
134
case-by-case analysis. I think if you have a pretty clear-cut case, if you've got an officer who's a risk to the community, you don't put him on the street. I think it's a case-by-case call. I would not want to see a blanket policy that says every officer who some citizen alleges has used excessive force to be taken off the street. I don't think that would be fair, any more fair than it would be to take every citizen off the street and put him in jail simply because somebody else alleged they did something wrong. Q What about circumstances where officers -strike that. What about in situations where the law enforcement and citizen contact results in serious bodily injury to the citizen, in those circumstances would it be appropriate as a blanket policy to remove the officer off the street to a desk job or administrative leave? MR. RICE: Can I hear that one back? (Last question was read.) A Again, I don't believe in blanket policies. You could have a situation where an officer runs into another car during a chase. It may not be the officer's fault. It may result in serious bodily injury to the other person. I'm not sure I
136
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 things I learned, you want to get a lot of complaints, do traffic. People don't like traffic cops. They complain about them all the time. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) So based on your review -- and I'll represent to you that on Defendant Officers 0220 the Landau incident does not even appear -A I'm sorry. Q -- on Defendant Officers 0220 the Landau incident does not even appear. So do you consider this to be a high number of unnecessary force allegations against Officer Nixon from April of 2006 through July of 2009? A You know, I look at the disposition. District 6, I've testified earlier, it's not a tough place, you know. Nixon to me is a concern, because of Landau, because of this case, but not solely based on this. Q So is it fair to say you don't put a lot of stock into the CUFFS II reports and the IAB -A I do, but I also believe that unless I have something further when it says declined, if I'm a defense attorney, I certainly don't want a jury hearing about my cases that my client was charged with and was dismissed. So, you know, I give

137
139
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Okay. That's fine. I just wanted to know if you have personal knowledge or involvement with the creation of that. A Huh. Q Did you have -A No. I was not involved in the creation. Q So let me ask that again. I'd like to turn your attention to Exhibit 52. A Okay. Q Exhibit 52, which is Bates labeled Defendant Officers 2 through 3 is the use of force report created by Sergeant Brian O'Neill. A Right. Q Did you review this document in consideration of your -A I did. Q -- opinions concerning the Denver Diner incident? A I did. Q Were you satisfied with the quality of this use of force report by Sergeant Brian O'Neill as it related to the Denver Diner incident? A I was not. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: All right. May I have a moment. I think we could be done.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
officers the same benefit I give a citizen. I hold them to a higher standard, but I certainly give them the same benefits, and so when I see declined, it goes off my radar. Q Don't district attorneys routinely reuse charged felonies -A Don't what? Q Don't district attorneys use charged felonies routinely against criminal defendants? A Convictions. Q Not just charged felonies for crimes of dishonesty? A Not if something is pending. They better not in my case. Q What about when deciding to charge, don't they use -A Do what? Q When deciding to charge, don't district attorneys use past charges in that determination? MR. REYNOLDS: Object to form. A You know, I would hope that district attorneys are not considering un-filed cases in their determination of whether or not to file a charges in a current case. If they are, you know, you've got a bad DA.
138
140
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (Pause in proceedings.) Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Can you turn your attention to Exhibit 69. My general question to you, sir, is have you been consulted by the new chief of police, Robert White, or the new manager of safety, Justice Alex Martinez, concerning any discipline or matters related to Officers Nixon and Devine in the Denver Diner incident? A None, zero. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: I have no further questions. MR. RICE: Mr. Remolds, do you have questions? MR. REYNOLDS: Yes. EXAMINATION BY MR. REYNOLDS: A I don't remember. Q Manager, will you please turn to Exhibit 52. It's the use of force report that we just looked at prepared by Sergeant O'Neill. A Okay. Q And you testified that you were not satisfied with this report. A Yep. Q What was your dissatisfaction with
Q I'd like to turn your attention to Exhibit 37, please. Of these police department's and sheriff's department's pending disciplinary cases, which ones were you a part of? A I think I did Spellman. I certainly did Morelock. I know I did Lemmons. I know I did Johnson. I know I did Sparks and Murr. I know I did Sandoval. I know I did Nixon and Devine. I know I did Katz. I know I did Estrada. Gibbs rings a bell. Ciempa/O'Neill I did. Sheriff's department, I did not. Sheriff's department I delegated to my deputy, Ashley Kilroy, because it's not Civil Service. It's career service. And the ordinance allows the manager of safety to delegate in career service, not Civil Service. The only sheriff's case that I ever was involved in was Booker. Lemmons does have two M's. Q Could you turn your attention to Exhibit 44. A Okay. Q Have you ever seen this document before? A I believe I have. City attorney, pretty much standard procedure that they send these to me. And I'll be honest with you, many of these I read and delete.

141
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Sergeant O'Neill's use of force report in this matter? A The amount of time that went into obviously his investigation was simply talking to Sergeant Ken Field, who had interviewed the officers and the suspects and that Nixon completed a use of force report. I mean, it really doesn't look to me like O'Neill did anything. Q Is the sergeant who prepares the use of force report supposed to undertake any investigation? A You know, I do not know what the rules and regulations exactly are. I would have to sit back and read them. But should they? Yes. Q You said you don't know whether the rules require it, but they should. A I believe. My personal belief is they should. Q Okay. And you can't tell us, though, whether the sergeant who prepares the use of force report is required to undertake any investigation? A I'd have to go back and look at the rules. Q If that sergeant is not required to undertake any investigation, would you still be unsatisfied with Sergeant O'Neill's use of force report?
143
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Q Sir, what is the charter for the City and County of Denver? A That's a tough -- it's kind of like a constitutional law question. It's -- I don't know what you call it. It's -Q Would you agree with me it's essentially the establishing document for the city and county? A Right. Yes, that's true. Q Okay. And the charter creates or sets forth the provision for the department of safety. A Okay. Q Do you know whether it does or not? A I'd have to look at it. Q Do you know whether the charter provides for the position of the manager of safety? A I believe it does. I'm not sure. I'd have to go back. Q And are you aware that the charter also provides for the creation of the Civil Service Commission? A That I believe is true. Q So your position and the Civil Service Commission are both created by the establishing document for the City and County of Denver? A Yeah. I have a difficult time when you
144
142
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Yes. If all any of us ever did was what we're required to do, it would be a sad society. Q So let me just make sure I'm clear. You're holding Sergeant O'Neill to a higher standard than the Denver Police Department holds him to? A If the rules do not require him to do any more than what he did, then I am holding him to a higher standard. Q Did -- I'm going to step back to another topic here. Did I understand you correctly that you testified that Officer Nixon told you that he had memory problems? A No. Q That's what I understood the question. What was the exchange then between you and Officer Nixon with regard to memory problems or memory issues? A He simply gave me the article and said, have you -- I believe he said something to the effect, have you ever seen this, and I said no. And he said, I would appreciate it if you read this. But I don't again, I do not remember specifically -- the only thing I remember specific to the facts of this case was Devine's comment about the Mace.
say the establishing document, because manager of safety certainly was established long after the City and County of Denver was established, so . . . Q Do you know when the charter was written? A I don't. Q Do you know when the provision for the manager of safety was initiated? A For some reason I'm thinking it was back in the early '90s, but it may have been earlier. There's been a lot of them, so it may have been before that. Q Are you -A Actually -- I'm sorry. Q Sure. A It was much earlier than that. I don't remember the year. Q Are you aware that the Denver city charter sets forth the disciplinary process for classified service employees? A Based on the testimony I heard from your witnesses at the hearing on Sparks and Murr before Judge Lemon, I believe that's correct. Q The charter empowers the chief of police to initiate disciplinary action. A If you say so.

145
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Do you know that to be true or not? A Again, I'm going to tell you that I do not remember what is in the charter without looking at it. Q Let's ask this: Do you know whether the charter and/or the Civil Service rules provide for a disciplinary process for classified service employees? MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Object to foundation. He's already said he doesn't know the charter by heart. A I remember that based on the testimony that I heard before Judge Lemon. Q (BY MR. REYNOLDS) Let me understand this correctly. You, as the manager of safety, were part of the disciplinary process? A I was. Q Okay. That disciplinary process starts when a complaint is filed? A Yes. Q And the initial review is made by the district command? A Yes. Q It's reviewed by the division chief, correct?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
147
panel, the Civil Service Commission? A Correct. Q And, in fact, those folks review the entire case and they disagreed with you? A Right. Q As simply a prior reviewer. Yes? A Sure. Q What is the current position of the City and County of Denver then with regard to the discipline that was issued against officers Devine and Nixon? A It's on appeal. Q What is the current -- other than saying on appeal, what is the current statement as far as the City and County of Denver has made with regard to the status of Officers Nixon and Devine? A That they believe that the hearing officers were wrong and that they have appealed it to the full commission. Q So the Civil Service Commission and the hearing officers, they're established by charter from the City and County of Denver, right? A Correct. Q Is it your position then that the decision by the hearing officer panel is not a decision of the
146
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Correct. Q Then the chief of police reviews it and makes a recommendation and then that goes -- that recommendation goes to the manager of safety? A Sometimes it's done by the deputy. Q Sometimes it's done by -- the recommendation is made by the deputy chief, but that recommendation goes to the manager of safety? A Correct. Q And then the manager of safety makes a decision as part of this process? A Correct. Q But that's not where the process ends? A Correct. Q The charter of the City and County of Denver and the Civil Service rules provide for an appeal of the manager of safety's decision? A Correct. Q So you're just part of this process? A That's correct. Q And in your portion of this process you disagree with certain prior reviewers? A Correct. Q The next step in the process after you had it goes to the hearing officer or the hearing officer
148
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
City and County of Denver? A I mean, they are formed by the City and County of Denver's charter, so in that sense it's the City and County of Denver decision. Q And the current status of that decision is that officers -- well -- the current status of that decision is overturning your decision and reinstating both Officer Nixon and Officer Devine? A Correct. Q Now, one of the things that you said earlier was that in the hearing officer panel's decision the panel did not sustain deceptive acts because they determined that Charles Garcia was a knucklehead. A That's my reading. Q But the hearing officer panel's decision actually was a lot more critical of you than just calling you a knucklehead? A They were. Q In fact, they say that the manager of safety's report was not free from untruthful statements. A That's what it says. Q Did you intentionally put untruthful statements into your report or into your disciplinary

149
151
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
decision? A No. And that says that in the document that you're reading. Q The hearing officer panel says that your report was untruthful. A That's what it says. Q They said that you were wrong essentially in your decision. A That's correct. Q Your decision and your disciplinary recommendation or even disciplinary order said that Lieutenant Ciempa was wrong, correct? A Correct. Q And Commander Dilley was wrong? A Correct. Q And Chief Klee was wrong? A Correct. Q And at least in part Chief of Police Whitman was wrong? A Correct. Q So you said all those folks were wrong, right? A As a deceptive act for sure. Q Okay. At the hearing officer panel, they said that, wait a second, maybe all those folks
150
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Q What was the charge against Kelly Boren? A I'd have to go back and look. Q Are you aware that she testified that she kept approaching Officer Nixon and asking him questions and she kept telling him -- or he kept telling her to back off and stay away? A I don't know. Q Do you know that that is in her written statement to IAB or -- rather, in her IAB interview? A Without reading it, I can't be a hundred percent sure that's what she said. Q Are you aware that Officer Nixon testified that he had to keep telling Ms. Boren to back up, to back away from him? A Yes. Q Are you aware that -- I'm sorry, were you finished? A No. I'm done. Q Okay. Are you aware that Ms. Boren responded by saying, go ahead and arrest me? A I believe that's correct. Q Are you aware that Ms. Boren, in fact, pled guilty to the charge of interference? A She did. Q Okay. Based on all that information, is
152
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
weren't wrong, Charles Garcia was wrong. A That's what I testified to earlier. Q Sir, who's Roddy (phonetic) Thomas? A Who? Q Roddy Thomas? A Doesn't ring a bell. Q You've never heard that name before? A If I did, I don't remember it. Q We had some discussion about the big lie, little lie issues. A Correct. Q I'm going to withdraw that. Never mind. Let me ask you this question instead. We're going to go over here. You said in your testimony Kelly Boren should never have been charged in this case. A Correct. Q What do you base that statement on? A Video. Q Do you base it on anything other than the video? A No. Q Do you base it -- I'm sorry, let me finish. Do you base it on any witness statements? A That may have been part of it, but I would have said that absent the witness statements.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
it still your position that Kelly Boren should never have been charged in this incident? A Yes. Q One of the issues that you had earlier was it seemed in your review that different reviewers had different definitions of what was excessive force. A Yes. Q What is the definition of excessive force? A I'd have to go back and look at the specification. Q Would you agree with me, though, that in determining whether something is excessive or not, that is a subjective determination? A Yes. Q So how can it be the same for everybody? A Correct. Q What is excessive for one person might not be excessive for another. A Fair. Q True? A Fair. Q So when you say something is clearly excessive, that's only your opinion. A My opinion. Q There's no black and white of what is

153
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 excessive or not excessive. A As I testified to earlier, in this case, I relied also on Chief Quinones. Q There's no black and white line where things are either excessive or not excessive, true? A Oh, I think there will be cases where it's pretty black and white. Q In most cases you deal with it's shades of gray? A Many. Not this one. Q One of the issues you had with the officers in this case was with their written reports? A Yes. Q Who wrote reports in this case of the officers -- of Officers Devine and Nixon, which of those officers wrote reports? A If memory serves me correct, I believe Nixon wrote the use of force report. Q And you said in your experience officers writing use of force reports was inadequate -A Yes. Q -- as a general proposition. A Yes. Q And, in fact, you suggested that the Denver Police Department officers would benefit from
155
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 doesn't depict different perspectives. A No, it does not. Q You were simply trying to put yourself in the shoes of the various parties to see what they were perceiving at the time? A I'm not sure that I believe that I could ever put myself in their shoes and perceive. I was just trying to watch their actions individually. MR. REYNOLDS: Fair enough. Thank you, sir. I don't have anything further. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: I have some brief follow-up. It's your turn. MR. RICE: Yeah. I had some questions. EXAMINATION BY MR. RICE: Q There's a handful of areas, Mr. Garcia, that I wanted to come back and ask some questions of clarification about. Let me revisit this issue about the definition of excessive force. A Okay. Q Okay. My first question deals with the fact that in the parlance of the department and that's what we have been talking about, these policy violations, it's actually dealt with in terms of inappropriate force, right?
154
156
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
additional training on report writing. A Still do. Q And, in fact, additional training on report writing specific to use of force reports. A Absolutely. Q Would that have benefited the officers in this case? A Sure. Q If those officers had had that additional training, you might not have -- you might not take issue with their written reports? A That's too much speculation for me. Q That's fair. But you do believe that these officers, Nixon and Devine, could benefit from additional training regarding report writing? A Sure. That assumes, of course, that I believe they should still be on the police force, which I do not. Q I appreciate that. I appreciate that. Just one final clarification. You said that in your review of this case you watched the video, you watched it once and you watched it from various perspectives of certain parties? A Correct. Q And let me understand. The video itself
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A Right. Q And so there is, in fact, a written policy that sets forth the parameters of what's appropriate and inappropriate, right? A Correct. Q Okay. So there is in a sense a definition in writing of what is appropriate versus inappropriate? A Yes. Q Okay. But really when you're saying there are differing definitions, it really is a matter of how one applies that policy to a given set of facts? A Exactly. Q Okay. And so what you're saying is that various reviewers see these things differently? A Sure. Q And as a general matter, there is room for disagreement on these things, isn't there? A A lot of room. Q Yeah. I mean, so my point being that you said there are some cases that are black and white. A Correct. Q All right. But there are many other cases where there is room for fair-minded people to disagree on these things.

157
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Correct. Q It's not at all unusual to see a case where the various reviewers, as alluded to in Mr. Reynolds' questions, have varying interpretations of the policy to the facts of that given case. A Correct. Q Okay. Now, let me move on to another thing that Mr. Reynolds asked about and that is this issue about use of force reports. The Denver Police Department as other police departments has a protocol by which officers are supposed to make a written report whenever force is used, right? A Correct. Q And these kinds of force reporting things evolve over time, don't they? A Yes. Q Okay. So, you know, as an example, what they were using for a use of force report in the 1970s probably varies greatly from what is used today. A I'm sure it does. Q In fact, in the 1970s there might not have even been the requirement of use of force reports, right? A Probably not.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
159
Q Okay. Just there were times when you found that to be the case? A Yes. Q All right. Now, let me move to this topic that -- I think the phrase that was chosen was "heavy handed." You made the observation that there had been some officers who perhaps were using heavy handed tactics. A Yes. Q Now, is that to say that it's prevalent? A No. Q Do you believe it is prevalent? A I do not. Q All right. Is it to say that it's tolerated by the management of the department? A No. Q All right. Do you believe it's tolerated by the management of the department? A No. Well, let me -- upper management, I would say no. Q Okay. But my point being this, is there a system in Denver where the command of the department tolerates heavy handed tactics by certain officers? A Absolutely not. Q Now, I want to talk just a little bit
158
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q And this isn't something that's set in stone. That's something that happens over time and there are suggestions that lead to improvements, right? A I would hope so. Q Okay. And is that a part of what was going on when you and the management of the Denver Police Department were talking about additional training on use of force report writing? A Yes. Q So in other words, it wasn't necessarily saying that the Denver Police Department was doing something wrong. It was trying to find ways to make it better. A I think the cases that came up over the six months that I was there probably brought more focus on this issue -- this particular issue than ever before in the history of the police department. Q So trying to find a better way -A Yes. Q -- to complete these reports? A Yes. Q You're not saying that all use of force reports are deficient? A No.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
160
about this case. When I say this case, I mean what we all refer to as the Denver Diner case. All right. Much has been made of the question here today of the review that was done by Lieutenant Ciempa. All right. By the time the matter got to you, Lieutenant Ciempa's recommendation had been countermanded by not just one but two officers who ranked above him, right? A Correct. Q So Deputy -- excuse me -- Division Chief Quinones and Chief Whitman had recommended something completely different than Lieutenant Ciempa? A Correct. Q And the same thing can be said for the findings made by Commander Dilley, right? A Yes. Q By the time -A Chief Quinones and Chief Whitman both disagree, yes. Q Right. So by the time it got to you, the police department had, inside the department separate and apart from your review by the manager of safety, made a determination that these two officers had engaged in inappropriate conduct that ought to be disciplined, right?

161
163
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 get their viewpoint, right? A I did. Q Okay. Is it fair to say that you found some of those people that didn't really want to be in the IAB? A Absolutely. Q And is that to say that they did a poor job? A I think they would have done a better job if they were people who wanted to be there. I think that their examination techniques leave a lot to be desired. Q Okay. A Was there intent to do a poor job to cover for another officer? No. Q All right. And that's what I'm really getting at here. Okay. Whether or not these folks were happy with their assignment or whether or not they were good at that particular assignment, did you become aware of any situation wherein the Internal Affairs Bureau people were in essence turning a blind eye to violations? A No. And I will tell you that the Ciempa and O'Neill highlighted that because they were offended by the actions of those officers to attack
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A Absolutely. Q Okay. Another set of questions were asked about -- I think the phrase that was used was an old time attitude basically having to do with the fact that officers ought to be able to take care of things on their own. A Yes. Q Okay. Now, the question is: Is that something that in your view is prevalent to the department? A To the extent that it was utilized in this case, no. Q Okay. All right. So in other words, what I'm asking you is: Do you believe that in the Denver Police Department, as it existed at the time of this incident in 2009, there was a prevalence of departments of who -- excuse me -- a prevalence of officers who believed in this old time attitude? A Two pieces. I believe that there is a very large attitude that we are sort of the protectors of the public and it's sort of our duty, which I think sometimes crosses the line. The heavy handed part, no. Q Okay. And is this old time attitude, in your view, tolerated by the management of the
162
164 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 IAB, because they feel at least that they were doing a good job. Sometimes they weren't doing such a great job, but they believed they were, and I think they honestly believed they were. Q All right. And is it your view that with any organization that we can always do a better job? A I would hope so. Q I mean, that's really part of what you saw as your mission as the manager of safety, is to try and help people find ways to do a better job? A Yeah. Q Okay. But that's a far cry from people turning a blind eye to misconduct, isn't it? A I didn't see a blind eye being turned in internal affairs. Q And you talked about Commander Burbach. Was he committed to his job? A Yes -Q Did he do a good job? A -- he was absolutely committed to his job. Q Did he do a good job? A I think he did a great job. Q All right. A Could have done more training, but . . . Q We can always do more training, can't we?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
department? A No, absolutely not. Again, upper management. Q All right. But, again, I mean, let's talk about the department as a whole. In the management department, whatever you want to call it, upper management or not, is there a tolerance for this old time attitude? A I look at the group that sits over on 1331 Cherokee as the management -Q Okay. A -- and there, no, it's not tolerated. Q Okay. A Again, I will say that there are division commanders that I believe are less tolerant than others. Q Okay. A I shouldn't say -- I mean, district commanders. Q Yeah. And I also want to ask about your viewpoint with regard to the IAB. You gave some significant testimony there about you went over and visited with those people. A I did. Q And tried to meet all the staff and try to

165
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A We can always do more training. Q We could do training every day, couldn't we? A Yeah. Q But then we wouldn't be able to do our jobs. A Yeah. Q All right. Last area. I just wanted to clear this up. You were asked questions about recommendations made by the Internal Affairs Bureau, and that really misperceived the way the system works; isn't that right? A Yes. Q I mean, the Internal Affairs Bureau is -their job and their charge is to go out and find the facts, right? A Right. Q Develop an investigation dossier that then others can review and evaluate, right? A Yes. Q And the IAB, as a matter of fact, it's part of the system, they're purposefully not required and not asked to give recommendations, right? A And I apologize. I thought I testified that --
167
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
is part of the City and County of Denver, is it not? A Yes, it is. Q In your time as the safety manager for the City and County of Denver, how many times did the Civil Service Commission overrule your decision making concerning officer discipline? A Every time. Q Now, tolerance of excessive force could be delineated in many ways, correct? A Yes. Q One way to express tolerance of excessive force is by failing to meaningfully discipline when it comes to excessive force. A Yes. Q And another way you can tolerate dishonest police officers is to fail to meaningfully discipline dishonest police officer, correct? A Absolutely. Q A lack of meaningful disciplinary process is in effect a type of tolerance for excessive force? A It undermines the entire disciplinary process. Q So based on your observations of the Civil Service Commission, does it as a body tolerate excessive force by the Denver Police Department?
168
A It does. Q And based on your observations and experiences as the safety manager for the City and County of Denver, does the Civil Service Commission tolerate dishonest police officers? A Let me step back. I have not yet seen what the Commission is going to do, so let's be clear -- the hearing board. So every time that you -- the last few questions that you may have used the term "Commission," and I just want to be careful -Q All right. A -- that it's the hearing board. None of these cases have been decided before the Commission at this point in time. Q Well, you understand how the quasi judicial review process works in administrative law, correct? A Yes. Q That the hearing panel is afforded extraordinary deference by the Commission in its fact finding, correct? A Yes. Q That the Commission as a whole doesn't actually do any new finding of fact, but they essentially look at the findings of the panel on
166
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q I think you did. I just want to make sure 1 it's entirely clear. And that's part of the system. 2 We don't want them to be making recommendations. We 3 wants them to stick to the facts, right? 4 A I did. I suggested getting a 5 recommendation from Burbach on Ciempa and O'Neill 6 that was laughed at. 7 Q And that was because it involved? 8 A Burbach. 9 Q Burbach. All right. You didn't -- you 10 didn't really mean that seriously? 11 A No. 12 MR. RICE: All right. All right. Those 13 are all my questions. I appreciate your time here 14 today. 15 EXAMINATION 16 BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: 17 Q I have some follow-up, sir. Mr. Rice made 18 a point to discuss the tolerance of excessive force 19 by the upper management of the Denver Police 20 Department. Do you remember that line of 21 questioning? 22 A Right. I don't think he used upper 23 management. I did. 24 Q Fair enough. The Civil Service Commission 25

169
171
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 appealed by the City and County of Denver, is it? A I don't believe so, because I know there's always discussion as to whether or not they're going to. In my cases I believe they have appealed all of them now. Q You were asked questions by Mr. Reynolds concerning Ms. Kelly Boren around her plea. Do you remember that line of questioning? A Yes. Q Was Ms. Kelly Boren provided the HALO video of the Denver Diner prior to her entering a deferred judgment plea? A I cannot tell you that she was not, but it was not provided to anyone, to my knowledge, outside of the investigation at that time. Q And it was in the hands of the -- strike that. And it was in the possession of the City and County of Denver through their internal affairs department while these charges were pending against these defendants, correct? A That was my understanding, although I'm never a hundred percent sure. Q All right. The HALO video was in the possession of the City and County of Denver and its law enforcement while the criminal charges were
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
abuse of discretion standard? MR. RICE: Can you cite me a case on extraordinarily deference? I've never heard of this standard. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: I'm not -MR. RICE: It sounds like hyperbole to me. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: Okay. I'd ask that you not into the interrupt the deposition. I certainly didn't interrupt your questions or was critical of your questioning, so I would just ask that you afford me the same respect that I afforded you when you were asking questions. MR. RICE: All right. Your point is well taken, Mr. Mohamedbhai, but that having been said, I can't let that pass because you're trying to, in essence, state law and you're stating it incorrectly. So go ahead. I apologize for interrupting. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) Does the Civil Service panel tolerate excessive force by the Denver Police Department? A I believe they do. Q Does the Civil Service panel tolerate dishonest police officers? A I believe they do. Q And they're part of the City and County of
170
172
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Denver, are they not? A They are. Q They almost have the final word in matters of police misconduct, do they not? A No, they do not. Q Who has the final word? A The Commission. Q Has -- have you ever observed the Commission -- strike that. Have you ever observed the entire Civil Service Commission to ever overrule a panel's decision? A None of my decisions have ever reached that far. And I'll be very honest. I've never looked back to anything except my decisions. The only decisions I've ever looked at in terms of what the Civil Service Hearing Board or Commission has done were the two cases where Mr. LaCabe fired officers in his last days in office and Torres/ Palomares, which Malatesta did. And I believe Torres/Palomares has been overturned by the panel and is now before the Commission. And I believe they upheld one of Mr. LaCabe's firing, and that's on appeal now by the officers to the Commission, so . . . Q Not every Civil Service panel decision is
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
pending against Ms. Ortega, Ms. Carrillo, and Ms. Boren? A That's my understanding, yes. Q And they were never turned over to Ms. Carrillo, Ms. Ortega or Ms. Boren despite there being criminal charges pending against them? A You have to ask them or their attorneys. Q The video could potential be exculpatory evidence, would you not agree? A As it relates to those three? Q Yes, sir. A I will believe so, but -Q Criminal defendants should be afforded the right to all evidence in the possession of the prosecution, which includes the police department, correct? A I've always believed that. Q Kyles v. Whitley, is it not? A Yes. Q It's a Supreme Court mandate. A Yeah. There's more than that, but . . . Q Brady versus Maryland. A Yeah. Q All exculpatory evidence in the possession of the police department should be turned over to

173
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 those who are facing criminal charges, correct? A I would hope so. Q Did that occur in the Denver Diner incident, based upon your review? A I have no idea. I can't -- I did not represent those individuals. All I can tell you is that I believe that Denver Diner never, ever reached outside the department until such time as Nick Rogers told Brian Maass that it existed and he filed a CORA request and we had to. Once the disciplinary matters were over, release the video. Q And that's your understanding of how the video eventually made its way into the public domain, is that Nick Rogers informed media of it? A Absolutely. Q What's the basis of your knowledge of that? A The CORA request, Nick Rogers on television, Brian Maass saying on television that Nick -- Nick Rogers said to Brian Maass, is my understanding, I believe it was part of the television interview -- the video will show you that these officers did nothing wrong, and it was after that that I received a CORA request for the video. Q So it was in defense of the officers -1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
175
may have been before the CORA request. The announcement of my decision was after the CORA request. Q Thank you. Now, concerning the tolerance of excessive force within the Denver Police Department, you made a distinction when referring to the word "management" to upper management. Do you remember that? A Yes. Q So based on your observations and experience as the former safety manager for the City and County of Denver, did you observe any tolerance by lower management within the Denver Police Department? A I did. Q And the same question for dishonesty. Did you observe any tolerance for dishonest police officers while you were the safety manager for the City and County of Denver by lower management for dishonest police conduct? A I did, but let me cast that in terms of particularly I'm always concerned about the word "tolerance" as it relates to deceptive acts. Differing definitions sometimes might be a better definition than tolerance, so I'm not going to say
174
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 conduct and in protest of the discipline that Nick Rogers went to the media to say, hey, take a look at this? MR. REYNOLDS: Object to form. A As far as I know. Q (BY MR. MOHAMEDBHAI) And the disciplinary decision had been made by that point presumably? A No. That's why we didn't turn it over. It was -- Nick Rogers went to the news after the chief's hearing. The officers obviously went to someone and the news got to Nick Rogers. Whether it was direct or not, I have no idea. But Nick Rogers went to the news between the chief's hearing and my decision. Q So your decision to -- well, strike that. So your decision to terminate Officers Nixon and Devine was made after the CORA request came in? A I believe that's correct. Q Now, Mr. Rice asked you some questions about tolerance of excessive force in the Denver Police Department and management, and you made the distinction between upper management and then presumably there's going to be a lower management -A Let me back up. I want to be very careful on that last question. My decision to terminate them
176
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
there's any blanket on either. I think there are people at the district levels -- and I think I testified to this -- who do not tolerate excessive force and who do not tolerate lying, but based on the experience I had, there were people -- and this case is a good example, with Sergeant O'Neill, Lieutenant Ciempa who have shown their disregard for IAB and I believe tolerated the excessive force in this case as evidenced by the fact that when it reached the level that I referred to as upper management, their recommendations were overturned. Q Was there any political influence in your decision to terminate the employments of Officers Nixon an Devine? A Absolutely not. I made it very clear to Mayor Vidal that all decisions I made would be made based on my analysis, nothing else. And as a matter of fact, I never informed him of my decisions prior to making the decisions and issuing the order. Q Had you made your decision to terminate Officers Nixon and Devine prior to the chief's hearing? A No. Q Had you made your decision to terminate

177
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Officers Nixon and Devine prior to your meeting with Officers Nixon and Devine? A No. MR. MOHAMEDBHAI: I have no further questions. MR. REYNOLDS: None. EXAMINATION BY MR. RICE: Q Do you even know if the video even depicts the conduct for which Kelly Boren was charged? A I testified to that earlier. I don't believe so. Q Yeah. A And I'm not even sure without going back and going through in detail again that some of the things that Ms. Carrillo was alleged to have done are on video. They were inside the diner. Q I understand. The last thing has to do with this last follow-up, because I -- you know, the semantics of this I think are important. That's why I want to come back to it. I don't want to ask the same question over again, but there's some question about tolerance, and the question is whether or not you've seen that at the lower management level. And what you're saying is that there are
179
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
safety say thank you, because, I believe, again, the majority of officers that are on the street today believe that the officers I terminated should have been terminated. MR. RICE: All right. Thank you, Mr. Garcia. (The deposition concluded at 4:32 p.m. on April 5, 2012.)
178
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 some circumstances in which you've seen sergeants not do their job. A Correct. Q Is that by any means prevalent in your view? A No. I mean, there are -- all of the sergeants need more training. Q Always, right? A Always. Q Right. A And I've really -- and I know that Captain White has already said -- or Chief White has already said this. The key to a really, really great police department begins at the sergeant level, and I really believe that and I learned that very early on. And so if you've got a bad sergeant, look out. But does that mean we've got all bad sergeants? No. Q So there was no prevalence to this acceptance of inappropriate force, in your view, was there? A No. Q Okay. You used the phrase no blanket acceptance. A No. And, again, I have had officers while I was manager of safety and since I was manager of
180
I, CHARLIE GARCIA, do hereby certify that I have read the foregoing transcript and that the same and accompanying amendment sheets, if any, constitute a true and complete record of my testimony.
_______________________________ Signature of Deponent ( ) No Amendments ( ) Amendments Attached Subscribed and sworn to before me this _____ day of ______________, 2012. Notary Public:___________________________ Address: ________________________________ ________________________________ My commission expires____________________ Seal: BJC

181
183
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 _____ Reading and signing not requested pursuant to C.R.C.P. Rule 30(e) _XXX_ Unsigned; amendment sheets and/or signature pages should be forwarded to Agren Blando to be filed in the envelope attached to the sealed original. Thank you. AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO, INC. Cc: All Counsel CHARLIE GARCIA April 5, 2012 Ortega vs. The City and County of Denver Case No. 11-cv-2394-WJM-CBS The original deposition was filed with Qusair Mohamedbhai, Esq., on approximately the 17th day of April, 2012. _____ Signature waived _____ Unsigned; signed signature page and amendment sheets, if any, to be filed at trial AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO, INC. 216 - 16th Street, Suite 650 Denver, Colorado 80202 (303) 296-0017
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
STATE OF COLORADO) ) ss. REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE COUNTY OF DENVER ) I, Barbara J. Castillo, do hereby certify that I am a Registered Merit Reporter, Certified Realtime Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of Colorado; that previous to the commencement of the examination, the deponent was duly sworn to testify to the truth. I further certify that this deposition was taken in shorthand by me at the time and place herein set forth, that it was thereafter reduced to typewritten form, and that the foregoing constitutes a true and correct transcript. I further certify that I am not related to, employed by, nor of counsel for any of the parties or attorneys herein, nor otherwise interested in the result of the within action. In witness whereof, I have affixed my signature and seal this 17th day of April, 2012. My commission expires January 5, 2013. ____________________________ Barbara J. Castillo, RMR, CRR 216 - 16th Street, Suite 650 Denver, Colorado 80202
182
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO, INC. 216 - 16th Street, Suite 650 Denver, Colorado 80202 (303) 296-0017 April 17, 2012 Thomas S. Rice, Esq. 1700 Broadway, Suite 1700 Denver, CO 80290 Re: Deposition of CHARLIE GARCIA Ortega vs. The City and County of Denver Case No. 11-cv-2394-WJM-CBS The aforementioned deposition is ready for reading and signing. Please attend to this matter by following BOTH of the items indicated below: _____ Call the number listed above and arrange with us to read and sign the deposition in our office _XXX_ Have the deponent read your copy and sign the signature page and amendment sheets, if applicable; the signature page is attached _____ Read the enclosed copy of the deposition and sign the signature page and amendment sheets, if applicable; the signature page is attached _XXX_ WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS LETTER
1 2 3 4 5 6
- AMENDMENT SHEET Deposition of CHARLIE GARCIA April 5, 2012 Ortega vs. The City and County of Denver Case No. 11-cv-2394-WJM-CBS The deponent wishes to make the following changes in the testimony as originally given: Page Line Should Read Reason ____ ____ _________________________ _____________
7 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 8 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 9 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 10 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 11 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 12 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 13 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 14 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 15 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 16 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 17 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 18 ____ ____ _________________________ _____________ 19 Signature of Deponent: ____________________ 20 21 22 23 24 25 Subscribed and sworn to before me this ____ day of ______________, 2012. Notary's signature ____________________ (seal) Notary's address ____________________ ____________________ My commission expires ________________.
18 _____ By __________ due to a trial date of ________ 19 20 21 22 Thank you. 23 AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO, INC. 24 Cc: All Counsel 25 Please be sure the signature page and amendment sheets, if any, are SIGNED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC and returned to Agren Blando for filing with the original deposition. A copy of these changes should also be forwarded to counsel of record.

Denver Diner Case: Charlie Garcia Deposition

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Denver Diner Case: Charlie Garcia Deposition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 47

DESCRIPTION INITIAL REFERENCE

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 11 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 12 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 13 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 14 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 15 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 16 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 17 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 18 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 19 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 20 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 21 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 22 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 23 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 24 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 25 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 26 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 27 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 28 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 29 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 30 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 31 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 32 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 33 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 34 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 35 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 36 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 37 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 38 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 39 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 40 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 41 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 42 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 43 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 44 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 45 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 46 of 47

Case 1:11-cv-02394-WJM-CBS Document 62-18 Filed 07/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 47 of 47

You might also like