Posted on 12/31/2002 2:57:48 PM PST by EBUCK
Taxpayers could pay $165,000 to clear records in K-Mart raid
Hundreds of people were arrested in August for trespassing on private property. By The Associated Press (12/31/02- Houston) — City council members are considering hiring a law firm to help clear the records of hundreds of people arrested at Kmart and other businesses over the summer, a move that could stick taxpayers with a bill of as much as $165,000. The council was scheduled Tuesday to consider whether to hire Winstead, Sechrest & Minick to help expunge the arrests from the records of nearly 300 people arrested during an ill-fated August sting on drag racing.
Though charges have been dropped, the arrests remain on their police records.
Amateur Houston songwriters riding wave of Yao Ming song Storms caused some damage in Montgomery County Taxpayers could pay $165,000 to clear records in K-Mart raid Houston police seek man who disarmed an officer during struggle Former HISD teacher charged with sexual assault Was driver to blame for Saturday's massive tollway pileup? Police warn against ringing in New Year with gunfire Eight Houston-area residents survive Belize plane crash More recent stories The city is considering using private attorneys because the city's legal department is already representing Houston in several lawsuits stemming from the arrests.
"We are trying to rectify a wrong," said Robert Cambrice, a senior assistant city attorney. "We are trying to help out people who are trying to get into school or apply for jobs and are denied that opportunity because they have an arrest record."
Cambrice said that if the contract is approved those arrested will be notified of the service by mail. Records would be expunged at a cost to the city of $484 each.
But Randall Kallinen, an attorney representing some of those arrested, said he would advise his clients not to accept the offer because they need proof of their arrests to pursue wrongful arrest lawsuits against the city.
"This is nothing but damage control which they (city officials) are going to try and use in later court cases," Kallinen said. "(Arrest records) are evidence of their own wrongdoing. They are trying to reduce future claims."
The city faces several lawsuits filed on behalf of some 60 people arrested in the raids. The lawsuits accuse the city and two police officers of false arrest, false imprisonment and civil-rights violations. Two lawsuits seek unspecified damages while others seek millions of dollars in damages.
Capt. Mark Aguirre directed the sweeps of parking lots that led to the arrests outside a Kmart, a Sonic Drive-In, and a James Coney Island on the weekend of Aug. 17.
Aguirre planned the raid to crack down on drag racers. But when police found no evidence of drag racing, they swept through the parking lots and arrested those gathered there anyway.
Many of those arrested were customers of the businesses, but were charged with trespassing and curfew violations.
The arrests fueled a public uproar, with council members and Police Chief C.O. Bradford criticizing the arrests as heavy-handed.
The Police Department launched its largest-ever internal affairs investigation, and a Harris County grand jury on Dec. 6 indicted Aguirre and Sgt. Ken Wenzel on Dec. 6 on five counts each of official oppression.
(Copyright 2002 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved)
The Houston Chronicle has quoted former Chief Bradford that 273 people were arrested for criminal trespass and elsewhere stated that 42 of those were juveniles.
One of the first articles published said that the juveniles were also cited for curfew violations, but I wasn't able to dig that up in a quick search.
No, I don't know, and I can't without asking the aforementioned parties. You don't know either. So stop pretending.
But we all know that suspended Chief Bradford lies when it suits him. Unless some of these false arrest suits go to trial I doubt that we will ever hear the full story of how this went down. Don't forget that there was a previous smaller scale version of this same thing a week or so before at another location. Just didn't get the publicity because of the smaller scale.
You prove that they were charged with the things you allege occurred, or give it up. The burden of proof is on YOU.
My only goal is to ensure that nobody new to the discussions is led to believe that Houmatt's position is remotely reasonable, because it's not. It's absurd and an embarrassment to this forum.
Bradford was actually amending previous police reports that 278 people were arrested for criminal trespass. Hopefully, not everyone at the police department is lying.
Unless some of these false arrest suits go to trial I doubt that we will ever hear the full story of how this went down.
Like you, I doubt that few, if any of the false arrest suits will go to trial. But, my rationale is different: I expect the city to settle out of court to avoid the risk of a huge damage award by a jury.
Don't forget that there was a previous smaller scale version of this same thing a week or so before at another location. Just didn't get the publicity because of the smaller scale.
25 people were arrested for criminal trespass at the James Coney Island the night before. The owner/operator of the business has stated that he planned to file a complaint with the Houston Police.
How stupid is it? Since I was originally talking about the behavior of people in the K-Mart parking lot that spurred complaints months before the raid took place (and I am STILL talking about that), just exactly how can you know what citations were handed out back then without asking the aforementioned parties, unless you happen to be omniscient?
Try again.
Oh, really? How about explaining that? I am curious.
There's a little detail about arresting the right people that you don't care about, and there's a little detail about the fact that no crime was actually being committed that you don't care about.
That is an embarrassment to this forum, but I don't ever expect you to recognize that.
If anyone had actually been arrested for offenses that instigated the past complaints, you might have a point.
But, no one was arrested for those offenses. Instead, everyone were arrested for an offense that was unsubstantiated. As a result, even those that may actually have been committing another offense walked away. And now the city is even offering to foot the bill for expunging those arrests.
Police cannot arrest someone for an offense that wasn't committed today because one may have been committed in the past. So no, the past isn't relevant in this case.
Standing department policy, actually.
A few police officers made anonymous statements to the press shortly after this happened, and a few Freepers reported call-in's to local talk radio shows. None of it was flattering.
Follow some of the links at the beginning of this thread and you'll find the reports.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.