File:Critical Incident Video Release –Use of Force Incident 6-5-2019 (Viewer Discretion Advised).webm
Original file (WebM audio/video file, VP9/Opus, length 15 min 44 s, 1,280 × 720 pixels, 2.05 Mbps overall, file size: 231.23 MB)
Captions
Captions
Summary
[edit]| Description |
English: The Elk Grove Police Department has concluded an administrative investigation into an incident that occurred in the 9100 block of E. Stockton Boulevard involving an Elk Grove Police officer and a man who was ultimately arrested for robbery, conspiracy, resisting arrest and violation of probation.
On June 5, 2019, at approximately 8:43 p.m., officers responded to a 9-1-1 call of at least two men stealing from the store and assaulting security guards who were trying to stop them. The officers’ in-car camera and body-worn camera systems were activated at the time of this incident. The video captured the interaction between the arriving officers and the two men related to the initial 9-1-1 call. One of those men, 23-year-old Juan Mendoza, who was involved in a physical altercation with store employees, was then contacted by Elk Grove Police Department officers as he left the store. What followed was a use of force by an officer that has been determined to be against department policy and not in line with any training provided by our department. This incident was brought to the attention of Elk Grove Police Department management in October, following a claim for damages from an attorney. An internal investigation was immediately launched. The officer involved was placed on leave and his law enforcement authority was suspended. Whenever an officer uses force, department policy calls for an internal review beginning with the supervisor of the officer involved in the force and culminating with a final review by the Chief of Police. The investigation found in this incident, the supervisor involved failed to identify the use of force, failed to report the use of force, and failed to complete an internal review in accordance with policy. At this time, the administrative investigation has been completed by the Elk Grove Police Department’s Professional Standards Bureau. The scope of the investigation focused on policy, procedure, and training. Following the extensive administrative investigation, the officer and supervisor are no longer employed with the Elk Grove Police Department. The Elk Grove Police Department wants to be transparent and build on the trust that has been established with our community. The actions that night were not congruent with the Elk Grove Police Department’s Mission, Vision, and Values. Members of the Elk Grove Police Department are dedicated to serving with empathy, integrity, and professionalism. |
| Date | |
| Source | YouTube: Critical Incident Video Release –Use of Force Incident 6-5-2019 (Viewer Discretion Advised) – View/save archived versions on archive.org and archive.today |
| Author | Elk Grove Police Department |
Licensing
[edit]
|
This work was created by a government unit (including state, county, city, and municipal government agencies) that derives its powers from the laws of the State of California and is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act (Government Code § 6250 et seq.). It is a public record that was not created by an agency which state law has allowed to claim copyright, and is therefore in the public domain in the United States.
Records subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act
Pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code § 6250 et seq.) "Public records" include "any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public’s business prepared, owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics." (Cal. Gov't. Code § 6252(e).) notes that "[a]ll public records are subject to disclosure unless the Public Records Act expressly provides otherwise." County of Santa Clara v. CFAC California Government Code § 6254 lists categories of documents not subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. In addition, computer software is not considered a public record, while data and statistics collected (whether collected knowingly or unknowingly) by a government authority whose powers derive from the laws of California are public records (such as license plate reader images) pursuant to EFF & ACLU of Southern California v. Los Angeles Police Department & Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and are not exempt from disclosure and are public records. Although the act only covers “writing,” the Act, pursuant to Government Code § 6252(g), states: “Writing” means any handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, photocopying, transmitting by electronic mail or facsimile, and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing any form of communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combinations thereof, and any record thereby created, regardless of the manner in which the record has been stored. Agencies permitted to claim copyright
California's Constitution and its statutes do not permit any agency to claim copyright for "public records" unless authorized to do so by law. The following agencies are permitted to claim copyright and any works of these agencies should be assumed to be copyrighted outside of the United States without clear evidence to the contrary:
County of Santa Clara v. CFAC held that the State of California, or any government entity which derives its power from the State, cannot enforce a copyright in any record subject to the Public Records Act in the absence of another state statute giving it the authority to do so. This applies even if there is a copyright notice, so long as the State of California or one of its agencies (other than those listed above) is indicated as the copyright holder. Note: Works that are considered "public records" but were not created by a state or municipal government agency may be copyrighted by their author; the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution prevents state law from overriding the author's right to copyright protection that is granted by federal law. For example, a state agency may post images online of the final appearance of a building under construction; while the images may have to be released by such agency since they are public records, their creator (eg. architecture/construction firm) retains copyright rights to these images unless the contract with the agency says otherwise. See: Government-in-the-Sunshine Manual: To what extent does federal law preempt state law regarding public inspection of records?. Copyrightable Works by the State in the United States: Works published by agencies that are permitted to claim copyright per state law should be tagged with {{PD-US-GovEdict}} instead of this template due to the reasons listed on that template. Disclaimer: The information provided, especially the list of agencies permitted to claim copyright, may not be complete. Wikimedia Commons makes no guarantee of the adequacy or validity of this information in this template (see disclaimer). |
 |
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
| Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| current | 14:35, 1 July 2024 | 15 min 44 s, 1,280 × 720 (231.23 MB) | Trade (talk | contribs) | Imported media from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25x0_RoUzDU |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage on Commons
The following page uses this file: