Did you know that currently the Santa Maria CA police department and their procedures are being investigated by the Los Angeles County Office of Review at the request of the Santa Maria City Council? I feel that this is a golden opportunity for Lawless Americas and its documentary crew as it heads to California, and this posting will explain why. Now this review came about after the questionable shooting death of one of their officers Albert Covarrubias by another officer during an attempt to arrest him. On the day prior to the shooting it had been reported that Officer Covarrubias had been sexually involved with a 17 year old female police explorer.
This of course triggered the investigation which lead to the decision on the following day to arrest him at the conclusion of his late night early a.m. shift. Here is a link to the local media’s initial coverage of the incident. Before you continue reading my story it would help to read the Medias story first so as to keep things in logical order.
Now by that media account and every other story I read they all claimed that Officer Covarrubias had fired 4 shots first while allegedly attempting to avoid arrest, and then was killed by one fatal shot to the front chest. So three months after the Santa Barbara County Sheriffs had turned over their investigation to the waiting District Attorney Joyce Dudley. She released her report, which as expected cleared the officer in question for the use of deadly force under the laws of California. Regardless the Santa Maria Community had been outraged from the very beginning and here is why.
Not even two months had passed since the last questionable police officer involved shooting in Santa Maria. In that incident two officers were hurt in a deadly shootout with an armed drug suspect. At the conclusion of the investigation it was found that the two officers were accidentally shot by their own fellow officers. So you can understand why the community immediately began challenging almost every reported action taken by those in charge on the Covarrubias situation. Please keep in mind that all the previous media reports were based on the press conferences and information released by the Santa Mariapolice department. Believe me you will find your effort well rewarded by the time I finish this posting. I must warn you it is a bit lengthy but in the hands of William Windsor I expect great things!
Here is a link to Santa Barbara D.A. Dudley’s report;@ https://magicinsantabarbara.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/da-report-on-sm-police-shooting.pdf
. After reading District Attorney Dudley’s report it is clear to me that her only agenda was to camouflaging and conceal questionable possibly illegal and at the very least unethical acts by all those whose names appear in the report from the scrutiny of the public. In the shooting report summary found on page one District Attorney Dudley states what her role is with the report; ” The District Attorneys role in reviewing this homicide was to determine whether the shooting of Officer Covarrubias was lawful and to provide a detailed explanation to the public about the facts and law in that regard. This process “requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances.” Hence, this analysis will give careful attention to both the facts and the circumstances of the fatal shooting of Officer Covarrubias”.
It just bothers me that her report failed miserably to live up to her summary and here is why. If you remember correctly originally theSanta Maria police reported to the media these facts;
1- Four shots were fired by Officer Covarrubias as he attempted to avoid being arrested.
2- Officer Covarrubias was killed by one fatal round to the front chest.
Now in D.A. Dudley’s report her facts state
1- That officer Covarrubias fired only one round as he attempted to avoid being arrested.
2- That actually three shots were fired at Officer Covarrubias, one to the upper back and two to the back of the neck. All while another officer was positioned on top of Officer Covarrubias who was being held face down to the ground.
We also learn in Dudley’s report that officer Covarrubias was actually wearing a bullet proof vest the night he was killed. A fact that was some how missed by the Santa Maria Police during the six previous months of press conferences. This fact alone would have never allowed for one kill shot to the front chest and D.A. Dudley’s report proves this as well. You she in her report the officer who killed Covarrubias did so with three shots, one to the upper back and two to the back of the neck. The shot to the upper back was not allowed to penetrate because of the vest, so it is safe to say a shot to the front chest covered by the same vest would also prevent a mortal wound.
I just don’t understand how the facts could have been so misrepresented initially by the Santa Maria Police Department during all those press conferences, or has the District Attorney intentionally altered the truth. Also this story has gathered National attention and not one single media source has taken the time to compare the two accounts and their facts as I have.
Now if this was all I had we would still have plenty to use for our documentary but I come bearing greater gifts for William Windsor. You see I have an even more urgent concern with the Santa Maria Police Department and District Attorneys Office.
Last year it was brought to my attention from one of my blog readers that the Santa Maria police with the permission of the D.A.’s office had created a new instrument to helped them charge suspects who otherwise could have never been charged, this instrument is called a “Ruse Affidavit”. It is absolutely unbelievable to me that so many people whose sworn duty it is to up hold the Constitution have failed on so many different levels. I know none of you have a clue as to what I am talking about but please bare with me just a few more minutes.
First let’s all look at the Definition of an AFFIDAVIT: A sworn statement in writing made especially under oath or on affirmation before an authorized magistrate or officer that the information before him is true and verifiable.
Here is my attempt to define the term ‘Ruse Affidavit’ based on how it is being used by the Santa Maria Police Department with the permission of the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office; Definition of RUSE AFFIDAVIT: obtaining a judicial signature with a fabricated sworn statement included as part of the affidavit. The only purpose of this act is to induce statements from a suspect whom they lack evidence for, by presenting these known false statements and or facts as true. The fabricated Ruse Affidavit must then also be illegally removed from the court files once the suspect is charged so that there is no proof of the arresting officer’s Constitutional violation against the now charged defendant.
“Law enforcement cannot violate the law to enforce the law,” Santa Maria Superior Court Judge Kuns said in her opening statement for one case that includes a “Ruse Affidaffit.” In a different case Santa Maria Superior Court Judge Kuns Rules Police Misconduct in Robbery Case, the use of “Ruse Affidavit” is basis for Misconduct!
Even the two presiding Superior Court Judges understand this practice is illegal yet they still allow it’s use in the cases that were before them. So just as I have done earlier please read these two news press articles about the use of “Ruse Affidavits in the Santa Maria Superior Criminal Court System.@ http://www.santamariasun.com/cover/75… Or
Then the actual “Ruse Affidavit’ files referenced in the media articles above. @https://magicinsantabarbara.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/eliz-docs-ruse-warrant.pdf
As all of us know it is hard to be surprised any more in regards to Judicial corruption based on our own personal experiences. But as we also know it is even harder to find a federal agency willing to perform their duty to the letter of the law. Now because the Los Angeles County Office of Review already has attorney Michael Gennaco in Santa Maria heading their investigation of the fatal shooting of Officer Covarrubias. I think we the Facebook followers of Lawless America can add the “Ruse Affidavit situation to his plate and demand a finding. Over the last month I have called Mr. Gennaco’s office and left two messages sharing my concern with the”Ruse Affidavits” used by the Santa Maria Police department, to date he has not returned my calls. I also emailed his office the letter below.
What I am thinking is that if one of us can create a generic phone statement asking why he has not addressed my concerns with the “Ruse Affidavit’ situation in Santa Maria. And as individuals all call in we may force his hand in the matter. Now should he not respond before the documentary team arrives in California, then it would be up to William Windsor and the film crew to visit him on camera. I really think this could be quite a victory for lawless America, and I hope you do too. The phone number for the Los Angeles County Office of Review is 1-323-890-5425, the attorney you want to speak with is Michael Gennaco!!
Attention Office of Review “Ruse Affidavit” (Santa Maria)
Date: 2012-07-25, 9:10AM PDT
Reply to this post
Good morning Mr. Gennaco,
My name is Larry Mendoza and I left you a phone message this morning. As promised I am forwarding to you a file from the Santa Maria police department that includes some discussion about the use of a “Ruse Affidavit” as part of their investigation. Best as I can tell Mr. Gennaco the term was coined by the D.A. and Santa Maria Police. Here is my attempt to define the term ‘Ruse affidavit’ based on how it is being used by the Santa Maria Police with the permission of the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office; Definition of RUSE AFFIDAVIT: obtaining a judicial signature with a fabricated sworn statement included as part of the affidavit. The only purpose of this act is to induce statements from a suspect whom they lack evidence for, by presenting these known false statements and or facts as true. The fabricated Ruse Affidavit must then be illegally removed from the court files once the suspect is charged so that there is no proof of the arresting officer’s Constitutional violation against the now charged defendant.
Mr. Gennaco I write a blog called http://www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruptionblogspot.com I think the title says it all. I first became aware of the “Ruse Affidavit” when the defendants girlfriend contacted me and later forwarded me the same files I have just sent you. I feared that this situation could become dangerous for myself and said so in my posting. I decided that this abuse required me to at the very least make the same files available to the public and hung them on my blog. A few weeks later I was contacted by a reporter from Santa Maria who found the files on line. We talked for about an hour and a half and he published a story ten days later. I have included two links to news press story’s talking about what was happening with the two cases that included “Ruse Affidavits’ as part of their file.
Mr. Gennaco I am not trying to insult you but I am wondering if you have read Santa Barbara District Attorney Joyce Dudley’s report on the officer involved shooting death of Mr. Covarrubias that originally brought you to Santa Maria? I hope you take the time to compare the D.A.’s account of how many rounds were fired and by whom against all the previous media reports. There is a huge discrepancy here and I wrote about it on my blog, I have included a link below to that story for your review..
In closing I hope we can have a phone conversation if you feel it could be valuable to your review. I learned a new phrase yesterday that seems to apply in far too many situations here in Santa BarbaraCounty ‘ Under the Color of the law’. I am not a very well educated person but some things seem to be spelling out all by themselves.
S.B.C.C.C. The place where COMMON SENSE never goes out of style!