Musings of a crackpot

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-28/audit-of-california-law-enforcement-finds-extreme-bias-among-officers-goes-unchecked The Title is pure theft; stolen from Ronan Farrow. Only the second clause applies, i.e. Lies, Spies, and a Conspiracy to Protect Profilers. https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-death-of-words/  These comments are based on a Draft 2023 RIPA Report that was prepared in November 2023. Each page of that draft report ended with this caveat: DRAFT REPORT – PENDING EDITING AND REVIEW This draft is a product of various subcommittees of the Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory Board. It has been provided merely for the Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory Board’s consideration and its content does not necessarily reflect the views of any individual RIPA Board member, the full RIPA Board, or the California Department of Justice. In the interests of truth and transparency, I hope that the final 2023 RIPA Report shall have undergone substantial revis

The City of San Francisco claims that it has created an independent group to handle complaints against the San Francisco Police Department. Believe it at you own risk of embarrassment; embarrassment for unwarranted gullibility. The SF DPA ( Department of Police Accountability ) was off to a spectacular start. In the first year of their existence, under the very noses of the RIPA Advisory Board, they reported zero complaints. I do not know what they did next, and do not care to know, for I do know their purpose and intended utility. The SF DPA exists to suppress complaints and/or to mischaracterize them; something that produces the same results. The following may have put a cap on my attempt to file a third party complaint with the bastards.  Richard Hylton From: Richard Hylton <rhylton@san.rr.com> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2022 9:20 AM To: 'AB953'; 'SF DPA' Cc: Nancy Beninati;

When you Google "San Diego Grand Jury Smart Street Lights" the following appears at the top of the displayed list: In the Grand Jury's investigation, no objective data was presented that the use of Smart Streetlights by the San Diego Police Department presents any abuse of privacy issues. The Smart Streetlight technology is non-discriminatory. Lies are sometimes omissions. Most people know that technology is usually non-discriminatory, but that the application of technology can be discriminatory and often is. I suppose that is why the people who made the above sentence available did not bother to tell us, the Googlers, that around 80% of the supposedly smart things were placed where the populations are predominantly Black or Brown people. The San Diego DA's position is also telling; that office speaks about everything except about where the Smart Street Lights have been placed, i.e. the ethnic composition, of the neighbourhoods, and of those who were prosecuted using

  Richard Hylton From: Richard Hylton <rhylton@san.rr.com> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2022 1:08 PM To: 'Tehanita.taylor@sfgov.org'; 'brian.cox@SFGOV.ORG' Cc: Nancy Beninati Subject: FW: Public Defender Says Police Body-Worn Camera Shows Evidence of Racial Bias During Traffic Stop. At least they recorded this one.  RE: Abuse of Police Body Cameras as evidence- suppression tools Lady and Gentleman,   As Public Defenders, doubtless you would be interested in these things. On reading what the officer said, I recalled Jack Black’s “that is how I roll.”     "This is race-based policing. The officer tells us that that's the way he practices. He tells us that it happens to him and there's nothing he can do about it because that's the way police in San Diego act." Abe Genser, San Diego County Public Defender