The CotoBuzz Journal, Community Journalism

Is COS (code of silence) part of the OCSD’s culture, something that just happened to show up during the Pople Vs. Hibbs’ trial as the Orange County District’s Attorney (OCDA) alleges, or simply a figment of the OCDA’s imagination as the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriff’s (AOCD) claim?

For reference, we have previously defined organizational culture as the basic pattern of shared assumptions, values, and beliefs governing the way employees within an organization think about and act on problems and opportunities, which in essence, is a form of social control.

This particular incident started September 13, 2007 at 0200 hours with an OCSD Patrol Car when the suspect with a previous less than stellar history flees on foot, foot pursuit ensues and eventually the suspect is taken into custody, but not before contact Tased during attempts to handcuff him.

Perhaps in the category of the law of unintended consequences, the incident leads to the trial of an Orange County sheriff’s deputy on charges of improper use of a Taser against a handcuffed suspect.

Eventually the OCDA’s office moves for dismissal of the charges against the deputy in question, because of inconsistent testimony at trial, otherwise known as code of silence (COS). Such characterization so enrages the AOCD that it sees it as an afront to all law enforcement officers and demands the resignation of OCDA’s spokesperson Susan Schroeder.

For its part, the OCDA presents a post-mortem to the press May 12, 2009 – a blow-by-blow account of the incident leading to grand jury testimony, trial, dismissal and subsequent press accounts. The presentation highlight include: (You can download the entire presentation here)

·    68 years of law enforcement experience present

·    OCSD Opens a criminal investigation based on the Robert Gunzel memo dated December 13, 2009 and subsequently FTO Hibbs is placed on Administrative leave December 17, 2007.

·    OCDA opens grand jury criminal investigation based on OCSD request

·    In February 2009, OCSD internal Affairs informs the OCDA that OCSD witnesses are going “sideways”

·    OCDA highlights what it considers “inconsistent testimony at trail”

·    “Based upon the quality of the testimony by the deputy sheriffs, we decided we couldn’t secure a conviction, even if we tried” – Susan Schroeder

·    Offensive statements by the OCDA with a letter to the Association saying in part “Given the strength of feelings exhibited, including a link to a picture of Ms. Schroeder, could be interpreted as encouraging harassment of, or even threats to Ms. Schroeder”

From OCDA's Press Presentation May 12, 2009

We caught up with Ms. Schoreder last Friday as she was getting ready to board a flight, who emphasized that in this case, “you cannot defend the indefensible”

Attempts to reach the president of the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriff’s to get his reaction on content of the OCDA’s presentation were not successful.

The question then remains: Is COS (code of silence) part of the OCSD’s culture, something that just happened to show up during the Pople Vs. Hibbs’ trial as the Orange County District’s Attorney (OCDA) alleges, or simply a figment of the OCDA’s imagination as the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriff’s (AOCD) claim?

Reviewing the OCDA Review – People Vs. Hibbs