2-27-07

Mr. Van Cleave,

I listened intently to all of the words or remarks made by your people from all over our State of Virginia.  I wondered why you all were so interested in 'our Police Dept. in Manassas who I have had contact over many years.  (I will say that the E-Mails were not called for)  I detest E-Mails anyway -- they cause many bad feelings among many of us.

Now -- that initial call is what deturbs me -- why would and whose business was this anyway?!  Could it have been a trouble-maker (we have so many in our desturbed world today.!  Maybe our Police thought there might be a riot -- and you of all people should know that feeling -- because it happens all over the Country -- more now than anytime in my life (also -- your people should know we are under enough stress -- with a Terriost War where our elected officials (some -- not all) are truly to blame for a lot of this termoil.

Why was it so necessary to have someone from near and far -- why couldn't you have handled it?  You alone could have, I m sure.

It makes me wonder too why everyone so anxious to come to Manassas and complain!  You can bear arms but I don't think you are above being Criticized either for your thoughts of always being right.  I must say -- I will try to defend myself (I am a female) but I don't want to carry a gun.  I could kill an innocent person -- thank God for our police!  They are knocked around by our citizens too!

Good luck, but I believe it was totally wrong to target our Police when they are terribly busy, as I see it, with taking care of illegals, rapist -- drugs and you know it too.

I think we all need to praise our Police -- they get shot, beat up by gangs and you know that also --

Thanks for taking time to read the thoughts of mine -- our Chief is the greatest!

A caring Citizen of Manassas

Dear Mr Troxel,

The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the police department's findings concerning an internal investigation into your complaint regarding an incident at Tony's Restaurant, 9108 Mathis Avenue, on the evening of January 13, 2007.  You alleged misconduct and unprofessional behavior by several officers during and after responding to a citizen initiated complaint about six (6) subjects (non-law enforcement) openly wearing firearms in the restaurant (It was later determined there were seven (7) individuals in the armed group).

I will respond to the various issues raised in summary form as follows:

Issue #1

The officers were confused about the Virginia Code regarding "open carry" of firearms in an establishment licensed to sell and serve alcoholic beverages.

The investigation confirmed that the initial responding officer was unfamiliar and confused about the law(s) pertaining to "open carry" in Virginia.  The officer suggested the group put the guns in their cars to lessen the impact on other patrons in the restaurant.  The group objected, as there is no obligation by law to do so.  This resulted in additional miscommunications and further frustrated the officer's ability to effectively resolve the complaint.

[So the poor officer was confused and frustrated - that would certainly justify abusing citizens - PVC]

The investigation also determined that a second,more senior, responding officer realized the developing confusion and interceded on behalf of the initial officer to clarify that "open carry" is permissible by law.  This officer was more effective in communicating to all parties on the scene.  According to Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) records, the call was handled and all officers left the scene in six (6) to nine (9) minutes.

[But plenty long enough to coerce the owner into kicking the gun owners out - PVC]

Issue #2

The officers exceeded their authority by unduly persuading (forcing) the owner(s) of Tony's to ask the group openly wearing firearms to leave the restaurant.

The investigation determined the owner was not coached or persuaded one way or another by the police concerning the presence of the group.  The owner(s) confirmed they had received several complaints from concerned customers and that only one officer explained their property rights(options) to them.  The owner(s) stated it was their independent decision to ultimately ask the group to leave because they felt it was bad for business.  This was reemphasized again in a recorded television interview with NBC News Channel 4 on February 26th with Tony's manager, Joe D'Agostino.  A copy of the taped interview was obtained from NBC News 4 for the investigation.

[This shows how phoney this whole 'investigation' is. In the email from Officer Clodfelter to Officers Thompson, Hittle, Hyland, Sutton, and Pannell, Officer Clodfelter ADMITS that they coerced the owner to kick out the gun owners!  Here is the wording: "My guess is the over-compensating assclowns at Tony's were hyper-aware of all this [translation: the gun owners knew Virginia gun laws - PVC]...when their event got spoiled by the whole "let's get the owners to tell them to get the [expletive deleted] out' thing."  That is very damning evidence that the Chief conveniently and disgracefully ignores.  In a murder investigation, would the Chief ignore such clear wording in a suspect's email? I hope not - PVC]

Issue #3

The responding officers did not act with the appropriate demeanor, were hostile, loud and antagonistic.

The investigation concluded,as stated earlier, that the initial responding officer was confused and became frustrated and ineffective in resolving the complaint.  Interviews with the owners and other independent witnesses (patrons) sitting a few feet away stated they were able to hear occasional words of the on going discussion between the police and the group.  Uninvolved,independent witnesses heard no inappropriate,loud, hostile or antagonistic conduct by police at the scene and were in a position to do so.  Witnesses did state that the interaction was non-confrontational and involved no profanity or derogatory comments.

[Yes, looking at the content of their emails that we got from our FOIA request, I just can't imagine this group of officers cussing or threatening anybody.  Sheesh.  How about officer Pannell yelling at the seven gun owners to, 'get out!' ?  Perhaps the witness forgot his or her hearing aids that night? - PVC]

Issue #4

The police response to the initial complaint was excessive.

The investigation concluded the response was not excessive and was deliberate given the preliminary information and number of non-law enforcement armed persons involved in the call.  Officer safety is a paramount law enforcement concern when responding to and engaging armed persons under any circumstances and was responded to accordingly.  It is very difficult to exactly quantify how many (or how few) officers are required to handle each type of call. In this case, it did not require this number of officers; however, this was not known until after the officers arrived on the scene.  I would note again that all officers left the scene in six (6) to nine (9) minutes which is a very reasonable time frame with in which to conclude this type of complaint resolution.

[Oh, yeah?  Then why, if this situation was SO dangerous, did officer Hyland come charging into the restaurant by himself instead of waiting for backup?  What Hyland did was actually consistent with what the dispatcher told the officers - that there was NO disturbance going on in the restaurant. - PVC]

Issue #5

There was a failure to properly supervise officers on the scene.

There is no evidence to support this allegation.  The sustained violations took place outside of the supervisor's immediate control.  The supervisor arrived at the scene after the initial officer's ineffective attempt to respond to the original complaint.  Likewise, the electronic messaging occurred after she and all units had left the scene and she had no knowledge of the text messaging.  Additionally, she identified herself to certain member(s) of the armed group as the on-duty supervisor asking any of them if they would like to talk to the supervisor.  No one indicated an interest to do so and she also left the scene.

[That's not what the seven gun owners saw. The supervisor (Pannell) was very much a part of the problem. - PVC]

Issue #6

There were inappropriate comments in electronic messaging about the armed group and the Virginia Citizens Defense League following resolution of the initial call at the restaurant.

The investigation confirmed that some officers inappropriately made disrespectful, vulgar or unprofessional comments expressing their opinion of the armed individuals involved in the earlier call and their formal organization, the Virginia Citizens Defense League.  This is unacceptable and a clear violation of the City's computer policy concerning the use of electronic messaging.  In addition, it is a discredit to the Department reflecting poorly on our professional standing and reputation and is in violation of our Code of Conduct.

[On this we agree! But notice how the Chief is concentrating on the CUSS WORDS and NOT the CONTENT of those emails. In magic or a con game, this is called a 'slight of hand' or 'misdirection.' Or from the Wizard of OZ, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" - PVC]

As Chief of Police, I extend my personal apology to you and each of the group involved and to the Virginia Citizens Defense League.  Conduct of this nature is not condoned and will not be tolerated. I will issue appropriate negative discipline in accordance with City policy.  In addition, I will direct several actions related to remedial training concerning the Concealed Carry laws as well as the Open Carry laws contained in the State Code.  Remedial training will include a review of the City's Electronic Communications Policy.  Lastly, our random auditing of electronic messaging will be enhanced.  It is my belief there will not be any similar future recurrence.

[Notice how the Chief is going to have the officers take "remedial training...of the City's Electronic Communications Policy...random auditing will be enhanced." He is saying that he doesn't want his officers leaving an electronic trail that would show inappropriate activities by the police! The message to Manassas officer: it's OK to abuse citizens, JUST DON"T GET CAUGHT or you are in trouble! Actually the Chief needs to take his own remedial training because there are no "open carry" laws in Virginia! - PVC]

Regarding my apology, I have taken the liberty of forwarding a copy of this letter to Mr. Philip Van Cleave, President,Virginia Citizens Defense League.

Additional Issues

A. The investigation found no evidence to substantiate that the initial responding officer suggested that members of the armed group conceal their weapons, thereby placing them in violation of the law.  The initial responding officer did suggest the group put the guns in their cars to lessen the impact on other patrons in the restaurant in an attempt to resolve the complaint.  This request, which was objected to, was deemed consensual, appropriate and reasonable and would not have created any conflict with the State Code regarding carrying concealed weapons; once objected to, the officer did not pursue further.

[This directly contradicts the seven gun owners. They said the officer told them to conceal their handgun because open carry was illegal. The Chief admits that officer didn't know the law and in an after-the-fact email from Clodfleter to Hyland, Clodfelter explains that open carry was indeed legal. So why is it so hard for the Chief to imagine an officer who didn't think open carry was legal asking the gun owners to conceal their guns? It's certainly more convenient for the police to say the seven gun owners were lying about this. Worse, according to the gun owners, the police never said anything about the gun owners putting their guns in their cars! - PVC]

B. The investigation determined that officer(s) declined to accept literature from member(s) of the group, however, the officer(s) are not obligated to receive literature from individuals and this issue is solely at the officer's discretion;

[The gun owners were not offering LITERATURE, but OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS to clarify the legality of open carry in restaurants. - PVC]

C. It was concluded that it was appropriate for an officer to suggest the armed group voluntarily leave the restaurant.  This was a suggestion made in the spirit of diffusing the situation and resolving the complaint. It was a reasonable consensual request that was declined by the group without further discussion.

D. Further, the investigation confirmed that the initial responding officer had asked for identification from the armed group, actually in the form of badges/credentials because he believed they were law enforcement officers.  This is a legitimate initial request which was not pursued further by the officer once members of the group objected to being required to provide identification upon request.  Again, it should be noted that an independent witness who was seated within earshot of this exchange described it as nonconfrontational and nonadversarial.

[Excuse me, but the normal time to ask for police credentials is AFTER someone says that they are a police officer, not before. Do Manassas police officers always start an interaction with the public by asking the citizens to produce police credentials? The gun owners said they were asked if they were police, but they were never asked for police ID, only regular ID as Hyland initially implied he could arrest them for open carry. - PVC]

In closing,I want to assure you, other members of the armed group, the Virginia Citizens Defense League, and our fine community that the Manassas Police Department is a professional agency with men and women of high integrity. committed to providing quality police services. We regret this negative incident and will work diligently to maintain the high levels of community confidence the department enjoys, have taken the necessary steps to address this matter as well as initiated actions to preclude any future reoccurrence and trust this experience will make us a better agency.

[Based on the rest of this letter, the 'reoccurrence' that is being precluded is leaving evidence of police misconduct laying around electronically. - PVC]

If you have further questions, please feel free to call me directly at (703)257-8001.

Sincerely,

John J. Skinner

Chief of Police

JJS/lrf

cc: Mayor and City Council
Mr. Lawrence D. Hughes,City Manager
Mr. Robert W. Bendall, CityAttorney
Mr. Philip Van Cleave, President, VCDL