Sheriff’s Office Investigates Two Deputies

Please look at the obituary for Diane Winkleman over on Edhat:
http://www.edhat.com/site/tidbit.cfm?...

She was one of the victims of this outrageous behavior on the part of these 'dedicated public servants'. Her family claims she died of exposure following following the theft of her bedding and belongings. I hope she gets justice. RIP Diane.

Wouldn't that be manslaughter?

Just read the EdHat article. Those officers need to be removed immediately and punished! Obviously the group had the Church's blessings to be there, and to purposefully destroy what little possession (and such crucial ones at that) is frankly Nazi behavior.
Before the antihomeless crowd jumps on their high horse, Ms. Winkleman appears to have been one of the many who have found themselves on the street because of economic conditions, not some flaw in her character or behavior.

That is the problem this is NOT an internal personnel matter, it is a cop run rougue that the public has to face and his potential abuse. There is no reason for this behavior and yeah, like the homeless are gonna march right on down to the foot patrol office after this fiasco and file a complaint without fear of reprisal? This is BS. Hopefully the Sheriffs office does a little better job of policing itself than the SBPD.

Inexcusable behavior. Understanding that this is an internal matter and since it's personnel related, we will never know the outcome of the investigation unless you no longer see those officers on the streets. An options would be to go after them in small claims court for the max of $10,000. If the family of Diane Winkleman wants to persue. Go for a civil trial for damages and a small claims case for medical costs. If the coroner does say exposure and in fact the deputies did destroy her only means of staying warm, they have a case.

I don't condone the deputies' alleged behavior, and regardless of the outcome of the investigation I suspect their assignment to the Foot Patrol is over, but the article indicates the location of the incident is the site of a "former" church, so I'm wondering how the group would have had the blessings of the church to be there, Ken...

the FootPatrol Lt and his deputies have gotten specific orders to clear the transients by any means possible from the IV PARK and REC BOARD OF DIRECTORS. they have met more than once to try to create new laws just to counter the transients. the board president and Mr Roger Laguerquist have made no secret about their intention to kick the homeless out of IV this is why the Perfect park was completely destroyed and replaced with a rotting wooden skater park.
The Board of Dis-Function will meet tonight at the Park and REc office, please show up and let your voice be heard. show the board president and his lackeys that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.

It seems now that since a sympathetic individual has passed away while living on the streets the homeless activist crowd, occupy crowd, and the average cop hater have something to comment on.

These deputies "nazi behavior" seems to be the same practices we see all over the United States as cops are given orders by their superiors to clean up transient and/or occupy encampments . When someone dies, even by the slightest possible connection, it's always the fault of the authorities. It's not like there are warming centers or other resources for the homeless... OH THAT'S RIGHT THERE IS.

How much do you want to bet these two deputies are now going to take the heat to save the a$$es of everyone above them for simply following orders. FROM THAT I.V. LIEUTENANT ALL THE WAY TO SHERIFF BROWN. It seems the only good job in law enforcement is sitting behind a desk. No wonder these agencies are so dysfunctional.

Let's do something unique. How about we wait and see what becomes of this investigation.

Gee what about that girl Gloria who was burned to death on the Eastside of Santa Barbara in November? We have been waiting for an investigation to be completed on that suspicous death..Gloria was a nice person she deserves justice. What about Ross Stiles he was murdered over 5 years ago he too was a good person his murder was it even investigated? There was another gentle soul beaten to death several years ago in IV his killers were apprently known but let go that investigation was dropped.. In Orange County a serial killer begans his rampage and is caught within 2 weeks..Seems to me Santa Barabara Lawenforcement don't give a damn about the homeless. I'm sure if eveyone waits for anything to really be done about it..It will be soon forgotton. Nazi Behavior is exacley what it is.

Trying going on a walk-along in IV sometime with the SBSO and then tell the readers how you feel about all the issues in IV. The homeless in IV are dopers and alcoholics who want to be there. Talk to any of them about how and why they are there! Take a walk around IV on friday night and open your eyes people!!!!

So that makes it ok to kill them? Because some of them are dopers, and alcoholics?

Making a connection between unsolved murders and nazi behavior sounds like a byrd brain idea.

Kill them? No one killed anybody!! How did you make that jump? They took some camping equipment from them and ruined it. That is wrong,but far from murder.

This investigation needs to be public, not hidden under “It’s a personnel matter”. If it were an ordinary citizen, the names and faces of those investigated/charged would be shown everywhere. Why the double standard? It's especially important that the SO be respected and the way to do that is by openness and transparency.

its murder if you are destroying what they use for shelter and pouring grease on it should be a vandalism and enviromental crime. for fargojj to say its ok to do this then i really hope for you to be in that situation one day (hopefully in IV) by the way Fargojj sounds like one of those ass backwards board members that gloat about dead homeless at meetings.

i am a ucsb alumni and recently visited iv. it has changed alot since i graduated. the homeless have really taken over all of the parks while the police have taken over iv theater. i read the obituary and the loss of human life is never a pleasant thing but i wonder if the police were simply doing there jobs? the woman died several days after the incident and (maybe i missed it) but the cause of death wasn't clear. I am just not seeing a cause and effect between these two events. i think mr welsh may be taking some creative license in his journalism.

Wait and See what becomes of this investigation sounds alot like someone who is part of the problem. Calling someone a name what are you 10?

@ sbconcerned and at_large,

There's another thing in society you may not like. It's called the law. It's not murder just because you're some sort of "activist", and those deputies are entitled to their rights

haha, im in the legal field validated and those deputies youre defending were the cause of someones life (regardless if they were homeless) expect these deputies to be pulled off duty immediately, this is a huge accusation plus i bet theres video of them doing it or else it would of been swept under the rug (as it has before) now that the Footpatrol bld was firebombed there are now MORE cameras watching Isla Vista.
Sheriffs dept usually sends rookies and young deputies to IV so they can mesh well with the UCSB students, this works on some occasions but usually fails since those officers lack the adequate training to deal with transients so they usually end up getting in verbal altercations and shouting matches.
i dont doubt one bit that the Deputies accused of this did in fact do it, i was living in IV when one deputy broke a 15yr old girls arm because she was trying to help her YOUNGER brother who was also getting harassed by footpatrol. the public made a big stink and that deputy was transferred by the next day. unless youve experienced the FootPatrol in action this case seems unheard of, but then again if you have had any interaction with FootPatrol then this is not surprising at all,
theres a reason why Lieutenants get switched off every 2 years there, no one is ultimately responsible.

These deputies do have rights, but when the people have entrusted them to protect and serve, with weapons including guns and tasers, they sure better be mentally and morally stable. The actions of these two deputies prove otherwise.

Sbconfused: "this is why the Perfect park was completely destroyed and replaced with a rotting wooden skater park."

REALLY? Gee Mr. Skate-whiz, perhaps you can enlighten us on what a "rotting wooden skateramp" is exactly.
Just skated it the other day, far from rotting Peewee. Proud to say I lent a hand (along w/ many others) building it too.

But since we're on the subject of rotting, the only thing rotting is the BUMS (not homeless) that CHOOSE to ruin far-from-Perfect Park as well as Anis Q'oyo Park w/ their peeing & crapping all over the place as well as leaving an ample supply of empty booze bottles & cans laying around along w/ all the cigarrette butts they strew about.
Let's not even mention their errant behavior because THEN we'd REALLY see what "rotting" truly is.

As for the IVFP 'murdering" the BUMS (not homeless) the only people murdering them is themselves.
They don't need any help from the IVFP, they do a smash-up job as they are.
Granted that the behavior of a couple of deputies is a serious grievance & should be dealt w/ as much authoritative force as possible, but PULEEZE! Murder? Try again, please.

continued>>>

Then there's this:

Sbconfounded: "its murder if you are destroying what they use for shelter and pouring grease on it should be a vandalism and enviromental crime."

What about the crap (fecal matter, urine, cans, bottle, butts, soiled toilet paper, used hypodermic needles) the BUMS (not homeless) strew around the park?
That spells environmental disaster to me as well, could couple it w/ a terrorism charge for using biological weapons of mass destruction against ordinary citizens.
Yeah, I know that sounds silly, but so does your argument(s) thus far.

I take it you "occupy" IV. Well, I live there too (since 1987) & can honestly tell you these BUMS (not homeless) sure as hell ain't the "salt of the Earth" folks like you make them out to be.
I've had more than my share of "pleasant" run ins w/ them & can honestly tell you that the new breed is aggressive to say the least. Well, aggression begets aggression, so...

By the way there toughie, I've been in the homeless situation before & guess what? Never had my belongings taken by the popo. Why? Because I wasn't a drunken/stoned jackass.

Maybe if Pirate (cut it out dude, the swashbuckler schtick is getting old), Ray Ray (I've nerver seent hat guy sober), Animal (a real upright guy, always in a brawl), etal got the memo the party was over when it was 1st published there wouldn't be these issues.

Finally, from my good friend (& I really mean that, no sarcasm intended):

KenV: "Those officers need to be removed immediately and punished!"

Uh, dude, that's what's going on.

"Obviously the group had the Church's blessings to be there, and to purposefully destroy what little possession (and such crucial ones at that) is frankly Nazi behavior."

Stop throwing the N word around so flippantly bro. In fact, their bahvior was more communist than anything else.
By the way, Father Hedges does what he can to help them out, but did you know he's also an SB County Sheriff's Dept. Chaplain?

"Before the antihomeless crowd jumps on their high horse, Ms. Winkleman appears to have been one of the many who have found themselves on the street because of economic conditions, not some flaw in her character or behavior."

So you know this how? Come on Ken, you're starting to sound like 1 of those former USSR "Ministry of Culture" agents that tried to get BUMS (not homeless) in NYC to say they were homeless as a result of that evil known as capitalism. Didn't work, when they told their real story it came down to personal choices they made :) henry

sorry hank but you sound like a confused ucsb kid, especially if your responsible for that particle board you call a skatepark. good luck with that

No luck needed, just outright skill & expertise, something you seem to lack in your career in the legal profession.
As for my age w/ reference to the "confused UCSB kid, well, let's just say I'm old enough to give you a spanking, the problem might be that you may just like it (not that there's anything wrong w/ it).
By the way smartiepants, it ain't particle board, it's called Masonite (R) (tm), soon to be replaced w/ Skatelite (R) (tm), a similar material but meant for the actual application of urethane skateboard wheels.
The rest of the construction is pressure treated lumber, far from particle board. Glad to hold your hand there sbcontradicted :) henry

Based on the facts so far, the manslaughter and murder theories won't fly due to the lack of intent and causation (tenuous at best). Nevertheless, there may be some civil actions available under tort law - trespass to chattels, conversion and possibly (if causation is established), wrongful death.

What the deputies did (and not for the first time apparently) is shameful. Regardless of whether or not these individuals were "dopers", drunks or punks, seizing and destroying their personal property without due process is a direct affront to the values and rights upon which our nation was founded.

Sacjon: "Based on the facts so far, the manslaughter and murder theories won't fly due to the lack of intent and causation (tenuous at best). Nevertheless, there may be some civil actions available under tort law - trespass to chattels, conversion and possibly (if causation is established), wrongful death.

What the deputies did (and not for the first time apparently) is shameful. Regardless of whether or not these individuals were "dopers", drunks or punks, seizing and destroying their personal property without due process is a direct affront to the values and rights upon which our nation was founded."

DITTO! :) henry

It won't fly because they always get away with it. :)

@sacjon

Although its obvious your legal knowledge far surpasses that of sbconcerned I have to question how you determined there are actual facts in this story. The story says a report was filed with some activist group, but there's been no formal complaint. Just because a reporter writes something doesn't mean an investigation and due process goes out the window.

You must realize most of these problem bums (not homeless) are hardcore alcoholics. Where do they get the money to puchase alcohol? Much of it comes from panhandling. Everyone one of you that give these people money is responsible for their alcohol induced criminal activity and their enormous hospital bills, so before you point the finger at anyone realize you're part of the problem.

The bum foot washing crowd needs to be exposed for the criminal enablers they are.

I would like to see hank and Validated decide who is "homeless" and who is a "bum." I have seen a lot of human tragedy in this town and others. And it is not as simple as you make it out.

I would think the destruction of private property would get you conservatives going...where is the consistency?

@ Validated - I just wrote a lengthy response to your comment explaining in detail each and every deficiency but, my browser froze and I lost it all. So here is a quick summary:

There is in FACT an investigation taking place - see the beginning of the last paragraph of the article.

It is taking place because, if the allegations are true, the deputies breached their official capacity and may also be liable under civil law for the destruction of personal property.
This has NOTHING to do with people giving panhandlers money (or washing their feet as you say) but rather, this is about an investigation by the Sheriffs Office of the alleged actions of its' deputies.

Quick tip: think before you write.

"local" is right, it isn't exactly cut and dry.. it is very very subjective. Another reader commented that there are very many homeless people who fall into the drunk/addict category and are very aggressive and that reader is absolutely correct. Its very disturbing especially with the amount of elderly people in IV now. I've personally intervened in a situation in which an elderly man was being hassled by that group .
Ms. Winkleman as we have already noted was of the economic type who got buried under medical bills for her mother.. the story is all in the edhat piece. There are many many working homeless as well in this County.
Christ washed the feet of the poor.

That there is an investigation contributes no facts to the story. What we have here is the Sheriff's department starting an investigation after someone complained to an activist group. There's not enough there to conclude anything so I was commenting on your statement of facts in the story. Sorry if you didn't understand. It's difficult to talk s...l...o...w and clear while writing.

Yes there could be a civil case because anyone can sue another for any reason, but the initial comments claimed it was murder. You see some people do think before they talk and that kind of logic still comes out.

Too bad I couldn't read your long response but there's only so much the spell check can handle before it crashes.

Here it is kiddo:

Based on the facts alleged in the story (the same ones others have used to base murder accusations), I attempted to explain why there will not be any murder charges against the deputies. Instead, the alleged facts, IF PROVEN TO BE TRUE, may give rise to certain civil actions, specifically the ones I mentioned (because they involve damages to personal property).

THIS IS NOT A CONCLUSION. It's merely an analysis based on objective reasoning. Just relax, sometimes adults do that.

MUST READ

http://www.homelessinsb.org/articles....

Isn't the Sheriff the coroner also?

Local: "I would like to see hank and Validated decide who is "homeless" and who is a "bum.""

Aw dude, why you gotta ask some simple question like that? It ain't a decision, it's a definition. Here goes:

Homeless: A person who is forced to live on the streets due to variable causes, these can include financial, familial, mental issues or substance (alcohol or drug) abuse.
They usually use the homeless shelters & programs because they want to get help & get back on track. They also never really have problems following a shelter's rules because all they want is a good rest in a warm, safe place.
When offered food they usually take it (in a very humble fashion) & thank the giver of said food (although no thanks are necessary). They appreciate any little thing they get.
They are not aggressive, rather withdrawn & usually don't mess w/ anyone, usually just want to be left alone.
Some are working homeless as well, no issues other than they can't afford a place to live so they work their jobs, save their $$$ & live where they can for the time being (Austin Rucker, awesome example).
Due to the complexity of the system in place that help usually arrives late & there's never any follow up & in some cases they don't get help because of their withdrawal from society.

BUM: A person who willingly decides to live on the streets due to variable causes, these usually include being motivationally challenged, not wanting to support the system (anarchist wannabe-ism, crusties) or just not wanting the party to be over.
They refuse to go to shelters because there are rules (such as no alcohol, drugs & jackass behavior) they must adhere to.
Mainly motivationally challenged, these individuals don't want to better their situation so they rely on handouts from the state (SSDI in some cases from $800-$1200/month depending on the extent of their alcoholic pedigree) or "progressive" do-gooders that these BUMS know will kick down for the cause.
They will only accept cash & not food because cash will buy them a 40 oz. of malt liquor or whatever other intoxicant they desire.
They are known to be confrontational, aggressive & in many cases violent, they also have a sense of entitlement.
Even though the system of help has complexities, these individuals have learned how to milk it for all it's worth & eschew the needed help (psychological, medical, counseling), but take the monetary aspect to heart.

Local: "I have seen a lot of human tragedy in this town and others. And it is not as simple as you make it out."

I have personally witnessed a lot of human tragedy myself (being "progressive" doesn't give you a monopoly on this), but sometimes the simplicity is oh, so apparent.
Pirate, Ray Ray, Animal & even way back to Leprechaun, Deva or The Mayor, the motive was apparent: They forgot to stop partying (or just didn't want to). In conversation w/ these individuals they've even admitted it. A little 1st hand knowledge paints quite a picture.

continued>>>

Local: "I would think the destruction of private property would get you conservatives going...where is the consistency?"

It gets me going alright, but not because I'm a "conservative" as you "progressives" love to claim/label. IT'S JUST WRONG!
By the way, never once have any of the so-called "conservatives" you claim on here have said there's anything right about what the deputies ALLEGEDLY did.

The ONLY reason you see some of us as "conservatives" (aside from apparently being the typical "progressive") is because we don't agree on this issue.
Many folks (liberal, conservative, progressive, democrat, republican) are sick & tired of BUMS (not homeless) abusing the system, taking from those who actually need help & being expected to cover the cost.
the ONLY consistency here is that of "progressive" do-good-ism which amounts to enablement.
Must feel good to support a peson's bad habits & watch them go down the toilet huh? Awesome :) henry

Well said, Hank.

Not a Pirate fan.

Hank forgot one general category and that is the people who are genuinely mentally ill and require at the very least some form of guidance and supervision if not medication.
Of course alcoholism and addiction are diseases as well, but it's astounding to me that some folks get to such a low and want to stay there. The characters Hank mentioned are well aware of the help that is available to them, and I've heard of at least one "IV bum" who did indeed turn his life around thru AA. But the clowns that Hank mentioned are a nuisance and menace and the problem lies in making people in the other two categories suffer or be ignored because of the types that Hank described.

KenV: "Not a Pirate fan."

Neither am I, the guy had to be forcibly removed from an establishment recently, he got plastered & started thinking he was a bucaneer & harassing people. NOT COOL!
The guy pissed me off @ Freebirds 1 nite last year around August, kept annoying customers for spare change (notice, NOT FOR FOOD) & when it was my turn to deal w/ the him he didn't get a pleasant reception.
By the way, he gets a hefty SSDI check for his "disease" (being a drunk). You should hear him bragging about it sometime. AMAZING!
Then there's "The Chief" & he likes to get in fights. Got in his grill 1 nite having dinner & a beer @ Deja Vu.
Sorry bro but you just don't come up & threaten people for $ or anything, wrong move.

KenV: "Hank forgot one general category and that is the people who are genuinely mentally ill and require at the very least some form of guidance and supervision if not medication."

Ken, I think those were covered in there under "mental issues" in the definition of "homeless" offered.
Regardless, you're absolutely correct, what they need is guidance & meds.

KenV: "But the clowns that Hank mentioned are a nuisance and menace and the problem lies in making people in the other two categories suffer or be ignored because of the types that Hank described."

Ken, again, absolutely correct. It is sad that in many cases those that do need serious help don't get it because the system is burdened by those who take advantage of it.
This creates skepticism among the trained professionals to the point of where they become jaded, this makes it easy to overlook an individual w/ the problems we've mentioned & hence they fall through the cracks.

There's asome homeless in IV that just do their gig & eke out enough for a meal through work.
They seldom panhandle or hassle people, in fact pride themselves on making their $$$ through work.
Whether it's collecting recyclables or other little services they offer, they're trying.
I've actually bought a meal for a couple of them on numerous occassions & they totally appreciated it :) henry

hank writes a homeless person can be someone with "mental issues or substance (alcohol or drug) abuse." However, when a person has mental health or substance abuse issue they can be "confrontational, aggressive & in many cases violent" (your description of a bum). They can also refuse shelter and other services because of their mental health or substance abuse issues. So there we are. I still do not think you can easily define human beings in to these two groups. By the way, I do not identify as a progressive or a conservative. More of an observer. I would just expect some of the people on this thread to be a little more upset about the destruction of private property by government officials run amuck (if that is what happened).

"It seems now that since a sympathetic individual has passed away while living on the streets the homeless activist crowd, occupy crowd, and the average cop hater have something to comment on"

"These deputies "nazi behavior" seems to be the same practices we see all over the United States as cops are given orders by their superiors to clean up transient and/or occupy encampments ." (Both comments by Validated, January 19th, 2:20 p.m.

@ the first comment, I am not part of the occupy crowd nor am I a cop hater, but if this happened, than I share in the disgust to those cops who did it.

Your second comment speak volumes. You complain about people comparing barbaric actions to Nazi behavior then you justify those actions because the cops that did it were acting under orders. When the Nazis were brought to trial and made to answer for their barbaric torture/murder of millions of people, the common excuse was "I was just acting under orders".

Local: "hank writes a homeless person can be someone with "mental issues or substance (alcohol or drug) abuse." However, when a person has mental health or substance abuse issue they can be "confrontational, aggressive & in many cases violent" (your description of a bum). They can also refuse shelter and other services because of their mental health or substance abuse issues. So there we are. I still do not think you can easily define human beings in to these two groups."

Actually, yes, you can identy the 2 different groups. Here, let me try again:
W/ the homeless the "confrontational &/or violent behavior" usually takes on a random fashion which really has no pattern, order or intent as well as a lack of wanting something based on entitlement.
W/ the BUMS the same behavior is attributed to wanting something like booze or money to get booze, is not random, has a pattern & is intentful & there is a sense of entitlement.

As for refusing shelter, a homeless person does so out of reduced mental/emotional capacity issues & it usually isn't refusal more than it is just a "state of mind" type of thing.
W/ BUMS it has everything to do w/ not wanting to follow rules & the fact that there is structure, which they despise or abhor.

See, there ARE simple differences between homeless & BUMS & they're visible is you simply CHOOSE to look.

Local: "By the way, I do not identify as a progressive or a conservative. More of an observer."

Well, you made the 1st assumption by coinsidering people on here "conservatives" based on a differing opinion, I just counter-assumed, Made asses of each other didn't we?

"I would just expect some of the people on this thread to be a little more upset about the destruction of private property by government officials run amuck (if that is what happened)."

Dude, in which language do you want me to say that we are upset about such an abuse? Spanish? German? Italian? Portuguese? Brazilian? Greek? Yeah we're ticked, but it comes down to the last part of your statement: "if that is what happened." :) henry

Swahili Hank, Swahili.
Why wait for the facts when their minds are made up?

Resources are limited in the best of times. Who are you going to row the lifeboat to? The people swimming towards it or the people swimming away?

What these deputies did was burn the life preserver of at least one person apparently trying to swim to the boat.

KenV: "What these deputies did was..."

From the article: "the department initiated the investigation on December 29 after hearing SECONDHAND reports from several sources. NO FORMAL COMPLAINT HAS BEEN FILED by any of the individuals involved."

The fact remains that what these deputies did is STILL AN ALLEGATION.
What that probably means, for all extensive purposes, is PROBABLY that a claim was made by some houseless persons in IV to some law & society activist group w/ an obvious agenda against law enforcement & they in turn filed a complaint on behalf of the houseless persons against some deputies.

So I have to ask here, whom do I believe?

1) A group of erratic individuals w/ a penchant for intoxicants.
2) An activist group w/ an agenda.
3) The Sherrif's Dept.

I'm willing to bet that 3 is probably the safest bet for a real answer.
I find it highly unlikely that a couple of deputies took the time for such an extensive act, even to the point of gathering restaurant grease for this act, especially since the majority of restaurants in IV (if not all of them) were closed during the Christmas break & the grease collection had already been done prior to closures (based on standard restaurant practices).
If the complaint had any "bite" to it there would be pictures to back up the stories & I know for a fact some of the IV houseless perons have camera phones (YES, I have seen it w/ my own 2 eyes).
If somebody produces tangible evidence to the ALLEGATIONS then maybe this whole thing will have some substance, otherwise it's another attempt to make the misbehaved houseless in IV to be the salt of the Earth. Lets see the evidence :) henry

Why do I have to believe any of them Hank? I apologize for omitting "alleged". But the woman's death from exposure is a fact.

KenV: "Why do I have to believe any of them Hank?

These days it's hard to believe ANYBODY Ken. In fact, you DON'T have to believe any of them if you choose to do so.
But there is something I forgot to say in choice #3 (Sherrif's Dept.): an organization w protocols of accountability in place. Sure, yeah, the supposed "law enforcement wall of silence" will come to mention here, but really people, in all reality, it really doesn't exist.

KenV: "I apologize for omitting "alleged"."

You probably just got emotional, easy to understand, I forget/omit stuff myself, no apology needed.
I was just pointing out that the fact is that these are all just still ALLEGATIONS. the CAPS are so that folks take notice of that word.

KenV: "But the woman's death from exposure is a fact."

It is a SAD fact, A TRULY SAD FACT. But is it as a result of what the deputies allegedly did? Were there other underlying issues @ hand such as illnesses or even drugs in her system? Where's the coroner's report?

If I blame ANYONE, it is homeless incorporated & their lack of attention toward the truly needy which is being overlooked as a result of catering to crusties, travellers & BUMS from other places, not the truly homeless.

Murder charges anyone? When it was "lynch mob style" pinned on the deputies you all screamed for it, why not against homeless incorportaed, they're responsible right? :) henry

I wouldn't dismiss the claims of the homeless or advocates so quickly. If you follow this issue at all you know that cities and counties have ended up on the loosing end of a lawsuit for the destruction of homeless property. The homeless have the same rights as everyone else. Not only is this a property issue it can also amount to unreasonable search and seizure and violate constitutional rights. It's good these deputies are being investigated. I don't want my tax dollars paying to defend those who violate the rights of our most vulnerable residents.

LC: "I wouldn't dismiss the claims of the homeless or advocates so quickly."

Nobody has dismissed it, the matter IS under departmental investigation, just like any other criminal investigation.

LC: "If you follow this issue at all you know that cities and counties have ended up on the losing end of a lawsuit for the destruction of homeless property."

Not exactly accurate, but there are always these kinds of cases in courtrooms across the US w/ most of the victories going to cities, counties & municipalities.

LC: "The homeless have the same rights as everyone else."

Absolutely guaranteed byt the United States Constitution.

LC: "Not only is this a property issue it can also amount to unreasonable search and seizure and violate constitutional rights."

Granted it even happened, which the departmental investigation will determine, but will most likely be reduced to a vandalism charge, granted this even occured as it is stated.

LC: "It's good these deputies are being investigated."

I am glad they're being investigated too as NOBODY is above the law, not even law enforcement.

LC: "I don't want my tax dollars paying to defend those who violate the rights of our most vulnerable residents."

On the matter of tax dollars defending those who violate rights of vulnerable residents I totally agree w/ you, but that can go many ways.
1 such way is SSDI payments from $800-$1200/month to alcoholics that harass vunerable people in parks, a clear attack on other's pursuit of happiness, a clear violation of Constitutional Rights as well as a criminal act.
Another way is all the tax funding homeless incorporated gets to attract more crusties & "travellers" to the area from other places.
I want to see our tax $$$ go to helping the local homeless that get overlooked & underserved as a result of the out of town crusties & "travellers" :) henry

Per responsibility: Who is responsible?...the person who gets drunk, gets behind the wheel and kills/maims someone or the bar/person/persons who encouraged them to drink? What about the overall culture that encourages "social drinking" when it's well know those drinkers will get behind the wheel?

Another thing I have to add before I let this matter die off in the the electron netherworld from LC's comment:

"The homeless have the same rights as everyone else."

Again, this is a true statement & guaranteed by our Constitutional freedoms.
But acting like a jackass & infringing on other people's well being is NOT a right, it is a behavior, A BAD BEHAVIOR & such behavior is NOT to be rewarded, regardless of which societal group you come from.

W/ that said, if I was approached by a BUM (not homeless) in a hostile, obnoxious & threatening manner, it is then MY Constitutional right to respond in kind, which I would have zero problem w/.
Just as if I were approached by a Sherrif's deputy in a hostile, obnoxious & threatening manner, I would resort to being a smartass, knowing I've done nothing wrong & while the outcome may inconvenience me a bit, it'd be worth it to show that's not how it works.

HOWEVER, I offer this: In my 25 year tenure as an IV resident I've NEVER been approached by a Sherrif's deputy in a hostile, obnoxious & threatening manner.
Guess which members of which group has approached me on NUMEROUS occasions in a hostile, obnoxious & threatening manner?
Yep, the "salt of the Earth" w/ their same rights as me & the outcome was NEVER in their favor, as I practiced my Constitutional rights :) henry