[00:00:00] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:00:00–00:00:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:00:01] Speaker 1

but a lot of times he

[00:00:02] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized

was with

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:00:02–00:00:02 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:00:02] Speaker 1

somebody else. It wasn't him. We

[00:00:05] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

are ready, sir, whenever you are. We are done? Yes, sir.

[00:00:08] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

All right. Ladies and gentlemen, it is now 625 p.m. Welcome to the City of Cocoa Police Community Relations Advisory Committee meeting. Please stand at this time for the national anthem followed by invocation. Mr. President, do you mind leading us in the national anthem? I mean, ‸ I'm sorry, Pledge of Allegiance. I know your singing voice isn't prepared tonight. I apologize.

[00:00:38] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:00:38–00:00:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:00:38] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:00:39] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:00:44] No voice detected

I

[00:00:45] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

[00:00:49] Speaker 4

America and to the world of which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[00:00:59] No voice detected

I

[00:00:59] Speaker 5

bet you. I bet

[00:01:00] Attribution uncertain

you.

[00:01:01] Speaker 5

Father God, we ask for your guidance, for your care, for the citizens of Cocoa, for the officers who maintain and protect their well-being, and for this committee. Amen. Amen.

[00:01:22] Speaker 1

Amen. All right. Has everyone had an opportunity to

[00:01:29] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized

review

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:01:29–00:01:30 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:01:30] Speaker 1

the minutes from the March 24th?

[00:01:33] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:01:33–00:01:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:01:34] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:01:35] Attribution uncertain

Oh,

[00:01:35] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

please.

[00:01:35] Speaker 1

Roll call, please. I apologize.

[00:01:37] Speaker 2

That's okay. Mr. Edmond? Present. Ms. Brown? Here. Mr. Bukard?

[00:01:45] Speaker 6

Here.

[00:01:47] Speaker 2

Mr. Klug is no longer with us. Mr.

[00:01:51] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:01:51–00:01:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:01:52] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:01:54] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:01:54] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Sorry. And Mr. Thomas.

[00:01:57] Attribution uncertain

Nobody

[00:01:57] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

ever gets that right.

[00:02:00] Speaker 1

Thank you, ma'am. At this time, has everyone had an opportunity to review the minutes from our March 24th meeting?

[00:02:10] Speaker 7 · Machine re-recognized

Aye.

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:02:10–00:02:10 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:02:14] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yes. At this time, I'll entertain a motion for the approval of those minutes.

[00:02:17] Speaker 5

I motion to approve the minutes. Do

[00:02:20] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice

I hear a second? Second. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any. The motion passes unanimously. Thank you.

[00:02:30] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:30–00:02:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:02:31] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:02:33] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:33–00:02:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:02:34] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:02:34] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:02:38] Speaker 1

Mr. Thomas was the second.

[00:02:40] Speaker 2

Thank you.

[00:02:40] Speaker 1

No, you're quite welcome. Has everyone had an opportunity to review the agenda for this meeting? Yes. I'll entertain a motion at this time to approve the agenda so that we can proceed with this meeting.

[00:02:57] Attribution uncertain

Do

[00:02:57] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I

[00:02:57] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

hear a

[00:02:59] Speaker 1

second?

[00:03:00] Speaker 5

Second.

[00:03:01] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Second from Mr. Thomas. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed?

[00:03:06] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:06–00:03:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:03:10] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice

At this time.

[00:03:13] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:13–00:03:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:03:18] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:03:20] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:03:21] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:03:21] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:03:22] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:03:22] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:03:26] Speaker 5

I motion that the Landis case be tabled until the July meeting. And the reason for that is it's currently in the appeals process with the city manager. I provided the documentation. It should be in part of the package.

[00:03:49] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:49–00:03:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:03:55] Speaker 5

After the city manager has time to investigate it and render a decision. So my motion is that we table it until July.

[00:04:09] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:09–00:04:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:04:10] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:04:10] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:04:11] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:04:11] Speaker 1

by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed?

[00:04:14] Speaker 6

Aye. You opposed? Yeah,

[00:04:18] Attribution uncertain

I

[00:04:18] Speaker 6

opposed.

[00:04:18] Speaker 1

Okay.

[00:04:20] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:20–00:04:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:04:22] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

think it is, you know, this case is, I looked at all the videos and the, uh, read pretty much a lot of the documentation that was provided. And I think, uh, some of the people that, uh, who made the complaint probably are here. And I, you know, I think, you know, they should be able to see or hear what we discuss about the case, you know, but that's just my opposition to it.

[00:04:50] Speaker 1

Yes, sir. I agree with you. I, um, I ‸ voted

[00:04:58] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized

I

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:04:58–00:04:58 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:04:58] Speaker 1

to approve the motion because I believe that the, the appeal itself and what happens as a result of that appeal could, um, be a part of what we discuss at some point, depending upon what happens and, and how relevant it is. And, um, and I think that if we partook in a discussion today without knowing what the outcome of that is or how that goes, we may be having an incomplete discussion on, um, the matters that lie before us. Um, but it was, it was frustrating to me to learn this information when I got here today, because I would have thought that we

[00:05:43] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized

might have

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:05:43–00:05:43 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:05:43] Speaker 1

been informed of that sooner. So that, um, certain people may not have, uh, spent their time or energy or drove this way, um, for the meeting unnecessarily. But,

[00:05:57] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:05:57–00:05:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:05:59] Speaker 1

be, um, it needs to be complete. And, uh, and I want to make sure that we discuss everything that is on the table, um, and relate it to the matter to discuss if we're going to discuss it.

[00:06:13] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:13–00:06:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:06:15] Speaker 1

Thank you.

[00:06:16] Speaker 5

As

[00:06:17] Speaker 1

do I. Any other, ‸ any other comments?

[00:06:19] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:19–00:06:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:06:21] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:21–00:06:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:06:28] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:28–00:06:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:06:33] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice

um, just let them know we value their, um, input.

[00:06:38] Speaker 5

Absolutely.

[00:06:39] Speaker 3

Absolutely. Well, we don't even have to make a decision, but let them just say what they came here to say and then in July we'll have all the information and their input and we can go from there.

[00:06:52] Speaker 5

Yeah.

[00:06:53] Attribution uncertain

I

[00:06:53] Speaker 5

think that's appropriate, but we won't respond to it. We'll let their comments be part of the record.

[00:07:00] Speaker 1

Duly noted our citizen, uh, participation, uh, section, section four of this agenda, um, is still, um, open and available for anyone that has comment as to any of the matters, um, that are on the agenda for discussion. We just won't make any recommendations to leadership or engage as a committee, um, in discussion on that particular item until we have all the information, um, from the appeal, uh, process

[00:07:32] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:07:32–00:07:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:33] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:07:33] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:10]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:07:33–00:07:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:43] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:07:43–00:07:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:06] Speaker 1

Um, I mean, I'll just say briefly, I understand why it's unfounded and I mean, agree in that situation. Um, there was a complaint about a staff member and that staff member wasn't identified. There wasn't a full name, badge number, no information, um, attached to that person and no way to identify them and to confirm whether they were a staff

[00:08:29] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:29–00:08:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:32] Speaker 1

And so I don't know how, uh, leadership can discipline someone, uh, if they don't even know who that someone is. So it makes sense to me that that one would be unfounded. Any further discussion?

[00:08:49] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:49–00:08:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:50] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:08:50] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:09]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:50–00:08:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:59] Speaker 1

failure to perform duties at this time. I'll entertain any discussion as it relates to that item.

[00:09:17] Speaker 5

Um, you have some. Yeah, I was going to say, uh,

[00:09:21] Attribution uncertain

uh,

[00:09:24] Speaker 5

commander Duval, uh,

[00:09:26] Speaker 8

on

[00:09:27] Speaker 5

this particular one, uh, ‸ case was

[00:09:29] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:29–00:09:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:09:35] Speaker 5

was, what was the sustained, uh, discipline in that case?

[00:09:40] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:40–00:09:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:09:42] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:09:44] Speaker 4

There was no discipline in that case. Um,

[00:09:47] Speaker 1

‸ my understanding from, from reading it, um, was that there was a, it was a teaching moment, uh, for retraining for a young officer that was still learning the role and learning the position. And basically the officer made, uh, gave, uh,

[00:10:04] Attribution uncertain

gave,

[00:10:04] Speaker 1

gave his word to a community citizen saying that he was going to, uh, forward, uh, the, the facts of the case to the state attorney's office. And then later decided that he wouldn't. And that community member rightfully so took issue with that. And my understanding is that, is that, uh, leadership took that as a teachable moment and basically, uh,

[00:10:26] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:26–00:10:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:10:29] Speaker 1

keep their word. Um, and that's how it went. Um, and I think under the situation, you, you got a, uh, a brand new officer, um, makes a mistake, gives their word. They, uh, they reprimand them. They make it a teachable moment. I think it's fair under the circumstances, assuming that, that there isn't a long history of disciplinary history from that young officer. Um, do we know if there's any other disciplinary history from that young officer or not?

[00:11:02] Speaker 4

I can answer that. He does not have a discipline history. He's a new officer. Um, and you know,

[00:11:08] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:11:08–00:11:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:11] Speaker 4

he wanted a report written, he told him, okay, I'll write that report.

[00:11:14] Attribution uncertain

And

[00:11:14] Speaker 4

then later on, he decided to rise to the level of actually writing a report, but he did not follow up with the citizen and let the citizen know, I'm not writing a report like I told you previously. He just let it go. And then the citizen obviously went down looking for his report. No report is there. So we just saw that as an opportunity to train them up and let them understand, you know, what our core values are today, ‸ we keep our word. You can't do something.

[00:11:41] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:11:41–00:11:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:43] Speaker 4

So that's why we felt ‸ appropriate just to give them a verbal warning. And then, um,

[00:11:52] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:11:52–00:12:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:53] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:11]

[00:12:04] Speaker 1

on

[00:12:04] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:04–00:12:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:10] Speaker 1

Um,

[00:12:12] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:12–00:12:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:19] Speaker 1

damage.

[00:12:36] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:12:36–00:12:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:53] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:12:53] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:53–00:13:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:13:01] Speaker 1

uh, December the 13th, 2015 for unprofessional conduct. And I'll open the floor for discussion to the committee at this time.

[00:13:43] Speaker 5

Okay. ‸ No,

[00:13:44] Attribution uncertain

it

[00:13:44] Speaker 5

seems, yeah. It seems to be,

[00:13:46] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:13:46–00:13:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:13:50] Speaker 5

charges against the, uh, I

[00:13:54] Speaker 1

think, I think the thing that spoke to me in that is that they reached out for confirmation from the state attorney's office, um, to ask about the investigation. And, um, attorney, uh, Clarissa Harrell of the state attorney's office confirmed that the investigation was such that they were able to properly charge, um,

[00:14:15] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:15–00:14:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:14:20] Speaker 1

uh, in that situation. And, um, and I can't say this about every attorney at the state attorney's office, but attorney,

[00:14:29] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:29–00:14:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:14:31] Speaker 1

amount of integrity, someone that whose word that I trust, um, and that I've worked across from. Um, and, um, and she does the job and does it with class. And, uh, and so, um, that's someone's whose word I, I definitely accept if she says that the investigation was, was up to snuff. Um, and, uh, and of course we have 2127 that we won't comment on. Um, but, uh, the finding was that it, that the, some of the allegations were sustained. Um, at this time, uh, is there any discussion from anyone on the committee, um, as it relates to any of these items? Chief?

[00:15:15] Speaker 5

Yeah,

[00:15:15] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I just want to make

[00:15:16] Attribution uncertain

a

[00:15:16] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

statement about the Landis case. Yes. Um, so, so you make sure you're armed with the appropriate information. Yes, sir. So the outcome of the case is still going to be the same. The outcome did change. So he's, he's actually, uh, disputing his, the discipline that was given to him, which is his perfectly is his right. So I think that, you know, even if the city manager decides to lower his discipline, the outcome of the case is not going to change. Okay. So I think that you still have an opportunity. If you want to discuss that case, you can, even if the city manager decides that,

[00:15:50] Attribution uncertain

uh,

[00:15:51] Speaker 4

because just tell you how the grievance process works. So the discipline was issued to him.

[00:15:55] Attribution uncertain

Um,

[00:15:55] Speaker 4

he grieved it with me. My discipline did not change.

[00:15:59] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:59–00:16:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:06] Speaker 4

That's his right. Uh, but the outcome is not going to change. So the facts of the case, that's not going to change.

[00:16:13] Speaker 1

Okay. So, um, so, uh, based upon that, my understanding is that, um, the findings that certain allegations were sustained is something that won't change. ‸ And that, um, and that, that isn't going to significantly affect the conversation that we're going to have here. Is that your understanding?

[00:16:34] Speaker 5

Yes. Well,

[00:16:35] Attribution uncertain

it

[00:16:35] Speaker 5

could at the end, but, uh, I think we all came to an agreement that we want to hear from the public. We're just not going to discuss it today. Um, is,

[00:16:45] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

is there the only issue that if we're going to hear from the public, I'm sure there may be a situation where you're provided with something that I may need to respond to, to make sure there's no confusion.

[00:17:00] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:00–00:17:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:05] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice

And then I'm not in a, in a posture or position to really kind of respond.

[00:17:10] Speaker 1

Okay.

[00:17:12] Speaker 4

Um, you see, so you see what

[00:17:14] Attribution uncertain

I'm

[00:17:14] Speaker 4

saying?

[00:17:14] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:17:14–00:17:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:19] Speaker 4

You're not,

[00:17:20] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:20–00:17:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:24] Speaker 4

you're going to table it. Then when you, when you bring it again in July, you can open back up and then now you're going to have to open up a discussion, whatever the public mentioned. And then now we have to still talk about it.

[00:17:39] Speaker 1

So we'd be having the conversation twice, twice. Um, I mean, based on the chief statements, I am open to entertaining

[00:17:47] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized

a motion

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:17:47–00:17:48 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:17:48] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:48–00:17:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:57] Speaker 1

neat, uh, is open for discussion. And, um, and I'm willing to entertain a motion. And if, if the board has changed its position, then we can discuss it. If not, then we will table it.

[00:18:09] No voice detected

Hmm.

[00:18:10] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:10–00:18:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:13] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:18:13] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:18:15] Speaker 6

Okay. Um, do I

[00:18:17] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:17–00:18:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:20] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:18:20] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

you

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:18:20–00:18:20 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:18:20] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice

supposed to say something else?

[00:18:22] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

Will

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:18:22–00:18:23 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:18:23] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice

we both sides talk about it or that's okay. What

[00:18:27] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

he said?

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:18:27–00:18:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:18:28] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Excuse

[00:18:28] Speaker 1

me.

[00:18:29] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:29–00:18:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:31] Speaker 3

we're going to open it up for everybody?

[00:18:34] Speaker 1

‸ Yes, I, I, I'm entertaining. I believe that I'm entertaining

[00:18:38] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:18:38–00:18:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:39] Speaker 1

for the committee as well as the public to discuss. Case number 21 dash 27 dash.

[00:18:49] Attribution uncertain

I,

[00:18:49] Speaker 1

is that my under is my understanding correct of what your motion is? Yes. ‸ Okay. Um, at this time, do I hear a second?

[00:18:57] Speaker 3

Okay.

[00:18:58] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:58–00:19:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:01] Speaker 3

Um,

[00:19:02] Attribution uncertain

Um,

[00:19:03] Speaker 3

open it up. If, um,

[00:19:06] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:06–00:19:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:13] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:19:14] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:19:16] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:19:16] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

what the chief is saying is that his consequences could change, but what is here and what has been found, the investigation in the internal affairs investigation, none of that stuff is going to change, but his punishment could ‸ change. And so that's the only thing my understanding is from the chief said that could possibly change. Here's the punishment that was issued.

[00:19:38] Speaker 4

Right.

[00:19:38] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:38–00:19:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:44] Speaker 4

any way that the punishment should be different just from what you see today, nothing can be done because the, the officer has a PBA, right? We're not going to reopen ‸ up the case or anything like that's not going to happen anyway.

[00:19:58] Speaker 5

Because I think that the city manager has the ability to review the entire case and make a determination based on what's presented in the course of the appeal as to

[00:20:10] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

whether

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:20:10–00:20:11 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:20:11] Speaker 5

the charges remain sustained or not. Depending upon the representation, the legal representation that they bring with them, which is

[00:20:20] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:20:20–00:20:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:23] Speaker 5

what his decision is because he has the ability to change the outcome, even though you don't want to change it. That is correct. Right. So that being the case, uh, I think it

[00:20:35] Speaker 1

should be tabled. Okay. So it's possible that the city manager could go in and find that the, uh, allegations were unfounded, even though those were sustained by leadership.

[00:20:48] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice

Correct.

[00:20:49] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:49–00:20:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:54] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

he'll read through all the documents. He'll look at everything. So, yes, he has an opportunity to, uh, anything that we sustained, he could make a determination,

[00:21:02] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:21:02–00:21:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:21:04] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

or it could be, he could make a decision that is not sustained. And then also in those cases, if he did that, then of course, the officer would not receive any discipline.

[00:21:16] Speaker 3

So either way it goes, we could talk about it today and in July.

[00:21:21] Speaker 5

Correct.

[00:21:22] Speaker 3

Whatever the city manager decides.

[00:21:24] Speaker 5

Well, I think from, from our side, we need to know what the city manager's decision is and if there is any change in sustained or not sustained findings. Uh,

[00:21:37] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:21:37–00:21:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:21:42] Speaker 5

that, uh, is handling that grievance. That's a part of the record with the city manager. So, um, I think it's inappropriate to, and we've dealt with this circumstance before we understand the public, uh, wanting to be able to speak to it today. And again, I said, I don't have a problem with hearing what they have to say, but can we address it? I don't believe it's appropriate for us to address it today. Sure.

[00:22:13] Speaker 4

So I would suggest that if you're going to open it up, let's roll with it. I would, I wouldn't want to do half and half. If we're going to open it up, let's talk about the entire case. Uh,

[00:22:26] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:26–00:22:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:22:30] Speaker 4

by doing part testimony today and then we're not going to, uh, to talk about it, you know, as far as from the police perspective, where we, where we stand. So I just say it's all or none. That's my suggestion.

[00:22:47] Speaker 1

There's a motion on the floor and there's a second.

[00:22:51] Speaker 3

Wait a minute. ‸ I'm thinking about taking my second back.

[00:22:54] Speaker 1

Okay. Well, let me know. Let me know.

[00:22:57] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:22:57–00:23:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:05] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:05–00:23:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:09] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:23:09] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:23:09] Speaker 3

And still come back in July. We're still talking about it.

[00:23:12] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:12–00:23:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:16] Speaker 3

back in July.

[00:23:17] Speaker 5

Correct.

[00:23:17] Speaker 3

So, um,

[00:23:19] Speaker 5

but

[00:23:19] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:19–00:23:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:21] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:23:22] Speaker 3

So I'm in accordance now, I think with the chief, because if we talk about it and then misinformation get out,

[00:23:31] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

then

[00:23:31] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

it can also affect what the city manager might have to say.

[00:23:36] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:36–00:23:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:41] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice

then the city could be in like some kind of, um, conflict with the, well, with the city manager and this committee. So I, I'm thinking like the chief, if we're going to talk about it, then we're going to talk about it.

[00:23:57] Attribution uncertain

If

[00:23:57] Speaker 3

we're not, we need to take until we get all the facts or whatever.

[00:24:04] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:04–00:24:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:06] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:24:08] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Okay.

[00:24:08] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Cause, um, I don't know the law like that, but she's got a point.

[00:24:13] Speaker 1

Nothing wrong with that. Um, do I hear a second?

[00:24:21] Speaker 3 · Machine re-recognized

Because

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:24:21–00:24:22 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:24:22] Speaker 3

my thing is, I want to hear what, what, you know, uh, the family has to say, but if we don't do it, let's do it the right way.

[00:24:34] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

Correct.

[00:24:34] Speaker 3

Let's do it the right way and see what the city manager decides. And then it'll be in the best interest for all.

[00:24:45] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Well, when you say the right way, you're implying that just talking about is ‸ wrong way.

[00:24:52] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:52–00:24:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:57] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice

to change and based on what the chief and the, everybody came, why this was sustained. I, I, I, I'm not an attorney or a police officer, but I can read and I can understand that what in certain parts of the documentation that the officer Landis filled out and some of

[00:25:20] Attribution uncertain

the

[00:25:20] Speaker 6

stuff they did, I don't see how anything can change based off of that information. I left somebody going to say, okay, well none of this happened. So now we're going to change the outcome.

[00:25:35] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:35–00:25:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:25:36] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:25:38] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice

You just said that the city manager could say the things that they found that was sustained. He can say, okay, it's either sustained or not sustained. And so if, if the city manager say it's not, uh, unfounded, what they said,

[00:25:52] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

some

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:25:52–00:25:52 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:25:53] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice

was founded.

[00:25:53] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:53–00:25:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:25:58] Attribution uncertain

I

[00:25:58] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

totally

[00:25:58] Speaker 6

agree. But if you read the information, ‸ I found this unfounded. That would be, let me just, let me just, it wouldn't make any sense for him to say

[00:26:08] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

this.

[00:26:09] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:09–00:26:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:10] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

going to change my investigation.

[00:26:13] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:13–00:26:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:15] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

This is my report. He may say that the violation that I sustained doesn't rise to the level of the discipline. He cannot tell me to change my report. And he cannot tell me that this,

[00:26:27] Attribution uncertain

my

[00:26:27] Speaker 8

investigation was not completed. So he's not going to tell me to change my report. Now he could say that it doesn't meet the level of discipline he was given. And that's what he's grieving. So I just want to make that clear.

[00:26:41] Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:41–00:26:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:41] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

[00:26:45] Speaker 5

legal representation of that officer in ‸ the appeals process introduces new or other information that may change something, the city manager has the authority and right to do that.

[00:26:58] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

He can send it

[00:27:00] Speaker 5

back to you to reinvestigate it.

[00:27:03] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:27:03–00:27:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:27:05] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

So only the chief of police can authorize or to have me and do an investigation city manager cannot order me to do that. And he also can change the discipline. He cannot change the outcome of my investigation because I did my investigation. So he may not agree with it, but it's going to stay the way it is. This report will not change. Right.

[00:27:27] Speaker 4

Because the officer, he grieved the discipline. He didn't grieve the content of the case. It was just ‸ the discipline he feels was not appropriate.

[00:27:38] Speaker 1

I understand what you're saying.

[00:27:40] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:27:40–00:27:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:27:47] Speaker 1

you guys do appeals the way that we do them in the law, the way that

[00:27:51] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized

it's

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:27:51–00:27:51 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:27:51] Speaker 1

done in the court room or the way that

[00:27:53] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized

it's

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:27:53–00:27:53 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:27:53] Speaker 1

done in the law is when you appeal, you appeal something very specific. And so if he only appealed the discipline

[00:28:00] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized

then

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:28:00–00:28:01 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:28:01] Speaker 1

he can't go and appeal the discipline and then overturn the whole case, it doesn't work that way.

[00:28:06] Speaker 8

Right.

[00:28:06] Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:06–00:28:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:28:11] Speaker 8

So he can say ‸ that he feels he he didn't violate whatever policy, but my investigation completed that he did violate certain policies.

[00:28:25] No voice detected

So

[00:28:25] Speaker 8

the city manager can look at that and he may disagree with me, but he can't tell me to change my report or change my finding.

[00:28:33] Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:33–00:28:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:28:35] Speaker 8

with my report and change the discipline.

[00:28:38] Speaker 5

Well, again, that would be a fact that we would have if we table it and do it in July, if he had a difference of opinion on the basis of the investigation, which is why I say we should table it. You know, I, my concern is for the public too. You know, that we want to hear what they have to say, but let's get all the facts here first.

[00:29:02] Speaker 1

I ‸ don't know if

[00:29:04] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:04–00:29:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:10] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:29:10–00:29:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:10] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:29:10] Speaker 1

Is impacted by what the city manager decides because our discussions that we've done up to this point have always been based on what is in the report. What action they took and what we recommend should be done in the future if someone acted like this.

[00:29:29] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:29–00:29:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:32] Speaker 1

it really doesn't matter if ‸ the city manager decided not to punish this guy at all. We can make a recommendation and say we think that the punishment that the chief sought was fair or that the ‸ punishment that the chief sought was ‸ not enough. ‸ And so I don't know ‸ if that is the only thing that's holding us back. I'm not sure if that ‸ is relevant to the discussion or impactful to the discussion. I think that the reason why I voted the way that I voted is because my concern was that the whole investigation could be overturned and he could be found. It could be found that the allegations were not sustained at all and that he was completely innocent of what he did.

[00:30:29] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:29–00:30:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:30:31] Speaker 1

and that just the discipline is what's being challenged. And so if if Miss Hamilton Brown withdraws her second, I will second the motion to allow for us to come to a vote. And if it's defeated, it's defeated. But I don't think that under those circumstances, we can't have this conversation because the ultimate, disciplinary outcome doesn't affect our conversation on the facts of what actually occurred. And that won't change based on the disciplinary outcome. That's my opinion.

[00:31:12] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:12–00:31:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:31:17] Speaker 1

saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Nay.

[00:31:23] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:23–00:31:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:31:26] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:31:27] Speaker 1

the deciding vote. You

[00:31:28] No voice detected

got

[00:31:28] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

to vote.

[00:31:29] No voice detected

‸ You

[00:31:29] Speaker 1

got to vote. Aye. You

[00:31:31] Attribution uncertain

got to vote.

[00:31:31] Speaker 1

The ayes have it. ‸ The vote is three to one, one extension. We will discuss matter 21-27-IA today.

[00:31:47] Speaker 5

Well, let's hear from the public in that case.

[00:31:51] Speaker 1

Well,

[00:31:51] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:51–00:31:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:31:53] Speaker 1

Normally, the way that we do it is our committee discusses first, and then the public responds or has an opportunity to discuss. But we can always open it for the, does anyone have anything from the committee that they want to discuss as it relates to this item?

[00:32:08] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:08–00:32:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:12] Speaker 6

Public's fine.

[00:32:12] Speaker 5

Is that a motion? Motion. ‸ Let the public say what they have to say. Second.

[00:32:17] Speaker 1

Second. All

[00:32:17] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:17–00:32:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:18] Attribution uncertain

please

[00:32:18] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:32:19] Speaker 1

Aye. Aye. All

[00:32:20] Attribution uncertain

right.

[00:32:20] Speaker 1

We'll let the public input weigh in first. Is there anyone from the public that wants to speak to any of the items that are on the agenda for tonight?

[00:32:30] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:30–00:32:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:34] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:32:35] No voice detected

correct?

[00:32:35] Speaker 1

Correct.

[00:32:36] No voice detected

Yes.

[00:32:37] Speaker 1

Please come forward. State your name.

[00:32:44] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

My name is Jessica Travis, and I am a local attorney, and I am the attorney for the family of Passion Lucas, who was hit and killed by Susanna Norris, who was driving more than two times the legal limit, and that is the investigation that Landis began. And I understand that the fact findings have already been made, and that it is this committee's ‸ job to look into the punishment and to make recommendations as to punishment.

[00:33:20] Attribution uncertain

I

[00:33:20] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

understand that the officer is appealing the recommended punishment.

[00:33:25] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:25–00:33:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:27] Attribution uncertain

Am

[00:33:27] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

I too loud?

[00:33:28] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:28–00:33:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:28] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:33:28] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:33:28–00:33:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:28] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:33:29] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:33:30] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:30–00:33:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:32] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:32–00:33:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:33] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:33–00:33:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:36] Speaker 1

before you began speaking, so we're not going to cut you off and restrict you to a limit.

[00:33:39] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

Well,

[00:33:39] Speaker 1

‸ I'm

[00:33:41] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

a lawyer, so I'm known to be wordy, but I'll try to keep it short. I

[00:33:45] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

appreciate you.

[00:33:45] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yeah. I mean, I think that you guys are all aware of what this case is about and very familiar if you've read the reports and things of that nature.

[00:33:55] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:55–00:33:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:59] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

punishment for Officer Landis. And I understand it's just that he's been removed from ‸ the traffic homicide investigation team or whatever that is. It's actually the family's position that he should no longer be working for the department. But I want you to, you know, in your negotiations and stuff,

[00:34:16] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:16–00:34:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:22] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

I mean, there was some mention in the report about

[00:34:28] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:28–00:34:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:36] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

or, you know,

[00:34:36] Attribution uncertain

not

[00:34:37] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

adequately investigating this case caused there to be a negative reflection on the department, Coco.

[00:34:43] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:43–00:34:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:47] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

some social media when my clients got frustrated. My clients being obviously the family, which is mother Sylvia Lucas and also sister Makita Lucas. And she's the main one that took to social media when she was frustrated with the state of the investigation and felt like she was not getting any answers. And she's not able to be here tonight.

[00:35:06] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:06–00:35:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:09] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Lucas was sick. Miss

[00:35:10] Attribution uncertain

Lucas was sick.

[00:35:11] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

So, um, you know, I know that there was mention in the report about the impact of the department, but I'm here to convey to you the impact to citizens that an inadequate investigation has. And so you have a family whose loved one has been killed by a drunk driver. And it is someone, you know, obviously within the community, Passion Lucas was well loved. She had children, she was involved in their lives. This is not a family that should have been discounted or discarded to the side. And they really felt like their concerns about their dead loved one was not being taken seriously.

[00:35:54] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:54–00:36:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:00] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

that it had for

[00:36:00] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:00–00:36:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:03] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

I understand that you guys want to have a good reputation, but I'm asking this committee to take into effect the multiple traumatization to this family by the inadequate communication and investigation in this case. Their loved one is dead. They cannot get answers. They're piecemealed out little things. And it wasn't until I got involved that we found out even more information. So I ask that you take into account that.

[00:36:34] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:34–00:36:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:34] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

[00:36:39] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

pick a fight and throw stones. But the problem wasn't limited to Officer Landis.

[00:36:45] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:45–00:36:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:51] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

of this car. And that was like six or seven months after the fact. The investigation was not done adequately from the get-go, and it was slow-rolled or not taken seriously thereafter, even after Landis was taken off of the case. Now, I do admit,

[00:37:08] Attribution uncertain

‸ I

[00:37:08] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

mean, and still, so I guess the impact is no communication, not getting answers about a loved one, and that impact is continuing to this day as to the status of the prosecution in this case. I don't know if you all followed any of the news about this, but Susanna Norris has been charged with misdemeanor DUI, not DUI manslaughter, despite the fact that there is blood alcohol, showing that she was well over the double the legal limit. And why is that? We are currently in a battle of experts. I have hired an expert. The state attorney's office had hired an expert.

[00:37:46] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:46–00:37:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:37:51] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

was doing so. And so we've now had this weird battle of experts, mainly because this scene was not well-documented and preserved. And I'm not going to say it wasn't documented. There's videos, there's photos. But by the time all that had been done, emergency vehicles and things had kind of driven up into the scene. And I ‸ understand it was dark and things like that happened. But

[00:38:18] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:18–00:38:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:38:24] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

seriously, an appearance in a crime scene not preserved. I am now in almost continuous discussions with the state attorney's office, consulting with my expert. They have consulted with my expert as well.

[00:38:36] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:36–00:38:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:38:40] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

inadequate information because of the scene. ‸ And I don't say that out of the blue in one of the videos.

[00:38:48] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:48–00:38:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:38:53] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

they had not adequately preserved the scene. And you can hear that in a video.

[00:38:57] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:57–00:38:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:38:58] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:58–00:39:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:38:58] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

[00:39:07] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

wasn't processed properly. I think there was swabs from that or something in the blood

[00:39:11] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

at

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:39:11–00:39:12 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:39:12] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

the investigators here as well.

[00:39:14] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:14–00:39:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:39:16] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Those things are gone as well.

[00:39:18] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:18–00:39:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:39:21] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Norris was on the phone or texting at the time that this accident happened, which if she was, would indicate she's careless and therefore she could be charged with DUI manslaughter. Those have been received now. But it's our understanding that we're not able to see those because

[00:39:36] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:36–00:39:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:39:40] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

That does not allow those to come out. Now, the state attorney's office has told us there's nothing incriminating on there, but you'd have to excuse my family if they just want to question everything because of the way that this has rolled out. So I ask that you take these things into consideration. I ask that you take these things, you know, obviously I'm a white woman standing here. My family, they're all black. The victim, I'm going to call her a victim because she was hit by a DUI driver, even if they only charge her with misdemeanor DUI or not. It's black. The driver is white. When you have imperfect investigations, not only does it traumatize the family, it traumatizes community because whether you're black, white, Hispanic, you tend to think that there's favoritism being played in investigations ‸ and in prosecutions. And I'm not necessarily saying that that was happening here, but that's something to think about when you as a committee, a commission are determining what kind of punishment should be recommended. How has this

[00:40:51] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

impact

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:40:51–00:40:52 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:40:52] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

the citizen and how has this impacted the community and how has this impacted, um, you know, appearances of favoritism and situations in which it appears that a department is not being transparent. And so, yes, it has affected us all, but the impact to the Lucas family has been the greatest.

[00:41:13] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:13–00:41:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:18] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

charges. My expert's great. She says that Susanna Norris had adequate time

[00:41:23] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:23–00:41:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:27] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Um, and, uh,

[00:41:30] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:30–00:41:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:33] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

the influence and all that kind of stuff.

[00:41:35] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:35–00:41:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:39] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

the influence of drugs, um, and things of that nature. So my expert is strong in that

[00:41:45] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:45–00:41:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:47] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

but the state's expert says, is saying that it's too dark and based on the limited information, he can't conclude that Susanna Norris should have seen passion Lucas and been able to stop her. So I fully expect, I hope that they would increase the charges to do my, I manslaughter. I fully expect that they probably won't because they have two competing experts. So the failures in this case that started with Landis, which by the way, when you watch,

[00:42:17] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:42:17–00:42:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:42:21] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Susanna Norris, the drunk driver. I mean, I've been a D I've been a criminal defense attorney for 23 years. I hardly have ever seen any of my clients treated with so much respect by a police officer. I don't know what was up with that. She was given the ‸ benefit of the doubt. She suggestions were made to her as to possible defenses. There's a suggestive line of questioning in which it was suggested to her that passion Lucas must have been under the influence

[00:42:51] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:42:51–00:42:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:42:51] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

walked into her car.

[00:42:52] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:42:52–00:42:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:42:57] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

driver. So officers need to be not only careful in their investigations, I would hope that they would be careful in their interviews with potential suspects and to treat all suspects the same. Not rudely.

[00:43:12] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:43:12–00:43:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:43:14] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

up or anything, but it was kind of alarming as how much deference and courtesy was given to her after this by, by Landis. And that, you know, I bring that up not to say I wanted her treated poorly, but that stings to my family when they had not been given answers by Landis and they felt like the ball was dropped. And then they watch a video in which the driver was treated with such courtesy. It really stings. Now, I will say since I got involved, I've been working with, um,

[00:43:46] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:46–00:43:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:43:49] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:43:49–00:43:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:43:50] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Sergeant. And he's been very courteous and communicated with me and wanted to make sure that I have everything.

[00:43:58] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:58–00:44:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:03] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

you know, one of my frustrations is he called me and make sure I have everything, but I don't know what everything is. And so we have that, but it has been very courteous and followed through and communicated.

[00:44:12] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:12–00:44:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:16] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

very professional, but as far as officer Landis, it's our position. He shouldn't be working for the department anymore. It's our greater position that it extended beyond officer Landis. And ‸ frankly, that the department might need to, um, do some general training if Landis is an example of what's on the force. So thank you.

[00:44:38] Speaker 5

Thank you.

[00:44:39] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

‸ You have any questions for me?

[00:44:40] Speaker 5

Uh, that's what I was about to ask. Okay. In

[00:44:42] Attribution uncertain

fact,

[00:44:42] Speaker 5

we are the direction to the chief.

[00:44:44] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:44:44–00:44:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:46] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:44:52] Speaker 4

Well, she covered a whole lot.

[00:44:55] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:55–00:44:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:56] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:44:56] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:44:56] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:44:57] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:44:58] Speaker 4

So, you know, just, just kind of give a perspective, um, about this entire case. And I can tell you from the, when I learned about the case, I was very disappointed in what I was told by the family.

[00:45:12] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

there's

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:45:12–00:45:12 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:45:12] Speaker 4

a lot of things I did not know. And then once I heard about what was pushed out on social media is when I just called in the sergeant and also the officer just kind of look and see what was going on with the case. And I made a decision that I just felt that we were not communicating with the family properly. So I had Sergeant Bradshaw call Miss Lucas.

[00:45:40] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

makita

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:45:40–00:45:43 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:45:44] Speaker 4

which is the sister of the victim. And I had him call her and I told him to tell I can come meet with her wherever she's at. She can come to the police department. And so she came to the police department where I met with her, met with her to get an idea of how what was going on in her mind with the case. And I just felt that we were not doing our part.

[00:46:05] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:05–00:46:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:10] Speaker 4

and Commander, just kind of get another idea about the case, what was going on.

[00:46:15] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:15–00:46:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:18] Speaker 4

hear what she's saying.

[00:46:19] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:19–00:46:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:20] Speaker 4

I met with them and they said they want the officer fired. And I said, well, you know, even if he did what they're alleging, it would not have possibly arrived, risen to a level of being terminated. Even if he had done the things they were accusing.

[00:46:36] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:36–00:46:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:37] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

[00:46:42] Speaker 4

we can go by what we believe happened, but we go by what ‸ we can prove happened. So I'm not discounting some of the allegation that the family made, but some of those allegations, you know, people that know him may believe that it might have happened. But if we go by what we can prove.

[00:46:59] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:59–00:47:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:02] Speaker 4

prove. And that's what we are with that.

[00:47:05] Speaker 5

Well, I think as a committee,

[00:47:08] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:08–00:47:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:15] Speaker 5

this, looking at the investigation and the failures procedurally that occurred. What actions has the Cocoa Police Department taken to ensure that this wouldn't be a reoccurring situation with a traffic

[00:47:32] Speaker 4

crash investigator? Right. So so since I've been here, if you if you watch some of the news, if you believe some of the news, I've been here about a year and as a new police ‸ chief. And we've made a lot of policy changes and procedure changes since I've been

[00:47:45] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

here.

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:47:45–00:47:45 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:47:45] Speaker 4

we have a lot of outdated policies and procedures.

[00:47:49] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:49–00:47:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:54] Speaker 4

Uh, well,

[00:47:55] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:55–00:47:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:59] Speaker 4

as we should. Uh, so since I've been in place and since the Lucas case, um. Um, now, if we have a case like that today, ‸ the sergeant is going to be there working the case as well. When I say working the case, guiding the case. So we have a policy and procedure in place where the supervisor has to go out to every traffic homicide. He also has the responsibility to meet with the investigator on a regular basis to ensure that the case is moving along. Um, to ensure that we'll communicate with the family that like we supposed to, ‸ because I always look at, um, ‸ always put myself in the victim's position and the family's position of how I would want to be treated. And I think, and I still believe that we failed the Lucas family and how we treated them and how we communicated with them. That's not going to change. But I have, as far as well, my part being, I've been proactive and changing our policy and procedure and how we do investigations and how we communicate with families.

[00:49:00] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

‸ That's appreciated.

[00:49:02] Speaker 4

No problem.

[00:49:05] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:05–00:49:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:49:13] No voice detected

Um,

[00:49:13] Speaker 1

I don't know if you can speak to this or not, but this is a question for you. Um, and oh, councilwoman, I apologize. Alex is up here at the, at the desk.

[00:49:23] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:23–00:49:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:49:25] Speaker 1

Um, do we know if there have been, um, any changes to the lighting situation in that part of Coco have, have steps been taken to make sure that that, that, that neighborhood or that area is more well lit since this?

[00:49:42] No voice detected

Um,

[00:49:43] Speaker 7

to be honest, I cannot speak to that. Um, that's something.

[00:49:46] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:49:46–00:49:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:49:46] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:49:46] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:49:47] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:49:47] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:49:47] Speaker 7

research on maybe council woman also, but she said she doesn't know either.

[00:49:51] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:51–00:49:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:49:54] Speaker 7

Um, but I, I don't have any further information on additional lighting in that area.

[00:50:00] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I ‸ speak to it a little bit. I went out there a couple months ago and it is an area under construction. And so it's constantly changing. Um, so it's constantly changing. Um,

[00:50:14] Attribution uncertain

so it's constantly changing.

[00:50:14] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:50:14–00:50:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:50:14] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

[00:50:20] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

know, contracted. Right line. Yeah. Yeah. That's a part of that bright line thing. And so there was no, the scene of this situation is she was walking under the, um, overpass by 28. Right.

[00:50:32] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

And

[00:50:32] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:50:32–00:50:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:50:40] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

a shoulder, but it was eaten up a little bit by construction barrels and construction

[00:50:44] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:50:44–00:50:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:50:49] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

says that she was probably walking ‸ in the street, at least a little bit. I mean, my position would be, it was dark. She knew that there was some weird drop off due to the construction. There's no sidewalk.

[00:51:00] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:51:00–00:51:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:51:03] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Um, but the greater allegation is that

[00:51:05] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:51:05–00:51:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:51:07] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

And even if passion Lucas was

[00:51:08] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

in

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:51:08–00:51:08 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:51:09] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

the street, she should have been seen, but yes, it's constantly changing.

[00:51:13] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:51:13–00:51:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:51:17] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:51:17–00:51:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:51:20] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

you know, so that's maybe something for the, the city to contact the construction people and see if there's anything that they could do about that.

[00:51:28] Speaker 1

I would think that, um, that as a city and as a community, we would expect or even require someone that's doing construction within our city to make sure that the construction zone is safe for the citizens of Cocoa, especially after an incident that explicitly shows us that it is not safe. Just something to think about.

[00:51:54] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

Right. I mean, we all know we have a pedestrian homicide, traffic homicide problem in this county, right? I mean,

[00:52:02] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:02–00:52:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:52:06] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

going to be a problem. But I

[00:52:08] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:08–00:52:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:52:12] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

Susanna Norris had the wherewithal to pay attention, but she didn't because she was two times over the legal limit. So I

[00:52:18] Speaker 4

want to share something else that the attorney mentioned as far as the investigation. She kind of talked about that.

[00:52:25] Attribution uncertain

It

[00:52:25] Speaker 4

was sloppy work alluded to sloppy work even after it was reassigned. So I've been in law enforcement, uh, over almost ‸ 34 years now and I don't usually get into meat potatoes of stuff. Uh, but I can tell you, and I've been ‸ a, um, homicide supervisor at the time when, when Jacksonville, Florida was named the most deadliest place in the state of Florida. I was,

[00:52:51] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:51–00:52:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:52:54] Speaker 4

so I know to meet potato,

[00:52:56] Attribution uncertain

I

[00:52:56] Speaker 4

know crime scenes and all that. So I took the time out and I had, uh, Sergeant Bradshaw take me to the crime scene. Cause I want to just take a look at the crime scene myself just to make sure that whatever the end result was going to be that I felt comfortable with. The outcome. Um,

[00:53:16] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:53:16–00:53:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:53:17] Speaker 4

I looked at all the photos and we also had an ‸ expert come out, which was with FHP to come out, to look at the diagrams and look at everything. Uh,

[00:53:29] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

because

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:53:29–00:53:29 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:53:29] Speaker 4

we wanted to make sure we was, we was looking at everything properly and we concluded the fact that passion, unfortunately, was in the road in the right of way of the vehicle. And so she was, she contributed more to that accident than the person being drunk. And although I knew that going in, we still charged the suspect ‸ with DUI manslaughter, DUI and leaving the scene of an accident. Uh huh. Even though that she went down the street for so far and turned around and came back, everything was a stretch. So then when you look at the state attorney, the prosecutor from the state attorney's office, they're only going to present cases they know they can prove. And the one thing they could prove was that they, without a doubt, was that this, that the suspect was DUI. And because they feel just like we feel that passion was in the roadway.

[00:54:33] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

she contributed to her demise.

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:54:33–00:54:41 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)

[00:54:36] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized

Well, if I could address that. The law actually says you're supposed to be charged with DUI manslaughter if you

[00:54:41] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:54:41–00:54:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:54:42] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized

or contributed to the death of another. It's not a who's more guilty than the other situation. Okay, and this is a debate and you guys arrested her for the DUI manslaughter,

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:54:42–00:54:52 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)

[00:54:52] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:54:52–00:54:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:54:53] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized

And I know it was up with the state attorney's office. And that was their decision as to the ultimate charge. So I'm not laying any faults in your direction, but I

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:54:53–00:55:02 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)

[00:55:02] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:02–00:55:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:55:03] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

a narrative I guess that I've heard more inaccurately on social media and

[00:55:08] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:08–00:55:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:55:11] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

road, even if you're drunk. That's not the law. The law

[00:55:15] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:15–00:55:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:55:16] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

who's more guilty one or the

[00:55:18] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:18–00:55:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:55:22] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

cause or contributed in any way. So somebody can be in the road. We've all been driving around this county and come up on somebody on a dark road, right? And seeing them at the last second and you stop or swerve or whatever. And if you couldn't at the last second when the police came up

[00:55:37] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:37–00:55:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:55:40] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

the last second I'm so sorry that kind of thing what did Susanna Norris say she said I didn't see anything I just felt an impact. To me,

[00:55:48] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:48–00:55:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:55:50] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

law is you don't get to hit passion Lucas just because she's in the road you don't get to decline to file DUI the manslaughter charges just because she she had some role in it. Even if it's greater than Susanna Norris the DUI driver

[00:56:04] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:56:04–00:56:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:56:07] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

so I'm not really having a you know stand up with the chief

[00:56:12] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice

that's

[00:56:13] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Machine re-recognized

what it sounds

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:56:13–00:56:13 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:56:13] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

like I'm just kidding I'm just kidding go ahead

[00:56:15] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I do have that in my nature but I want to contribute I you know I want to correct that narrative

[00:56:20] Speaker 6

I want to

[00:56:23] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

correct

[00:56:23] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

that I do have a question earlier you said that there was no drugs and miss Lucas system I

[00:56:31] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

said she wasn't under the influence

[00:56:32] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

well okay because I read it I'm just wondering because I read the email that miss Norris attorney sent to the state attorney that said that she was under an influence right

[00:56:46] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:56:46–00:56:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:56:47] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:56:48] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

[00:56:53] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

false narrative that in my opinion started with Landis and was adopted by Norris and then her attorney about her being under the influence about Passion being drunk and under drugs I'm not gonna ‸ sit here and tell you ‸ passion Lucas didn't have her battles. She was in rehab at the time, okay? And she had had a medical issue and had gone to the hospital and she knew she didn't get back to the living facility that she would be kicked out so that's where she was walking I'm not gonna ‸ sugarcoat this. But she had, ‸ maybe when the officers can correct me, she had, I always mispronounce it she had some substance in her sister

[00:57:33] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:57:33–00:57:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:57:37] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

okay in her system but the toxicology it was a trace amount. It was barely above the detection level. And so the toxicologist concluded, and the state attorney's office agrees with me on this. That it wasn't enough to cause her to be under the influence. It was consistent with someone who had been in rehab, who had a problem and been ‸ rehab for three days. And

[00:57:58] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:57:58–00:58:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:58:02] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

of the 7-Eleven worker, who was the last person to talk to Passion, but, well, while she was conscious and able to communicate she'd gone into the 7-eleven

[00:58:13] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:58:13–00:58:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:58:15] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

obviously by a

[00:58:16] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:58:16–00:58:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:58:20] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

that would be consistent with that drug. So my toxicologist, which the state attorney's office agrees, and they told us in meeting with the family, they're not pursuing that narrative. They know that that's not true, that she wasn't under the influence of drugs to ‸ the extent that she would have been impaired and in the road, like stumbling around. She had some residual in there it was consistent with three days ago, but not enough, you know, to impair her in any way.

[00:58:50] Speaker 1

chief could you talk a little bit about um some of the steps that were made to repair some of the damage that was done by Landis after the fact.

[00:59:03] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:03–00:59:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:59:04] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:59:04] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:25]

[00:59:31] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:59:31–00:59:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:59:32] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:59:32] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:59:34] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:59:34] Speaker 4

And you see through the internal affairs case. So

[00:59:37] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:37–00:59:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:59:44] Speaker 4

and we've still given him some additional instructions, we learned that same day he had submitted a citation. And that was not shared with us in that meeting. Not that we even asked, but it was not even shared with us. So it gave the appearance that he was trying to dispose of this case quickly. But we learned through the investigation that

[01:00:06] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:00:06–01:00:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:00:11] Speaker 4

So that has since been corrected. It appeared that he had done something malicious, but he was able to talk about that and mitigate that,

[01:00:22] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:00:22–01:00:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:00:24] Speaker 4

There was a lot of errors in our systems, which

[01:00:26] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

we have

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:00:26–01:00:27 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:00:27] Speaker 4

corrected. Another thing that launched this whole investigation that

[01:00:33] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:00:33–01:00:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:00:38] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:38–01:00:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:00:44] Speaker 4

attorney viewing the suspect's vehicle,

[01:00:51] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:00:51–01:00:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:00:55] Speaker 4

Well, I'm not used to that because we don't let a defense attorney look at nothing where I'm from the state going to be all over that case, all over that car first. So I had issues with that. And when he said that, I just didn't believe him.

[01:01:08] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:08–01:01:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:01:09] Speaker 4

And I looked at Sergeant Bradshaw told him to go contact the state attorney to find out that that happened. Well, that state attorney told Sergeant Bradshaw, he never told. Uh, officer Landis that the, uh, ‸ defense attorney can, uh, do an observation of that vehicle. So now I'm thinking that the officer lied to us. So that's a series, a series. Cause to me, that's, that's, that can be, you can be terminated for it's a variation. Yes. Well, for departure from the truth.

[01:01:39] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:39–01:01:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:01:42] Speaker 4

officer Landis was able to produce some emails back and forth with the state attorney that showed that he did in fact tell him to allow the defense, the, uh, suspects attorney to look at that vehicle. Now I did. Once I learned that after the investigation,

[01:01:59] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:59–01:02:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:02:00] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[01:02:01] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

[01:02:04] Speaker 4

Uh, he, he agreed with me that should not have happened. Uh, but it did happen. And, uh, he, he assured me that it wouldn't happen again. So, um, he gave the officer Landis, uh, bad advice, but, but even with that officer Landis should have contacted his supervisor and, and talked about that. So those

[01:02:26] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

kind

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:02:26–01:02:27 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:02:27] Speaker 4

of things in play, those things should have been communicated with his supervisor. Not necessarily with the state. I have a question.

[01:02:34] Speaker 1

Yes. Do you know if there's been any disciplinary action against the state attorney that I

[01:02:39] Speaker 4

can't answer that?

[01:02:40] Speaker 1

Okay.

[01:02:41] Speaker 4

And I can just tell you this because things were sent to him in an email.

[01:02:43] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:43–01:02:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:02:45] Speaker 4

The state attorney, they get hundreds of emails every day. And if you have an officer going back and forth about a case, there's a possibility he might miss something.

[01:02:55] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:55–01:02:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:02:58] Speaker 4

because he, he has other other fires to put out. So I don't

[01:03:01] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:03:01–01:03:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:03:04] Speaker 4

I trust, um,

[01:03:06] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:06–01:03:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:03:07] Speaker 4

Uh,

[01:03:07] Attribution uncertain

that he took care of that. And

[01:03:07] Speaker 4

he said that he would talk with the state attorney, uh, because that's not a normal practice that they do in those cases like that. Okay. So if that would have happened with one of my commanders or something like that, where they told somebody that some gave them bad advice. I mean, that's just a conversation that you have to have, you know,

[01:03:24] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

because

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:03:24–01:03:24 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:03:24] Speaker 4

a lot of

[01:03:25] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

times

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:03:25–01:03:25 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:03:25] Speaker 4

we can't be too busy. We got to focus in on what we're, what we're doing because I mean, we got people lives on the line.

[01:03:32] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:32–01:03:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:03:33] Speaker 4

Like I said, I trust field archer, uh, that he took care of that. Thank you.

[01:03:38] Speaker 5

That's my understanding to chief that, uh, after reading all of this and seeing all of the notes on, on different documents in here leading into corrective actions that, uh, you've reviewed all of the policies, uh, as far as traffic crashes go and, uh, and you're, you're ensuring that. What is necessary is provided. And immediately not later.

[01:04:06] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:04:06–01:04:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:04:07] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[01:04:08] Speaker 4

So, like I said, we've updated policies. Um, we, we have better things in place where, uh, our. Traffic homicide investigative supervisor has regular meetings with his staff to get, uh, what we do case staffings. So you can have those constant updates. So that's what's in our policy. Now that's that's the new practice, which was, which was never done before. ‸ So, like I said, I have compassion. I understand why the family felt the way they felt, but even with the early on investigation that officer Landis was doing, it didn't change the circumstances.

[01:04:44] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:04:44–01:04:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:04:47] Speaker 4

and, um, a lot of errors in his reports, but that did not change the facts. Any follow up

[01:05:00] Speaker 1

attorney Travis.

[01:05:04] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

You know, we had an investigation in which the defense attorney was given courtesy after courtesy. His client was given a lot of courtesy. He was allowed to go see the car. Um, and my clients were left in the dark. And so I guess I would, and I hear the policy changes and I appreciate that. And

[01:05:25] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:05:25–01:05:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:05:26] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

cooperation that we've gotten from the department since then.

[01:05:31] No voice detected

Um,

[01:05:32] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

I don't know if the facts would or wouldn't have changed because, you know, we're stuck with what we have due to the nature of the investigation.

[01:05:42] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:05:42–01:05:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:05:44] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:05:44] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

[01:05:50] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

as just a communication issue. I mean, it's easy to minimize that kind of thing. Um, this was a pretty big deal. And it, ‸ it certainly looked like, and I don't know that it wasn't some sort of favoritism or something to a DUI driver who may, ‸ you know, some people might think she should be charged and some shouldn't with the UN manslaughter.

[01:06:15] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:06:15–01:06:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:06:16] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

certainly this communication wasn't like just a lack of communication. It was pervasive and extensive and it re traumatized this family all over again. So I just ask you to keep that impact in mind.

[01:06:31] Speaker 1

Thank you.

[01:06:32] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

All right. Any

[01:06:34] Speaker 10 (introduced as “Jessica Travis” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:06:34–01:06:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:06:35] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[01:06:36] Speaker 1

questions from the committee? Any follow up from leadership? Thank you. Appreciate your time.

[01:06:45] Speaker 7

Chair. Yes,

[01:06:46] Attribution uncertain

sir. I

[01:06:46] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

wanted to clarify something to dealing with the lighting. Yes, sir.

[01:06:50] Attribution uncertain

You

[01:06:50] Speaker 7 · Machine re-recognized

discussed

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:06:50–01:06:51 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:06:52] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:52–01:06:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:06:56] Speaker 7

road. All

[01:06:57] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:06:57–01:07:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:07:00] Speaker 7

inspections ‸ of that particular job unless it's a connection to our water. Um, but what we can do is which, which, which, what they always wanted us to do. If we have any issues on the road doing their project, we can contact, um, their public relations department to let them know if we see any issues.

[01:07:21] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:07:21–01:07:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:07:25] Speaker 7

have not had, uh, ‸ been obligated to put up construction lights, even, um, unless they was working at that night. And I'm not sure. If that was a night that they was actually actively working on the thing ‸ they obligated to do is put the barrels up, which have the lights on the top, um, to allow the citizen to walk behind unless it's an object in a way or a piece of equipment or something like that.

[01:07:51] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:07:51–01:07:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:07:55] Speaker 7

that work zone. So I wanted to clarify that.

[01:07:59] Speaker 1

Thank you, sir. And I appreciate that.

[01:08:01] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:08:01–01:08:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:08:01] Speaker 1

imagine that part of that information that you have is from your own experience, considering that your family is in the construction business. Correct.

[01:08:09] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:08:09–01:08:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:08:13] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Not everyone in here may know that. So I just wanted to make sure there was some clarity. Because I don't want to put, um,

[01:08:20] Speaker 7

the city, as far as the city responsibility for that, they, they are not responsible for that.

[01:08:26] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:08:26–01:08:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:08:31] Speaker 7

say, Hey, look, this strip of, uh, work zone is dark. And they let us know

[01:08:38] Speaker 7 · Machine re-recognized

we're

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:08:38–01:08:38 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:08:38] Speaker 7

obligated to contact FDOT and say, Hey, look, 528 is, you know, really dark at two in the morning or whatever the timeframe was. But I just wanted to clarify.

[01:08:49] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice

Thank you, sir. And, and I don't know if the city's responsible or not. That's why I asked the question.

[01:08:53] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:08:53–01:08:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:08:53] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice

I don't know. Thank you for that clarity. I appreciate that. Um, is there any other input from the public about any of the items of discussion? Please come forward. State your name.

[01:09:10] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Hello. I'm Nicholas Sandberg. Um, this issue with the Lucas case has impacted the community, not just Coco, but several communities. Several organizations have taken concern and are watching this in observance to see how corrective measures are taken and how effective you guys are going to be moving forward from this. I know for a fact, I'm on the

[01:09:36] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:09:36–01:09:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:09:41] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

the Cocoa Police Department.

[01:09:42] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:09:42–01:09:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:09:48] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

is

[01:09:48] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

in

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:09:48–01:09:49 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:09:49] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

observance of this. And they have some deep concerns, not just with Landis's investigation, but with the investigation ‸ moving forward with him being removed. Many situational things with the public record requests that have been made. Everybody talks about transparency in the community with trust and transparency.

[01:10:10] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:10:10–01:10:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:10:12] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

There's been negligence that has been made in this case. You know, evidence being misplaced.

[01:10:19] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:10:19–01:10:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:10:21] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:10:21–01:10:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:10:25] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

documented that could possibly, who knows, make the intention that the suspect in the case did maybe touch the person.

[01:10:34] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:10:34–01:10:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:10:38] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Okay. The scene wasn't properly secured in the initial get go. You know, public record requests have been made for the

[01:10:45] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:10:45–01:10:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:10:47] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

understand there are laws to protect the personals information. Okay. I, as a private investigator have made several requests to multiple agencies and police departments in cases with phone records. You know what they do? They do a redaction. Anything that's personalized information, they do a redaction and you're able to view that. Whether it be just down

[01:11:08] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

that

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:11:08–01:11:08 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:11:08] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

a call was made at this time. Okay. There's no personal expectation of privacy like that in the elements of that law that's been written to protect those, those sanctions. Okay. That has not been provided. It has been stated that, you know, that's not a really pertinent thing in this case. To me, we know when the 911 call was placed. Okay. But we have no idea the calls that

[01:11:34] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:11:34–01:11:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:11:35] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

made. You know, we're not talking about a little fender bender bump up. I kind of bumped her and she hit her head on the road. We're talking about a complete collapsed windshield blood splatter in the vehicle blood splatter on the driver. She was almost completely decapitated. Okay. This is not a little fender bender. I have prior years in law enforcement. Okay. We normally in situations in high priority cases of felony nature have a checklist. Obviously these checklists were not checked.

[01:12:14] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:12:14–01:12:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:12:19] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

state, but we continuously worked with the state attorney to check up on what they're doing in relations to dealing with the case and what we've provided. I can't say that definitively that has been done. You may have had conversations with the state attorney, but even just reviewing the expert case report that the

[01:12:42] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:12:42–01:12:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:12:46] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:12:46–01:12:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:12:46] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:11]

[01:12:58] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:12:58–01:13:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:13:01] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

prosecution. You know, me as an officer, I seen a case stand through and through and through. I met with the state attorney completely. If we had problems in the case from the get go, I went and I talked to the state attorney. I

[01:13:15] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized

advised

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:13:15–01:13:15 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:13:15] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

them. This is a situation that we have. This is what we're taking steps. We need to follow up with everything that we're doing. Please keep me informed. Okay,

[01:13:24] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:13:24–01:13:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:13:28] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

everything. That's not doesn't do any good. Okay, I believe Coco PD has has drones. If not, you can hire one from the public for $40. You could have went out the very next day and took an aerial shot of the scene.

[01:13:45] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:13:45–01:13:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:13:48] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

reviewed some of that. It's in the dark foreshadowed. You can't see anything.

[01:13:53] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:13:53–01:13:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:13:56] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

You know, trying to check on the individual that got struck. That was almost malice in the way the officer confronted that individual. He might as well come over and just, yeah, and walked on because that was the extent. Is that how we train people to check out me as an officer? I, you know, at least I would kneel down, sternum, rub something. Hey, can you hear me? None of that was done.

[01:14:23] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:14:23–01:14:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:14:30] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

stated on the radio. Hey, we need this scene secure. Tell EMS to come in on the opposite side of the road. I have an individual that's still breathing, but she's rapidly, you know, trauma alert. None of that concern. He immediately left that person laying there and went to the driver.

[01:14:46] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:14:46–01:14:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:14:48] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

You seen the video. It's Pauling. You know, this is very concerning and you guys as a committee, we have an observation from many groups.

[01:14:59] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized

Poor power positions,

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 01:14:59–01:15:02 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)

[01:15:01] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:15:01–01:15:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:15:02] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

[01:15:08] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:15:08] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

[01:15:12] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:15:12] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

[01:15:19] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

than just trying to do your checklist. And therefore, I believe ‸ you guys really need to follow up more with everything that's going on.

[01:15:31] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Okay?

[01:15:32] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

And make sure that ‸ there's checklists and that it's not, we did a charge, the attorney's got it. Call us when we need us for trial. There's more to that than the case

[01:15:44] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized

and

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:15:44–01:15:44 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:15:44] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

criminal prosecutions and caring for the community. I

[01:15:48] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:15:48–01:15:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:15:51] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

has tried to perform ‸ and has met with multiple members from different committees and groups in the community. Okay, but I don't feel like we've been fully transparent. So, and this is a big public interest. So, and that's what I have to say. Thank you. I appreciate your time. Thank you, sir. ‸ Yes, sir.

[01:16:14] No voice detected

So,

[01:16:15] Speaker 4

gentlemen, I think he's giving y'all a false ‸ narrative. First, he says that our victim was decapitated. Then he says the officer barely checked on her. But

[01:16:30] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

she

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:16:30–01:16:30 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:16:30] Speaker 4

decapitated, there's nothing to check on. So, you're getting a false narrative.

[01:16:35] Attribution uncertain

So,

[01:16:35] Speaker 4

I would ‸ caution you on what he's saying. He's alleging that there's evidence that's missing.

[01:16:40] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:16:40–01:16:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:16:42] Speaker 4

So, he's creating a story that's not there. So, I would caution you on listening to somebody that's giving you a false narrative. That's all I have to say. Thank you.

[01:16:51] Attribution uncertain

Thank

[01:16:51] Speaker 4

you, sir.

[01:16:54] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Can I make a rebuttal to that just to clarify my intentions of what I'm saying?

[01:16:58] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:16:58–01:17:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:17:05] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

a slash from the shoulder going down her back and around the top of her shoulder with a deep indentation of over eight millimeters. That was recorded.

[01:17:15] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:17:15–01:17:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:17:18] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

That's about eight millimeters. Okay?

[01:17:19] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

Yeah.

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:17:19–01:17:20 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:17:20] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

Three or four inches. Okay? Extensive damage. My, my stating and going to that, that's almost a decapitation. Okay? It doesn't take much when you go through muscle after that tearing muscle, ripping muscle, and breaking bones that body parts don't come off.

[01:17:37] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:17:37–01:17:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:17:41] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

bender. The windshield was completely caved in on the passenger side.

[01:17:47] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:17:47–01:17:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:17:50] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice

was completely bashed in. Greatest deformity. I could stick my body, my hands through the windshield as much. And you think a little woman hitting that vehicle on that pillar post and going into that windshield wouldn't almost decapitate her? I urge you to look at the police report, the medical examiner photos of her autopsy. And I think you'll get a different opinion.

[01:18:23] Speaker 1

Any follow-up? Any questions from the committee

[01:18:28] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

to this gentleman? ‸ No. ‸ I think that it's important for the citizens to understand that our posture here is

[01:18:39] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:18:39–01:18:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:18:46] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice

unfortunate circumstances from reoccurring.

[01:18:50] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:09]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:18:50–01:18:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:18:59] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice

sitting there. The chief, the commander, and the internal investigator. And they go out of their way to try to get all of the facts and weigh the facts in on whatever the case may be. And my question originally to the chief was, what have you done to ‸ ensure that changes are made so that we don't have a reoccurrence? I know you removed immediately Landis from his position as a traffic investigator. And you had a thorough investigation. That's evidenced by what's probably 40, 50 pages here. So to be fair to Chief Collier, ‸ you have been making changes on a regular basis. And I know that your interest and the interest of your commander ‸ and the investigations conducted by the internal affairs sergeant are all motivated towards having an agency that is responsive, caring, and accurate in their reporting.

[01:20:31] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:31–01:20:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:20:36] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice

this committee is to ensure that those things are happening.

[01:20:40] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:09]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:20:40–01:20:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:20:48] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice

you have already been enacted.

[01:20:52] Speaker 4

And just so I can add a couple more things.

[01:20:55] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:20:55–01:20:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:20:59] Speaker 4

the

[01:21:00] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

motor,

[01:21:01] Speaker 4

that is a big deal. In the police world to take a motorcycle from an officer. So that's in their mind, that's punishment already. And that's punishment through his peers to look at that as punishment.

[01:21:15] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:21:15–01:21:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:21:21] Speaker 4

a motorcycle. That went away immediately once he was removed from that. So he was hit financially. And then thirdly, with the errors that he was having, his lack of communication, all that, those are trainable exercises. ‸ So he was he received remedial training to correct his report writing. And he soon he'll have a training for how he communicates with the public.

[01:21:50] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:21:50–01:21:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:21:52] Speaker 1

Will that training also include his ability to request subpoenas and things like that? Because I remember reading something about him saying that he wasn't trained on how to how to properly request subpoenas and things like that. And I saw that as troubling for someone that had been with

[01:22:10] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:22:10–01:22:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:22:12] Speaker 1

And I don't know whether he lied about that or not. I don't know. It's not my place to insinuate. But he I remember reading that he said that he wasn't trained on how to write subpoenas.

[01:22:25] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:22:25–01:22:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:22:31] Speaker 1

homicide detective. And I saw that as extremely troubling. Right.

[01:22:35] Speaker 4

I'm gonna ‸ let him comment on that part

[01:22:36] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

because

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:22:36–01:22:36 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:22:36] Speaker 4

he did the investigation.

[01:22:38] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

But

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:22:38–01:22:38 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:22:38] Speaker 4

let me just tell you what I've inherited with the police department. Uh, when we, when we find when, when anyone is bought brought

[01:22:46] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

under

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:22:46–01:22:46 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:22:46] Speaker 4

scrutiny of a policy violation, the go to is I've never been trained on it. So before then everything was okay. But now it's before us and there's repercussions.

[01:23:00] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:23:00–01:23:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:23:02] Speaker 4

That's the go to.

[01:23:03] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:23:03–01:23:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:23:07] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:23:07–01:23:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:23:11] Speaker 4

things. We've got to that point. I mean, um, the, the agency that I came from, uh, our

[01:23:18] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:23:18–01:23:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:23:18] Speaker 4

probably about that thick.

[01:23:20] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:23:20–01:23:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:23:23] Speaker 4

Okay. I'm kind of exaggerating a little bit, but

[01:23:24] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

that

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:23:24–01:23:25 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:23:25] Speaker 4

just kind of show you what type of guidance that they had. So, you know,

[01:23:28] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:23:28–01:23:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:23:28] Speaker 4

probably some validity to that, you know, it's just like past practice stuff, but past practice work before. But now in this case, well, I've never been trained before.

[01:23:39] Speaker 5

So

[01:23:40] Speaker 4

those are ‸ things that we're still addressing to make sure that all our officers are trained properly. I'm constantly giving additional training to my staff, to my police department.

[01:23:49] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:23:49–01:23:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:23:54] Speaker 5

Correct me if I'm wrong, chief, but I believe you also are doing that, uh, with your supervisors and you're holding them accountable for what their subordinates do. Yes. Yes. That's something that's

[01:24:06] Speaker 4

also been trained, uh, changing our policy that now, uh, they're responsible for, uh, the actions of their officers. That was not in our policy before. So they have responsibility to guide and coach our staff. That was not in our policy before. Thank you. You're welcome.

[01:24:31] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:24:31–01:24:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:24:33] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:24:33] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

[01:24:36] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

So

[01:24:36] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

in the interview, ‸ when I questioned him about the lack of, um, subpoena for the black box and the phone records, his excuse was that he wasn't, he wasn't trained on that. And like chief said, that was the catch all, um, answer for most times when you're doing an investigation. Unfortunately, there's not a specific training class that teaches you how to do a subpoena. It's more of a, a learned practice that other detectives walk you through. And those are the things that he had at his, uh, disposal. You know, we

[01:25:12] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

had

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:25:12–01:25:12 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:25:12] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

plenty of people, the sergeant is, is, could have done it. So it was kind of, uh, a lackadaisical response to ‸ question, which was valid. And he really didn't have an answer other than I wasn't trained because it's not a valid answer. Um, he had other avenues to go to.

[01:25:30] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:25:30–01:25:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:25:33] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:25:33–01:25:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:25:38] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

You just fill in the blanks. So it's not really, it wasn't really a valid response. And it goes to the, basically the whole lack of investigation that he did on this case. Thank you, sir.

[01:25:53] Speaker 1

Any further response from the committee or input from the committee as it relates to this item?

[01:25:59] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:25:59–01:26:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:26:03] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[01:26:06] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:26:06–01:26:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:26:06] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:26:06] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

[01:26:11] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[01:26:12] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:26:13] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:14]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:26:13–01:26:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:26:27] Speaker 1

we were sent on Landis and I, I watched the videos, I watched the interviews, I read all of the documents, um, uh, involved.

[01:26:40] No voice detected

Um,

[01:26:40] Speaker 1

I saw, um, a deference from Landis that I have never seen. And, and I'll say, I, I've been practicing law since, uh, ‸ 2014. In that time, I've probably, I've probably handled. Maybe. 200 DUI cases.

[01:27:09] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:27:09–01:27:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:27:10] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

[01:27:16] Speaker 1

so forth. Um, and outside of DUI cases, I've handled thousands of cases and I've saw so many video interviews and whatnot. I have never, ever seen what appeared to be, um, an officer, uh, taking the side of the perpetrator that they're supposed to be investigating for ‸ crime. Um, and.

[01:27:50] No voice detected

And.

[01:27:51] Attribution uncertain

And

[01:27:51] Speaker 1

I, there's no explanation as to why in this particular circumstance.

[01:27:57] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:27:57–01:28:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:28:00] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

[01:28:07] Speaker 1

preferential treatment when I have seen so many ‸ thousands of people, um, being truly interrogated for the crimes that they're accused of. Um. Um. And I can't comment on that. I can't make any assumptions about that. And.

[01:28:26] No voice detected

Um.

[01:28:26] Speaker 1

As much as I want, as much as I want some other action to be taken or some recommendation, the reasons why I want more punishment for this person. Um. Can not be explained. In what I've read. Because there's no explanation for his actions and I don't understand it.

[01:28:50] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:28:50–01:28:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:28:59] No voice detected

because

[01:29:00] Speaker 1

there's really not enough for me to see or go on to understand it. But I know that what happened is highly unusual. And I think that there are probably factors and circumstances affecting this case that are different from the other cases that are going on and that we have reviewed. And I don't know what those factors are. I know what the word on the street or the gossip is, and I won't on the record make insinuations about that or about those connections. ‸ I

[01:29:38] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice

can respond to that.

[01:29:39] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:29:39–01:29:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:29:40] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:29:41] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[01:29:43] Speaker 4

Truth to what? To the accusation that she is connected with another law enforcement official. There's no connection there at all.

[01:29:52] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:29:52–01:30:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:29:58] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:29:58] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

[01:30:02] Speaker 4

make suspects as comfortable as possible with the intentions of getting a confession, getting evidence that we need. Did that interaction appear to be too cozy? Yes. Yes. ‸ But that was, uh, what it appeared to be that he was trying to ensure a, uh, confession of, of the ability to collect evidence. Um, me and my 34 years, I probably wouldn't have done that, but you know, I'm not in another officer's head of what he or she may have been thinking about at the time.

[01:30:44] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:30:44–01:30:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:30:50] Speaker 4

a perception that maybe that was, she was, uh, given preferential treatment. At the end of the day, you look at the charges that we garnered against her. So, um, even if we felt that, that interaction was a

[01:31:06] Attribution uncertain

little

[01:31:06] Speaker 4

bit too cozy, it still wouldn't arise to a termination event.

[01:31:12] Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:31:12–01:31:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:31:15] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:31:15] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:31:15] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

admit.

[01:31:15] Attribution uncertain

And where

[01:31:15] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

she was at.

[01:31:16] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

And where she was at.

[01:31:17] Speaker 8

He got her to admit all of those things that she could have said, I'm not saying anything.

[01:31:22] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

And

[01:31:22] Speaker 8

now we have nothing.

[01:31:23] Speaker 9 (introduced as “Nicholas Sandberg” — machine-transcribed, not verified)

So ‸ like

[01:31:25] Speaker 8

chief is explaining,

[01:31:26] Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:31:26–01:31:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:31:29] Speaker 8

And I covered that with him in the investigation, but that is a technique that officers use to make the suspect feel comfortable to gain some of that information ‸ that we wouldn't have had.

[01:31:41] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yeah. Understood. I appreciate it. Um, uh, anything else from the public? Anything else from leadership? Anything else from the committee? Uh, hearing none.

[01:32:04] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:32:04–01:32:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:32:09] Speaker 5

All right. Motion to adjourn.

[01:32:11] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:32:11–01:32:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:32:12] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Second.

[01:32:13] Speaker 1

Uh, all in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you.

[01:32:21] Speaker 5

Thank you.

Police Community Relations Advisory Board Regular Meeting

The City's record

What the City's record shows

Agenda (the City's wording)

Transcript Partial transcript

Ask about this meeting