“My 27 years in law enforcement have been dedicated to the ethical and committed service to the departments and communities I have been proud to be a part of,” the statement read. “For the past seven years, I have accomplished many good things for both the Police Department and community here at UC Davis; and am grateful to those of you who have remembered this.”
“As the university does not want this incident to be its defining moment, nor do I wish for it to be mine. I believe in order to start the healing process, this chapter of my life must be closed.”
University Spokesperson Claudia Morain did not have further details at the time, other than to say they are confirming that they received her resignation.
The university also confirmed that they will have more information on her successor shortly. Lt. Matt Carmichael has been acting as chief since the incident occurred. He emerged largely unscathed by this scandal; indeed, his name does not even appear in either the Reynoso Task Force or the Kroll reports.
The reports painted a bleak view of the police chief, ineffectual and also failing to challenge the leadership team’s decision on the timing of the police operation. Also, apparently, she lacked the respect of the lieutenants under her control, as they basically ignored her.
The task force nails her on multiple occasions in their summary of events. They write, “Chief Spicuzza bears individual responsibility for failing to challenge the leadership team’s decision on the time of the police operation and for not clarifying the role the police were expected to play during the operation.”
They add: “She is also responsible for numerous deviations from best police practices both before and during the operation.”
The reality is even far worse than that, as the report paints a picture not only of indecisiveness but incompetence, to the point where even her own people did not follow her orders.
The Reynoso report writes, “Police Chief Spicuzza, at least initially, argued to her officers that the police operation was to be limited in various respects. She attempted, unsuccessfully, to dissuade her officers from using batons and pepper spray or to prevent them from wearing ‘riot gear’ during the operation.”
The task force report describes a complete breakdown in the leadership in the UCD Police Department.
They write: “The command and leadership structure of the UCDPD is very dysfunctional. Lieutenants refused to follow directives of the Chief.”
It went further: “This breakdown is illustrated by the heated exchanges between the Chief and her Lieutenants as to the scope and conduct of the operation and the Chief’s apparent concession that her officers will do things their own way and there is nothing she can do about it.”
Kroll further reports, “Also that night, Chief Spicuzza told the Lieutenants that she didn’t want them wearing helmets and face shields, or ‘riot gear, as she called it,’ according to Garcia-Hernandez.”
The Lieutenants replied, “You cannot tell somebody to walk into a situation like that without their safety gear” and called her suggestion “ridiculous.”
The Vanguard, therefore, concluded that the chief needed immediately to be terminated, based on this account.
The most puzzling portion of the account is that Chief Spicuzza largely withdrew from a command position. Instead, Officer L describes seeing the “Chief of Police staring at me with her camera, videotaping me with her iPhone.”
Kroll notes, “Other officers said that they observed Chief Spicuzza outside of the encircled crowd observing the events.”
In summary, the Kroll team cites an order by the police chief, without any asserted legal authority for the order, to clear the Quad. Furthermore, “Chief Spicuzza failed to challenge or question this administrative policy directive at crucial decision points. Indeed, according to Pike’s Supplemental Narrative Report, it was Lieutenants Pike and OFFICER P who demanded the last-minute call to Campus Counsel to obtain legal guidance.”
Kroll continues, “The timing of any police operation is a key tactical consideration and Chief Spicuzza should have affirmatively resisted this direction – that is, assuming she did not agree with it. Chief Spicuzza’s position is unclear: she clearly considered 3:00 a.m. on Friday morning as a first choice and 3:00 a.m. on Saturday morning as a second choice. Kroll has not determined whether Chief Spicuzza viewed 3:00 p.m. as simply the third choice or whether she strongly objected to this timing on tactical/operational grounds.”
Kroll goes on to argue that Lt. Pike “was hampered by repeated failed leadership of Chief Spicuzza, his supervisor, who did not attend the briefing for the operation, did not raise objections to the flawed plans suggested by the administration, and played an unusual, disengaged role at the scene.”
They call the chief’s actions deficient, as “she failed to say ‘no’ to the chancellor when suboptimal tactical decisions were being promoted; when she saw things during the police operation not occurring to her satisfaction, she did not to step in and assume command. Rather, the chief chose to call. repeatedly. the Department Operations Command post and relay instructions.”
It was clear from this report that there was no conceivable way for the police chief to continue on in her capacity. The personnel under her command clearly lacked respect for her.
Moreover, none of these problems are particularly new. UC Davis had simply never really evaluated the performance of the chief in any meaningful way. If they had they would have seen the personnel problems and the breakdown in the command structure far sooner.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
I hope nobody derives any pleasure from the departure of Annette Spicuzza. She failed, yes, and a departure is in order. But nobody should celebrate the pain of others, no matter what they did.
There are 14 time-honored principles of organization that date back to the beginnings of the University itself. They are carved in stone and published with Moses’ permission. Almost all of them were violated in this “systematic” (Kroll quote) demonstration of how to do nothing right.
The most glaring organization principles violated at every level of the University hierarchy was “Unity of Command.” Everybody and nobody was making critical decisions at critical times. No wonder organization anarchy ruled the day.
Annette is gone. But she did not make this system of Non-leadership by Committee. She fell victim to it.
I agree with most of what you say here Phil. On a personal level, Chief Spicuzza was a professional and helpful. But the report was pretty glaring. I don’t take pleasure in seeing her demise, I don’t see her as being malicious, but I am relieved that she is gone, because she needed to be gone. And she’s not the only one.
Well said Phil Coleman, as I posted yesterday, She gained a ton of respect from me for not only taking responsibility, but moving the healing forward .
Agree with Phil Coleman. There was no fixing the problems if the chief stayed on. The report exposes a lack of respect for her and her professional views on the part of colleagues at every level of UCD. She gets criticized for her lack of assertiveness with Meyer and Katehi as well as Pike and other underlings. But it appears she operated in an atmosphere of fear and non-communication; she may have learned her past lessons well.
I wonder if she’ll be more forthcoming and cooperate with the investigations still underway. Her hope that this not be seen as the “defining moment” of her career is futile, I’m afraid. Not many people have the background of Phil Coleman to judge her in a broader context than the viral video and Reynoso/Kroll findings.
The incident command system responses I’ve observed have been so much different that what happened here. Following just half of the concepts would have all administration/police operating substantially differently.
[quote]There are 14 time-honored principles of organization that date back to the beginnings of the University itself. They are carved in stone and published with Moses’ permission. Almost all of them were violated in this “systematic” (Kroll quote) demonstration of how to do nothing right.
The most glaring organization principles violated at every level of the University hierarchy was “Unity of Command.” Everybody and nobody was making critical decisions at critical times. No wonder organization anarchy ruled the day. [/quote]This is the important lesson to be learned.
David, I believe that the first sentence of your response was fine… everything after “But…” seemed, well, “catty”
[quote]“My 27 years in law enforcement have been dedicated to the ethical and committed service to the departments and communities I have been proud to be a part of,” the statement read. “For the past seven years, I have accomplished many good things for both the Police Department and community here at UC Davis; and am grateful to those of you who have remembered this.”
“As the university does not want this incident to be its defining moment, nor do I wish for it to be mine. I believe in order to start the healing process, this chapter of my life must be closed.”[/quote]
Unfortunately this is probably how Spicuzza will be remembered. I would like to offer a different, more personal perspective. While my daughter was attending UCD, her friend died in a terrible auto accident, just a few miles from campus at 1 am. It was as a result of driver fatigue and the failure to wear a seat belt (the deceased girl was in the back seat w/o a seat belt and went through the front windshield; the driver had driven up from LA, starting out in the late afternoon on Memorial Day weekend). My daughter and I were devastated by the loss of such a vibrant, and intelligent friend. I contacted Annette Spicuzza, asking if there was some way to warn students of the dangers of driving while drowsy. Annette Spicuzza immediately sprung into action, and made the issue a part of incoming freshman orientation at all UC campuses. I have always admired her for such kind and professional responsiveness.
For those of you who insist Annette Spicuzza was “ineffectual”, we have not heard her side, and it appears now probably never will. What we don’t know is to what extent she was hampered in her duties by an overbearing administration? If her superiors refused to give her the necessary power to do her job effectively, then how can she carry out her tasks like a professional? How could her subordinates respect her? We just don’t know enough to sit in judgment IMO. Phil Coleman said it very well:
[quote]The most glaring organization principles violated at every level of the University hierarchy was “Unity of Command.” Everybody and nobody was making critical decisions at critical times. No wonder organization anarchy ruled the day.
Annette is gone. But she did not make this system of Non-leadership by Committee. She fell victim to it.[/quote]
By the way, three UCD students died that same weekend – it deeply effected Annette Spicuzza…
Correction – three UC students…
“And she’s not the only one. “
I agree . Katehi seems safe, but I hope chastened, into attentiveness . In the cases of Lt. Pike and the other unnamed mutineers, I don’t think a demotion and LOP are sufficient administrative consequences for insubordination and dereliction of duty . Lt. Pike may well be facing far worse outcomes in criminal and/or civil court . Having had so long to reflect on the personalities involved, and now, knowing more of the backstory, thanks to Reynoso/Kroll and The Vanguard, these last few days I have been struck by the personal toll this must be taking on all those involved . It is easy to see the “Authorities” as two dimensional bumbling thugs . In fact, they were just plain folks, in a very tough job, pushed, in some cases, past the point of breaking .
That does not excuse their performance or behavior, but it should temper our discussions of the events . I know it will mine .
[quote] It is easy to see the “Authorities” as two dimensional bumbling thugs . In fact, they were just plain folks, in a very tough job, pushed, in some cases, past the point of breaking .
That does not excuse their performance or behavior, but it should temper our discussions of the events . I know it will mine .[/quote]
Well said! An apt quote comes to mind:
“There but for the grace of God go I.”
Great. The pound of flesh has been acquired after the half-million dollar report.
Now David, do you think you can quell your obsession with this topic? You guys remind me of a dog with a bone that you won’t let go of even though the bone is bleached white and tasteless. It is long-past appearing desperate seeking meaning to a cause… a cause that folks like myself see as poorly understood with goals still yet undefined.
“Now David, do you think you can quell your obsession with this topic? “
Yes I will not cover Spicuzza anymore.
“Now David, do you think you can quell your obsession with this topic?”
Even if he could, the rest of the media won’t . As I said at the outset,” …remember how the 1968 Democratic convention riots focused the nation on the abuse of police power and fueled future anti-draft and anti-war demonstrations ? The images of armored police pepper spraying kids plays much better for the demonstrators than it does for the Police . ” The viscous yellow precipitate has only just begun to swirl .
“a cause that folks like myself see as poorly understood with goals still yet undefined. “
As many of us see the Tea Party !
[quote]“But…” seemed, well, “catty” [/quote]
Unfortunately my cats have gotten the best of me for some time.
[quote]“For me, I’m more interested in the police and administration reactions and how they handle it than I am about whether the 99% are getting screwed over, which btw, I assume they are.”[/quote]Some people also need to be more interested in how the tiny percent (the demonstrators) behave when speaking for the rest of us. Being loud, rude, rowdy, etc., is fine. Breaking the law is counter-productive, partly because the rest of us don’t sympathize with law-breakers, regardless of cause for which the claim to be advocating.
Some people also need to be more interested in how the tiny percent (the demonstrators) behave when speaking for the rest of us. Being loud, rude, rowdy, etc., is fine. Breaking the law is counter-productive, partly because the rest of us don’t sympathize with law-breakers, regardless of cause for which the claim to be advocating.
well put.
But the report was pretty glaring. I don’t take pleasure in seeing her demise, I don’t see her as being malicious, but I am relieved that she is gone, because she needed to be gone. And she’s not the only one.
talking out of both sides of your mouth.
on another note, what a waste. The end result of the camping and protests is people losing their jobs both in terms of law enforcement, and the bank employees. On the student side, they are going to jail. And even if they get light sentences (or no sentences), their potential careers are put on hiatus if they are lucky. Not to mention all the costs involved, for no good reason.
Has anyone explained why the UCD police had pepper spray canisters that weren’t on some “authorized list”? Lt. Pike bought it from terrorists? Somebody (Chief Spicuzza?) authorized purchasing it for used by the force? What is the “authorized list,” and how significant is it that Pike and others carried something not on it? Is it a violation of law? Maybe the chief would have an answer.
Lt. Pike needs to be the next one to leave, regardless of why his actions were inappropriate. Nothing can move ahead until he’s gone.
It’s nice to hear something good about the police chief, thanks to Elaine.
It’s amazing the chief’s grammar in her “official” emailed news release to the Bee and others is faulty.
Her salary has been over $100,000/year and yet she can’t get a noun and verb together in a sentence. This likely reflects scattered thinking.
No wonder she couldn’t handle the job.
Re: JustSaying
Regarding the MK-9 and the “Authorized Weapons”
I think the Kroll Report did not sufficiently explain the meaning, the significance, and the policies related to Authorized Weapons. In the Report, Kroll only said that UC San Francisco PD told UC Davis PD and UC San Diego PD about MK-9 (which UC San Francisco uses), and that MK-9 is not in UCDPD’s list of authorized weapons. (Reynoso 113/190)
For people reading this, they must first understand that when Kroll said that a weapon is “not listed”, it doesn’t mean that the weapon is “banned”. It simply means that it is not on the document. For UC Davis PD, such document is dated 2009. [559 Authorized Weapons and Tools] ([url]http://police.ucdavis.edu/departmental-policy-and-procedures[/url])
According to UCDPD Dept Policy 559 section III B 4:
[quote]The Chief of Police, at their discretion, may grant an exemption to the type of chemical agent deployed.[/quote]
According to UC Police Policies ([url]http://www.ucop.edu/ucophome/coordrev/ucpolicies/documents/policepol_adminproc.pdf[/url]) 812.1 and 812.3, the pepper spray used should follow California Penal Code 12403, which states that:
[quote]Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit any person who is a peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, from purchasing, possessing, transporting, or using any tear gas or tear gas weapon if the person has satisfactorily completed a course of instruction approved by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training in the use of tear gas.[/quote]
This means that if:
A. Lt. Pike completed POST approved training on pepper spray (12403), AND
B. MK-9 is certified by the California Department of Justice, AND
C. Chief Spicuzza gave the OK for MK-9,
then MK-9 was in fact a lawful department-issued weapon.
I do not know how to check if MK-9 is certified by the Department of Justice.
[quote]812.3 Chemical Agents to be Certified for Use. All chemical agents used by the department shall be certified as acceptable by the State Department of Justice as required by Section 12403 of the California Penal Code.[/quote]
The lastest outrage is that UCDPD just endorsed Schwarzenegger appointed Republican Judge Dan Maguire who is in a contested election for his seat. In this kind of toxic situation, you would think they would realize that this case could land on his docket and cause him to be biased (or since lots of the judges have closed ranks(and some have loaned Magure’s campaign as much as $10,000.00) which could cause them to be biased in their future management of this issue. Man, kind of stings your eyes and smells bad. Too uncool. UCDPD – bad decisions then, bad leadership now. These types of backdoor deals and bad behavior hurt everyone.
[quote]…you would think they would realize that this case could land on his docket and cause him to be biased …[/quote]
Why would MaGuire be any more biased than any other judge? I’m not following you here…