Accuracy in Media and those Stubborn little things called FACTS!

The Los Angeles Men's Central Jail has a library? Wow! Who knew?

It's interesting that a very recent article in The Daily Breeze, written by Denise Nix, would lead us to believe there is a library there. And that information is according to none other than Deputy District Attorney Dennis Lockfield. Quoting a portion of the article as it appeared in the Daily Breeze on June 18, 2008:

Cameron Brown shank case dismissed

By Denise Nix on June 18, 2008 3:12 PM

Prosecutors dropped a weapon posession [sic] charge today for a man jailed while waiting trial in connection to his 4-year-old daughter's Rancho Palos Verdes cliff death.

Cameron Brown, 46, was charged with one felony count of custodial posession [sic] of a weapon after a jailer found a razor blade in a book Brown borrowed from the jail library, according to Deputy District Attorney Dennis Lockfield.

Lockfield said the case was dismissed because he did not believe it could be proved that Brown knew about the razor.

First of all, I believe there are rules with regard to a prosecutor providing false or misleading information to the media, and nothing can be more false or more misleading than the statement Ms. Nix claims Lockfield made. Mr. Brown did NOT borrow a book from the library. Furthermore, the Men's Central Jail, according to Deputy Nawotny who testified during the Preliminary Hearing, has NO library!

The Daily Breeze is a well-known and relied upon source of news in the beach communities surrounding the Palos Verdes Peninsula. As such, it would seem they have a responsibility to make sure their customers are provided with unbiased reporting. I don't know what ever happened to "fact checking", but it seems to have taken a back seat to sensationalism. At the very least Ms. Nix might have been wise to add the caveat, "the unconfirmed statement of DDA Lockfield". Or, perhaps, Ms. Nix might have checked with the defense team to see if they have anything else to add to these developments.

Well, I guess we aren't always lucky enough to get what we pay for, but we will do our very best to take up the slack and correct the mistakes.

Weapons Charge Against Cameron Brown Dismissed!

Yesterday, June 18, 2008, the weapons charge that had been filed against Cameron Brown was dismissed. This case was filed after a razor blade was found in the spine of a book that was ostensibly discovered in Cameron's cell. The book was a hard-covered book, which inmates are not permitted to possess in the jail. On January 6, 2008, after Cameron was brought back from a shower, he immediately noticed a hard-cover book in his cell which had not been there when he had been taken to the shower. He asked a deputy to remove it since it was not his book. As soon as the deputy took the book from Cameron, he looked for and found a razor blade in the spine of the book.

At the Preliminary Hearing on April 30, the deputy who had found the blade testified that the book had been destroyed because it was considered to be contraband. The destruction of this main piece of evidence was, of course, a major point of concern to the defense. For one thing, all books belonging to inmates are stamped on the inside cover indicating how they were received into the jail and to whom they were being sent.

Since inmates are not permitted to possess hard-cover books, such a book would have to have been brought in by a prison employee, or else by someone with access (such as for example the chaplain). Cameron's cell was searched regularly and the book had not been in his cell at the time that he left for the shower. It is completely incomprehensible to suppose that the book had been in his possession. Nevertheless, since it was found in his cell, he was charged with possession of a weapon. It is shocking to learn that the book, which was an important piece of evidence, was destroyed!

It was also revealed that the razor blade which was in evidence had not been checked for fingerprints. Why not? Fingerprints found on the book or on the razor blade would seem to be a primary piece of evidence. There is no logical reason why they would not have been checked for fingerprints prior to bringing the case forward. But they were not.

The defense also immediately subpoenaed a video tape that would have shown all the activity in Cameron's cell. Because of previous problems and complaints that Cameron had filed, he was placed on a special tier in the jail where all activity was videotaped. The defense immediately subpoenaed the videotapes, and also made an offer to send someone from their office to the jail to retrieve the data at their own expense. But they were assured that this would not be necessary. However, at the next hearing they were told that the tapes were not available since they had already been recycled and taped over. They were told that the deputies did not know how to save the data on the tapes! Now, really! Are we supposed to believe that?

At each subsequent hearing there was a new prosecutor appearing for the State. At the hearing prior to the dismissal there was also an attorney representing the Sheriff's Department present. He tried to advance the idea that the book wasn't destroyed and had only been misplaced. He tried to say that they would find it somehow -- somewhere -- at sometime. This was odd since the Deputy who found the shank was very clear about what had happened to the book, and why. The testimony from the prior hearing was referred to on the record to establish the point.

We believe that the weapon was planted in Cam's cell deliberately as a means of pressuring him into making a deal, and also to have a charge of potential violence on his record. Prosecutor Hum has been trying to find whatever he can to show that Cameron is ostensibly a "bad guy" with a violent temper. After nearly 8 years, he is certainly frustrated by the reality that Cameron has never been a violent person.