Showing posts with label CSPD Internal Affairs Division. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CSPD Internal Affairs Division. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

El Paso County Responds, Rozita to be tried NEXT YEAR.

I called, and I emailed Frederick Stein, Senior Deputy District Attorney for El Paso County Colorado.
This is my letter, to him:
"Mr. Stein,

I have several questions with regard to the Rozita Swinton case, that continues to be delayed. From where I stand this seems to be the oldest misdemeanor case in El Paso county, at this time.

Are you aware of the recently concluded CSPD IA investigation regarding Lt. Magdalena Santos and her well known (around CSPD) association with the defendant?

Are you aware of a statement made by Becky Hoerth, Rozita's former roommate in which she states that Lt. Magdalena Santos (980D) and Lt, Jane Anderson have interfered in a case or cases involving Rozita before, in her favor? This 50 page statement appears to have been generated in the first half of 2008, probably in April.

Are you aware of Rozita being used as "voice talent" for CSPD/CBI (and possibly FBI) internet sex sting operations that drew in suspects from across the Western United States? CSPD in conjunction with a task force was using phone contacts with leads picked up on the internet in which adults successfully portrayed themselves as little girls, to lure in predator suspects.

All of this looks terribly suspicious in view of the fact that the defendant sparked the largest child custody case in US history last year and in view of the fact that her attorney, former El Paso county prosecutor David Foley rather loudly stated he had "surprises" regarding the case in April of last year, a week after Rozita's arrest.

Can you let me know what is going on with this case and when it will next be on the court's calender?

Hugh McBryde
Modern Pharisee Blogspot."
This is his reply:
"Mr. McBride [sic],



The next court dates for Rozita Swinton’s case are Jan 6, 2010 for pre-trial readiness and Jan 13, 2010 for JT. Because this is a open case which is currently being prosecuted by the 4th Judicial District Attorney’s Office, I am unable to answer any further questions about this case.



Frederick Stein

Senior Deputy District Attorney

4th Judicial District Attorney's Office

719-520-6191

frederickstein@elpasoco.com "
I of course, told you it would be delayed, again.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

And Rozita's Trial? YOU GUESSED IT (called off) UPDATED

Will Rozita EVER go to trial before a case in the YFZ matter is finished? It's beginning to look as if the answer is "NEVER."
CallOffs for Tuesday November 10, 2009
CaseNumber AppearanceDate DefLastName DefFirstName Division
D021 2009CR 003517 11/10/2009 Windle Emily 07
D021 2009CR 000857 11/10/2009 Rodriguez Jesus 09
D021 2008CR 005179 11/10/2009 Rodriguez Jesus 09
D021 2009CR 003056 11/10/2009 Allen-turner James 18
D021 2009CR 003389 11/10/2009 Tian-velasquez Pablo 18
C021 2008M 002726 11/10/2009 Swinton Rozita C
If you go there, go to this page, it will be under "View Cases For Tomorrow" until sometime this morning, then it will revert to "View Today's Cases." "Called Off" does not mean "it will never happen," at least TECHNICALLY it doesn't mean that. It means IN THEORY it is being rescheduled.

UPDATE: Judging from the case number, Rozita's case originated in 2008. The "M" after "2008" appears to does designate "Misdemeanor." On the whole page of 7 day call offs, there is only one case from 2008 that is a misdemeanor that is still in play in El Paso County. Rozita's. Don't tell me this is normal, this is highly unusual.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, November 07, 2009

CSPD Internal Affairs concludes it's investigation.

It lacks specifics and I have never been given the "receipt number" for the investigation:
November 2, 2009



Hugh McBryde
P.O. Box ****
Montpelier, VT 05601

Dear Mr. McBryde

This letter is in response to the suspicions you raised in your complaint on 09-24-09 regarding employees of the Colorado Springs Police Department.

A thorough inquiry was conducted which included a review of Department records and reports, interviews with involved employees and review of Department policies. The investigation disclosed there was no violation of Department policy nor was there any indication of inappropriate behavior by our employees.

Sincerely,


Lt. K. D. Wilson
Internal Affairs Division
Colorado Springs Police Department
The letter came in an envelope postmarked November 3rd, 2009, as Raymond Jessop's trial was winding down, and right before Rozita's starts in Colorado Springs. I got it today.

Right way I note it is fairly vague. What is "inappropriate behavior" on the part of their employees? What is department policy? Where's my receipt number?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Meanwhile, back in Colorado....

Here's a first. Rozita's pre-trial conference is NOT on the "Call off" list for today in Colorado Springs.
There is nothing to say that it might not appear later, or that at the pre-trial conference, more delays are in the offing, but she's not on the list today, which may mean she's actually there. You can look yourself, but only until about 9am tomorrow when it's updated to show Thursday's "Call Offs." If you recall, her trial is set for November 10th.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, September 26, 2009

Rozita, David Foley, Maggie Santos and Surprising things left unsaid.

Rozita's attorney David Foley has been confident from the beginning, boldly swaggering and making public statements, accurately predicting the future, and then, saying nothing more. Listen to what he said, one week after Rozita was arrested:
The San Antonio Express-News - "Texas Rangers accompanied Colorado Springs police officers last week when they searched Swinton's apartment, where they found items indicating a possible connection between Swinton and calls regarding the Eldorado compound. Swinton, who works for an insurance office, is free on $10,000 bond. Her attorney, David Foley of Colorado Springs, said he could not discuss the allegations.

'There's a lot more to this than the public is getting. I think people would be surprised. Stay tuned,' Foley said.

Her initial court appearance is set for May 1, but Foley said he expects the case will be rescheduled."
Not only did someone probably pay cash for Rozita's bond (I checked) but David Foley is ALREADY saying the case will be delayed (has it ever been) and publicly trumpeting in the press that they should "stay tuned" because he thought "people would be surprised."

He's said exactly zero after that. You can't catch David Foley. He's casually skipped court dates and had arrest warrants sworn out for his client that were later dropped, his client has traveled the country after being listed as a flight risk in the warrant (probably routine, I grant you), she has received expensive psychiatric care out of state and she has skipped in and out of the court confidently, right under the noses of the press with last minute changes in venue.

You'd think she was a rich celebrity client.

She's not. She's a simple misdemeanor defendant.

So David Foley was right, his client did get a delay, and a delay and a delay and a delay and who knows how many other delays.

Why DO you go out and say that you've got surprising things to say and then not say them and then get everything you want?

Could it be because you've got surprising things to say, and you're not saying them?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, September 25, 2009

Bring it on


A coward, and a nobody whose gender we do not even know, Texas Blues (Man?) aka "HeShe," aka "Hac Hoc" is telling me that I am risking a lawsuit. Do we REALLY think this is because he cares about what happens to me?
Bring it on. All of you. I would LOVE to make this an issue about ME. That is truly beyond my wildest dreams that I would be sued, and then have the opportunity to subpoena and depose and have testify, all these persons who I am alleged to treat poorly.

I am serious. Oh please. Oh please, OH PLEASE just do it.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Revisiting Sean Mandel

Back in January, I may have been wrong. That happens.
That's may have been wrong, but not very. On January 21st I reported to you that I had contacted Sean Mandel of the CSPD and discovered that he had NOT been contacted by Texas, rather he had been contacted by an FBI agent he was working with on detached duty in April of the preceding year. That would be the month that the YFZ raid occurred and Rozita was apprehended.

In view of what has been discovered in the last several days, I'm forced to say this might not have been "first contact." This was indeed a "back channel" that I discovered, a sort of "carrier pigeon" network instead of the normal channel, but who contacted whom first? I have always assumed that I stumbled upon the first communication between CSPD and Texas and the FBI, but it may have been one in a long series of contacts, designed to stay OFF THE RECORD.

One of the things CSPD's IA needs to ask, and look for is who contacted who first? Was it "Beta" (Maggie's "longtime companion") or was it Maggie or did some other member of CSPD call TEXAS first and say "I think we know your caller?" The precise mechanism of the first contact between the FBI, the Texas Rangers, Sherri f David Doran and CSPD must be known. WHO called WHOM first and WHEN?

What if Maggie did the RIGHT THING and called before the kids were carted away? Before the raid took place?

PS: I'm apparently "Stalking" Rozita, assuming of course that this blogger is Rozita. It has always seemed to be her. The graphic is funny. (In case you're wondering, the smallest print says ("BTW, you're out of milk.")
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, September 24, 2009

More on the relationship of Lt. Maggie Santos and Rozita Swinton

When someone doesn't tell you the truth, or at least, when they skirt around it, and you check their story, you keeping sitting up straight in your chair and having those insight moments. Here's another insight:
From the April 2008 arrest warrant of Rozita Swinton.
"On February 14, 2007, Sergeant Magdalena Santos (980D) was contacted by Jenna Hamilton from the Cocoon House located in the state of Washington. Ms. Hamilton stated she was concerned for the welfare of a 14-year-old she was talking to identified as 'April' from Colorado Springs, Colorado, who had been calling her since September 2006. Ms. Hamilton advised 'April' would call several times a week reporting sexual abuse by her father and uncle. She advised 'April' had told her she was staying at the TESSA safe house with her mother (at) the end of 2006. Ms. Hamilton stated 'April' told her she was a student at Rampart High School. Ms. Hamilton stated she had spoken with counselor Catherine DiNuzzo at the school in reference to 'April.' Ms. Hamilton advised 'April' had called from 719-447-7981 and 719-217-7329."
Since we now know it was "common knowledge" around CSPD that Lt. Maggie Santos knew Rozita Swinton, we can assume that Maggie was familiar with her cases. At least, she was familiar with the February 2007 call from Jenna Hamilton. She TOOK the 2007 call from Jenna Hamiliton. She KNOWS Rozita has "exported" her talents after her Douglas county guilty plea on similar charges where Rozita received a deferred sentence.

So, are we to believe that in view of Maggie's familiarity with this particular case of a young teen girl complaining of sexual abuse to a shelter in Washington State, from old friend Rozita, that Maggie turns on the tube, Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and during the first part of April 2008, watches the unfolding drama (along with her friend "Beta") and doesn't say "Oh CRAP...ROZITA?" Don't they have an IMMEDIATE responsibility to call and say "WHAT NUMBER IS YOUR CALLER CALLING FROM?" The story was so plastered all over the news that it was like it was happening in their back yard. And really, it was, because in February, the month before Rozita began calling Texas:
Newsweek - "This past February (2008), according to an arrest-warrant affidavit against Swinton, Colorado Springs police responded to two 911 calls from someone claiming to be Jennifer, a 4-year-old abused girl locked in a basement. By tracking the calls, cops narrowed the location to a two-block radius and then searched the area house by house for a trapped little girl. Swinton 'basically shut down a whole police division,' says Thrumston. The girl was never found. (In between calls, Swinton also found time to get elected as a state delegate for (then Sen.) Barack Obama in the Colorado Democratic caucuses.)"


Toes also says that if IA doesn't look at Rozita's and Maggies (and Beta's) phone numbers, they're not trying.

Don't tell me they didn't think of it. They are detectives. What do they do? They DETECT.
Last updated 7:22am EDT 09/25/09
More →

Sphere: Related Content

CSPD Internal Affairs, Lt. Maggie Santos and Rozita Swinton

I had two conversations with Colorado Springs' Police Department's "Internal Affairs" division today.
The first was grossly unsuccessful. The listed contact for CSPD's "IA" is a Lt. Kirk Wilson, and it should be noted that while Lt. Wilson was with CSPD in April of 2008, he was not in "IA."

When I called, about 9am their time, a woman answered the phone and indicated that Lt. Wilson was "in training" this morning and was unavailable. I left my phone number and name and asked that he get back to me. Within the hour I had a call back from a male member of CSPD, presumably in IA named Sgt. Lux. The conversation with Sgt. Lux could be best described as initially cordial, then cold, and then verbal warfare. At no time during the conversation would I describe Sgt. Lux as being helpful.

The gist of the conversation from my point of view was, that if I brought evidence, signed sealed and delivered of impropriety on the part of a CSPD officer, they would look into it. Specific times, specific places, specific persons and specific crimes. I was verbally harassed at several turns in the conversation and it descended into an exchange that I could best compare to a traffic stop where I was the driver being asked to quickly produce my License, Insurance and Registration.

In calling CSPD's IA, I had little expectation of real result. Lt. Maggie Santos had directed me to call IA and so I did. In general I expected the most positive outcome to be that IA had investigated Lt. Santos, and had cleared her. That would be a positive result in terms of information. I also have no desire that Lt. Santos be involved in anything improper. That would be sad and would possibly destroy lives. I have no desire for such an outcome, but Lt. Santos has brought this on herself, by being less than forthcoming.

If there was an ongoing IA investigation, I would not expect IA to tell me, one way or the other, and as far as I know, there is an investigation. I think that is unlikely, but it's possible.

The conversation with Sgt. Lux was fruitless with me yelling at him in the end that he was obstructing, and being obtuse and wasting my time. He repeated questions and belittled saying I was unprepared for the call and didn't know what I was alleging. Right Sgt. Lux. I was unprepared, I don't know what I am alleging. This is all new to me. I eventually found part of the information he asked about, having no way to know in advance what CSPD's IA would want to know or use as documentation, and I gave it to him. Like I said, after that I ended up yelling at Sgt. Lux. It was an infuriating conversation.

So I went to Costco. Did some shopping, drove back, and called the number I had to pry out of Sgt. Lux for CSPD's records division in the hope that I get access to Becky Hoerth's deposition that almost certainly had to spring out of the April 2008 arrest warrant of Rozita Swinton.

And got interrupted.

By a call.

From Lt. Kirk Wilson.

Lt. Wilson said he had a "number on his phone" and was calling back, he also said he had an email about the conversation Sgt. Lux and I had from Sgt. Lux. The tone of our conversation was considerably different. Whereas the one that took place between myself and Sgt. Lux could be best characterized as Sgt. Lux telling me "What do you want US to do about it?" and me eventually becoming angry, Lt. Wilson wanted to know what I had called about, and made an effort to fit it into a form Internal Affairs could deal with.

Eventually I was able to clarify who it was that I was suggesting there be an investigation concerning and why it was important. Essentially it boiled down to "This is the largest child custody case in US History, Lt. Santos has not been forthcoming, it needs to be investigated for even the smallest appearance of impropriety and then those appearances pursued until resolution." It was not hard once the case was laid out to convince Lt. Wilson that this was important.

I would say there has NOT been a case opened with regard to Rozita at any time by IA involving Rozita and either Lt. Santos and her "friend" in the department, with whom she lives, the female officer I refer to as "Beta." Had there been, Lt. Santos would have been better prepared when I called on the 21st. She wasn't. Lt. Wilson would have been carrying out a case of faked ignorance as to some of the details, that should have him acting out his job, not doing it, in Hollywood, for bigger bucks. I'm going to call this as the first formal investigation into the matter. I of course, cannot predict the outcome.

One of the things that I told Lt. Wilson I would quote him on was his statement that it was "common knowledge" that Rozita and Lt. Maggie Santos had a "relationship" around CSPD, as an internal matter. For this to be true, contact with Maggie and Rozita simply had to be of a relatively contemporary nature. The obvious familiarity and "common knowledge" in the department (which included Lt. Wilson knowing at the time of Rozita's arrest) means that it wasn't a 15 year old relationship. I'm sorry. Rozita has gained weight, changed in appearance, and was arrested initially under a different name. Maggie, in addition had fielded a call in February of 2007 from Washington state regarding Rozita and if her memory had faded, it certainly had been recently refreshed, and a little over a year later, here they were again. Similar problem. False reporting across state lines.

After telling Lt. Wilson I intended to publish his statement, he hung a few believable qualifiers on it. By "common knowledge" he did not mean "EVERYBODY at CSPD knew." He offered that of course, he knew, but that didn't mean everybody, but indeed quite a few people at CSPD that were around for the arrest, did know.

He also did not mean that the quality or nature of the relationship was known for anything other than "they knew each other." In other words that's all that there might have been to the association. They knew each other. That makes sense to some degree for an officer that is the CSPD sex crimes unit and a frequent false reporter that used to be your kid's nanny. Except this was not acknowledged to me by Maggie, so that further erodes her credibility.

Basically it is evident to me so far that Lt. Wilson is being truthful with me (this could change) and at least initially intended to investigate the charge. The fact that a good number of CSPD officers knew of the familiarity of Santos and Swinton says that Lt. Santos blew smoke my direction.

At one point Lt. Wilson wondered aloud why I would want to push the issue and I explained. This is the largest child custody case in US History. Hoerth, Swinton, Santos and "Beta" are almost certainly all lesbians that at one time, hung out together. That makes their relationships anything from romantic to professional and inappropriate. If it was "common knowledge" at CSPD that Rozita and Maggie had a "relationship," then why has that fact NEVER come to light in the reporting of the story?

IA has opened a case or initial investigation, they will be getting back to me.
More →

Sphere: Related Content