Go to BeeHiveSites.com to learn more!
Prince William County’s Sanctuary Policy For Illegals
By Greg L | 24 May 2007 | Illegal Aliens, Prince William County | 21 Comments
Earlier today I alerted readers that the Prince William County Police Department has recently adopted a policy that prohibits officers from asking suspected illegal aliens who are suspected of committing crimes and driving violations their immigration status. Tonight it’s time to tell that story, and about how the police department is attempting to cover up this policy which puts not only residents of Prince William County, but those in surrounding jurisdictions at risk.
On April 8th, a Mr. Roberto Martinez-Rodriguez of Manassas Park was involved in a traffic accident in Woodbridge and cited with driving while intoxicated, felony hit-and-run, and driving without a license. This looked suspiciously like a case of an illegal alien endangering residents of Prince William County, so in order to determine what the facts were in this case, I filed a request with the Prince William County Police Department on April 10th under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act which asked “Is Mr. Rodriguez a citizen of a foreign country?” and “If Mr. Rodriguez is a citizen of a foreign country, did he provide documentation that establishes that his presence in the United States is lawful?”
On April 17th, County Attorney Ross Horton responded to these questions with “There are no documents in our possession that would contain the answer to that question.” I found that answer very unusual, since it would seem that the police never asked Mr. Rodriguez whether his presence in the country was lawful, otherwise there would be a document responsive to this request which they would have provided, excerpted, or said they were withholding under some provision of the statute that governs Freedom of Information requests. Were they even asking the question?
Help Save Manassas Vice President Mike Austin joined the effort a little later, and talked to one of the police officers that he knows socially, who told him that in fact the department had recently instituted a policy which prohibits officers from inquiring into the immigration status of suspected illegal aliens. Another tip, so far unconfirmed, indicated that this policy was in place and that it was adopted at the request of local illegal alien apologists “Unity In The Community”. Now it was time to start filing additional requests.
I filed a request with the department asking what their policy was regarding interactions with suspected illegal aliens on May 7th, and received a curious response back from Ross Horton which he sent on the 14th stating that the department was refusing to release General Order 26.05 pursuant to the exemption provided in Virginia Code Section 2.2-3706(D). I contacted Judicial Watch to get their feedback on this, and they immediately agreed to represent Help Save Manassas pro-bono in an appeal after hearing about this. Judicial Watch seems to think that the notion of the police department refusing to divulge what it’s policy is to be entirely ridiculous. HSM Vice-President Mike Austin also filed a request for this policy, and information about the process by which they adopted it, and the department refused his request using the same provision of the Virginia Code.
I subsequently filed a request asking for all third-party communications regarding this policy, and today the response was that the police department has no records responsive to this request. The scope of the request was such that any coordination between the police department and the Board of County Supervisors or other governmental entity would be included, which would indicate that this policy was changed without notice to or coordination with the Board of County Supervisors. That they did not divulge any communications with local illegal alien apologists is surprising, but if it has in fact occurred, that information should be uncovered soon which would put the county police department in a very difficult position.
Such policy is extremely dangerous to county residents. In Virginia Beach, two girls died because a drunken illegal alien had never been deported in large part because a similar policy against asking the immigration status of suspected illegal aliens. This policy allowed a dangerous individual to remain at large despite more than a dozen previous incidents where he had clearly demonstrated that his continued behavior presented a clear danger to American citizens. After it became clear that the Virginia Beach Police Department was collecting grant money from the Department of Homeland Security in order to collect information on suspected illegal aliens, but actually had a policy that prohibited the collection of that information, the Virginia Beach Police Department changed their policy amidst a storm of criticism. At the nearly same time that public outrage over this policy forced Virginia Beach to rescind their ill-advised and vastly unpopular policy, the Prince William County Police Department has adopted it.
Residents should be outraged. It’s bad enough that the county police department has a sanctuary policy, but to try to hide that policy from the citizens is beyond the pale. If you’re one of those who are upset by this, it’s time to join Help Save Manassas and join in the fight to have this policy overturned.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
21 Comments
Views: 1916
Loading ...
That portion of the code they cited pertains to the “disclosure of criminal records” specifically. It then says: “The identity of any victim, witness or undercover officer, or investigative techniques or procedures need not but may be disclosed…”
Does that say that investigative techniques or procedures need not be disclosed — such as do we ask about illegal status? Yes it does. But only insofar as it relates to the “disclosure of criminal records.” Meaning, we, PWC, don’t have to tell anyone how we went about gathering incriminating evidence against Suspect X.
If the question was not asked in regard to specifically Mr. Roberto Martinez-Rodriguez or any other individual, then I can’t see how PWC’s response is a legitimate one.
Once again, PWC appears to be shading the truth. I guess some lawyers would call that a vigorous defense. I call it not faithfully and honestly serving the citizens of PWC.
Just a quick question; Even if the Manassas Park police did not question immigration status, wouldn’t the newly trained officers at the detention center do so? It seems that if they are committing a crime and sent to jail, the net will catch them now and the officers in the field questioning immigration status might be redundant. If this is not the case then I agree, something needs to be changed.
*Edit* PWC’s police as well. That actually makes even more sense when anyone they arrest will be processed at the jail.
Since the jurisdiction of enforcing illegal immigration does not fall on PWCPD, but a Federal Agency, and the members of the ADC being trained as ICE “deputies” have not yet even completed their training, I don’t see your point. If the guy (Mr. Roberto Martinez-Rodriguez) ran into the police department and started screaming that he was an illegal alien, and begging to be deported, all a PWC Officer could do is call ICE. This is NOT a local crime, it’s a federal crime. Local police do not enforce federal crime, and federal police do not enforce local crime. (You see the FBI coming down to break up a bar fight at Confetti’s?) This whole “jurisdiction” thing is a pain, I agree, but it’s not fair to PWC to blame them for not doing someone else’s job. I mean, might as well blame PWCPD for causing the recent increase in fuel prices, global warming, or whatever else we feel like. Your “police source” obviously only told part of the story, or you only listened to the part you could sensationalize. I assure you, PWCPD would create their own bus service, one way, to S. America if it were up to them.
Greg,
If your initial FOIA request was in the form of the quoted questions, you’re an idiot. I would suggest “investigating” what a FOIA request is and how to write one before sumitting future requests which would be as doomed to failure as that one. Understand, a FOIA request is for a public record and is not intended to serve as a method of discovery by which you can ask questions. Your right is to specific documents, not explanations or answers, the statute specifically notes that the creation of records is not contemplated. As to documentation regarding the individuals legal status, what if the officer did ask him and he provided some measure of documentation? Last time I checked cruisers did not come equipped with photocopiers for him to make a copy of said documentation, assuming that would even be appropriate.
The response “There are no documents in our possession that would contain the answer to that question” is probably correct, not because PWC is hiding anything but because you screwed up the FOIA request and don’t understand the scope of what a responsive document is.
With regard to your second request, both you and anon 11:41 are idiots. That section of the statute is used specifically to protect just such SOPs, frankly, I’m surprised they didn’t exempt it under 3706(F)(7). BTW anon 11:41 if you read the exemption cited, note the comma after the word officer then diagram the sentence like you should have been taught in grade school and you should realize that your assertion is incorrect.
Similarly, if there was third party input, if that input was verbal, say a meeting between the PD and some group, then again there would be no responsive DOCUMENT. FOIA does not require the PD to provide you with a detailed account of verbal discussions.
I just love how everybody is an expert on FOIA but few appear to have ever read the statute or case law.
Mom, while I take your point that technically the PWC PD could respond truthfully to such FOIA questions if they are not asked in precisely the correct language, the purpose of FOIA — “Freedom of Information” — has a broader spirit to it. Any citizen should be able to file a request on their own without assistance of legal counsel or a lobbyist to craft perfect wording in order to receive a complete response.
Riley,
You’re missing the point, in the first instance the response is probably correct because under most circumstance there are no responsive documents. Last time you were pulled over for a speeding ticket were you asked for you birth certificate or passport and if so was it copied by the officer? Greg’s request was for documentation proving citizenship, even if such documentation were provided at the time of incident, it is unlikely PWCPD policy is to make a copy of it and even less likely that equipment was available to accomplish the task.
With regard to the second FOIA request, the exemption is in place for reasons regarding officer and public safety as well as shielding investigative and tactial techniques, plans and orders from the view of those who might wish to circumvent them. Nothing about the PWC responses is novel and I would suggest both are firmly grounded in an accurate interpretation of the statute and case law. I’m not suggesting that PWC is getting away with something by virtue of a technicality but rather that before filing a FOIA request, individuals should understand what a request for public records is and more importantly what constitutes a public record. If they don’t wish to invest the time to understand what they can and can’t get under FOIA, I don’t wish to hear them whine.
Given that yesterday the US Senate voted down (49-48) an amendment (S-1158) to the immigration bill that would ban local jurisdictions from forbidding their law enforcement personnel from asking about immigration status, this will become a moot point (assuming the comprehensive bill passes).
Oh, Warner voted for the amendment and Webb voted against it.
41 Dems and 8 Repubs voted against the amendment
39 Repubs and 9 Dems voted for it
2 Repubs and 1 Dem didn’t vote
“Last time I checked cruisers did not come equipped with photocopiers for him to make a copy of said documentation, assuming that would even be appropriate.”
mom, why the tone of superiority? FOIA is a tool for all, including average citizens. You can’t expect everyone to be an expert at FOIA requests.
As to your assertion regarding technology in PD vehicles, perhaps you couldn’t see all the equipment, from the back seat of the cruiser.
Many police cruisers are equipped with Computers and Scanner/Fax units. They can upload drivers licenses, passports, etc. and download suspect photos. If PWC PD wants to determine the identity of a suspect, and their legal status, it is a small matter to do so. The department only needs the “will” to do do. The “means” to do so, is no problem.
This whole situation is just madness to me. Why are all our leaders doing everything in their power to do the opposite of what the people demand? It just makes no sense why this amnesty is being pushed through. There has to be something to this whole thing that we are all missing. It’s like this entire country has just lost its mind and has taken a bizarre turn down some strange road of no return. For all the outrage and the amount of people online and on tv that are against this, still local and federal leaders push this down our throats. It really is time for another revolution I fear.
Hey mom, you idiot [since you started it],
Here’s what applies (I know how to diagram a friggin’ sentence)…
“The identity of any … investigative techniques or procedures need not but may be disclosed…”
The issue is that it specifically applies to CRIMINAL RECORDS DISCLOSURE.
If Greg words his request correctly, then he CAN learn what the policy is in regard to generically asking about questioning suspects about their immigration status. Why, because it won’t have anything to do with a CRIMINAL RECORD.
This subsection cannot be used to evade disclosing every single policy a police department has.
“Say No” the issue doesn’t regard the will of a department to check someone’s status but if a “public record” subject of FOIA is created. Even if a cruiser had the equipment, is it appropriate for an officer to make copies of all documentation regarding an individuals identity and in the event that it were, could such documentation be released without violating the individuals right to privacy.
As to my tone, it has nothing to do with a sense of superiority or desire to restrict FOIA requests, my problem is with amateur conspiracy theorists who don’t understand the parameters of FOIA and then blather on that their deficient request has been denied as the result of a conspiracy by some grand PWC cabal.
BTW anon, if you broke the sentence down into separate statements, one of them would be “The investigative techniques or procedures need not but may be disclosed unless disclosure is prohibited or restricted under § 19.2-11.2″ or precisely what Greg asked for and was, it would seem, appropriately denied.
“BTW anon, if you broke the sentence down into separate statements, one of them would be “The investigative techniques or procedures need not but may be disclosed unless disclosure is prohibited or restricted under § 19.2-11.2″ or precisely what Greg asked for and was, it would seem, appropriately denied.”
Duh. Duh. Duh. That’s what I said (perhaps there was confusion because I didn’t delete the words “identity of any”). BUT if Greg asks with PRECISELY the correct wording it should not be denied BECAUSE this subsection applies ONLY to CRIMINAL RECORDS DISCLOSURE.
If he does not ask in regard to an individual or criminal record, then this is not the subsection that can be used to deny him access to information on departmental policy. It CAN be used to deny him access to information on departmental policy as it regards a specific individual or criminal record disclosure.
From my reading of the post, Greg filed two different FOIA requests. One in regard to a specific individual (which could be said was rightly denied) and one in regard to general departmental policy.
What is truly unfortunate is that a regular citizen has to have a law degree and come up with precise and specific wording. It is truly unfortunate that OUR government is spending time and money trying to figure out how to evade answering a simple question.
The question is this:
Does the PWC police department ever inquire into the citizenship status/legal status of any individual(s) encountered by the police department? This inquiry and/or encounter would include data on the in-car NCIC computer.
The answer to THAT question should not be a secret from the citizens in this county. It is clear THAT is what Greg is trying to ascertain and the county is doing what it can to avoid answering the question.
So mom, does this mean you will lend your assistance to Greg’s FOIA efforts?
To the person who says that it is the Federal government’s responsibility for arresting illegal aliens, I have one question for you. Do you know the difference between right and wrong?
I suppose according to your thinking that when John Allen Mohammed and Lee Boyd Malvo were shooting victims in Maryland, D.C. and Virginia, Charles Moose and the Montgomery Co. police should of just wiped their hands from the whole thing and just left it up to the Federal government to catch them. After all what they did was a federal crime.
When someone commits a crime, it is a local, state and federal issue!
Patty said:
“I have one question for you. Do you know the difference between right and wrong?”
Yes.
Patty said:
“When someone commits a crime, it is a local, state and federal issue!”
So, if I get drunk and crash my car into a 7-11, the Feds should come down and take care of it? It doesn’t matter whose “issue” it is, it matters who has authority to enforce it. Mohammed and Malvo have nothing to do with this, and you are side-stepping and skewing the facts by even bringing it up.
I think what you are missing here is the FACT that PWCPD has no authority to enforce federal immigration violations. So if they WANT to enforce it or not has no bearing on if they CAN enforce it or not. Like I said before, if an illegal immigrant walked into the front of PWCPD’s beautiful new Headquarters on Wellington Road, and stated, “I am an illegal immigrant, and I wish to be deported.” The only AUTHORITY a PWC Officer has is to call ICE, and ICE will decide what to do about it. I don’t make these rules, they are written right there in the code. As soon as PWC has authority to enforce such a code, then we can point fingers at them, but since they don’t, we only have ICE, and those who are responsible for ICE, to blame.
The only response I have to you is that it is the basic responsibility for all levels of government to protect its citizens.
I’m sure the lady who lives on Lafayette who had her car smashed by an illegal alien would love to chat with you.
P.S.
I knew an FBI agent that lived in my neighborhood. Yes, he would arrest a drunk!!!
Robbing a bank is a Federal crime. There are also many Federal drug laws as well. Local police work hand in hand with the Feds on these types of cases. I do not see where immigration law is any different.
I give up. Can’t tell anyone something if they already know it all. Good luck with getting PWC to enforce that Federal law.
ACLU saying it’s okedoke. You can’t mess with undocumented. ACLU what does that stand for. Aliens Come Live Undocumented. I thought they were here for American Civil Liberity Union, which side is your bread buttered on? 12-20Million invaded this country. I think 200-250 Japenese invaded our country on 12/7/41, we declared war on them. You do the math.