FINAL REPORT - San Bernardino Superior Court

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2011‐2012 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFF-CORONER SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS DIVISION BACKGROUND The Scientific Investigations Division (SID) is a division of the San Bernardino County Sheriff- Coroner Department. The SID has law enforcement, scientific, technical and support personnel which provides forensic support (the use of science or technology in the investigation and establishment of facts of evidence for use in a court of law) for the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department (SBCSD) and outside law enforcement agencies. Some of the forensic support provided includes processing Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) samples, ballistics testing, analyzing chemical and alcohol evidence and fingerprint processing, including the Central Property-Evidence Unit. The Grand Jury reviewed past Grand Jury reports from 2004-2005 through 2009-2010 specifically in the area of facility and workspace conditions that might compromise the results of forensic evidence. In 2004-2005, the Grand Jury recommended “05-148 Expand the operation of the crime lab to include acquisition of more workspace….” The 2005-2006 Grand Jury recommended in “06-45 Provide adequate workspace for the Sheriff’s Scientific Investigations Division, to include plans for future growth of the County….” The Findings of the 2006-07 Grand Jury stated “The workspace area is not adequate for the amount of investigative services that the division provides.” Additionally, the grand juries of 2007-2008 and 2009-2010 recommended that the Sheriff-Coroner Department provide additional workspace for the SID with the consideration for population growth throughout the County. The Grand Jury determined that a more focused investigation on the present facility was warranted. This report includes a pictorial review of the deteriorating conditions that are currently evident. The Grand Jury made three visits to the SID facility to collect information and to take photographs. It was noticed that the hallways and public areas appeared to be clean. The DNA laboratory required protective clothing for access. The Grand Jury was able to look through an open door and observe that this area was pristine. In the Driving Under the Influence (DUI) analysis laboratory, the ceiling tiles were discolored from prolonged leaks, the floors were stained and dirty. The furniture and chairs were acquired from surplus without consideration for the use of Specialists while conducting lab analyses. For example, two Crime Scene Specialists (Specialists) were required to work at a desk that necessitated one specialist straddling a desk corner while peering into a microscope. The Grand Jury was advised that air monitoring devices measure the levels of narcotic vapors in the room atmosphere. Filters are changed annually and face shields and gloves are routinely used. The Grand Jury did not see any face shields in use. However, a vent, utilizing appliance ducting has been rigged to blow air from the wall vent out 80
2011‐2012 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report into the center of the room to dissipate the contaminated fumes. Throughout the main facility, many missing, broken and stained ceiling tiles were observed. In several laboratory areas there are work areas with electrical cords jumbled in piles on the floor and wiring hanging from the ceiling throughout the room. Upon inspection of the firearms portable office, which is located in the parking lot adjacent to the main building, it was observed that there is a room used for storing live ammunition. These are bullet samples from each local enforcement agency throughout the County are used in forensic exclusionary testing. Although, the outer door to the firearms office was locked, the ammunition storage room door was open. Further, at the time of our walk-through there were no personnel in that facility. In the room designated for breathalyzers, there were 35 yellow portable new breathalyzers yet to be distributed. Invoices provided indicated receipt of breathalyzers in May 2011. The portable units had not been distributed because they had not been calibrated and the vendor was in the process of preparing the appropriate software. Thus, the equipment costing approximately $400,000 has been stored in a room for over eight months. Also, there are 42 fixed breathalyzers which are primarily used at local enforcement agencies (LEA) stations. These have not been calibrated or distributed. The new fixed equipment will be able to conduct automatic calibration checks once per week through pre-programmed software that tests itself. The breathalyzers are manufactured to shut off automatically if not recalibrated. Five of the portable breathalyzers are scheduled to be distributed to the Needles office for use at the Colorado River during highseason (May through September) for DUI testing. The reason the breathalyzers are not in use is due to a shortage of staff to complete the necessary protocols and validations required prior to distribution. It should be noted that there is not a shelf-life limitation for this equipment. However, it is expedient and less expensive to use a breathalyzer rather than to draw blood for testing. A breathalyzer test costs 50 cents each and to test blood costs $53. During the tour of the facility, the Grand Jury viewed a number of files and file cabinets that were characterized as ‘historic files,’ which are actually case files. These files are located in the back of a room in a walled off area approximately four feet wide by fifteen feet long with a loft. Further, the opposite outside wall is a corrugated aluminum wall. The sheds, where vehicles are stored for inspection by Specialists, were filthy. Dirt, broken glass and other detritus were on the bare ground in and about where vehicles are processed. One car was awaiting the outcome of proceedings. The coverings over the shed were ‘easy-ups’ surrounded by chain-link fencing with aluminum slats. On occasion, cars can be pulled partially into a bay at the main facility for search and evidence retrieval. SID does not currently have sufficient space to conduct vehicle searches within an indoor space. The previously processed vehicles are stored out in an open lot. Some vehicles are rusted-out hulks. There is a newer yellow Hummer and a white sedan among the vehicles. Also a motorcycle is on the ground, in pieces, that has been there for at least 10 years as reported. 81
Page 1 and 2:
FINAL REPORT COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDI
Page 3 and 4:
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE From left to ri
Page 5 and 6:
Honorable Ronald M. Christianson, P
Page 7 and 8:
2011-2012 GRAND JURY SAN BERNARDINO
Page 9 and 10:
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2011-2012 GRAND J
Page 11 and 12:
CITIES/SPECIAL DISTRICTS COMMITTEE
Page 13 and 14:
2011‐2012 San Bernardino County G
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
May 15, 2012 Ted Burgnon, Foreman a
Page 25 and 26:
Executive Summary Harvey M. Rose As
Page 27 and 28:
Executive Summary year to prevent b
Page 29 and 30:
Executive Summary never completed a
Page 31 and 32:
Executive Summary purposes that dir
Page 33 and 34:
Introduction Harvey M. Rose Associa
Page 35 and 36:
Introduction Victorville was establ
Page 37 and 38:
Introduction Exhibit 1 City of Vict
Page 39 and 40:
Introduction boundaries of the Vict
Page 41 and 42:
Introduction The SCLAA operated und
Page 43 and 44:
Section 1: Financial Condition In t
Page 45 and 46:
Section 1: Financial Condition Tabl
Page 47 and 48:
Section 1: Financial Condition Cash
Page 49 and 50:
Section 1: Financial Condition Char
Page 51 and 52:
Section 1: Financial Condition has
Page 53 and 54:
Section 1: Financial Condition Char
Page 55 and 56:
Section 1: Financial Condition City
Page 57 and 58:
Section 1: Financial Condition Impa
Page 59 and 60:
Section 1: Financial Condition Tabl
Page 61 and 62:
Section 1: Financial Condition Reco
Page 63 and 64:
Section 2: Inter-fund Loans and Use
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
3. Power Plant Developments Th
Page 81 and 82:
Section 3: Power Plant Developments
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Section 4: SCLA Hangar Development
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Section 5: SCLAA Bond Expenditures
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
2011-2012 San Bernardino County Gra
Page 125 and 126:
COUNTY COMMITTEE Back row: Darrell
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Back row:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148: LAW AND JUSTICE COMMITTEE COUNTY OF
Page 149 and 150: 2011‐2012 San Bernardino County G
Page 197: 2011‐2012 San Bernardino County G
Page 211 and 212: RESPONSE ACCOUNTABILITY COUNTY OF S
Page 213 and 214: 2011-2012 San Bernardino County Gra
show all

FINAL REPORT - San Bernardino Superior Court

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?