Criminal Justice District Attorney LASD

CA Supremes Vote Unanimously In Favor of “Brady List” of Misbehaving LA Sheriff’s Deputies Going to Prosecutors

Celeste Fremon
Written by Celeste Fremon

On Monday morning, August 26, the California Supreme Court voted unanimously that it is permissible for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department — and any other California law enforcement agency — to disclose misconduct by a deputy to prosecutors when that deputy is a material witness for or otherwise significantly involved with a criminal case.

The justices ruled that an individual’s right to a fair trial outweighs the privacy rights of officers who have a history of problematic behavior.

Here’s the backstory: In 2014, then-interim Los Angeles County Sheriff John Scott convened what he called a Commander’s Panel to review the individual personnel files of approximately 9,000 members of the LA County Sheriff’s Department. The panel’s goal was to identify officers who had histories of dishonesty and related misconduct in their personnel files which might fall into the category of exculpatory material that should be turned over to the defense in a case in which the department member was involved.

The idea was that the officers’ past behavior would constitute “Brady material,” as it is called, in reference to Brady v. Maryland, the landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court ruling which established that the prosecution must turn over all evidence that might exonerate the defendant — a.k.a. exculpatory evidence — to the defense.

The panel identified approximately 300 department members with sustained allegations in their personnel files which might fall into the category of Brady material.

Fast forward to 2017, when the LA Times broke the news that Jim McDonnell, who was by then the sheriff, wanted to send the Brady list of deputies to the Los Angeles District attorney and other relevant prosecutorial agencies.

This didn’t mean that material from a deputy’s personnel file would be sent with the list. If a deputy was going to testify as a material witness in a criminal case, the DA could file what is known as a Pitchess motion to get a court order for access to the relevant material, which the prosecution is then required to turn over to the defense.

The Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs or ALADS sued to challenge this procedure of handing over potential Brady material involving LASD deputies, asking that the court issue a temporary restraining order blocking the sheriff’s department from disclosing the Brady list or the identity of any individual deputy on the list to the DA or any other agency without first obtaining a court order after filing a Pitchess motion.

ALADS also wished to preclude the sheriff’s department from transferring deputies or restricting their duties if they were placed on the Brady list.

A state appeals court ruled in favor of ALADS in July 2017, and McDonnell immediately appealed the decision to the California Supreme Court.

“This is about respecting the rights of peace officers, and preserving the integrity of criminal cases,” Sheriff McDonnell said at the time.

“There is no other objective, other than to seek clarity and guidance from the courts on how to comply with our legal responsibilities under the Brady Decision,” the sheriff added.

On Monday, the California Supreme Court agreed.

Earlier this year, 55 prosecutors from around the nation signed a joint letter expressing their support for the general idea of a Brady list.

“When police officers refer cases to a prosecutor’s office,” the prosecutors wrote, “their testimony or role in the investigation – including in interviews, chain of evidence collection, or as an eyewitness – may be a significant factor in the prosecutor’s exercise of the weighty discretion to file charges and prosecute the case. Brady lists allow prosecutors to implement an orderly process for gathering in one place information on officers who may not be able to serve as credible witnesses. Serious allegations of having made false statements, using excessive force, or engaging in other questionable behavior could undermine the credibility of those in law enforcement who are central to the pursuit of criminal charges that trigger loss of liberty and other significant consequences.”

LA County’s current sheriff, Alex Villanueva, said during his campaign that he is not against the Brady list, per se.  But more recently, he dismissed the existing list as a “fake list” that was used to retaliate against or discipline deputies unfairly.

Yet on Monday night,  Sheriff Villanueva put out this interesting statement on the California Supreme Court’s decision.

“The Sheriff’s Department will comply with today’s Brady decision which enables us to release Brady information,”  the sheriff said.  ” The District Attorney’s office designates all Brady material and assigns employee’s names to the list. Since the official Brady list is a product of the District Attorney’s office, the Sheriff’s Department will not be maintaining ‘a list’ of potential Brady material, but will provide all information required to the District Attorney’s office on a case by case basis. Because the Sheriff’s Department understands the needs of the community, we plan on sitting down with the District Attorney to work out an effective, efficient, transparent and open process for turning over the information.  We want to effectively and consistently ensure all defendants’ rights to due process are honored, which includes providing all exculpatory evidence as outlined in Brady vs. Maryland.”

So there you have it.

66 Comments

  • C: Why is it when criminals commit rape, murder and all other assorted felonious crimes neo-progs/socialist do all they can to have their records expunged so employers are fooled into hiring thugs and when a cop used excessive force twenty years before this force is used against them the rest of their lives? Typical hypocrisy!

    • There’s police officer out there that should not be policing anywhere because they act like gang members also, that’s why.

  • “… the DA could file what is known as a Pitchess motion to get a court order for access to the relevant material, which the prosecution is then required to turn over to the defense.”

    Nope, no such automatic disclosure occurs. Each and every Pitchess Motion is reviewed and ruled on by the trial court judge. The judge then decides how much, if any, information is to be released for the instant matter only. This means that defense attorneys may only use the information in the current case and may not “database” the information for future cases.

    Um: Unfortunately, there is no statute of limitations placed on Brady material as is the case under Pitchess (5 years of material).

  • Oops, one more comment about the DA accessing Brady material.

    For several years, established LA County DA procedures have been followed that allow any peace officer who comes to their attention a chance to oppose inclusion in the DA’s Brady Alert System. The employing agency and the officer receives a notification. The officer may file an opposition to his/her name being included in the system and appear with counsel in front of a judge. The judge makes a determination whether the information rises to the level of specific, pre-determined criteria. If the officer’s name is added to the system, Deputy DAs and trial DAs will find out at the time a case is filed and/or when it goes to trial (ideally at the outset when it’s filed).

    This new decision will likely not change the DA’s internal process, but it will certainly add to the workload by requiring the DA to conduct additional hearings on the lists provided by law enforcement agencies.

  • Hey Um: Can you please tell me why deputies are raping female inmates at crdf?

    How about explaining to me why the ppl that are hired as police are forming gangs within the organization?

    Hey how about telling me why deputies have actually found in the rooms of child explorer’s they are supposed to be teaching and advising?

    Hey why are there deputies with tattoos of gangs that they became apart of from working in Lynwood?

    Oh, how about explaining to me why back in the early to late 90’s deputies actually had confederate flags in the windows of their vehicle’s?

    Oh this one really got me…why did deputies from mcj that worked on the 3000 floor think that bc they babysat the hardcore gang members, they were hardcore deputies?

    Its quite clear that you nazi pigs are quite pathetic, especially after what ur av brother did. So what is ur point?

    • Our point is that you can read because all you do is repeat the fascist talking points and questions of the left. You clearly have not investigated anything but what some fascist attorney has spoken in an attempt to get money in their pocket.

      Hey um, why did the group of attorneys tell their clients and juries that they just wanted a rewards of one dollar on the cases filed? so the attorney could file for million in fees.

  • Ironic…The Brady case involves prosecutors (not police) withholding exculpatory evidence in a murder case.

    Implementation of this ruling will bring up some challenging administrative issues. Stay tuned.

  • Another ultimate lawsuit loss for ALADS. Now go ahead and complain about California Supreme Court’s decision. Jim McDonnell had it right

  • Um, let me explain it to you. When, as you say, “criminals commit rape, murder and all other assorted felonious crimes” they are not government employees feeding at the government trough. They commit the crime, they go to jail. Once they finish their sentence, they can have some crimes expunged. I would love to see the same standard applied to deputies – go to prison, pay the price and then they can expunge that record. Instead, your fellow officers/deputies get to commit A, B and C (I would list the crimes some of you have been accused of but Celeste may delete my post thinking I am being too mean to you and yours) and you still keep your job. Is it really too much to ask to know which deputies have lied, especially when we pay their salary? Paaaaleeeeeease!

    And, are you serious- “when a cop used excessive force twenty years before this force is used against them the rest of their lives.” I do not see the problem with that. If you use excessive force, you should not wear a uniform, period. If you are a truck driver and you have an accident, you can get fired. If you are flipping burgers and you drop one, you can get fired. Similarly, if you are an officer and you use excessive force or lie, you should be fired. And, it will not be held against you, if you get off the government dime.

    • Dang cf, the life of a lady barista must be a hard core, dog eat dog existence. You shouldn’t judge the world through all that pent up anger and hostility.

    • CF….if a medical doctor “causes someone to die” they get fired right? Wrong. Thousands of people die because of medical malpractice every year, but the medical lobby protects them, while society and the media have no stomach to dare go after them. When a judge or lawyer makes a mistake in judgement (deliberate or accidental) and causes harm to someone, are they ever fired or sued? No…they have immunity. When a reporter post a bogus article without factual verification that is later found out to be a lie, are they ever fired or sent to jail? Fired maybe (rarely)…..jail never.

      When a truck driver has an accident he doesn’t get fired, when a fast food worker drops a burger on the ground they simple pick it up and put it back on the grill. Grow up and stop uses simplistic examples to support a weak argument.

      • SpookEm-Yes I would. I have many times before. The best part is when they threaten me that they’ll catch me on the street. I’ve ran into a few of them that told me that. They try to act like we’re buddies. Then when I bring up that threat they made against me, the laugh it off and say they were kidding. Like I said before…cowards in numbers.

  • This rule doesn’t mean shit. Nothing at all. The Da’s and the PD’s are county employees; translation, lazy. No one will check anyone’s background any more or less than they do now using a Pitches Motion. The departments will not keep the lists and everything will go back the way it has been for decades. I say ALADS won this war and the County spend more millions fighting it because their boy McIdiot was coerced into doing it by the devil woman Teran. Man, what I would give to see her in cuffs (not in a sexual way either). She has ruined so many good people’s lives and families. Karma will not be nice to her.

    • Don’t fool yourself that “this rule doesn’t mean shit”.
      If it wasn’t such a big deal, it would have would have not went to the California Supreme Court.
      The court ruling is bigger than you think.

  • @La County Tax Payer

    Only reason it went to Supreme Court is because Teran made Mcdummy fight it and the county’s attorney had the meter running. Trust me, even lawyers from County Counsel’s office say they spent millions on lawyers and nothing changed. It’s still the same process it was for decades. Read it yourself. This county spends money on lawyers like it’s free and no one questions them. They have over 300 inhouse attorneys but hire outside counsel on every case… How does that make sense? If I was a betting man, they spend over several hundred of millions on outside counsel. LA city utilizes their in-house lawyers for all litigations.

    • Sounds like Board Members from ALADS, spending money on lawyers like it’s free because it’s not coming out our their personal pockets.
      Meanwhile the cash cow is continuously milk as attorneys laugh all the way to bank.

      • “Happy@LASPA” I’m confident those who are on this Brady list appreciated the fight.

        You can’t be afraid to be in a fight, just because you might lose. Unfortunately we don’t get to dictate outcomes.

        And, we’re not done! We are going to make sure our members are treated fairly, according to the decision.

        You do know that I’m a full dues paying member, right! So, it IS coming out of my pocket, and I’m not even on the list.

        That’s why they call it collective bargaining!

        I can sort of understand why you’re “Happy at LASPA,” since someone else is paying to fight the bigger issues, on your behalf.

        I can’t remember seeing LASPA in the ring, but to each his own!

        Everyone is entitled to their own happiness!

  • Definition of Propaganda:

    ideas or statements that are often false or exaggerated and that are spread in order to help a cause, a political leader, a government, etc.

    We’ll just let the readers make up their own minds.

    Fyi: two of LASPA’s Directors are ALADS dues paying members.

    Hmm! Maybe they aren’t as happy at LASPA as you.

  • You do realize we can still see your initial post, riiight!

    So paying attorneys to fight on behalf of members is a bad thing?

    For the sake of LASPA members I sure hope you’re not a Director.

    What I also find perplexing is the fact the LASPA flyer claims they send attorney’s when ALADS sends Defense Reps, which is incorrect, but I’ll play along.

    So which is it, you like to pay attorneys to do the work, or you don’t?

    Serious question: who rights your complaint reports for you?

    • To quell you momentarily, I remind that our current Sheriff Alex Villanueva left ALADS to start LASPA because of their reluctance to account financially to membership. History repeats itself.

      • Not sure what your point is but our finances are fully accounted for and I invite any member to come down and view them.

        I know why Sheriff Villanueca started LASPA, and whether I agree or not I’ll add a quote from him, “if ALADS WAS operating then the way it is being operating today, there would have been no need to start LASPA.”

        What part of history is repeating itself?

  • Ron, again, don’t waste your time with the anonymous keyboard warriors. Their idiots. Your man enough to use your real name and for that, you have my respect. The cry babies are NEVER happy and they are so tough, they will call you out by name but won’t give theirs. You’re (ALADS) doing a great job, keep working hard.

  • Just before retirement I witnessed the juvenilistic charades against then ALADS President Armando Macias.

    Floyd Hayhurst along with Ron Hernandez and many others dog piled a fellow member because of differences which resulted in a legal battle which is ongoing still. My question is, what is the end result and at what cost?

    Long story short, it is never the institution (ALADS) but those who run it, be it ALADS, LASD or the White House.

    • And it’s never the rumors fault, it’s those who spread it.

      Check your facts.

      First, I was not on the board when that started.

      Second, I have never acted in step with Floyd. Let’s just say we’ve never been BFF’s

      Third, I initially supported Armando’s right to President, until HE chose his path.

      Fourth, it’s not me, this board or ALADS who won’t let this go, it’s YOU, Armando.

      I’m assuming your Armando, because I’ve never met anyone who KNOWS THE TRUTH who would continue defend him.

      • No Ron, I am not Armando and he was the defendant. Secondly you downplay your involvement as the legal case is public record BC540789.
        My thoughts as were my concerns before I promoted is. what does ALADS garner from this other than vengeance and a huge legal tab. Regardless of it all Macias is long gone as you will be shortly and ALADS foots the bill.

        • Just as Sheriff Villanueva is the new person on record as the head of the dept, same applies to me.

          If you’re not Armando, then ask him how many times both parties could have walked away, but he chose not to.

          The ole you’ll soon be gone threat! Never heard that one.

          If the members don’t re-elect me, that is their choice and I’ll walk away with no hard feelings or regrets.

          • “You’ll be gone: meant ultimately retirement, nothing personal.
            Ask yourself this as others are also querying this, why so much for so little?
            While some have short memories the records are permanent including the billings.
            One day someone with mettle within the organization will ask you in front of the unknowing, why so much for so little?

  • Where did Sass go? How did Ron’s buddy Gainsford get reappointed back to the board? Were other people considered? How do people/friends get magically appointed and put on the ALADS board? I would have loved to have been considered. I’m sure there’s a logical explanation, but when something is done under people’s noses, it seems very fishy. Gainsford lost his seat a few years ago, in my eyes he was not elected by the membership but is now put back on the board maybe because he’s a close friend of the president without going through a voting process. Why have elections at all when you can just knight who we want. I wonder who else was considered and was there a selection process? How and why do certain people get preferential treatment? Ron please explain. This doesn’t seem like a fair process and should be looked into.

    • Here’s the SIMPLE explanation, one point at a time:

      But let’s start with correcting his name, it’s Gaisford.

      Sass took a promotion to become an OSS Detective.

      Were other people considered, yes, but we chose a person who has actually been on the board, so he can actually hit the ground running. If you recall, no one ran last year and we had to appoint two seats.

      The appointment is not “magical.” It’s in the bylaws. Gaisford will finish up Sass’ term. An appointment had to be made to keep the election cycle on track.

      The most logical answer for not being able to confirm if you were considers is, a question. WHO ARE YOU?

      I don’t know if you realize there is an election for four spots this year. Have you put your name in? I’m guessing no!

      My director’s seat is up for re-election! You know what would have really been magical, is if I or one of the current directors had been appointed to the seat vacated by Sass, thereby avoiding one of us having to run this year.

      There’s nothing in the bylaws that say we can’t do that, but it would not have been ethical.

      Questions?

      Yes, you Deputy Simple in the back row, with the paper bag over your head, and electric tape on your name tag…..

        • Don’t think for one moment that ALADS V.P. Sass left his position just to become a OSS Detective. If such is the case, he could still remain on ALADS Board of Directors.
          Another deflection by Ron Hernandez to the real reason why Sass is no longer ALADS V.P. or Board Member.

  • Celeste, to me your headline of “misbehaving LA Sheriffs Deputies” was offensive. “Administratively Involved LA Sheriff’s Employees” would have been much more appropriate for a progressive website like yours. Please be sensitive to others in the future.

  • Let’s just sum up the mostly unknown about ALADS VS Macias. A pissing contest ensued among factions in ALADS in which one side “went low” (but was denied per D.A.) to stick Macias with embezzlement, no win there.

    ALADS then went the civil route in which retiree Macias lost, no big deal. The big deal is that ALADS can’t recoup the multi-million attorney fees and court costs, thus ALADS appealing the case (BC540789) five and half years later. There you have it.

  • Hey “Simpleton” why don’t you just start working for a living? It’s embarrassing when you hear grown ass men/women cry like you. Start working for once. Weenies always cry. Boo hoo hoo!!!!! By the way, at least Ron uses his real name when he calls out shit. Yea, I’m not using my real name either but I’m also not calling out real names on this trash site. Idiot.

  • @ALADS Member

    Calm down partner. You should already know which posers visit this page. Hats off to Ron for using his name, but you can’t sit here and tell me that Ron has never used a different alias like everyone else to say what he really feels. Lol..

    If anyone takes this blog seriously is a fool. This is like a therapy session for those who’ve had their lunch money taken majority of their careers and now have an avenue to vent, snitch, badger, talk shit and throw people under the bus. 99.5% of the things said here are false and made up. None of these people would ever face those they talk shit about, on the contrary, they’ll smile and laugh and act as if everything is great when they see that person. No need to raise your blood pressure brother. I can almost guarantee that no one from this blog has ever gone up to Ron and said, “Yeah, that was me on WLA.”… Am I right or am I right, Ron?

  • @Pokerface, you are right on both counts. I used an alias before I was on the board, and before I reached retirement age, like many, because I was fearful of retaliation, from department brass.

    Once I became an ALADS Rep, and since I have been on the board I have used my name, to confront people spreading lies about me or ALADS, hoping to be transparent and bring more credibility to ALADS.

    You are also right that no one has ever confronted me to my face regarding rumors spread here, admitting they were the one on WLA. Not because anyone is afraid me, but most likely as an attempt to sway what people think of ALADS. I’m confident those people do not come to the meetings to get informed.

    It’s all entertaining. And, I just can’t seem to pass up a good confrontation, and an opportunity to set the record straight!

    • Really Ron? ….. “hoping to be transparent and bring more credibility to ALADS”….

      You’ve been hit with two interesting subjects in this thread. One is the acknowledgement of ALADS biggest single expenditure ever, Macias/ALADS and the actual unredacted departure of former ALADS V.P. Sass.

      The next rep meeting is a start and if you can’t handle it, give it to the new V.P.

  • Good to see that you are setting the record straight keeping the keyboard klowns in check. Hey Ron, did ALADS actually spend a million dollars in attorney fees or is that just hyperbole?

      • Ron, why do you waste your time? I bet you there’s only 20 people that actively respond here under numerous aliases. Very few even know or check this blog. The less you respond the less they’ll chime in. If these hard characters really had an issue they’d come talk to you. So, please don’t feel compelled to acknowledge them.

        No need to respond to me brother. I’ll speak to you in person when I see you.

      • Thx for responding Ron as very few deputies can make the monthly meetings due to scheduling and other mandatory obligations, I’m sure you understand.

        It’s ok for you to occasionally respond on WLA and also good to know what’s going on at/in ALADS whether it positive or negative.

        Just one pro tip and that is don’t take everything so personal.

  • Great commentary and great, while I take the browns to the super bowl!

    I dropped ALADS and joined LASPA and handed by drop card directly to Ron. I said my piece and gave my opinion. No disrespect to Ron, but does anyone ever attend meetings or “check the books!”

    I shouldn’t have too and I don’t have the time. Your the only options so deputies will just go with it. We don’t know better except those that have really gone through it. I love the responses from Ron. Just embarrass us more as deputies and as a union. Like a sarcastic young kid.

    “ I don’t see you putting your name” well that’s cause I got better things to do

    “You more then welcome to come down and…” yeah I’m sure we are just to get your politician answers and not just accept some facts.

    And my favorite “ that was before my time” so then we are all good then right? I think not. I’ll pay my minimum because I have too and keep on. I wish I could just educate more young deputies. Cause they won’t know until they get there.

    I know deputies that are fired that are being done dirty and guess what they ain’t getting calls from Ron. I also know deputies that have gone 998 recently and their call was directly to a lawyer (laspa) and handled accordingly! Their lawyer was there before ALADS. Just saying .

    Don’t get me started on the hiring of inadequate candidates and what’s happening in the academy? Does ALADS not have a say in that, they are the future?

    • Agreed, typical responses and cliches from Ron.
      He will never address the ridiculous amount of unrecoverable attorney fees as he attempts to minimize his role in the ALADS vs Macias Case.
      ALADS gambled with membership money and lo$t, big time.

  • Getting back on topic, how ironic that the pushback against McDonnell regarding the “Brady List” backfired for ALADS, all for naught.

    Who’s running that joint in Monterey Park and who is signing those checks?

    • Can you please explain how it backfired?

      The ruling basically says the dept CAN keep a list, but a Pitches motion is still ultimately required, and this regime of the dept, so far has said they are willing to sit down and discuss the accuracy. Had ALADS not fought it, the past regime would have/tried to give it to the DA’s office without any member protection or discussion.

    • It was sent to correct the rhetoric from a competing organization’s flyer, wherein the flyer states ALADS doesn’t always send attorneys to shootings.

      We always have and always will!

      We can’t have our members who have yet to be in a shooting, believing incorrect information.

      People should have the opportunity to make choices with correct, not misleading information.

      • Before I comment Ron, at what point after a shooting are you referring to, hours or days for ALADS to send an Attorney.

        I remember a shooting years ago with two deputies involved, one deputy was with LASPA and the other was a ALADS member.
        The attorney from LASPA was at the station within an hour, two hours later (3 total) no Attorney from ALADS.
        The LASPA Attorney stated that he would represent the ALADS deputy in which he did.
        The ALADS deputy then joined LASPA the next day and submitted a drop card for ALADS, true story.

        • We could go back and forth with this, but it’s pointless, save for the fact I feel the need to set the record straight. I throw out info, which I have to be sure is accurate, because I’m using my name and anyone using an anonymous name can make up scenarios to try and make ALADS look bad.

          Our attorneys roll out the night of the shooting if requested by the member, but you can continue to paint whatever picture you would like people to believe.

          In the end the superior product rises to the top and does the heavy lifting while haters scramble to make themselves appear to be credible.

          The Janus decision has been made, people who don’t want to be an ALADS member can drop! Plain and simple. But it doesn’t seem to be happening, because Deputies are smart enough to understand the value of a strong association.

          I’ll throw out the same question I’ve asked before, if LASPA is the premier association why are two of their directors, also ALADS members?

          Another question I have is, why are you guys using anonymous screen names. Who is going to retaliate? The dept? ALADS? That excuse no longer works.

          You make LASPA look bad with the false claims you make, while hiding!

          • Just because you use your name doesn’t automatically means the information you state is accurate, please don’t go into that arena.
            This is not a competition, just stating a fact, take it or leave it

  • It must be nearing election time for ALADS, seeing that Ron Hernandez is making multiple comments on this thread. The term “spinning wheels” comes to mind.

    • Yup, election time, and only 5 people put in for 4 spots. 3 incumbents and 2 unit Reps who come to the meetings and have a desire to get more involved.

      That means approximately 7795 dues paying members must be happy with the way things are going with ALADS.

      • You snd I both know that outside of Family night at Universal Studio and food trucks at custody facilities that most deputies are clueless
        about ALADS.

  • I love it! I use my name so I’m a leader and I set the example. Please for all I know your a transient on the street using Ron’s name. You putting your name is no more integral in the discussion then me putting a turd symbol.

    And I am very familiar with a shooting that occurred in which a lawyer from LASPA was present, while a second deputy waited for ALADS.

    More importantly your comment on 7000 plus being happy is laughable. I’d say more like 7000 + don’t know LASPA exist. Secondly and thankfully maybe it means these deputies haven’t gotten in trouble or had a need for a lawyer, therefore not experiencing what others have. You thrive on the fact that deputies are lazy, because if that options was really out to vote (who do we want to have the bargaining power?) I venture to say you’d be surprised.

    Your comment on the little/embarrassing numbers on people wanting to get involved, well did you stop to think that maybe no one wants to work with you or ALADS. I know I don’t. You are as political as the next and don’t try to be a blow hard and tell me “ I could’ve walked away long ago,” cause I’ll just tell you walk away.

    Also, when you show up to a Deputies funeral try to be on time. Don’t act like no one saw you walk in all late and sit in the back at the industry sergeants funeral. What kind of nonsense is that, disrespectful.

    • “Thoughts,” I read your post, as ridiculous as it is, and was going to leave it alone.

      Sgt. Beamon was a classmate and coworker at Firestone. You have no idea why I was late! Not showing up would have been disrespectful, as is you bringing it up in this post.

      Take your shots.

      You reached a new low. Right now I’m thankful I don’t know who you are, and embarrassed at the possibility that you wear our uniform!

      LASPA can keep you.

Leave a Comment