A Cygnus Business Media Website

Phoenix PD Critics Call Police Raid 'Witch Hunt'

Posted: Thursday, July 2, 2009

Updated: July 2nd, 2009 11:41 PM GMT-05:00

Most Read

Most E-mailed E-mail This Story

E-mail Article Print This Story

Print Article

Story by kpho.com

PHOENIX --

Two valley men spoke out against Phoenix’s top cops. Then, both were slapped with simultaneous search warrants.

One of them, Officer Dave Barnes, is a 13-year veteran of the police department. Barnes had been critical of the city’s crime lab.

The other, Jeff Pataky, is part of a Web site,

BadPhoenixCops.com

, which is critical of Phoenix’s public safety manager Jack Harris and many of the department’s top brass.

Court records made public on Wednesday reveal when police searched the homes of Barnes and Pataky in March, they were looking for computers, e-mails between Barnes and Pataky and even a military-grade thumb drive.

"It's a joke. It's a couple hundred thousand dollars in city resources on a complete witch hunt," said Jeff Pataky.

The records show police believed Barnes may have sent an e-mail and leaked embarrassing information about two of his coworkers in the homicide unit.

Police also suspected Barnes and Pataky may have used name plates, stolen from the homicide unit, to post disparaging photos on Pataky's site. The photos depict the name plates in settings, including with a potato head figurine. They appear to mock certain homicide investigators.

"I really think they're trying to make an example. It could've been Dave Barnes. It could've been any cop,” said Pataky. “But they want to send a message that any cop who provides information to the Web site BadPhoenixCops.com is going to get nailed."

Barnes helped shine a light on cases where the crime lab either chose not to test, or delayed testing of key pieces of evidence.

E-mails show that for the past year and a half, department officials have threatened to retaliate.

"Mark my words, if Dave is dealt with, others will think twice about lab bashing," wrote Assistant Chief Tracy Montgomery in an e-mail dated Oct. 16, 2007.

Pataky said he believes the Phoenix Police Department wants either to shut down his Web site or deter officers from providing information for the Web site.

The search warrant listed several alleged offenses committed by Barnes and Pataky: possessing property that was stolen or embezzled and computer tampering.

Pataky said he considers the information on his Web site “free speech.” After reading the court records released Wednesday, he felt confident he would not be arrested.

“There’s nothing here that shows any crime was committed," said Pataky.

A Phoenix police representative declined to comment on the investigation, but said the department may have more to say Thursday morning.

Documents Released In PD Raid Of Critics' Homes

» More Stories From Top News Stories

Share your thoughts, advice, opinions, and expertise @ Officer.com

Submit a comment

Comments

Posted by vamcdenver

(07/03/09 - 10:43 AM)

Even cops have First Amendment rights.

Exercising your constitutional rights, even unpopular choices they may be is not a cancer.

Imagine how popular southern cops were in the 60's who chose to protect the rights of black voters and civil right marchers.

Taking a stand and acting as a private citizen off duty is a right that extends to LEO's and other city workers.

Calling it a cancer and taking White Out to the Constitution are steps toward anarchy and a violation of the public's trust.

Using the weight of their office, command has creating a chilling effect on the exercise of free speech.

Even distasteful speech and images are protected by the constitution.

If Assistant Chief Tracy Montgomery is willing to ignore the rights of his officers, how does he view the rights of the citizens he is hired to protect and serve?

If the courts see it as such, it becomes a civil rights case and can wind through various trials for years, costing millions of dollars.

I clicked in the "affidavit" link here:

http://badphoenixcops.blogspot.com/

Sounds like they really were trying to go after these two.

There is no such thing as setting aside the rights of the officers because of their status as LEO's.

It's a losing battle, one in which the existing time line, via the archived in house emails and actics will blow up in the chief's faces.

A better tactic would been to have pursued libel remedies against the bloggers, IF there is a credible case.

So far, they have been within their rights to express controversial views.

Factual dissemination of unfavorable opinions and criticisms, or unpleasant information, and editorial blogs is not against the law.

The affidavit for a search warrant looks like it was written by the Keystone Cops.

The blogs, however cite attribution and audio recordings of various snafu's by management.

Unless the bloggers knowingly posted false statements, slanderous, or libelous subject matter, etc., the chief's office is on thin ice here.

Using the court system to try to muzzle critics opens the city to enormous liability and even criminal conspiracy charges.

The site may be a thorn for the chief and his staff. But it's kind of like watching cable TV.

If you don't like the channel, look at something else.

Posted by vamcdenver

(07/04/09 - 12:06 PM)

If you took an oath like I did, you swore to "uphold and defend the constitution of the US", as well are your home state.

You can disagree with anything.

I always thought constitutional law should have been covered and taught as a refresher course at the academy and in service.

Once the command crossed the line, they shot themselves in the foot.

I didn't say I agreed with their choices, just as I and most of the demonstrators I have encountered were on different sides.

The chiefs had choices too, but they and anyone who took part in this debacle just may find themselves in a RICO jackpot if the officers can prove an ongoing conspiracy.

Where the hell was the DA during the search warrant application?

Being a lawyer as much as a politician, he should have known where this was headed.

Posted by silent detective in Phoenix, AZ

(07/06/09 - 10:23 PM)

Ladies and Gentlemen, I would like to add a comment to this.

Even though I agree with your comments on ��Free Speech�� you seem to forget the effect this BS had on Heather Polombo, her husband, and, yes, even the Homicide Unit itself. Dealing with the ��Public�� outcry because someone in the Family Investigations Bureau called Jeff Patsky a ��dickweed�� is not reason enough to go after Heather. Image if this was your wife, your mother, your sister, or only a family friend? Image your career being viewed under these circumstances. Now image going to work day to day and having to look over your shoulder watching everything you say hoping that your comments don��t show up on a website like bad phoenix cops. Imaging going to work with the people you��ve known for years and suddenly wondering if you can trust them. Image if you suspected your partner of providing information to this site? Image you��re a detective in the homicide unit who was called in for questioning and advised of your rights because of this investigation? Where was Dave��s responsibility to them?

This has turned the Phoenix Homicide Unit upside down. No, this was a personal attack on Heather Polombo by Dave Barnes because he was kicked out of the Homicide Unit for being a whistleblower on issues with the Phoenix Police Crime Lab. And YES the Lab has issues and yes they need to be looked at. But Dave had an axe to grind and took out his frustrations on the Polombo��s. And this is WRONG!!!
After reading the warrant Barnes basically cooked him own goose; his Career is OVER and that��s too bad. He is the cause to the end of his career; not the effect. He has no one to blame but himself and I still can��t believe Dave would have been this stupid.

As for the affidavit; in Arizona the County Attorney doesn��t write or even review the warrants here; the officer or detective write them and swears to them before a judge. The County Attorney will tell you ��We can��t tell you how to do your job.�� In Arizona the affiant has the sole responsibility for the content of the warrant.

As for Chief Jack Harris I have a lot of respect for the man; we could do worse; remember Ruben Ortega?

And as far as I��m concerned Jeff you are a ��DICKWEED.��

Today's Hot Articles

Most Read | Most Sent

Officer.com E-Mail Alerts

Daily News & Features

Officer Down Alerts

Special Offers

Weekly Job Alerts

Officer.com RSS Feeds

Copyright 1998-2009 Officer.com, Cygnus Business Media
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Contact