Tag: Jose Paez

Posted onBad Cops

The Fullerton Observer in a Nutshell

by 16 Comments on The Fullerton Observer in a Nutshell
Pravda
Fullerton Observer in their Native Russian

I don’t read the Fullerton Observer because I find little value in their brand of blasé government cheerleading masquerading as serious “local” journalism. However, that doesn’t mean that I can always escape their content, after all they were the rag-tag group of City Hall Sycophants who hired a consultant to help the city smear me and this very blog with ludicrous claims of “hacking”.

More recently however it was brought to my attention that they ran a story titled “Weighing the Costs of Police Officers on Campus” and it’s a good example of where the Observer fails at local journalism.

The piece is a pretty run of the mill “school to prison pipeline” story with Fullerton data dropped into what feels like a form letter. It’s got local numbers and some local meeting information but it does what the Observer often does and it just… misses. And it misses where it counts – locally.

To summarize, it’s about School Resource Officers – or Fullerton cops on campus – and what role they have and possibly shouldn’t have in student discipline. Seems like a good idea for a story, I’m probably even in agreement with the writer on quite a few things.

But how in the ever loving hell are you going to write a story about SROs in Fullerton schools and completely omit the story of former Fullerton Police Officer AND SRO Jose Paez?

Paez

That’s the dude who used his department issued Body Worn Camera (BWC) to film up a 17 year old’s skirt. He also, based on the audit of his own BWC, had sexually explicit material of students on his (maybe department issued?) cellphone. We’ve never been given an explanation of this issue or a reason to believe anything has changed at FPD to stop another Paez from perving on our children.

It’s literally the single biggest example of why SROs, locally, need oversight and to be questioned.

In case somebody at the Observer finds this story, Paez’s case is #19NM12214 over at OC Courts.

Paez Case Detail

See the issue?

An entire piece on School Resource Officers that omits the best LOCAL example of the complete lack of transparency and oversight in the very program being discussed.

It’s not a shock though. The Observer has long been unwilling to point real criticisms or questions in the direction of City Hall. For such a shocking story, that we broke mind you, they’ve only ever mentioned Paez precisely twice on their site; once to regurgitate the FPD press release and once to mention in passing that the Fullerton school board avoided the topic.

Hell, the Daily Titan has covered this story more than the Observer which speaks volumes.

People ask me quite often why I’m so critical of government and while there are a few answers to that question, one answer would certainly be because somebody has to be critical when the fourth estate is more interested in acting like the fifth column.

Read More
Posted onBad Cops

OC District Attorney Spitzer Goes Limp for Perv Cop

by 8 Comments on OC District Attorney Spitzer Goes Limp for Perv Cop

In case you haven’t heard by now, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office which is led by Todd Spitzer, filed a peeping charge against Fullerton Police Officer Jose Paez for filming up the skirt of a 16 year old student.

Let that sink in for a moment. A 16 year old, who Paez was on campus to protect, was his victim under color of authority.

According to the case information the violation date was 11/03/2017 and according to the FPD press release it was found by accident while investigating something else.

Paez Case Detail

Based on the Body Worn Camera audit conducted by FPD we know that Paez also attempted to film up a teacher’s skirt on 08/29/2017 which shows a pattern of behavior.

He also had underage sex videos and photos on a phone in his possession. Apparently chain of custody at FPD, regarding Child Pornography, is so lax that they don’t know who has it on what devices or where it’s stored.

To further complicate the issue, Paez was allowed to schedule deletion of his own Body Worn Camera videos.

Taking into account the potential charges such as peeping on teachers and underage students and possession of child pornography on his phone it seems unprofessional that Fullerton PD wouldn’t contract this case out to another department or agency. This ins’t a case of policy violations to be investigated by Internal Affairs but rather it is one of potential criminal conduct against children under color of authority. The community and students at FJUHSD deserved an objective outside source to look into these issues.

This is something they did not get because Fullerton put their perv officer first and the wall of silence stood still. Not a single officer came forward about Paez. Not a single council member. Not a single school board member. An officer was allowed to prey on our children in his capacity of School Resource Officer and the protected status of the police was more important than public notification.

Thanks to the DA only levying a single charge dating to almost two years ago this smells more like another case of FPD being caught with their pants down than actual due diligence. The priority doesn’t seem to be in protecting our city and our city’s children despite all of the attaboys Chief Dunn gave himself in his Press Release on the issue.

What stopped Paez from sharing nude photos of your daughters with his friends and co-workers? What’s to stop his replacement from doing the same?

Nothing and that’s how FPD likes it so shut up and go back to sleep. They’ll make this go away like so many other cases of criminality by their own in blue and then have the audacity to ask for a raise which council will give them.

This is the upside-down world we live in where justice consists of a press release followed by a likely plea deal where a pervert with a pattern of behavior of preying on women and children while under the color of authority will be allowed to walk with barely a slap on the wrist.

Spitzer is continuing the efforts of his predecessor who refused to file charges against Fullerton Officer Rincon despite groping women in his patrol car during traffic stops. A pattern that consisted of letting off Fullerton Officer Christopher Chiu who forced a naked women to stand for him so he could shine his light up her crotch and then ask for her number.

Sexual predation seems to be A-OK behind the Blue Wall of Silence supported by the brass at FPD, City Hall and the DA’s Office.

We all knew, based on the Jailhouse Snitch program, that there was seemingly nothing the Orange County District Attorney’s Office wouldn’t do to protect bad cops but now that includes downplaying sexual crimes against a School Resource Officer. All to protect a pervert in blue.

When did FPD send the case to the DA? How long did they sit on the Paez problem? Was he fired or was he allowed to quit? Chief Dunn won’t tell you. Did FPD or the DA even ask for potential victims to come forward or were they too worried about the bad press they’d get by possibly uncovering a #PaezMeToo problem they ignored for at least a year?

Meet DA Todd Spitzer, same as DA Tony Rackauckas – a hero for self-proclaimed heroes and nobody else.

Read More
Posted onBad Cops

Fullerton Cops Label Camera Data Wrong 60% of the Time

by 13 Comments on Fullerton Cops Label Camera Data Wrong 6013 of the Time

It was bad enough when we learned that Fullerton Officers had (have?) no oversight in how they themselves are allowed to categorize videos and schedule them for deletion. Do something wrong like the litany of SB1421 criminal cops? Just change the category to delete the videos and nobody is the wiser.

It was worse that we learned that in the context of Fullerton Officer Jose Paez perving on High School kids and teachers while on the job, including for allegedly shooting video up a 16 year old’s skirt for which he’s being prosecuted.

But it turns out that Fullerton cops label their video files wrong 60% of the time according to Chief Dunn himself:

BWC 60 Percent

“We also learned the way we label data, officers tag the video via an app on their phones, is incorrect 60% of the time.  This contributes to the storage overages and can cause evidence to be missed.”

So when officers aren’t just deleting the videos of their criminal activity, such as Paez did, they’re potentially missing evidence for cases by simply not doing their jobs correctly.

The guys and gals in blue whom we pay the vast majority of our budget to can’t manage to tag a video properly for evidence – when evidence is quite literally one of the most important aspects of their job.

Guess they need more training and raises to justify that training. Bring on Fitzgerald’s taxes to solve this pernicious police problem. Just kidding. We’re paying for software (CAD integration) because a machine is the only thing that can save us from officer incompetence. But we’ll still get hosed with the taxes to pay for their ever growing pensions just you wait.

Read More
Posted onBad Cop

Fullerton School Board Ignored Issue of Campus Police Pervert

by 28 Comments on Fullerton School Board Ignored Issue of Campus Police Pervert

Paez Barista

For those of you paying attention to the story of Perv Cop Paez, I’ll direct your attention to some correspondence with the Fullerton Joint Union High School Board of Trustees from back in December 2018 when rumors of this story first came to light.

This is an email a friend of ours sent to each member of the school board:

FUHSD re Paez

Hi,

I just heard a rumor that a school officer working with Fullerton police, officer Paez, had naked photos of at least one student on his phone. If the student is underage I understand a name not being released but how many victims are there and do I need to be worried about my children?

Should parents be concerned about their child being victimized?

Is this true and if so is the school district covering this up?

I would hope that you learned something about honesty after Lindgren molested students at Nicholas. Please let me know if these allegations have merit and that Fullerton isn’t in the habit of covering up sexual predators.

Thanks.

Concerned Parent

Only one member even bothered to respond and that was the following paltry message:

Thank you for the information, I will bring this up with our Superintendent tonight. 

Thanks,

Andy Montoya

So there you have it folks. A Fullerton Police Officer, in his capacity of School Resource Officer, was allowed to roam campus unchecked, film up the skirts of teachers and students, delete his own Body Camera videos with no oversight and allegedly store child pornography on his (department issued?) phone and you the public get to know nothing.

The Fullerton High School Board of Trustees won’t even bother to respond to you if you’re concerned about such things as predatory officers abusing their power to peep on your daughters.

To this day the school board has remained mum, the police chief put out a press release extolling his own virtues and you can bet our useless council will pat the department on the back for the bare minimum that was accomplished here.

How many students were victims of Fullerton PD while on campus? How many have a #PaezMeToo story to tell? Are your kids safe from predators while on campus? You don’t have a right to know according to the Fullerton Joint Union High School Board and Fullerton Police Department.

FUHSD School Board

Read More
Posted onBad Cop

Fullerton Officer Paez Charged with Filming up 16yo Student’s Skirt

by 53 Comments on Fullerton Officer Paez Charged with Filming up 16yo Student’s Skirt
Jose Paez (left) with his former Captain Tom Oliveras. Both have been charged with crimes in the last year.

Former Fullerton Police Department School Resource Officer Jose Anthony Paez has been charged with a misdemeanor.

From the District Attorney’s Press Release:

FORMER FULLERTON POLICE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER CHARGED FOR VIDEOTAPING UP HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT’S SKIRT

SANTA ANA, Calif. – A former Fullerton Police Department school resource officer has been charged with secretly photographing and videotaping up the skirt of a 16-year-old high school student.

The Fullerton Police Department initiated an internal investigation into accusations that Officer Jose Anthony Paez was acting inappropriately while on duty. The investigation spanned the last five years of the officer’s on-duty interaction with the public.

The internal investigation revealed several photos and video clips taken on Paez’ personal cell phone in November 2017 that were shot up the skirt of a 16-year-old high school student while Paez was conducting a police investigation on school grounds.

Paez stopped working for the Fullerton Police Department in May 2019. The Fullerton Police Department referred the case to the District Attorney’s Office for criminal prosecution.

“As the elected District Attorney, I am charged with judging the conduct of police officers,” said Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer. “Law enforcement officers are entrusted with a tremendous amount of authority and trust. The actions this officer engaged in betrayed that trust and preyed on the very people he was charged with protecting.”

Paez is scheduled to be arraigned on October 2, 2019 at the North Justice Center in Fullerton. He faces a maximum of one year in the Orange County Jail if convicted.

Deputy District Attorney Laila Nikaien is prosecuting the case.

A quick phone call to the DA’s office reveals that Paez is being charged with PC 647(j)(2):

“(2) A person who uses a concealed camcorder, motion picture camera, or photographic camera of any type, to secretly videotape, film, photograph, or record by electronic means, another identifiable person under or through the clothing being worn by that other person, for the purpose of viewing the body of, or the undergarments worn by, that other person, without the consent or knowledge of that other person, with the intent to arouse, appeal to, or gratify the lust, passions, or sexual desires of that person and invade the privacy of that other person, under circumstances in which the other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. For the purposes of this paragraph, “identifiable” means capable of identification, or capable of being recognized, meaning that someone could identify or recognize the victim, including the victim herself or himself. It does not require the victim’s identity to actually be established.”

The DA’s office seems to essentially be charging him with peeping when there are questions of possession of child pornography in the audit conducted by Fullerton Police.

The Fullerton Police Department issued a Press Release written to show how awesome they are and how committed to openness and accountability they are – despite have little to no details in the release itself.

The closest we get to details is as follows:

“When the criminal investigation concluded, Fullerton detectives requested the Orange County District Attorney’s Office to review the case for filing criminal charges against Officer Paez, whose employment with the Department ended in May 2019.”

Notice how as don’t even get to know if Paez was allowed to resign or if he was fired. The Press Release then goes on to extoll the unearned virtues of FPD:

“We are committed to being first to hold accountable those within our organization who do not meet the high standards we set for ourselves. That is exactly what happened in this case.”

This is the same city/department that worked out a settlement agreement with an officer to expunge Internal Investigations into her conduct specifically to bypass disclosure laws.

That settlement agreement, and this story about officer Paez are two of the things we wrote about a couple of months ago are some of the stories that led to the City of Fullerton threatening us with prosecution for telling you things we think you have a right to know about but they want kept quiet.

Prepare for City Manager Ken Domer, Police Chief Bob Dunn and the entire council and school board to keep you in the dark as this “ongoing case” works through the system. The city has yet to even give us a date for when Paez left the force or who’s phone the child pornography that FPD found in their audit was on – Paez’s personal one or his department issued phone. Nor have they explained why an officer had student sexts and underage pornography on any device so easily accessed.

Is this just another case of a badge giving somebody a slap on the wrist when a civilian would have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law?

Read More
Posted onBad Cops

What Happened to School Resource Officer Jose Paez

by 35 Comments on What Happened to School Resource Officer Jose Paez

Paez

Something untoward may have been happening at Fullerton High School and the entire community appears to have been once again kept in the dark.  Your children may have had their privacy invaded & may be the victims of somebody they were told to trust.

We’ve received what looks like part of a Body Worn Camera audit and it shows some very questionable information.

Paez BWC Audit

Highlights are as follows (emphasis added):

  • Father reporting his 13 year old daughter having inappropriate relationship with 16 yr old boy. Paez takes photos of text messages from father’s phone with an iPhone.

  • Returned to a home, asked teenage boy and girl if he could get their mother’s phone number. He wrote it on an envelope he was holding with name “***”.

  • Texting on freeway while driving to CHOC with a suicidal teenage girl in backseat.

  • With an iPhone he takes 13 photographs of text messages between 422 victim and suspect from victim’s phone using an iPhone. Unsure if his own or PDs.

  • While investigating Snapchat Hacking report, he takes picture with iPhone of victim girl’s phone screen that has text messages and what appears to the girl in the shower. Girl is 17 years old. At 8m 30s he asks the girl to take screenshots of the conversation (presumably the one he had just photographed) and send it to his work email so he can add it to the case. Why did he take photos with phone?

  • Talking with an 18 year old woman – about some sort of sex crime involving her ex-boyfriend . He tells her there was mention of a sex video. She said it was deleted. He asked to see her phone to confirm the video was not there. She tells him she has “inappropriate” pictures of herself on her camera roll. He takes her phone and scrolls through the pictures. He spends 4 minutes 20 seconds scrolling through her phone.

  • Talking to teenage boy about oral sex video on his phone. Stops recording before interview is over. Next video is 2 hours later with boy’s mother in the room.

  • Talking to girl who took videos and pictures of herself and her boyfriend having sex. Paez pulled the video from his own iPhone to show her. (Not sure if work phone)

  • Takes picture of a teenage boy he is interviewing at a school. Appears Paez adds a caption to the image and sends it to multiple recipients.

  • Takes photos of juveniles phone text messages. Unk if work phone or personal.

  • (17-68541) Paez investigating one juvi with another juvi’s nude pictures on phone. On this case he called CSI to take photos of the images he discovered on the phone.

  • Interviewed a female teacher wearing a skirt. Had his BWC on his belt. Of the 200+ videos I watched of his, this was the only time I’ve seen footage with BWC on belt. Had pretty clear view, under the table they were sitting at, of her knees to hips. Fortunately, nothing “candid” was captured on his BWC. I checked audit trail and discovered he watched the video only once about a month later. Interestingly, the video that preceeded this one was deleted. The deletion occurred because the category was changed, by Paez, from “Arrest” to “Radio Calls”, which changed the deletion schedule from August 29, 2019 to March 04, 2018. Attached is the audit trail for the deleted video.

Make of all of that what you will but quite a bit of it seems like questionable behavior at best.

It is interesting that Officer Paez was able to delete files from the system by changing categories. It would be enlightening to know how often this happens at FPD. That there seems to have been no oversight on this process up this point is problematic to say the least.

Fullerton Officer Jose Paez may or may not be with the Fullerton Police Department anymore, we’ve seen no confirmation either way, but we do know that he was a School Resource Officer (SRO) at Fullerton High School.

This is confirmed though an March 2, 2017 article in the Fullerton Union High School Tribe Tribune.

Paez Tribe Article

We also know that this status as an SRO is no longer current based on FPD’s website about the School Resource Officer program.

FPD SROs 2019

I understand the premise of innocent until proven guilty, but unfortunately, Fullerton PD does not — as they parade names and faces on social media to brag about their arrests while they themselves hide behind the Police Officers Bill of Rights and other such laws. I’d love to give officers the benefit of the doubt but they, through their unions, fight tooth and nail to stop disclosure of criminal acts amongst their brothers and sisters in blue, and enough is enough.

It’s possible that Officer Paez did nothing wrong and I’ll leave that up to the readers to demand answers from City Hall, Fullerton High School and FPD. It seems inappropriate at best to be using a Body Worn Camera to potentially video record under a teacher’s skirt, under a table, or taking screenshots and photos of underage nudity on a phone that might not even be department-issued.

It should be remembered that just a few days ago I showed Christopher Wren was terminated, partially, for having a nude photo of himself on a department-issued phone. Now square that with the above. I’ll share more as I know it and hopefully somebody can demand and get answers as to what is going on over at FPD and City Hall.

Read More