Come To Court Friday or Call/Email Fremont Mayor, City Council, & Best Western

First of all, please forgive if this personal message is unwanted,
off-topic or you receive it multiple times. As most of you getting
this have probably heard, I was arrested last month in an entrapment
operation by the Fremont police for peacefully trying to make a living
as an escort. They charged me with 647b "soliciting prostitution,"
which many governments consider illegal thanks to their vested
interest in having lots of laws to enforce and to puritan anti-sexual
morality which is still unfortunately widespread.


So, my arraignment hearing is scheduled for tomorrow:


WHERE: Fremont Municipal Court, 39439 Paseo Padre Parkway, Fremont

WHEN: Friday morning (Jan. 6) at 9:00 a.m.


I realize 9:00 a.m. on a weekday is a bad time for most people. They
obviously don't schedule these hearings for the convenience of people
who don't work for the criminal justice system! But if you are able
and willing to attend, I will certainly be grateful. If you are
planning to come or need a ride, please call me for details - (415)
621-7932.


If you can't attend (or maybe even if you can), would be willing to
call and/or email Fremont's mayor and city council members? This is
not just for me, though naturally I'd also like to see the Fremont
police get some negative feedback from their bosses as a result of
what they did to me, but so that other people won't be similarly
victimized.


Here are the city leaders' names, phone numbers, and email addresses:



Bob Wasserman

Mayor

(510) 284-4011

bwasserman [at] ci.fremont.ca.us


Steve Cho

Vice Mayor

(510) 494-4895 x5901

scho [at] ci.fremont.ca.us


Dominic Dutra

Councilmember

(510) 492-4148

ddutra [at] ci.fremont.ca.us


Bob Wieckowski

Councilmember

(510) 494-4895 x5904

bwieckowski [at] ci.fremont.ca.us


Anu Natarajan

Councilmember

(510) 494-4895 x5902

anatarajan [at] ci.fremont.ca.us


And here are some possible talking points for communicating with the
politicians:



-Prosecuting prostitution is a waste of police resources and taxpayer
money

-The police claim they are underfunded and understaffed; if they have
money and personnel to do this kind of thing, obviously that's a false
claim

-How can the police claim not to have the resources to investigate
auto theft or burglar alarms if they have the resources to entrap
escorts (see memo below)?

-I don't want Fremont to get the reputation of being an intolerant
place that doesn't respect different lifestyles

-Allowing police to keep proceeds from sting operations against
prostitutes and drug dealers encourages abuse

-People want their police to focus on responding to real crimes

-Are you aware of abuses in the Fremont City Jail? (e.g. being
threatened by a police officer with transfer to an institution where I
could be raped, if I didn't cooperate with them; denied meals; kept
shivering in cold rooms, all of which happened to me)

-See if you can find out any information about:

(1) How much money the city spends on going after prostitution in
particular and/or victimless crimes in general

(2) Why the police are engaging in these operations

(3) How many escorts have been arrested? How many clients?


A couple interesting articles are attached below. The first in
particular is good ammunition to use when writing or calling the
politicians (big thanks to Morey Straus for posting the blog entry
that turned it up). This is a memo from the Fremont Police Chief,
describing how because of an alleged lack of resources they (a) no
longer investigate auto thefts, (b) eliminated a street crime unit,
(c) no longer dispatch police to respond to alarms going off unless
there is a "verified problem," etc.!


And yet they apparently have PLENTY of resources to:


(1) Find my ad on the Internet, and have an undercover officer think
up a bunch of lies and call me in San Francisco posing as a client to
get me to come to Fremont

(2) Have 7 officers and a police dog, along with two patrol cars,
waiting around the hotel for me to show up (!!!)

(3) Book me, keep me in the Fremont jail overnight, and then drive me
to Santa Rita the next day, only to be cited and released with a piece
of paper telling me when to show up in court (which they could have
simply given me at the time of my arrest and sent me on my way -- but
no, evidently I was such a threat to public safety that they had to
keep me in jail overnight even though the legal standard is supposed
to be "innocent until proven guilty" and I had not been convicted of
any crime... sorry if I rant a little bit here!)


The second article below talks about how the police department stands
to profit from prostitution and drug stings. This may partly explain
why they like to devote resources to this even as they cut back on
trying to catch real criminals. The first article in particular is
good ammunition to use when writing or calling the politicians.


***************************************************************************



I'm also encouraging calls to the Best Western Garden Court Inn (5400
Mowry Avenue, Fremont) where the arrest took place. They need to hear
from the public that hosting police stings is bad for business - (510)
792-4300 or
Info [at] GardenCourtInn.com.



Here are some possible talking points for the hotel:


-I want to speak with your manager

-I want a written response from the manager

-I won't stay at your hotel because of this incident

-I'm a customer and want to be able to have an escort come to my room
without fear of either of us being arrested

-Allowing police stings against people who are guilty of nothing more
than peaceful, consensual acts between adults is going to cost you
more business from escorts and their clients and supporters than you
get from the police

-Don't be intimidated by law enforcement; it's important we all stand
up for our rights

-The Best Western Garden Court Inn is already mentioned on Craigslist
and other venues warning people to stay away

-People are going to associate your establishment with bigoted and
intolerant attitudes

-People are not going to feel safe staying at your establishment if
they know the police might be hanging around


Oh, and I'm also interested in publicizing this case, if any of you
know anyone in the media who would like to do a story about my
experience.


Finally, if you aren't the activist type, there is one other way you
can help, which is to contribute to my legal fund. Unfortunately I
have not found a lawyer to take this on pro bono; it looks like it may
cost me about $2500, or more if the case goes to trial. As of right
now, I will have to pay this out of pocket. Please don't send money if
you're just getting by yourself and don't have it to spare. But if you
are financially secure, any donation you care to send to help me with
the costs of fighting this would be most welcome. Checks may be sent
to Starchild, 3531 16th Street, San Francisco, CA 94114.


Whatever you can do, thanks from the bottom of my heart for your help
and support. Even when you know you have nothing to be ashamed of,
being arrested is a demoralizing and disheartening experience. It's
good to know that I have friends, and that people who understand that
this prosecution is an affront to justice are paying attention and
care what happens to me. No one should have to go through this as a
consequence of simply offering an honest service to consenting adults.
With your help, perhaps my case will have some impact in making this
less likely to happen to others.


Happy New Year and best wishes,

<<< starchild >>>

(aka Chris Fox)


***************************************************************************


Dear Fremont Resident and Alarm Owner:


The Fremont Police Department, like most law enforcement agencies
across the United States, has been responding to alarm calls since our
existence as a law enforcement agency. Our studies have shown that
historically over 98.5% of our alarm calls are false alarms. This
number has held for many years and continues even today.


In an effort to reduce false alarms, and continuously improve the use
of limited public resources the Fremont Police Department instituted
the Model States Plan of false alarm reductions back in 1998. This
plan, jointly developed by the alarm industry and law enforcement, was
developed to have a significant impact on false alarms. The plan
included developing an ordinance which contained provisions such as
alarm permits to make it easy for law enforcement to know who to
contact at the scene of an alarm, a fine structure for false alarms as
well as imposing some operational issues on the alarm industry. With
respect to alarm permits, the alarm industry was supposed to provide
the police department with a customer list and advise all customers
that a permit was required. Out of over 200 alarm companies with at
least one system installed in Fremont, only 3 have provided a customer
list in the past 4 years.


We have seen about a 20% to 30% reduction in false alarms, but in 2004
we still responded to 7,000 alarms of which over 6,900 were false.
Again in an effort to save limited resources the police department
proposed to the alarm industry that we would fine the alarm company
for any false alarms and they could recoup the costs from the end
user, their customer. We felt that with this plan the alarm industry
would be more responsive to getting a problem false alarm location
fixed. In November 2004, we received a letter from a law firm
representing the alarm industry in which they claimed our proposal was
invalid and which could mean the City would end up in expensive
litigation to defend the ordinance.


Alarm calls represent the single highest volume call for service
received by the police department accounting for just over 11% of all
calls for service. The next highest call for service is a 9-1-1
disconnect where someone calls 9-1-1 and then hangs up or does not
respond to any questions posed by the police dispatcher. We had about
5,000 9-1-1 disconnect calls for service last year, which of course
require an officer(s) to respond.


The police department was reduced by 52 employees during the budget
downturn, 24 of these were police officers and represent an 11.52%
reduction in available police officers to respond to calls for
service.


The police department has done a number of things to reduce the impact
of these budget cuts and still provide a critical and valuable service
to our community. We have modified, reduced or deleted, among others,
the following programs:


Deleted a 5-officer Street Crimes Unit, which was available to handle
specific crime problems reported by neighborhoods.

Deleted the D.A.R.E. Program.

Deleted Commercial Truck Traffic Program.

Deleted virtually all Crime Prevention Programs.

Developed an on-line reporting system and have directed citizens
reporting most misdemeanor crimes to report them on-line.

Stopped investigations of auto theft cases.

Dropped responding to Priority 3 calls for service (including alarm
calls) when staffing falls below acceptable levels (this happens
during at least one shift daily).

Dropped responding to Priority 2 calls for service when staffing drops
below officer safety levels.


With all of this, we are still being overwhelmed daily with calls for
service and need to look at other areas to make reductions in order to
have officers available for emergency calls for service.


Not needing to respond to over 6,900 false alarms is a way to save
resources, personnel and equipment costs and still have personnel
available for emergencies. In 2004, we responded to 66 calls out of
7,000 that led to a police report, and of these 26 were reported
burglaries. Last year the police department spent over $600,000 in
staff time and equipment usage just to respond to false alarms. As
mentioned earlier, the Model States Plan and City Ordinance have not
had an appreciable effect on reducing false alarms. Secondly, and
just as important, all of the Fremont homeowners and business owners
who do not have an alarm system are subsidizing the minority number of
people who do have alarm systems by paying taxes used to pay for the
overall costs of law enforcement.


In my 38-year history in law enforcement, no alarm company has ever
approached law enforcement and asked if it was all right to enter into
a private contract with a customer and use a public agency to service
the contract. The alarm industry has just concluded that they can
sell alarm systems and the public will pay for any response to the
alarm whether it is a real crime or a false alarm.


A review of research literature on false alarms has shown that law
enforcement and the alarm industry nationwide have recognized the
problem of false alarms for the past 30 years. Multiple approaches
have been tried in order to reduce false alarms and nothing has had an
appreciable effect. Most of the programs, which have been tried, have
depended on the public agency to do most of the work via ordinances
which have a fine structure, permitting process, citations issued by
officers, etc.


Effective March 20, 2005, the Fremont Police Department instituted a
program of "Verified Response" to all alarm calls with the exception
of panic, duress and robbery alarms. For this reason, if you have a
panic, robbery or duress feature to your alarm system, these will
continue to be treated as high priority calls for service by the
Police Department, and will need to continue with the Alarm Permit
Program and be subject to false alarm fines if your system sends a
false duress, robbery or panic alarm. Verified Response will require
the alarm or monitoring company to verify there is an unusual
occurrence at the location of the alarm. This can be done with a
video or webcam visual system or with multiple microphones for a sound
feed system, with an eyewitness, or by the alarm/monitoring company
hiring private security to check out the location. No police will be
dispatched until there is a verified problem.


THE FREMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT DISCOURAGES YOU FROM RESPONDING TO
VERIFY AN ALARM. THIS IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF YOUR ALARM COMPANY.
THERE IS A POTENTIAL DANGER TO RESPONDING TO AN ALARM ACTIVATION AND
ENCOUNTERING A SUSPECT, OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WHO MIGHT HAPPEN
UPON THE SCENE AND CONFUSE YOU WITH A CRIMINAL. INSIST THAT YOUR
ALARM COMPANY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALARM VERIFICATION.


Verified Response has been in effect in a number of cities throughout
the United States and has shown to be highly effective in saving
police resources. No study has shown conclusively that the crime of
burglary has risen where Verified Response is the norm for responding
to alarm calls.


We hope you will understand that our core mission is public safety
through the suppression of crime and apprehension of suspects who do
commit crimes. We are policing the fourteenth largest city in
California and the ninety-eighth in the United States, and we are
doing it with less police officers per capita than any other city with
a population of 200,000 or more.


We really have no choice but to make further reductions in our service
model. In reviewing all calls for service, we have determined that
false alarms have the greatest financial and staffing impact on the
department with virtually no return in apprehension of suspects or
reduction in crime.


We hope you will understand the situation we are in at this time and
the fact that as the Chief of Police I must make very difficult
decisions within the financial boundaries that exist today. There are
simply no further places I can make reductions which would accommodate
our spending over $600,000 annually, and continue to allow us to
respond to false alarms.


Sincerely,

CRAIG T. STECKLER

CHIEF OF POLICE




***************************************************************************




Article Last Updated:
12/05/2005 02:40 AM

Seized drug, prostitution cash may
help police work

Nearly $25,000 available for use in Fremont for
department


By Ben Aguirre Jr., STAFF WRITER

Inside Bay Area


FREMONT — Money collected from prostitution stings and drug busts soon
may make its way into police work.


The City Council is scheduled Tuesday to consider authorizing the
police department to use almost $25,000 in seized cash to buy digital
audio recorders and other updated technology for its police officers.


If approved, it will be the second year that the council allows the
department to use funds obtained during various raids and arrests.


Last year, the council let the department use almost $77,200 in
evidence money — which was collected from 1992 to 2000 — toward
upgrading a firearms training trailer and to replace various
equipment, said Susan Aro, the police departments business manager.


And as of Oct. 3, there was another $24,716.17 that was eligible to be
used by the department, she said. That money had been collected
through a series of arrests between January 2001 and October 2002.


When cash is seized, it is placed in a police evidence account where
it sits for at least three years, or until it is claimed or used to
repay victims of crimes, Detective Bill Veteran said.


Under the state Government Code, unclaimed money becomes the property
of the police department three years after the seizure date, Veteran
said. The department then has to post notices in the local newspaper
for two consecutive weeks informing the public about the unclaimed
money.


If Tuesdays agenda item is approved, the department plans to use the
cash to help pay for 200 digital audio recorders and a new software
system to replace the microcassette recorders officers currently use.


They are kind of cumbersome, Aro said. We have to duplicate (the
tapes) and then store them. ... Its something weve been struggling
with the last three years.


Every patrol officer carries a voice recorder to document some
conversations and certain events. The tapes then are copied and stored
as evidence, which may be used in court.


That technology is way past its time, Aro said. The department has
been using the same recorders for at least a decade.


Staff writer Ben Aguirre Jr. covers police and the courts for The
Argus. He can be reached at (510) 353-7011 or
baguirre [at] angnewspapers.com