by Juan
Wilson on 17 September 2006
The ludicrous controversy over the Chief K. C. Lum retirement letter
continues. What began as the circulation of the letter with the last
page cut off (apparently because of a faxing error), may have led
to a raid of Lum’s home and confiscation of his computer. If
this is really the reason for the action, it's too pathetic to contemplate.
Lum, of course,
is running for the County Council. The very body that relieved him
of his position as Chief of Police. The computer is question had Lum's
election campaign information on it. This is all highly suspicious.
If the Attorney General's warrant proves to be an empty political
gesture it is a compelling reason to vote for K. C. Lum in the September
23rd Democratic primary and rid ourselves of Kaipo Asing for good.
Below is a copy of the Garden Island article (9/15) about the seizure,
followed by a Garden Island Editorial Comment (9/17) on the issue
(which ironically was printed in the paper with the end cut of - please
don’t arrest us for this!).
These are followed
by the entire history of the controversy, including our original posting
of the letter to Lum from the County (2 & 3 page versions).
It should be noted
that as questions about the source of "the conspiracy" were
raised, even when allegations were made that we might be the source
of the "forgery", there was never any effort by the county
to contact our publication for clarification or for sources. On this
issue, as on so many others, Kaipo Asing, Jay Furfaro, Jimmy Tokioka
and Mel Rapozo have proved to be bunch of political windbags.
AG
raids Lum’s house, seizes computer
by Lester Chang on 15 September 2006 in The
Garden Island
Citing alleged altering of government documents tied to his
retirement in June, seven investigators with the state Attorney
General’s office seized computer equipment from the
home of former police chief K.C. Lum in ‘Ele‘ele
Thursday morning.
Armed with a search warrant, investigators also seized backup
drives from Lum’s home on Mimo Street shortly after
9am.
Investigators also searched Lum’s 2003 Ford Explorer
and 1989 Nissan truck. The also sought laptops, storage devices,
cassettes, printers, modems, software and photography equipment.
The Attorney General’s office is investigating whether
Lum altered a letter sent to him by the county, then sent
the altered version to the Police Commission, county officials
and others. Lum’s attorney contends the altered letter
originated with him, that the county alerted Lum as early
as June 5 it was aware of the discrepancy and that Lum sent
the full version of the letter to all recipients of the altered
letter the same day.
Lum said the computer equipment mostly contains information
on his county council candidacy this year. In a press release
from his Honolulu-based attorney’s office, Lum said
the motivation was most likely political.
“I am outraged, period,” he said in a phone interview
yesterday.
His attorney, Clayton Ikei, echoed those sentiments, saying
the warrant has no merit and seeks to defame his client, one
of 15 Kaua‘i County Council candidates. The search warrant,
signed Thursday, was to be executed on or before Sept. 23,
the day of Kaua‘i’s primary election.
Lum declined to comment on what impact the search might have
on his chances.
The state Attorney General’s office refused to comment
on any aspect of the investigation.
Government prosecutors are expected to examine the three hard
drives they seized and determine whether charges will be lodged.
No charges were filed when the search was conducted.
The investigation centers around a May 30 letter from the
Honolulu law firm of Watanabe, Ing and Kawashima faxed to
Ikei, informing him of the county’s decision to cancel
Lum’s contract as chief of police.
The Honolulu firm was retained by the county to represent
Mayor Bryan Baptiste, the County Council and the county in
a discrimination lawsuit Lum filed in U. S. District Court
while he was still police chief.
The May letter gave Lum a week to decide whether he wanted
to return as a lieutenant with police department, Ikei said.
According to Ikei, his office scanned the letter, e-mailed
it to Lum and mailed him a hard copy as well. While scanning,
however, Ikei said two pages accidentally became overlapped
and two paragraphs were omitted, making a three-page document
a two-page document.
Ikei said the paragraphs did not contain “crucial information.”
The paragraphs say Lum could be reinstated as a lieutenant
to avoid any gaps in his employment with the police department.
Lum was instructed to see Baptiste’s executive assistant,
Gary Heu, within a week if he wanted to be reinstated at lieutenant.
“This was a mistake on my partners and my firm,”
Ikei said. “And it was our error, and we explained it
to the investigator.”
Unaware of the error, Lum sent a two-page correspondence to
the county police commission, Ikei said.
On June 5, Lum said he received an e-mail from Heu.
“He advised me that it was not the exact letter that
(the county) got from their attorney,” Lum said yesterday.
“That’s when I knew there was a mistake. Right
then I attached (the three-page letter) and sent copies to
everyone to tell them.”
Lum has since faced allegations from the County Council and
others that he altered a government document by distributing
the altered version of the letter.
When reached for comment late Friday, Heu said he has not
seen the release from Ikei and said it was not appropriate
to comment.
When a state investigator later met with Ikei and the legal
assistant who scanned the letter, Ikei said the paralegal
volunteered information to the investigator and explained
how the error occurred.
Ikei also said the search may have been illegal because the
warrant, although issued by Judge Gerald Matsunaga in the
Fifth Circuit Court of Kaua‘i, called for officers of
the First Circuit Court to conduct the search.
The First Circuit Court is located in Honolulu.
Lum said he is not worried about his legal position.
“I am not concerned because I know that (the investigation)
is baseless,” he said, “but I am concerned at
how everything can be manipulated.”
|
This
serial drama has a final act
from The Garden Island
opinion page on 17 September 2006
For one to believe that the Thursday raid on the home of K.C.
Lum was warranted, one would have to believe there is more
to the allegations than the silliness that ensued over a late
May letter sent by a county-hired lawyer to notify Lum that
cancellation of his employment contract with the county was
pending.
That letter was three pages and included a section stating
Lum may be able to get his old job back as a lieutenant.
Not long after, the Web site www.islandbreath.org
posted the letter online but it was only two pages with the
portion about the lieutenants job missing. (That two-page
posting is where the apparent document tampering occurred
and was evidence enough for the County Council to allege forgery
in an effort to smear the reputation of the council.)
The fact
that the original document in its entirety was already in
the hands of the County Council and the mayor’s office
and every one else who should have it, did not matter. Neither
did the fact that the letter originated from an attorney hired
by the county.
Mayor Bryan Baptiste in a June 3 article in The Garden Island
is quoted as saying there was a lieutenant position created
for Lum and that he would be eligible to apply for the chief’s
job again if he so desired.
The June 15 County Council meeting occurred nearly two weeks
after Baptiste made those statements to the newspaper. At
that meeting Kaipo Asing, Jay Furfaro, Jimmy Tokioka and Mel
Rapozo lamented the conspiracy of false information being
foisted on the community by the posting of the document minus
the paragraph, stating there was an open lieutenant position
that Lum could apply for. Asing and his merry band were quite
distraught at the blemish boiling to the surface on their
untarnished reputations. “The council does everything
right, and then people do something that is not right and
we get blamed for it,” Asing said.
Tokioka hung his head low and sorrowfully said it was a shame
that people would believe what they were reading.
The media and the community are to blame for the council’s
tarnished reputation, lamented Asing. He was utterly disgusted
that uninformed residents were actually speaking their minds
when the only true authority on everything is the council.
It was at that same meeting Asing, upset at a member of the
public for asking the question about whether there are any
charges against Lum, replied “We’re not here to
answer questions, we’re here to take testimony.”
Not two meetings before that response, Asing said he was going
to look into a possible Sunshine Law violation over some documents
a member of the community had acquired. Asing, were he to
file a Sunshine Law violation with Les Kondo at the Office
of Information Practices, would learn that the Sunshine Law
is for open meetings while the Uniform Information Practices
Act addresses public records issues. He would also learn that
the person who possessed those documents is a private citizen
with First Amendment rights and not beholden to the Sunshine
Law or UIPA. Furthermore, the law is meant to promote open
meetings and open public records by governments serving the
public. It is about the release of information, not a punitive
measure for releasing information.
This newspaper often receives documents of the kind discussed
above and while we might get a chuckle out of the idea that
Asing would evoke the authority to tell us what to do with
them, the public can chuckle too when Asing spreads false
information about his ability to tell the public what they
can and can’t do with information. Asing himself knows
quite well what happens practically every time the council
is hit with a records request. First, the request is ignored,
requiring the person to file a request with the OIP, who then
sends an opinion to the council.
Whether the council adheres to that opinion can go either
way. If they don’t like the opinion they may file a
lawsuit or simply ignore the OIP’s assertions. It takes
time and perseverance. A former Honolulu Star Bulletin reporter
recently gained access to Executive Session 26 minutes from
the county council. Considering that the council’s most
recent executive session is numbered ES 237, it becomes obvious
how long the wait is.
The search warrant served against Lum by the Attorney General’s
office allowed the seizure of Lum’s computers and personal
electronic files as evidence in a possible document tampering
case. Even though Lum endured a lengthy process culminating
in his retirement, the powers that be are not ready to leave
him alone. The posting of the letter on a Web site minus the
portion that says Lum may have had a future with the police
department was so damaging to the reputation of the council,
Asing said on June 15, that he was going to launch an investigation.
Many passed it off as grandstanding by Asing, as he projected
the full three-page letter during his Powerpoint presentation.
Let it be known that Thursday was the day that Asing’s
claims were revealed as quite serious. What can be the motivation
for accusing a man who was sent a letter from a county attorney
that his employment contract was to be canceled, and then
accuse the recipient of document tampering.
The final act in this serial drama is yet to be played out.
The person accused of document tampering is running for office
to sit on the very body that is making the accusations. It
is an election year and Lum is running for County Council.
Tampering with a document in and of itself is not something
to be taken lightly.
Serving a search warrant against a man for a document posted
to a Web site is also something not to be taken lightly.
We hope substantial cause was needed to seize Lum’s
property from his home last Thursday. For the sake of the
integrity of the system, let’s hope it is for reasons
other than the silliness over the two-page letter that...
|
|
