"Wow...please read below..."

January 20, 2004: Major Angus Butler calls Abe Laeser re ASA on police shooting.
January 22, 2004: Decision made to remove ASA from police shooting and all future police
shootings.
Time spent by S.A.O.: two days.


May 5, 2008: Public records request made for emails concerning police shooting.
May 20, 2008: Public records request received.
Time spent by S.A.O.: fifteen days.


Within the scope of the May 5, 2008 public records request, there were two emails from January 16, 2004, the date of the police shooting, through January 20: one from my secretary asking me if I would be able to attend the "Police Shooting Brief Conference," commonly referred to as the "Seventy-two hour meeting," on January 29, the other, my response to my secretary, asking what time the meeting was scheduled.

In between those two emails I received the phone call from Det. McCully.

On January 21, there were four emails concerning this incident, on January 22, four emails, and on January 23, fifteen emails.

The first email on January 21 was at 1:19 pm, from Miami Herald reporter Chuck Rabin to office media liaison Ed Griffith:

Thanks for taking the time to speak with me Ed. Here are a couple of questions regarding the police shooting of 17-year-old Leonardo Barquin by Miami-Dade police officer Jorge Espinosa that hopefully you, or someone in your office can answer for me:

1: Why was the teen who survived, Rolando Llanes, charged with second degree murder?
2: Is it common for the state to charge someone with murder in such a situation?
3: Do you have any type of history you can forward to me on such charges. For instance, recent cases, or how many times it's happened, say, in the last year or two?
4: And finally, the single biggest question that remains unanswered: Do police or the state have possession of the gun that Barquin allegedly pointed at officer Espinosa? Many are questioning if there ever was such a weapon. (emphasis added)

I'm writing for tomorrow, so answers to these questions today would help tremendously. Thanks again for your time. Chuck

Next is an exchange between Howard Pohl, "Sheila Phillips," I assume a secretary, and Kathleen Hoague.

The subject heading is "David Ranck."

Phillips wrote to Pohl on January 21 at 4:22 pm,

Howard, I have been trying all morning (sic) to reach David and he's not responding. After lunch I spoke with his Secy. (sic) Debbie and she informed me that she advised David as soon as he got out of trial. She then paged him to call the office and as of now he hasn't respond. (sic)

Pohl responded at 4:25 and copied Hoague:

I ran into him at lunch time and he said he's not in trial. He should have still (sic) called me back.

It is clear from context that the impetus for these "Subject: David Ranck" emails was Butler's call to Laeser, and Laeser's communication to Pohl, of the conversation.

Consistent with what I was told at the January 23 meeting, the email below establishes that the decision to summarily remove me from this and all future police shooting investigations was made at a meeting on January 22 at 4 pm, a meeting of which I had no knowledge and was not invited.

The email also establishes that a conscious decision was made not to inform me of the decision that day. The email is from Laeser, at 4:50 pm, to Miller-Batiste, Richard Scruggs, my replacement, and Emomotimi Brisibe, and copied to Don Horn, Pohl, Hoague, and Susan Dechovitz. The subject is "LLANES (sic) police shooting. Llanes was Barquin's co-defendant, who was charged with the second degree felony murder of Barquin. Llanes' arrest for the murder was a subject of Herald reporter Rabin's email to Griffith.

I understand that this criminal case (second degree felony murder) arose out of a burglary and a police shooting. Mr. Ranck and Ms. Miller went to the scene. The substantive case has fallen into Judge Ward's division.

The case will be assigned to Tim [i.e. Mr. Brisibe] to prosecute, and I will be co-counsel. No pre-trial meeting has yet been set with the detectives or any witnesses. However, the '72 hour' review will be held on Thursday, January 29th. I cannot attend on that date, but I have been told that Ms. Miller and Mr. Scruggs will be able to attend that meeting. Sometime early next week I will try to get a firm handle on the charging decisions, after discussing the issues with Tim.

Please notify me of anything which you believe may be relevant to our legal and practical decision making. Thank you.

Abe Laeser (sic)

At 7:53 pm, Susan Dechovitz forwarded the email to Reid Rubin with her reaction,

Wow...please read below...