Main Page: http://bit.ly/XHa8Mr
Detailed Outline: Outline
ARIC Homepage: http://bit.ly/YNJcIi
Pertaining to the Austin Regional Intelligence (Fusion) Center, APD and Occupy Austin
We know from documents obtained through court that a total of 6 under cover officers were involved with infiltration activity in Occupy Austin. We have evidence that 3 detectives were undercover and the chief knew about it as early as Oct 3rd 2011, which was 3 days prior to the camp starting. We also know that 3 detectives were involved with the entrapment of 7 occupiers from around Texas in an action in Houston back in December of 2011. 3 undercover detectives provided schematics for, purchased and assembled pvc lock boxes for arrests in Houston. The lock boxes were then called criminal instruments and a Grand Jury in Houston re-indicted the 7 on felony charges after a judge had ruled no probable cause on the charges to begin with. I am one of the 7.
Two weeks prior to a trial by jury, Greg Gladden, my attorney with the NLG had the 1st under cover in court. An anonymous tip-off in Feb. of 2012 helped me find the identity of Shannon Dowell. But that was a long process of searching through public documents and it wasn’t until august of 2012 that we had his identity. We now know that the 3 involved with constructing the devices were Det Shannon Dowell, Det Deek Moore and Det Rick Reza.
We know from transcripts obtained in pre-trial settings that Det Dowell stated that he worked in an intelligence unit under LT Mark Spangler, who is the director of the ARIC fusion center here in Austin. He also included his chain of command, which went as high as the chief of Police.
We obtained the names of the 3 under cover officers involved as well as internal email, text messages and photos of the operation. In total we have about 300 pages in two documents. 1 document is from the APD, which includes fusion center SAR reports and 1 document, mostly redacted is from DPS and the Texas fusion center. All of this information is available from the front page of our website, occupyaustin.org
We contend that the APD is not being transparent, and in fact they seem to be obfuscating the facts of this case. Are they outright lying? We might be able to find out if we get a little more information. APD has had 2 press conferences since the undercover officers were dragged, kicking and screaming, into court. It is important to note that they did not volunteer the information of their involvement, they had to be found out.
Essentially, they are saying 2 things which are extremely questionable. First, they sent in under covers for public safety because they were getting “tip-offs” of some kind of safety concern. Second, they are saying that the “5th floor”, assistant chiefs and chiefs, didn’t know about the whole pvc pipe debacle, so it was just rouge activity in another jurisdiction, no big deal.
On their first point, they sent them in as early as Oct. 3rd based on email and its likely they were at our Sept. 29th meeting from txt messages. What kind of “tip-off” do they need to send in detectives to a meeting of activists? We know that they attended a meeting on Oct. 3rd where attorneys Stephanie Collins and Frances Montenegro attended. Our goals were crystal clear from the beginning, we were peaceful activists united on core values of non-violence. Why the need for the fusion center? Why the need for surveillance?
One point 2, the APD Disclosure Packet contains an email (pg. 38) that shows that Asst. Chief and counter terrorism expert, Brian Manley was notified of under cover detectives infiltrating a meeting where civil disobedience in another jurisdiction is being discussed. So I guess we are to believe that the 5th floor is notified but they just don’t care. The fusion center is involved, 5 Commanders and the Asst Chief are notified but the 5th floor couldn’t care less and so that in addition to almost no communication being released about the pipes from the disclosure packet has us wondering what exactly happened. And how do we make sense of what the APD is saying.
The document has 13 Sections, in terms of violations I’m pointing to Section V, subsection D and Section V, subsection K, part 1. Section 5 talks about the information collection limitations of ARIC.
V. COLLECTION LIMITATION
D. Within the Criminal Intelligence System, ARIC shall collect and retain information only where there is reasonable suspicion that a specific individual or organization has committed a criminal offense or is involved in or is planning criminal (including terrorism) conduct or activity that presents a threat to any individual, the community, or the nation and the information is relevant to the criminal (including terrorist) conduct or activity
Related to this section. When and how was the determination to use under covers and surveillance established?
We have evidence that Det Moore and Dowell were undercover and the chief knew about it as early as Oct 3rd, which was 3 days before the camp started. Are they saying that our early meetings at Ruta Maya, Plaza Saltillo and Zilker Park warranted the use of 3 organized crime detectives? Did they not understand that we were a peaceful movement?
Then there is Section V, subsection K, part 1
K. Related to SAR reports
(1) Prior to sharing the information, ensure that attempts to validate or refute the information have taken place, the information has been assessed and labeled for sensitivity and confidence, and the ARIC reporting format and data collection codes for SAR information have been used.
Related to this section. Why did they publish factually incorrect SAR reports when they were so close to the source of information and had so many gadgets to get the info?
They are so close to the source of information, yet they are opening SAR’s saying we are shutting down the port of Houston, that misconception is based on 1 early flier and blog post, anyone helping to plan the action, which the 3 of them were, would know that we realized very early on that the port of Houston is massive, it would be a huge undertaking to do such and we all planned a symbolic action blocking a roadway to the main entrance. This this means that we are to accept that they have 3 embedded under covers closely working with the group but who fail to grasp the very basic logistical features of the action. We weren’t blocking a port, we were sitting down in a road.