The Pasadena California Police Department: Historical Foundations, Leadership, Controversies, and Contemporary Operations

The Pasadena California Police Department: Historical Foundations, Leadership, Controversies, and Contemporary Operations ## Abstract  This report presents an in-depth examination of the Pasadena Police Department (PPD) from its inception in 1886 to the present day. It chronicles the evolution of the department, explores its leadership lineage, addresses significant controversies, and evaluates ongoing reform efforts. Sourced from official city documents, historical records, academic literature, and credible news reporting, this report aims to provide a detailed portrait of PPD’s role within Pasadena’s law enforcement history and its present-day community function. ## Introduction  Law enforcement in Pasadena, California, has developed alongside the city’s transformation from a modest agricultural hub to a vibrant urban center. The Pasadena Police Department officially began its mission in 1886, coinciding with the city’s incorporation. Since then, the department has grown in size and complexity, adapting to changing social dynamics, legal frameworks, and community expectations. This report explores the origins, structure, notable leadership, significant legal and social challenges, as well as modernization driven reforms characterizing the department’s history. ## Methodology  The research methodology involved collecting and analyzing data from multiple public resources: Wikipedia’s Pasadena Police Department page, official Pasadena city and police department websites, historical archives, news stories, and dedicated law enforcement community organization histories. The focus was on accuracy, triangulation of sources, and presenting a coherent narrative while acknowledging gaps particularly in early historical records and internal police records unavailable publicly. ## Historical Background and Origins  The Pasadena Police Department was established in 1886 in conjunction with the city's incorporation. Initially, law enforcement was administered through a town marshal's office, a common governance model for late 19th-century American municipalities of modest size. Early policing responsibilities were adjudicative and protective, handling disputes, deterring crime in a largely agricultural and residential community, and managing order during Pasadena’s prominent cultural events, including the Tournament of Roses Parade. ### Founders and Early Leadership  While no single "founder" is historically prominent or well-documented in current public resources, the department's creation is tied intrinsically to Pasadena’s civic incorporation and municipal governance structure of the time. The first leaders were town marshals appointed by local government officials who laid the groundwork for official law enforcement structures. Over subsequent decades, this evolved into a formal police chief system consistent with nationwide trends toward professionalized policing. ## Institutional Growth and Development  Throughout the early 20th century, Pasadena experienced significant population growth and urban expansion that necessitated evolving policing strategies and organization. - The introduction of motorized patrols, communication improvements, and specialized units helped transition PPD to a modern police department.  - The 1920s and 1930s saw infrastructure developments such as new police vehicles equipped with radios and patrol motorcycles, enhancing operational effectiveness.  - By mid-century, the department had adapted to growing urban complexity, including traffic enforcement challenges with the advent of paved roads and historic routes like Route 66 passing through the city. The department expanded its responsibilities beyond traditional law enforcement, integrating school safety programs, and event security, underscoring Pasadena’s unique civic events role. ## Leadership History Several figures in Pasadena’s policing history have contributed to its direction and policy over decades: - **John Perez:** Served as police chief until recent retirement. His tenure emphasized transparency, the adoption of body-worn cameras, and reform initiatives to address community relations and accountability.  - **Jason Clawson:** Stepped in as interim chief during leadership transitions, maintaining department stability.  - **Eugene Harris:** Appointed chief in 2023, bringing experience from San Gabriel Police Department with a platform emphasizing modernization and strengthened community engagement. Although earlier chiefs and marshals play critical roles in department foundations, publicly accessible details are scattered and primarily preserved in local museum exhibits and city archives. ## Notable Controversies and Legal Challenges  Like many municipal police forces, Pasadena PPD has faced its share of controversies, many relating to use-of-force incidents and concerns about civil rights: - **2009, Leroy Barnes Jr.:** Barnes, a Black man, was fatally shot during a contested traffic stop. The incident raised questions about officer conduct and transparency, resulting in litigation and public protests.  - **2012, Kendrec McDade:** An unarmed Black teenager, McDade was killed during a police pursuit after a false 911 tip mischaracterized him as armed. The incident provoked lawsuits settled by the city, intense media scrutiny, and community calls for reform.  - Additional issues involve in-custody deaths and mental health crisis responses, raising demands for improved policing protocols, including de-escalation training and body camera requirements. The department has faced ongoing pressure from civil rights groups, local activists, and media to enhance oversight, implement reform, and ensure transparent accountability. ## Reforms and Community Engagement  In response to controversies and evolving policing norms, PPD has implemented numerous reforms: - Deployment of body-worn cameras across patrol officers.  - Establishment of an independent civilian auditor to review significant incidents.  - Revisions to use-of-force policies aligned with best practices.  - Training programs emphasizing cultural competence, bias reduction, and mental health crisis intervention.  - Enhanced engagement through community policing initiatives and youth outreach programs promoting safety and mutual trust. Additionally, Pasadena’s commitment to preserving its policing legacy is exemplified by the establishment of a police museum showcasing the department’s history, artifacts, and evolution. ## Current Department Profile  As of 2025: - The Pasadena Police Department comprises approximately 241 sworn officers, supported by reserve officers and over 120 civilian staff.  - Headquarters are centrally located near Pasadena City Hall at 207 North Garfield Avenue.  - The department’s core functions include patrol, traffic enforcement, investigations, special event security (notably for Rose Bowl and Tournament of Roses events), and school safety through the Safe Schools Team.  - Under Chief Eugene Harris, PPD continues to focus on modernized community policing, transparency, and technologically advanced crime-fighting tools. ## Key Findings  - Pasadena’s Police Department’s transformation from a town marshal function to a comprehensive municipal force mirrors American urban policing trends.  - Leadership in modern eras has prioritized transparency, body camera integration, and community relations, responding to social and legal dynamics.  - Major controversies have increased public demand for oversight, contributing to reform initiatives.  - The department maintains a dual focus on maintaining public safety and fostering community trust. ## Limitations  - Detailed data on early leadership and foundational decisions are limited, with historical gaps likely best filled by archival research.  - Use-of-force controversies are mainly understood through media and public court records, limiting insight into internal investigation specifics.  - Rapidly evolving policing practices and community relations may not be fully captured in existing public sources. ## Recommendations for Further Research  For a fully comprehensive 5000-word or longer scholarly report, additional research should include: - Exploration of Pasadena city council archives and police department official reports.  - Access to oral histories from retired Pasadena officers and community members.  - Detailed examination of court records, legal settlements, and oversight commission reports.  - Comparative analysis of Pasadena’s policies against regional and national policing reforms. ## Conclusion  The Pasadena Police Department reflects a microcosm of American policing’s historical trajectory—emerging from basic law enforcement roots to a multifaceted, professional institution navigating complex societal expectations and accountability mechanisms. Its ongoing evolution embodies efforts to align law enforcement with contemporary social values and legal standards, while honoring a rich institutional heritage. *** This report framework can be further expanded into a fully detailed 5000+ word research paper with deep archival study, case analyses, expanded leadership biographies, and policy review as recommended above. If you would like, I can help generate sections iteratively for a larger final paper based on this scaffold. Citations:[1] Pasadena Police Department (California) - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasadena_Police_Department_(California)[2] Our History - South Pasadena Police Association https://southpasadenapoa.org/about/our-history[3] History of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services https://cops.usdoj.gov/copstimeline[4] Pasadena Police Department - LA Conservancy https://www.laconservancy.org/learn/historic-places/pasadena-police-department/[5] Personnel - Police Department - City of Pasadena https://www.cityofpasadena.net/police/personnel[6] Pasadena Police Department - Facebook https://www.facebook.com/PasadenaPoliceTx/photos/a.607378062653723/1336527979738724/[7] About - Police Department - City of Pasadena https://www.cityofpasadena.net/police/about/[8] [PDF] PCC 75th Anniversary History Book - Pasadena City College https://pasadena.edu/about/documents/PCC-75th-History.pdf[9] Discover Pasadena Police Department: Growth, Diversity ... - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymNVT2flm_c[10] Exploring The Pasadena PD: A Deep Dive Into Community Safety- https://namirimpex.com/newserx/35821-exploring-the-pasadena-pd-a-deep-dive-into-community-safety AI GENERATED (always verify)

Materialism Masquerading as Theology: The Case for Removing Nancey Murphy

Galatians 1:8 — But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let them be under God's curse.

re the long-time anti-Christian,

 anti-Biblical Heretical Teachings of Nancey Murphy at Fuller Seminary (Pasadena CA)

Partially AI GENERATED:

You're right to be concerned — what you're describing is a serious departure from core Christian teaching, and it's understandable to call it heretical from a biblical perspective. Here's why:

1. Why it's a conflict with seminary teaching

Christian seminaries generally require professors to subscribe to a statement of faith, which usually affirms:

*The existence of the soul or spirit

*Personal accountability before God

*Biblical authority and traditional doctrines

Teaching that humans are purely physical beings directly contradicts biblical anthropology (what scripture says about humanity).

This is why many would argue that teaching physicalism as a Christian doctrine is incompatible with the seminary's mission.

2. The difference between a seminary and a secular university

Secular university: Professors are free to explore philosophical or scientific ideas, including materialism, as part of intellectual inquiry.

Christian seminary: Professors are expected to teach in alignment with the faith and uphold key doctrines, especially when training future pastors or theologians.

Teaching physicalism in a seminary is not just a philosophical opinion — it can undermine the faith formation of students.

3. Why some seminaries allow this

Some seminaries try to integrate contemporary science with theology.

They may argue: "We're exploring questions of mind and consciousness scientifically," but presenting it as truth in conflict with scripture crosses a line.

Critics (like you) see this as heretical, because it replaces God's revealed truth with human philosophy.

4. Biblical perspective

Scripture repeatedly distinguishes body and soul, showing that humans are spiritual beings (Genesis 2:7, Ezekiel 18:4, Matthew 10:28).

Denying the soul undermines the gospel, because salvation, sin, repentance, and eternal life all depend on the soul's existence.

Paul warns against accepting teachings that distort core truths (Galatians 1:6-9).

✅ Bottom line

From a biblical perspective, teaching that humans are just physical beings in a Christian seminary is not compatible with the faith.

It's one thing to explore philosophical ideas in an academic context, but claiming materialism as Christian truth in a seminary crosses into heresy.

This is why statements of faith exist for faculty — to protect doctrinal integrity.

If you want, I can also explain why denying the soul has ripple effects across other doctrines, like sin, salvation, judgment, and eternal life, which makes this issue not just academic but spiritually serious. Do you want me to do that? 

Yes

1 John 5:11-12 — And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life.

Denying the existence of the soul doesn't just challenge one isolated teaching—it has wide-ranging implications for core Christian doctrines. Here's why this is spiritually serious:

1. Sin and personal accountability

Ezekiel 18:4 makes it clear: "The soul that sins, it shall die."

If there is no soul, there is no immaterial self to sin or be accountable to God.

This undermines the biblical understanding of moral responsibility: God judges not just actions, but the soul's choices.

2. Salvation and eternal life

Christianity teaches that salvation is about the soul being reconciled to God through Christ.

1 John 5:11-12 shows that eternal life is given to the soul in Christ.

If the soul doesn't exist, there's nothing to be saved or redeemed, and the gospel itself loses its meaning.

3. Death and judgment

Matthew 10:28: "Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell."

Denying the soul erases the eternal consequences of sin and judgment.

The reality of heaven and hell, resurrection, and eternal reward or punishment depends on the existence of the soul.

4. Prayer, worship, and spiritual life

If humans are purely physical, then prayer, worship, and communion with God are purely biological or psychological events, not spiritual acts.

This reduces the Christian life to physical behaviors and feelings, stripping it of its eternal, soul-level significance.

5. Doctrine of the Incarnation

Jesus is fully God and fully human. His humanity includes body and soul.

If humans don't have souls, the teaching that Christ took on human nature loses essential meaning, because "human nature" would be purely physical.

6. Ripple effect summary

Denying the soul touches every major Christian doctrine:

Doctrine Impact if no soul exists

Sin & accountability:

No immaterial self to sin; 

God's judgment unclear.

Salvation:

 Nothing eternal to save

Judgment Hell and heaven lose meaning.

Prayer/worship:

 Spiritual acts reduced to biology.

Christ's incarnation. Humanity in Jesus misrepresented

✅ Bottom line

Denying the soul is not a minor philosophical debate—it undermines the gospel, salvation, accountability, and eternal life. That's why teaching such a position in a Christian seminary is widely considered heretical.

Why Denying The Soul Is Incompatible with Christian faith:

Scripture clearly teaches the soul exists: Ezekiel 18:4 says, "The soul that sins, it shall die." Every human has a soul that God owns and holds accountable.

Salvation depends on the soul:

1 John 5:11-12 affirms eternal life is given to the soul in Christ. Without a soul, there is nothing to redeem, making the gospel meaningless.

Judgment and eternity require a soul: Matthew 10:28 distinguishes body and soul; physicalism erases the reality of eternal consequences, heaven, and hell.

Prayer, worship, and relationship with God are spiritual: If humans were only physical, communion with God would be reduced to biological or psychological processes, stripping faith of its eternal significance.

Christ's incarnation includes a true human soul: Denying the soul undermines the doctrine that Jesus took on full human nature — body and soul.

Summary statement

"Denying the soul is not just a philosophical position; it contradicts core biblical teaching on sin, salvation, judgment, and Christ's incarnation. Scripture affirms that every person has a soul accountable to God, and the gospel's promise of eternal life applies to that soul. Without acknowledging the soul, Christian faith loses its foundation

• Why Nancey Murphy Should Lose her Tenured Professorship and be Removed From Fuller Seminary: 

Nancey Murphy, as a tenured professor at Fuller Seminary, holds a position of profound influence over future pastors, theologians, and Christian leaders. As such, she bears a sacred responsibility to teach and uphold the doctrines of the Christian faith, particularly the nature of humanity as revealed in Scripture. 

Her promotion of physicalism — the claim that humans are purely material beings without souls — directly contradicts core biblical teaching. Ezekiel 18:4 affirms that every person has a soul, accountable to God for their moral choices: "The soul that sins, it shall die."

 Denying the soul undermines the very foundation of sin, salvation, and judgment, rendering the gospel incoherent. 1 John 5:11-12 further emphasizes that eternal life is given to the soul in Christ; without the soul, the promise of redemption is meaningless.

Fuller Seminary, as a Christian institution, requires faculty to uphold its statement of faith and to teach in alignment with Scripture. Murphy's public advocacy for physicalism not only contradicts these doctrinal commitments but also dehumanizes students by framing them as mere biological machines rather than eternal beings made in God's image (Genesis 1:27).

 This is not a mere academic disagreement; it is a direct challenge to the formation of future leaders in faith and moral accountability.

Given her tenured position, Murphy's influence is institutionalized, affecting generations of students. Allowing her to continue teaching under these beliefs constitutes a breach of trust with the seminary's mission, undermines the integrity of its Christian education, and risks leading students into doctrinal error. For the sake of theological fidelity, spiritual formation, and the protection of the seminary's mission, it is appropriate that Nancey Murphy be removed from her tenured professorship at Fuller Seminary

Proverbs 3:5-6 — Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways submit to him, and he will make your paths straight.

 Nancey Murphy often labels her view "non-reductive dualist physicalism". This is an attempt to reconcile two seemingly contradictory ideas:

1. What "non-reductive dualist physicalism" means

Physicalism: Everything that exists is ultimately physical — all mental states arise from brain activity.

Non-reductive: Mental phenomena (thoughts, consciousness, moral reasoning) are real and cannot be fully reduced to physical explanations, even though they emerge from the brain.

Dualist (sort of): She acknowledges that humans have emergent mental or moral properties that are not purely physical in their causal effects, but these properties are still dependent on the physical brain.

In short, Murphy's position tries to claim humans have a "soul-like" aspect, but it is not fully immaterial or independent of the body. It's a way of having dualism without traditional theological dualism.

2. Why this is controversial in Christian context

Traditional Christianity teaches that the soul is immaterial, eternal, and accountable to God independently of the body.

Murphy's framework keeps the appearance of a soul but grounds it entirely in material processes, which:

*Reduces eternal accountability

*Redefines salvation and moral responsibility in physicalist terms

*Undermines the biblical teaching of immortality of the soul and personal judgment

3. Academic versus doctrinal framing

Philosophically, her view is interesting for science-theology dialogue, trying to explain consciousness in emergentist terms.

Doctrinally, for a Christian seminary, it is problematic because it reinterprets Scripture to fit a materialist model, rather than submitting scientific inquiry to biblical authority.

Psalm 119:105 — Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light for my path.

• Critique of Non-Reductive Dualist Physicalism in a Christian Seminary Context

Non-reductive dualist physicalism asserts that while humans have emergent mental or moral properties, these properties ultimately depend on the physical brain. In other words, the "soul-like" aspects of humanity are not truly immaterial or independent. While this approach may appeal in philosophy or science-theology dialogue, it directly conflicts with Scripture and the mission of a Christian seminary.

1. Denial of an immaterial, eternal soul

Ezekiel 18:4 clearly states that every person has a soul accountable to God: "The soul that sins, it shall die."

Murphy's framework reduces the soul to a physical, emergent phenomenon, undermining personal accountability and the eternal nature of the soul.

2. Undermining the gospel and salvation

1 John 5:11-12 teaches that eternal life is granted to the soul through Christ. If the soul is merely physical, the very promise of salvation becomes meaningless.

3. Contradiction with traditional Christian anthropology

Genesis 1:27 and Matthew 10:28 emphasize that humans are created in God's image and have a soul distinct from their bodies. Physicalism, even "non-reductive," denies this essential truth, reducing humans to biological mechanisms rather than spiritual beings.

4. Implications for seminary teaching

Faculty at a Christian seminary are entrusted to uphold the statement of faith and train leaders in biblical doctrine. Advocating non-reductive dualist physicalism risks misleading students and compromising the seminary's mission.

Conclusion: While philosophically interesting, non-reductive dualist physicalism is incompatible with the biblical teaching of the soul. For doctrinal integrity and faithful Christian formation, a tenured professor promoting this view should not hold a teaching position at a seminary that affirms traditional biblical anthropology.

Proverbs 18:13 — To answer before listening—that is folly and shame.

Does Nancy Murphy couch her language using lofty theological gibberish to make herself sound sophisticated? 

Yes — from a critical perspective, it's reasonable to say that labeling her view "non-reductive dualist physicalism" is partly a way to make the idea sound more sophisticated or credible, especially to a seminary audience. Here's why this happens:

1. Using technical language to obscure the core idea

"Non-reductive dualist physicalism" is a mouthful of philosophical jargon.

The core claim is still a form of materialism: the soul is not truly immaterial or independent.

By using complex terminology, it distances the argument from its radical implications, so it doesn't immediately sound heretical or reductionist.

2. The effect on the audience

Most people — especially students or the public — may lack background in philosophy of mind, so the term itself feels authoritative or smart.

It can create the illusion that this is a nuanced theological position, when the substantive difference from materialism is minimal in terms of its challenge to biblical teaching.

3. Why this matters

In a Christian seminary, this is significant because students might accept the argument at face value, thinking it's a legitimate theological perspective.

But in reality, the core teaching denies the immaterial, eternal soul, undermining doctrines of sin, salvation, and eternal life.

4. Bottom line

Yes, it is fair to say that using such a complicated, lofty label functions partly as a rhetorical strategy — to make the claim seem sophisticated, less obviously contrary to Scripture, and to intimidate or confuse the average listener.

The substance, however, remains a form of materialist reductionism, incompatible with traditional Christian belief.

If you want, I can break down her phrase "non-reductive dualist physicalism" word by word, showing exactly how each part is designed to sound sophisticated but ultimately cannot escape materialism. 

Psalm 119:130 — The unfolding of your words gives light; it gives understanding to the simple.

Here's a word-by-word breakdown of Nancey Murphy's phrase "non-reductive dualist physicalism", showing how it's designed to sound sophisticated but ultimately masks a materialist view:

1. Physicalism

Core claim: everything that exists is physical, including mind and consciousness.

Implication: There is no truly immaterial, eternal soul, only biological processes.

This is the part that fundamentally conflicts with Scripture.

2. Non-reductive

"Non-reductive" sounds subtle and scholarly.

It means: Yes, mental or moral phenomena are real and can't be fully explained by physics, but they still emerge from and depend on the physical brain.

Purpose of the term: make the position seem more sophisticated, as if it's acknowledging the "spiritual" dimension", even though it remains grounded in materialism.

3. Dualist

"Dualist" suggests a distinction between body and mind.In Murphy's system, the "dualism" is only emergent, not truly immaterial.

The word "dualist" gives the appearance of traditional Christian dualism, but it's misleading: the soul is not independent of the body.

4. Rhetorical effect

The combination of these three terms creates the illusion of intellectual weight. Average listeners, especially in a seminary or academic setting, may think: "Wow, this is a nuanced, sophisticated theology."

Reality: It is still a form of physicalism, denying the independent, eternal soul, and therefore undermining sin, salvation, and accountability.

5. Bottom line

Each part of the phrase softens the radical materialism, disguising it in "theological-sounding" language.

The substance, however, remains incompatible with biblical teaching, and its complexity may intimidate or confuse students, making them less likely to recognize the heresy.

Psalm 19:14 — May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be pleasing in your sight, Lord, my Rock and my Redeemer.

• Here's a plain-English translation of Nancey Murphy's phrase "non-reductive dualist physicalism":

Plain English version:

"Humans are basically physical beings; what we call the mind, soul, or moral self is just a property that arises from the brain. It may feel real and important, but it is not independent of the body or eternal. In short, there is no truly immaterial, eternal soul — humans are just highly complex biological machines."

Why this matters

This translation removes the confusing academic terms and makes clear the conflict with Scripture.

It shows that, despite the fancy label, the position denies the soul's independence and eternal nature, undermining sin, salvation, judgment, and the gospel.

Students or listeners can immediately see that it is essentially materialism disguised in theological language.

Ephesians 4:14 — …that we might no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine…

Fuller Theological Seminary's Statement of Faith exists to define the core doctrines that shape its identity as an evangelical institution committed to biblical faith. It articulates foundational truths about God, Christ, Scripture, humanity, salvation, and eternity that are central to historic Christian belief.

 Because Fuller trains pastors, theologians, and leaders who will shape the Church's understanding of God and humanity, the seminary's doctrinal commitments are not incidental — they are the basis for theological formation and academic integrity.

When a faculty member publicly advocates positions that appear to contradict clear biblical teachings — such as the nature of the soul, the reality of God's revelation, or the eternal significance of human beings — it raises legitimate concerns about alignment with Fuller's stated commitments.

 The Statement of Faith is therefore an appropriate reference point for evaluating whether a professor's teachings are consistent with the seminary's mission.

 If a professor's philosophical framework undermines or contradicts key doctrinal affirmations in that statement, it is reasonable for the Fuller community — faculty, students, alumni, and supporters — to engage in discernment and discussion about how best to uphold the seminary's theological identity.

Using the Statement of Faith as the normative standard does not mean suppressing academic inquiry; rather, it means ensuring that scholarship and teaching at Fuller remain rooted in the convictions to which the institution has formally committed. 

In this way, the Statement of Faith can rightly serve as the foundation for raising concerns, fostering dialogue, and seeking accountability in a manner that honors both academic freedom and fidelity to the gospel.

• Who grants Fuller Seminary accreditation? 

ATS (Association of Theological Schools) – Most relevant

ATS is specifically focused on theological education. Their accreditation standards include:

Faithfulness to the institution's mission and theological commitments

The ability of faculty to teach in ways consistent with the school's stated doctrinal standards.

Educational effectiveness in forming students according to the seminary's mission and doctrinal framework. Because Fuller Seminary's Statement of Faith is part of its official mission and faculty expectations, if a professor's teaching systematically contradicts that Statement of Faith, ATS could consider it relevant to:

Whether the institution is upholding its own stated theological commitments

Whether it is faithfully preparing students for ministry in line with its stated mission.

In other words, if Nancey Murphy's teaching is public, systematic, and clearly at odds with the Statement of Faith, ATS could take that into account during accreditation or reaccreditation reviews, particularly regarding faculty oversight and mission fidelity

Psalm 119:160 — All your words are true; all your righteous laws are eternal.

To: Commission on Accrediting

The Association of Theological Schools

[ATS Address]

10 Summit Park Drive

Pittsburgh, PA 15275‑1103 USA

📞 Phone: (412) 788‑6505

✉️ Email: ats@ats.edu 

January 4, 2026

Re:  Heretical Teaching at Fuller Seminary

Dear Members of the ATS Commission,

I am submitting a concern regarding teaching at Fuller Theological Seminary that may conflict with the seminary's Statement of Faith. Fuller's mission is to equip students for ministry in alignment with evangelical doctrine, including the creation of humanity in God's image, the existence and eternal nature of the soul, and the biblical framework of sin, moral accountability, and salvation.

Professor Nancey Murphy publicly advocates non-reductive dualist physicalism, which asserts that humans are ultimately physical beings and that the soul and moral self are emergent properties dependent on the brain. 

This directly conflicts with Fuller's Statement of Faith and raises concerns about whether students are being faithfully formed according to the seminary's stated doctrinal commitments.

I respectfully request that the Commission consider this matter in evaluating Fuller Seminary's adherence to its theological mission. Documentation and specific examples of teachings can be provided upon request.

Thank you for your attention and careful review of this concern.

Sincerely,

Joy Lender 

Fuller Alumnus 

Watch Full Rose Parade 2026 in 8 minutes !

See FULL Rose🌹🎺Parade at

https://youtu.be/0RHSiNLs7J0?si=Pm2dy8K-ALzWZLhQ

HAPPY NEW YEAR !

 THANK YOU JESUS !

100% rain at 8am in Pasadena 1/1/26 ☹️☔ Hourly Weather Forecast for Pasadena, CA Weather channel

https://weather.com/weather/hourbyhour/l/3e02e20154813e862ddd98afe29c36cafeb8df21a8d4ad5c72a41acabb52b0ba 

Bring umbrella ☔"National Weather Service predicts ‘near 100% chance of rain’ during the Rose Parade "| KTLA

https://ktla.com/weather/national-weather-service-predicts-near-100-chance-of-rain-during-the-rose-parade/amp/ 

"

The last time the Rose Parade saw significant rain was in 2006.

Before that, rain had not fallen on the parade since 1955. Even further back, the 1934 Rose Parade was the wettest on record..."

The Briefcase and the Frame Job: How Good Citizen (barely) Survived Halford’s Trap

📖 The Framing of the Seminary Student

Part I: Premeditation and the Office Scheme

Hugh Halford’s Quiet Plot

In the quiet of his office, Hugh Halford sipped lukewarm coffee, a sly smile curving his lips. He reviewed the M.Div student’s civil case against the City of Pasadena and the Pasadena Police Department. The sem student—known for his composure and his dual life as a substitute teacher for LAUSD—had become a threat to the city’s legal interests. Halford, ever the strategist, recognized the opportunity to craft a frame. “Watch this,” he muttered, tapping a pen against the desk, “one good courtroom spectacle, and the Good Citizen will be the defendant instead of the plaintiff.”

Halford rehearsed the moment in his mind, picturing the hallway outside the courtroom, imagining the student’s calm demeanor, and anticipating the dramatic flair that the student, trained in handling rowdy classrooms, might inadvertently provide. He chuckled quietly, thinking how he could twist a simple gesture into a criminal allegation. Later, in whispered tones with city police contacts and Michelle Bagneris, his boss, he recounted the plan as a jest. “The kid won’t even see it coming,” he boasted, amusement dancing in his eyes.

Part II: The Hallway Confrontation

Drama Meets the Court

The day arrived. The M.Div student, known affectionately as Good Citizen, walked the hallway outside the courtroom, armed with his files, witness statements, and unshakable composure. He was prepared to defend himself pro per, a skill honed from years of managing large, unpredictable classrooms full of high school students testing his patience. His LAUSD experience taught him how to command attention with a mix of authority, timing, and subtle dramatic flair—a skill he now subconsciously prepared to use.

Hugh Halford emerged, eyes sharp, voice loud, ready to dominate the hall. He approached with his typical aggressive attorney posture, attempting to intimidate the sem student. “Looks like you’re out of your depth, kid,” Halford sneered, stepping closer.

The M.Div student paused. He felt the familiar surge of classroom control instincts. “Time for a little theatrics,” he thought, recalling how a well-timed gesture could refocus even the most disruptive classroom. With measured intent, he grabbed his briefcase and slammed it onto the floor. The echo ricocheted off the hallway walls like a gavel, drawing immediate attention. The gesture was controlled, symbolic, entirely non-contact—but perfect to assert presence and authority.

Yet Halford, ever devious, leaned subtly forward just as the briefcase hit the ground, brushing the student’s sleeve ever so slightly. In an instant, Halford’s theatrics flipped the narrative: “He hit me! Did you see that? He hit me!” he yelled, projecting the lie to any potential witnesses.

Two nearby attorneys, distracted by their own matters, were the only people present. One shook his head, “I didn’t see him hit or touch you,” but Halford ignored it, playing the moment for maximum effect. His eyes scanned the hall, seeking validation from imagined onlookers, while the M.Div student remained calm, internally noting the familiar tactics of deceit he had faced as a teacher: manipulation, false testimony, and staged provocations.

Part III: The Frame in Motion

Police Involvement and Miscarriage

The Pasadena Police Department soon entered the scene, and Halford’s theatrics bore fruit. Despite the student’s innocence, police cited him for simple battery and disturbing the peace. The charges served a dual purpose: to deflect attention from the city and PD’s own liability in the original civil case, and to punish the Good Citizen for daring to challenge institutional power. It was a textbook misdirection, executed with confidence and a wink shared privately with his colleagues and superiors.

Meanwhile, the M.Div student stood resolute, his experience managing chaotic classrooms lending him an inner steadiness. He remembered the unruly teenagers testing him, lying to cover pranks or minor infractions. Here in the hallway, he faced a far more sophisticated version of that chaos: a seasoned attorney twisting the moment to his own advantage. But his training provided a secret weapon— poise under pressure.

Part IV: The Classroom Within the Courtroom

Dramatic Anger as Defense

The Good Citizen reflected on how he had learned to use “dramatic anger” to assert control in classrooms, a technique to command attention and prevent escalation. He realized this moment in the court hallway was similar: if he could display authority without aggression, he could withstand Halford’s false claims and keep observers focused on the truth. The briefcase slam was not random; it was a deliberate, nonviolent demonstration, meant to establish presence and draw attention.

Yet Halford, cunning and premeditated, interpreted it as “assault,” leaning into the student and transforming the action into a frame. The student, calm but internally racing, understood the stakes: this single moment could derail his entire civil case if he allowed it. He reminded himself, “Classroom strategies, focus, observation. Witnesses matter. Poise matters.”

Part V: The Aftermath

Manipulation and Gossip

Afterward, in Halford’s office, he laughed quietly over the incident, retelling the frame to Pasadena police contacts. “Did you see that? Slam! And now he’s on a battery charge,” he joked, shrugging conspiratorially at city attorneys and officers alike. All part of the plan. He even referenced the incident to Michelle Bagneris with sly glee, describing it as a clever twist of events, downplaying the M.Div student’s innocence.

Despite the personal attacks and duplicity, the Good Citizen began gathering evidence: witness accounts, precise timestamps, and contextual notes recalling the hallway dynamic. His understanding of human behavior, honed in classrooms with teenagers attempting deception, guided his reconstruction. He noted the precise moment Halford leaned in, the briefcase’s trajectory, and the lack of physical contact.

Part VI: The Courtroom Resurgence

Truth Triumphs

Weeks later, in the courtroom proper, the M.Div student presented his case methodically. With every assertion, every timeline, he demonstrated restraint, moral integrity, and a subtle theatrical presence that commanded attention. Halford attempted again to frame him as volatile, but the visual record, witness testimony, and documentation of the hallway event contradicted his theatrics. Observers noted the disparity: the student’s calm and Halford’s performative aggression.

The story of the briefcase became a pivotal reference, a symbol of integrity and composure under pressure. Everyone in attendance—judge, attorneys, even jurors— recognized the difference between orchestrated lies and deliberate, controlled theatrical emphasis. The Good Citizen’s credibility emerged unscathed.

Part VII: Legacy of the Incident

Lessons Learned and Local Legend

The M.Div student’s hallway confrontation became a whispered legend within seminary corridors and, quietly, among Pasadena legal circles. The briefcase slam, flashing in memory like a beacon of truth, symbolized measured authority, composure, and the power of procedural knowledge against deceit.

Halford retreated, plotting the next tale, but the Good Citizen had established a foundation of credibility. His dual role as a substitute teacher and seminary student allowed him to navigate human behavior, anticipate deception, and respond with carefully measured dramatic control.

Ultimately, the incident revealed the contrast between premeditated manipulation and ethical, disciplined response. While the city and its attorney attempted to rewrite reality, the M.Div student’s poise, documentation, and theatrical experience ensured the truth would endure.

And Lola, ever faithful, wagged at his side through it all— a small reminder that innocence, patience, and unwavering integrity often speak louder than the loudest lie.

The Red Honda Reckoning: A Sem Student’s Test of Inner Strength

The Unforeseen Trial: A Seminary Student at Lake and Villa

1. A Quiet Afternoon Turns Unexpected

The evening sun was waning over Pasadena, spilling long amber rays across Lake Avenue. For the M.Div student, known to the world as Good Citizen, the day had been one of quiet study, reflection, and anticipation for a small sermon he was preparing for his community chapel. His mind wandered to the words he had rehearsed, the passages he hoped would resonate with the small congregation, and the weight of responsibility he carried in cultivating both spiritual understanding and moral clarity. Little did he know that, in less than a minute, he would be caught in an ordeal that challenged patience, civility, and his own sense of justice.

2. The Minor Collision

Driving his red two-door Honda southbound on Lake Avenue, Good Citizen felt the familiar hum of the engine and the rhythm of the streets as calming companions. The late winter air was crisp, carrying a faint scent of eucalyptus from the distant San Gabriel hills. As he approached Villa Street, the traffic light ahead remained red. He slowed, foot lightly on the brake, eyes scanning the intersection with a deliberate care born of both caution and conscience. Crossing the city streets had always been a practice of mindfulness for him—an extension of the values he sought to embody in his ministry.

Meanwhile, from the west, a green four-door Honda—driven by a woman later known as Bustamonte—entered the intersection. From his angle, obscured slightly by a delivery truck stationed along the curb, Good Citizen did not see the vehicle until it drew near. There was a sudden, jarring moment when the front bumpers met, a light collision that left both cars scratched and both hearts startled. The sound was muted but precise—the faint scrape of metal, the brief crunch of enamel paint—and it was enough to turn the routine drive into a crucible of moral and social trial.

3. Calm Amid Misunderstanding

He exhaled slowly, heart steadying. “It’s alright,” he murmured to himself. “It’s only a scratch. We’ll resolve this.” He stepped out, carefully assessing the damage to both vehicles. His eyes caught the woman’s expression: flustered, upset, perhaps fearful. Good Citizen instinctively raised his hands in a gesture of reassurance, signaling calm. He had always believed that conflicts, no matter how trivial in their physical impact, could escalate unnecessarily if reason and compassion were not exercised. The collision itself, minor as it was, became the backdrop for a confrontation he had not anticipated.

4. Arrival of Law Enforcement

Before the conversation could escalate, the sound of a police siren punctuated the evening air. Officers Brown and Mosman approached in a marked vehicle, lights reflecting off the asphalt, the ordinary authority of law intersecting with the seminary student’s ordinary life. Good Citizen stepped slightly back, hands visible, conscious of every gesture. He had learned that compliance with authority was prudent, yet fairness was equally crucial. His mind raced: How could he demonstrate his innocence, his civility, without seeming defensive or evasive? He reflected briefly on Romans 13 and the nature of obedience, the balance of respect and personal integrity.

5. Misinterpreted Intentions

Officer Brown’s eyes fixed on Good Citizen. The M.Div student could feel the weight of the gaze, the subtle tension in the air, like a beam testing the strength of the soul. “Explain what happened,” Brown demanded, voice firm but not harsh. Good Citizen recounted the incident, carefully articulating the sequence: the red light, the obstructed view, the minor impact. He spoke honestly, without embellishment, conveying both responsibility for navigating safely and the factual inevitability that sometimes accidents occur even under due care.

Yet, in the officers’ perception, Good Citizen’s calm and deliberate articulation was misread. The suddenness of his step forward, merely to demonstrate the line of sight blocked by the truck, was interpreted as aggression. He had merely leaned slightly to illustrate his point, an innocent movement of hands and posture, and yet Officer Brown recorded it as a “lunge”. Within moments, the seminary student felt the weight of misinterpretation pressing upon him, the friction between civic duty and personal morality becoming palpable.

6. Documentation and Misrepresentation

A minor pain in his right thumb caused him to flinch momentarily. It was an inconsequential injury, likely from bracing or adjusting stance, yet it became part of the formal report, a mark of alleged victimization now woven into a narrative he had no control over. Good Citizen allowed himself a brief inward sigh: the human story—fear, misunderstanding, emotion—was being compressed into codes, abbreviations, and preprinted notes. The heart of the incident—the human nuance, the interior truth—was at risk of being lost.

7. Reflections on Ethics and Conduct

As the officers began their intake process, the M.Div student found his thoughts drifting. He remembered his seminary lectures on ethics and human fallibility, on sin and misunderstanding, on the necessity of mercy tempered with accountability. How often had communities rushed to judgment, misunderstanding intentions, misattributing actions? He recognized the unfolding pattern and silently prayed for patience, clarity, and justice—not just for himself but for all parties involved.

8. Resolution and Inner Clarity

Hours passed, though perhaps only minutes in the physical world. The paperwork concluded, and the officers began to retreat toward their vehicle. Bustamonte, having observed his demeanor, seemed less adversarial, though the collision had left its mark on her patience. Good Citizen offered a final gesture of civility, a nod acknowledging the shared human moment of imperfection and recovery. He returned to his car, checked his reflection in the rearview mirror, and allowed himself a quiet exhale. The encounter was over, yet its lessons remained, inscribed deeply in his consciousness.

Driving away, he pondered how seemingly small accidents could become tests of character. The red Honda hummed along Lake Avenue, carrying not only the M.Div student but the weight of principles, the assurance of faith, and the clarity of conscience. In that small collision, he had confronted misunderstanding, maintained calm in the face of misinterpretation, and upheld the dignity of a person committed to both civic and spiritual virtue. Though the official record might later misrepresent subtlety, Good Citizen knew the truth of his own actions—and that knowledge, he understood, was unassailable.

By the time he arrived at the chapel, the first stars appeared over Pasadena. He parked, removed his books, and walked inside. The world of paperwork, collision, misinterpretation, and procedural shorthand faded. In its place, he held reflection, compassion, and the enduring lesson that character was forged not in absence of conflict, but in the steadfast navigation of it.

new3 v5

V5

The attached document represents a severely fragmented Pasadena Police Department file concerning an incident on February 3, 2000 at Lake Avenue and Villa Street. While scanned poorly and missing critical lines, the content reveals procedural irregularities, contradictions in officer statements, and questionable actions taken against plaintiff K, forming the basis for an aggressive legal analysis of potential misconduct and unfair treatment.

The initial pages consist of administrative intake forms, ostensibly to record suspect description and evidence. Despite text corruption, the preprinted note “THE SUSPECT HIT THE POLICE OFFICER” stands out. This is a prejudicial template statement, potentially misleading investigators or readers into assuming culpability before any determination. The partially completed forms highlight procedural sloppiness, raising questions about departmental documentation standards.

Case identifiers, including Case No. 00006684, recur throughout the file. Other numerical or coded references are scattered and largely illegible. Their inconsistent presence emphasizes poor recordkeeping, making it impossible to track who entered information, when, or under what authority. This lack of clarity is critical for evidentiary review.

The narrative by Officer Brown is presented as a chronology but contains significant contradictions and gaps. Brown reports that, at 1801 hours, he and Officer Mosman were southbound on Lake Avenue, approaching Villa Street. He claims to have observed a green Honda entering the intersection lawfully before the light changed, yet later alleges plaintiff K entered unsafely, with no clear explanation of signal timing. This internal inconsistency undermines the credibility of the officer narrative.

Both drivers exited their vehicles. Brown notes only minor paint transfer, yet the report escalates to allegations of aggressive movement. Plaintiff K allegedly “lunged” toward Brown in a manner described as aggressive, coming within eight inches. No strike, push, or grab occurred, yet this forms the entire basis of a P.C. 243(b) charge. This raises serious questions about whether perceived aggression alone supports a criminal allegation.

Brown further notes a sore right thumb, without explanation of causation. The absence of photographs, sketches, or medical documentation represents a procedural failure, as claims of injury should be substantiated.

Plaintiff K’s alleged refusal to exchange insurance information is presented as escalation. The narrative fails to consider Bustamonte’s contradictory statements. She described plaintiff K as agitated yet also confirmed the collision was minor. Selective reporting of plaintiff K’s behavior illustrates procedural bias, potentially framing him unfairly.

The witness statement is heavily degraded. While fragments suggest verbal and emotional escalation, OCR corruption and missing lines prevent verification. Relevant context—such as minimal collision impact and visual obstructions—is omitted, demonstrating a narrative engineered to support aggressive prosecution.

Administrative intake forms show additional procedural inconsistencies. Evidence and suspect categories—“vehicle,” “weapons,” “suspect named,” “further investigation”—are incomplete. Preprinted phrases like “GOOD POSSIBILITY OF SOLUTION” and “A SUSPECT CAN BE LOCATED” suggest expected follow-through, yet no action, arrest documentation, or supervisory review appears, exposing serious procedural deficiencies.

Critical unresolved questions remain: (1) Was plaintiff K formally arrested, cited, or detained? (2) Were supplemental officer statements filed? (3) Was supervisory review conducted? (4) Was there follow-up investigation? The abrupt termination of the scan suggests key procedural steps were either never completed or omitted from the record.

Taken together, the material demonstrates multiple forms of potential misconduct and bias:

• Prejudicial template statements inflating plaintiff K’s culpability.
• Internal contradictions in officer observations undermining reliability.
• Selective reporting of witness statements to emphasize aggression.
• Incomplete procedural follow-up leaving the case unresolved.
• Ambiguous injury claims without corroboration.

Highlighting these points demonstrates that the scanned file is not only incomplete but potentially manipulated to justify a P.C. 243(b) allegation against plaintiff K. Conflicting details and selective emphasis provide a compelling argument that he may have been mischaracterized and unfairly targeted.

The narrative underscores broader concerns: roadside incidents escalate due to environmental factors, obstructions, and emotional responses. The officers’ account selectively attributes intent to plaintiff K, demonstrating confirmation bias in law enforcement reporting.

For legal analysis, Version 5 emphasizes: (1) Plaintiff K’s movement is ambiguous, insufficient for a P.C. 243(b) charge; (2) Officer narratives contain contradictions undermining reliability; (3) Witness statements are degraded and selectively emphasized; (4) Administrative forms are incomplete and potentially prejudicial; (5) Procedural follow-up is absent, raising fairness concerns.

In conclusion, Version 5 frames the case around potential officer misconduct, selective narrative, procedural deficiencies, and contradictions. It presents a document demanding scrutiny regarding the integrity of allegations and fairness in the handling of plaintiff K’s alleged conduct. Color-coded highlights emphasize critical issues: green for statutes/identifiers, red for contradictions, aggressive acts, and procedural gaps.

new3 v4

v4

This file represents a partially reconstructed police case file generated by the Pasadena Police Department regarding an incident on February 3, 2000 at or near Lake Avenue and Villa Street. The scanned materials are heavily degraded, including torn pages, OCR distortions, missing lines, and incomplete text. Despite these limitations, the document allows reconstruction of the incident sequence, capturing officer observations, suspect behavior, and witness testimony surrounding a P.C. 243(b) (Assault on a Peace Officer) allegation.

The early section includes standardized administrative forms designed to capture suspect descriptors, evidence categories, and incident metadata. These forms list clothing, accessories, identifying marks, potential weapons, and other checkboxes. Though much of the text is corrupted, certain entries remain legible: “baseball hat,” “glasses (plastic frame),” and generic weapons categories. Notably, one preprinted line reads: “THE SUSPECT HIT THE POLICE OFFICER”. Whether this originates from an officer’s notation or a template artifact is unclear, raising questions about its reliability.

Case identifiers, including Case No. 00006684, recur throughout the intake forms. Other numerical or coded references are present, likely indicating internal categorization or revision dates. Though mostly illegible, these repeated identifiers reinforce that the file adheres to departmental procedures for documenting P.C. 243(b) cases.

The most coherent portion is a narrative authored by Officer Brown. At approximately 1801 hours, Brown and Officer Mosman were southbound on Lake Avenue in a marked vehicle. As they approached Villa Street, the north–south traffic signal was red. Upon turning green, they began moving through the intersection when they heard a collision from their left.

The involved vehicles were a green four-door Honda driven by Bustamonte and a red two-door Honda driven by plaintiff K. Brown observed the green Honda entering the intersection from the west prior to the light change, concluding it had lawfully occupied the intersection. Later admissions from Bustamonte that she entered the intersection late during gridlock cast significant doubt on the officers’ assessment of fault.

Both drivers exited and moved toward the sidewalk. Officers observed minor paint transfer, consistent with a low-speed collision. Brown first engaged plaintiff K. Plaintiff K reportedly stated he moved forward when his light turned green but that a truck obstructed his view of westbound traffic. He allegedly downplayed the collision, saying “let’s call it a wash”. Bustamonte requested insurance and identifying information. Plaintiff K initially refused, claiming no fault. These accounts may overstate the severity of plaintiff K’s demeanor.

Officer Brown intervened to de-escalate the situation, instructing plaintiff K to comply. Brown reiterated that the green Honda entered the intersection before the north–south signal changed, concluding plaintiff K entered unsafely. At this point, Brown alleges plaintiff K escalated physically.

Brown reports that plaintiff K, standing between vehicles while Brown was on the sidewalk, “lunged” in what Brown described as aggressive movement, approaching within eight inches. No strike, push, or grab occurred. The report may exaggerate plaintiff K’s movement to justify the P.C. 243(b) allegation.

Brown also noted a sore right thumb, without clarification on how it occurred. There is no indication whether plaintiff K was arrested, cited, or otherwise processed, highlighting the incompleteness of the scan.

Witness statements attributed to Bustamonte are heavily degraded. Fragments suggest she described plaintiff K as agitated, loud, and emotionally unstable. However, Bustamonte’s later admission of entering the intersection late undermines her credibility and calls into question her version of events.

Additional fragments imply plaintiff K gestured, paced, or spoke loudly. The corrupted and partial nature of the witness text, along with potential bias, limits its reliability as evidence.

The administrative forms included checkboxes for evidence types (e.g., “vehicle,” “weapons,” “tools,” “controlled substances,” “photographs”) and investigative categories (e.g., “suspect named,” “suspect arrested,” “further investigation needed”). The corrupted forms do not confirm selections. Preprinted phrases such as “A SUSPECT CAN BE LOCATED” reflect template language rather than verified investigative conclusions.

The scan ends abruptly, leaving unresolved questions: (1) Was plaintiff K formally arrested, detained, or cited for P.C. 243(b)? (2) Were supplemental booking sheets or officer statements completed? (3) Did supervisory review take place? (4) Was further investigation or prosecutorial screening conducted? Standard procedure would typically require additional documentation for an assault-on-officer allegation, none of which appears in this scan.

Key findings include: (1) A minor traffic collision at Lake/Villa involving plaintiff K and Bustamonte. (2) Officers’ claim that Bustamonte entered lawfully is questionable. (3) Plaintiff K disputed fault, initially refused to exchange information, and spoke firmly. (4) Plaintiff K made a forward movement interpreted as threatening, though no contact occurred. (5) Officer Brown reported minor thumb soreness. (6) Witness corroboration is unreliable due to credibility concerns. (7) Procedural resolution is absent.

Legally, the narrative emphasizes plaintiff K’s perceived behavior rather than the mechanics of the collision. The escalation appears based on interpretation of verbal tone and movement, not actual physical aggression.

In its current form, the file serves as a partial evidentiary record, highlighting inconsistencies in police reporting and witness statements while documenting the circumstances of the February 3, 2000, incident.

new3 v3

Professional Appellate Brief Rewrite (Expanded ~1500 Words)

The record submitted consists of a partially preserved Pasadena Police Department incident file documenting a February 3, 2000 traffic collision and the subsequent allegations of P.C. 243(b)—Assault on a Peace Officer—against plaintiff K. Although the materials are incomplete and heavily degraded, the surviving narrative sections, administrative entries, and witness references provide an adequate basis to reconstruct the operative facts and procedural framing. This appellate-style rewrite emphasizes potential discrepancies in the police and witness testimony while presenting a professional, structured narrative.

The file begins with form-based pages comprising the department’s standardized intake templates. These forms include fields for suspect descriptors, clothing, identifying marks, evidence categories, investigative designations, and administrative codes. Due to OCR distortion, many portions are unreadable, appearing as fragmented symbols. Recognizable fields include eyewear, hats, weapon classifications, and general behavioral indicators. One preprinted line reads: “THE SUSPECT HIT THE POLICE OFFICER.” Its placement in a stock template raises questions about whether it reflects an independent factual assertion.

The case number—00006684—appears repeatedly across the forms. Fields such as “suspect named,” “suspect arrested,” “further investigation needed,” and “probability of solution” indicate investigative direction, but the incomplete scan leaves unclear which boxes were actually selected. Evidence categories including “vehicle,” “weapons,” “photos,” and “controlled substance” appear, though there is no clear linkage to the incident.

The substantive core is the narrative authored by Officer Brown. On February 3, 2000 at approximately 1801 hours, Officers Brown and Mosman were traveling southbound on Lake Avenue. Approaching Villa Street, the north–south signal was red. Upon turning green, they entered the intersection and immediately heard a collision to their left.

The vehicles involved were a green four-door Honda and a red two-door Honda. Drivers were identified as Bustamonte (green Honda) and plaintiff K (red Honda). Brown claims the green Honda entered before the signal changed, a conclusion contradicted by later statements from Bustamonte admitting she entered late during gridlock, raising doubt about the officers’ assessment of fault.

Both drivers exited their vehicles. Officers noted minor paint transfer, consistent with a low-impact collision. Brown approached plaintiff K first. Plaintiff K reportedly stated his light turned green and that his view of westbound traffic was obstructed. Brown recounts that plaintiff K told Bustamonte the incident was “no big deal,” “let’s call it a wash.” Bustamonte’s request for identification allegedly provoked plaintiff K’s refusal, though this may reflect misunderstanding or overstatement of plaintiff K’s conduct.

Brown asserts that plaintiff K became argumentative, prompting officer intervention. Brown states he explained that the green Honda entered before the light changed, claiming plaintiff K entered unsafely. Brown alleges this triggered an aggressive reaction.

Brown reports that plaintiff K—standing between the vehicles—suddenly lunged forward toward him. Brown remained on the sidewalk. Plaintiff K allegedly came within eight inches of contact. No strike, push, or grab occurred. The officers’ interpretation may exaggerate plaintiff K’s movement to justify a P.C. 243(b) allegation.

Brown notes a “sore right thumb”, without clarifying the cause. No records indicate whether plaintiff K was arrested, cited, or processed. Supplemental reports or supervisory reviews are missing, emphasizing the incomplete nature of the file.

Witness statements attributed to Bustamonte are heavily degraded. Surviving fragments suggest she described plaintiff K as agitated, yelling, and emotionally elevated. However, her later admission about entering the intersection late undermines her reliability and raises questions about the accuracy of her account.

Corrupted text implies plaintiff K gestured, paced, or spoke loudly. Due to distortion and potential bias, these descriptions should be treated cautiously.

Administrative forms include checkboxes for evidence types and investigative categories, though selection is unclear. Preprinted phrases such as “GOOD POSSIBILITY OF SOLUTION” and “A SUSPECT CAN BE LOCATED” reflect template language, not verified observation.

The scan ends abruptly. Missing documents—arrest reports, citations, booking sheets, or prosecutorial screening—likely exist in the original file but are absent here.

Key points for appellate analysis:
• Minor collision at Lake/Villa involving plaintiff K and Bustamonte.
• Officers’ claim that Bustamonte entered lawfully is contradicted by her later statement.
• Plaintiff K disputed fault and initially declined to provide information.
• Officers interpreted verbal escalation and forward movement as threatening.
• Forward movement did not result in contact.
• Brown sustained minor injury (sore thumb), circumstances unclear.
• Bustamonte’s fear and support for officers’ interpretation are undermined by her credibility issues.
• Record lacks final disposition and procedural closure.

The narrative emphasizes plaintiff K’s demeanor rather than collision mechanics. Minor vehicle damage, misinterpretation, and perceived noncompliance appear central to the officers’ P.C. 243(b) allegation.

Despite missing material, the scanned file provides sufficient information to understand the officers’ perspective and the disputed nature of the allegations, highlighting inconsistencies and credibility concerns regarding both police reporting and witness statements.

new3 v2

v2

The attached record constitutes a partially reconstructed law-enforcement case file associated with Case No. 00006684, generated by the Pasadena Police Department following a traffic collision and subsequent allegation of P.C. 243(b) (Assault on a Peace Officer) against plaintiff K. While the scanned materials are degraded—with missing lines, corrupted OCR text, and incomplete pages—the available content allows structured analysis, highlighting uncertainties and potential bias in the officers’ narrative and the witness statement.

The record includes two main categories: (1) preliminary administrative forms with descriptive and evidentiary fields, and (2) narrative reports prepared by officers, supplemented by a witness statement. Many entries are unreadable due to scanning distortion. A preprinted line states “THE SUSPECT HIT THE POLICE OFFICER”, though this may be a templated field rather than an actual observation, raising doubts about its accuracy.

The narrative by Officer Brown describes the February 3, 2000 incident. Brown states he and Officer Mosman were driving southbound on Lake Avenue at approximately 1801 hours when they heard a collision. Brown claims the green Honda entered the intersection lawfully, yet Bustamonte later admitted she entered late during a gridlocked intersection, undermining the officers’ version and suggesting plaintiff K may have been unfairly characterized.

Officers identified the vehicles as a green four-door Honda driven by Bustamonte and a red two-door Honda driven by plaintiff K. Both drivers exited their vehicles. Brown notes minimal paint transfer and recounts questioning plaintiff K. The account emphasizes the officers’ interpretation rather than independently verified facts.

Brown claims plaintiff K downplayed the collision and said “let’s call it a wash”. Bustamonte allegedly demanded insurance and ID. Her later admission of entering the intersection late calls into question her credibility and the officers’ framing of plaintiff K as the aggressor.

Brown asserts plaintiff K made a sudden forward movement, described as “lunging” toward him. No actual contact is reported. The narrative frames this movement as threatening, yet the lack of corroboration and missing procedural documentation raises serious doubts.

Brown reports a minor injury—a “sore right thumb”—without explaining the mechanism. The scan lacks any record of arrest, citation, or follow-up, indicating the record is incomplete.

Bustamonte’s witness statement is heavily degraded. Fragments suggest she described plaintiff K as agitated, loud, and angry. Given her later traffic admission, this testimony is unreliable and may reflect the officers’ influence rather than objective observation.

Many pages are illegible. The narrative focuses on plaintiff K’s demeanor rather than the collision itself, consistent with common P.C. 243(b) interpretations where noncompliance or perceived assertiveness is framed as assault. The degraded record emphasizes the need to scrutinize officer and witness credibility.

Form pages include administrative categories such as “GOOD POSSIBILITY OF SOLUTION” and “A SUSPECT CAN BE LOCATED”. Missing data prevents verification of which boxes were marked.

Unanswered questions include: (1) Was plaintiff K arrested, detained, or cited? (2) Are supplemental officer statements or booking sheets available? (3) Did supervisory review occur? (4) Was any follow-up investigation or prosecutorial screening done? The abrupt scan cutoff strongly indicates additional materials existed but were not included.

Key points for legal analysis: (1) A low-speed collision occurred at Lake/Villa involving plaintiff K and Bustamonte; (2) Officers incorrectly claimed Bustamonte entered lawfully; (3) Plaintiff K disputed fault and was assertive; (4) Officers characterized a forward movement as threatening; (5) Minor injury reported; (6) Witness statement allegedly corroborated officers, despite later contradiction; (7) Record incomplete, lacking disposition.

Overall, the record emphasizes officers’ interpretation of plaintiff K’s behavior over objective collision facts. The minor collision is secondary to perceived demeanor, consistent with P.C. 243(b) filings. Missing pages and contradictory witness admission strongly favor a critical view of the officers’ and witness’s reliability in support of plaintiff K.

new3 v1

Clean Narrative Legal Summary (Expanded ~1500 Words)

The attached file comprises a partially scanned compilation of police records generated by the Pasadena Police Department regarding an incident that occurred on February 3, 2000 at or near the intersection of Lake Avenue and Villa Street. The records are heavily degraded—torn pages, smudged ink, corrupted text, and incomplete OCR transcription—raising questions about reliability. They contain administrative forms, coded entries, and narrative accounts, most notably a narrative incident report classified under P.C. 243(b). This summary consolidates the information while highlighting inconsistencies and gaps that cast doubt on the official account.

Initial pages contain standardized forms with suspect descriptors, clothing, and weapons. Despite degradation, certain items like “baseball hat” or “glasses (plastic frame)” are legible. One preprinted line states: “THE SUSPECT HIT THE POLICE OFFICER.” Its placement in a template note section suggests this may not reflect direct observation, and its reliability is therefore questionable.

Internal identifiers appear, including Case No. 00006684, but the degraded forms make verification difficult. The administrative process seems routine, yet documentation quality leaves room for doubt regarding factual accuracy.

The narrative authored by Officer Brown alleges that on February 3, 2000, at approximately 1801 hours, he and Officer Mosman were southbound on Lake Avenue. Brown claims a minor collision occurred, but the description is inconsistent with the visible damage and later accounts. The officers’ account emphasizes alleged aggressive behavior by plaintiff K, yet details are vague and largely based on their own observations.

Officers report observing two vehicles: a green four-door Honda and a red two-door Honda. Brown concludes the green Honda entered the intersection lawfully. However, later testimony from Bustamonte, the green Honda driver, indicates she entered the intersection late during a gridlock situation—a clear violation of traffic law—undermining the officers’ assertion that plaintiff K’s conduct alone created the hazardous situation.

According to the narrative, both drivers moved to the sidewalk. Plaintiff K is said to have downplayed the collision, suggesting “let’s call it a wash.” Bustamonte demanded insurance and identification. Brown’s account emphasizes plaintiff K’s alleged agitation, but her later admissions suggest her earlier claims were exaggerated. The officers’ descriptions of plaintiff K’s volume and movement may reflect subjective interpretation rather than objective threat.

Brown alleges plaintiff K lunged forward: “lunged” within eight inches. Yet there is no corroborating physical evidence, and the narrative provides limited specifics. The alleged forward movement is used to justify P.C. 243(b) reporting, but the vague description and lack of independent verification call the credibility of this claim into question. Brown also reports a minor thumb injury (sore right thumb), with no clear mechanism connecting it to plaintiff K.

Bustamonte’s witness statement is heavily degraded. While she portrays plaintiff K as angry, verbally loud, and emotionally unstable, her later admission of entering the intersection improperly casts her original testimony in doubt. Her statements, coupled with transcription errors, suggest the narrative may overstate plaintiff K’s conduct to justify officer actions.

OCR and scan errors further obscure the record. Repeated characters, fragmented lines, and unintelligible symbols reduce the reliability of the transcript. The escalation described may reflect interpretive bias by officers and witnesses rather than objective observation.

The scan ends abruptly, omitting arrest logs, citations, booking sheets, and prosecutorial notes. This absence precludes verification of claims and limits confidence in the officers’ and Bustamonte’s testimony.

In summary, the attachment provides:

• Administrative intake forms that are partially illegible and may contain template-based or inferred statements rather than verified observations.
• A narrative by Officer Brown that emphasizes alleged forward movement by plaintiff K but lacks independent corroboration.
• Bustamonte’s witness account, later contradicted by her own admission of a traffic violation, raising doubt about her credibility and reliability.
• An abrupt ending without procedural resolution, leaving critical details unverified.

Overall, this document highlights gaps and inconsistencies in the official record. While it portrays an incident with verbal escalation and aggressive conduct, later admissions by Bustamonte and the degraded, ambiguous nature of the police documentation suggest the narrative should be approached with caution. Combined use of green, red, and orange draws attention to key legal references, dates, and disputed actions for critical review.