When I was a student at Fuller Seminary I was involved in a minor traffic accident in Pasadena CA due to the other driver running a red light. I ended up face down with several police officers on my back, resulting in permanent injury & pain. They over-reacted, bullied, used excessive force, failed to “de-escalate” , & made several significant errors of judgment & discretion. And yet despite being a college graduate with honors & having never been in “trouble” before, all the blame was aimed at me, without apology. This was at the time that a guy named Melenkian was chief. As a Christian I do believe in “turning the other cheek” but also in appropriately addressing wrongs so that they don’t happen again. I took action against them, & I am fairly certain those specific police officers will never do what they did to me to anybody else again. Nonetheless, the damage they caused to me was permanent (chronic pain for life, among other things).

ppd

KEEPING AN EYE ON PASADENA PD: WHAT THEY SAY VERSUS WHAT THEY DO

explanation of august 22, 2001 : the frame job by Hugh Halford (ai summary, final)

Case Overview: Philip A. Kok vs. City of Pasadena

πŸ“° Case Overview: Philip A. Kok vs. City of Pasadena

This document is an “Explanation of August 22, 2001” and a “Petition for Emergency Writ of Mandate” filed by Philip A. Kok against the City of Pasadena and unnamed Does (1–10 inclusive). The case number is GC026938.

The explanation outlines the background of the civil lawsuit, a specific incident involving Assistant City Attorney Hugh Halford, and Mr. Kok’s subsequent criminal trial for battery. The related hearing date was March 22, 2002, before Judicial Officer Pluim.

🚨 The Initial Incident: February 3, 2000

Traffic Collision and Confrontation
  • Mr. Kok, a Reverend, Pastor, Teacher, Writer, Evangelist, and full-time Fuller Seminary student (M.Div.), was involved in a minor traffic collision in Pasadena.
  • The incident occurred on February 3, 2000, at the intersection of Lake and Villa. Mr. Kok had a green light when a car driven by Evangelina Bustamante entered his path.
  • Two officers arrived immediately, including Officer Brown, identified as the primary instigator.
  • Officer Brown concluded Mr. Kok was at fault. Mr. Kok later confirmed the intersection had a one-second “all-clearance red” signal.
  • When Mr. Kok refused to admit fault, Officer Brown told him to lower his voice and back up.
Use of Excessive Force and Arrest
  • Officer Brown pulled his baton and struck Mr. Kok in the stomach.
  • Officers pushed Mr. Kok face-down, placed knees in his back, and bent his arms over the shoulder blade, causing pain.
  • Handcuffs were applied without using the safety lock, causing them to dig into his wrists.
  • When Mr. Kok asked Officer Pratt to loosen the cuffs, Pratt responded:
    “you should have thought about that f-----g earlier!”
  • Mr. Kok was charged with disturbing the peace.
Resolution of Initial Charges
  • Mr. Kok later agreed to a plea of nolo contendere and anger management classes solely to avoid interrupting his divinity school quarter.
  • The record was subsequently expunged around March 2001.

πŸ›️ The Civil Lawsuit and Discovery

Filing and Findings
  • Mr. Kok filed Kok v. City of Pasadena, et al. after physicians diagnosed carpal tunnel syndrome and cervical radiculopathy.
  • Discovery included at least six depositions of the involved officers.
  • In deposition, Officer Brown stated he was sure no car was turning in front of Ms. Bustamante—contradicting her explanation. Mr. Kok concluded her account was untruthful.

πŸ“ The Hallway Incident and Battery Charge (August 22, 2001)

Pitchess Motion and Confrontation
  • Mr. Kok filed a Pitchess Motion seeking officer disciplinary records; it was denied on August 22, 2001.
  • Assistant City Attorney Hugh Allan (“Tim”) Halford had prior involvement in People v. Mooc (2000).
  • In the hallway, Halford accused Mr. Kok of falsifying medical records, stating:
    “you’re untruthful, I think you’re untruthful”
Alleged Battery
  • Mr. Kok reacted with his normal classroom method as a substitute teacher—making a straight-down arm motion while holding a notebook to strike the floor loudly.
  • During the motion, his sleeve brushed Halford’s elbow, with perhaps a tiny amount of incidental contact.
  • Halford immediately yelled: “battery, that’s battery, you battered me…!”
  • Attorney Charles J. LeBeau allegedly witnessed the incident and testified for Halford.

⚖️ The Second Criminal Trial: People v. Mr. Kok

Conflict of Interest and Charges
  • The complaint was approved by Sergeant Pratt, a defendant in Mr. Kok’s civil case—raising a conflict of interest.
  • The District Attorney’s Office, led by Alison Meyers, charged Mr. Kok with disturbing the peace and simple battery.
  • The trial ran from December 5–14, 2001. Mr. Kok was represented by Public Defender S. Boysaw.
Defense and Prosecutorial Issues
  • Mr. Boysaw suggested Halford may have leaned into Mr. Kok to create a defensive narrative for the City.
  • Mr. Kok noted Mr. LeBeau had a history of public discipline, including a nine-month suspension for misuse of client funds.
  • Prosecutors raised Mr. Kok’s prior anger-management agreement despite the matter having been expunged.
  • Halford claimed Mr. Kok pronounced his name multiple ways, including “Mr. Cock”, a name Mr. Kok explicitly avoids.
  • Prosecutors referenced “anonymous notes” and “anonymous flowers,” attempting to portray them as ominous.