2003-03-14 Police Commission Minutes

Home

Hawaii County Police Commission Regular Session Minutes March 14, 2003 Page 3 that home belonged to her. The TRO was on her, and she could not go on the premises, so, on the day they left, she hired people to move the furniture. Her son -in -law called the police, and under Captain Osorio's instructions, the officers made them take the furniture back to the home. She feels that she was arrested unnecessarily. She had done nothing to be arrested. She wants her named cleared and to get back the money she paid to the movers. In response to questions from Commissioner de Silva, Mrs. Nakamoto stated that her daughter owns the house. She was married when she bought the house. She used her own earnings, and her husband had nothing to do with the house. The furniture came with the house. She was not aware that if a couple is married, and one person spends his income to purchase furniture that the furniture belongs to the husband and wife jointly. Commissioner Manago read the portion of the TRO that stated: "You or anyone acting on your behalf are ordered as follows: "Do not visit or remain within 100 yards of any place where the plaintiff lives or works." The order was set on December 17, expires on March 5, and the incident happened on December 21, after the TRO was issued. According to the documents she violated the TRO by sending someone to the house that was listed on the TRO. The officer had the right to arrest her for violating the TRO. Mrs. Nakamoto explained that there were two TROs, one she went to court for, and it was dismissed. The one that was ongoing at the time that she hired the people to get my stuff did not state that. She further stated that during the four -month ordeal, she met almost all of the officers, and they were all very kind and nice. Her specific complaint is that Captain Osorio should not have instructed the officers to arrest her. STATEMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS — Closed to the public (executive session) Vice Chair Manago moved to consider discipline and charges against officers or employees of the Hawaii County Police Department where consideration of matters affecting privacy will be involved and a closed session is requested and to consult with Corporation Counsel on questions and issues pertaining to the commission's powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities pursuant to HRS 92 -5 (2) and Hawaii County Charter Section 13 -20 (b). Commissioner Lambeth seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. DEL PRANKE stated that an executive session was not allowed in the Sunshine Law, although there is an executive meeting. CORPORATION COUNSEL ASHIDA stated that there is a section in the Charter, Section 13- 20 that allows it, and the Charter is consistent with the Sunshine Law. Under HRS 92 -5 (A) (2), the Sunshine Law states that the board may hold a meeting closed to the public to consider the hire, evaluation, dismissal, or discipline of an officer or employee or of charges brought against that officer or employee. The agenda indicates that the meeting is for Friday, March 14, 2003, at 10:00, at the Hilo Police Station. Mr. Pranke stated that the public meeting had been noticed, but not the executive meeting.