Key Takeaways From The Vice Presidential Debate Between JD Vance And Tim Walz; A Civil Discussion Between Two Candidates That Ultimately Makes No Difference; CBS Instant Poll: Vance 42% , Walz  41%, Undecided 17%

On October 1, Republican Ohio US Senator JD Vance and Democratic Minnesota Governor Tim Walz debated and clashed on everything from economic and gun policy to immigration and school shootings in the only vice-presidential debate of the 2024 election.  The two candidates kept things cordial and civil personally, even appearing friendly at times and saying they could work with each other.  However, they repeatedly savaged each other’s running mates and defended their party policies and tickets.

Following are key takeaways from the debate as reported by the national news organizations  CNN by staff reporters Eric BradnerDaniel StraussArit John and Gregory Krieg and NBC News staff reporter  Sahil Kapur:

IT WASN’T REALLY ABOUT VANCE OR WALZ

“It was immediately clear the two prominent politicians on stage were merely proxies for their running mates, using the questions as vehicles to attack their top-of-the-ticket rivals and on many occasions going out of their way not to personally attack each other.

Walz used his first question, regarding Iran’s strikes on Israel, to hit at Trump’s age: “A nearly 80-year-old Donald Trump talking about crowd sizes is not what we need in this moment.” He went on to assail “Donald Trump’s fickle leadership” around the world.

Vance replied, “Who has been the vice president for the last three and a half years? And the answer is your running mate, not mine. Donald Trump consistently made the world more secure.”

In the next section, about climate change, Walz hit Trump again: “Donald Trump called it a hoax, and then joked that these things would make more beachfront property to be able to invest in.”

On immigration, Vance sidestepped when asked how Trump would carry out his mass deportation promise, and repeatedly attacking Harris: “I’ve been to the southern border more than our border czar, Kamala Harris, has been.”

Notably, both men said they believed their on-stage rival wants to solve the problem at the border, as well as other areas of policy disagreement.

“I believe Sen. Vance wants to solve this, but by standing with Donald Trump and not working together to find a solution, it becomes a talking point,” Walz said.

Vance replied, “I actually think I agree with you. I think you want to solve this problem, but I don’t think that Kamala Harris does.”

The most tension between them came toward the end, when Walz asked Vance point-blank if Trump lost the 2020 election. Vance wouldn’t give a straight answer, instead throwing a question back at Walz about censorship about the Covid-19 pandemic on Facebook.”

VANCE DEFENDS HIS FLIP ON PAST CRITICISM OF TRUMP

Vance was well-prepared with an answer when asked to explain his past criticisms of Trump, including saying he could be “America’s Hitler” and his critiques of Trump’s economic record as president.

“Sometimes, of course, I disagree with the president, but I’ve also been extremely open about the fact that I was wrong about Donald Trump. I was wrong, first of all, because I believed some of the media stories that turned out to be dishonest fabrications of his record,” Vance said, treading over territory he and his campaign have talked about in media interviews and responses to stories.

Vance continued: “But most importantly, Donald Trump delivered for the American people, rising wages, rising take home pay, an economy that works for normal Americans, a secure southern border… When you screw up, when you misspeak, when you get something wrong, and you change your mind, you ought to be honest with the American people.”

He also partially blamed Congress, saying there “were a lot of things on the border, on tariffs” that “could have done so much more if the Republican Congress and the Democrats in Congress had been a little bit better about how they governed the country.”

WALZ AND VANCE PICK THROUGH THEIR RUNNING MATES’ ECONOMIC RECORDS

Walz came equipped with an argument to attack Trump on the economy, which is one of the GOP nominee’s strongest issues, according to polls that ask voters who they trust to handle it.

“Kamala Harris’ day one was Donald Trump’s failure on Covid that led to the collapse of our economy. We were already, before Covid, in a manufacturing recession — about 10 million people at work, largest percentage since the Great Depression,” Walz said.

Vance responded by attacking the Biden-Harris economic record as “atrocious” and defending Trump.

“Honestly, Tim, I think you got a tough job here, because you got to play Whac-A-Mole,” he said, accusing Walz of having to “pretend” that Trump’s economy improved wages and had lower inflation.

Walz also attacked Trump on taxes and trade policy.

“If you’re listening tonight and you want billionaires get tax cuts,” Trump is your candidate, Walz told voters while looking through the TV screen. “How is it fair that you’re paying your taxes every year and Donald Trump hasn’t paid any federal tax in the last 15 years?”

VANCE’S REVISIONIST HISTORY ON TRUMP’S OBAMACARE REPEAL PUSH

Vance rewrote the history of Trump’s years-long efforts to destroy the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare,” instead repeating the campaign’s claim that Trump rescued it.

“Donald Trump could’ve destroyed the program. Instead he worked in a bipartisan way to ensure that Americans had access to affordable care,” Vance said when asked about Trump saying he has “concepts of a plan” to replace the 2010 health care law.

The claim distorts the facts. As president, Trump worked in a partisan way with Republicans to try and destroy ACA, endorsing legislation that would have rescinded the law’s insurance subsidies and prohibitions on charging higher prices to people with pre-existing conditions; the push fell one vote short in the Senate. He used executive actions to cut funding for programs to sign people up for coverage on the law’s marketplaces. He also asked the Supreme Court to wipe out the ACA in its entirety in 2020 — the case failed.

The link to the quoted NBC news source with photos is here:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/5-takeaways-walz-vance-presidential-debate-economy-health-care-defendi-rcna172591

VANCE DODGES ON JANUARY 6

The clearest divide of the night came when Walz put Vance on the spot during a discussion of the January 6, 2021, insurrection and Trump’s false claims that he won the 2020 election.

“Did he lose the 2020 election?” Walz asked Vance, attempting to force the Ohio senator to acknowledge a reality that Trump himself won’t.

“Tim, I’m focused on the future,” was how Vance began his response.

“That is a damning nonanswer,” Walz shot back.

Vance tried to sidestep the violent attack by Trump supporters on the US Capitol on the day Congress was gathering to officially count Electoral College votes and certify Joe Biden’s victory.

“On January 6, what happened? Joe Biden became president; Donald Trump left the White House,” Vance said.

Walz, though, drilled into the details of the costs of Trump’s efforts to overturn the election results.

“He lost this election, and he said he didn’t. One hundred and forty police officers were beaten at the Capitol that day, some with the American flag, and several later died,” he said. “The democracy is bigger than winning an election.”

Vance tried to redirect the discussion of democracy into a debate about social media censorship. But each time he tried, Walz pushed back, arguing that Trump was already laying the groundwork to reject the outcome of the 2024 race if he loses.

“Here we are four years later, in the same boat,” Walz said. “The winner needs to be the winner. This has got to stop. It’s tearing our country apart.”

MIDWESTERN NICE, UP TO A POINT

In many ways, this vice-presidential debate reflected the way typical Americans argue about contentious issues.

There was no name-calling, few canned zingers and a clear directive for both Vance and Walz not to get personal – unless they were aggressively agreeing that the issues were, in fact, issues. The housing crisis, they agreed, was a crisis. Gun violence, both said, needed to be reduced.

Instead of jousting among themselves, Vance and Walz behaved agreeably in the service of trying to depict the respective presidential candidates as uniquely divisive or misguided.

“I agree with a lot of what Sen. Vance said about what’s happening – his running mate, though, does not,” Walz said when the debate turned to abortion. “And that’s the problem.”

Even after Walz rejected Vance’s claim that housing prices were being driven up by undocumented immigrants, the Republican offered his rival some kind words.

“Tim just mentioned a bunch of ideas. Now some of those ideas I actually think are halfway decent, and some of them I disagree with,” Vance said, before regaining his focus and adding, “But the most important thing here is: Kamala Harris is not running as a newcomer to politics. She is the sitting VP.”

 SPRINGFIELD PET-EATING CLAIMS FEATURE IN IMMIGRATION CLASH

 During a debate over immigration and border security, Walz invoked Vance’s false claims about Haitian immigrants eating the pets of residents in Springfield, Ohio.

“There’s consequences for this,” Walz said, pointing out that Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, dispatched state troopers to Springfield to ensure the safety of children after a series of bomb threats.

Vance shot back, “The people I care most about in Springfield are the American citizens.”

In the Ohio city and others like it, Vance said, because of an influx of migrants, “you’ve got schools that are overwhelmed, you’ve got hospitals that are overwhelmed, you’ve got housing that is totally unaffordable.”

What Vance didn’t say: The 12,000 to 15,000 Haitian migrants in Springfield are in the United States legally.

But Walz didn’t fact-check Vance on that matter. And when he didn’t, CBS moderator Margaret Brennan explained those immigrants’ legal status.

The clash over Springfield came during a lengthy back-and-forth over immigration policy. Vance repeatedly referred to Harris as President Joe Biden’s “border czar,” a label that refers to her 2021 assignment to tackle the root causes of migration from Central American countries. And Walz hammered Trump for his role in thwarting a bipartisan border security bill earlier this year, saying the former president did so in order to keep immigration alive as a campaign issue.

“We could come together and solve this if we didn’t let Donald Trump continue to make it an issue,” Walz said.

WALZ SAYS HE ‘MISSPOKE’ ABOUT HIS PRESENCE AT TIANANMEN SQUARE

New reporting by Minnesota Public Radio News and APM Reports in the lead up to Tuesday’s debate called into question Walz’s claims about how frequently he traveled to China, which he has previously said was as many as “about 30 times.” Reports contradicted those claims and specifically whether the Minnesota governor was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989.

CNN also reported additional information on Walz’s claims earlier on Tuesday.

When asked about the reports and the discrepancy, a Harris campaign spokesperson said it was “likely closer to 15” times.

And when asked directly during the debate Walz filibustered, first describing his upbringing and rise in electoral politics before conceding that he can sometimes get caught up in the moment, be a “knucklehead,” and said he “misspoke.”

Vance didn’t seek to directly capitalize on Walz’s concession, but alluded to it in a different question shortly thereafter, saying, “When you misspeak, you ought to be honest with the American people about that.”

ASSERTIONS OVER ABORTION

As the debate turned to abortion, both candidates were asked to address claims about their ticket’s stances on reproductive rights.

Walz was asked to respond to a false assertion from Trump that the Minnesota governor supports abortion in the ninth month. In one of his stronger moments of the night, Walz brought up the personal stories of women who faced health crises or died due to state abortion bans.

“In Minnesota, what we did was restore Roe v. Wade,” Walz said. “We made sure that we put women in charge of their health care.”

While discussing abortion, the governor incorrectly claimed the Trump campaign and the conservative Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 would create a “registry of pregnancies.” The organization’s proposal would require the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to collect data on abortions.

Vance was asked if the Trump campaign wants to create a “federal pregnancy monitoring agency,” referencing another past claim by Walz.

“Certainly we won’t,” Vance said. The Ohio senator defended the repeal of federal abortion protections, pointing to a 2023 ballot initiative in his state that enshrined abortion rights in the state constitution. Vance argued that the Republican Party needs to do a better job of advancing “pro-family” policies, including access to fertility treatments and make housing more affordable.

CONVERSATION ON GUN VIOLENCE

Vance and Walz had something approaching a constructive conversation about gun violence in America, agreeing that it is bad, getting worse and needs to be addressed – especially in schools.

That this bears noting underscores just how fruitless past Democratic-led efforts have been in stemming the bloody tide. But the question of how to deal with it, despite the friendly nods between the two onstage, remained unresolved.

Vance at one point even suggested that the current administration’s border policy (or, as he put it, “Kamala Harris’ open border”) was a driving factor – a non sequitur given the length and depth of the crisis. He did, however, also acknowledge it was a more complicated issue.

Walz mostly agreed with that sentiment but fought to keep the conversation from turning into a stalemate. When Vance pointed to mental health and drug use as another cause of gun deaths, Walz sought to refocus the conversation.

“Sometimes it just is the guns,” Walz said. “It’s just the guns.”

The Minnesota governor agreed that lawmakers “should look at all the issues” but stopped there to add a line of caution.

“This idea of stigmatizing mental health – just because you have a mental health issue doesn’t mean you’re violent,” Walz said.

The candidates also shared concerns over how schools were responding to the threat of active shooters. Again, though, Vance treated the issue as something more like a force of nature than a policy question.

“I unfortunately think we have to increase security in our schools,” he said, acknowledging that it was not a pleasant prospect. “We have to make the doors lock better. We have to make the doors stronger. We’ve got to make the windows stronger.”

Walz agreed, in part, but, in urging tighter restrictions, asked viewers, “Do you want your schools hardened to look like a fort?”

The link to the quoted news source with photos  is here:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/01/politics/vp-debate-takeaways-vance-walz/index.html

CBS FLASH POLL: THE DEBATE WAS A DRAW

CBA conducted a flash poll to gage public opinion on who won the debate. The following CBS news story was written by CBS staff reporter Steven Shepard:

“Voters who watched the VP debate rendered a split decision in a flash poll conducted by CBS News and YouGov.

Roughly equal shares of debate-watchers scored JD Vance (42 percent) and Tim Walz (41 percent) the winner, the poll showed. The remaining 17 percent called it a tie.

That stands in contrast to the two presidential debates earlier this year. In flash polls conducted by CNN, Donald Trump was seen as a clear victor over Joe Biden in their June debate, while Kamala Harris clearly beat out Trump in last month’s meeting between the two nominees.

And in another turnabout from the top of the ticket, the vast majority of debate-watchers, 88 percent, described the tone of the VP debate as “generally positive.” Only 12 percent said it was “generally negative.”

Both running mates improved their image ratings among voters who watched the debate. Walz entered the night with 52 percent of this sample holding a favorable opinion of him; 60 percent said they did after it was over. Among the same group, Vance’s favorable rating improved by roughly the same margin, from 40 percent to 49 percent.

A reminder: Polls of voters who watched the debate are not representative of the broader electorate. The CBS News/YouGov poll was conducted online among voters who said in advance they planned to watch the debate and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.7 percentage points.

On issues, debate watchers said Walz gave the better answers on abortion (62 percent to 38 percent) and health care (59 percent to 41 percent). The two candidates were roughly even on the conflict in the Middle East, the economy and immigration.

And a majority of debate watchers said Walz spent most of his time explaining his own views (54 percent) as opposed to attacking the other side (46 percent). Those results were flipped for Vance: 55 percent said he spent most of his time attacking the other side.”

The link to the quoted news source with photos is here:

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/10/01/vance-walz-vp-debate-tonight/cbs-flash-poll-results-00182122

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The match-up between Walz, 60, and Vance, 40, is expected to be the last debate of the 2024 presidential election cycle. Former President Donald Trump has signaled that he will not debate Vice President Kamala Harris again before the election, which is less than 40 days away.

The Vice-Presidential debate between Vance and Waltz was a stark contrast with the Presidential debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamal Harris. It was a debate that was amazingly normal given the vitriol of the campaign and the Presidential debate.

Gov. Walz was noticeably less comfortable on stage than Vance but eventually settled in after a nervous start. He cast Trump as a liar who ignores experts and rejects the truth as he offers “alternative facts” that are many times simply made up.

The two VP candidates were cordial and polite to each other concentrating their attacks on the presidential candidates and focusing largely on policy differences. Vance repeatedly hit Vice President Kamala Harris on border security, while Walz lambasted former President Donald Trump on abortion rights.

Both candidates did no harm and did not make a fool of themselves. They acted like adults. It’s unlikely the debate will change the trajectory of the presidential race with the race that is still  considered a toss up. .

“Citizens of Albuquerque” Petition Circulates Demanding Termination Of APD Chief Harold Medina; Open Letter To Mayor Tim Keller From “Citizens of Albuquerque”; Civil Litigation Pending; LEA Complaint On Medina’s Law Enforcement Certification Still Pending And Could Result In Suspension

On August 22, a petition calling for Mayor Tim Keller to terminate Chief Harold Medina began to circulate on the internet and by email. The petition was started by Citizen of Albuquerque using a free on-line petition organization identified as “change.org.”  

Change.org is a website that allows users to create and sign petitions to raise awareness and influence decision-makers on social causes. Change.org does solicit contributions but does not require them to sign the petition. The site is owned by a nonprofit foundation and is a for-profit public benefits corporation. Change.org claims to be the world’s largest nonprofit-owned platform for social change.  Users can create petitions on a variety of topics, including general justice, economic justice, criminal justice, human rights, education, environmental protection, animal rights, health, and sustainable food.  The link to change.org is here:

https://www.change.org/login_or_join?redirectTo=%2Fu%2F1348170913

The petition has a photo of APD Chief Harold Medina and provides an update on the status of the number of those who have signed the petition. Citizens of Albuquerque can be considered as those who have signed the petition. As of September 30, a total 309 people have signed the petition.

The petition states:

WHY THIS PETITION MATTERS

Started by Citizen of Albuquerque

As citizens of Albuquerque, New Mexico, we hold our public officials to a high standard of professionalism and integrity. Regrettably, one among them, Harold Medina, current Chief of the Albuquerque Police Department, has recurrently demonstrated his unsuitability for such an esteemed position. Cambridge’s Policing Project highlights that ethical leadership is integral to enhancing departmental functioning and citizen trust, which we believe is currently lacking under Medina’s leadership (International Association of Chiefs of Police, Policing Project).

His admissions concerning his crash, that seriously injured a citizen of Albuquerque, show that he is only concerned for himself and not the citizens he is sworn to serve. He was recorded during a citywide briefing attempting to downplay his actions and said that the investigation was to simply “appease everyone.” Furthermore, he was exposed during an internals affairs investigation saying that he intentionally did not turn on his camera so he would not incriminate himself. Is that really acceptable for someone who is supposed to be the pinnacle of public servant? The citizens of Albuquerque deserve better!

Mayor Keller, our demands rest on a pressing need for the termination of Harold Medina from his role as chief for the greater good of our community. By signing this petition, we take a collective step towards a safer and better governed Albuquerque. Sign this petition today and be part of the change we need.”

The link to the petition and to sign it is here:

https://www.change.org/p/mayor-keller-terminate-chief-harold-medina

OPEN LETTER TO MAYOR TIM KELLER

On September 27 the following email to Mayor Tim Keller was forwarded to www.PeteDinelli.com and ostensibly has been sent to Mayor Keller for his response:

EDITOR’S NOTE: Direct contact was made by www.PeteDinelli.com with the sender of the correspondence to Mayor Keller.  The identity of the author of the correspondence to Mayor Keller has been identified as a retired APD Police Officer who asked to remain anonymous and is considered as a confidential source.  The confidential source stated the media has ignored several requests for news coverage as have the city councilors.

Mayor Keller,

As an elected official it is your responsibility to serve the best interests of the public. Your service as mayor to Albuquerque is a privilege and is not your right. With that said, I wish to address the ongoing concerns many citizens have over the continued appointment of Chief Harold Medina. I am sure you aware that an official Brady complaint was lodged against Medina for “Abuse of Authority.” While this could apply to many instances during his tenure, it stems from his recent chicanery surrounding his admission that he intentionally violated state statutes (New Mexico Statutes Chapter 29. Law Enforcement § 29-1-18) concerning his body camera during his reckless crash that seriously injured a citizen of Albuquerque (the other driver sustained a broken collarbone, broken shoulder blade, eight broken ribs, and a collapsed lung and was taken to the hospital in critical condition). 

Considering the nature of this incident, I find it relevant to point out the many incredulous administrative steps that were taken to allow this travesty of justice to occur. Despite the excuses your administration made for Medina, his crash was preventable. To clarify, even if he and his wife were in danger, that does not authorize him to engage in reckless behavior placing others in peril to protect himself. The fact is that he acted cowardly in a situation he is supposedly trained and experienced to handle (I myself have decades’ worth of law enforcement experience that include multiple situations of being in mortal danger). There was no excuse to recklessly speed through a red light with no regard for anyone else. 

 After this preventable incident occurred, the proper course of action was to have a third-party law enforcement agency conduct the investigation. How is it possible for a subordinate to conduct a fair and impartial investigation into their boss? It is not. Furthermore, Chief Medina was recorded by a member of his own department saying that they were doing this investigation to “appease everyone.” Not only was his attitude irreverent, but it is also demonstrative of his cavalier thoughts and actions toward his responsibilities to the public. 

 When this sham of an investigation was completed, Medina evaded actual consequences with nothing more than two letters of reprimand. If any other officer admitted, in an internal affairs interview, that they intentionally did not turn on their camera to protect themselves, from liability, they would have been facing harsher disciplinary measures up to and including termination. I say this knowing that politically it would be hazardous for the department to allow an admission like this to go unchallenged, considering the DWI scandal hanging over your and Medina’s head. Ultimately, Albuquerque’s “top cop” should have been held to the highest standard and terminated for his behavior.

 Mr. Mayor I would like to remind you that under the city’s current Merit System Ordinance, Section 301.1; it is Chief Medina’s and your responsibility to remember that your “first obligation is to the general public’s safety and well-being.”  Furthermore, under Section 301.3; “Employees shall in all instances maintain their conduct at the highest personal and professional standards in order to promote public confidence and trust in the City.…” Considering the intent of this ordinance, I would argue that these sections have been violated. 

 For the sake of brevity, I have chosen to focus on this incident alone, although there are many others where Medina and his staff have violated other Merit System Ordinances. I believe it prudent that I share a petition that is circulating (and still growing) demanding that you carry out your responsibility to the public and terminate Chief Harold Medina. For your contemplation and consideration, I have included the links to the petition, the Brady complaint, and a news article relevant to your reelection.

  With great concern,

 Citizens of Albuquerque

 [The following links are provided]

Petition – https://www.change.org/terminateharoldmedina

Brady List – https://giglio-bradylist.com/individual/harold-%20medina

Reelection Controversies Article – https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-mayor-keller-2025-campaign/62087340

RESULTS OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS INVESTIGATIONS

On April 3 it was reported to the City Council that the APD Crash Review Board voted unanimously to deem Medina’s crash “non-preventable” and therefore Chief Medina was not charge charged with any traffic violations by APD.

On July 18, the city announced that the Internal Affairs investigation and disciplinary review of APD Chief Harold Medina actions during the February 17 car crash resulted in two “letters of reprimand” issued to Medina by Superintendent of Police Reform Eric Garcia.  Chief Harold Medina was found to have violated APD policy by failing to safely operate his vehicle while on duty and not turning on his lapel camera as required by APD standard operating procedures. The letters of reprimand were placed in Medina’s personnel file.  No other disciplinary action was taken. APD spokesman Gilbert Gallegos said Medina accepted the discipline and signed the letters of reprimand.

NEW MEXICO STATUTE MANDATING ACTIVATION OF LAPEL CAMERAS BY LAW ENFORCEMENT

Chief Medina publicly admitted in news interviews that he did not have his body camera on during the February 17 incident and car crash and for that reason he referred the matter to APD Internal Affairs.

It was in 2020 that the New Mexico legislature enacted New Mexico Statute § 29-1-18 which mandates the use of body cameras by law enforcement.  The statute reads as follows:

“A.  A law enforcement agency shall require peace officers the agency employs and who routinely interact with the public to wear a body-worn camera while on duty …. . Each law enforcement agency subject to the provisions of this section shall adopt policies and procedures governing the use of body-worn cameras, including:

  1. Requiring activation of a body-worn camera whenever a peace officer is responding to a call for service or at the initiation of any other law enforcement or investigative encounter between a peace officer and a member of the public;
  2. Prohibiting deactivation of a body-worn camera until the conclusion of a law enforcement or investigative encounter;
  3. Requiring that any video recorded by a body-worn camera shall be retained by the law enforcement agency for not less than one hundred twenty days; and
  4. Establishing disciplinary rules for peace officers who… fail to operate a body-worn camera in accordance with law enforcement agency policies …

B.  Peace officers who fail to comply with the policies and procedures required to be adopted pursuant to Subsection A of this section may be presumed to have acted in bad faith and may be deemed liable for the independent tort of negligent spoliation of evidence or the independent tort of intentional spoliation of evidence.”

There are serious consequences for a law enforcement officer’s failure to abide by the statute. Under the statute, per Section 29-1-18(C), a law enforcement officer “may be presumed to have acted in bad faith and may be deemed liable for the independent tort of negligent spoliation of evidence or the independent tort of intentional spoliation of evidence.”

 CAR ACCIDENT VICTIM FILE SUIT

On August 26,  Todd Perchert, the victim of the February 17 car crash caused APD Police Chief Harold Medina, filed in the 2nd Judicial District Court in Albuquerque a 20 page personal injury lawsuit naming as Defendants the  City of Albuquerque and APD Chief Harold Medina.  The lawsuit alleges negligence and that “Defendant Harold Medina battered and/or assaulted Todd Perchert by driving at a high rate of speed and violently colliding with Plaintiff’s vehicle.” The civil complaint outlines personal injury damages, alleges violations of the New Mexico Tort Claims Act, and Violations of the New Mexico Civil Rights Act and alleges “Loss of Consortium.” Perchert’s wife, Danielle, is also suing. The Percherts are requesting a jury trial.

The Percherts are claiming Chef Medina violated multiple state laws and department operating procedures when the crash happened. They also say the city is responsible because it was negligent in hiring, training and supervising Medina. The 20-page lawsuit also states Todd Perchert is unable to work, and has “suffered damage to the value and enjoyment of his life” because of his injuries from the crash.

Todd Perchert is seeking damages for the following personal injuries sustained in the car crash:

  • Broken collarbone and shoulder blade
  • 8 broken ribs (Reconstructed with titanium plates after surgery)
  • Collapsed lung
  • Lacerations to left ear and head
  • Multiple gashes to face
  • Seven-hour surgery
  • Hospitalized with an epidural painkiller and chest tube for nearly a week

 The civil litigation is pending. If the case is not settled and  proceeds to a jury trial, it’s very likely that a jury will render a significant judgment against the city and Chief Medina. Given all that has been reported in the media, including incriminating statements by Chief Medina, his admissions of liability and admissions against interests, as well as the videos of the car crash, the case will be extremely hard for the city to defend. Medina has caused the city and the citizens of Albuquerque major exposure to financial liability because of his actions, statements and willful failures to follow APD standard operating procedures.  Because his acts were “official” the city and taxpayers will be required under the New Mexico Tort claims act to defend and indemnify him for his liability.

CITY COUNCILOR LOUIE SANCHEZ FILES COMPLAINT AGAINST CHIEF MEDINA

On August 26, 2024, in a press release, it was announced that District 1 City Councilor Louie Sanchez has filed a complaint with the New Mexico Department of Public Safety (DPS) to investigate potential misconduct by Chief Medina at the scene of the Chief’s February 2024 automobile crash.

The press release reads in full as follows:

“For Immediate Release: August 26, 2024

Councilor Sanchez Files Complaint with NM Department of Safety Against APD Chief Medina Chief’s actions on accident scene appear to be in violation of state law.

 “[Albuquerque City] Councilor Sanchez submitted a formal request for a state investigation of the conduct of Chief Medina at the scene of the February accident.  The request, known as a LEA-90, comes in the light of Medina’s admission to APD Internal Affairs that he intentionally and purposefully did not activate his body-worn camera when involved in police action. Such action by Medina appears to violate Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s 2020 public safety accountability bill which requires police officers to wear the body worn cameras and record encounters with citizens.

The Law Enforcement Training Act (Section 29-7-1 through 29-7-16), grants the Law Enforcement Academy Board of Directors the power and duty to refuse, suspend, or revoke the certification of a police officer or telecommunicator for just cause as provided for under the Law Enforcement Training Act and Board Rules.

“As the chief law enforcement officer of the state’s largest police department, the chief should hold himself to a higher standard than that of his rank and file, not lower. We are at a crossroads where officer morale is at an all-time low and public trust might even be lower,” Councilor Sanchez stated. “Chief Medina’s actions are the type of actions that brought the U.S. Department of Justice oversight in the first place. Here, he openly disregarded state law.”

It is imperative to uphold the highest standards of integrity and professionalism within our law enforcement agencies, and this investigation aims to address any concerns or allegations with the utmost seriousness.

The request for investigation has been submitted to the Department of Public Safety, Law Enforcement Academy and will be conducted by the LEA Board of Directors. The findings of this investigation will be made public to ensure that our community is kept informed throughout the process.”

The link to the press release is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/council/find-your-councilor/district-1/news/councilor-sanchez-files-complaint-with-nm-department-of-safety-against-apd-chief-medina#:~:text=ALBUQUERQUE%20%E2%80%93%20District%201%20City%20Councilor,Chief’s%20February%202024%20automobile%20crash.

According to former Attorney General Hector Balderas, anyone can submit an LEA-90, or misconduct form, to the LEA Board.

 COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

There is absolutely no doubt that APD Chief Medina still enjoys 100% confidence of Mayor Tim Keller despite all of Medina’s admissions of violating standard operating procedures.  After the accident caused by Medina, both Mayor Keller and Chief Medina had the gall to declare it was Medina who was the victim the car accident Medina caused. Medina declared his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination when he was asked about his failure to activate his lapel camera.  Keller went so far to say “[Chief Medina is] arguably the most important person right now in these times in our city.” 

The preferential treatment that Chief Medina has been given by Mayor Keller and Medina’s Internal Affairs management team when it comes to investigating the car accident caused by his reckless driving that almost killed a private citizen is obscene and an embarrassment. Chief Medina violated multiple state laws and department operating procedures when the crash happened that normally would get any other police officer fired.  Chief Medina should have been charged with reckless driving but instead was given a slap on the wrist in the form of letters of reprimand by his Internal Affairs department.

There has been no announcement on the status of the complaint filed against APD Chief Medina by City Councilor Louie Sanchez with the Law Enforcement Academy Board. Should the board in fact find that Chief Medina intentionally violated state law by not activating his lapel camera, the Board could suspend or terminate Medina’s law enforcement certification. Maybe then and only then will Mayor Keller take appropriate action to hold Chief Medina accountable for his conduct, thank him for his service and ask him for his resignation.

The links to related Dinelli blog articles are here:

APD Chief Harold Medina Pleads 5th Amendment Right Against Self Incrimination In Car Crash Investigation; Medina Found He Intentionally Did Not Have Lapel Camera On; Given New $100,000 Ford Expedition; Citizen’s Petition Seeking Medina’s Termination Circulates

https://www.petedinelli.com/2024/07/22/apd-chief-harold-medina-given-slap-on-the-wrist-for-car-crash-he-caused-critically-injuring-another-given-two-written-reprimands-no-charges-filed-despite-elements-of-carel/

https://www.petedinelli.com/2024/08/28/victim-of-car-crash-caused-by-apd-chief-harold-medina-files-personal-injury-lawsuit-to-recover-damages-extent-of-personal-injuries-coupled-with-medinas-conduct-admissions-and-video-of-crash-wi/

https://www.petedinelli.com/2024/08/27/complaint-filed-against-apd-chief-medina-with-nm-department-of-public-safety-by-councilor-louie-sanchez-after-medina-admits-he-intentionally-did-not-turn-on-lapel-camera-after-car-crash-medina-may-be/