Una mujer de 19 años fue detenida en Orange después de un enfrentamiento en un paso elevado de la autopista.

ORANGE, California—28 de mayo de 2025

Tras una amenaza de saltar desde un paso elevado de la autopista Orange el miércoles por la noche, una mujer de 19 años fue detenida. Esto provocó el cierre de varios carriles en la autopista Costa Mesa (55).

Las autoridades informaron que el incidente ocurrió poco antes de las 4:30 p. m. cerca del paso elevado de la avenida Lincoln. Alrededor de las 4:25 p. m., agentes de la Patrulla de Carreteras de California (CHP) comenzaron a desviar el tráfico de la zona mientras las autoridades intentaban resolver el asunto.

El teniente Phil McMullin, del Departamento de Policía de Orange, confirmó que la joven parecía estar en estado de angustia emocional y que había ascendido a la cornisa del paso elevado, lo que aumentaba la preocupación por su seguridad.

Un negociador de crisis del Departamento de Policía de Orange se unió al equipo de respuesta y habló con la mujer durante más de una hora para intentar ponerla a salvo. Las autoridades informaron que fue arrestada discretamente poco antes de las 6 p. m.

“Ella cooperó una vez que pudimos establecer comunicación”, dijo el teniente McMullin, y agregó: “Nuestra prioridad siempre fue su bienestar”.

Trasladada a un hospital cercano para realizarle pruebas, se espera que la mujer reciba tratamiento y apoyo a través de los servicios de salud mental del condado.

Debido a la ubicación del enfrentamiento, la autopista 55 estuvo cerrada en ambas direcciones durante varias horas, lo que provocó una grave congestión vehicular en las horas punta de la tarde. La Patrulla de Caminos de California (CHP) reabrió la autopista poco después de las 7 p. m.

Este suceso pone de relieve la importancia de la concienciación sobre la salud mental y el papel fundamental de los equipos de respuesta a crisis capacitados en situaciones difíciles.

Cualquier persona que tenga información o haya presenciado los sucesos previos al enfrentamiento debe comunicarse con el Departamento de Policía de Orange.

Anuncio de Servicio Público:

“Si usted o alguien que conoce se siente abrumado o piensa en suicidarse, por favor, contáctenos”.

“Hay personas que se preocupan y recursos que pueden ayudar”.

La Línea de Apoyo entre Pares de California está disponible las 24 horas, los 7 días de la semana, al 1-855-600-9276 para cualquier persona que experimente angustia emocional.

También puede contactar a esta agencia por teléfono celular.

Hay ayuda disponible.

Hable con alguien hoy mismo.

988 Línea de Ayuda para Suicidios y Crisis
Idiomas: Inglés, Español
Horario: Disponible las 24 horas

Llame al: 988

Editorial: A Personal Encounter Underscores the Significance of Clear Boundaries at Camp Pendleton

US Military Base Camp Pendleton MP

I unintentionally entered Camp Pendleton this week through one of its public access sites, which put me in an unexpected situation. I had accidentally driven onto federal property, which was a genuine mistake that was immediately noticed by the military police at Camp Pendleton.

After that, I had a courteous and professional conversation with the MPs who pulled me over at the entrance checkpoint. They checked my identification, interrogated me about why I was there, and made sure I wasn’t a security risk. They gave me a warning and sent me back to the main road after concluding that my presence was unintentional and not dangerous.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency was noticeably absent from this interaction. I was not surprised by this fact given that immigration enforcement and law enforcement frequently converge in unexpected ways in the current environment. And the fact that the military police were entirely concerned with security and safety—not immigration status—gave me a sense of comfort.

Every U.S. military facility, including Camp Pendleton, has its own distinct jurisdiction. It is a community that welcomes thousands of service members, their families, and civilian workers, as well as a sovereign military area. The military police’s decision not to include ICE during regular vehicle stops or searches is not only legally correct but also necessary for preserving trust and operational efficiency inside the base.

Camp Pendleton

The lack of immigration enforcement in routine policing creates a culture of security and cooperation for people who reside or work on base, such as civilian contractors, international military liaisons, or foreign nationals serving under special visas. It makes certain that individuals are not deterred by the threat of deportation from seeking necessary services or reporting crimes.

My brief but ultimately uneventful experience serves to emphasize a more fundamental point: military facilities must continue to prioritize their primary purpose of protecting the country. The law enforcement in that area should be carried out with professionalism, clarity, and a thorough awareness of the unique characteristics of military communities.

For a long time, the Department of Defense has maintained that military facilities are not the place for local law enforcement activities that have nothing to do with base security. Whether by duty, invitation, or, like in my case, by mistake, this policy safeguards the integrity of the military objective as well as the rights and dignity of all persons who enter the base.

The Camp Pendleton Military Police should be praised for their professional and cautious response to the situation. Their behavior demonstrates a dedication to the values of fairness, discretion, and respect that characterize our military, as well as to security.

Mistakes occur, but an institution’s actual character is revealed by how it responds. In this instance, Camp Pendleton successfully completed the test.

Editorial: Responsabilizar al Departamento de Policía de Santa Ana por detenciones de patrullaje no reguladas

Fotografía de: Igmar Rodas/The Orange County Reporter, el Departamento de Policía de Santa Ana realiza paradas de tráfico en propiedad privada.

En Santa Ana ha surgido una tendencia preocupante: los agentes de patrulla están realizando controles de tráfico sin informar adecuadamente a la central, lo que da como resultado que no haya documentación oficial de su paradero ni de la razón de la detención. Cuando los residentes ansiosos se ponen en contacto con el departamento de policía para denunciar estos dudosos incidentes (que cuentan con los números de los coches patrulla y detalles precisos), se encuentran con respuestas evasivas y de obstrucción por parte del personal supervisor.

El problema fundamental radica en la falta de rendición de cuentas. Los vehículos de patrulla están equipados con sistemas de seguimiento por GPS, pero los supervisores se niegan a utilizar esta tecnología para confirmar la ubicación de los agentes. Algunos incluso afirman que acceder a la información del GPS está “fuera de su nivel salarial”. Esto provoca serias preguntas: si los supervisores desconocen la ubicación de sus agentes, ¿quién posee ese conocimiento? Y si lo tienen pero deciden no revelarlo, ¿qué podrían estar ocultando?

Foto de: Igmar Rodas/The Orange County Reporter, Los residentes de Santa Ana corren el riesgo de ser detenidos sin control, según lo desconocen los despachos de la policía.

La transparencia es la piedra angular de la confianza pública en la aplicación de la ley. Cuando los agentes actúan fuera de las normas de su propio departamento, se abre el camino a la mala conducta: detenciones ilegales, discriminación racial y violaciones de los derechos civiles. La situación en la que un supervisor niega la existencia de una unidad de patrulla que los residentes han observado claramente, o se niega a proporcionar los números de placa, es intolerable.

Los residentes de Santa Ana merecen una fuerza policial que funcione dentro de los límites de la ley, en lugar de por encima de ella. El departamento debe aplicar protocolos de supervisión más estrictos, que incorporen el seguimiento en tiempo real de las ubicaciones de los vehículos de patrulla que los supervisores están obligados a supervisar. Además, debe haber una política definida y aplicable que exija que todas las paradas de tráfico se registren con un despacho.

Foto de: Igmar Rodas/The Orange County Reporter.

Si el departamento se resiste a estas iniciativas fundamentales de rendición de cuentas, la comunidad tiene la responsabilidad de abogar por un cambio. Los funcionarios de la ciudad, el jefe de policía y los organismos de supervisión civil deben intervenir para garantizar que los agentes cumplan con los protocolos adecuados. La transparencia no es un privilegio, es un derecho público. Los agentes de Santa Ana deben rendir cuentas a las personas a las que sirven, en lugar de operar de forma encubierta.

Editorial: Holding the Santa Ana Police Department Responsible for Unregulated Patrol Stops

Photo by: Igmar Rodas/The Orange County Reporter Santa Ana Police Department makes traffic stops on Private Property.

A concerning trend has surfaced in Santa Ana: patrol officers are conducting traffic stops without adequately informing dispatch, resulting in no official documentation of their whereabouts or the rationale for the stop. When anxious residents contact the police department to report these dubious incidents—equipped with patrol car numbers and precise details—they encounter stonewalling and evasive responses from supervisory personnel.

The fundamental problem lies in a deficiency of accountability. Patrol vehicles are fitted with GPS tracking, yet supervisors decline to utilize this technology to confirm officer locations. Some even assert that accessing GPS information is “beyond their pay grade. ” This provokes serious questions: if supervisors are unaware of their officers’ locations, who possesses that knowledge? And if they do have it but choose not to reveal it, what could they be concealing?

Photo by: Igmar Rodas/The Orange County Reporter, Santa Ana Residents at Risk for Unchecked Stops, As Police Dispatch are unaware.

Openness is the cornerstone of public confidence in law enforcement. When officers act outside the regulations of their own department, it paves the way for misconduct—unlawful stops, racial profiling, and violations of civil rights. The situation where a supervisor denies the existence of a patrol unit that residents have clearly observed, or declines to provide badge numbers, is intolerable.

Santa Ana residents warrant a police force that functions within the confines of the law, rather than above it. The department must enforce stricter oversight protocols, incorporating real-time tracking of patrol vehicle locations that supervisors are obligated to supervise. Moreover, there must be a defined, enforceable policy requiring that all traffic stops are recorded with dispatch.

Photo by: Igmar Rodas/The Orange County Reporter.

Should the department resist these fundamental accountability initiatives, it falls upon the community to advocate for change. City officials, the police chief, and civilian oversight bodies must intervene to guarantee that officers adhere to appropriate protocols. Transparency is not a privilege—it is a public entitlement. Officers in Santa Ana must be accountable to the individuals they serve, rather than operating covertly.

Editorial: Encubrimiento de una muerte bajo custodia policial, Departamento de Policía de Santa Ana

La muerte de Freddie Washington mientras se encontraba bajo custodia policial ha provocado una gran controversia, en particular en relación con la respuesta del Departamento de Policía de Santa Ana al incidente. Muchos se preguntan por qué el departamento no ha sido abierto respecto de información vital sobre la muerte de Washington, lo que ha llevado a sospechar de un posible encubrimiento.

Fredd

Es importante reconocer, en primer lugar, que Washington falleció mientras se encontraba bajo custodia de las fuerzas del orden en Santa Ana, California. La falta de transparencia sobre los hechos que precedieron a su muerte, junto con las declaraciones públicas incompletas o tardías del Departamento de Policía de Santa Ana, ha intensificado el escepticismo público. Los críticos sostienen que la vacilación del departamento a la hora de revelar detalles esenciales, como la causa de la muerte o detalles específicos sobre las circunstancias de su arresto, puede ser un intento de proteger a los agentes implicados de ser interrogados.

En situaciones de alto perfil como ésta, es frecuente que se produzcan encubrimientos, especialmente cuando las autoridades se enfrentan a posibles repercusiones jurídicas y políticas. A falta de una investigación exhaustiva y transparente, es imposible que el público conozca la verdad. En una época caracterizada por una desconfianza generalizada hacia las fuerzas del orden, sucesos como éste aumentan las preocupaciones en torno a la rendición de cuentas de la policía y la protección de los derechos de los ciudadanos.

Además, existen problemas sistémicos más amplios. En numerosos casos, los departamentos pueden intentar ocultar información para mantener su reputación, evadir demandas judiciales o evitar más discordia en la comunidad. Sin embargo, esa falta de rendición de cuentas no hace más que aumentar las tensiones y generar demandas de una mayor supervisión y reformas en las fuerzas del orden.

La prioridad ahora debe ser insistir en una investigación completa e independiente sobre la muerte de Freddie Washington. Solo con transparencia y rendición de cuentas se puede empezar a restablecer la confianza entre las fuerzas del orden y las comunidades a las que sirven. Hasta que eso ocurra, la nube de sospechas y la posibilidad de un encubrimiento persistirán, socavando la credibilidad del departamento de policía y perpetuando el ciclo de desconfianza pública.

Editorial: Unpacking the Disturbing Reality of Police Immunity and Accountability

Recent occurrences throughout the United States have once more illuminated the concerning dynamics among law enforcement, politics, and the justice system. The most recent tragedy—the shooting and killing of a man by the Anaheim Police Department—represents yet another chapter in a burgeoning narrative of police violence that appears to be unrestrained. This incident is not an isolated event, but rather a manifestation of a much deeper, systemic issue, wherein police officers, safeguarded by politicians, continue to evade meaningful accountability for their actions.

The demise of Tamir Rice, a 12-year-old boy fatally shot by police in Cleveland in 2014, stands as a stark reminder of how swiftly law enforcement can resort to lethal force without repercussions. Rice’s heartbreaking death served as a catalyst for protests nationwide; nevertheless, years later, episodes like the one in Anaheim indicate that little has altered. The question then arises: why are these officers still unpunished?

A pervasive culture of impunity exists within police departments, one that is sustained by political figures who depend on these law enforcement entities for support and empowerment. Police unions, with their considerable political influence, have frequently protected officers from accountability, even when they have contravened the most fundamental principles of justice. The deeply rooted connections between law enforcement and politicians often imply that the very individuals who ought to uphold the law are accorded an unfair advantage concerning evading punishment.

However, the issue transcends the officers themselves. The very foundation of our justice system—judges—also plays a pivotal role in perpetuating this cycle. Time and again, judges have neglected to hold law enforcement accountable, extending leniency or outright dismissing charges against officers implicated in fatal shootings. While the public focuses on the officers who discharge their firearms, the judiciary that consistently exonerates them of misconduct should not be overlooked. It is insufficient to merely demand justice for the victims of police violence; we must also confront the broader system of corruption that guarantees these actions go unpunished.

There are calls to cease referring to law enforcement officers as “officers”—a gesture intended to remove the deference with which they are frequently regarded, to remind us that they are public servants, not untouchable entities. This rebranding is symbolic yet necessary. The public’s perception of law enforcement often elevates them to a status that obscures their role as accountable servants of the law. We must acknowledge them as individuals capable of wrongdoing, just like anyone else—and ensure they are held to the same standards.


Moreover, the citizens of this nation must reclaim their rights and commence utilizing their constitutional amendments to contest and resist these systemic abuses of power. It is essential to demand transparency, to insist on independent investigations, and to hold accountable not merely the officers who engage in these actions, but also the politicians, unions, and judges who shield them. The strength of the populace resides not solely in protests and appeals for justice but in the active participation with the mechanisms of power that facilitate these abuses.

Finally, we must hold our political leaders, such as Congressman Lou Correa, responsible for their involvement in sustaining this system. When politicians protect and advocate for law enforcement at the cost of justice, they foster a culture of corruption. They are complicit in the preservation of a system that injures marginalized communities and disregards fundamental human rights.

In conclusion, the epidemic of police violence cannot be addressed by focusing on individual officers alone. It necessitates a comprehensive strategy that includes holding not only law enforcement accountable but also the political and judicial systems that allow this violence to persist. We must demand a total reform of the systems that protect and sustain this cycle of impunity. Only then can we aspire to cultivate a society where justice genuinely signifies justice for all.

Editorial: The Brawls Inside and Outside Downtown Santa Ana Nightclubs: A Call for Action

On any weekend night, the lively streets of downtown Santa Ana brim with excitement, yet beneath the vivid lights and booming bass of the nightclubs exists a more troubling aspect—one tainted by violence. As someone who has spent numerous evenings walking through these streets, I have observed firsthand the growing prevalence of fights erupting both within and outside the clubs. What’s equally concerning, however, is the sluggish and often insufficient reaction by the Santa Ana Police Department to these occurrences, prompting me to wonder if the safety of the community is genuinely a priority.

Within the nightclubs, the tension is tangible. The densely packed crowds, fueled by alcoholic drinks and drugs, foster an atmosphere ripe for conflict. A careless remark or a minor shove can swiftly escalate into a full-blown brawl. I have seen altercations ignite over insignificant issues—someone cutting in line at the bar, an intoxicated person inadvertently colliding with another, or even just an incorrect glance exchanged between two strangers. The ensuing chaos is consistently the same: people yelling, chairs and bottles flying, and bystanders hastily trying to dodge getting caught in the fray. However, it’s not only the fights that unsettle me. It’s the absence of action from club security, who appear more concerned about safeguarding their business than ensuring patron safety.

Photo: Igmar Rodas / Chaos erupts outside Next Round Bar & Grill in Downtown Santa Ana.

Yet even more alarming is what transpires when the brawls bleed out into the streets. The once-vibrant streets of downtown transform into battlegrounds, with individuals throwing punches, hurling slurs, and generating an overall sense of lawlessness. Just a few weeks ago, I watched in astonishment as a fight between two men escalated into a blockwide clash. People were yelling for assistance, yet the police were nowhere to be found. It wasn’t until several minutes later—an eternity in the midst of chaos—that officers arrived, and by that moment, the harm was done. Several individuals had already been harmed, and the offenders had vanished.

Photo: Igmar Rodas / Over 50 intoxicated people blocking traffic brawling in the middle of an intersection at 2nd and Broadway in Downtown Santa Ana.

The sluggish reaction from the Santa Ana Police Department is the elephant in the room. For a city that takes pride in cultivating a lively nightlife, it’s unacceptable that the police appear so ill-equipped to handle these frequent violent episodes. On numerous occasions, I have heard from both patrons and local business proprietors that they have reached out to the police for assistance, only to have officers arrive far too late. There’s a feeling of neglect, a sense that the police are either too short-staffed or simply too overwhelmed to adequately tackle the situation. The absence of prompt action often leaves those caught in the turmoil feeling deserted, while those accountable for the violence go unpunished.


This delayed reaction isn’t merely an inconvenience; it’s a critical safety issue. Each time an altercation occurs, there’s a potential for it to escalate—firearms, blades, or even worse could easily come into play, and the longer it takes for law enforcement to intervene, the more probable it is that circumstances will deteriorate. The streets of Santa Ana shouldn’t resemble a battleground after sunset. People ought to be able to enjoy an evening out without the anxiety of being caught up in or witnessing violence. And yet, repeatedly, we’re left questioning: where are the police when they are needed?

Photo: Igmar Rodas / Brawl still going with no Santa Ana Police Department presence, (I had to call 911 to get the Santa Ana Police Department to respond).

What is evident is that the situation necessitates action, and it must occur immediately. The Santa Ana Police Department ought to devise methods to enhance its response time to incidents within and surrounding the downtown area. An increase in officer deployment during peak times is essential, along with improved coordination with nightclub security to stop situations from escalating initially. Moreover, there ought to be a heightened focus on community policing, with officers establishing connections with local business owners and the public, so that when an altercation does occur, there’s already an element of trust that can speed up the response process.

As a resident and Independent Reporter to downtown Santa Ana, I desire to see it prosper. I want individuals to unite and relish the nightlife, without concerns for their safety. However, for that to materialize, the Santa Ana Police Department and the city must do more to guarantee that the fights inside and outside the nightclubs don’t continue to tarnish the reputation of this once-vibrant area. We require a quick, definitive response to violence, not just dealing with its consequences. The moment for action is now.


Editorial: The Unlawful Use of Vehicle-Mounted Spotlights by Law Enforcement Personnel.

Photo: Igmar Rodas / Santa Ana Police Department among others in Orange County are making it unsafe for drivers in their vehicles.

As a citizen worried about the rising issues regarding law enforcement practices, one matter that has caught my attention is the unlawful use of vehicle-mounted spotlights by personnel . This activity, although appearing harmless at first, raises serious concerns regarding civil liberties, accountability, and the abuse of power.

Spotlights are potent instruments utilized to illuminate large areas during nighttime operations. While undeniably useful in specific law enforcement contexts, like searching for suspects or evaluating perilous situations, their application has become significantly more widespread and frequently excessive. In numerous cases, spotlights are used during ordinary traffic stops or to intimidate citizens simply going about their daily lives. It is not unusual for personnel  to direct these bright beams straight into the windows of private vehicles or residences, resulting in discomfort, disorientation, and in some instances, even fear.

What troubles me most is that this behavior is not consistently performed within the legal framework. The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution shields citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures, and shining a strong spotlight into a vehicle or home without justification often surpasses that limit. By employing spotlights indiscriminately, law enforcement could be infringing upon citizens’ rights to privacy and due process, frequently without any evident or prompt rationale.

Photo: Igmar Rodas / Santa Ana PD using spotlight directly on unsuspecting drivers, an illegal use of spotlights and violation of the 4th Amendment.

Moreover, there are alarming reports of spotlights being utilized in non-enforcement contexts, such as during police patrols in communities where they may be wielded to intimidate residents. The application of such a blaring, intrusive tool in areas already facing tension between citizens and law enforcement only heightens mistrust and fear. An instrument intended to safeguard and ensure public safety is, in these cases, being weaponized to create a sense of powerlessness in communities.

Equally concerning is the absence of transparency and oversight regarding the usage of vehicle-mounted spotlights. When the spotlight is activated, an adequate explanation is rarely provided to the public or to those who have been subjected to this invasive practice. In the absence of clear regulations governing how and when these instruments can be utilized, we are left vulnerable to abuse. This practice frequently appears arbitrary, with personnel  making decisions impulsively, based on personal judgment or bias.

What’s even more exasperating is the silence on this matter from higher authorities. It is uncommon to witness any public recognition or accountability for the misuse of spotlights, and even rarer to observe steps taken to mitigate their illegal application. Law enforcement agencies are often swift to defend the tools they employ, but when these tools transgress into unlawful surveillance or harassment, there exists a duty for oversight and rectification.

As a community, we need to insist on greater accountability. Law enforcement personnel should be expected to adhere to elevated standards of behavior, and the usage of vehicle-mounted spotlights needs to be strictly controlled. There should be explicit regulations that safeguard citizens’ rights while guaranteeing personnel  have the necessary resources to perform their duties effectively. The random and unlawful deployment of such devices only worsens the rift between law enforcement and the communities they aim to protect.

Chief of Police Directive 21-1(View Full Document)

“Based on the public safety hazard and in response to community and Council concerns, effective immediately the indiscriminate use of vehicle-mounted spotlights towards the driver of a moving vehicle is PROHIBITED, unless officers can articulate exigent circumstances necessitating their use.”

In the end, the right to privacy and shielding from unjust governmental interference must always be preserved. The existing pattern of spotlight misuse signifies a concerning shift away from these principles, and it is time for us to confront this practice and advocate for reform. The rule of law must be applicable to all individuals, including those assigned with enforcing it.

Police Brutality in Santa Ana

Police Violence & Brutality in Santa Ana

Police brutality in Santa Ana has been an issue, which has received lots of concern from the people and especially the activists. Several mishandled cases of use of force and police misconduct involving affines of the Santa Ana Police Department or SAPD have received public outcry. Such occurrences happen in contact with minority groups making many people question the department and their conduct.

Notable Incidents

This has led to several cases of police brutality being highlighted of which some have occurred in Santa Ana. This occurred when some of the officers were said to have involved unnecessary force when arresting some individuals which resulted to harm and protest. These factors have led to investigations and have been the force behind community activism for police accountability of their conducts.

Community Response and Activism

To counter the claims of the police brutality local activists and groups have come forward to push for reform within the SAPD. Citizens, however, have demanded reform to the police functioning, one on the ability to control force or in proper handling of riots, and the other concerning the absence of a body unrelated to the police force that supervises their actions. People walk to incite justice for victims of the police brutality while numerous public demonstrations are heard to respond to injustice.

Calls for Reform

Responding to years of police misconduct in Santa Ana, people continue raising their voices to address the problem systemically. There are people that would like the state to introduce measures when the citizens are protected rather than being harmed. This entails increasing support to police officers’ mental health and improving the Force/Public Order Policies.

SAPD

Conclusion

The problem of police misconduct hence the excessive use of force in Santa Ana is still prevalent with people demanding a change. The above concerns can only be addressed as the societies gain trust in the police and feel safe with whatever actions the police take against them.

Santa Ana Police Department Misuse of Vehicle Mounted Spotlights and Public Safety

During the last year and a half, The Orange County Reporter correspondent  investigative reporter Igmar Rodas has been documenting the Santa Ana Police Department misuse of Vehicle Mounted Spotlights on their Patrol Vehicles.

As it has been documented Santa Ana Police Officers have been using the Spotlights in emergency situations, regular traffic stops, but also shining the spotlights onto oncoming traffic.  This has been a concern to many Community Leaders and the public in general especially those who have been affected by the misuse of the spotlights by the Santa Ana Police Officers.

Several Safety concerns that were observed were when the police officers used the lights onto oncoming traffic going the opposite direction of the officers, those drivers were getting startled up to a point of getting into an accident.  Our correspondent Reporter has witnessed this safety issue as he has been a victim of such practice of misuse of spotlights.  The last time it happened to him about 3 weeks ago, he slightly lost control of his vehicle and hitting the curb while the Police Officers going the opposite direction sped off at a high rated speed.

Santa Ana Police Department Patrol Vehicle with Spotlights.

There have been other instances where our Correspondent Reporter has witnessed that practice of equipment misuse and nearly causing accidents by the abuse of those police officers.

 Mr. Rodas reached out to Santa Ana Mayor Sarmiento in concern of the misuse of the Spotlights; Mayor Sarmiento said that he would pass along the information in regards to this. Mayor Sarmiento did keep his word and the Santa Ana Police Chief David Valentin Issued a Department Wide Directive as of April 27th 2021 on the Use of the Spotlights mounted on the Patrol Vehicles.

“Based on the public safety hazard and in response to community and Council concerns, effective immediately the indiscriminate use of vehicle mounted spotlights towards the driver of a moving vehicle is PROHIBITED, unless officers can articulate exigent circumstances necessitating their use”

Santa Ana Police Chief Directive 21-1 Use of Vehicle Spotlights

Chief of Police Directive 21-1 , USE OF VEHICLE SPOTLIGHTS.

This is a VICTORY for Santa Ana Residents because of the safety issue that was at stake