![](http://www.syracusenewtimes.com/newyork/file-178-.jpg")
Beck is a 41-year-old musician whose house was broken into by police responding to sounds they believed were gunshots. Beck’s dog ran out as police burst in, and the 4-year-old Pomeranian was killed by a hit-and-run motorist blocks from home. (See the Sanity Fair column on page 7.) Beck is an urban homesteader who has been fixing up a home on the Near West Side which he acquired for $1 in February.
Stephanie Miner picked up her cell phone on Sunday afternoon, Oct. 25. She had not been to visit Beck. She knew of the case, and said that she had been in Beck’s neighborhood earlier in the weekend and planned to talk with him.
“This was not one of our finest moments as a city,” said the Democratic two-term councilor-at-large. “It clearly illustrates that there needs to be more training.”
Miner, a lawyer, said she was hesitant to comment further. “He {Beck} is currently considering all his legal options, and I am a city employee, and have been advised by corporation counsel not to say anything.”
Q: But if you are elected mayor, you will still be a city employee. How will we get mayoral leadership on these kinds of issues if the mayor won’t say anything?
A: “You can make change but you have to be careful about attributing blame and fault.”
Q: How so?
A: “Obviously there are no specific rules about vacant houses. It illustrates the need for police officers to have relationships with the neighborhoods. It illustrates that the police officer did not have full information about those issues.”
The name Jeff Beck didn’t ring a bell with Steve Kimatian when reached by phone late Sunday afternoon. When the situation was explained, Kimatian promised to look into it. Prodded by this reporter’s call, he stopped by Beck’s house later that afternoon and later contacted The New Times, sounding every bit the corporate manager he once was (Kimatian served until recently as general manager of WSYR-Channel 9).
“My initial reaction as a leader,” he said, “is to find out what took place, and to find out how to use that experience to learn how to better serve your residents. It’s a learning experience.
“As far as the facts of the case, the police say they did hear shots, and they did react. It’s a good thing that they reacted. Could there have been other alternatives? I would look at the steps they took or did not take and see that there would be procedures to take care of that issue.”
Q: Should the police have known that the house was occupied?
A: “Under my administration, I propose an office of neighborhood advocacy, which means they would have a greater chance of knowing. The info would be at their fingertips. I think there should be greater awareness of the homes in our neighborhoods.”
Q: Would it be acceptable under your administration for a police chief reviewing this situation to conclude that the only misstep was the failure to leave a note?
A: “I think there has to be a personal follow-up. It’s like a business where our customer is the resident. After such an episode the resident should be able to say, ‘I’m sorry this occurred but I feel that the follow-up was adequate.’”
Q: Is it acceptable in your view for police to break down the door of an occupied home?
A: “If you’re talking about gunfire versus a door, gunfire wins.”
Q: I’m talking about the perception of gunfire versus breaking into someone’s home. I’m not a lawyer, but there is a Fourth Amendment.
A: “I think you have to leave that up to the police judgment. If shots were fired, and the police perception was that it was gunfire, you’d have to take whatever action was needed. Given the fact that shots were fired, should they have drawn a perimeter and waited? I think they had to make a split-second judgment.”
(Editor’s note: In fact, the police report indicates that the officers took the time to call their superiors for approval of the break-in.)
Kimatian later called back with this revised statement: “The best approach to take would be this. You hear the gunshots. You go over. You secure the perimeter. Since there is no imminent danger, you call the judge and get the warrant. That can be done quickly. Procedurally that would give me the most comfort.”
Q: You have said many times that if a person in the private sector doesn’t perform, that person doesn’t have a job, and that you would bring this business practice into your administration. In your view, is the police chief performing adequately when he says publicly that the only problem here was not leaving a note?
A: “I would have to ask, was the incident completely researched and investigated? Was there a complete enough report?”
Q: What would you say about a report that said the only problem here is not leaving a note?
A: “I would have a conversation with the police chief. That is not sufficient, and is not completely serving the public. I would not leave that as it is.”
Q: Who does the investigation of the police?
A: “It’s incumbent upon law enforcement to complete an investigation. If those are not satisfactory, I would have the mayor’s office review this. As mayor I believe I have the obligation to see a report that follows an incident and is responsive to all the necessary information. The mayor has the last say.”
Q: Jeff Beck says this wouldn’t have happened in Sedgwick or Eastwood. What do you say?
A: “It would be no different. If there was gunfire they have to respond.”
Otis Jennings did not return a phone call requesting comment on this issue.
