WASHINGTON – U.S. Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt announced today the transfer of administrative jurisdiction of approximately 560 acres of federal lands to the U.S. Department of the Army to build roughly 70 miles of border barriers. This action comes in response to a series of applications for emergency withdrawal as submitted by the Army for construction or augmentation of barriers along the southern border. No national parks nor segments from Indian country are included in the land transfer.

The Army submitted its requests following President Proclamation 9844, issued by President Donald Trump on Feb. 15, declaring a national emergency regarding the border security and humanitarian crisis at our southern border. The requests follow the Defense Department announcement on Sept. 4 to defer $3.6 billion to fund 11 barrier projects at our southern border.  In accordance with this proclamation, and as requested by the Army, the land will be transferred to the Army for military construction projects under 10 U.S.C. 2808.

“I’ve personally visited the sites that we are transferring to the Army, and there is no question that we have a crisis at our southern border. Absent this action, national security and natural resource values will be lost. The impacts of this crisis are vast and must be aggressively addressed with extraordinary measures,” said Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt. “The damages to natural resource values are a byproduct of the serious national security, drug enforcement, and other immigration challenges facing our dedicated staff along the border. Construction of border barriers will help us maintain the character of the lands and resources under our care and fulfill our mission to protect them.”

“We made it a priority to work closely with the Departments of Homeland Security and Defense, to protect the wildlife, natural, and cultural resources that occur on these federal lands along the border. This work will provide the necessary tools to enhance the safety of those that live, work and recreate in this region,” said Casey Hammond, acting assistant secretary for Land and Minerals Management. “Through this collaboration we will maximize safety and stewardship, benefiting all Americans in response to this crisis.”

The lands requested for these projects include:

- El Paso 2 (170 acres in Luna and Hidalgo counties, N.M.): Replacement of existing vehicle barrier with pedestrian barrier.

- El Paso 8 (43 acres in Hidalgo County, N.M.): Construction of new primary and secondary pedestrian barriers.

- San Diego 4 (43.77 acres in San Diego County, Calif.): Construction of new primary bollard fence and secondary pedestrian barrier.

- Yuma 3 (228 acres in Yuma County, Ariz.): Replacement of the existing vehicle barrier adjacent to the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge with pedestrian barrier.

- Yuma 6 (73.3 acres in Yuma County, Ariz.): Construction of both new primary and secondary pedestrian barriers.

The Public Land Orders temporarily transferring jurisdiction of the land to the Army will be for a period of three years for border security purposes.

In addition to national security concerns, this act also responds to environmental issues caused by unlawful border crossings. Wilderness areas, wildlife refuges, as well as species and vegetation are adversely impacted by land degradation and destruction caused by the creation of trails, the deposition of trash, and unlawful fires, among other things. Construction of border barriers will reduce or eliminate these impacts and preserve values that will otherwise be lost.

For more information, please visit the Bureau of Land Management’s landing page on the transfer. 

The FBI is offering a $5,000 reward for information that leads to the arrest and conviction of the person or persons responsible for the homicides of a father and son on Taos Pueblo.

The victims were identified as Antonio "Tony" Romero, 82, and Buck Romero, 51, both members of Taos Pueblo.

Their bodies were found in Buck Romero's residence on June 1.

The cause of death is not being released at this time.

The Taos Pueblo Department of Public Safety is assisting with the investigation.

Anyone with information is asked to call the FBI at (505) 889-1300 or use the online form at tips.fbi.gov.

New Gallup PD program stresses reasonable use of non-deadly force

The Gallup Police Department is undergoing a policy change regarding use of force.

The department has been transitioning to the new program, called Response to Resistance, since the latter half of June, according to Captain Erin Toadlena-Pablo.

She mentioned that officers in Gallup PD are taking the training courses for the new program from Aug. 26 - 30.

The crux of the program is reducing the use of deadly force in the case of encountering a suspect. Officers first assess the situation through verbal contact with the suspect, and then resort to defensive tactics, such as mace or taser, only if the situation has escalated to the degree where using the tools can be justified.

“Everyday encounters will change,” Toadlena-Pablo said Aug. 28.

According to Toadlena-Pablo, there have been 60 use-of-force incidents involving certified Gallup police officers in 2019. That is higher than the total number of cases in each of the three previous years, and she noted there are still four months left to be counted.

Toadlena-Pablo said the program was designed using the outcome of two U.S. Supreme Court cases as a foundation. Lieutenant Billy Padavich gave more info on these two cases.

The first case is Tennessee v. Garner, decided in March 1985, where the outcome states an officer may use deadly force to stop a fleeing suspect from escaping if they have reason to believe the suspect poses a significant threat to the officer or others.

The second case is Graham v. Connor, decided in May 1989, the outcome of which states in the event of an arrest, stop, or other seizure of a free citizen, any claims that an officer used excessive force must be analyzed under the Fourth Amendment’s “objective reasonableness” standard, and not under a substantive due process standard.

THE TRAINING PROCESS

Every officer from the patrol to the admin staff and former community service aides at Gallup PD attended a two-part training program throughout the week.

The training is comprised of a Powerpoint presentation approved by the New Mexico Law Enforcement Academy and consists of descriptions of scenarios like the one displayed in a video Toadlena-Pablo showed to the Sun as an example.

In the video, an officer encountered a suspect who was confrontational. The suspect shouted repeatedly at the officer and eventually brandished a knife. The officer continued to use verbal warnings toward the suspect as he drew his firearm. The suspect eventually moved to attack a fellow officer, and the decision to discharge the firearm had to be made.

The Gallup officers then had to assess the situation they witnessed in the video and recall important details, such as when they made contact with the suspect, the actions they took to get the suspect to stand down, and if necessary mark how many shots were fired.

“This is done to address issues in the reports to make sure they’re clear,” Toadlena-Pablo said. “The officers have to convey information accurately.”

The reports are then reviewed by supervisors for accuracy as well as whether the officer followed the key points of Response to Resistance.

Having the officers explain their actions in detail will put accountability back on them, Toadlena-Pablo said.

The second aspect of the training involves live field exercises in and outside the Gallup Police Department. The Sun was invited to sit in on these exercises and participate in one of them.

Lieutenant Billy Padavich said the live exercises help the officers to determine what type of force is reasonable for a particular scenario, using what they are learning through the training to make decisions to help defuse the situation.

“We’re teaching them not every situation will be the same,” Padavich said. “That everything they do has to be objectively reasonable.”

OUT IN THE FIELD

The first live exercise was one where the officer had to respond to a call about a disruptive person on the premises.

After answering the call from Metro Dispatch, the officer pulled into the parking lot of a designated building. The officer made contact with the caller, who said the person has been shouting obscene and threatening messages at nearby pedestrians and staff.

The officer then had to confront the disruptive suspect, played in the scenario by Officer Neil Yazzie, who shouted that they were just minding their own business in the lot and are allowed to do so.

The officer first attempted to defuse the situation verbally, but then drew his firearm after it was revealed the suspect had a knife.

The suspect waved the knife toward the officer in a threatening manner, and eventually discarded it by throwing it in the direction of the officer. Finally, the suspect drew a firearm of his own and shouted at the officer to shoot.

In numerous practice runs of the incident, the suspect either discarded his firearm and agreed to leave the premises or he opened fire and was subsequently “shot” by training ammo used by the officer.

After the scenario concluded, Sgt. Steven Collins discussed the importance of doing the reality-based training exercises.

“The officer must learn how to assess if the suspect has the means, the intent, and the ability to commit the crime,” Collins said.

The intent of a suspect can be determined by observing their stance and demeanor, Collins said. This means having to stand about seven yards away from the suspect, giving the officer enough time to react in case the suspect decides to charge or attack.

“Distance and time are our friend,” Collins said. “The ultimate goal is to gain compliance without using [excessive] force.”

However, Collins added they teach their officers in the event of a hostile suspect, officers should have their firearms drawn and be ready to defend themselves.

“Be one step ahead of them,” he said.

While the situation in the lot of the police department was hypothetical, Yazzie said officers would actually have several seconds at most to make a crucial decision if they are in that position in reality.

“The officers have to go home, too,” Yazzie said. “We still render aid, do what we need to do, and try to save the suspect. Our job is to stop their unlawful actions.”

The scenario in the lot played out in under five minutes. But Yazzie said the corresponding report would be about 10 pages long, because the officer would have to explain why the scenario went from non-violent to involving use of deadly force.

“The reality-based training opens [the officers’] eyes to see where they’re doing good and where they need to improve,” Yazzie added.

The second exercise involved officers responding to a call at a place of business in reference to a person who was refusing to leave, and was unresponsive to calls by the manager to leave the premises.

In the walk-throughs of this scenario, the officer assessed the situation by speaking with the manager and then making contact with the suspect. Eventually, a second officer arrived on-scene to assist by also asking the suspect what was happening.

Occasionally, the manager would repeatedly insist the officers take the suspect away immediately. The officers told the manager multiple times to stay back a safe distance.

After failing to comply with the officers’ request to stand up, the officers then had to determine when they were left with no other option but to use a taser on the suspect.

The final exercise was one in which two officers had to enter a residence in reference to a call about a domestic dispute. The victim greeted the officers and told them her husband, a war veteran currently dealing with mental problems, had hit her earlier. The suspect was intoxicated, along with second person in the room.

The officers made sure the space was clear when they entered, making their presence known to the suspect and the person he was with. The suspect repeatedly told the officers he did not want to talk to them, but eventually began to act erratically.

In this instance, the officers were able to detain the suspect without having to use a taser.

Terrance Peyketewa, the officer who oversaw this exercise, said in these scenarios the officers may have reason to pull the trigger and use force, such as the taser, but it will ultimately be a judgment call on their part, based on how they view the situation and what they have learned.

“Everything’s against you in this scenario,” he said. “But whether they say yes or no [to use of force] depends on the officer.”

By Cody Begaye
Sun Correspondent

Pedophile currently in jail for violating probation in Colo.

Following the Gallup-McKinley County Schools Board of Education meeting Aug. 6, Judith Goins, criminal investigators administrative assistant for McKinley County Sheriff’s Office, was inundated with phone calls about one of the meeting attendees.

Goins received nearly two dozen calls regarding the status of Guy Priel, 53, of Woodland Park, Colo., and what he was doing at the GMCS meeting. Goins said those callers suspected Priel might be a sex offender.

After some research on OffenderWatch, the software program used by the State of New Mexico to register sex offenders, Goins verified Priel was a registered sex offender in Santa Fe and Chama, N.M., and had last registered as homeless with the Colorado Springs Police Department in July. He is required to register as an offender every month due to his homeless status.

Further, Priel had obtained employment with a local publication and was assigned to write stories regarding education and the local schools.

McKinley County Chief Investigator Lt. Merle Bates said Aug. 20, Priel missed an important step for someone in his position who gets a job.

“He has to tell an employer he’s a sex offender, otherwise he’s violating probation,” Bates said.

Mike Hyatt, superintendent for Gallup-McKinley County Schools, said the district is disappointed in the hiring of a registered sex offender to cover school stories.

“We never expected this blatant disregard for our students’ safety by [the publication] sending a serious child sex offender to their school,” Hyatt said Aug. 20.

Hyatt added he does not understand how Priel’s offenses could have gone unnoticed.

“A simple Google search shows that this person should never have been sent to our schools,” he said.

CHARGES AND PROCEDURES

Previously, Priel served 3 years in prison after being convicted on 10 counts of possessing child pornography in New Hampshire Sept. 10, 2004.

Priel was also convicted of sexual assault Aug. 11, 1993 and was placed on 4 years probation.

Before arriving in Gallup, Priel had worked for publications in Hobbs, N.M., Las Vegas, N.M., New Ulm, Minn., Gardner, Mass., North Conway, N.H., Tyler, TX, Santa Fe, N.M., Chama, N.M., and Manitou Springs, Colo.

Goins said a registered sex offender has 10 days to verify their arrival in the state of New Mexico. After that they are supposed to prove they have lived in the state for 10 days.

The first indication Priel had arrived in Gallup was when his name showed up on the GMCS meeting sign-in sheet, and also when he attended the new teacher orientation for the district.

After MCSO received word of Priel’s attendance at GMCS functions and reached out to his place of employment, Priel came in to the sheriff’s office Aug. 8 to register.

According to the police report, Priel said he had not come in to register despite being in town for several weeks, because he did not have a permanent residence, and his new employment was keeping him busy. He added he had to come register after receiving a directive from his boss.

However, the sheriff’s office still filed a failure to comply notice with Priel, because he had not immediately come into MCSO to verify he was living and employed in Gallup.

“He knows his requirements,” Goins said. “It turns out he was on probation in Colorado.”

Goins said she called Priel’s probation officer when she got back into the office Aug. 15. Probation Officer Brandy Caldwell was shocked to learn Priel was in Gallup, and said Priel had not been approved to leave the state of Colorado.

“The probation officer can get a warrant if [the sex offender] violates probation, an extraditable warrant,” Goins said.

Goins received the warrant Aug. 19, and Bates and a team of investigators and patrol officers went to arrest Priel at the hotel where he was staying.

Priel had quit his publication job Aug. 16, and will be extradited back to Colorado to face charges for violating probation, Goins said.

The Sun attempted to reach the publication in question to ask whether Priel’s charges were unnoticed or unknown, but received no response by press time.

WHAT OFFENDERS CAN DO LEGALLY

Goins said she receives a number of calls from members of the public who ask why sex offenders are allowed to be employed at a specific business or attend public functions such as a high school basketball game or church event.

While there are restrictions the offender has to follow while on probation or parole, Goins said it is ultimately the employer’s prerogative to hire the offender in New Mexico.

“There is no state law that says they can’t be hired for being registered sex offenders,” she said.

Goins said a privately-owned business like the local publications are able to legally hire whomever they want.

After verifying the status of a sex offender, Goins said the sheriff’s office must then verify their employment status with the employer, and then periodically verify both their employment and residence.

These visits are done with no prior warning, Goins added.

As for limitations, Goins said a sex offender under probation cannot live within 1,000 feet of a school. She said MCSO is also required to notify the local schools when updates to probation and parole statuses come in.

But there will also be cases in which a convicted sex offender serves their full sentence and is not under probation or parole. Under those circumstances, they do not have those limitations, Bates said.

Goins added registered sex offenders are legally allowed to come to local schools in cases in which they are not under probation or parole.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Goins said there are a number of steps a member of the public can take if they suspect someone may be a sex offender, as well as find information on local offenders.

The first step is to use OffenderWatch, the software used by McKinley County to verify local registered sex offenders. OffenderWatch can be viewed at http://www.communitynotification.com/cap_main.php?office=55312. Site visitors can also choose to be alerted through email when new sex offenders are registered nearby.

Goins also mentioned the sex offender registries operated by the Navajo Nation (https://navajo.nsopw.gov/) and Pueblo of Zuni (https://zuni.nsopw.gov/).

“All these other entities have to register [the offender] if they live in McKinley County,” Goins said.

Residents can also use the Sex Offender Registration and Tracking Unit by calling (505) 722-8514 or emailing either This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it or This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it for more information, or to report someone.

Goins also stressed the phone number has 24/7 public access.

The other number to call for info or assistance is McKinley County Sheriff’s Office at (505) 863-1410.

“We rely heavily on the public to verify these offenders,” Goins said.