SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
May 9, 2007· scvtalk.com · PHP-Nuke (SCVTalk 1.0) · Wayback capture

Dave Bossert – Plagiarist?

Attributed to Jeff Wilson (editor-supplied)

jonmsable writes "I am a first time poster to SCVTalk. I was going to let an online incident I had with Mr. Bossert on May 2, 2007, slide, but due to recent posts of his, I felt I could not stay silent.

On April 27, 2007, Bossert had created a thread named “Update – Stevenson Ranch Bank Robbery”. On that thread, Dave Bossert had given updates as to the description of the suspects, as well as where they were arrested. I was the third poster on the thread, following “Jack” and “ChrisA”. Their posts had a similar theme; Mr. Bossert’s reporting of crime, specifically how he reported on crime trends and the interaction between agencies on the day of the bank robbery in Stevenson Ranch. As I read, I found that Dave Bossert had made several errors in his understanding regarding law enforcement agency interaction.

Bossert’s posts and mine, back and forth (there were two at this point), mostly focused on that fact that I, as a fifteen year veteran of the LAPD, had far more knowledge on law enforcement policies and procedures than he did. His response was that he had checked his facts with a friend of his who is a LASD lieutenant. While I didn’t deny this, I wrote that he did not have a fundamental knowledge of the agencies that he wrote would respond in a time of crisis. Bossert wrote many times that the Parks Police would respond if needed. To prove my point that he didn’t have a grasp of the local agencies, I pointed out that the Parks Police have not existed since 1998. They, as well as the Los Angeles County Safety Police, were combined in 1998 to form the Los Angeles County Office of Public Safety. Those officers are generally referred to as Los Angeles County Police Officers.

Attempting to simplify my thoughts regarding his knowledge of law enforcement, as my final thought to Mr. Bossert, I wrote this:

Simply saying that the sky is blue does not explain why it is blue.

In very short order, Bossert posted a reply to my earlier post. He also posted a rather long explanation on why the sky was blue.

If you would like to read it, it can be found at the following website here.

Just so we are clear, the above article was copyrighted in 1997 by Science made Simple, all rights reserved. Bossert, for whatever reason, copied and pasted the article to show why the sky was blue. It took me all of five minutes to find the source of Bossert’s post and I called him on it.

I also used my third and final post to exemplify and prove my belief about Bossert’s law enforcement knowledge:

In response to your statement that you, and I’m paraphrasing here, take the
time to check your facts and talk to various officials is something that I can
neither prove nor disprove. I would submit however that your sources of
information, whoever they might be, are flawed. In reading several of your past articles, including the “Cornucopia of Crime”, you present yourself
(not as a direct statement but in the tone of your articles) as an expert,
or at least, a semi-expert on several law enforcement issues.
When that is called into question, you say that you are simply taking the
information from other sources to complete your post.

The article regarding the sky being blue is a perfect example of this. You cut
and pasted an article that anyone with an internet connection and
a search engine could have found. In fact, I found it in less than five minutes.
Do you have a true understanding of the materials, or question being posted,
to offer a comprehensive answer? I haven’t seen much proof of that regarding
the articles on crime.

After my post, I waited to see what Bossert’s response would be. It turned out I was waiting in vain. A short time later, I checked the West Ranch Beacon to see if there was a reply posted. Not only was there no reply, there were no posts at all! Bossert deleted the entire thread!

Before the thread was deleted, both Jack and ChrisA had, in my opinion, Bossert on the ropes. He tried to dance around their questions without giving any answers other than a rehash of what he had already posted. Did the thread disappear because of their posts alone, my posts, a combination of the three, or possibly another individual who posted to the thread before I realized the entire thread was gone? I can’t tell you – only Bossert knows for sure, and I don’t think he is willing to tell. My belief is that Bossert was unable to answer questions about law enforcement that Jack, ChrisA and I put forth. In addition, Bossert was caught plagiarizing a portion of an article, and that’s why the thread disappeared into cyberspace. Is plagiarism a crime that I have ever made an arrest for? No. Is plagiarism a crime that writers abhor more than any other? Yes.

Truth be told, I was going to let the whole thing slide. Had Mr. Bossert admitted that he cut and pasted the article, I would have let the matter rest. Unfortunately, Bossert reacted, much like a petulant child, and destroyed the evidence.

Now, some of you reading this might say that Dave Bossert might not know that much about plagiarism and copyright laws. But…if you look on the home page of the West Ranch Beacon, there on the top banner, two left of the word “HOME”, you find the words “Copyright Notice”. Mr. Bossert went to great lengths to make certain that the posts and threads of the West Ranch Beacon are protected under current copyright laws. So, one can assume that he is somewhat versed in intellectual rights of writers.

By the way, I realize that Mr. Bossert has taken offense to jabs at his spelling ability in the past. In reading the copyright notice section, in the first paragraph, fourth line, first word, it is written ‘dirative’. The proper spelling is ‘derivative’.

Yes, I was going to let the whole matter slide until I read another post on the West Ranch Beacon by Dave Bossert. This one dealt with the apology by Tim Myers of the Signal regarding an article written about Bossert some weeks ago. The apology was edited by Len Worden, which made Bossert blow a gasket. It seems that editing in West Ranch is acceptable, but if someone else does it, it’s a crime.

Apparently, Mr. Bossert feels that he is free to censor his own material (and those of others) to serve his own purpose. He is certainly not the first individual to do such a thing. My problem with this lies in the fact that he feels he is the only one that can do this. From Bossert’s own writings, one can see that if an editor from the Signal does it, it is an unconscionable act.
"
Dave Bossert – Plagiarist?

Comments (6)

  1. PICOKIDMay 9 at 11:40 AM PT
    For those that haven't guessed, I write a column for the SIGNAL and have suffered from Mr. Bossert's use of copyrighted material, specifically a picture taken from the SCVHistory files on the web.He claimed, at the time, that it showed me firing a machine gun at a ship and that he feared for the safety of the West Ranch Town Council. Since I had just postulated in a column that myself and some old friends ride our horses over to the next WRTC meeting and make sure they voted right about annexation. (We were suppossed to take the guns we carried as teenagers across town back in the mid 1960's). I think he was really afraid. It is his fears that have driven him in the many corners he finds himself and for that I feel sorry for him. BTW, if my friends from way back when in 1964 or 1965 rode from Placerita to Pico Canyon on horses with the same weapons today, we wouldn't get more than a few yards from our starting point before meeting the very good and capable SWAT teams of Los Angeles County. I've ceased debating him since I won't engage an unarmed man in a battle of wits. (Now that is Plageiarism!). The best that can be said for the WRB is that it provides a laugh for some and proves the poor condition of the educational systems in the USA. -Darryl Manzer "West Ranch Resident..."Wy Back When". and BSR (before Stevenson Ranch etc.).
  2. honeystartpackingMay 9 at 12:46 PM PT
    I don't understand why so much effort is being spent on Bossert-bashing lately. OK, so he's probably not one of the most well-liked people in the SCV, but he does have the right to post whatever rubbish he wants to on his own blog. That's the power of free press combined with the instant gratification of an online environment! If he's quoting another post or article, then he should have the sense to refer to that original post as the rest of us do (or at least most of us). I don't make a habit of linking to the original article in many cases any more, since those links rapidly become dead links (as in useless) when the articles are archived by the newspapers themselves. I link to the main page of the source instead. And if the West Ranch area wants to keep someone like him in a position of authority as the president of the West Ranch Town Council, then again that's their choice. If the residents of that area don't like it, then they can work to change things by either throwing him off the town council or by mandating that he stop posting this type of stuff until his term expires. Meanwhile, his stuff provides a source of entertainment for many, so what the heck... let him think that a Park Ranger (or even a Power Ranger) has the authority of a Police Officer if that makes him happy! A blog is editorial by definition anyways, so he's well within his rights to rant at will, although the intentional distortion of facts is not generally recommended (even for a blog environment). Still, a misunderstanding of facts happens all the time, especially in an opinion-based article. If you want a true example of off-the-charts ranting, check out this article (and other posts on this blog): http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/05/08/18412809.php [www.indybay.org]. Bossert's posts are no comparison to this guy!
  3. RickLMay 9 at 1:57 PM PT
    If anyone is keeping count, add me to the list of people tired of reading about this guy whatshisname, whoever he is.
  4. PaulineMay 10 at 9:50 AM PT
    Dave Bossert is a total waste of time, and no one takes his pathetic rants seriously. If not for insults and lame, pointless attacks against people who try to get some actual facts to him, Dave wouldn't have much to say in the way of a rational discussion. I did mention the plagiarism bit here, myself, when Chris A. brought it to my attention - that is a very serious offense, and one must wonder how much other stuff Dave posts over there that he steals from other writers and passes off as his own. But just this one offense makes his blog a totally uncredible source, especially when he tried to hide his arrogant plagiarism blunder by deleting the entire thread! Yeah, Dave, such a "beacon" you are, LOL! I guess Dave didn't take the judge's words to heart when Dave sued SR resident Keith Pritsker in an attempt to censor/silence Keith. Dave will go to any lengths to censor others, but the judge threw the case out and said Dave was guilty of trying to intimidate Keith so Keith wouldn't participate in West Ranch governmental issues. And now Dave is still censoring by deleting entire threads to eliminate the truth about his dishonest act - lesson not learned. The thing is, Bossert's censor-ridden blog wouldn't get any attention at all if not for Dave being president of the West Ranch town council. Thus, everything he says on his West Ranch blog is attached to the West Ranch town Council. Doesn't matter if that seems unfair or unrealistic, that's the way it is. Expecting rational discussion from Dave is an unrealistic expectation - besides plegiarism, Dave writes without bothering to get the facts and the truth about issues, he lies about what prople actually post on the blog, attributing his own comments as the actual words of others, he is an L.A. County suck-up puppet, and he will gladly screw the entire West Ranch community if screwing them means he can keep his powerless seat on a powerless (L.A. County owned and operated) town council that should be called what it really is: the West Ranch advisory committee. Town councils don't work in a productive manner for the communities the councils represent. Dave Bossert will not support ANYTHING that threatens his little paper crown, and the hell with what the majority of the community wants and needs. At this point, Dave amounts to nothing more than comic relief. Pauline Harte.
  5. BillMay 10 at 5:13 PM PT
    At one time I read the funny papers but reading stuff about Dave is MUCH MUCH better
  6. JackBlackMay 16 at 11:12 AM PT
    Ole Bossert is at it again. He made a big deal about the Suset Point annexation informational meeting on his blog. A meeting he didn't attend but spoke as if he did. Then when questioned about that fact, stated that the story was posted by someone else who did secretly attend but failed to mention that part in the report. Thus the debate began! Ask some simple questions on his blog regarding his comments and here is how he responds in the following thread. I thought all should know since I guess feels threatened by my questions both now and in the past, so he will just censor me........ **************** Jack Says: May 15th, 2007 at 8:33 pm Hmmm? So the WRTC represents the Sunset Point residents?? “Sunset Point is within the area designated as being covered by the West Ranch Town Council. The WRTC has worked on and is currently working issues that affect the Sunset Point community and will continue to do so.” Your words, right? So if that’s is the case, where were you when this meeting was being held so you could have “STOOD UP IN PUBLIC” and suggested that those residents should wait for the study to be completed? I’m sure you were probably too busy doing something else that day. If that’s the case, then where was the other WRTC members who represent the Sunset Point residents. Were they ALL hanging out with you? Having REPRESENTATION and a voice that is listened to and respected is one of the main issues for this community. Looks like the WRTC is just as responsive as the COUNTY!! ***************** Jack, The fact is that I spoke with the Mayor of Santa Clarita on Friday and let her know that I would not be attending the meeting. Also, it is relevant to point out that the organizers of that meeting declined to invite anyone else to attend. This would lead some to believe that they have their own agenda and don’t wish to give residents all of the information. The rest of you comments appear to be trying to taunt me. Frankly, you are becoming a bore that has little or nothing to contribute. Do you live in the West Ranch community or are you commiserating with the Communist House Frau in Canyon Country? Either way, I will probably start to delete your comments if you continue down the useless path of taunting that leads nowhere. -Dave ******************** Dave, I thought you said you don't believe in censorship? As for taunting you, I'm sorry you feel threatened by my questions and comments. I thought it was a fair question to ask that if the WRTC represents the residents of Sunset Point (like you stated), why didn't the WRTC send a representative to be present to offer additional advice or alternative point of view to "Their" information hungry residents. How is this a taunting question? Why not just answer it honestly instead of saying you weren't invited. This meeting was widely reported before hand, you made mention of it several times in your blog before hand, it was open to any who wished to attend, so why not attend or send a WRTC representative in your place? Again, these sound like resonable questions to ask based on your comments and responses to Sandy and Pauline. I thought the purpose of a reputable blog was to inform and engage the on-line community in open discussion, debate, or entertain? I actually enjoy some of the discussions I've viewed, some of the debates we have had, and I, as probably some others, find it somewhat entertaining. Oh well, I guess it's your porogative to refuse to post any of my comments or replys to YOUR site. At least we still have the SCVTalk website were those who would like to discuss, reply or challenge your comments can do so openly and without fear of name calling, tantrums or censorship! And lastly, you speaking of communism in Canyon Country?? What do you call deleting comments of those who question or challenge your public comments.

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support