HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnnual report FY2007POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Established in 1997, by ordinance #97-3792, the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board (PCRB)
consists of five members appointed by the City Council. The PCRB has its own legal counsel.
The Board was established to review investigations into claims of police misconduct, and to assist the
Police Chief, the City Manager, and the City Council in evaluating the overall performance of the
Police Department by reviewing the Police Department’s investigations into complaints. The Board is
also required to maintain a central registry of complaints and to provide an annual report setting forth
the numbers, types, and disposition of complaints of police misconduct. It may recommend that the
City Council hold public forums and/or hearings designed to encourage citizens to provide
information, recommendations, and opinions about police policies, procedures, and practices. To
achieve these purposes, the Board complies with Chapter 8 of the Iowa City Code and the Board’s
By-Laws and Standard Operating Procedures and Guidelines.
ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007
Meetings
The PCRB holds monthly meetings on the second Tuesday and special meetings as necessary.
During FY07 the Board held thirteen meetings. Three meetings were cancelled due to lack of Board
business.
ICPD Policies/Procedures/Practices Reviewed By PCRB
The ICPD regularly provided the Board with monthly Use of Force Reports, Internal Investigation
Logs, Demographic Reports and various Training Bulletins. The Department also provided various
General Orders for the Board’s review and comment. A senior member of the Police Department
routinely attended the open portion of the PCRB meetings, and is available for any questions Board
members have regarding these reports.
Presentations
None.
Board Members
There were no changes to the make-up of the Board during FY07. In October officers were
nominated with Michael Larson as Chair and Elizabeth Engel as Vice Chair.
COMPLAINTS
Number and Type of Allegations
Four complaints (06-03, 06-04, 06-05, 06-06) were filed during the fiscal year July 1, 2006 – June 30,
2007. Five public reports were completed during this fiscal period (06-02, 06-03, 06-04, 06-05, 06-
06). The five completed public reports involved 10 allegations.
Allegations
Complaint #06-02
1. Intimidation, Harassment, Threats.
2. Officers refused to allow prayer.
Complaint #06-03
PCRB Annual Report FY 2007 - (Approved 7/10/2007) – 2
1. Personal Conduct.
2. General Conduct on Duty.
Complaint #06-04
1. Inappropriate Behavior.
2. Wrongful Arrest.
Complaint #06-05
1. Unwarranted delay in accomplishing the ticketing and searching tasks.
2. Use of harsh tone of voice, of glaring at the Complainant, of using disrespectful language, of
insulting and degrading the Complainant, and showing prejudice.
Complaint #06-06
1. Retaliation.
2. Destruction of Property.
Level of Review
The Board decided, by simple majority vote, the level of review to give each report, selecting one or
more of the six levels specified in the City Code per complaint:
Level a On the record with no additional investigation 4
Level b Interview or meet with complainant 1
Level c Interview or meet with named officer 1
Level d Request additional investigation by Chief or 1
City Manager, or request police assistance
in the Board’s own investigation
Level e Board performs its own additional investigation 1
Level f Hire independent investigators 0
Complaint Resolutions
The Police Department investigates complaints to the PCRB of misconduct by police officers. The
Police Chief summarizes the results of these investigations and indicates in a report (the Chief’s
Report) to the PCRB whether allegations are sustained or not sustained. (If complaints are made
against the Chief, the City Manager conducts the investigation and prepares and submits the reports.)
The Board reviews both the citizens’ complaint and the Chief’s Report and decides whether its
conclusions about the allegations should be sustained or not sustained. The Board prepares a report
which is submitted to the City Council.
Of the 10 allegations listed in the five complaints for which the Board reported, none were sustained.
The Board made comments and/or recommendations for improvement in police policy, procedures, or
conduct in four of the reports:
Complaint #06-02
The Board feels that the investigative report compiled by the ICPD investigator(s) and the Chief’s
Report is very comprehensive and thorough. The complainant refused to speak with investigators.
It is commented in multiple interview/supplemental reports from VA and UIHC staff that the ICPD
officers were very patient and respectful with the family while attempting to de-escalate the situation
without use of physical means or arrests. No one observed any ICPD officer do anything
disrespectful or inappropriate in action or speech while dealing with the family.
Complaint #06-03
PCRB Annual Report FY 2007 - (Approved 7/10/2007) – 3
The Board wishes that the Chief had addressed formally the allegations of handcuffing and alleged
arrest of a juvenile as listed by the complainant and as stated by the Chief in his cover letter and his
Report to the Board. The Report included investigation regarding these allegations but did not issue
Findings.
Handcuffing and Arrests of Juveniles: The Board recommends a review of OPS-19.1, Juvenile
Procedures, with emphasis on handcuffing of juveniles and arrests of juveniles.
In Car Recording Device Activation: The Board does not concur with the internal investigation
conclusion that no policy violation occurred when no officer activated an in car recording device.
OPS-12, In Car Recording Devices [effective 8/4/1999], section IV, states, “In addition to traffic stops,
officers should manually activate the recording equipment on calls for service and on self initiated field
activity.” According to Merriam-Websters Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition the operant, “should”, is
“used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory” and placed an obligation on the
officer(s) at the scene and involved in the field investigation to activate their recording device(s). The
existence of a visual/audio documentary of the events which transpired during the detention of the
juvenile(s) would have been an invaluable tool for the resolution of PCRB #06-03, if after viewing the
recording of the incident, a complaint had transpired at all.
Disrespectful Commentary: The Board suggests that consideration be given to additional training and
a review of Leg-01, Civil Rights, III-(D)-(2), “Act, speak and conduct themselves in such manner as to
treat all persons with courtesy and with that respect due to every person as a human being.” In the
Investigator’s Report, it was acknowledged by officers at the scene that certain officer(s) did not
exhibit the consummate level of professionalism that is typically exhibited by the members of the
ICPD.
Officer Communication at the Scene: The Investigator’s Report documented conflicting information
among the officers who had direct contact with the juveniles. The Investigator’s report detailed
multiple incorrect assumptions made by officers at the scene due to a lack of communication between
the lead officer and those detaining the juvenile(s). i.e.: “Officer II said he had assumed that Juvenile 2
(Juvenile 1) had been arrested by Officer I, and he searched him incident to the arrest.“
Incident Documentation: The Board concurs with the Chief’s assessment that a review of reporting
requirements is necessary. The Board suggests a review of OPS V., Reporting Use of Force, and
review of LEG-03, Field Interviews and Pat Down Searches, be included in the additional training.
Complaint #06-04
The Board commends the officer(s) involved for activating the in-car recorder so a video could be
reviewed. State law does not require an officer to summon a supervisor upon refusal of a citizen to sign
a citation. State law does require that the seat belt be worn properly.
Complaint #06-05
We commend the Officer involved in this case for activating the in-car camera. The evidence from the
recorded video made it possible for the investigating officers to compare the accusations received from
the Complainant with what was captured by the in-car camera. This Complaint demonstrates the value
of consistent use of the in-car cameras when there is need for later review of actions.
Name-Clearing Hearings
PCRB Annual Report FY 2007 - (Approved 7/10/2007) – 4
The ordinance requires that the Board not issue a report critical of the conduct of a sworn officer until
after a name-clearing hearing has been held. During this fiscal period, the Board scheduled one
name-clearing hearing of which the officer(s) declined.
Mediation
Officers and complainants are notified by mail that formal mediation is available to them at any stage
in the complaint process before the Board adopts its public report. All parties involved must consent to
a request for mediation. No mediations were convened this year.
Complaint Histories of Officers
City ordinance requires that the annual report of the PCRB must not include the names of
complainants or officers involved in unsustained complaints and must be in a form that protects the
confidentiality of information about all parties. Complaints were filed against twelve officers in the five
complaints covered by the FY07 annual report.
ICPD Internal Investigations Logs
The Board reviewed the quarterly ICPD Internal Investigations Log, provided by the Chief of Police.
COMPLAINT DEMOGRAPHICS
The following is demographic information from the five complaints that were completed in this fiscal
year. Because complainants provide this voluntarily, the demographic information is incomplete.
Category/Number of Complainants
Age: National Origin: Color:
Over 21 3 US 1 African American 2
Unknown 2 Unknown 4 Unknown 2
White 1
Sexual Orientation: Gender Identity: Sex:
Heterosexual 0 Unknown 5 Male 2
Unknown 4 Unknown 2
Lesbian 1 Female 1
Marital Status: Religion: Mental Disability:
Single 1 Unknown 4 Unknown 5
Married 1 Baptist 1
Unknown 3
Physical Disability:
Unknown 5
BOARD MEMBERS
Michael Larson, Chair
Elizabeth Engel, Vice Chair
Candy Barnhill
Loren Horton
Greg Roth