Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-19-1999 ArticlesLocal Wednesday, January 13, 1999 Iowa City Press-Citizen City adopts PCRB rules ByTrevor R. Maxwell track complaints against indi- The Press-Citizen vidual officers is fundamental to Despite opposition fr,,)m a the board's chartered purpose: reprcsentativc of Ibc Police to impartially monitor and keep Citizens Review Bom'd, the tabs on citizen complaihts Iowa City Council Tuesday against thepolice. adopted a set of operating pro- He asked the council to cedures for the board, delay a vote on procedures until In a 6-I vote that belied divi- Feb. 11, when a full discussion skin among melnbers, the coun- is scheduled between the coun- cil opted to ciland the PCRB. Iowa City empower a set Council member Dee of lbrmal rules Norton, who originally opposed that include revisions made by adopling the roles, changed his city attorney Eleanor Dilkes. mind because he is concerned However, PCRB co-chair- thai the council and PCRB man John Walson said Ihat could take months to reach some of Dilkes' revisions corn agreemc.; on the specifics of promise the intent of thc board, the rules. Watson also said thc board's "My concern is we would be inlormal set of procedure,, is into st)mc kind of limbo here," working fine. Norton said. "I'm reluctantly 2 "The board was charged going to go along with the city with dralting its own rules," attorney." Watson told thc council, "It is Councilor Kaxen Kubby was grossly inaccurate to state or thc sole member to vote against imply Ihat tho PCRB has been the rules adoption. She said the operating on an ad hoc basis." action is not lhir to the PCRB. The kc>, disputed point: T;.e -It's much more important to bom'd will m*t bo provided with wail and have that discussion thc idcntificalion el officers, belbrc we approve anything," Watson sitid lbo ability 1o size said. public http://www.pr~ssdcmo.com/polandpub/pola~0p ~b~;.html t O i :iiiili':iii !i Police review: Separate approaches .... Here are how each of the Bay Area's eight i~;..Ati~i~iiiii~i~il}~i!il examples of civilian oversight work. ....... :;:;:.~.:~*~'c:~: ':~:: ::: ~:'. By BOB KLOSE ........................ ~ Press Democrat Staff Writer SAN FRANCISCO · Established: 1983 · Complaints in 1997:1,1:26 · Sta~: 30 · Budget: $2.1 million With a population of almost 800,000 and a police forc~ of some 2000 sworn officers, San Francisco leads the area in the number ofdtizen complaints against poli~ officers and the size of the oversight mechanism. The Office of Citizen Complaints, created by voters in 1983, received 1,126 complaints in 1997, each consisting of one or more allegations; 983 cases were resolved and 179 allegations against officers were sustained for misconduct. "We handle complaints ranging from rudeness and invalid traffic tickets to wrongful shootings," said Director Mary Dunlap. "We investigate all shootings that result in death whether there is a complaint or not." Dunlap said the office is an investigative and prosecuting authority. The police chief and civilian Poli~ Commission are the final judges. Most cases in which evidenc~ supports the allegations go to the police chief £or disposition, she said. But when we are seeking dts¢~phn¢ higher than 10 days suspension, we have to go to the Police Commission. Only the commission can fire or suspend for more than 10 days." hO~'d/vo~e.pt'~mo,conl/polandll~b/polandp'abg,llt~ The o~ce ~s subpoena authofi~, and poli~ o~cers ~e required to cooperate ~th the agency or fa~ ~her discipline. Hearings before the cMef~e closed. Co~ssion proce~ings no~ly ~e open to the pubic. Du~ap s~d her o~ce has ex,ned dozens of shoo~gs, ~d tMt ~ at least one case the shooing was found to unjustified ~d the officer resigned. She ~d investigations ~e especi~ly ~pon~t to ~e offi~rs. "It's ve~ importer to exonerate officers when ~e facts do so," she s~d. O~LAND * Establish~: 19~0 * Compl~ts in 199T 4~ ~ St~: 3 * Budget: $397,000 O~d has h~the population ofS~ Fr~cisco, but its Citizens' Polim Rehew Bo~d st~is o~y about 10 percent the s~e of S~ Francisco's Offi~ of Citizen Complains. The oversight body operated for ~ost 14 ye~s ~thout its om ~vestigators, rel~ng on ehdence subdued by ~e po~ dep~ment's om ~temfl ~aks investigation. The counc~ broadened the power ~d ~dependent investigative ~ncfion h 1996 ~er a cfiticfl report by the ACLU ~d P~ple U~ted for a B~ter O~d. The O~d st~ whch investigates complains of excessive fome ~d bias, has one ~ll-t~e ~vestigator ~d is ~ng a second. ~er compl~nts ~e investigated, if the evidence w~ants, ~ses ~e t~en to a ~ne-member cMli~ co~ssion that he~s ~d decides the case ~ public ~d r~o~ends pu~s~ent or po~cy review to the m~ager, who consults Mth the pofice c~ef. The city m~ager is the find authofi~. Investigator N~cy Sc~dt s~d Oared received 43 compl~nts in 1997, ~d ~ne went before the co~ssion. ~legations in t~ee of those ~ses were sustained, she s~d. Four civili~s were sl~n by O~d officers l~t According to Assist~t District Attorney Stacy Wflth~l, htip:/Av~v.prmademo.com/polaMpub/p~;:d p'ab,~..htl public no wrongdoing has been found in any officer-involved shooting for more than I0 years. BERKELEY · Established: 1973 · Complaints in 1997:42 · Staff~ 4 · Budget: $247,000 Berkeley's Police Review Commission is the most public of such agencies in the Bay Area. Hearings are open and the public record remains available for public inspection -- even in cases in which allegations are not sustained. However, the commission's findings are only advisory to the city manager, who with the police chief sets disciplinary measures based on the police department's own internal affairs investigation and the commission information. And the actual disciplinary conseque, nees for the officer, if any, are not public. "That is weakest part of the system," said Director Barbara Attar& The commission, established in 1983 and one of the nation's oldest, is made up of nine civilians appointed by the City Council and the mayor. The commission staffis authorized to investigate complaints and policies and procedures. Cases of deadly fore~ are not automatically investigated, Attard said. Complaints are investigated by staffand submitted to a three-person commission subcommittee called a board of inquiry. Officers and complainants are questioned and cross-examined in a quasi-judicial proceeding, and findings are forwarded to the city manager. Attard said 42 complaints were filed in 1997. Two allegations were sustained. RIC//lVIONI) · Established: 1983 · Complaints in 1997:24 · Staff.' 2 · Budget: $200,000 Richmond's Police Review Commission, established in 1983 by the City Council following several officer-involved shootings, investigates excessive force and race-based disputes. Commission investigator Don Casimere, a former Berkeley police officer, conducts the inquiry and submits his findings to the nine-member commission, which is appointed by the City Council. The commission reaches a conclusion and makes a recommendation to the police chief. If the chief disagrees with the commission recommendation, he submits the issue to the city manager for final disposition. The commission also can review policy. SANTA CRUZ · Established: 1994 · Complaints in 1997:25 · Staff: 1 · Budget: $64,000 The seven-member civilian Santa Cruz Citizen Police Review Board primarily reviews the police department's own internal investigation. Internal affairs investigates citizen complaints and sends its findings to a deputy chief and the Police Review Board for automatic review. Board members discuss the findings in dosed session and send their recommendations to the police chief. The chief weighs both the board's and deputy chief's recommendations and makes a decision. The city manager is final authority. NOVATO · Established: 1992 · Complaints in 1997:10 · Staff: None · Budget: $8,500 Novato's 6-year-old Police Advisory and Review Board, a five-member panel appointed by the City Council, reviews citizen complaints only if the complaining party is not satisfied with an internal affairs investigation and findings. The panel has subpoena power, subject to City Council approval, but has never used it, according to City Manager Pod Wood. ,.~/~ and thc public http://www' PreSsd~m°'c°m/p°landpub/p°l~d trab$'ht Police Chief Brian Brady said the Novato board rarely differs fi.om police investigators. In virtually all the cases, the board agreed with the internal affairs investigation," he said. "In one case we had a minor difference. Internal affairs found one allegation unfounded, The board found that there was no evidence to indicate one way or another." SAN JOSE · Established: 1993 · Complaints in 1997:443 · Staff: 4 * Budget: $320,000 An independent police auditor, paid $110,000 a year and guaranteed job security unless she loses the support of 10 City Council members, provides civilian oversight for the San Jose Police Department. Under the San Jose formula, Teresa G-uerrero-Daley monitors investigations of citizen complaints conducted by internal affairs. "It is as extensive or as superficial as I decide to make it and with the exception of use of force cases, which are all monitored. We review about 60 percent of the rest," she said. San Jose audited 443 cases and sustained 22 allegations last year. Two officers resigned while under investigation, she said. Gerrero-Daley said she takes her findings directly to the police chief and attempts to reach an agreement on disposition. But the police chief has final authority, and if the auditor is not happy with his decision, she can discuss the issue further with the chief and city manager, or go directly to the council, which hires and fires the chief. FAERFIELD · Established: 1997 e Complaints in 1997:35 · Staff: None * Budget: None Internal Affairs investigations are reviewed by a Citizen Complaim Audit Committee that reports to the City Police and tho public http://www.pressdemo.eom/polandpub/polandp.sb~..htmt Council quarterly. Members include one civilian appointee and representatives from the police department and the city manager's office, and a city insurance official, It has no investigative budget. Pollcel Click here to ~o back ~p~ Sibe Inf~ Feedback sub~:ribe Advertir~nS Home Uallas Citizens/Polio© Review Board: Future Plans hltp://w'~av,ci.dallas.tx.us/cso/cprO/t~ture.~tm Dallas Citizens/Police Review Board FUTURE PLANS The Dallas Citizens/Police Review Board will continue to review complaints against Dallas Police Department employees when requested to do so by a citizen. If a citizen is dissatisfied with the results of the Internal Affairs Division or Chain-of-Command investigation, he/she can request a heating to appear before the Review Board. Training classes required by City Ordinance for Board members will be conducted during the program year of October 1998 through September 1999. Future training sessions will be conducted monthly and will include the following topics: A. Judiciary Ethics and Protocol B. The Board's Enabling Ordinance C. Robert's Rules of Order D. lAD and Chain-of-Command Complaint Process/Findings and Parameters E. Deadly Force F. Force Continuum G. Family Violence H. Excited Delirium Additional training will be provided by guest speakers from the following agencies: · North Texas Councel of Government · Dallas Police Association · Texas Trail Lawyers Association The Board will continue to enhance and perfect its operations and procedures. Mission Statement Objective Programs Success Indicators Annual Summary Future Plans Recommendations Schedule Organizational Chart of lq~oxville, Ter~essee, LiSA <PARC> ht~g://www'ci'kn°xville'tn'us/b°~r ?~ s ~ ~'~ re.btm OPTIONS Police Advisory and Review . Committee Carol Scott, Executive Director Mezzanine Level, Civic Coliseum Building - (423) 215-2536 ~ E-mail cscott~..ci.knoxville.tn.~u.s Mayor Victor Ashe established this review committee by executive order in September, 1998~ The purpose of PARC is to strengthen the relationship between the members of the Knoxville Police Department and the citizens they serve through an independent review of police actions. PARC reviews incidents involving police action following the conclusion of the Internal Affairs investigations. Citizen can either register formal Or anonymous complaints with PARC's executive director. Members of PACR are: Ms. Robyn Askew Ms. Bridgett Bailey Rev. Reginald Butler Dr. Joe Johnson Kanu Kenyatta Rev. James McCluskey Sterling Owen, IV Back to Boards & Commissions PaRe UP .PERF Publications: Use of Force, Gun Viol..., Citizen Review and Other Current Issues http://v,a,ca,.policaforum.orWhome/pv~blic/u~cf:,rt~,.html Police Executive Research Forum PERF Publications: Use of Force, Gun Violence, Citizen Review and Other Current Issues How to order a PERF publication Direct any questions about publications to Eugenia Gratto at 202.466.7820. And Justice for All: Understanding and Controlling Police Abuse of Force (William Geller and Hans Toeh, eds., 1995) Product #237, 372 pp. ISBN#: 1-878734-37-7 SALEI Member Price: $26.95 Nonmember Price: $29.95 Police abuse of force is one &the most difficult and painful issues both for citizens interested in polic~ accountability and police departments seeking to forge partnerships with citizens. This collection of essays fi.om leading experts addresses such topics as public opinion about police abuse of force, race-related issues, officer training, prevention strategies, lawsuits, resolution strategies that satisfy both citizens and police, and much more. Citizen Review of the Police, 1994: A National Survey (Samuel Walker and Betsy Wright, 1995) Product #004, 20 pp. SALEI Member Price: $3 Nonmember Price: $4 Citizen review of the police has steadily increased in the United States over the past 25 years. In Citizen Review of the Police, 1994, authors Walker and Wright examine citizen review in the United States, addressing both its prevalence among cities and jurisdictions of various sizes and types of citizen review procedures that now exist. PERF Publications: Use of Force, Gun Viol..., Citizen Review trod Other Current Issues htr p://www.poltc~torum.°r8~ n°mez PU°nc~ u ~c L "t ~'" mu Citizen Review Resource Manual (Samuel Walker, 1995) Product 8802, 424 pp. ISBN#: 1-878734-37-7 · Member Price: $24.95 Nonmember Price: $27.50 As more and more jurisdictions, large and small, establish review committees of community members in an effort to hold the police accountable for their actions, it is crucial that police leaders and policymakers be familiar with the policies and procedures in place across the country. In the Citizen Review Resource Mcmual, author Samuel Walker provides an overview of the state of citizen review today, including a section of ordinances and statutes, executive and department orders, and other documents collected from over 30 police departments nationwide. Deadly Force: What We Know~A Practitioner's Desk Reference on Police-Involved Shootings (William Geller and Michael Scott, 1992) Product #197& 656 pp. (paperback) ISBN8: 1-878734-30-X SALEI Member Price: $23 Nonmember Price: $25.50 Product 8197B, 656 pp. (hardcover) ISBN8: 1-878734-30-X SALEI Member Price: $29 Nonmember Price: $32.00 Published in 1992, Deadly Force remains the most comprehensive volume of information about police-involved shootings, compiling data from hundreds of research studies conducted over the past 30 years. Its 187 detailed graphs and tables highlight the most important findings from prior landmark research and present such previously unpublished information as national FBI data on justifiable homicides by police and data from a dozen major American cities on all shots fired from 1970 through 1991. The book also provides data and practical advice on such critical issues as shootings of cops by "friendly fire," justifying actions to local officials, averting a civil disorder at, er a controversial shooting, creating sound policies and reducing civil liability. The Force Factor: Measuring Police Use of Force Relative to Susp'ect Resistance (Geoff Alpert and Roger Dunham, 1997) Product 8821, 28 pp. ISBN 8:1-878734-52-0 Member Price: $5 Nonmember Price: $5.50 In The Force Factor, authors AIpert and Dunham present a new concept for evaluating use-of-force incidents. The "force factor" is a simple mathematical calculation that measures the difference between the level of force used by police and the level of suspect resistance. Using existing use-of-force data from three police departments, the authors illustrate the force factor concept and outline its potential use as an evaluative and policy-guiding tool for police managers. This paper is a new addition to PERF's "Research and Evaluation" series. ~ o1~3 V,~'q9 3:34 PM p EI>.F Pubhcatlons: Use of Force, Gun Viol..., Cttlzcn Review and Other Current Issues 11 ttp;// w ww.ponc~tot urn.ut i~ ssum~, puon~ u ,~ ~ .~,., .,,,,~,, Police Use of Force: A Statistical Analysis of the Metro-Dade Police Department (Geoffrey P. Alpert and Roger G. Dunham, 1995) Product #801, 44 pp. ISBN#: 1-878734-38-5 Member Price: $5.95 Nonmember Price: $6.50 Police Use of Force focuses on both purposeful and accidental firearms discharges in the Metro-Dare, Fla., Police Department between 1988 and June 1994. Presented largely in tabular format, the data are organized to compare variables such as the weapons used, training of officers involved, the situations in which shootings occurred, and characteristics of involved officers and suspects. The study not only provides a detailed picture of pollce shootings in one metropolitan area, but also illustrates the value of' statistical research in helping police departments to make policy decisions. Police professionals and policymakers interested in analyzing their own departments' use-of-force policies and practices will find this study a useful tool. Toy Guns: Involvement in Crime & Encounters with Police (David L. Carter, Allen D. Sapp and Darrel W. Stephens, 1990) Product #163, 50 pp. ISBN#: 1-878734-21-0 Member Price: $5 Nonmember Price: $5.50 Toy guns are not just kid stuff. According to a PERF survey of n~arly 700 large pblice agencies, a significant number of crimes have been committed with such toy weapons as Uzi-style water guns. Toy Guns: Involvement in Crime & Encounters with Police summarizes the results of this extensive survey, assesses the severity of the problem and details the dynamics of typical toy gun incidents. Under Fire: Gun Buy-Backs, Exchanges and Amnesty Programs (Martha Plotkin, ed., 1996) Product #805, 234 pp. ISBN#: 1-878734-47-4 Member Price: $18.95 Nonmember Price: $21 Frustrated by gun violence, communities nationwide have turned to gun buy-backs, exchanges and amnesty programs to address gun-related crime. But are these programs effective? What outcomes should be measured to determine their success? How do they fit into the larger issue of violence prevention? Under Fire is the first publication to bring together the views of researchers, community organizers, police practitioners, and public health professionals to assess how gun buy-backs, exchanges and amnesty programs are promoted, implemented, evaluated, and pemeived. R~: Gloc .ks & Polic~ - Seek Information .... v ........... o~--w v-~ Re: Glocks & Police - Seek Information Nel Orig±nal Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 00:$4:02 -0700 {PDT) >Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 07:28:51 -0700 >From: Aaron Handel <aaron@dsp.com> >To: Michael Hovick <ranov±ckttt@~gc.or~> >Subject: Re: Glocks & Police - Seek Information > >Following an accidental shooting of a citizen by a Berkeley police >officer using the Glock, the Police Review Commission called for the >replacement of Glocks with a safer handgun. Today BPD uses the Smith and >Wesson revolver. Police use of the Glock is not permitted. > >Aaron Handel >Chair, Police Review Commission, City of Berkeley > > In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. Be PART of the solution -- People Against Racist Terror/PO Box 1055/Culver City CA 90232-1055/ 310-288-5003/ Order our journal: "Turning the Tide." The unjust verdict on Geronimo has been reversed! Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! Free All P.O.W.'s and Political Prisoners! Abolish the Racist Death Penalty! Keywords: cops The CCPA Story Home CCPA Sto~ The Concerned Citizens for Police Accountability was formed September 4, 1997 in the wake of two controversial police shootings which killed Ryan Hcnnessey age 20 What are your and Justin Atkinson, age 21. John and Patricia Billington, stepfather and mother of Rights? Ryan Hennessey formed the organization shortly after they attended a N-COP& National Coalition tbr Police Accountability conference at Temple University in Stories: Local Philadelphia. On a local level in Boise, Idaho law enforcement claimed no wrong & National doing when an offduty detective fatally shot their unarmed intoxicated son on November 6th, 1996. The Billingtons attended the conference looking for answers for Complaint their concerns on police accountability and whether such a thing exists. What they Center discovered was that there are many organizations across the nation already working in the field of police accountability through citizen review of law administration and Donations & the promotion of progressive law enforcement Membership Mission Statement: Concerned Citizens for Police Accountability (CCPA) is an Loss of Life organization of religious, community, and legal groups as well as progressive law Stories enforcement representatives working to hold police accountable to their communities through public education, community organizing, legislation, litigation, and the Suggestions promotion of empowered civilian oversight. N-Copa NACOLE Women in Policing A Positive Note: Similar Links: video clips Idaho Police Facts How dan~gerous is it? Education NACOLE Home CCPA Stop/ National Association for Civilian What are your P hts? Oversight of Law Enforcement Stories: Local & National Complaint 1997 Conference Center Donations & "Civilian Oversight-Advancing the Blueprint for Membership Change". Loss of Life Stories At the invitation of the ACLU and the CCPA, a small Suggestions delegation of Boisians attended the National Association N-Copa for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement's,(NACOLE) 3rd annual conference last October in Oakland, NACOLE California. One hundred and six people from nineteen Women in states attended the conference. Boise law enforcement Policing representatives were Lt. Jim Tibbs, BPD and Lt. Jim A Positive Maxson, BPD. The CCPA sponsored two former Ada Note: County Sheriffs, Chuck Palmer and Myron Gilbert (see Similar Links: Myron Gilbert's letter at end). Representing the Boise video clips City Council was Pauta Forney. Also attending were Jack Van Valkenburgh, executive director of the ACLU ~ of Idaho and John Billington, president and co-founder of the CCPA. NACOLE provides practitioners of civilian oversight ldahoPo~ice with the opportunity to dialogue and exchange Facts information on questionable and unacceptable actions of How law enforcement personnel. The NACOLE organization dangerous is is endorsed by the International Association for Civilian it? it~? Oversight of Law Enforcement, (IACOLE). ICAOLE Educationheld its annual conference last September in Ottawa, Information Canada. One hundred and eighty-six delegates (many Law snots from the United States) from twenty-two countries (settlements) attended. The NACOLE conference in which Boise Curre.t Po~ioe delegates attended was beneficial to participants by complaint proocan~es providing exposure to critical law enforcement issues shaping our future as well as giving attendees opportunities to meet and share ideas with leaders in Civilian Oversight. Attendees learned that every city which has implemented a review commission has a different spin, however it was unanimous that the citizens themselves, council people and law enforcement need to be an equal partnership in regard to truth and Please sign respect for the review commission to work. guest book View on~ Another key point from the conference was that the guest book police department maintain a pro-active not reactive Copyright© attitude and that the police chief must retain the power 1996-97 Findusat.com todiscipline his officers despite inevitable union All rights interference. reserced. Sponsored by Findusat.com Letter: Former Ada County Sheriff Myron Gilbert returned from the conference and expressed his concern with this letter to the Boise City Council: This is in response to your invitation to provide the Council with information regarding the strangle hold the Boise Police Union has upon the Police Department. As we discussed last week, I believe the opportunity exists at this very small window in time to bring an end to their out of control reign. Over time, the Union Contract has been expanded to include certain seemingly harmless benefits that have rendered the Chief of Police powerless to properly manage his department. The inability to assign officers to shifts at the discretion of the Chief is only one of the problems tying his hands. Sergeants who should be part of management are members of the Union rendering their usage practically worthless in terms of enforcing discipline. It stands to reason that if former Chief Church was unable to discipline or fire rogue cops back in 1982 that little has been done in the interim period to change things for the better. Those officers whom Chief Church described as brutes became the teachers of new officers who are more likely to emulate the actions of the tough cops or meat eaters, (as ! like to describe them) instead of the instructions they are given in academies such as POST. Sometimes the meat eaters even find their way into teaching positions in the academies. Chief Church ordered his officers to send back what he considered to be objectionable training films supplied by the Union and not use them in the future. These films tend to exaggerate danger to officers and teach them methods more suitable for use by an invading army that those for use in dealing with the citizens in your community. After Church resigned it is likely that they went back to using these types of training films; some of the recent happenings would tend to support that theory. I was appalled to witness upon my return to the valley, police officers demonstrating in front of City Hall. This is certainly not the proper behavior of those sworn to protect and to serve. (CICA (Nacol¢) http://,ax~vccpa-ldaho.coln:nacolchmlt As a former proud member of the Boise Police Department, I hope you will take the necessary steps to bring discipline back to a great Police Department. It will never be great again until the Union strange hold is released. The citizens of Boise will applaud you for your courage if you take this stand and give us back a Police Department worthy of our respect. Respectfully, Myron Gilbert Former member Boise Police Department Former Sheriff Ada County (three terms) Former Deputy Ada County Sheriff, Inspector rank under E.C. Palmer (1972-1984). Wickersham <ommission, Part 1 http://www.upapubs.com/guides/wiekersham.htm University Publkaflons of America Copyright © 1997 by University Publications of America. All rights reserved. Records of the Wickershaln Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement Part 1: Records of the Committee on Official Lawlessness · Introduction · Scope and Content Note · Note on Sources · Editorial Note [This item added to Web December, 1997.] Introduction The production of the 1931 Report o. Law/ess. ess i. Law Enforceme.t by the Wickersham Commission is one of the most important events in the history of American policing. It was the first systematic investigation of police misconduct and became a catalyst for reforms involving new forms of accountability for the police. 1 The Report on Law/ess.ess in Law Enforcement was one of the fourteen reports published by the National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, known popularly as the Wickersham Commission. The commission conducted the first national study of the administration of justice in the United States and was a precursor to the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (1965-1967), popularly known as the President's Crime Commission.2 The material in this collection, involving the original files of the Committee on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement, will be of interest to scholars specializing in a wide variety of subjects, including the history of law enforcement, criminal justice, and criminal procedure, as well as urban history, labor history. American race relations, and the administration of President Herbert Hoover. The Wickersham Commission The National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement was appointed by President Herbert Hoover on May 20, 1929. It completed its work and published Wickersham C~)mmission, Part 1 hap://www'upapubs'c°m/suides/wickersham'htm fourteen reports in June 1930.3 The commission was chaired by George W. Wickersham, who had served as U.S. attorney general under President William Howard Taft. The other ten members included some of the most prominent individuals in American law and public life. Most notable was Roscoe Pound, dean of Harvard Law School and widely regarded as the leading expert on American criminal justice. Also serving on the commission were Newton D. Baker, a leading urban reformer during the Progressive Era and secretary of war under President Woodrow Wilson, and Frank J. Loesch, a prominent Chicago attorney and leader of the Chicago Crime Commission, who had led the fight to prosecute Al Capone. The fourteen reports of the Wickersham Commission covered the following subjects: Prohibition; Enforcement of the Prohibition Laws of the United States; Criminal Statistics; Prosecution; Enforcement of the Deportation Laws of the United States; the Child Offender in the Federal System of Justice and the Federal Courts; Criminal Procedure; Penal Institutions, Probation, and Parole; Crime and the Foreign Born; the Cost of Crime; the Causes of Crime (two volumes); and the Police. A fourteenth report, on the controversial Mooney-Billings case, was submitted to the commission but not officially published. It is presently available in a reprint edition.4 Origins of the Wickersham Commission The Wickersham Commission was the result of three different factors. First, it represented an attempt by President Hoover to find a solution to the vexing problem of Prohibition enforcement, which had deeply divided the country and the Republican Party in particular.5 Second, it was an expression of Hoover's technocratic approach to governing. An engineer by training, he had a deep faith in the capacity of a democratic society to master social problems by mobilizing and applying scientific expertise. In this respect, he had more in common with the pre-World War I Progressives than with the postwar conservative Republicans (Presidents Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge) with whom he is generally associated.6 Crime had begun to emerge as a national problem in the late 1920s, in part because of the problems associated with Prohibition enforcement and the publicity surrounding gang "wars" in Chicago and other cities.7 Hoover believed that a scientific study of crime and the administration of justice would help to solve both a general social problem and a specific political problem for him and his party. Third, the Wickersham Commission was the logical outgrowth 0fthe crime commission movement that had appeared in the 1920s.8 The Cleveland Survey of Criminal Justice, which published its report in 1922, served as the model for the Wickersham Commission.9 Codirected by Roscoe Pound (who later served on the Wickersham Commission) and Felix Frankfurter, the Cleveland Survey was unique in two important respects. First, it aspired to be an objective, scientific study of the administration of justice. There had been many investigations of criminal justice in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but they had been essentially partisan efforts to expose existing problems and to identify the corrupt and evil persons who were responsible. The Chicago Crime Commission, established in 1919, functioned as a 2 o[' lO I/t 1199 '., ',:4S :\M Wickersham C,ommission, Part 1 http://www.upapubs.com/guidos/wiokersham.htm "watchdog" of local criminal justice issues and did not have the social science aspirations of the Cleveland Survey. Unlike previous efforts, the Cleveland Survey undertook the study of an entire local criminal justice system from the police through local penal institutions. The 1926 Missouri Crime Survey applied this approach to the state level, encompassing county sheriffs and the state prison and parole systems. 10 The Wickersham Commission extended this approach to the national level. In addition to the three major components of the criminal justice system (police, courts, and corrections), it investigated new areas, such as theoretical criminology, criminal statistics, and the costs of crime. The Wickersham Commission Reports and Their Impact With one exception, the reports of the Wickersham Commission had little immediate impact on public policy. That one exception was the Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement, which is discussed in detail below. The work of the Wickersham Commission was overtaken by events. By the time the reports were published in 1931, the United States was in the second year of the Great Depression. The president and the Congress were preoccupied with the problem of economic recovery and had little time and energy for the reform of the administration of justice. 11 Prohibition, which had prompted President Hoover to create the commission in the first place, was repealed in 1933 despite the fact that the deeply divided commission recommended against this step. 12 In several important respects, however, the commission's reports did have long-term effects on the understanding of crime and criminal justice. The Report on Penal Institutions, Probation, andParole signaled an important shift in thinking about the treatment of convicted offenders. In the 1920s, there was a powerful public backlash against the optimistic, rehabilitation-oriented reforms of the Progressive Era. The Missouri Crime Survey in particular expressed the widespread public and professional disillusionment with parole and the sense that the criminal justice system was failing to adequately punish criminal offenders. 13 The Report on Penal Institutions, Probation, andParole gave both probation and parole strong endorsement and marked the revival of an optimistic belief that effective programs for the correctional treatment of offenders could be developed. 14 This new movement slowly gained ground in professional circles over the next few decades and achieved fruition in the 1960s, most notably in the work of the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. t 5 The Report on Prosecution is particularly significant in that it came close to articulating a "systems" approach to the administration of justice. 16 Beginning with the Cleveland Survey, the early crime commissions approached justice agencies as part of an interrelated system but did not have a conceptual framework that would explain the processes and problems they examined. The "systems" paradigm, which now dominates professional thinking about the administration of justice, was developed by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. 17 The Report on Prosecution marked a tentative step in the direction of this intellectual development but one that went unfulfilled for over three decades. Wickersham Commission, part i htlp://www.upapubs.com/guides/wickersham.htm The two-volume Report on the Causes of Crime marked the coming-of-age of American criminology. The scientific study of crime originated in Europe in the nineteenth century and did not begin to engage American scholars until just before World War I. The field blossomed in the 1930s, most notably with the work of urban sociologists at the University of Chicago. The Wickersham Commission gave a strong endorsement to the sociological approach to the study of crime, explicitly noting the limitations of psychological and other approaches. 18 The second part of the Report on the Causes of Crime was devoted to Clifford R. Shaw and Henry D. McKay's study of "Social Factors in Juvenile Delinquency," which became a highly influential work in the field. 19 Thus, the Wickersham Commission played a major role in shaping the development of the field of criminology in the United States. The Report on Criminal Statistics was the focus of a major controversy over the development of a national system of crime data. The work of the Wickersham Commission coincided with the development of the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) system under the control of the Bureau of Investigation (later the Federal Bureau of Investigation). Key Wickersham Commission figures, notably Roscoe Pound and Harvard Law Professor Samuel B. Warner, had serious criticisms of the new UCR system.20 Their arguments did not prevail, however, and the UCR system was established and remained essentially unchanged for decades. The Report on Criminal Statistics, therefore, should be read in the context of this debate over the development of a national crime data system. The Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement Origins The origins of the Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement remain somewhat of a mystery.21 While police misconduct was undoubtedly a serious problem in 1929 and had been for nearly a century,22 there was no political constituency with any strength at the national level demanding a federal investigation. The principal interest groups and organizations concerned with the problem of police misconduct were small and extremely weak. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was small, with little political influence, and still operated under the cloud of suspicion that "free speech" was a dangerous radical concept.23 The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) was also small and lacking in political influence. In 1929, its era of great impact on American law and life lay years in the future.24 Finally, the labor movement was in serious disrepair by the late 1920s, reeling under the impact ora concerted antilabor campaign by the business community. Consequently, it does not appear that the Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement was the result of conventional interest group lobbying. Had the commission not undertaken this particular report it is likely that few people would have noticed, much less complained. It is worth pointing out that the crime commissions (i.e., Cleveland, Missouri) were silent on the subject of police misconduct. It is entirely possible that the commission undertook this particular investigation out of a conventional sense of "good government." Adding somewhat to the mystery surrounding the origins of the Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement is the identity of the three consultants who prepared it: Zechariah Chafee Jr., Walter H. Pollak, and Carl S. Stern. All three were closely identified with ,; of 10 U1 !/99 11:48 AM Wickersham Commission, part I http:/~www.upapubs.¢om/guides/wickersl~am.htm civil liberties issues. Chafee's book, Freedom of Speech (1920) defined the field of free speech law for a generation and was a severe critique of the Supreme Court's major decisions denying the free speech rights of antiwar dissenters.25 Conservative Harvard alumni had, in fact, attempted to have him fired for his allegedly radical views on free speech. Walter Pollak, meanwhile, was closely associated with the ACLU, and on behalf of the organization had argued the case ofGitlow v. New York before the Supreme Court in 1925.26 Thus, he too must have appeared to many establishment figures as dangerously radical. Carl Stem was an attorney with civil liberties concerns. It was precisely the civil liberties orientation of the three consultants that shaped the report. They were sensitive to abuses of power by government officials and believed that formal legal controls were both necessmy and proper. Thus, they designed a study that was prepared to investigate the worst allegations of police misconduct and give credence to reports of its existence. This view was noticeably out of step with conventional views expressed in other crime commission reports of the period. The Wickersham Commission Report on Criminal Procedure, for example, expressed little concern for police abuse of citizens and emphasized the need to free police arrest authority from procedural restraints.27 The 1929 Illinois Crime Survey adopted that view.28 It should also be noted that Chafee, Pollak, and Stem prepared the report on the controversial Mooney-Billings case, which the commission declined to publish.29 The Report and Its Impact In uncompromising language, the Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement concluded that "It]he third degree--that is, the use of physical brutality, or other forms of cruelty, to obtain involuntary confessions or admissions--is widespread. ,30 Specific tactics included protracted questioning, threats and methods of intimidation, physical brutality, illegal detention, and refusal to allow access of counsel to suspects. The report declared unequivocally that "the third degree is a secret and illegal practice."31 The documentation assembled by the consultants and their staft'was impressive in several respects. First, there was rich detail from both participants and observers. Second, the survey was national in scope, with detailed evidence from fifteen cities across the country. Only the southeastern region was not represented, an unfortunate omission that undoubtedly lef~ one pattern of race discrimination unexamined. Third, the consultants considered arguments denying the existence of these abuses and, in light of conflicting evidence, rejected them. The report had an immediate and direct impact on American policing. Police officials angrily denounced the report and denied its findings. With the exception of the issue of Prohibition, no other commission report received the same degree of public attention. Despite the response of police officials, the report put the problem of police misconduct on the national agenda and pointed policymakers in the direction of reform. 32 One of the curious aspects of the report, however, is the extremely brief and vague discussion of possible remedies. There is no separate section labeled "remedies," and the discussion appears virtually as an afterthought. The report concludes that law Wickersham Commission, Part I http://www.upapubs.com/guides/wickersham.htm cannot really solve the problem of lawlessness and that the solution ultimately depends on the "will of the community." This, in effect, represents a "good government" or "concerned citizen" approach to the problem. The brevity and vagueness of the suggested remedies may well have been the result of a political compromise. As noted above, the basic thrust of the report was out of step with the dominant thinking on the subject and even the commission's own Report on Criminal Procedure. It is likely that the strong indictment of official lawlessness in the body of the report was stronger medicine than the commission had been prepared for and that it was unwilling to propose reforms that, in the context of the period, would have been extremely controversial. Several events in the years following publication of the report suggest its impact on police reform First, a new generation of police executives emerged in the 1930s.33 The leader of this group was O. W. Wilson, prot~g6 of August Vollmer who had been the foremost leader of the police professionalization movement. Far more than the first generation of reformers, Wilson's generation was willing to address the issue of police abuse of citizens, and one of the results was the appearance of the first formal internal affairs units designed to investigate police misconduct and to receive citizen complaints about abuse.34 The publicity surrounding the Wickersham Commission report undoubtedly strengthened the hand of these chiefs in dealing with this problem. Perhaps even more important, the Supreme Court in the 1930s took the first tentative steps in the direction of imposing constitutional standards on the criminal justice system. The watershed was the 1932 decision in Powell v. Alabama (argued not coincidentally by Waiter Pollak).35 Although it did not relate to policing, the decision clearly signaled that the Court was prepared to scrutinize criminal justice practices for possible constitutional violations.36 Four years later, the Court overturned the conviction of an African American suspect in Mississippi whose confession had been brutally coerced? In the 1960s, the Court emerged as one of the principal instruments of reform with respect to police misconduct.38 The famous decisions of this period had their roots in the work of the Wickersham Commission's Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement. The Value of the Report on Lawlessness Files The materials in this collection of original papers of the committee to investigate lawlessness in law enforcement have great potential value for historians working in a wide variety of fields. As indicated earlier, these fields include the history of the police, criminal justice, and criminal procedure, as well as urban history, labor history, American race relations, and the Hoover administration. First, the materials offer some insight into the thinking of the consultants. As the previous section suggested, the Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement represented a very different perspective on police problems from the one that dominated other Wickersham Commission reports and the reports of other crime commissions. The materials here may provide insights into how the consultants defined the problem, designed their investigation, and interpreted the data. Second, the materials provide rich firsthand descriptions of local police practices. The Wickersham Commission, Part I hUp://www.upapubs.eom/guides/wiekersham.htm most valuable materials are the interviews with individuals in different cities. These individuals included current and former police officials, current and former judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys, law professors, and journalists. The interviews contain richly detailed accounts of such practices as "cold storage," the practice of detaining arrested persons incommunicado for days. These materials offer insights not just into local police departments but also into the local criminal courts, the legal profession, and municipal politics. Third, urban historians researching particular cities investigated by the consultants (e.g, Buffalo, Seattle, and others) may find useful material related to local social and political issues. Fourth, because so much police lawlessness was directed at the poor, at racial minorities, at labor union activists, and at members of radical political groups, historians with interests in these subjects will find the materials extremely valuable. Fifth, these materials offer a fresh perspective on the struggle to curb police misconduct. In large part because the great breakthroughs in this struggle eventually occurred in the U.S. Supreme Court (notably the Warren Court decisions in Mapp v. Ohio and Miranda v. Arizona), historians (including this author) have tended to write the story exclusively in terms of the Court. As a result, the early history of this struggle has vanished from the record. In a similar fashion, the history of freedom of speech has focused on post-1919 developments in the Supreme Court and neglects pre-World War I developments.39 The materials in this collection (press clippings, citations to court decisions, summaries of relevant state statutes) clearly indicate that the problem of police misconduct was a major issue at the local level prior to the historical breakthroughs in the Supreme Court. They may prove valuable in recapturing the role that issue played in local politics during this earlier period and its relationship to issues of justice, class, and race. Samuel Walker Professor, Department of Criminology University of Nebraska at Omaha Notes 1. Samuel Walker, Popular Justice: A History of American Criminal Justice, 2d ed., rev. (New York: O,,d'ord University Press, 1997), 154-157. 2. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967). 3. James D. Calder, The Origins and Development of Federal Crime Control Policy: Herbert Hoover's Initiatives (Westport: Praeger, 1993), chap. 4. 4. Wickersham Commission Reports (Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smith, 1968); Curt Gentry, Frame-Up: The Incredible Case of Tom Mooney and Warren Billings (New York: Norton, 1967). 5. Calder, Origins of Federal Critne Control Policy. 6. Joan Hoff-Wilson, Herbert Hoover: Forgotten Progressive [1975] (Prospect Hts., IL: Waveland Press, 1992). 7. Walker, Popular Justice, 157-161. 8. Walker, Popular Justice, 152-154. Virgil W. Peterson, Crime Commissions in the United States (Chicago: Clficago Crflne Conmfission, 1945). 9. Cleveland Survey of Criminal Justice, Criminal Justice in Cleveland (Cleveland: The Cleveland Foundation, 1922). 10. Missouri Association for Criminal Justice, The Missouri Crime Survey (New York: Macmillan, Wickcrsham Commission, Part I hnp://www.upapubs.~om/guides/wiekersham.htm 1926). 11. But see Calder, Origins of Federal Crime Control Policy. 12. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Report on the Enforcement of the Prohibition Laws in the United States (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931). 13. Missouri Association for Criminal Justice, Missouri Crime Survey; Walker, Populardustice, 153-154. 14. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Penal Institutions, Probation, and Parole (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931). 15. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, Challenge of Crime in a Free Society. 16. Samuel Walker, "Origins of the Contemporary Criminal Justice Paradigm: The American Bar Foundation Survey, 1953-1969," dustice Quarterly 9 (March 1992): 47-76. 17. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, Task Force Report: Science and Technology (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967). 18. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, The Causes of Crime, vol. 1 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931). 19. Ibid., vol. 2. 20. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Report on Criminal Statistics (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931); Calder, Origins and Development of Federal Crime Control Policy. 21. The most detailed account of the Wickersham Commission does not explore this issue: Calder, Origins of Federal Crime Control Policy, chap. 4. 22. Samuel Walker, A Critical History of Police Reform: The Origins of Professionalism (Lexington: Lexington Books, 1977); Wilbur R. Miller, Cops and Bobbies: Police Authority in New York and London, 1830-1870 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977). 23. Samuel Walker, In Defense of American Liberties: A History of the ACLU (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990). 24. Mark V. Tushnet, Making Civil Rights Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994). 25. Zechariah Chnfee, Freedom of Speech (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1920). 26. Louis H. Pollak, "Advocating Civil Liberties: A Young Lawyer Before the Old Court," Harvard CiviI Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 17 (Spring 1982): 1-30; Gitlowv. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925). 27. National Commission on Lmv Observance and Enforcement, Report on Criminal Procedures (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931 ). 28. Illinois Association for Criminal Justice, Illinois Crime Su~,ey [1929] (Montclalr, NJ: Patterson Smith, 1968). 29. Wickersham Commission Reports, Mooney-Billings Report (Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smifll, 1968). 30. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 193 I), 4. 31. Ibid., 21. 32. Walker, Popular dustice, 155-157. 33. Robert Fogelson, Big City Police (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1977). 34. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, Task Force Report: The Police (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967). 35. Powellv. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932). 36. Yale Kamisar, Police Interrogations and Confessions (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1980), 95-112. 37. Richard C. Cortner, A "Scottsboro" Case in Mississippi: The Supreme Court and Brown v. Mississippi (Jackson: University of Mississippi, 1986). 38. Walker, Popular ffustice. 39. See, especially, David Rabban, Free Speech in Its Forgotten Years (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997). Scope and Content Note This edition reproduces five of the six series of records of the Committee on Official Lawlessness on deposit at the National Archives. Each of these separate series is clearly indicated in the Reel Index portion of the microfilm guide. The first series, the Wickersham Comlnission Part I http://www.upapubs.com/guidcs/'Mckershara,htm Subject File of Research Materials, is by far the largest. This spans Reds 1 through 12 of the microfilm. The major subjects documented in the series include arrests, bail, entrapment, evidence, search and seizure, third degree practices, wiretapping, foreign law enforcement, immigration, deportation, labor, lawlessness by police and state police, and lawlessness by officials, including bondsmen, U.S. commissioners, coroners, detectives, Department of Justice and Customs Department agents, federal and state district attorneys, judges, and magistrates. There are also files on state bar associations; Prohibition and Prohibition killings; unfair prosecutions; personal rights; class prejudice against aliens, negroes, and radicals; freedom of motion; freedom of the press; remedies (for official lawlessness); violence and intimidation; police brutality; prosecution reports; and third degree reports. The subject files contain much of the research data that the committee used in draining its reports to the full Wickersham Commission. Several of the draft reports themselves are reproduced on Reel 12. The subject files typically contain four kinds of data. Bibliographies provide lists and in some cases digests of scholarship, which the committee staffand members compiled. Newspaper clippings provide a record of contemporary events concerning the subject. Interviews provide transcripts of testimony obtained through conversations with professionals and observers in the criminal justice system from many cities around the United States. Miscellaneous files contain primary documents such as reports, rulings, and statutes governing the respective subject. The larger subject files devote separate folders to each type of document; the smaller subject files often combine them or include only one or two kinds of data. Among the most valuable files are the interviews, which contain candid observations by persons knowledgeable of official lawlessness in the criminal justice system. These interviews were conducted by journalist Ernest Hopkins. An apparently complete set of the interviews appears on Reel 11 beginning at frame 0342. The subject files contain reproductions of those portions of the interviews that pertain to the subject. Many of Hopkins' findings proved to be controversial and some were vigorously disputed by officials in the localities he investigated. A separate series of the collection, called "Letters Sent," includes correspondence both challenging and defending the integrity of Hopkins' interviews. The Letters Sent series begins on frame 0087 of Red 15. This series also includes background correspondence on administration of the Wickersham Commission, including recruitment of the staff, methodology of the research, and the wisdom of investigating extensively the Mooney-Billings case, as well as on several of the areas covered by the subject files. Although there is information in both the Subject File series and the Letters Sent series about the Mooney-Billings prosecution, this famous case is the subject of a separate series beginning on frame 0001 of Reel 13. This series, which covers all of Reel 13 and half of Reel 14, documents extensively the determination of certain commissioners, most notably Zechariah Chafee Jr., to investigate the prosecution, conviction, and denial of criminal appeals of labor radicals Tom Mooney and Warren Billings for the bombing of a pro-British Preparedness Day parade in San Francisco in 1916. The series reveals that a majority of the commission disagreed with the need to conduct a major investigation of this case, and the commission refused to issue the final report on the case as one of its official documents. The report was published privately and contributed to the pardon of Tom Mooney from a Califomia prison. There is extensive Wickersha? {2ommission, Part 1 hitp://www.upapubs.eom/guides/wickersham.htm correspondence to the commission from Mooney at Folsom Prison. A fourth series of the collection is State Statutes. This series begins on frame 0492 of Reel 14 and it compiles statutes of states, along with the District of Columbia and the Territory of Hawaii, and the federal code that governed criminal procedures in 1930, including arrest, bail, search and seizure, third degree practices, taking [a suspect] before a magistrate, right to counsel, and wiretapping. The fifth series in this microfilm collection is a single file of correspondence called the General File. It includes correspondence on several instances of official lawlessness and on criminal appeals based on allegations of official lawlessness. A sixth series from the original collection, Financial Records, was not filmed for this collection. The series contains vouchers and payments for routine office expenses. Researchers may also want to consult Records of the Wickersham Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Part 2: Research Reports and General Subject Files. This companion edition includes the research files for the entire commission. Note on Sources The records microfilmed for this edition were selected in consultation with Professor Samuel Walker, Department of Criminal Justice, University of Nebraska at Omaha. Each file has been microfilmed in its entirety. Editorial Note This edition is drawn from National Archives Record Group 10, Records of the National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, College Park, Maryland. ~ ~ Catalog Publications Publications Service I1 Link__s II ~orm Local Tuesday, January 12, 1999 Iowa City Press-Citizen City, PCRB spar on rules By Trover R. Maxwell roles need immediate clarifica- The Press-Citizen tion. The Iowa City Council like- "There may be only ofi;e ly will adopt tonight an over- complaint pending, but what:If hauled set of we get five tomorrow? saJtl Dilkes. She said it is importam Iowa City operating pro- cedures for the to get the rules in place, "even if Police Citizens Review Board we have to change them down -- a move that frustrates PCRB the readY members who say their opin- Council members Mike ions are being overlooked. O'Donnell, Dean Thomberry, The formal set of guidelines, Dee Vanderhoef and Mayor which include revisions sug- Emie Lehman voted to make a gested by city attorney Eleanor decision tonight, and then make Dilkes, would update the work- any necessary changes after the lng roles that have been evolv- Feb. 11 meeting. ing since the PCRB's inception Karen Kubby, Conni[ in 1997. Champion and Dee Nortott But PCRB members told the voted to defer any decision~ council Monday that Dilkes' until a full discussion. revisions compromise the The rift between the cit1' board's purpose. They asked the attorney's office and the PCRt} council to wait until Feb. I I, formed because the bodies dis, when a full discussion between agree on how the board shoul~ the council and the PCRB is operate. scheduled. Dilke~ and Police Chief R..~ "There is no compelling rea- Winkelhake recommended son for immediate action;' said November that the PCRB com,t PCRB co-chairman John Watson. plaint process be changed so th~ "It is just not right to make board would not have access t* changes without discussion." officer's names of ~dentffytnl~ Dilkes and council members information. in support of adopting rules PCRB members, howeve~ quickly said the council could say that the ability to track com{ not wait until mid-February, plaints against office,rs is funda~ Because the PCRB deals with mental to the board s intend~l controversial issues, they said, watcb-~icg role. The Gazette, Cedar Rapids, iowa: Tues., Jan. 12, 1999 Council likely adopt rules for police board By Jim Jacobson eanor Di]kes that the board Gazette Johnsop County Bureau needs to be operating under IOWA CITY -- Over the an official policy. objections of the Police Citi- "There's not one thing that zens Review Board, the City can't be changed in Febru- Council is expected tonight to ary," when the board and ihe adopt official rules for how the council are scheduled to meet, 16-month-old board does busi- said council member Mike ness. O'Donnell. At last night's council work In addition to Vanderhoef and O'Donnell, council mem- IOWA CITY her Dean Thornberry and Mayor Ernie Lehman said session, board Vice Chairman they favor voting on the John Watson asked the coun- board's operating procedures cil to delay a vote until board and incorporating changes and council members could Dilkes has recdmmended to discuss their differences about them. the so-called Standard Operat- For the most part, members lng Procedures. of the review board and Dilkes "We're your appointed agree on how the board should board. We ask that you listen operate, but two points remain to us," Watson said. contentious. Council member Dee Van- Watson said board members derhoef reflected the majority disagree with Dilkes about viewpoint when she said she agreed with City Attorney El- · Turn to 3B: Iow~' Cit~ Iowa City: Board wants to be able to track officers' behavior · From page lB whether complainants should be al- Until recently, each officer on the a very important power, Watson said. lowed to appear and testify before the force had a number the board used to According to a memo from Dilkes to board when a complaint is under identify him or her. Only the officer's the council, the board has requested review for summary dismissal, number was used in investigation that the officers' names remain in the The board thinks they should, while reports. Police Chief R.J. Winkelhake initial complaint so officer behavior Dilkes contends that such testimony said last month he would no longer can be tracked. will probably stray from the limited use those numbers in his reports to scope of such a hearing and include the board. Instead he would identify Following the council's work ses- the merits of the case. officers in each report as "Officer 1," sion, board members had not decided "Officer 2" and so forth, depending on ff they planned to attend tonight's Second, Watson said part of the how many officers are included in a formal council meeting to express board's job is to track misconduct by complaint, their displeasure at the way the court- officers to see if an officer requires cfi handled the process of adopting the additional attention from superiors. The chiefs move strips the board of operating procedures.