Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-19-2010 Police Citizens Review BoardAGENDA POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD January 19, 2010 - 5:15 P.M. HOUSING AUTHORITY CONFERENCE ROOM 410 E. Washington Street ITEM N0.1 CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL ITEM NO. 2 ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION -NAME CLEARING HEARING Comment: Officer has signed waiver, and no hearing will be held. ITEM NO. 3 CONSIDER MOTION ADOPTING CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED • Minutes of the meeting on 11/03/09 • Minutes of the meeting on 11/18/09 • ICPD General Order 99-10 (Domestic Violence) • ICPD General Order 99-12 (Field Interviews and "Pat-Down" Searches • ICPD P.A.U.L.A. Report -September 2009 • ICPD P.A.U.L.A. Report -October 2009 • ICPD Use of Force Report (June 2009) • ICPD Use of Force Report (July 2009) • ICPD Use of Force Report (August 2009) • ICPD Use of Force Report (September 2009) • ICPD Department Memo #09-41 (August-September 09 Use of Force Review) • ICPD 2008 Pursuit Analysis • Minutes of the meeting on 12/11/09 • ICPD SOG 09-02 (Lineup Procedures) • ICPD SOG 09-03 (Show Up Procedures) • ICPD SOG 09-04 (Juvenile Curfew) • ICPD Quarterly/Summary Report (All Quarters) - IAIR/PCRB, 2009 • ICPD Use of Force Report (October 2009) • ICPD Department Memo #09-43 (October 09 Use of Force Review) • ICPD P.A.U.L.A. Report -November 2009 • ICPD P.A.U.L.A. Report -December 2009 ITEM NO. 4 NEW BUSINESS • Discussion of Conflict of Interest ITEM NO. 5 OLD BUSINESS • Community Forum • Service Animal Training -Update on Iowa Police Law Lesson Plan (Nov09) • Comprehensive Review of PCRB Ordinance, By-Laws, SOP's ITEM NO. 6 PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM NO. 7 BOARD INFORMATION ITEM NO. 8 STAFF INFORMATION PCRB-Page 2 January 19, 2010 ITEM NO. 9 CONSIDER MOTION TO ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. ITEM N0.10 MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS • February 9, 2010, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm • March 9, 2010, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm • April 13, 2010, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm • May 11, 2010, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm ITEM N0.11 ADJOURNMENT MEMORANDUM POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City DATE: January 13, 2010 TO: PCRB Members FROM: Kellie Tuttle RE: Board Packet for meeting on January 19, 2010 Enclosed please find the following documents for your review and comment at the next board meeting: • Agenda for 01/19/10 • Minutes of the meeting on 12/11/09 • ICPD SOG 09-02 (Lineup Procedures) • ICPD SOG 09-03 (Show Up Procedures) • ICPD SOG 09-04 (Juvenile Curfew) • ICPD Quarterly/Summary Report (All Quarters) - IAIR/PCRB, 2009 • ICPD Use of Force Report (October 2009) • ICPD Department Memo #09-43 (October 09 Use of Force Review) • ICPD P.A.U.L.A. Report -November 2009 • ICPD P.A.U.L.A. Report -December 2009 • Extension request to City Council regarding PCRB Complaint 09-04 • Extension request to City Council regarding PCRB Complaint 09-05 • Memorandum from City Clerk regarding Board and Commission budget requests • Complaint Deadlines • PCRB Office Contacts -December 2009 (The following materials were included in the December 8th meeting packet -please bring to the meeting for discussion) • Agenda for 12/08/09 • Minutes of the meeting on 11/03/09 • Minutes of the meeting on 11/18/09 • ICPD General Order 99-10 (Domestic Violence) • ICPD General Order 99-12 (Field Interviews and "Pat-Down" Searches) • ICPD P.A.U.L.A. Report -September 2009 • ICPD P.A.U.L.A. Report -October 2009 • ICPD Use of Force Report (June 2009) • ICPD Use of Force Report (July 2009) • ICPD Use of Force Report (August 2009) • ICPD Use of Force Report (September 2009) • ICPD Department Memo #09-41 (August-September 09 Use of Force Review) • ICPD 2008 Pursuit Analysis • Iowa Police Law Lesson Plan -November 2009 • Section 11, article V -Conflict of Interest • Draft of Forum Summary • Complaint Deadlines Cover Sheet January 19, 2010 Page 2 • PCRB Office Contacts -October 2009 • PCRB Office Contacts -November 2009 • Policy Review Materials (handed out at November 3~d meeting) Other resources available: National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement NACOLE provides information regarding civilian oversight in law enforcement nation wide. For more information see: www.NACOLE.org DRAFT POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES -November 3, 2009 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Donald King called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Janie Braverman, Joseph Treloar, Vershawn Young MEMBERS ABSENT: Abigail Yoder STAFF PRESENT: Staff Catherine Pugh and Kellie Tuttle OTHERS PRESENT: Captain Richard Wyss, Officer David Schwindt, and Officer Mike Smithey of the ICPD; and public, David and Benjamin Brandauer RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (1) Accept PCRB Report of Summary Dismissal on Complaint #09-06 CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Braverman and seconded by Treloar to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended. • Minutes of the meeting on 10/13/09 • ICPD General Order 89-04 (Civil Rights) • ICPD General Order 99-11 (Arrests) • ICPD Department Memo #09-36 (June-July 09 Use of Force Review) Motion carried, 4/0, Yoder absent. OLD BUSINESS Community Forum -King and Treloar meet with the Police Chief and agreed that the Chief would do the Use of Force presentation at the forum. All questions should be directed to the Board after the presentation. King will introduce the Board and give some background on the PCRB. There will be complaint forms, Use of Force policy, and information on how to find the general orders on the City website. Braverman would also like to mention at the forum that the PCRB will be reviewing the Board's polices and procedures over the next few months. Braverman confirmed that she would draft the summary of the forum for the December meeting. The Board would also like to have information regarding the Citizens Police Academy at the forum. Tuttle thought the dates and information would be available in time for the forum. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Young, seconded by Braverman to re-open item number 2 (consent calendar) for discussion. Motion carried, 4/0, Yoder absent. Young wanted to know why the Board receives the General Orders and what they're supposed to do with them. King and Braverman explained that it's part of the Boards overall charge to look at policy. In the past the Board has looked at language and made corrections to typos. More importantly the Board will ask for clarification if they don't understand part of the general order and why that policy is in place. There is a re-evaluation date on each general order. After the police department has re- evaluated the general orders come to the Board for review. Braverman also explained the color coding on the general orders. PCRB November 3, 2009 Page 2 Also under General Order 89-04 (Civil Rights), Section III (Procedures/Individual Rights) B2(c), Young asked for some examples that can otherwise legally justify an officers action when entering a private dwelling. Wyss explained that this allows for not having to change the policy every time the case law changes and gives some discretion to the officer to make the entrance. Also under Section III (Procedures/Arrested Persons) 63, Young inquired whether coercion includes verbal manipulation. Wyss explained that coercion is placing a person in a situation where a person that's not guilty of an offense would confess to that crime anyway because whatever is explained to them in their perception would be worse than confessing to the crime. Verbal manipulation by simply asking questions would not be considered coercion, such as interviews or interrogations since there is on-going dialogue and the goal is to get to what the truth is. Under the same section B4, Young asked for clarification on the prisoner's right to refuse to give evidence against him/herself and should they voluntarily supply such information. It was explained that when a prisoner chooses not to speak without an attorney that is their right, but if they voluntarily start talking even after stating they want an attorney present, any information given is admissible. OLD BUSINESS (cont.) Braverman handed out materials for the December planning meeting regarding the Comprehensive Review of PCRB Ordinance, By-Laws, SOP's to save on postage and to give the Board ample time to review. NEW BUSINESS King referenced a letter from the Chief regarding Pursuits and the Boards request to receive the annual analysis. The Chief is looking into and will forward to the Board. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Wyss had an update on the Service Animal Training. The training will be held in November with the Police Legal Science Training for all officers. Wyss was unable to get a printout of the lesson plan prior to the Board packets going out. He will get the information to staff for inclusion in the next meeting packet. BOARD INFORMATION None. STAFF INFORMATION Tuttle responded to the inquiry from the last meeting regarding Board members receiving a City a-mail account. Currently there are no citizens that have a City e- mail account. There are costs incurred by the IT department as far as setting up and maintaining and with 18 Boards and Commissions and open records laws it wasn't going to be cost effective. Tuttle is looking into a way for members to subscribe and receive an agenda notice to their personal a-mail account and then a link where they could go on-line and review the meeting packets. Confidential materials would still have to be mailed, but overall costs could be reduced. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Braverman and seconded by Young to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential onto be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and PCRB November 3, 2009 Page 3 school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 4/0, Yoder absent. Open session adjourned at 6:08 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 8:34 P.M. Motion by Braverman, seconded by Treloar to Summarily Dismiss PCRB Complaint #09-06 as required by the city Code, Section 8-8-3 E, requiring that only those complaints which do not involve the conduct of an Iowa City sworn police officer. Motion carried, 3/0, Young abstaining and Yoder absent. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change) • November 18, 2009 7:00 PM, Harvat Hall (Community Forum) • December 8, 2009, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm • January 12, 2010, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm February 9, 2010, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Young and seconded by Braverman. Motion carried, 4/0, Yoder absent. Meeting adjourned at 8:40 P.M. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2009 Meetin Date NAME TERM EXP. 1/13 2/10 3/10 4/14 5/26 6/8 7/14 8/11 9/8 10/13 11/3 Janie Braverman 9/1/12 X X X NM X X NM X X X X Donald King 9/1/11 X X X NM X X NM 0/E X X X Michael Larson 9/1/09 X X X NM X X NM X --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Greg Roth 9/1/09 X X X NM X X NM X --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Abigail Yoder 9/1/12 X X X NM X X NM X X O/E O/E Joseph Treloar 9/1/13 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- X X X Vershawn Young 9/1/13 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- O X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member PCRB REPORT OF SUMMARY DISMISSAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL Re: Investigation of C©rTapiaint PCRB #09-06 Complaint PCRB #09-06, filed October 26, 2009, was summarily dismissed as required by the city Code, Section 8-8-3 E, requiring that only those complaints which do not involve the conduct of an Iowa City sworn police officer may be subject to summary dismissal by the board. DATED: November 3, 2009 DRAFT POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD COMMUNITY FORUM November 18, 2009, 7:00 P.M. EMMA J. HARVAT HALL 410 E Washington St CALL TO ORDER: Chair Donald King called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Janie Braverman, Joseph Treloar (7:14), Vershawn Young MEMBERS ABSENT: Abigail Yoder STAFF PRESENT: Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh and Staff Kellie Tuttle OTHERS PRESENT: Chief Sam Hargadine of the ICPD (Transcriptions are available) PRESENTATIONS The following presentations were made: Introduction and Complaint Process by PCRB Chair Donald King. ICPD Use of Force Policy by Chief Sam Hargadine from the ICPD. PUBLIC DISCUSSION The following individuals appeared before the PCRB: Carol deProsse Heidi Sinderman Dean Abel Michael Smithey Caroline Dieterle Jerry Partridge 1401 Burry Dr, IC 1503 Rochester Ave #4, IC 2049 Tanglewood St, IC PO Box 2013, IC 727 Walnut St, IC Iowa City CONSIDER MOTION TO ACCEPT CORRESPONDENCE AND/OR DOCUMENTS None. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Young and seconded by Treloar. Motion carried, 4/0, Yoder absent. Meeting adjourned at 8:46 P.M. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2009 (Meeting Date) NAME TERM EXP. 1/13 2/10 3/10 4/14 5/26 6/8 7/14 8/11 9/8 10/13 11/3 11/18 Janie Braverman 9/1/12 X X X NM X X NM X X X X X Donald King 9/1/11 X X X NM X X NM O/E X X X X Michael Larson 9/1/09 X X X NM X X NM X --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Greg Roth 9/1/09 X X X NM X X NM X --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Abigail Yoder 9/1/12 X X X NM X X NM X X O/E O/E O/E Joseph Treloar 9/1/13 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- X X X X Vershawn Young 9/1/13 --- ___ --- --- --- --- --- --- O X X X KEY: X =Present O =Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member DRAFT POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES -December 11, 2009 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Donald King called the meeting to order at 11:04 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Janie Braverman, Joseph Treloar, Abigail Yoder, Vershawn Young (11:09) MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Staff Catherine Pugh and Kellie Tuttle OTHERS PRESENT: None RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (1) Accept PCRB Report on Complaint #09-03 EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Braverman and seconded by Treloar to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 4/0, Young absent. Open session adjourned at 11:05 A.M. REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 11:44 A.M. Motion by Braverman, seconded by Treloar to request 45-day extension for PCRB Complaint #09-04, a 60-day extension for PCRB Complaint #09-05 due to timelines and scheduling. Motion carried, 5/0. Motion by Treloar, seconded by Yoder to forward the Public Report as amended for PCRB Complaint #09-03 to City Council. Motion carried, 5/0. Motion by Yoder, seconded by Braverman to schedule aname-clearing hearing for Complaint #09-04 for January 19, 2010, at 5:15 P.M. Motion carried, 5/0. PCRB December 11, 2009 Page 2 TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change) • January 12, 2010, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Rm (RESCHEDULED TO 1/19/10) • January 19, 2010, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Rm • February 9, 2010, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Rm • March 9, 2010, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Rm Motion by Braverman, seconded by Treloar to move the January 12th meeting to January 19th. Motion carried, 5/0. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Yoder and seconded by Braverman. Motion carried, 5/0. Meeting adjourned at 11:47 A.M. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 (319) 356-5041 December 11, 2009 To: City Council Citizen Dale Helling, Interim City Manager Sam Hargadine, Chief of Police Officer(s) involved in complaint From: Police Citizens Review Board Re: Investigation of PCRB Complaint #09-03 0 ~~ cs-t -=ic-~ ~_" m o ~' ~'`"" O O rn c-~ ~• a c.3 0 This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB #09-03 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7B (2), the Board's job is to review the Police Chief s Report ("Report") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference" to the Report "because of the Police Chief s professional expertise", Section 8-8-7 B (2). While the City Code directs the Board to make "Findings of Fact", it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if these findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence", are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious" or are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice, or any Federal, State or local law", Section 8-8-7 B (2) a, b, c. BOARD'S PROCEDURE The Complaint was initiated by the PCRB at its June 8, 2009 meeting. As required by Section 8-8- 5 (B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation. The Chiefs Report was completed on September 1, 2009 and was filed with the City Clerk on September 3, 2009. The Board met to consider the Chief s Re~ort on September 8, October 13, November 3, and December 11, 2009. At the September 8 meeting the Board voted to review the Chief s Report in accordance with Section 8-8-7 (B) (1) (a), "on the record with no additional investigation". Page # 1 This complaint was based on Complaint #09-02 which was filed Apri120, 2009 by a person without "personal knowledge" of the incident. The Chief's review of the complaint was filed with the Board on May 1, 2009. At the June 8, 2009 meeting the Board considered Complaint #09-02. City Code section 8-8-3B: Definition of Complaint states that any person with personal knowledge of the alleged police misconduct may file a PCRB complaint with the board. In order to have "personal knowledge", the complainant must have been directly involved in the incident or witnessed the incident. It was the conclusion of the Board that the complainant was not directly involved and had not witnessed the incident, and therefore did not have personal knowledge of the incident. It was, however, noted by the Board that there still should be some investigation into the allegations made in Complaint 09-02. The Board felt that although the complainant was not directly involved in the incident, a complete investigation would remove any doubt about police misconduct o `° On September 1, 2009 the Chief completed his review of 09-03 and submitted his rt ~dthe C Clerk's Office on September 3, 2009. ~"~ ~ ~'-' ~~ rn FINDINGS OF FACT '~ °.,~~ ~? The original incident happened on April 10, 2009, at 5:00 am in downtown Iowa ~5' and ~s observed by Officers A, B and C, who were on foot patrol. The officers observed Citizen being tackled into a tree. That assailant was arrested. During the course of the investigation into the incident, it became apparent to the Officers that Citizen A was under legal age and intoxicated. He was "flippant and verbally aggressive" with the Officers, who described him as "mouthy". Citizen A was then arrested for public intoxication. A specimen of his breath showed a BAC of .164, over twice the presumptive level for under the influence. Officer A observed a scrape on Citizen A's cheek. He assessed the wound as superficial and mostly likely caused by tree bark. Citizen A did not complain of the injury at that time. Officer B had minimal contact with Citizen A, did not know the grounds for the arrest or recall seeing an injury or hearing Citizen A complain about an injury. Officer B then transported Citizen A to the Johnson County Jail. While the Officers were preparing to transport Citizen A and the assailant, Citizen B approached Office A and reported that he, too, had been assaulted. Officer A took information for an incident report. Citizen B then approached the Officers again, reporting that the man who had assaulted him was at the Fieldhouse bar. Officer A walked toward the Fieldhouse with Citizen B, but then Citizen B told the Officer that the assailant was gone again. There was another assault call at the Fieldhouse bar, so Officer A checked for the assailant inside the Fieldhouse bar. Officer D was summoned to College and Clinton Streets by Officer A at the request of Citizen B. Citizen B complained that Citizen A had been assaulted and arrested. He said that he, himself, had been assaulted. Citizen B also complained to Officer D that he had approached two other officers Page #2 who were dealing with another subject on the plaza about having located the man who had assaulted him near the Third Base bar. He stated he felt it was un-American that two officers were dealing with one person, that it shouldn't take two officers to deal with one person, and was upset that the officers had told him that they were busy. He felt that his assault was more important than whatever the officers were dealing with at the time. During the time Officer D was with Citizen B, Officer D stepped away to deal with a bar fight. Officer D also noted that Citizen B was intoxicated and that Citizen B admitted to being intoxicated. The Chief's report also notes that this was not the first interaction that Citizen B has had with Officers A and C. On February 25, 2009, at 12:43 am, Citizen B was cited for a PAULA violation and for being under 19 years of age and in a licensed alcoholic beverages establishment after 10 pm. A statement attributed to Citizen A includes the following allegations: (1) he was threatened with having the police fill the police car with tear gas; (2) he was not allowed to tell officers his account of what happened nor did any officer ask him for an account of what happened, nor was there an acknowledgement of his having been assaulted and injured; (3) he was offered no medical attention nor was medical intervention provided by the jail staff. A statement attributed to Citizen B includes the following allegations: (1) Officers were non- responsive to his inquiries about Citizen A and the assaults; (2) officer threatened Citizen A with force if Citizen A did not quiet down and were rough with Citizen A when they put him into a police car; (3) later in the night, when Citizen B saw his assailant, officers refuse to assist him and refuse to give him their names; and (4) when he tried to pick Citizen A up from jail, jail staff told him he could pay Citizen A's fine or he could leave. The Police Chief s Report finds the "incidents regrettable", but goes on to state that both on-scene and post-event investigations have been hampered by Citizen A and Citizen B. At the scene, Citizen B was "aggressive and intoxicated". He failed to follow through with evidence (the cellphone photograph) which he stated directly related to the identification of his, and possibly Citizen A's, assailant. The Report goes onto state that Citizen A's arrest was predicated entirely on his level of intoxication and corresponding behavior that night. He was detained initially so Officers could evaluate his role in the conflict. Only as the contact between Citizen A and the Officers continued was the decision made to arrest him, due to "his flippant nature which is clearly a demonstration of poor decision-making and judgment, him being under legal age, and being profoundly intoxicated and unable to attend to his own actions safely and satisfactorily." Officer D initiated a Report of Inquiry (ROI), an internal document used to identify performance or behavior which is either in question or performance which is of an exemplary nature. This ROI addressed performance by members of the Police Department, which was being questiona~by a community member. Officer D spoke with Officers A, B and C in connection wit~1~ R~ „~ D~i n Officer D prepared and submitted a second ROI regarding a phone conversation t14~t-Btffieer D with Citizen A's mother. Citizen A's mother was concerned that Citizen A had bsssa'u~lted, not been seen for a head injury, that he had a headache and that he had a lacerationxd~is ~. S e felt the injuries should have been of concern to the officers and that the evaluatior~ in~qua~ In response to Officer D's inquiry as to why Citizen A hadn't discussed his injurie~s'and h~dache 0 Page #3 with jail staff, she stated that officers had told Citizen A to shut up or they would beat him and that one of the officers had hit him with a night stick. When she was told that that particular officer did not carry a night stick, she then said that officers had threatened to shoot Citizen A with a Taser. Following Officer D's submissions of the ROIs, the Watch Commander followed up on the investigation by interviewing the officers involved. The information obtained by the Watch Commander was consistent with that gathered by Officer D. The assault reports were submitted and turned over to the Investigations section for follow up. The Investigations Commander learned that Citizen B had a picture of his assailant on his cell phone. Citizen B was asked to submit that photo to aid in the follow-up investigation, but as of September 1, 2009, had not done so. Citizen B had not made Officer D aware of the photo at the time he made his complaint on April 11, 2009. The Investigations Commander also contacted Citizen A, who advised him that the person who assaulted Citizen A is a friend of the person who assaulted Citizen B. The first assailant was contacted, initially lied about his own identity and refused to discuss anything about the identity of any friends who were with him or who may have been involved in a fight. Citizen A shared nothing more about his attackers. Attempts to contact a witness who was listed on the incident r~,port as having accompanied Citizen B to make the report to Officer A, were made with o succ~. Citizen A advised the Investigations Commander that he did not know the witness. ~c-3 r°n ~ ~ n .~. According to the Chief's Report, additional follow-up has occurred on the case, ~~e ~xse remains in open/active status. :<~ ~ o~ Inquiry was made to the Johnson County Sheriff s Office regarding activities tha~~clirr~Q at the Johnson County Jail. The Sheriff s Office provided intake information and a phone wai~`, which indicated that Citizen A had waived his right to a phone call and signed the waiver. Jail staff confirmed that Citizen A appeared to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs and that Citizen A admitted to drinking (or taking unprescribed drugs). The intake form indicates that Citizen A denied, when asked, that there were any other medical problems (or dental disorders) that he was not asked about and that he thought the jail staff should know about. On September 8, 2009 the Board reviewed the Chiefs Report and made the following conclusions with regard to the allegations. The mother of Citizen A made seven allegations that the board thought needed addressed. Of the seven allegations made, only two involved Iowa City Police officers. ALLEGATION 1: No medical assessment was conducted when Citizen A was arrested. When Citizen A was walked over to a planter, Officer A observed a scrape on his face. Officer A assessed the wound as superficial and most likely caused by the tree bark from the tree he hit when the assailant tackled him into. Since Citizen A talked through most of the interaction with the officer and did not complain of the injury he had, it supports the officer's assessment that the wound was superficial. NOT SUSTAINED Page #4 ALLEGATION 2: Citizen A's attackers were not pursued In fact, the person responsible for attacking Citizen A and tackling him into the tree was arrested. Additionally there has been no formal information received from Citizen A about the attack which he states preceded him being tackled into the tree. NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION 3: No medical assistance or treatment was offered prior to Citizen A being placed in jail. This allegation involves Johnson County Sheriff's Department personnel at the County jail. As it does not involve the Iowa City Police Department, it is NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION 4: No continued medical assessment was conducted after Citizen A fell asleep in his cell. This allegation involves Johnson County Sheriffs Department personnel at the County jail. As it does not involve the Iowa City Police Department, it is NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION 5: Citizen A who had open wounds was allowed to be in the presence of others in a jail cell. This allegation involves Johnson County Sheriff's Department personnel at the County jail. As it does not involve the Iowa City Police Department, it is NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION 6: Due to Citizen A's open wound, he was exposed to contaminants in the jail cell. He was not offered gauze to protect against infection. This allegation involves Johnson County Sheriff's Department personnel at the County jail. As it does not involve the Iowa City Police Department, it is NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION 7: Citizen A was in jail for 11 hours and while there, had no access to water to drink or clean up with. This allegation involves Johnson County Sheriff s Department personnel at the County jail. As it does not involve the Iowa City Police Department, it is NOT SUSTAINED A statement attached to the original 09-02 complaint was from Citizen A. An investigation was initiated on these allegations and the findings are listed below as Allegations 8 through 13: ALLEGATION 8: Citizen A alleges that he was not read his Miranda warning. Citizen A was not asked questions about the offenses for which he was arrested and was not the subject of an interrogation. Miranda warnings were not required as information wad of being solicited. NOT SUSTAINED. o ~ c;r ~ ~ " ALLEGATION 9: ~~ ~ °` r . Citizen A alleges that he was sworn at by police and demeaned by the officer's l~gea ~ ~~ `p ~ A w a Page #5 There was no evidence other than Citizen A's allegation to support this allegation. NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION 10: Citizen A alleges that he was threatened with force. This allegation is both specific and non-specific. In one allegation, it was stated that the officer would or did beat him with a night stick. When the investigating officer responded that the officer in question does not carry a baton or night stick, it was then stated that the officer threatened to use a Taser on Citizen A. Investigators were unable to identify any information other than Citizen A's a allegation which supports this allegation. NOT SUSTAINED N_ c O ALLEGATION 11: ~y~-~ c~-~ ~~ ~ Citizen A alleges that he was threatened with having the police car filled with tear-gt>~? :'~~ ~ Officers do not carry, or have at hand, tear gas. Investigators have not been ab~~ id~tify information other than Citizen A's allegation which supports this allegation. NOT~ETSTA~IED O ALLEGATION 12: Citizen A alleges that he was not allowed to tell the arresting officer his account of what happened nor did any officer ask him for his account of what happened, nor was there an acknowledgement of him having been assaulted and injured. The circumstances of Citizen A's assault are captured in the officer's report. The substance of this incident report is provided by Citizen B, another person involved, and nowhere in this report does he allege that Citizen A was assaulted prior to being tackled into the tree. It is the original complainant in PCRB complaint 09-02 that contains the allegation about Citizen A being assaulted prior to being tackled. During the investigation conducted by Officer A, based on information heard at the scene, it was apparent that the person(s) who assaulted Citizen B, which was the subject of the report, were responsible for the assault on Citizen A. An investigation into this matter was initiated on the scene and has continued via the case being routed to the Investigative Section of the Iowa City Police Department. This could only have been gleaned by officers listening to assertions made by Citizen A about the assault he alleges occurred that preceded his being tackled into the tree. There clearly was acknowledgement ofthe injuries sustained by Citizen A, as officers mentioned that they observed the injuries and attributed them to him having been tackled into a tree. Allegations made by Citizen A differ in degree of injury and the manner in which it was addressed by both Iowa City Police and Johnson County Jail staff. Officers on scene and the transport officer, who serves as supervisory staff in a combat medical unit, did not believe the injuries presented were of a degree to require on-scene medical intervention. Citizen A was accepted by the jail staff without being redirected to UIHC for further evaluation. Citizen A did not offer at booking the same assertion as to degree of injury he makes in the statement which is attributed to him in complaint 09-02. Page #6 Part of the investigation has included a conversation between Citizen A and Investigation's Commander. At no time, did Citizen A ask the Commander to file an official crime report regarding the assault which preceded him being tackled into a tree. Citizen A has failed to advance his concern about the assault which he states occurred prior to him being tackled. Additionally, lack of cooperation from Citizen B to submit the photo which he alleges that he has on his cell phone, has hindered the investigation. NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION 13: Citizen A alleges that while in jail, he was offered no medical attention nor was medical intervention provided by jail staff. This issue does not involve Iowa City Police personnel and should be referred to the other agency involved. NOT SUSTAINED A statement attached to the original 09-02 complaint was from Citizen B. An investigation was initiated on these allegations and the findings are listed below as Allegations 14 through 18: ALLEGATION 14: Citizen B alleges that he was told to leave the area after Citizen A was handcuffed and was not given the opportunity to give a statement about his and Citizen A's assault. He also alleges that the officer was not interested in pursuing the perpetrators of Citizen B's assault. Citizen B did provide information for an incident report, quizzed Officer A about what he had been told. Officer A recited the facts back to Citizen B, to his apparent satisfaction. Officer Aden went to the area of the Fieldhouse Bar twice, and inside the bar once, to try to find Citi~n B's ~sailant. NOT SUSTAINED ~cz ,°,~ ALLEGATION 15: ~~ ~ r ~ The statement also includes references to the officers being non-responsive to his ~e~Eibou •- Citizen Aand the assaults. p~ 0 Not only were officers responsive, Officer A accompanied Citizen A to try to identify the assailant who Citizen A said was in the plaza near the 3`d Base Bar. The assailant was not located. Additionally Officer A made an examination of the interior of the bar for the suspect, without success. NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION 16: Citizen A also alleges that the officers threatened him with force if he did not quiet down, and that officers were rough with him A when they put him into a police vehicle. Page #7 It is significant that Citizen A, to whom this alleged aggressiveness by the officer is directed, does not list his loading and transport as one of his grievances. No other evidence supports this allegation. NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION 17: The statement further alleges that later that night, he saw the assault suspect, tried to summon officers who were with another subject, and they refused to assist him and refused to give him their names. This allegation relates to Citizen B approaching Officers B and C who were occupied with another incident. As the officers tell him they are busy and can't attend his problem, Officer A approaches and advances toward the Fieldhouse to search for Citizen B's assailant. NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION 18: Citizen B alleges that when he tried to pick-up Citizen A from jail, jail staff told him he could pay the Citizen A's fine or leave. This issue is for the Johnson County Jail staff to address. NOT SUSTAINED BOARD COMMENTS: Both of these incidents are unfortunate, but both on-scene and post-event investigations were hampered by the victims themselves. Citizen A was arrested entirely on his level of intoxication and corresponding behavior that night and had nothing to do with the fact that he was a victim of an assault. He was detained initially so officers could evaluate his role in the conflict. Only as the contact between Citizen A and the police officers escalated was the decision to arrest him made. He was arrested for public intoxication; being under the legal age; being profoundly intoxicated; and unable to attend to his own actions safely and satisfactorily. Citizen B was aggressive and, by his admission to Officer D, intoxicated. He did not like the way the officer took report information, even though the officer repeated the information back to him. He challenged the manner in which officers were dealing with a separate issue were deployed, asserting that his issue was a priority and was defiant when told differently. He has also failed to show investigators evidence related to his assailants identification (the cell phone photo). Page #8 o n d ~° ~ ~ ~ ~ r°t, ~ „~ ~~ .~- :<m z~ ~ ,°~ ~ ~n ~ m c.~ Iowa City Police Department P.A.U.L.A. Report -September 2009 (Possession of Alcohol Under Legal Age) Business Name (occupancy] Monthly Totals Year-to-Da te Totals PAULA Visit (occupanc loads updated Oct '08) visits arrests visits arrests ear-to-date ~ - 808 Restaurant & Nightclub [176] 4 1 35 36 1.029 Airliner [223] 6 2 32 20 0.625 American Legion [140] 3 0 0.000 Aoeshe Restaurant [156] Atlas World Grill [165] 7 0 0.000 Blackstone [297] 1 0 0.000 Bluebird Diner [82] Bob's Your Uncle [260*] Bo-James [200] 5 0 26 1 0.038 Bread Garden Market & Bakery [?] [It's] Brothers Bar & Grill [556] 11 0 70 29 0.414 [The] Brown Bottle [289] Buffalo Wild Wings Grill 8~ Bar [189] 1 0 3 0 0.000 Cafe Z [56] Caliente Night Club (498] (oPenea rnnRl 4 0 29 0 0.000 Carl & Ernie's Pub & Grill [92] 2 0 10 0 0.000 Carlos O'Kelly's [299] Chipotle Mexican Grill [119] [The] Club Car [56] 1 0 10 0 0.000 Colonial Lanes [502] Dave's Foxhead Tavern (87] 3 0 0.000 David's Place (aka Dawit's) (73] 1 0 6 0 0.000 DC's [120] 2 2 24 8 0.333 [The] Deadwood [218] 8 0 0.000 Devotay [45] Donnelly's Pub [49] 1 0 12 0 0.000 [The] Dublin Under round [57] 9 0 0.000 [Fraternal Order of] Eagle's [315] 2 0 0.000 EI Dorado Mexican Restaurant [104] [BPO] Elks #590 [205] EI Ranchero Mexican Restaurant [161j Englert Theatre [838] Etc [178] 33 47 1.424 Fiesta Mexico (aka Farras) [200] 3 0 13 0 0.000 [The] Field House (aka Third Base) [420] 3 2 62 117 1.887 Firewater [114] 1 0 4 1 0.250 Formosa Asian Cuisine [149] 6 5 0.833 George's Buffet [75] 5 0 0.000 Givanni's [158] Godfather's Pizza [170] Graze [49] 3 0 0.000 Grizzly's South Side Pub [265] 9 0 0.000 Guido's Deli (20] Hawkeye Hideaway [94] 2 0 7 0 0.000 [The] Hilltop Lounge [90] 1 0 7 0 0.000 IC Ugly's [72] 3 0 10 0 0.000 India Cafe [100] [The] Industry [436] 1 0 18 0 0.000 Jimmy Jack's Rib Shack [71] 3 0 0.000 Joe's Place [281] 2 0 18 0 0.000 Joseph's Steak House [226] Kamodo Klub [144] 1 0 8 1 0.125 Kandy Land (120] 2 0 8 0 0.000 Karaoke La Reyna [78] 1 0 0.000 ~' __ :.-, La Casa [300] La Reyna [49] 1 0 0.000 Linn Street Cafe [80] Los Cocos [99] 86 0 0.000 Los Portales [161] Martini's [200] 2 0 16 0 0.000 Masala [46] Mekong Restaurant [89j Micky's [98] 1 0 7 0 0.000 [The] Mill Restaurant [325] 3 0 0.000 [Loyal Order of] Moose [476] Monica's Italian Bistro & Pizzeria [160] [Sheraton] Morgan's [231] 3 0 0.000 Motley Cow Cafe [82] Okobo i Grill [222] Old Capitol Brew Works [294J 2 0 5 0 0.000 One-Eyed Jake's [299] 4 5 29 33 1.138 One-Twenty-Six [105] Oyama Sushi Japanese Restaurant [87] Pagliai's Pizza [113] Panchero's (Clinton St) [62] Panchero's Grill (Riverside Dr) [95] Piano Lounge [65] 9 1 0.111 [The]Picador[261] 2 0 10 0 0.000 Pints [180] 4 0 39 11 0.282 Pit Smokehouse [40] Pizza Hut [116] Pizza Ranch [226] Quality Inn/Highlander [971] Quinton's Bar & Deli [149] 1 0 10 0 0.000 [The] Red Avocado [47] Rick's Grille & Spirits [120] 2 0 0.000 Riverside Theatre [118] Saloon [120] 1 0 9 1 0.111 Sam's Pizza [174] 1 0 4 0 0.000 [Thej Sanctuary Restaurant [132] 3 0 0.000 Shakespeare's [90] 1 0 7 0 0.000 Short's Burger & Shine [56] 1 0 9 0 0.000 Sports Column [400] 6 7 50 71 1.420 Studio 13 [206] 11 0 0.000 [The] Summit [736] 9 22 68 130 1.912 Sushi Popo [84] 1 0 1 0 0.000 Takanami Restaurant [148] 2 3 1.500 TCB [250] 1 0 25 0 0.000 Thai Flavors [60] Thai Spice [91] Tropicana (aka Club Furia) [280] 3 0 43 1 0.023 T. Spoons [102] Union Bar [854] 3 3 54 57 1.056 VFW Post #3949 [197] [The] Vine Tavem [170] 2 0 6 0 0.000 Vito's [320] 3 0 32 7 0,19 - Wig & Pen Pizza Pub [154] 3 0 0:000 [Iowa City] Yacht Club [206] 12 0 0:000 Zio Johno's Spaghetti House [94] Z'Mariks Noodle House [47 Totals: 105 44 1064 580 0.545 Other PAULA at non-business locations: 39 106 _ _,_ PAULA Totals: 83 686 ,___ *includes outdoor seating area current month year-to-date - - Iowa City Police Department P.A. U . L.A. Report -October 2009 (Possession of Alcohol Under Legal Age) Business Name (occupancy] Monthly Totals Year-to-Date Totals PAHLA Visf~ (occupancy loads updated Oct 'os) visits arrests visits arrests a -to-date '' 808 Restaurant & Nightclub [176] 3 0 38 36 0:947 - Airliner [223] 1 0 33 20 0.606 American Legion [140] 3 0 =>J.000 ~°°~~ ~,. Aoeshe Restaurant [156] Atlas World Grill [165] 7 0 0 000 Blackstone [297] 1 0 ~-Q.tiDO """ Bluebird Diner [82] ~ •',' Bob's Your Uncle [260`] ~ `.__.~ Bo-James [200] 3 0 29 1 0.034 '_=.1 Bread Garden Market & Bakery (?] [It's] Brothers Bar & Grill [556] 4 1 74 30 0.405 [The] Brown Bottle [289] Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar [189] 3 0 0.000 Cafe Z [56] Caliente Night Club [498] copenea MAR) 2 0 31 0 0.000 Carl & Ernie's Pub & Grill [92] 1 0 11 0 0.000 Carlos O'Kelly's [299] Chipotle Mexican Grill [119] [The] Club Car [56] 10 0 0.000 Colonial Lanes [502] Dave's Foxhead Tavern [87] 3 0 0.000 David's Place (aka Dawit's) [73] 6 0 0.000 DC's [120] 24 8 0.333 [The] Deadwood [218] _ 1 0 9 0 0.000 Devotay [45] Donnelly's Pub [49] 12 0 0.000 [The] Dublin Underground [57] 1 0 10 0 0.000 [Fraternal Order of] Eagle's [315] 2 0 0.000 EI Dorado Mexican Restaurant [104] [BPO] Elks #590 [205] EI Ranchero Mexican Restaurant [161] Englert Theatre [838] Etc [178] 2 0 35 47 1.343 Fiesta Mexico (aka Farras) [200] 13 0 0.000 [The] Field House (aka Third Base) [420] 6 14 68 131 1.926 Firewater [114] 4 1 0.250 Formosa Asian Cuisine [149] 6 5 0.833 George's Buffet (75] 5 0 0.000 Givanni's [158] Godfather's Pizza [170] Graze [49] 3 0 0.000 Grizzly's South Side Pub [265] 1 1 10 1 0.100 Guido's Deli [20] Hawkeye Hideaway [94] 1 0 8 0 0.000 [The] Hilltop Lounge (90] 7 0 0.000 IC Ugly's [72] 10 0 0.000 India Cafe [100] [The] Industry [436] 2 0 20 0 0.000 Jimmy Jack's Rib Shack [71] 3 0 0.000 Joe's Place [281] 18 0 0.000 Joseph's Steak House [226] Kamodo Klub [144] 8 1 0.125 Kandy Land [120] 1 0 9 0 0.000 Karaoke La Reyna [78] 1 0 0.000 La Casa [300] La Reyna [49] 1 0 0.000 Linn Street Cafe [80] Los Cocos [99] 86 0 0.000 Los Portales (161] Martini's [200] _ 16 0 0.000 _ Masata [46] Mekong Restaurant [89] Micky's [98] 7 0 0.000 [The] Mill Restaurant [325] 3 0 0.000 [Loyal Order of] Moose [476] Monica's Italian Bistro & Pizzeria [160] _ [Sheraton] Morgan's [231] 3 0 0.000 Motley Cow Cafe [82] Okoboji Grill [222] Old Capitol Brew Works [294] 5 0 0.000 One-Eyed Jake's [299] 2 2 31 35 1.129 One-Twenty-Six [105] Oyama Sushi Japanese Restaurant [87] Pagliai's Pizza [113] Panchero's (Clinton St) [62] Panchero's Grill (Riverside Dr) [95] Piano Lounge [65] 2 0 11 1 0.091 [The]Picador[261] 10 0 0.000 Pints (180] 39 11 0.282 Pit Smokehouse [40] Pizza Hut [116] Pizza Ranch [226] Quality Inn/Highlander [971] Quinton's Bar & Deli [149] 1 0 11 0 0.000 [The] Red Avocado [47] Rick's Grille & Spirits (120] 2 0 0.000 Riverside Theatre [118] Saloon (120] 9 1 0.111 Sam's Pizza [174] 4 0 0.000 [The] Sanctuary Restaurant [132] 3 0 0.000 Shakespeare's [90j 7 0 0.000 Short's Burger & Shine [56] 9 0 0.000 Sports Column [400] 6 8 56 79 1.411 Studio 13 [206] 11 0 0.000 [The] Summit [736] 7 22 75 152 2.027 Sushi Popo [84] 1 0 0.000 Takanami Restaurant [148] 2 3 1.500 TCB [250] 4 0 29 0 0.000 Thai Flavors [60] Thai Spice [91] Tropicana (aka Club Furia) [280] 43 1 0.023 T. Spoons [102] Union Bar [854] 3 0 57 57 1.000 VFW Post #3949 (197] [The] Vine Tavern [170] 6 0 0.000 Vito's [320] 3 2 35 9 0.257 Wig & Pen Pizza Pub [154] 3 0 0.000 [Iowa City] Yacht Club [206] 12 0 0.000 Zio Johno's Spaghetti House [94J Z'Mariks Noodle House 47 Totals: 57 50 1121 630 0:,552 Other PAULA at non-business locations: 6 112 PAULA Totals: 56 742 -- "includes outdoor seating area currant month year-w-oare , a .'~ ~'~ '_,- J MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: DATE: File Captain Johnson, Field Operations ,~ Quarterly/Summa Report (All Quarters)- IAIR/PCRB, 2009 January 4, 2010 Attached you will find the 2009 Summary Report, (all quarters), for the Iowa City Police Department Internal Affairs/Police Citizen's Review Board investigative file. cc: PCRB Chief Hargadine N O ~ `~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ .~ ~ n~ ~n ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ I.A.I. #:09-01 Incident Date: 12-3-08 Location: ICPD Allegation: 1. Violate Rules/Regulations Disposition: 1. Sustained I.A.I. #:09-02 Incident Date: 2-10-a Location: Other Allegation: 1. Improper conduct Disposition: 1. Not sustained I.A.I. #:09-03 Incident Date: 2-21-09 Location: 900 Iowa Avenue Allegation 1. Violate Rules/Regulations Disposition: 1. Sustained I.A.I. #:09-04 Incident Date: 4-10-09 Location: 100 E College St Allegation 1. Improper Action Disposition: 1 Complaint rejected by PCRB PCRB#: none Incident Time: 3:00 PM Date Assigned: 1-26-09 PCRB#: 09-01 Incident Time: various Date Assigned: 02-19-09 PCRB#: none Incident Time: 3:OOAM Date Assigned: 02-21-09 PCRB#: 09-02 Incident Time: 12:OSAM Date Assigned: 04-24-09 Want absence of I.A.I. #:09-04A Incident Date: 4-10-09 Location: 1Q0 E College St PCRB#: 09-03 Incident Time: 12:05AM Date Assigned: 07-01-09 Allegation 1. Improper Action N Disposition: ° 1. Not sustained ~' ° ~:.~ ~,. ---t ,;,~ c-~ -C i --~ c'~ ~ =fir -v ~ ~ o -~ .. ~ ~ r .r. LA.I. #:09-05 Incident Date: 6-19-09 Location: 2001owa Avenue Allegation 1. Improper Conduct Disposition: 1. Not sustained PCRB#: 09-04 Incident Time: 10:02PM Date Assigned: 06-26-09 #:09-06 I A I PCRB#: 09-05 . . . Incident Date: 6-30-09 Incident Time: 11:51 PM Location: 3500 Shamrock PI Date Assi ned: 07-01-09 Allegation 1. Excessive force Disposition: 1. Not sustained* *One otic violation, unrelated to com taint, identified duri course of investi anon #:09-07 I A I PCRB#: n/a . . . Incident Date: 10-1-09 Incident Time: 8:22PM Location: Jefferson/Madison Date Assi ned: 10-5-09 Allegation 1. Violate rules/Regulations Disposition: 2. Sustained LA.I. #:09-08 PCRB#: 09-06 Incident Date: 09-19-09 Incident Time: 5:30PM Location: 511 S. Capitol St. Date Assigned: n/a Allegation 1. Excessive force Disposition: 2. Complaint dismissed by PCRB- did not involve ICPD personnel I.A.I. #:09-09 Incident Date: 12-4-09 Location• 410 E. Washington Street Allegation 1. Violate Rules/Regulations Disposition: 2. Sustained PCRB#: n/a Incident Time: 3PM Date Assigned: 12-7-09 ru _ _o ~ O ~~ A c~ -~ i ~~ ~ r- =~r~t ~ ~ °~ ~ .. .r- I.A.I. #:09-10 Incident Date: 12-3-09 Location: 410 E. Wasr Allegation 1. Violate Rules/Regulations Disposition: 2. Sustained PCRB#: n/a Incident Time: n/a Street Date Assigned: 12-7-09 N n p ~ ~ aa Y~ ~- ~~ ~r ~ ! • f ®y1i 7 ~~ ,~- DEPARTMENT MEMO #09-43 TO: Chief Hargadine FROM: Captain R. D. Wyss RE: October 2009 Use of Force Review DATE: December 10th, 2009 The "Use of Force Review Committee" met on December IOth, 2009. It was composed of Captain Wyss, Sgt. Hurd and Sgt. Kelsay. The review of submitted reports for October (7 incidents-1 S reports) were completed and revealed no training, policy or safety issues. Of the 7 incidents in the month of October, I was for a drawn sidearm or displayed weapon. OC was deployed on one occasion, and in two incidents a Taser was discharged. Of the 7 incidents reviewed, I suspect and 1 Officer had sustained injuries. All personnel continue doing a good job in their documentation and review of the reports. Please contact me if you have any questions. © 0 0 `° t~-G -=~c'S ~ r- :"~ ~ n• rn ~~ 3 .. 3' t.J'1 Copy: City Manager, PCRB, Watch Commanders, Review Committee Iowa City Police Department P.A. U. L.A. Report -November 2009 ~ ~,,, (Possession of Alcohol Under Legal Age) 7nfla nor ~~ Business Name (occupancy] Monthly Totals Year-to-Date Totals PAULd I~siY ~'~ (occupancy toads updated Oct '08) visits arrests visits arrests ear-to- 808 Restaurant & Nightclub [176] 4 7 42 43 1.QA + Airliner [223] 5 2 38 22 ~~~~ 0.5 /i • 1 American Legion [140] 3 0 0.000 Aoeshe Restaurant [156] Atlas World Grill [165] 1 0 8 0 0.000 Blackstone [297] 1 0 0.000 Bluebird Diner [82] BIUe MOOSe (opened OCT; formerly Industry) 1 0 1 0 0.000 Bob's Your Uncle [260`] Bo-James [200] 2 0 31 1 0.032 Bread Garden Market & Bakery [?] [It's] Brothers Bar & Grill (556] 6 0 80 30 0.375 [The] Brown Bottle (289] Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar [189] 3 0 0.000 Cafe Z 56] Caliente Night Club [498] (opened nnnR> 31 0 0.000 Carl & Ernie's Pub & Grill [92j 11 0 0.000 Carlos O'Kell 's 299] Chipotle Mexican Grill [119J [The] Club Car [56] 10 0 0.000 Colonial Lanes 502 Dave's Foxhead Tavern [87J 3 0 0.000 David's Place (aka Dawit's) [73] 6 0 0.000 DC's [120] 2 0 26 8 0.308 [The] Deadwood (218] 1 0 10 0 0.000 Devotay [45J Donnell 's Pub [49 2 0 14 0 0.000 [The] Dublin Underground [57] 1 0 11 0 0.000 [Fraternal Order of] Eagle's [315] 2 0 0.000 EI Dorado Mexican Restaurant [104] [BPO] Elks #590 [205J EI Ranchero Mexican Restaurant [161] En lert Theatre [838 Etc [178] 1 0 36 47 1.306 Fiesta Mexico (aka Farras) [200] 13 0 0.000 [The] Field House (aka Third Base) [420] 4 4 72 135 1.875 Firewater [114) 4 1 0.250 Formosa Asian Cuisine [149] 6 5 0.833 Geor e's Buffet [75] 5 0 0.000 Givanni's [158] Godfather's Pizza [170] Graze [49] 3 0 0.000 Grizzly's South Side Pub [265] 10 1 0.100 Guido's Deli (20] Hawkeye Hideaway [94] 8 0 0.000 [The] Hilltop Lounge [90] 7 0 0.000 IC Ugly's (72] 10 0 0.000 India Cafe [100] [The] Industry [436] 20 0 0.000 Jimmy Jack's Rib Shack [71] 3 0 0.000 Joe's Place [281] 1 0 19 0 0.000 Joseph's Steak House (226] Kamodo Klub [144] 8 1 0.125 Kandy Land [120] 9 0 0.000 AM 9~ 4fl ~K O YVA Karaoke La Reyna [78] 1 0 0.000 La Casa [300] La Re na 49 1 0 0.000 Linn Street Cafe [80] Los Cocos [99] 86 0 0.000 Los Portales [161] Martini's [200] 1 0 17 0 0.000 Masala (46] Mekon Restaurant[89] Micky's [98] 7 0 0.000 [TheJ Mill Restaurant [325] 3 0 0.000 [Loyal Order ot] Moose [476] Monica's Italian Bistro & Pizzeria [160] [Sheraton] Morgan's [231J 3 0 0.000 Motle Cow Cafe 82] Okoboji Grill (222] Old Capitol Brew Works [294] 5 0 0.000 One-E ed Jake's [299] 5 1 36 36 1.000 One-Twenty-Six [105] Oyama Sushi Japanese Restaurant [87J Pa liars Pizza 113 Panchero's (Clinton St) [62J Panchero's Grill (Riverside Dr) [95J Piano Loun a (65] 11 1 0.091 [TheJ Picador [261] 10 0 0.000 Pints (180] 39 11 0.282 Pit Smokehouse [40] Pizza Hut [116] Pizza Ranch [226J Quality Inn/Highlander [971j Quinton's Bar & Deli [149J 1 0 12 0 0.000 [The] Red Avocado [47] Rick's Grille & Spirits [120] 2 0 0.000 Riverside Theatre [118] Saloon [120] 9 1 0.111 Sam's Pizza [174] 4 0 0.000 [The] Sanctuary Restaurant [132J 3 0 0.000 Shakespeare's (90] 7 0 0.000 Short's Bur er i~ Shine [56 9 0 0.000 Sports Column [400] 5 10 61 89 1.459 Studio 13 [206] 1 0 12 0 0.000 [The] Summit [736] 6 10 81 162 2.000 Sushi Popo [84) 1 0 0.000 Takanami Restaurant [148j 2 3 1.500 TCB [250] 5 0 34 0 0.000 Thai Flavors [60] Thai Spice [91] Tropicana (aka Club Furia) [280] 43 1 0.023 T. Spoons [102] Union Bar [854] 4 5 61 62 1.016 VFW Post #3949 [197] [The] Vine Tavern [170] 6 0 0.000 Vito's [320] 4 0 39 9 0.231 Wi & Pen Pizza Pub 154] 3 0 0.000 [Iowa City] Yacht Club [206] 1 0 13 0 0.000 Zio Johno's Spaghetti House [94] Z'Mariks Noodle House 47 Totals: 64 39 1185 669 0.565 r" Other PAULA at non-business locations: 4 116 "' 4 C? ~©o PAULA Totals: 43 785 ~h C7 ~ *includes outdoor seating area currenfmonth year-toaare +-~,,,~ ~ g ""l~ N ~ ©~ ~.' Iowa City Police Department P.A. U. L.A. Report -December 2009 (Possession of Alcohol Under Legal Age) Business Name occupancy] Monthly Totals Year-to-Date Totals PAULA Visit (occupancy loads updated Oct 'os) visits arrests visits arrests ear-to-date 808 Restaurant & Nightclub [176] 1 0 43 43 1.000 Airliner [223] 1 0 39 22 0.564 American Le ion [140] 3 0 6 0 0.000 Aoeshe Restaurant [156] Atlas World Grill [165] 8 0 0.000 Blackstone [297] 2 0 3 0 0.000 Bluebird Diner [82] BIUe MOOSe (opened OCT; formeAy Industry) 2 0 3 ~ ~'~~~ Bob's Your Uncle 260* Bo-James [200] 31 1 0.032 Bread Garden Market & Bakery [?] (It's] Brothers Bar & Grill 556] 4 2 84 32 0.381 [The] Brown Bottle [289] Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar [189] 1 0 4 0 0.000 Cafe Z 56] Caliente Night Club [498] coaa~ea MAR) 1 1 32 1 0.031 Carl & Ernie's Pub & Grill [92] 11 0 0.000 Carlos O'Kell 's [299] Chipotle Mexican Grill [119] [The] Club Car [56] 1 0 11 0 0.000 Colonial Lanes 502 Dave's Foxhead Tavern [87] 3 0 0.000 David's Place (aka Dawit's) [73] 6 0 0.000 DC's [120] 26 8 0.308 [The] Deadwood [218] 1 0 11 0 0.000 Devotay [45] 0 15 0 0 000 Donnell 's Pub 49 1 . [The] Dublin Underground [57] 1 0 12 0 0.000 [Fraternal Order of] Eagle's [315] 2 0 0.000 EI Dorado Mexican Restaurant [104] [BPO] Elks #590 [205] EI Ranchero Mexican Restaurant (161] En lert Theatre 838 Etc [178] 2 0 38 47 1.237 Fiesta Mexico (aka Farras) (200] 13 0 0.000 [The] Field House (aka Third Base) [420] 3 6 75 141 1.880 Firewater [114] 4 1 0.250 Formosa Asian Cuisine [149] 6 5 0.833 Geor e's Buffet [75] 5 0 0.000 Givanni's [158] Godfather's Pizza [170] Graze [49] 3 0 0.000 Grizzly's South Side Pub [265] 2 0 12 1 0.083 Guido's Deli [20] Hawkeye Hideawa [94] 8 0 0.000 [The] Hilltop Lounge [90] 7 0 0.000 IC Ugly's [72] 10 0 0.000 India Cafe [100] [The] Industry [436] 20 0 0.000 Jimmy Jack's Rib Shack [71 ] 3 0 0.000 Joe's Place [281 ] 1 0 20 0 0.000 Joseph's Steak House [226] Kamodo Klub [144] 8 1 0.125 Kandv Land (1201 3 0 12 0 0.000 Karaoke La Reyna [78] 1 0 0.000 La Casa [300] La Re na 49 1 0 0.000 Linn Street Cafe [80] Los Cocos [99] 86 0 0.000 Los Portales [161] Martini's [200J 17 0 0.000 Masala [46] Mekon Restaurant 89 Micky's [98] 1 0 8 0 0.000 [The] Mill Restaurant [325] 3 0 0.000 [Lo al Order of] Moose [476] Monica's Italian Bistro & Pizzeria [160] (Sheraton] Morgan's [231] 3 0 0.000 Motle Cow Cafe 82 Okoboji Grill [222] Old Capitol Brew Works [294] 5 0 0.000 One-E ed Jake's [299] 36 36 1.000 One-Twenty-Six [105] Oyama Sushi Japanese Restaurant [87] Pa liars Pizza 113 Panchero's (Clinton St) [62] Panchero's Grill (Riverside Dr) [95] Piano Loun a [65] 11 1 0.091 [TheJ Picador [261] 10 0 0.000 Pints [180] 1 0 40 11 0.275 Pit Smokehouse [40] Pizza Hut [116] Pizza Ranch [226] Qualit Inn/Hi hlander [971] Quinton's Bar & Deli [149] 12 0 0.000 [The] Red Avocado [47] Rick's Grille & Spirits [120] 2 0 0.000 Riverside Theatre [118] Saloon [120] 9 1 0.111 Sam's Pizza [174] 4 0 0.000 [The] Sanctuary Restaurant [132J 3 0 0.000 Shakespeare's [90] 4 0 11 0 0.000 Short's Bur er & Shine [56] 9 0 0.000 Sports Column [400] 4 6 65 95 1.462 Studio 13 [206] 12 0 0.000 [The] Summit [736] 2 5 83 167 2.012 Sushi Popo [84] 1 0 0.000 Takanami Restaurant [148] 2 3 1.500 TCB [250] 1 0 35 0 0.000 Thai Flavors [60] Thai Spice [91J Tropicana (aka Club Furia) [280] 43 1 0.023 T. Spoons [102] Union Bar [854] 2 3 63 65 1.032 VFW Post #3949 [197] 1 0 1 0 [TheJ Vine Tavern [170] 6 0 0.000 Vito's [320] 4 3 43 12 0.279 Wi & Pen Pizza Pub 154 3 0 0.000 [Iowa City] Yacht Club [206] 13 0 0.000 Zio Johno's Spaghetti House [94] Z'Mariks Noodle House 47 Totals: 50 26 1235 695 0.563 Other PAULA at non-business locations: 8 PAULA Totals: 34 819 'includes outdoor seating area cunenf month year-ro-oare OPS-14.1 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE Date of Issue General Order Number October 8, 1999 99-10 Effective Date Section Code November 20, 2009 OPS-14 Reevaluation Date Amends /Cancels October 2010 C.A.L.E.A. Reference 1.2.7, 55.1.1, 55.1.3, 55.2.3 INDEX AS: .C~~~: ~~' ~ ~-- Domestic Abuse - _ __~ Domestic Violence _' Domestic Violence Reports ~ j Domestics -- ~~a No Contact Orders Protective Orders - '-~~~ v~ I. PURPOSE The purpose of this General Order is to establish policy and procedures concerning domestic abuse. The Iowa City Police Department will respond properly to all domestic abuse requests for assistance. "Domestic Abuse" has been deemed as a series of criminal offenses in Iowa pursuant to Iowa Code Chapter 236, Domestic Abuse. Additionally, several other Iowa Code Chapters address domestic abuse-related issues. Efforts will be made to deter this criminal behavior. OPS-14.2 II. POLICY It is the policy of the Iowa City Police Department to: • Appropriately respond to domestic abuse calls for assistance and arrest domestic abuse offenders as defined under the law. • Maintain apro-arrest policy whenever probable cause exists to support the belief that a domestic abuse violation has taken place. • Protect victims and families experiencing domestic abuse, and provide information concerning support and services. • Promote officer safety by educating officers in the area of domestic abuse response. • Develop a working relationship with the Domestic Violence Intervention Program (DVIP). • Actively participate in multi-disciplinary and community efforts to prevent and reduce the incidence and severity of domestic abuse assaults and deaths. • Provide community and workplace education about domestic abuse, including releasing an annual report on domestic abuse. III. DEFINITIONS ~_., .:, A. Domestic Abuse means an assault, as defined in Iowa Code Section 708.2A and Iowa Code Section 236.2, that has occurred .between ~ '_.. parties who share a certain relationship. .~' . . i --r,. The relationship element defined: 236.2(2) ~` ~-~~_d 1. family or household members residing together at the time p#~he ~`' assault or who have resided together within the past year, b'ut not ~', at the time of the assault; 2. separated spouses or persons divorced from one another not residing together at the time of the assault; 3. biological parents of the same minor child, regardless of whether married or living together at anytime. 4. brothers and/or sisters over 18 who live at the same residence. If under 18, Chapter 232, Juvenile Justice applies. B. Family or Household Members; spouses, or persons co-habitating, parents or other persons related by consanguinity or affinity. C. Children: Children under age 18 are not subject to these provisions as chapter 232, Juvenile Justice, applies. OPS-14.3 D. Cohabitation: means two unrelated adult persons living together for a substantial period of time, resulting in some permanency of relationship. Cohabitation does not require a sexual relationship, but does require something more than merely residing together. State v. Kellogq, 542 N.W.2d 514(1996). Kellogq provides anon-exclusive list of factors for the jury's consideration: - Sexual relations between the parties while sharing living quarters - Sharing of incomes and expenses - Joint use or ownership of property - Whether parties hold themselves out as husband and wife - The continuity of the relationship - The length of the relationship - The degree of access to the residence (does each possess a set of keys) E. Primary Physical Aggressor.' The Code requires a peace officer to arrest and take into custody the primary physical aggressor of the domestic abuse assault when the assault caused a bodily injury, involved the use or display of a dangerous weapon or was committed with the intent to commit a serious injury. See Iowa Code Sections 236.12(2) (b)(c) and (d). Considerations relating to an officer's determination of the primary physical aggressor are set forth in Iowa Code Section 236.12(3). In identifying the primary physical aggressor, a peace officer shall consider the need to protect the victims of domestic abuse, the relative degree of injury or fear inflicted on the persons involved, and any history of domestic abuse between the persons involved, and shall not be based solely on the absence of visible indications of injury or impairment. F. Discretionary Arrest: Peace officers may arrest a person for a simple misdemeanor (non-injury inflicting) domestic abuse assault, but are not required to do so. Discretionary arrest also applies to indictable level offenses where the offender was not the primary physical aggressor. G. Pro-Arrest Policy: Refers to a philosophical position in which physical arrest should be made in situations where an arrest is legally permissible. , ;~~ "': _.. ... ,, ~ ___. ~°~ OPS-14.4 IV. PROCEDURES A. B. C D E F. G H J. K. Procedures for the following qualifying factors are included in this protocol: Communications Officer Approaching the Scene Officer Responsibility at the Scene Enforcement of Court Protection Orders Written Reporting Victim Rights Follow-up Investigation Confidentiality Hostage Situations Officer Training Officers Charged with Domestic Abuse A. COMMUNICATIONS The Emergency Communications Operator (ECO) shall dispatch officers to every reported incident of domestic abuse. When warranted, the ECO should give a domestic abuse incident call priority as would be given to any other life threatening call. Whenever possible, a minimum of two officers should be dispatched to the scene. During the initial call for assistance, the ECO should ask these questions: 1. Where is the emergency? What address? What apartment number? 2. Who am I speaking to? 3. What has happened? 4. Has anyone been injured? If yes, is an ambulance needed? 5. Are you the victim? If no, are you a witness? 6. Is the suspect present? What is his/her name? Please describe. the suspect and, if not present, his/her expected whereabouts:. -' 7. Are weapons involved? If yes, what kind? __ _ . 8. Is the suspect under the influence of drugs or alcohol? If y~~,:wha~., substance? - ~~ ~ 9. Are children present? `' 10. Have the police been to this address before? If yes, how many times? 11. Does the victim have a current restraining order? _ _..x ,: ~_ ..:.a ,: Communications will dispatch all pertinent information to the responding officers. As events progress through a domestic abuse incident, the ECO will keep the responding officer(s) apprised. The ECO should listen for OPS-14.5 background noises that assist in evaluating the threat level (screams, shouts, threats, breaking glass, and furniture). These sounds will raise the potential danger level and can help to provide the probable cause required if criminal charges are filed. During the dispatching process, the ECO should initiate a check to determine the existence of no-contact orders (both civil and criminal), and notify the officer(s) of the results. Meanwhile, the ECO should continue to reassure the victim/caller that assistance is en route. Remaining on the line with the caller is preferential; if the victim/caller chooses to hang-up; this shall not influence the response effected. If the hang-up was voluntary, a callback should be made to inquire whether the victim/caller can be located by officers upon their arrival. Likewise, if the caller states that officers are no longer needed, the call will continue to proceed, and under no circumstances will the call be cancelled. 9-1-1 calls and calls for assistance or/calls received on the routine line should be preserved for any possible prosecution. Requests for 9-1-1 recordings to be taped for preservation will be made through the ECO supervisor by the domestic abuse investigator. If based on the information provided the ECO reasonably determines that a call is a domestic, it will be classified as a domestic. Once a call is classified as a domestic, the ECO shall not reclassify the call except as follows; If the officer determines that the relationship does not meet the criteria of a domestic relationship an on-duty watch supervisor may have the ECO reclassify the incident. If the incident is reclassfied to a non- mandatory report incident, the supervisor will determine if the officer will complete an incident report. In instances where a call is classified as something other than a domestic, and the call is in fact a domestic, the ECO, upon notification from the officer may reclassify the call as a domestic. B. OFFICER APPROACHING THE SCENE 1. Domestics are a high priority call. Officers will respond immediately with due consideration of the information available and coordinate their approach if two one-unit crews respond. 2. Remain in contact with the dispatcher, requesting assistance, (see "Communications" section above) information and updates as needed. If protective orders are in force, then verification and clarification should be obtained from the county : heriff's department. (See "protective orders" section below.) 3. Remain alert for suspect leaving the scene. _' C. OFFICER RESPONSIBILITY AT THE SCENE - w._ ,...,~ ~.a .~ , __:y, 3} i OPS-14.6 When officers respond to a call for assistance at the scene of a domestic abuse incident, they shall: 1. Approach the scene safely, and in an alert manner. 2. Identify yourself and give an explanation of your presence. Request entry into the home when conditions permit. When permission is freely and voluntarily given by either party, a search of the premises may occur. 3. When entry is refused, exercise persistence in gaining entry based on the request for assistance received by the department. Request communications re-establish contact with the complainant, if it has been lost, and reassess the situation. If entry continues to be refused, contact the watch commander/supervisor for further guidance if circumstances permit. 4. Forced entry may be allowed when probable cause exists to suspect that a felony is occurring, has just occurred, or that a life is in danger. In evaluating the need for forced entry, the officer (s) must consider the degree of urgency versus requesting a warrant, the possibility of danger, whether the suspected offense involved violence and whether the belief exists that persons may be armed. (See exigent circumstances analysis in Use of Force G/O) 5. In incidents where a suspect has vacated the scene, and probable cause exists for an arrest, a complaint and affidavit shall be prepared immediately, and forwarded to a judge for a request for issuance of an arrest warrant. However, an officer may arrest a violator within the first 24 hours of an incident without a warrant. (See Iowa Code Section 236.11) 6. Restore order. 7. Take control of all weapons known to be used, or used in a threatening manner, and safely store them. (See Seizure of Weapons, Iowa Code Chapter 809.) Iowa Code Section 809.1(1)(c) defines seizable property as "... property which if not seized by the state poses an imminent danger to a person's health, safety or welfare." When weapons are seized, the officer shall notify a supervisor of the seizure prior to the officer going off duty. 8. Assess the need for medical attention, and call for assistance if warranted, and whenever requested by the victim. The officer shall assist the victim in obtaining transportation to the nearest hospital if. requested. . 9. Determine complainant, separating all parties if possible, including suspect, victim, children, and other witnesses. 10.Interview all parties. If necessary, reasonable efforts should be' made to obtain a translator. ~ ~_~ 11.Following interviews, a conference of the responding ~#~cers~~ should occur, if necessary, with the goal of arriving at a cor~sensu~: for determining whether to arrest. Apply appropriate Chapter 236`'x', OPS-14.7 Domestic Abuse criteria in making the decision to arrest. If consensus or a determination is not made, a supervisor shall be called to assist. When an officer is solo in responding, they may confer with a supervisor as needed. Identifying the primary aggressor is necessary, as persons acting in self-defense are exempt from this mandatory arrest. 12. If probable cause exists, arrest the suspect. Read suspect Miranda rights. Place individual in custody. Field release or issuing of citations are not allowed in the event domestic abuse has occurred. This applies to either /both arrest for domestic abuse, related charges and / or violations of protective orders. If possible, immediately transport suspect to jail. Factors that tend to support a finding of probable cause for arrest include: physical injuries (including bruises or cuts); disheveled clothing or furniture; a victim's credible statements or visible fear; credible statements of witnesses, including children; and previous calls to the home. If probable cause exists, an arrest shall be made, regardless of the stated wishes of the victim or the apparent use of alcohol or drugs by either the victim or abuser. 13. If a child is present during an incident of domestic assault in which charges are filed, a mandatory report shall be made to the Department of Human Services. Any time a companion charge of "Child Endangerment" is made, Department of Human Services must be contacted. Notification shall include contacting DHS by phone prior to the end of the watch and forwarding copies of the written report. Reports should include names and DOB of all children present as well as an account of where they were at time of assault, what they saw, and/or heard. - 14.Collect and record evidence, including torn clothing, broken objects, etc. 15. Photograph the following: a. Victim in a full body picture (front and back). b. Victim's specific injury(s). c. Children. `-= d. Scene, including broken objects, weapons, general disarf~y, etc. e. If possible, the suspect's full body and any injuries, in addition to the mug shot. f. When photos are taken at a domestic incident, the evidence sheet should be marked as a domestic along with the incident number being noted g. When the property manager receives photos from a domestic incident, they shall be forwarded to the domestic abuse investigator. .::, _',: ~,..~ -~ . k~ _sl ~'J t.J G'~ OPS-14.8 16. When an arrest causes a child(ren) to be without responsible adult supervision, Department of Human Services shall be contacted immediately. Officers are responsible for the care of children until such time they are relieved of this obligation by DHS. 17. Upon filling out the complaint, the officer will also complete the victim section of the incident report, making sure to include name, address, DOB, SS#, sex and race. A photocopy of the incident report containing this information will be attached to the complaint. D. ENFORCEMENT OF COURT PROTECTION ORDERS Violation of a valid court order shall be enforced in the same manner and with the same vigor as violations of statutory law. When encountering potential court order violations in domestic violence or other contexts, officers shall follow these procedures. 1. In cases of domestic violence, officers shall use all reasonable means to quell open conflict, protect the victim(s) and enforce the law as applicable in procedures set forth in this policy on domestic violence. 2. The officer shall verify the existence of the order and it's provisions by requesting the ECO check with the Sheriff's Dept. in the county where the order was issued and, if available, by examining any copies of the order the victim may provide. 3. Arrest of the offender is the preferred agency response if probable cause for an arrest exists, whether or not the victim wishes to file a complaint. 4. If a person is suspected of domestic assault or violating a no contact order, the investigating officer shall run a criminal history on the suspect and check for any prior convictions of domestic assault or violation of a no contact order. (allows for enhanced penalties) E. WRITTEN REPORTING Written reports should be factual, specific and clear so as to present an accurate portrayal of the domestic abuse incident. Written documentation that will be made as a result of a domestic abuse arrest are the complaint and affidavit, a supplementary information report narrative, Iowa City Police Incident Report Form, and the Domestic Abuse Reporting Form. All officers present at a domestic shall complete a report including narrative detailing their observations. In instances where there is a no locate, or the call was incorrectly classified as a domestic, the primary officer shall complete a report detailing the circumstances and identifying the correct call classification. OPS-14.9 All reports involving a domestic or originally classified as a domestic, or involving the violation of a domestic abuse no contact order shall be forwarded to the departments domestic abuse investigator. Reports will, at a minimum, contain narratives which will include the following information: 1. full names of parties involved, including dates of birth of the suspect and victim 2. address and phone numbers for the victim, witnesses and those present, including the address and phone number of the location where the victim will be staying 3. reports should include names and DOB of all children present as well as an account of where they were at time of assault, what they saw, and/or heard 4. the relationship of the victim and suspect 5. location of the assault 6. whether no contact orders are known to exist 7. a description of the scene 8. weapons used 9. whether a 9-1-1 call was received and if the tape was preserved 10. documentation of injuries of all parties injured 11. if alcohol is involved, the result of any PBT given to the suspect and victim 12.whether they received medical treatment 13. an indication of whether the victim was presented their rights 14. excited utterances should be recorded in quotation marks. Other statements may be directly recorded or summarized. The demeanor, spirit and physical description of the suspect should be noted along with that of the victim --- 15. if the officer is aware of pending domestic charges, note that-fact in` the narrative 16. if in-car camera recording system was activated ~,:3 F. VICTIM RIGHTS ..._ ~: Chapter 236.12 identifies victim rights which must be provided;to the,.~~ victim in writing and / or verbally. The Iowa City Police Department wilF'' routinely present the victim their rights in written and verbal form. Officers at the scene will present the victim a printed copy of their rights and request the victim sign the sheet. One copy of the form should be left with the victim and the other included with the domestic abuse supplemental report and narrative. _~.1 . 4 ~= OPS-14.10 G. FOLLOW-UP INVESTIGATIONS All domestic abuse reports shall be forwarded to the domestic abuse investigator for review. Useful information not obtained in the initial report gathering stage may require afollow-up investigation. History of domestic abuse, past requests for service with observance of frequency of occurrence noted, interview of witnesses and any other information applicable may be included. Follow-up photographs may be taken as injuries change in their appearance. Other photographs may be taken as part of the investigation, however, all photographs shall be appropriately documented. If an emergency 9-1-1 call initiated the domestic abuse response, then the domestic abuse investigator shall forward a written request to the ECO supervisor for a copy of the call to be taped and forwarded to the domestic abuse investigator. H. CONFIDENTIALITY Iowa Code Chapter 236A defines and describes issues of confidentiality specific to victim services. Victim services personnel shall be afforded courteous and respectful treatment, as they must honor the law reciprocally. HOSTAGE SITUATIONS As a hostage situation becomes apparent to the investigating officef, and /=- or ECO, the watch commander /supervisor. shall be immediately notified. Following an assessment of the circumstances, a determination shall be, -a made as to strategy for resolution of the call. Special Response Tean- (SRT) and/or Crisis Negotiation Team (CNT) protocol and personnel .may,. -' determine this strategy. ._,~ ~~ J. OFFICER TRAINING ~°~ In addition to initial domestic abuse training at the Iowa Law Enforcement Academy, the Iowa City Police Department will routinely offer training in regard to domestic abuse. Training will be provided by both in-house staff, as well as utilizing outside authorities as available. OPS-14.11 K. OFFICERS CHARGED WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE Concerning application of Iowa Law, should a law enforcement officer be arrested for domestic abuse, they will be treated equitably as would any other citizen. Likewise, the Iowa City Police Department will adhere to the Federal Lautenberg Amendment concerning the possession of firearms should a domestic abuse conviction occur, within this jurisdiction, or any other within the United States. In responding to a domestic abuse call for assistance, should it be known that any sworn officer, of this or any other law enforcement agency, in or out-of-state, are identified as a suspect, the watch commander / supervisor will be immediately notified. If the person arrested/suspected is not an Iowa City Police Officer, the watch supervisor will notify that officer's department. Additionally, the watch commander /supervisor shall be notified if any other employee of the Iowa City Police Department is arrested for domestic abuse. Following any of these notifications, the appropriate division commander will be contacted. In the event that any officer or employee of the Iowa City Police Department is arrested for domestic abuse, or involved as a victim of a domestic assault, or is a suspect but not arrested for a domestic assault, appropriate referrals for services and assistance will be made. Internal Investigations will be conducted as warranted. A copy of the report on such an incident shall be forwarded to the Office of the Chief of Police. r Sam el Hargadin hief o Police WARNING This directive is for departmental use only and does not apply in any criminal or civil proceeding. The department policy should not be construed as a creation of higher legal standard of safety or care in an evidentiary sense with respect to third-party claims. Violations of this directive will only form the basis ,for ,departmental administrative sanctions. ,.~ `: LEG-03.1 ~e', o~ c IELD INTERVIEWS . ~°~ ;~ F ~~ AND "PAT-DOWN" SEARCHES Date of Issue General Order Number October 13, 1999 99-12 Effective Date Section Code ~--- November 7, 2009 LEG-03 Reevaluation Date Amends /Cancels October 2010 C.A. L. E.A. Reference 1.2.3, 1.2.4 INDEX AS: Field Interviews Field Information (FI) Cards Pat-Down Searches Searches .a t I. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to assist officers in determining when field interviews and pat-down searches are warranted and the manner in which they shall be conducted. II. POLICY The field interview is an important point of contact for officers in preventing and investigating criminal activity. But even when conducted with respect for involved citizens and in strict conformance with the law, it can be perceived by some as a means of police harassment or intimidation conducted in a discriminatory manner against groups or individuals. In order to maintain the effectiveness and legitimacy of this practice and to protect the safety of officers in approaching suspicious individuals, members of the Iowa City Police Department shall conduct field interviews and perform pat-down searches in conformance with procedures set forth in this policy. LEG-03.2 III. DEFINITIONS A. Field interview: The brief detainment of an individual, whether on foot or in a vehicle, based on reasonable suspicion for the purposes of determining the individual's identity and resolving the officer's suspicions. B. Pat-Down Search: A "frisk" or external feeling of the outer garments of an individual for weapons only. C. Reasonable Suspicion: Articulable facts that, within the totality of the circumstances, lead an officer to reasonably suspect that criminal activity has been, is being or is about to be committed. _ IV. PROCEDURES `~y Y, -..~:x9 ~~, A. FIELD INTERVIEWS . r_ 1. Justification for conducting a Field Interview - Officers ~ #nay shop individuals for the purpose of conducting a field interview only wk~re reasonable suspicion is present. Reasonable suspicion must be more than a hunch or feeling, but need not meet the test for probable cause sufficient to make an arrest. In justifying the stop, the officer must be able to point to specific facts that, when taken together with rational inferences, reasonably warrant the stop. Such facts include, but are not limited to: a. The appearance or demeanor of an individual suggests that he/she is part of a criminal enterprise or is engaged in criminal activity; b. The actions of the suspect suggest that he/she is engaged in a criminal activity; c. The hour of the day or night is inappropriate for the suspect's presence in the area; d. The suspect's presence in a location is inappropriate; e. The suspect is carrying a suspicious object; f. The suspect's clothing bulges in a manner that suggests he/she is carrying a weapon; g. The suspect is in proximate time and place to the alleged crime; h. The officer has knowledge of the suspect's prior criminal record or involvement in criminal activity. 2. Procedures for initiating a Field Interview -Based on observance of suspicious circumstances or upon information from investigation, an officer may initiate the stop of a suspect if he/she has an articulable, reasonable suspicion to do so. The following guidelines shall apply when making an authorized stop to conduct a field interview. a. When approaching the suspect, the officer shall clearly identify him/herself as a member of the Iowa City Police Department, and if LEG-03.3 not in uniform, the officer shall announce his/her identity and display departmental identification. b. Officers shall be courteous at all times during the contact but maintain caution and vigilance for furtive movements to retrieve weapons, conceal or discard contraband, or other suspicious actions. c. Before approaching more than one suspect, individual officers should determine whether the circumstances warrant a request for backup assistance and whether the contact can and should be delayed until such assistance arrives. d. Officers shall confine their questions to those concerning the suspect's identity, place of residence and other inquiries necessary to resolve the officer's suspicions. However, in no instance shall an officer detain a suspect longer than is reasonably necessary to make these limited inquiries. e. Officers are not required to give suspects "Miranda" warnings in order to conduct field interviews unless the person is in custody and about to be interrogated. f. Suspects are not required, nor can they be compelled, to answer any questions posed during field interviews. Failure to respond to an officer's inquiries is not, in and of itself, sufficient grounds to make an arrest although it may provide sufficient justification for additional observation and investigation. 3. Reporting - If after conducting a field interview there is no basis for making an arrest, the officer should record the facts of the interview on the departmental FIELD INFORMATION CARD (FI card) and write the incident number on the FI card. Field Information Cards should be submitted to the Records Division. Upon entry of basic information from the FI card into the records system (name, address and telephone number) as well as information regarding the purpose for the field interview, Records shall forward the original FI cards to the Lieutenant of Investigations. This function may also be accomplished by;~#he use of warning citations. B. PAT-DOWN SEARCHES _, ,. 1. Justification for conducting Pat-Down Searches: An officer has the ngfi~ to ~~ perform a pat-down search of the outer garments of a suspect` for weapons if he/she has been legitimately stopped with reasorle suspicion and only when the officer has a reasonable fear for his/her own or another person's safety. Clearly, not every field interview poses sufficient justification for conducting spat-down search. Following are some criteria that may form the basis for establishing justification for performing apat-down search. Officers should note that these factors are not all-inclusive; there are other factors that could or should be considered. The existence of more than one of these factors may be required in order to support reasonable suspicion for the search. LEG-03.4 a. The type of crime suspected -particularly in crimes of violence where the use or threat of deadly weapons is involved. b. Where more than one suspect must be handled by a single officer. c. The hour of the day and the location where the stop takes place. d. Prior knowledge of the suspect's use of force and/or propensity to carry weapons. e. The appearance and demeanor of the suspect. f. Visual indications that suggest that the suspect is carrying weapon. 2. Procedures for performing aPat-Down Search a. When reasonable suspicion exists to perform apat-down search, it should be performed with due caution, restraint and sensitivity. These searches are only justifiable and shall only be performed to protect the safety of .officers and others and may never be used to harass individuals or groups of individuals or as a pretext for obtaining evidence. Under these circumstances, pat-down searches should be conducted in the following manner. 1) When possible, pat-down searches should be conducted in the presence of a second officer who provides protective cover. 2) Because pat-down searches are cursory in nature, they should be performed with the suspect in a standing position. Should a weapon be visually observed, a more secure search position may be used. 3) In a pat-down search, officers are permitted only to feel the outer clothing of the suspect. Officers may not place their hands in pockets unless they feel an object that could reasonably be a weapon. 4) If the suspect is carrying an object such as a handbag, suitcase, briefcase, backpack, book bag or any other item that may conceal a weapon, the officer should not open the item but instead place it out of the suspect's reach. 5) If the external feeling of the suspect's clothing fails to disclose evidence of a weapon, no further search may be made. If evidence of a weapon is present, an officer may retrieve that item only. If the item is a weapon the possession of which is a crime, the officer may make an arrest of the suspect and complete afull-c~rstody ;', search of the suspect. b. It is emphasized that none of these requirements preclude officers from requesting consent from the individual for a more thorough search, . i.e.: __. backpacks, bags etc. ~y- 3. if during the course of an authorized pat-down search of an individual, an ~,j? officer comes upon an item that the officer readily recognizes through his/her experience and training is probably contraband, the officer may remove the item from the suspects clothing. If upon further examination the seized item is of a nature for which the possession of is crime, the LEG-03.5 officer may make an arrest of the suspect and complete afull-custody search of the suspect. Samuel Hargadine, Chief of Police WARNING This directive is for departmental use only and does not apply in any criminal or civil proceeding. The department policy should not be construed as a creation of a higher legal standard of safety or care in an evidentiary sense with respect to third-party claims. Violations of this directive .will only form the basis for departmental administrative sanctions. "a -~:~, .. _ ~t Y t r_.. iZJ Iowa City Police Department Standard Operating Guideline N C'~ `n fir, v D.~ n ~.. r SOG #: 09-02 Effective date: 12/11 /2009 ~~ .:., -~~"' Subject: Reference: c~~ ~ ' Lineu Procedures Witnesses, Show u s, Idenf a iofi Section: Issue #: w 1 Comm S" n e: CALEA 42.2.11 Purpose The purpose of this directive is to provide guidelines to be used when having victims and/or witnesses identify potential subjects either through a Lineup or a Show-Up. Victim and/or witness memories are best immediately following the incident, giving investigating officer a better opportunity to identify the person responsible. In situations where a formal line-up is not feasible, officers must rely on a field investigative procedure such as a field show-up to identify a suspect. The most common situations are when a crime is still fresh and the suspect is believed to still be in the vicinity. Other factors include the time of day, number of witness and/or victims and the availability of victims and/or witnesses. Benefits of a field show-up include: quick verification of a subject's identity. If the detainee is not the suspect, officer(s) can continue searching for the person responsible. DEFINITIONS: Lineup - A lineup is any procedure in which a witness to a crime or other incident is asked to identify a suspect from among a grouping of individuals with similar features in order to eliminate or confirm the identity of a suspect. Such procedures may involve actually viewing individuals or photographs of individuals. Physical Lineup - Is a lineup of live individuals. This procedure is not required by the Johnson County Attorney's office and is not used by the Iowa City Police Department. If an exceptional case were to arise in which it is determined that a physical lineup is necessary, the investigating officer shall consult with the Johnson County Attorney's office for advice on how to proceed and follow the guidance provided. Photo Lineup - Is any lineup in which photographs are used in lieu of a live individual. This procedure is often used when a suspect has not been identified or when such person has not been located or arrested. Show-Up - A suspect is viewed by a victim or witness shortly following the commission of a crime for the purpose of identifying or eliminating the susp~ts as a perpetrator. c`7 Vic? r°., ~° PROCEDURES: -_+~ ~ ~r -v rn Photo Lineup Procedure - ~~ ,~ A photo lineup is the structured presentation of six to eight photogri~hs containing a recent photograph of the suspect plus photographs of other persons of similar appearance to be shown to a victim or witness for the purpose of identifying or eliminating the suspect as the perpetrator. While the use of the use of electronic recording equipment is not required, the officer should consider recording the procedure. The officer shall record the composition photo lineup. Composition of lineup - In composing the photo lineup the officer should: 1. Include only one suspect in each procedure /lineup; 2. The officer will determine if the photos will be presented sequentially or all at once. 3. Select fillers who generally fit the witness's description of the perpetrator provided by the witness, or when the description provided differs significantly from the appearance of the suspect, fillers should resemble the suspect in significant features. a. Officers may consider using booking photos from the Johnson County Jail, photos from the investigations section, or other sources. 4. If multiple photos of the suspect are reasonably available to the officer he/she should select a photo that resembles the suspect's description or appearance at the time of the incident. 5. Include at least five fillers per identification procedure. 6. Consider that complete uniformity of features is not required. 7. Create a consistent appearance between the suspect and fillers with respect to any unique or unusual features (scars, marks, tattoos) used to describe the perpetrator by artificial adding or concealing that feature. 8. Consider placing suspects in a different position in each lineup, both across the cases and with multiple witnesses in the same case. Position the suspect randomly in the lineup. 9. When presenting a new suspect, avoid reusing fillers used in previous lineups shown to the same witness. 10. Ensure that no writings, comments or other information concerning the suspect's previous arrest(s) will be heard or visible to the witness. 11. Review the lineup once completed to ensure that the suspect does not unduly stand out. Prior to the presentation of a photo lineup the officer should interview the witness and obtain as detailed description of the suspect as possible. The officer should also determine the witnesses opportunity to view the event, i.e. distance from the event, lighting, length of observations etc. During this time officers shall refrain from making comments that may influence the witness. In instances where more than one witness is available, they shall be interviewed and view the photo lineup separately. The witnesses shall be instructed not to talk to each other about the line up prior to, during, or after the photo lineup. Additionally the officer shall provide instructions to witnesses on the line up process. These instructions should include language which includes the following: In a moment you will be shown several photographs. The person who committed the offense may or may not be among the pictures you are about to see. 1 will not be able to assist you. Keep in mind that the hair styles, facial hair may easily be changed. Also photographs may not always depict the true complexion of a person, the person may be lighter or darker than shown in the photo. It is as important to exclude innocent persons as it is to identify the perpetrator. Focus on the event and take as much time as you need viewing the photos before commenting. Then tell me if you recognize any of the persons in these photographs. I will not be able to tell you whether your selection, if you make one, is a suspect in the incident. . After you have observed the photos, 1 will ask you Is this the person you saw (insert the description of the event) contained in the photographs. If so, please show me which photograph. Take your time in answering this question. If you answer "Yes" 1 will ask you to describe in your own words how certain you are. Because you are involved in an ongoing investigation, in order to prevent compromising the investigation, you should avoid discussing this identification procedure or its results. This includes discussing the incident with o~ber witnesses or the media. 1 will not be able to provide you with any f~dbac~or comment on the result of your identification. ~~'? ° D n `~~ ~ ...~ -=tc~ rGm -t, ~' ~ °~~ r ~ ~ ~ Do you understand the manner in which this procedure will be conducted and the instructions 1 have provided? When presenting the lineup, the officer shall not provided feedback to the witness and shall refrain from making suggestive comments or remarks to the witness before, during and after the process. Once the witness has made their selection or non-selection, the officer shall thoroughly document the lineup procedure to include: 1. Identification information and sources of the photos used; 2. Names of all persons presented in the lineup; 3. Date and time of the identification; 4. To the extent possible, the officer should keep the contents of the lineup intact and submit it to the property custodian. If circumstances prevent keeping the lineup intact the officer shall photocopy or otherwise record the contents of the lineup. 5. Document both the positive identification of a suspect as well as any non-identification. 6. Statements made by the witness regarding their confidence in their selection /non-selection. _ 0 N d O WD ~ ~~ ~ n ~"C ~ ~ =<rn ~ "~ ~° ~~ ~ r ~ ~' N Iowa City Police Department Standard Operating Guideline N C7 O ~ ~.O Dr ~ SOG #: Effective date: ~~ ' .,~ ~ 09-03 12111!2009 ~ Subject: Reference: o ~ " Show U Procedures Lineups, Identifications, ~es.~- Witt~s Section: Issue #: r" c.3 1 Command i t r . CALEA 42.2.12 ~ ~ U Purpose The purpose of this directive is to provide guidelines to be used when having victims and/or witnesses identify potential subjects either through a Lineup or a Show-Up. Victim and/or witness memories are best immediately following the incident, giving investigating officer a better opportunity to identify the person responsible. In situations where a formal line-up is not feasible, officers must rely on a field investigative procedure such as a field show-up to identify a suspect. The most common situations are when a crime is still fresh and the suspect is believed to still be in the vicinity. Other factors include the time of day, number of witness and/or victims and the availability of victims and/or witnesses. Benefits of a field show-up include: quick verification of a subject's identity. If the detainee is not the suspect, officer(s) can continue searching for the person responsible. DEFINITIONS: Lineup - A lineup is any procedure in which a witness to a crime or other incident is asked to identify a suspect from among a grouping of individuals with similar features in order to eliminate or confirm the identity of a suspect. Such procedures may involve actually viewing individuals or photographs of individuals. Physical Lineup - Is a lineup of live individuals. This procedure is not required by the Johnson County Attorney's office and is not used by the Iowa City Police Department. If an exceptional case were to arise in which it is determined that a physical lineup is necessary, the investigating officer shall consult with the Johnson County Attorney's office for advice on how to proceed and follow the guidance provided. Photo Lineup - Is any lineup in which photographs are used in lieu of a live individual. This procedure is often used when a suspect has not been identified or when such person has not been located or arrested. Show-Up - A suspect is viewed by a victim or witness shortly following the commission of a crime for the purpose of identifying or eliminating the suspects as a perpetrator. PROCEDURES: Show-up Procedure - Field show-ups can be used whenever a suspect is apprehended within close proximity to the crime and within a reasonable time frame. Prior to the show-up, officers will determine and document a description of the suspect(s) and provide instructions to witnesses on the show-up process. Because a show up is inherently suggestive, compelling reasons must exist before it is decided to use this procedure. These compelling reasons may be: 1. Proximity to the crime 2. Method of flight 3. Comparing factors to the witness's initial description 4. Public Safety concerns /exigency 5. This allows the officer to quickly identify or eliminate a person in custody in order to expedite the investigation. If longer than an hour has transpired from the time that the crime was committed anfj,the time the show-up would occur, officers should consider u a g a ~oto lineup. ~~ c°rn~ ~~ 6. If the officers have detained the wrong person, finding out~~edi~tely ~°" allows officers to focus their investigation. ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Conducting ashow-up identification - ~~ -~` N 1. It is preferred that an officer transport the witness(es) to the locatfbh of the detained suspect. This will lessen the time that anon-involved party will be detained. If the witness(es) elect to transport themselves they shall be instructed not to speak with anyone about the incident prior to arriving at the show-up. 2. If there are multiple witnesses immediately available, they should be transported separately. In instances where this is not practical they shall be instructed not to discuss the incident or suspect while enroute to the location and shall make separate, independent identifications. 3. If a positive identification is made by one witness, officers may consider using a photo lineup for subsequent witnesses. 4. Refrain from statements that may unduly influence the witness's selection. 5. Advise the witness that the person they are looking at may or may not be the perpetrator. 6. Regardless of whether identification is made, the incident will continue to be investigated. 7. Providing there is an unobstructed view and adequate lighting, viewing may take place from the vehicle. The officer should document the witness position in the car as well as the distance between the witness and the detainee and lighting conditions. 8. Officers should not provide feedback to the witnesses} and refrain from making suggestive comments or remarks before, during or after viewing. When conducting a show-up, the investigating officer will determine and document a description of the suspect(s) prior to the show-up identification. Additionally the officer shall provide instructions to witnesses on the show-up process. These instructions should include language which includes the following: In a moment you will be shown an individual; if is as important to exclude innocent persons as it is to identify the perpetrator. The person you are looking at may or may not be the perpetrator. Focus on the event and take as much time as you need. Remember people may not appear exactly as they did at the time of the event because of changes in clothing, hairstyle or other readily changeable characteristics. After you have observed the individual, 1 will ask you "Is this the person you saw (insert the description of the event)?" Take your time in answering this question. If you answer "Yes" 1 will ask you to describe in your own words how certain you are. Because you are involved in an ongoing investigation, in order to prevent compromising the investigation, you should avoid discussing this identification procedure or its results. This includes discussing the incident with other witnesses or the media. 1 will not be able to provide you with any feedback or comment on the result of your identification. ,,~ a Do you understand the manner in which this procedure will be condu~,ar~the .. instructions 1 have provided? ~'=-~ ~ ..,,.. c7-< ~ Following the identification procedure, the officer shall document tl~~sult~s ofd the show-up. This documentation should include: o~ ~ ~~ N w 2 3 4 5 Identification of the detainee; Name and contact information of the witnesses (even if identification is not made); The results of the identification including any non-identifications; Determine and document the witnesses confidence level in their identification; Clothing and physical description of the detainee. Officers should strongly consider obtaining a photo of the detainee. _ N O 4 ~~ i3 ~ i11~r ~~ ""~~ ~ =<rn -° ~~ ~ ~ Iowa City Police Department Standard Operating Guideline o ~° n o - ~~ rn D _...~ c-~ ,,,~ n"o N SOG #: Effective date: =-~~ tD 'gym -° ~ 09-04 12/23/2009 Subject: Reference: ° ~ ~., ~~ Juvenile Curfew Juveniles, ~ Section: Issue #: ``' Ori final Comm d "gn re: Originallssue: - 12/23/2009 u PURPOSE: The purpose of this guideline is to provide procedures for the enforcement of City Ordinance 8-6-2 titled Juvenile Curfew. This ordinance was developed in response to a need to provide options for the legal system to address a significant number of juveniles being out during the late night / early morning hours. America's Children: Key National Indicators of Wetl-Being - 2009PhysiCal Environment and Safety (http://www, childstats.gov/americaschildren/phenviro. asp) "The physical environment in which children live plays a role in their health, development, and safety. This section presents indicators on how environmental conditions such as outdoor and indoor air quality, drinking water quality, and exposure to lead may affect children. In addition, indicators of housing problems, youth victims of serious violent crimes, and child and adolescent injury and mortality are presented:" "Violence impacts the lives of young people who experience, witness, or feel threatened by it. In addition to the direct physical harm suffered by victims of serious violence, such violence can adversely affect young victims` mental health and development and increase the likelihood that they themselves will commit acts of serious violence.sz,ss Youth ages 12-17 were more than twice as likely as adults to be victims of serious violent crimes.84~~ The ordinance states in part persons under the age of eighteen (18) are particularly susceptible by their lack of maturity and experience to participate in unlawful and gang-related activities and to be victims of older perpetrators of crime". The City has found that there has been a significant breakdown in the supervision and guidance normally provided by parents and guardians for juveniles, and ... legal sanctions to enforce such responsibility have had demonstrated effectiveness in many cities, the City has determined that a curfew ordinance will increase the responsibility of parents and guardians for juveniles within their control and decrease juvenile delinquency." In response to these concerns the Curfew Ordinance was develo~l as much to protect juveniles as it is to protect the public. o o ~ c := rn v ~ ~ .~.. DEFINITIONS: ~~ ~ Parens patriae - A doctrine that holds that the state has a re~ib'I~' y t look after the well-being of children and to assume the rolea~nt i necessary. a) Holds that the state has not only a right but a dut~to ca~e for children who are neglected, delinquent, or in some other way disadvantaged. This philosophy is echoed by the "justification language" of the ordinance as it states "WHEREAS, the City has an interest in providing for the protection of minors from each other and from other persons, for the enforcement of parental control over and responsibility for children, for the protection of the general public, and for the reduction of the incidence of juvenile criminal activities"... Curfew - is defined in Black's Law Dictionary as "a law which imposes on people (particularly children) the obligation to remove themselves from the streets on or before a certain time of night". Non-secured custody - (as defined in the ordinance) means custody in an unlocked multipurpose area, such as a lobby, office or interrogation room which is not designed, set aside or used as a secure detention area, and the person arrested is not physically secured during the period of custody in the area; the person is physically accompanied by a peace officer or a person employed by the facility where the person arrested is being held; and the use of the area is limited to providing non-secured custody only while awaiting transfer to an appropriate juvenile facility or to court, for contacting of and release to the person's parents or other responsible adult or for other administrative purposes; but not for longer than six (6) hours without the~oral or written order of a judge or magistrate authorizing the detention. PROCEDURES: Juvenile Curfew Ordinance City Ordinance 8-6-2, Juvenile Curfew prescribes the hours that persons under the age of 18 may be out and lists exceptions (activities) to the ordinance. (attached) The highlights of the ordinance are as follows: 1. The ordinance is a simple misdemeanor and should an incident rise to a citation it should be written on a Uniform (traffic) Citation. 2. The use of a detention facility (i.e. Linn County) for a violation of this ordinance is expressly prohibited by the ordinance. If a juvenile is transported to a juvenile detention facility it MUST be for something other than a violation of this ordinance. 3. The ordinance prohibits persons under designated ages from being in certain locations between set hours. Places that are prohibited are stores, parking lots, parks, playgrounds, streets, sidewalks and common hallways in apartment buildings. This includes juveniles being in vehicles in parking lots of said locations. 4. This ordinance DOES NOT APPLY if the juvenile is accompanied by a "responsible adult". This is defined as a parent, guardian or other adult specifically authorized by law or authorized by a parent or guardian to have custody or control of a minor. There is NO minimum age for the responsible adult thus. it is conceivable that a younger child may be in the custody of an older (18 + years of age) sibling. Different ages have different hours. The hours of the c ~ w a~ as 5 . follows - (ages included) ~r~ a a. 13 or younger -between 22:00 and 05:00 ~~ N b. 14 through 15 -between 23:00 and 05:00 ~~ ~ ~'""' c. 16 through 17 -between 00:00 and 05:00 ~~ ~ ~ 6. Exceptions to the ordinance are as follows: ~ ~ ~''' G? a. If the juvenile is traveling between home and their plae~ of employment; (one hour before or after) b. If the minor is traveling to or from a religious, s chool, political activity. (one hour before or after) c. The juvenile hours of work are within the curfew hours; d. The juvenile is traveling through Iowa City; e. The juvenile is on an emergency errand for a responsible adult. 7. Parental Responsibility -Section 8-6-2 D of the ordinance states "It shall be unlawful for a parent or guardian having legal custody of a minor knowingly to permit or by ineffective control to allow the minor to be in violation of this Section. This requirement is intended to hold a neglectful or careless parent or guardian up to a reasonable community standard of parental responsibility through an objective test. It shalt, therefore, be no defense that a parent or guardian was completely indifferent to the activities or conduct or whereabouts of such minor." Violation of this section is a simple misdemeanor and should be written on Uniform (traffic) Citation. 8. Enforcement Procedures - Section 8-6-2 E of the ordinance prescribes steps for enforcement of the ordinance when dealing with juveniles under this ordinance. a. Officers should determine the age of the juvenile, when instances arise that a juvenile does not have any type of identification the officer should "use his or her best judgment in determining the age". b. Grounds for taking a juvenile into Custody include the refusal of the person to sign the citation, continued violation of the ordinance, refusal to identify themselves; the person constitutes an immediate threat to their own safety or the safety of the public. c. The use of secure custody is prohibited. Juveniles may be transported to the PD or to a responsible adult but they shall not be taken a detention facility for violation of this ordinance. If a juvenile is taken into custody for violation of this ordinance, the officer is required to notify the adult responsible for the juvenile as soon as possible. The minor SHALL be released to the responsible adult upon promise of the person to produce the minor in court. d. Minors Without Adult Supervision - If the juvenile does not have a responsible adult or the officer cannot locate the parent, guardian or person legally responsible for the minor, the officer shall place the juvenile in a "shelter care fa~ty". Prior to placement in a shelter, the officer shl nor a ,~. supervisor who shall ensure the placement is corjsin~rith ,,,~„ the ordinance. ~~ ^' ~°" =-a ~ `° 9. When an officer uses the ordinance to intervene in juvent'l~e'~ti~es, but does not cite pursuant to the ordinance, the ~i~r cshall ~ document such action on a juvenile complaint forr~i' including demographic information and submit the form to the records se tion. (note curfew warning on the description) 10. When a person is cited pursuant to this ordinance, the officer shall complete a report detailing the circumstances. The citation may serve as page one of the report. The narrative portion of the Juvenile form shall include the details of the incident. If an adult is charged for violation of this ordinance, the charging officer shall complete a narrative detailing the circumstances surrounding the incident again with the cite serving as page one. If the charges are related to another incident the officer may use the same narrative of the original call provided it includes the details pertaining to the curfew violation. This is anon-scheduled violation with a fine not to exceed fifty dollars. "' 11. Prior to going off-duty, officers shall advise an on-duty su~cais~hati"~ a person was cited or warned pursuant to this ordinance. ~,,~~ ~ '~"" =sc~ `° ~ 12.The supervisor shall ensure that associated forms rely t~the curfew violation have been submitted. o~ w ~ 13.The Sergeant of Planning and Research will notify the Juvenile f~ourt Office of the charge. 14. The Sergeant of Planning and Research will maintain records pertaining to the enforcement of this ordinance including demographic information, frequency, and location information. This information shall be provided to the Chief of Police on a monthly basis. IN PRACTICE - As with other laws/ordinances it is expected that officers will continue to exercise discretion in the application of the ordinance. This ordinance was passed as a tool to address the issue of unsupervised juveniles becoming the victim of a crime and/or becoming involved in problems during the overnight hours. It is not expected nor is it desired that officers cite all juveniles who may be out at night. It is expected that enforcement of the ordinance will be based, of the totality of the circumstances related to the call. I.e. was the person cooperative, were parents responsive, is there past history of violations for curfew or other violations, the specifics related to the call such as, was it merely a juvenile out after hours or was there a fight, etc. Until March 1, 2010 officers shall warn persons in violation of this ordinance in lieu of citing them. If prior to March 1, 2010 circumstances are such that the officer believes that a juvenile or adult should be charged under this section, the officer shall consult with a supervisor prior to issuing the citation. IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT USE OF FORCE REPORT June 2009 Ofc # Date Inc# Incident Force Used 2009 06/07 6-01 28122 Disturbance Officers used hands-on control techniques to arrest and transport an aggressive and assaultive 51 6-OS 28787 Armed Subject 06/29/ 6-10 29843 OWI 45/43 51 6-11 29872 Hit and Run Accident erson. While investigating a report of a man with a gun, an officer detained four suspects at gunpoint (a handgun was found by officers). Officers used hands-on control techniques to arrest and transport an agitated person seemingly intent on harming himself. An officer used hands-on control techniques and discharged a Taser to arrest an assaultive and intoxicated driver. 32 6-11 30054 Traffic Stop An officer used hands-on control techniques to capture and detain a fleeing, resistive subject. 51 6-12 30070 Fight An officer used hands-on control techniques and discharged a Taser while controlling an uncooperative combatant. 44 6-13 30393 Fight At a supervisor's instruction, an officer discharged a Taser during the apprehension of a fleeing suspect that had just repeatedly stabbed his victim. 06/07/ 6-14 30524 Weapons Officers displayed firearms while confronting an 33/35/ Offenses agitated person armed with a long gun that had 36 been threatening his neighbors. 59 6-21 31578 Disorderly An officer used hands-on control techniques and Conduct discharged a Taser to control and arrest an agitated and physically uncooperative person. 20 6-25 32218 Armed Subject An officer displayed his sidearm while arresting a suspect that had fled from officers investigating a report of a man threatening other persons with a gun. 85/88/ 6-25 32218 Search Warrant Members of the tactical team displayed firearms 93/04/ while serving ahigh-risk search warrant related 16/22/ to a weapons offense. A K-9 unit was also used 25/29/ to search for suspects hiding in the, residence. 49/51 / 54/55/ :. 59 - -= lrva " < ~~~~ Y J A , -- v 99/85/ 6-30 33270 Search Warrant Members of the tactical team displayed firearms 93/04/ while serving ahigh-risk narcotics search 06/08/ warrant at a location where weapons had 16/22/ previously been present. 25/29/ 34/35/ 49/51 / 54/55/ 59 IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT USE OF FORCE REPORT July 2009 Ofc # Date Inc # Incident Force Used 2009- 46/15 07-01 33448 Assist Other Agency 09/43 07-05 34156 Disorderly Conduct 13/43 07-18 36461 Domestic Assault 11/43/ 07-19 36648 Fight 54/55 32 07-26 37801 Out w/ Subject 07/32/ 07-31 38743 Armed Subject 27 11 07-31 38740 Armed Subject Officers displayed sidearms while assisting another law enforcement agency conducting a felony car stop of a stolen car whose occupants were possibly armed. Officers used hands-on control techniques and discharged Tasers to control and arrest an aggressive combatant. Officers used hands-on control techniques and displayed a Taser to control and arrest an assailant. Officers used hands-on control techniques and OC (pepper spray) to arrest combatants. An officer used hands-on control techniques to guide and transport a passive resistive prisoner. Officers displayed sidearms while conducting a high-risk stop of a vehicle after one of the occupants reportedly threatened another person with a handgun. An officer displayed her sidearm while arresting a suspect that had fled from officers investigating a report of a man threatening another person with a gun. /-~~,, V Ct„j ~ ~o ~ IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT -}-' USE OF FORCE REPORT a c ~v ~ August 2009 ~ Ofg# . .~ to Inc # Incident Force Used ~°, 2009- 09 08-01 38973 Fight Officer used OC to stop a fight separate combatants. 32 08-02 39187 Fight Officer used hands-on control techniques to arrest and transport a resistive combatant. 57/60 08-02 39312 Domestic Officers used hands-on control techniques to Assault arrest the assailant. 98 08-03 39411 Injured Animal Officer discharged his sidearm to destroy a critically injured deer. 60 08-04 39649 Disturbance Officer used hands-on control techniques and displayed a Taser to arrest an assaultive subject. _ 29 08-OS 39682 Car/Deer Officer discharged his sidearm to destroy a Collision critically injured deer. 84 08-09 40420 Shots Fired Officer displayed his sidearm while arresting two subjects, one of whom had fired a handgun outside of a local bar. 16/40 08-14 41390 Assault Officers used hands-on control techniques to arrest a physically resistive assailant. 20/59 08-21 42812 Fight Officers used hands-on control techniques to arrest a fleeing, then resistive assailant. 08 08-22 43084 Fight Officer discharged a Taser to stop a combatant from repeatedly striking another. 50/58 08-23 43411 Fight Officers used hands-on control techniques to arrest a physically resistive combatant. 02/08 08-24 43596 Suspicious Officers used hands-on control techniques to Activity detain a delusional, resistive subject and transport him for evaluation/treatment. 04 08-22 43078 Out with Officer saw an intoxicated person accosting Subject others. Officer used OC and hands-on control techniques to arrest the resistive subject following a foot pursuit. 60 08-23 43377 Out with Officer used hands-on control techniques to Subject arrest a resistive, fleeing and intoxicated subject. 13 08-25 44060 Fight Officer used hands-on control techniques to arrest and transport a resistive and intoxicated subject threatening to harm herself. 20/59 08-27 44315 Fight Officers used hands-on control techniques to arrest and transport a resistive and intoxicated subject attempting to take a police car. 30 08-28 44739 Injured Animal Officer discharged sidearm to destroy an injured deer. 27 08-31 45477 Robbery Officer displayed his sidearm while searching for, and arresting, an armed (handgun displayed) robbery suspect. o .~ ~ ~ ~o ac ~ ~ °` ~~ ....~ c°~ 7- V ...r ~i . ~,. °~ F--Q ~' o o• d a _. ~1L~~ IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT 2009 OEC -2 Pf1 2~ 03 CITY' CLERK 16~/~ Cl~t~OW,~nc # 2009- USE OF FORCE REPORT September 2009 Incident Force Used 12 09-03 45908 Fight Officer used hands-on control techniques to arrest and transport a resistive subject. 38 09-03 45964 Domestic Officer displayed a Taser to stop an assault and Assault to gain compliance from the assailant. 13 09-03 46075 Traffic Stop Officer briefly initiated a vehicle pursuit (then discontinued) when violator drove away during a traffic stop. 84/18/ 09-OS 46756/ Burglary Officers used hands-on control techniques and 32/55 46767 discharged a Taser (drive-stun) to control and arrest a combative suspect under the influence of 85 09-06 46801 Assault Officer used hands-on control techniques to arrest a resistive and intoxicated subject. 13 09-06 46954 Arrest Warrant Officer initiated a vehicle pursuit when a wanted subject (felony warrants) drove away after being stopped. Subject was arrested when he subsequently stopped and surrendered. 89/34/ 09-07 47179 Disturbance Officers used hands-on control techniques to 42 arrest a combative and intoxicated subject 89/45/ 09-09 47510 Collision 57 48 09-17 49033 Traffic Stop 02/57 09-18 49154 Disturbance 27/31 09-19 49387 Intoxicated Driver Officers used hands-on control techniques to restrain a combative and intoxicated driver who had intentionally and repeatedly rammed another occupied vehicle with his vehicle. Officer briefly initiated a vehicle pursuit (then discontinued) when violator drove away during a traffic stop. Officers used hands-on control techniques to arrest a resistive subject believed to be armed with a handgun. Officers used hands-on control techniques to detain a resistive and intoxicated driver. 06/57 09-19 49522 Fight Officers used hands-on control techniques and discharged a Taser to control and arrest an aggressive combatant. 26/37 09-25 50636 Public Assist Officers used hands-on control techniques to arrest and transport a resistive violator. 20/55 09-26 50844 Out with Officers used hands-on control techniques to Subject arrest a fleeing and intoxicated subject who continued to resist once apprehended. 30 09-30 51746 Domestic Officer used hands-on control techniques to Assault arrest a resistive assailant. IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT USE OF FORCE REPORT October 2009 Ofc # Date Inc # Incident Force Used 2009- 08/20/ 10-02 51961 Out with Officers used hands-on control techniques, 41/55 subject empty-handed strikes, OC, and discharged a Taser while arresting an assault suspect who assaulted arrestin officers. 07/50 10-02 52167 Fight Officers used hands-on control techniques and OC to arrest a combatant who was physically threatenin officers. 20 10-04 52472 Attempt to Officer was in a foot pursuit of a suspect locate -Armed reportedly armed with a handgun. When suspect subject attempted to hide, officer displayed his sidearm while arrestin sus ect. 85 10-10 53545 Fight Officer used hands-on control techniques to arrest a fleein combatant. 07/39 10-23 55995 Fight A reported fight evolved into a narcotics investigation. Officers securing the residence used hands-on control techniques to arrest a suspect that attempted to remove drugs and then became assaultive toward officers. 84/02/ 10-30 57168 Welfare check Officers were investigating a report of a subject 31 exhibiting erratic behavior. Officers located the subject who was apparently under the influence of drugs. Officers used hands-on control techniques to facilitate transport of the a ressive subject for medical treatment. 29/31 10-31 57657 Out with Officers used hands-on control techniques and subject discharged a Taser to control an armed subject (knife) for emergency medical transport and treatment. The subject had intentionally and critically injured himself. 0 a o ~ n~ ° ~ _.._ c-3-t ~~ -- o r :ern i rn s~ w ~ 3~' _, w December 8, 2009 Mtg Packet PCRB COMPLAINT DEADLINES PCRB Complaint #09-03 Filed: 06/09/09 Chief's Report due (90days): 09/08/09 Chief's Report filed: 09/03/09 PCRB Mtg #1 (Review & Assign) 09/08/09 PCRB Mtg #2 (Review Draft #1 Report) 10/13/09 PCRB Mtg #3 (Review Draft #2 Report) 11/03/09 PCRB Mtg #4 (Review Draft #3 Report) 12/08/09 PCRB Report due (45days): 10/19/09 PCRB 60-day Ext Request: 12/18/09 PCRB Complaint #09-04 Filed: 06/25/09 Chief's Report due (90days): 09/23/09 Chief's Report filed: 09/18/09 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ PCRB Mtg #1 (Review & Assign) 10/13/09 PCRB Mtg #2 (Review Draft #1 Report) 11/03/09 PCRB Mtg #3 (Review Draft #2 Report) 12/08/09 PCRB Report due (45days): 11/02/09 PCRB 45-day Ext Request: 12/17/09 PCRB Complaint #09-05 Filed: 06/30/09 Chief's Report due (90days): 09/29/09 Chief's Report filed: 09/23/09 PCRB Mtg #1 (Review) 10/13/09 PCRB Mtg #2 (Review) 11/03/09 PCRB Mtg #3 (Review & Assign) 12/08/09 PCRB Report due (45days): 11/09/09 PCRB 60-day Ext Request: 01/08/10 January 19, 2010 Mtg Packet PCRB COMPLAINT DEADLINES PCRB Complaint #09-04 Filed: 06/25/09 Chief's Report due (90days): 09/23/09 Chief's Report filed: 09/18/09 PCRB Mtg #1 (Review & Assign) 10/13/09 PCRB Mtg #2 (Review Draft #1 Report) 11/03/09 PCRB Mtg #3 (Review Draft #2 Report) 12/11/09 PCRB Mtg #4 (Review Draft #3 Report) 01/19/10 PCRB Report due (45days): 11/02/09 PCRB 45-day Ext Request: 12/17/09 PCRB Additional 45-day Ext Request: 02/01/10 PCRB Complaint #09-05 Filed: 06/30/09 Chief's Report due (90days): 09/29/09 Chief's Report filed: 09/23/09 PCRB Mtg #1 (Review) 10/13/09 PCRB Mtg #2 (Review) 11/03/09 PCRB Mtg #3 (Review) 12/11/09 PCRB Mtg #4 (Review & Assign) 01/19/10 PCRB Report due (45days): 11/09/09 PCRB 60-day Ext Request: 01/08/10 PCRB Additional 60-day Ext Request: 03/09/10 PCRB MEETING SCHEDULE February 9, 2010 March 9, 2010 April 13, 2010 May 11, 2010 POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD OFFICE CONTACTS October 2009 Date Description 10-8-09 Call regarding complaint process. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD OFFICE CONTACTS November 2009 Date Description None POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD OFFICE CONTACTS December 2009 Date Description None POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 (319) 356-5041 January 19, 2010 To: City Council N Citizen Dale Helling, Acting City Manager ~c~ ~''--3 ~ x "'~ ®... Sam Hargadine, Chief of Police ~~ ~' t°' Officer(s) involved in complaint ~ ~ -n ~ From: Police Citizen's Review Board ~~ :- w Re: Investigation of PCRB Complaint #09-04 This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB #09-04 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7B (2), the Board's job is to review the Police Chiefs Report ("Report") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference" to the Report "because of the Police Chief s professional expertise", Section 8-8-7 B (2). While the City Code directs the Board to make "Findings of Fact", it also requires that the Board recommend that ~~ the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if these findings are unsupported by substantial evidence, are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious" or are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice, or any Federal, State or local law", Section 8-8-7 B (2) a, b, c. BOARD'S PROCEDURE The Complaint was initiated by the Citizen on June 25, 2009. As required by Section 8-8-5 (B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation. The Chiefs Report was completed on September 18, 2009 and was filed with the City Clerk on September 18, 2009. The Board met to consider the Chiefs Report on October 13, November 3, December 11, 2009 and January 19, 2010. At the October 13, 2009 meeting the Board voted to review the Chiefs Report in accordance with Section 8-8-7 (B) (1) (a), "on the record with no additional investigation". Page 1 FINDINGS OF FACT On June 19, 2009 the Citizen tried to enter a private party sponsored by Iowa City Night Life at the Industry. Citizen was denied entry by two employees and the bar owner. Citizen refused to leave and the police were called. Officer A arrived and made contact with the Citizen and obtained identification from him. After a check for warrants was negative, Citizen agreed to leave. Prior to Citizen leaving the area, the officer noticed a wrist band on the Citizen, which the officer associated with downtown bars issuing to patrons who drink. The officer then asked the Citizen if he had been drinking and he replied "yes." The officer reestablished contact with the Citizen to assess his level of intoxication, since the Citizen lived quite a distance away, and might attempt to drive. Officer A was then able to determine that Citizen was not intoxicated and Citizen was then allowed to leave. ALLEGATION a o co Citizen alle es that Officer A harassed him during the incident of June 19th, There is no evidence that shows Officer A violated Iowa Code section 708~~}-~, deNfmitio~f harassment which provides. _~ ~ ~ 708.7 HARASSMENT. 1. a. A person commits harassment when, with intent to intimidate, annoy or alarm another person, the person does any of the following: (1) Communicates with another by telephone, telegraph, writing, or via electronic communication without legitimate purpose and in a manner likely to cause the other person annoyance or harm. (2) Places a simulated explosive or simulated incendiary device in or near a building, vehicle, airplane, railroad engine or railroad car, or boat occupied by another person. (3) Orders merchandise or services in the name of another, or to be delivered to another, without the other person's knowledge or consent. (4) Reports or causes to be reported false information to a law enforcement authority implicating another in some criminal activity, knowing that the information is false, or reports the alleged occurrence of a criminal act, knowing the act did not occur. b. A person commits harassment when the person, purposefully and without legitimate purpose, has personal contact with another person, with the intent to threaten, intimidate, or alarm that other person. As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires, 'personal contact" means an encounter in which two or more people are in visual or physical proximity to each other. "Personal contact" does not require a physical touching or oral communication, although it may include these types of contacts. The officer had reason to believe that the Citizen may have been drinking and could possibly be driving and therefore reinitiated contact after releasing him. According to the Citizen and witnesses, the Citizen did not stop for questioning by the officer and Officer A had to follow him to get him to stop. After determining that the Citizen was not intoxicated, Officer A allowed the Citizen to leave. The Citizen did not show up for scheduled interviews with investigators and none of the witnesses listed by the Citizen could corroborate any police harassment. NOT SUSTAINED Page 2 COMMENT While the Citizen may not have been harassed under the definition of the Iowa Code, the Citizen felt he had been harassed because he was stopped, then let go, and then stopped a second time. Had the officer stopped him and completed his investigation in a single stop, the Citizen would not have felt harassed. The PCRB feels it's important that the officers behave in a way that the citizens don't feel harassed and that this particular agitation could have been avoided. 0 v ~' -~-~ ~ C'3 "~ ~ ~' -i t'7 ~~ ~ Q ~" W Page 3 Pc~licc Legal. Sciences, ~,u Iowa Police Law Lesson Plan November 2009 .a :,. J PLS Goal The goal of Police Legal Sciences, Inc. is to stren¢then a law enforcement professional's caaacity to make good decisions. A good decision is defined as one that: a) is ethical; b) correctly follows the applicable statutory and case law of the specific jurisdiction; and c) promotes respect for the law and for law enforcement officers. LESSON OBJECTIVES This lesson consists of five sections which address the following questions: Section 1: When has a suspect "clearly and unequivocally" invoked his right to counsel? Section 2: When is a police officer liable for money damages for allegedly committing the tort of false arrest? Section 3: When does an officer responding to the report of crime have reasonable suspicion to make an investigatory stop? Section 4: Can an officer's use of his personal relationship to a suspect impact the admissibility of a confession? Section 5: What types of laws regulate service dogs under state and ADA rules. LESSON TOPICS On July 17, 2009 the Iowa Supreme Court decided the case of the State of Iowa v..Iames Carson E,~j4er, in which the defendant challenged his conviction for the crimes of kidnapping and sexual abuse. Subtopics: Miranda Advisory Cessation of Questioning Ambiguous Request On July 22, 2009 the Court of Appeals of Iowa decided the case of the Bruce Buldhaupt v. City of Des Moines, in which the plaintiff sued the police defendants for false arrest. Subtopics: Tort False Arrest Essential Elements Probable Cause Failing to Cooperate On July 22, 2009 the Court of Appeals of Iowa decided the case of the State of Iowa v. Anthony Lee Sherrod, in which the defendant challenged his conviction for armed robbery. Subtopics: Exception to Warrant Mere Presence Investigatory Stop Reasonable Suspicion On July 2, 2009 the Court of Appeals of Iowa decided the case of the State of Iowa v. Daniel Alan Blair, in which the defendant challenged his conviction for the crime of murder. Subtopics: Voluntary Statements Establishing Voluntariness Inducements The section addresses the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act that relate to the rights of persons with service animals. Subtopics: ADA -Service Animals Application of Law Criminal Penalties .~ ~~~ ~a N~ .. Copyright ®2009 Police Legal Sciences, Inc. P.O. Box 52, Washington, IA 52353 ~,~ Sciences, Iowa Police Law Analysis & Application November 2009 Section 1 State of Iowa v. Effler the Right to Counsel ~_ , - . .. ,_, ,, ... -- _,. _~- ;._ On July 17, 2009 the Iowa Supreme Court decided the case of the State of Iowa v. James Carson Effler. In this case the defendant was arrested and prosecuted in Polk County for the crimes of kidnapping and sexual abuse. The decision of the court and its reasoning will be examined below. Questions based on the facts of this case and questions testing comprelrensioa of the legal principles underlying the decision will be presented in the interactive, computer-based part of the lesson. State oflowa v. James Eder, 2©09lowa Sup. LEXIS S0. Primary Case Facts. The defendant, James Effler, abducted a 2-year-old girl in a public library, took her into a restroom, and attempted to sexually abuse her. The girl's babysitter and the library staff forced their way into the locked restroom, rescued the girl, detained Effler, and called police. Officers arrested Effler and transported him to the police station for questioning. A detective activated a video camera and noted that Eider smelled strongly of alcohol. Effler asked the detective if he was a lawyer to which the detective said "No." Effler asked the detective if it was true that he was only being booked for public intoxication right now. The detective advised him that he had not even been booked yet. Effler then stated, "So I'm being released?" The detective replied that "intox people" are usually kept overnight and a judge usually lets them out in the morning. The detective then began to read Effler his Miranda rights. Seconds after the officer read the phrase "I do not want a lawyer at this time," Effler intemtpted and said, "I do want acourt- appointed lawyer." The detective said, "Okay." Then Effler said, "If I go to jail." The detective responded by saying, "Let me finish this and then we'll talk." The detective fmished reading the form, and Effler started making numerous requests for a cigarette. After Effler had a cigarette, the detective reminded him of his rights and Effler stated, "I akeady know them." Effler went on to confess to the abduction and was charged with the crimes of first-degree kidnapping, second-degree sexual abuse, and failure to register as a sex offender. The defense claimed that the police had violated the defendant's Fifth Amendment right to counsel. They claimed that police should have ceased questioning the defendant when he made the statement, "I do want acourt-appointed lawyer...if I go to jail." Because they failed to stop their questioning, the defense argued, the defendant's incriminating statements should be suppressed. -Outcome of the Case. The Iowa Supreme Court justices were evenly split in their vote on this case should come out, which by law resulted in the decision of the trial judge being affirmed: 1) ruling that the defendant's Fifth Amendment rights were not violated; and 2) remanding the case back to the lower court for trial. -Court Reasoning In reaching its decision, the court reasoned as follows: 1. The defendant was the subject of a custodial interrogation. 2. The defendant was properly administered his Miranda warnings. 3. The trial judge determined that when the defendant stated: "I do want acourt-appointed lawyer...if I go to jail." he was not clearly and unequivocally requesting an attorney. 4. Because the justices of the Iowa Supreme Court were equally divided on the question of whether the defendant had irrvoked his Fifth Amendment right to counsel, the decision of the trial judge stood. -Legal Principles. An understanding of the following legal principles will help explain the court's decision in the case: Miranda Advisory. The U.S. Constitution requires police to inform a suspect that he has a right to remain silent and a right to counsel during a custodial interrogation. Absent Miranda warnings and a valid waiver of those rights, statements made during an interrogation are inadmissible. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Cessation of Questioning. When a suspect clearly invokes his right to counsel during a custodial interrogation, the police must stop questioning him immediately until an attorney is present. Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (1981). Page I of 6 Copyright ®2009 Police Legal Sciences, Inc. P.O. Box 52, Washington, IA 52353 Ambiguous Request. Questioning need not cease "if a suspect makes a reference to an attorney that is ambiguous or equivocal in that a reasonable officer in light of the circumstances would have understood only that the suspect might be invoking the right to counsel." Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452 (1994). ._ SeCtIOII 2 Buldhaupt v. City of Des Moines Sued for False Arrest '~ On July 22, 2009 the Court of Appeals of Iowa decided the case of the Bruce Buldhaupt v. City of Des Moines.. In this case the plaintiff Buildhaupt sued the defects (including certain named police officers) in Polk County-for several torts including false arre~. The decision of the court and its reasoning will be examined below. Questions based on the facts of this case and questions testing comprehension of the legal principles underlying the FkCision will be presented in the interactive, computer-based part of the lesson. - Bulcltiaapt v. City of Des MoDtes, 20091owa App LFXIS 676. ..,. Primary Case Facts. Bruce Buldhaupt had an argument with his daughter and her boyfriend, both of whom lived next door. The daughter called 911 and two officers were dispatched to the scene shortly after midnight. While Officer N. interviewed the daughter, Officer T. went to Buldhaupt's home where Mrs. Buldhaupt was sitting on the front steps. As Officer T. approached her and advised that he understood there was a problem, she got up and went in the home to fmd her husband. Officer T. followed her inside. Seeing Officer T. inside his home, Buldhaupt ordered the officer to leave. Officer T. told Buldhaupt he was conducting an investigation and asked him to step outside to talk with him. When Buldhaupt refused, Officer T. stated he was going to arrest him. Buldhaupt sat down on the couch; Officer T. approached to handcuff him; and a physical altercation ensued. Having heard yelling, Officer N. entered the home. The officers eventually removed Buldhaupt from the couch, handcuffed him and removed him from the residence. He was placed in a transport van, taken to jail, and charged with interferer~e with official acts and resisting arrest. Buldhaupt received injuries from the altercation, including a cracked sternum. When the charges were later dropped, Buldhaupt and his wife sued the arresting officers and their employer, the City of Des Moines for unlawful entry and false arrest. The defense claimed that the civil suit against the defendant police officers should be dismissed because they had a good faith and reasonable belief in the legality of their actions. They argued that there was probable cause to arrest the plaintiff and that the plaintiff was not entitled to any damage award. -Outcome of the Case. The Court of Appeals for Iowa: 1) rejected the defense arguments and ruled that it was appropriate for a jury to conclude that the officers had made a false arrest and an unlawful entry; and 2) affirmed the outcome of the case in the lower court, fmding against the officers. -Court Reasoning. In reaching its decision in the case the court ruled as follows: 1. When the officers arrived at the scene there was no crime in progress. 2. The officers had no grounds upon which to arrest the plaintiff, who was sitting on a couch inside his own residence. 3. Neither the plaintiff nor his wife had summoned the officer to the scene. 4. If the officer initially believed he had consent to enter the plaintiffs residence, the plaintiff immediately informed him that he did not. 5. Instead of leaving the premises and allowing the plaintiff to exercise his rights of privacy in his own residence, the officer (who was joined by a second officer) initiated arrest procedures that would lead to the plaintiff's suffering a broken sternum. 6. A jury could reasonably fmd that the plaintiff had been falsely arrested and suffered an injury, pain and suffering as a result. -l:egal Principles. An understanding of the following legal principles will help explain the court's decision in the case: Tort. A "tort" is a wrongful act, not including a breach of contract or trust, that results in injury to another's person, property, reputation, or the like, aml for which the injured party is entitled to compensation. Black's Law Dictionary. False Arrest. A false arrest is one way of committing the tort of false imprisonment -- restraining freedom of movement. Nawtwr a Mathers, 271 N.W. 321 (lava 1937). Essential Elements. The essential elements of the tort of false arrest are (1) detention or restraint against one's will and (2) unlawfulness of the detention or restraint. Yaladez v. City ofDes Moines, 324 N.W.2d 47S (lava 1982). .,.' i ~:_ ~.,:. ds a.,~:, -1 Page 2 of 6 Copyright ®2009 Police Legal Sciences, Inc. P.O. Box 52, Washington, IA 52353 Probable Cause. Probable cause exists where "the facts and circumstances within their [the officers'] knowledge, and of which they had reasonably trustworthy information, [are] sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution to the belief that" an offense has been or is being committed. Children x Burton, 331 N.W.2d 673 (lava 1983). Failing to Cooperate. "Simply 'object[ing]' or even passively 'failing to cooperate' with law enforcement officers does not provide arguable probable cause..." McCabe v. Macaulay, SIS F. Supp.2d 944 (N.D. Iowa 2007). --- Section 3 State of Iowa v. Sherrod Reasonable Sus icion to Sto On July 22, 2009 the Court of Appeals of Iowa decided the case of the State of Iowa v. Anthony Lee Sherrod In this case the defendant was arrested and prosecuted in Pottawattamie County for the crime of armed robbery: The decision of the court and its reasoning will be examined below. Questions based on the facts of this case acid questions testing comprehension of the legal principles underlying the decision will be presented in the interactive, computer-based part of the lesson. State oflowa x AnthonySherror~ 20091owaflpp. I.EXIS 67. Primary Case Facts. At approximately 12:02 p.m. police received a report that anAfrican-American male had just robbed a credit union wearing a light blue coat, baggy blue jeans, and heading east on Avenue A. Within approximately one minute, about four and one-half blocks from the credit union an on-duty officer saw the defendant, Anthony Sherrod, an AfricarhAmerican male, wearing dark clothing "jogging, walking real fast" head east on Avenue A. At approximately 12:04 pm, the officer exited his vehicle and ordered Shen od to the ground. Sherrod was breathing heavily and sweating. Several uniformed officers and detectives arrived; an officer handcuffed Shertrod while a second officer read him his Miranda rights. A third officer conducted a pat down search for weapons and discovered a mesh laundry bag full of cash in the beltline of Sherrod's pants. The search officer stated that when she touched the beltline area she knew she was not touching a weapon, but because of the sound of paper rustling and the fact that she was investigating a robbery, she believed she was feeling the stolen cash. Although witnesses had reported that the robber had a gun, officers did not find a weapon on Sherrod. Officers then searched the path between the credit union and the location of Sherrod's arrest and found a pair of gloves, a light blue coat, a stocking hat, and a BB pistol that looked like a gun. The defense claimed that the officer's initial detention violated the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights. They argued that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion for making the stop. If the officer violated the deferxiarrt's Fourth Amendment rights, then all of the evidence seized from the defendant as a result of the defendant's illegal seizure, according to the defense, should be suppressed. With all of the evidence suppressed, the defense reasoned, there would be insufficient evidence to sustain a conviction and the criminal charges against the defendant would have to be dismissed. -Outcome of the Case. The Court of Appeals of Iowa: 1) found that the officer's detention of the defendant was based on reasonable suspicion; and 2) affirmed the defendant's conviction for second-degree robbery. -Couty Reasoning. In reaching its decision, the court ruled as follows: 1. The officer received the report of a specific crime (robbery) that had happened perhaps as recently as a minute earlier and probably no more than a few minutes earlier. 2. The officer was provided the description of the robber, his clothing, his means of transportation (by foot), the street upon which the robber was last seen, and his direction of travel. 3. The officer saw the defendant who, except for lacking a light blue jacket, fit the description of the robber, his means of transportation, the street the robber was last seen, and the direction of travel. 4. The defendant was "jogging, walking real fast" at a location (i.e. four and one-half blocks) consistent with having fled the robbery scene a minute or so earlier. 5. The officer possessed sufficient probable cause to make an investigatory stop of the defendant. 6. All of the incriminating evidence discovered and seized following the defendant's stop should be admissible. -I.egal Principles. An understanding of the following legal principles will help explain the court's decision in the case: Exception to Warrant. "One exception to the warrant requirement allows an officer to stop an individual... for investigatory purposes based on a reasonable suspicion that a criminal act has occurred..." State v. Kreps, 6S0 N. W. 2d 636 (Iowa 2002). ,.., __ ~s ..._ ,, r~ Page 3 of 6 Copyright ®2009 Police Legal Sciences, Inc. P.O. Box 52, Washington, IA 52353 Mere Presence. "An individual's presence in an area of expected criminal activity, standing alone, is not enough to support a reasonable, particularized suspicion that the person is committing a crime." Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000). Investigatory Stop. This stop is a "seizure" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. An investigatory stop is lawful if the officer can "point to specific and articulable facts, which taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant that intrusion." State v. Kreps, 650 N. W.2d 636 (lava 2002). Reasonable Suspicion. Reasonable suspicion is an objective test determined in light of the totality of the circumstances. A good test of reasonable suspicion is whether "the possibility of criminal conduct was strong enough that, upon an objective appraisal of the situation, we would be critical of the officers had they let the event pass without investigation." Wayne R. LaFave, Search and Seizure ,¢ 9.4(b), at 148 (3d ed. 1996). Section 4 State of Iowa v. Blair Conductin a Personal Interco ation On July 2, 2009 the Court of Appeals of Iowa decided the case of the State of Iowa v. Daniel Alan Blair. In this case the defendant was arrested and prosecuted in Boone County for the crime of murder. The decision of the court and its reasoning will be earamined below. Questions based on the facts of this case and questions testing comprehension of the legal principles underlying the decision will be presented in the interactive, computer-based part of the lesson. State oflowa v Daniel Alan Blair; 2009IowaApp. LEXIS 667. Primary Case Facts. Shane Hill called a 911 dispatcher twice to report that he had accidentally shot himself. He died shortly thereafter. A sheriff s investigation revealed that Hill had actually been the victim of a homicide. The investigation focused on Hill's wife and the defendant, Daniel Blair, the man with whom she was having an affair. Several sheriff deputies were involved in the investigation, including Deputy K. who had known Blair from when Blair had been a minor in foster care. This deputy served as Blair's temporary foster parent for approximately two to three weeks in the late 1980s or early 1990s and, a decade later hired Blair to perform some work around his home. Deputy K. and Blair had not had any contact for nearly nine years. After Hill's death, the deputy contacted Blair and arranged to pick him up and escort him to the police station for an interview. The interview lasted approximately an hour. The deputy later picked Blair up for a second interview that lasted a little more than two hours. During the first interview, Deputy K. referenced his prior associations with Blair. "You know I think over the years I've - I know Ibe booted your butt to go get your tratTic fines paid. I know I booted your butt, in fact, I even gave you money once to get your auto insurance, am I right? During the second interview, Deputy K. again reminded Blair of their past association stating, "You were my foster child for how long, a while anyway?" The deputy then asked whether he had always been honest with Blair, and asked whether he tried to get Blair to "do things the right way." Later in the interview, the deputy twice urged Blair to be a "big boy." The fast time he stated, "I'm not going to think less of you, Dan, in fact, I'll probably think more of you because, you know what, you were a big boy and you stood up and you told me what you did." The second time, he stated, "You were on the farm, this is where you need to step up to the plate and be a big boy. I think it's pretty damn sad, Dan, when you can take somebody's life and not stand up and be accountable for it?" Deputy K. also demanded that Blair look at him and not the floor. He scolded Blair for nodding instead of answering verbally and sat close to him during the second interview. Blair eventually confessed to his involvement in the death of Shane Hill and was charged with first-degree murder. The defense claimed that the deputy sheriff violated the defendant's Fifth Amendment rights. They argued that the deputy sheriff used his past, personal, paternal relationship with the defendant to overbear the defendant's will and render his confession involuntary and that the involuntary confession must be suppressed, forcing the police and prosecutors to try the case without the benefit of an important piece of incriminating evidence. . . -Outcome of the Case. The Court of Appeals of Iowa: 1) rejected the defense claims that the confession had been green involuntarily; and 2) affirmed the defendant's conviction for first-degree murder. -Court Reasoning. In reaching its decision, the court reasoned as follows: 1. The deputy had not had any contact with the defendant for the previous eight or nine years. 2. There was not a close relationship between the deputy and defendant. Page 4 of 6 CopyrigLt ®2009 Police Legal Sciences, Inc. P.O. Box 52, Washington, IA 5?353 ,,'a ~_,; V'I ^a :_.,: 3. While referencing their past association and encouraging the defendant to be "a big boy," nothing said or done by the deputy was sufficient to constitute a promise or a threat that would render the defendant's confession involuntary. 4. The defendant's confession was voluntary and was properly admitted against him. -Legal Principles. An understanding of the following legal principles will help explain the court's decision in the case: ~~ Voluntary Statements. Statements are voluntary if they were the product of an essentially free and unconstrained choice, made by the defendant whose will was not overborne or whose capacity for self- determination was not critically impaired." State v. Payton, 481 N. W.2d 325 (Iowa 1992). Establishing Voluntariness. In order to establish the voluntariness of a defendant's inculpatory statements, the police and prosecutor must demonstrate from the totality of circumstances that the statements were the product of an essentially free and unconstrained choice, made by the defendant at a time when his will was not overborne nor his capacity for self-determination critically impaired. State v. Cullison, 227 N. W. 2d 121 (Iowa 1975). Inducements. An officer can ordinarily tell a suspect that it is better to tell the truth. The line between admissibility and exclusion seems to be crossed, however, if the officer also tells the suspect what advantage is to be gained or is likely from making a confession. Ordinarily the officer's statements then- become promises or assurances, rendering the suspect's statements involuntary. _, State v. Mullin, 8S N. W.2d 598 (Iowa 1957). , •, ;..~ Section 5 Rervice Animalc __. The final section of this month's lesson will address the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Aft that relate to the rights of persons with service dogs. Questions based on the ADA regulations and questions-'testing comprehension of the regulations will be presented in the interactive, computer-based part of the lesson. t~ ADA -Service Animals. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), privately owned businesses that serve the public, such as restaurants, hotels, retail stores, taxicabs, theaters, concert halls, and sports facilities, are prohibited from discriminating against individuals with disabilities. The ADA requires businesses to allow people with disabilities to bring their service animals onto business premises in whatever azeas customers are generally allowed. An individual with a service animal may not be segregated from other customers. -ADA v. State & Local Law. The ADA provides greater protection for individuals with disabilities and so it takes priority over the local or state laws or regulations. In the event the ADA is in conflict with any state, county, or municipal ordinance, tbe ADA controls. A business that refuses to admit any type of service animal on the basis of local health department regulations or other state or local laws is in violation of the ADA. In an effort to codify the state's effort to comply with the federal ADA Iowa law provides the following: "It is the policy of this state to encourage and enable persons who are blind or partially blind and persons with physical disabilities to participate fully in the social and economic life of the state and to engage in remunerative employment. To encourage participation by persons with disabilities, it is the policy of this state to ensure compliance with federal requirements concerning persons with disabilities." Iowa Code section 216C.1. -Federal Definition. The ADA defines a service animal as any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability. [If they meet this definition, animals are considered service animals under the ADA regardless of whether they have been licensed or certified by a state or local government.] -State Law Definition. A "service dog" means a dog specially trained at a recognized training facility to assist a person with a disability, whether described as a service dog, a support dog, an independence dog, or otherwise. "Assistive animal" means a simian or other animal specially trained or in the process of being trained under the auspices of a recognized training facility to assist a person with a disability. -Functions. Service animals perform some of the functions and tasks that the individual with a disability cannot perform for him or herself. "Guide dogs used by blind individuals are the type of service animal with which most people are familiaz. But there aze other types of service animals, ones that assist persons with other kinds of disabilities in their day-to-day activities. Some examples include: 1) Alerting persons with hearing impairments to sounds or potential dangers; 2) Alerting persons when a seizure is imminent; 3) Pulling wheelchairs or carrying and picking up things for persons with mobility impairments; and 4) Assisting persons who have mobility impairments with balance. r ~ .i ~~ Page 5 of 6 Copyright ®2009 Police Legal Sciences, Inc. P.O. Box 52, Washington, IA 52353 -AppGcation of Law. Several screens in this section refer to "places listed in sections 2160.3 and 2160.4. To avoid repeating the places listed in these two sections, they are set forth here: Iowa Code Section 2160.3 refers to: "streets, highways, sidewalks, walkways, public buildings, public elevators, public facilities, and other public places." Iowa Code Section 2160.4 refers to: "...all common carriers, airplanes, motor vehicles, railroad trains, motorbuses, streetcars, boats, other public conveyances or modes of transportation, hotels, lodging places, eating places, places of public accommodation, amusement, or resort, and other places to which the general public is invited." Iowa Code Sections 2160.3 & 2160.4. -Access. Every blind or partially blind person shall have the right to be accompanied by a guide dog, under control and especially trained for the purpose, in any of the places listed in sections 2160.3 and 2160.4 without being required to make additional payment for the guide dog. A landlord shall waive lease restrictions on the keeping of a guide dog for a blind person. The blind person is liable for damage done to the premises or facilities by a guide dog. Iawa Code section 2160.5 -POLICY CONSIDERATION. An agency may fmd it useful to discuss establishing a policy to deal with this issue if it has not akeady done so. As a starting point for discussion, the FAA has established a policy in its effort to comply with the ADA that would be adaptable and applicable to law enforcement: The FAA Policy reads: "Carriers shall accept as evidence that an animal is a service animal identification cards, other written documentation, presence of harnesses or markings on harnesses, tags OR THE CREDIBLE VERBAL ASSURANCES. of the qualified individual with disabilities using the animal." -Criminal Penalties. Any person, Earn, or corporation, or the agent of any person, firm, or corporation, who denies or interferes with the rights of any person under this chapter shall be guilty of a simple misdemeanor. Iowa Code section 2160.7. A person who denies or interferes with the right of a deaf or hard-of-hearing person under this section is, upon conviction, guilty of a simple misdemeanor. Iowa Code section 2160.10. -Rights of Dog Trainers. A person with a disability or person training an assistive animal has the right to be accompanied by a service dog or an assistive animal, under control, in any of the places listed in sections 2160.3 and 2160.4 without being required to make additional payment for the service dog or assistive animal. A person who knowingly denies or interferes with the right of a person under this section is, upon conviction, guilty of a simple misdemeanor. Iawa Code section 2160.11(2) & (3). -DOJ -Civil Rights Division. The phone number for the ADA Information Line at the U.S. Department of Justice is 800-514-0301, ext. 7 (voice) or 800-514-0383 (TDD). The DOJ also maintains a website at: ~r~~~v.ada.~ov Procedures for filing complaints are posted at: w~~w. asdoj .gov/crUada/t3compfm.htm Police Legal Sciences, Inc. P.O. Boz 52 Washington, Iowa 52353-0052 319-351-5001 87753-5366 (Toll Free) e-mail: nlsnn,oolicelegalsciences.com www.policele~alsciences.com All these materials, including this Iowa Police Law Analysis & Application are copyright© 2009 by Police Legal Sciences, Inc. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written permission. ~ J c~ ~_J y~ ~J ~..~. _ . .Mtl`{~ Page 6 of 6 :, - _. , ~:v Copyright ®2009 Police Legal Sciences, Inc. P.O. Box 52, Washington, IA 52353 V'! ~y - ~~.~s g p-~tL~ 1 L ~ S meeting places in Iowa City. Section 6. Notice of Meetings. Notice of meetings shall be required; meetings may be called upon notice not less than twenty-four (24) hours before the meetings unless such notice is impossible or impracticable, in which case notice shall be provided as outlined in the Iowa Code. The news media shall be notified by staff. Board meetings shall be public except where provided in the Iowa Code. Section 7. Proxies. There shall be no vote by proxy. Section 8. Public Discussion. Time shall be made available during all meetings for open public discussion. Section 9. Motions. Motions may be made or seconded by any member of the Board, including the Chairperson. Section 10. Exparte Contacts. A member who has had a discussion of an agenda item outside of a public meeting with an interested party shall reveal the contact, name the other party and share specifics of the contact, copies if in writing or a synopsis if verbal. ,` Section„ 1. nflict of Interest. Members who believe they have a conflict of interest on a matter a o come before the Board shall state the reason for the conflict of interest, leave the room before the discussion begins, and return after the vote. Section 12. Voting. A majority vote is required for adoption of any motion, except for a motion to close a session as provided for in the Iowa Code. Upon request, voting will be by roll call and will be recorded by yeas and nays. Every member of the Board, including the Chairperson, is required to cast a vote upon each motion. A member who abstains shall state the reason for abstention. Section 13. Roberts Rules of Order. The rules in the current edition of Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the Board in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws and any special rules or order the Board may adopt. ARTICLE VI. GENERAL AND LIMITED POWERS AND DUTIES: The Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board shall have the powers and duties- set forth in Chapter 8 of the City Code of Iowa City. ARTICLE VII. PUBLIC RECORDS: EXCEPTIONS Section 1. All records of the Board shall be public, except: (a) Complaints, reports of investigations, statements and other documents or records obtained in investigation of any complaint shall be closed records unless a public hearing is held or a contrary determination is made by Counsel to the Board pursuant to the provisions of the Iowa Code. (b) The minutes and tape recordings of any session closed under the provisions of the Iowa Code shall be closed records. (c) No member of the Board or of its staff shall disclose information protected by the Iowa [dYIZ t letter to City Council; from PCRB] [matters in italics are for PCRB discussion) Re: November 18, 2009 Police Citizen Review Board Community Forum The second annual Police Citizen Review Board Community Forum was held at 7:00 pm on Wednesday, November 18, 2009, in Emma J. Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street. The purpose of this letter is to summarize the Community Forum and to set forth the PCRB's report and recommendations to the City Council. A copy of the transcript of the Community Forum is available from the City Clerk. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Don King, Chair. Other members present were Janie Braverman, Joseph Treloar (7:14) and Vershawn Young. Abbie Yoder was absent. Catherine Pugh, Legal Counsel; Kellie Tuttle, Staff; and Sam Hargadine, Chief of Iowa City Police Department, were also present. We are pleased that Mayor Regenia Bailey also attended. Mr. King announced that copies of the following were available at the door: (i) applications for the 13th Annual Citizens Police Academy, (ii) the PCRB complaint form and information sheet, and (iii) the Iowa City Police Department's written Use of Force Policy, General Order O5. The board members introduced themselves, then Mr. King presented an overview of the PCRB. In addition to describing the PCRB's charge and jurisdictional limits, he reported that during fiscal year July 2008 to June 2009, nine (9) complaints were filed with thirty-three (33) allegations. Of those allegations, thirty-two (32) were not sustained and one (1) was sustained. At the request of the PCRB, Chief Hargadine then gave a presentation on the Iowa City Police Department's Use of Force Policy. Approximately nine (9) members of the public attended. Six (6) residents of Iowa City spoke during the public discussion with the PCRB, including one (1) Iowa City Police Department officer, who spoke as a private citizen. Their comments and questions can be summarized as follows: 1. Location and Format of Community Forum. There appeared to be a consensus among those speaking that the PCRB should hold future forums in differing venues, going to the neighborhoods rather than asking the residents to come to City Hall. There was also a specific request to focus the forum on public discussion rather than presentations by either the PCRB or the ICPD or, at the least, to have the presentations at the end of the forum, rather than the beginning. There was also a suggestion that better publicity was needed. [The PCRB: a. concurs that better public attendance at the forums (and better public access to the PCRB) is desirable b. will (will not) consider future forums elsewhere, with (or without) more public input c. will (will not) hold future forums elsewhere, with (or without) more public input d. has scheduled (intends to schedule) forums for the following neighborhoods: east side; southeast; south; north?; west? e. the PCRB has already undertaken a review of its own policies and procedures - the PCRB will (will not) use additional community forums as a way to obtain residents' input into that process f will (will not) consider making PCRB complaint forms available at locations other than the City Clerk's officer and/or the ICPD -perhaps make them available at the community centers?(will accept forms signed elsewhere and delivered by persons other than the complaining citizen) g. other?J 2. Use of Force. There was lengthy discussion about the ICPD's Use of Force Policy. Questions included whether the police offers were armed with too much weaponry; whether less lethal force could be used other than shooting for center body mass -such as shooting for other body parts or firing warning shots; whether police officers should be given the benefit of the doubt in the event of the lethal use of force; whether police officers have any discretion in the use of lethal or less lethal force; whether a person with a knife is a real threat to a police officer armed with a gun. Training and education were discussed. Several people talked about the value of training, education and more interaction with the community on the part of the ICPD. Concerns were raised about the racial and class overtones of some of the tension in parts of Iowa City. Mr. King mentioned the new Community Crime Prevention Officer. There was discussion as to the source of various portions of the Use of Force policy - local ordinances, state law and federal law as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court - and what it would take to make changes to the policy. Dr. Young pointed out that part of the PCRB's charge is to look at policy so that even if an officer does nothing that is contrary to policy, the PCRB will look at whether the policy is appropriate or should be changed. [The PCRB a. recommends more public education? b. recommends changes in the Use of Force policy? c. will review the Use of Force policy? d. has no recommendations?J 3. Counseling Following Use of Force. In his presentation, Chief Hargardine stated that he had the discretion to send officers involved in use of force resulting in death or serious injury to post-traumatic stress counseling. One resident asked if the PCRB had any information on how many, if any, officers had been sent to counseling. 2 [The PCRB will inquire of the Police Chief and respond to the resident and at a PCRB public hearing.) 4. ICPD Priorities. One resident asked specifically how one would register any kind of opinion about how enforcement priorities are set for the ICPD, whether it would be the PCRB, the City Council, the Police Chief, and/or the City Manager. This is a question that has been raised to the PCRB in the past. [The PCRB: a. will solicit input on enforcement priorities at future forums b. will seek an answer to this question from City Council c. agrees that this is not clear d. other or some combination of the foregoing?J 5. Ammunition Restrictions. One resident asked about ICPD policies with regard to ammunition, expressing a specific concern about the use of hollow point bullets. [The PCRB will inquire and will respond to the resident and at a PCRB public hearing.) 6. PCRB Past Performance. One resident asked whether, in light of the fact that thirty-two (32) out of thirty-three (33) complaints in the last fiscal year were held to be not sustained, the PCRB is doing its investigative job. [The PCRB has already undertaken a review of its own policies and procedures -the PCRB will (will not) address this question as part of that review.) The PCRB is available to discuss any of the foregoing, should the City Council wish. Sincerely, DK, Chair, PCRB 3 DEPARTMENT MEMO #09-41 TO: Chief Hargadine FROM: Captain R. D. Wyss RE: August-September Use of Force Review DATE: 16 November 2009 The "Use of Force Review Committee" met on November 16, 2009. It was composed of Captain Wyss, Sgt. Hurd and Sgt. Kelsay. The review of submitted reports for August (18 incidents-24 reports) and September (15 incidents-27 reports) were completed and revealed no training, policy or safety issues. Of the 33 incidents over the two month period, 5 were for a drawn sidearm or displayed weapons and three of those were for the destruction of animals. OC was deployed on two occasions, and in three incidents a Taser was discharged. On two separate occasions, a Taser was displayed which resulted in compliance without deployment. There were two vehicular pursuits involving three Officers during this time period. Of the 33 incidents reviewed, 5 suspects and 1 Officer had sustained injuries. One incident was referred back to a supervisor to address a report that was not submitted by a back-up Officer. All personnel continue doing a good job in their documentation and review of the reports. Please contact me if you have any questions. ~~~~ d u __=~ ^.7 . =v ~:...J Copy: City Manager, PCRB, Watch Commanders, Review Committee Basis for Pursuit distance Traveled Originating Unit 1 Reasonable Suspicion 1 Less than 1 mile 1 Patrol Division 2 Traffic Misdemeanor 2 From 1 to 3 miles Traffic Division Non-Traffic Misdemeanor From 3 to 5 miles 2 CID Traffic Felony More than 5 miles Community Services Non-Traffic Felony Average Distance Administration Outside Agency Roadblock Data Manner of Pursuit Termination 3 None Used Discretion of Officer Suspect Apprehension Data Stationary Roadblock 1 Order of Supervisor 3 Apprehended Moving Roadblock 1 Traffic Collision (suspect) Not Apprehended Forcible Stopping Maneuver Traffic Collision (police} Roadblock by Outside Agency Voluntary Stop /Surrender Traffic Volume Vehicle Abandoned -Fled 3 Light (L) Maximum Speed Reached Roadblock /Forced Stop Moderate (M) Less than 55 MPH Tire Deflation Device Heavy (H) 2 Between 55 - 74 MPH 1 Other -evasion attempt 1 Between 75 - 99 MPH Light Conditions 100 MPH or Greater Duration of Pursuits 1 Day (D) 3 Average Duration (Minutes) 2 Night (N) TirrtFe of Day 06:00 - 09:59 Roadway Conditions Suspect Vehicle Type 10:00 -13:59 2 Dry 3 Passenger Vehicle (PV) 1 14:00 -17:59 Wet (Rain) Commercial Vehicle (CV) 18:00 - 21:59 1 Ice or Sleet Motorcycle or Moped (M) 22:00 - 01:59 Snow Bus /Common Carrier (CC) 2 02:00 - 05:59 Other Other (O) Suspect Vehicle Ownership Suspect Age Suspect Impairment 2 Owned by Suspect Less than 16 (Juvenile) 3 Alcohol 1 Not Owned by Suspect 16 - 21 Years Old Controlled Substances Stolen Vehicle 2 21 - 30 Years Old Mental Illness Unknown 31 - 40 Years Old No impairment 1 41 or Older Unknown Suspect Race Unknown 3 White Black Suspect Gender Collision Data Collision Class Hispanic /Latino 3 Male No Collision 2 Property Damage Other Female 3 Suspect Vehicle 1 Personal Injury Unknown Unknown 1 Police Vehicle Fatality 1 Other Vehicle - Datakioc\fomts\Pursuit Analysis Data Form.doc STATISTICAL SUMMARY 2008 -PURSUIT EVENT DETAILS :•; Inc. # Date Time Legal Basis Officers DIS DUR MPH T/C APP VT LT TV RD A R S I Terminatia~n 20080- In~•oh-ed T ~ e~ r ~ • ~ . 08988 Febniar<~ 2:3Gatn Dnutk Three 1.5 2 (iU+ Yes Yes PV Night Light Ic}~ 2~l W M Yes Supen-isor 17 Dri~~ing (see #a) (see (see #c) Im•esti ation #b) 26782 Ma}~ 1C S:SSpm Traffic Stop One <1 1 60 Yes Yes PV Da~~ Light Dt,~ ~I W M Yes Crash (see #d) (see (see #fl #e) ~1•l78 Jul}~ 31 3:-L2am In~~estigation One I I 78 No Yes PV Night Light Dn~ 23 W M Yes Stopped ui (see #g) (see (see attempt to #h) #i) e~~ade KEY.• • A: Suspect age • APP: Apprehended • DIS: Distance (miles) traveled • DCIR: Duration (minutes) of pursuit • 1: Suspect impairment • MPH: Maximum MPH • LT.• Light Conditions • PV.• Passenger Vehicle • R: Suspect race • RD: Roadway Conditions • S: Suspect gender • T/C: Traff c Collision • TV.• Traffc Volume • VT.• Suspect Vehicle Type FOOTNOTES: a. Off cer 1 initiated pursuit. Off cer 2 unsuccessfully attempted to get into position to deploy Stop Sticks; he then trailed pursuit. Off cer 3 successfully deployed Stop Sticks. b. Suspect vehicle involved in three separate collisions: struck ambulance; struck bridge guard rail; struck snow bank. c. Terminated by supervisor after Stop Sticks deployed. Officers saturated area where suspect vehicle last seen and found suspect vehicle abandoned after a single vehicle crash (vehicle was stuck in/on a snow bank). Suspect located nearby and arrested following foot pursuit. d. Driving while Revoked e. Suspect vehicle and pursuing patrol car travelled off end of dead-end road and came to a stop touching one another. f. Suspect drove vehicle into a field at the end of a dead-end road. g. Off cer was attempting to locate a driver who had fled on foot from a previous stop involving drag racing. h. Off cer ran back to his vehicle and initiated a pursuit of suspect vehicle but suspect vehicle was already far enough in front of officer that off cer immediately lost sight of him. i. Suspect vehicle struck road sign. ,,", Pursuit Analysis Narrative - 2008 The Iowa City Police Department was involved in three vehicle pursuits in 2008. Recent historical data predicts approximately three vehicle pursuits per year. Year Number of Vehicle Pursuits 2007 3 2006 1 2005 7 ._ 2004 2 . Yearly Average: 2004-2007 3.25 ~~~~~ Statistically, the number of vehicle pursuits in 2008 is not in itself alarming as it I~$ .. within the expected number of pursuits. _, Each of the three vehicle pursuits in 2008 is directly or indirectly related to traffic safety. (Incident #2008008988) A Street Crimes Action Team officer was operating an unmarked patrol car equipped with emergency lights and siren. The officer observed the suspect vehicle operating erratically (included driving in and out of his lane of traffic and striking a curb) and suspected that the driver might be impaired. The officer initiated a traffic stop (2:36am) when the suspect vehicle pulled into a parking lot off of Riverside Dr. When the officer exited his patrol vehicle and approached the suspect vehicle, the suspect vehicle sped away from the officer. The suspect vehicle struck a passing ambulance as it entered the roadway. The officer initiated a vehicle pursuit. The suspect struck a bridge guard rail while fuming onto Burlington St. The suspect threw a handgun from his vehicle near this location. A second patrol officer attempted to get into position to deploy Stop Sticks but was unable to do so before the suspect vehicle passed. He then trailed behind the pursuit as a supporting officer. A third patrol officer was able to successfully deploy Stop Sticks. At approximately the same time, a supervisor terminated the pursuit. The suspect vehicle reached speeds in excess of 60 mph during the pursuit. Officers discontinued the pursuit but saturated the area the suspect vehiGe was last seen. The suspect vehicle was found abandoned in a snow bank. The suspect was located in the area and arrested after a short foot pursuit. He was transported to a local hospital to be treated (and released) for minor injuries sustained in the various collisions. The 24-year-old white male suspect was intoxicated (.124 BAC). 2. (Incident #2008026782) A patrol officer initiated a traffic stop (5:55pm) on an individual whose driving status was believed to be suspended or revoked. The suspect vehicle failed to stop and accelerated away from the officer. The pursuit was extremely short, less than a mile and less than a minute in duration. The suspect vehicle accelerated to approximately 60 mph as it fled. The officer was still in the process of communicating information to Dispatch when the suspect vehicle drove off of the end of a dead-end street and into the field beyond. The officer followed in his patrol car. The two vehicles came to rest touching one another. The suspect was apprehended after a short foot pursuit with the assistance of a Department of Corrections officer. The 41-year-old white male suspect was intoxicated (.133 BAC). c: _.~ 3. (Incident #2008041478) A Street Crimes Action Team officer was operating an unmarked patrol car equipped with emergency lights and siren. The officer was attempting to identify and locate a driver who had fled from an earlier traffic stop related to two vehicles drag racing. While the officer was at a residence conducting the investigation, a vehicle pulled into the driveway, apparently saw police, abruptly backed out of the driveway, and accelerated away, squealing its tires in the process. The officer ran. to his patrol car and initiated a pursuit (3:42am). The suspect vehicle was already some distance away and continued to out accelerate the patrol car. The officer very quickly (within seconds) lost sight of the suspect vehicle, especially when the suspect shut off the vehicle's lights. The officer reached a speed of 78 mph and the suspect vehicle was still pulling away from the officer. The pursuit was effectively terminated because the suspect vehicle could no longer be seen to be pursued. Officers saturated the area and found the suspect vehicle parked nearby with the suspect still seated in the driver's seat in an unsuccessful attempt to evade apprehension. The 23- year-old white male suspect was intoxicated (.102 BAC). All pursuits were properly documented and reviewed by supervisory personnel to determine if the criteria contained in General Order 99-01 were satisfied. In all cases, the pursuing officer attempted to relay the required information to Dispatch and supervisors; however, two of the pursuits were of such short duration that they ended before the information exchange was completed. The longer pursuit was terminated by a supervisor. Some issues were identified and addressed during review of the pursuits (e.g. pursuits not allowed for minor traffic offenses; maximum allowable speed for pursuing officer). On a whole, however, the policy and practices (including: the pursuit policy; the conduct of the pursuing officers; and the supervisory review process) worked smoothly and as desired. Communications were excellent, back-up officers did not allow themselves to being drawn into a train of pursuers, supervisors were apprised early of the pursuits and their details, supervisors provided appropriate oversight as evidenced by the terminated pursuit, and the review process identified the issues of concern and allowed a mechanism to address these issues. Several common themes were present in each of the 2008 pursuits: • Each was initiated directly or indirectly as a result of traffic offenses (driving behavior; • Each male driver was operating while impaired (alcohol); • Each pursuit ultimately ended in a [minor] crash (loss of control). Future data sets should be examined to see if these factors represent an actual trend or are unique to 2008. If 2009 pursuits share these characteristics, it would be appropriate to revisit the pursuit policy. This analysis did not identify any patterns or trends that indicate training needs or policy modifications at this time. 2 POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5041 December 11, 2009 Mayor Regenia Bailey 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mayor and Council Members: At the December 11, 2009 meeting, the PCRB voted in open session to request a 45-day extension regarding the reporting deadline for the Public Report according to the City Code for PCRB Complaint #09-04 for the following reasons: • Due to timelines, and scheduling • Public Report presently due December 17, 2009 45-day Extension request -Report would be due on February 1, 2010 The Board appreciates your prompt consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Donald King, Chair Police Citizens Review Board cc: City Attorney POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5041 December 11, 2009 Mayor Regenia Bailey 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mayor and Council Members: At the December 11, 2009 meeting, the PCRB voted in open session to request a 60-day extension regarding the reporting deadline for the Public Report according to the City Code for PCRB Complaint #09-05 for the following reasons: • Due to timelines, and scheduling • Public Report presently due January 8, 2010 60-day Extension request -Report would be due on March 9, 2010 The Board appreciates your prompt consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Donald King, Chair Police Citizens Review Board cc: City Attorney City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM TO: Staff of City Boards and Commissions FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk DATE: December 15, 2009 (hard copy to follow) The City Council has scheduled a budget work session addressing the FY11 budget requests for Thursday, January 14, starting at 7:00 p.m. If your Board or Commission would like to address the Council during this work session, please call me at 356-5041 (or a-mail works too) to schedule a time as soon as possible. Boards and Commissions are being scheduled 15 minutes apart, and suggest each appearance include a 10 minute presentation followed by five minutes for questions. It is intended this time be used to discuss changes to the proposed budget. I will provide a schedule to you and include in the Council information packet of January 7. S:budget presentations-Boards & Commissions Notes for December 8, 2009 PCRB working meeting: Preliminary matters I. Categories of things we might want to see changed: a. PCRB informal policies -PCRB able to change b. things not mandated in the ordinance or elsewhere -PCRB able to change examples: where to hold the public forums; whether to afford every complainant the right to appear before the board; what kind of reporting system(s) to use c. SOP -adopted by ordinance d. By-Laws -adopted by ordinance e. Ordinance -would take Council action or referendum examples: should there be a third option, other than Sustained/Not Sustained; should every complaint brought to ICPD be reviewed by the PCRB f. Union policy - we can recommend, but cannot change example: use of mediation by officers g. ICPD policy - we can recommend, but cannot change example: how the Police Chief responds to allegations against officers of other agencies h. State Open Records law - no change without state legislative action PCRB to be aware of statute, but not to focus on it 2. Philosophy Behind the Review a. start with brainstorming sessions ~~ q rn f' b. feel free to look at anything and everything about those things we can change and the things we would need either Council action or a referendum to change informal policies, things not mandated our ordinance, by-laws, SOP c. get all the ideas out on the table, even those we might think we want to reject out of hand d. sift through the ideas and decide what changes we'd like to see e. make the changes we can make; recommend to Council the changes we'd like Council to make 3. Procedure for review a. sources of suggested revisions: i. review of the Ordinance, By-Laws and SOP ii. things the PCRB has noticed iii. things that have been pointed out by citizens iv. solicited citizen input v. ICPD input b. protocols -can we bring lists and notes with us to share, or do they have to go out in the packets every month? c. look at police review boards of other jurisdictions 2 Policy [revised December 6, 2009] Invite every complainant to appear before the PCRB Levels of review - i.e. listen to audio and/or video as a matter of course Are we doing our job if we're not sustaining any complaints? Require all new PCRB members (other than law enforcement personnel) to attend the Citizen's Police Academy? Or use part of our budget to pay for it? What kind of annual or other reports, records, compilations What kind of information on officers -sustained vs. not sustained What kind of communication re: availability of mediation What kind of communication with citizens registering complaints what happens now? SOP By Laws Ordinance All complaints filed with ICPD to come to PCRB or require ICPD to give a copy of PCRB complaint form to every complainant or change ICPD complaint form to refer to PCRB complaint process Sustained/not sustained -alternative of undetermined or inconclusive? Knowing the identity of the officers complained against Review all complaints against any agency if action occurs within the city limits": (exclusion for State Highway Patrol? Jail? Other?) look at any use of deadly force in IC? Deference to police chief, and PCRB standard of review ("Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7B (2), the Board's job is to review the Police Chiefs Report ("Report") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference" to the Report "because of the Police Chief s professional expertise", Section 8-8-7 B (2). While the City Code directs the Board to make "Findings of Fact", it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if these findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence", are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious" or are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice, or any Federal, State or local law", Section 8-8-7 B (2) a, b, c.") To be Cate org ized How the police chief refers complaints to other agencies SER-05.1 WEAPONS Date of Issue General Order Number October 4, 2000 00-08 Effective Date Section Code November 26, 2008 SER-05 ~~ Reevaluation Date Amends /Cancels October 2009 C. A. L. E. A. 1.2.2, Reference 1.3.4,1.3.9-11, 22.2.7, 33.1.5, 33.4.1 Use of Force / Trainin INDEX AS: Firearms Munitions Off-duty weapons Weapons Special Response Team Use of Force Less Lethal Training Field Training Conducted Energy Devices I. PURPOSE The purpose of this order is to identify those positions responsible for training officers in the use of various types of weapons and the minimum requirements for officers to carry certain weapons. In addition this order identifies minimum specifications handguns and munitions must meet to be authorized by the Iowa City Police Department. ~~;~ ~ ~ ~~ II. POLICY It is the policy of the Iowa City Police Department to equip its officers with weapons and ammunition which are safe and reliable. It also the policy of the Department to require officers to demonstrate at least annually, proficiency in the use of all firearms, and intermediate weapons utilized under color of official duty. The Iowa City Police Department recognizes that combative, armed and/or violent subjects create handling and control problems requiring special training and equipment. SER-05.2 III. DEFINITIONS Lead Range Officer - A sworn member who has received specialized training in the instruction of firearms training and activities (firearms instructor school). The Lead Range Officer shall be responsible for the development and coordination of firearms training, courses of fire, recommendations for firearms, targets, range safety issues and all supplies needed for the operation of the firing range and duty use. The Lead Range Officer shall ensure that firearm maintenance and repair issues are referred to an armorer. Range Instructor - A sworn member who has received specialized training in the instruction of firearms training and activities (firearms instructor school) and recommended by the Lead Range Officer, Training Officer and approved by the Chief of Police or designee. Range Instructors assist the Lead Range Officer in the development and coordination of firearms training, courses of fire, targets, range safety issues and all supplies needed for the operation of the firing range and duty use. Armorer -Sworn member who has received specialized training to provide firearms manufacturer's authorized maintenance and repair for authorized firearms. The armorer must be recommended by the Lead Range Officer, Training Officer and approved by the Chief of Police or designee. The written approval shall specify which firearms the armorer is authorized to maintain and repair. Departmental issued handgun -Handgun issued to the officer by the department and which the officer shall carry when on duty. Any exceptions require the approval of the Chief of Police or designee. Department issued shotgun -Shotgun provided by the department for deployment in tactical situations. Authorized Automatic Weapon -Any department issued automatic weapon which the officer has met approved levels of proficiency in firearms qualification training. Projectile Launcher -Any department issued launcher with which the officer has met approved levels of proficiency in firearms or less lethal qualification training. Less Lethal Philosophy - A concept of planning and force application, which meets operational objectives, with less potential for causing death or serious injury than conventional police tactics. Subject -The person who is the focus of the police operation. Official color of duty -Any action taken by a sworn officer whether on or off duty pursuant to his/her status or authority as a police officer and within the scope of their duties. Defensive Tactics Instructor -Sworn officer who has received specialized training in the instruction of defensive tactics. SER-05.3 Baton Instructor -Sworn officer who has received specialized training in the instruction of department issued impact weapons. Less Lethal Munitions Instructor -Sworn officer who has received specialized training in the instruction of department issued less lethal munitions. Department issued impact weapons -The department issued impact weapons will consist of the collapsible straight baton or the 36" straight baton. Any deviation shall be approved by the Chief of Police or designee. Personally owned weapons -Any weapons not purchased and owned by the department. Personally owned weapons shall not be worn or carried on duty without the express written permission of the Chief of Police or designee. Conducted Energy Device Instructor -Sworn officer who has received specialized training in the instruction of department issued conducted energy devices. IV. PROCEDURES A. GENERAL FIREARMS REQUIREMENTS 1. All on-duty sworn personnel, whether in uniform or non-uniform, shall be armed with a departmentally issued duty handgun. (see Appendix I) a. Exceptions - i. Officers operating in a status where possession of a firearm would endanger the officer or the operation in which they are participating. ii. Where there is a need to or requirement that officers secure their weapon prior to entering a secured area. I.e. courtroom, correctional facilities or psychiatric wings of hospitals. iii. Officers with non-uniform administrative assignments while performing that assignment. iv. Officers on "light duty" will carry weapons based on limitations as provided by a physician. 2. Prior to initial issuance, weapons shall be reviewed, inspected and approved. On an on-going basis, qualified instructors or armorers shall conduct inspections of individual weapons. The date of the inspection and name of the inspector shall be recorded and forwarded to the Lead Range Officer, Training Officer or SRT supervisor, as appropriate. a. If a weapon is determined to be unsafe, the instructor or armorer shall remove it from use pending repair, record the malfunction, cause repair to be made, and provide a replacement to the employee as soon as practical. 3. Non-uniformed on-duty officers carrying a firearm in an unconcealed manner must be readily identifiable as a police officer by wearing their badge adjacent to the weapon. SER-05.4 4. Whether on or off-duty, officers shall carry their police identification while armed. a. Exceptions i. When participating in recreational shooting events. ii. When the possession of police identification would endanger the officer, or operation in which he/she is participating. iii. When in the department issued uniform, the uniform may serve as police identification. 5. The carrying of a handgun while off-duty shall be at the discretion of the officer. If the officer elects to carry a Department approved handgun off- duty, it shall be concealed from public view. An officer electing not to carry a handgun while off-duty shall not be subject to disciplinary action if an occasion should arise in which they could have taken police action were they armed. 6. The carrying of a personal backup firearm while on duty is prohibited 7. All sworn officers shall be armed with a Department approved handgun while operating any marked police vehicle. 8. Department issued firearms shall only be used for departmental duties. 9. All officers must meet approved levels of proficiency in firearms qualification training as set forth by the Range Officer and approved by the Chief of Police 10. While on-duty, officers shall carry their handgun fully loaded. (I.e. full chamber and magazines for semi-auto handguns and full cylinder for revolvers.) 11. Long guns will be carried with the magazine loaded and the chamber empty, unless being used by the officer. 12.Only magazines authorized by the department may be used in a firearm. 13.Officers are responsible for the safekeeping and security of all department authorized firearms in their custody. 14. When loading or unloading a firearm in the Police Department, the unloading /loading shall occur using the bullet trap provided by the department. 15.A11 department issued firearms shall be stored, handled, and / or maintained in such a manner as to prevent the firearm from accidentally discharging. SER-05.5 16. All department authorized weapons shall be stored consistent with Iowa Code Chapter 724.22 (7). a. It shall be unlawful for any person to store or leave a loaded firearm which is not secured by a trigger lock mechanism, placed in a securely locked box or container, or placed in some other location which a reasonable person would believe to be secure from a minor under the age of fourteen years, if such person knows or has reason to believe that a minor under the age of fourteen years is likely to gain access to the firearm without the lawful permission of the minor's parent, guardian, or person having charge of the minor, the minor lawfully gains access to the firearm without the consent of the minor's parent, guardian, or person having charge of the minor, and the minor exhibits the firearm in a public place in an unlawful manner, or uses the firearm unlawfully to cause injury or death to a person. This subsection does not apply if the minor obtains the firearm as a result of an unlawful entry by any person. A violation of this subsection is punishable as a serious misdemeanor. 17.Officers shall not carry any firearm under the following circumstances: a. The officer is on suspension or is directed not to do so by the Chief of Police. b. The officer has not successfully met proficiency and qualification levels as set forth by the Department. c. While under the influence of alcoholic beverages or medications that impair physical or mental ability. 18. Probationary officers shall carry weapons as directed by Field Training protocols. B. DISPLAY OF FIREARMS 1. Except for general maintenance, supervisory inspections, storage or authorized training, officers shall not draw or exhibit firearms unless circumstances create a reasonable suspicion that it may be necessary to lawfully use the weapon in conformance with departmental directives. 2. Unless specifically designed to be carried in this fashion, at no time shall a firearm be carried or placed in a cocked condition, except for a second or subsequent shot of a semi-auto firearm. 3. Department owned firearms shall not be carried or utilized for any non-law enforcement activity without the express written permission of the Chief of Police or designee. 4. No officer shall display or provide any weapon to a citizen to inspect, examine or otherwise handle unless authorized by the Chief of Police or designee. SER-05.6 C. AUTHORIZED WEAPONS (see Appendix I) 1. On-duty handgun, uniform duty a. An approved on-duty handgun for uniform duty is any department issued handgun as approved by the Chief of Police. b. Specifications i. Upon the effective date of this order, newly authorized handguns must be double-action only or decock-only models. Single-action handguns are not authorized. ii. Minimum trigger pull weight: Factory trigger pull weight not less than five (5) pounds. iii. Barrel length: not less than 3.5 inches and not more than 6 inches. iv. Ammunition capacity: six (6) round minimum. v. Handguns shall be carried in department authorized holsters. 2. On-duty handgun, non-uniform duty (see Appendix I) a. An approved on-duty handgun for non-uniform duty is any department issued or personally owned departmentally approved handgun. b. Specifications i. Upon effective date of this order, newly authorized handguns must be double-action only or decock only models. Single action handguns are not authorized. ii. Minimum trigger pull weight: Factory trigger pull weight not less than five (5) pounds. iii. Barrel length: not less than 3 inches and not more than 6 inches. iv. Ammunition capacity: six round minimum. v. Handguns shall be carried in department authorized holsters unless authorized by the Commander of Field Operations. a) Exceptions: Undercover officers or officers assigned to plain clothes duty shall wear a holster or otherwise safely secure their weapon. 3. Off-duty Handguns (see Appendix I) a. An approved off-duty handgun is any department issued handgun or personally owned handgun meeting the following requirements. i. Criteria for personally owned, off-duty handguns a) .380 ACP or larger b) .45 ACP or smaller c) Annually inspected by a departmental armorer or firearms instructor. ii. Upon effective date of this order, newly authorized revolvers must be double action. Single action only revolvers are prohibited. Semi-automatics shall be carried according to manufacturer specifications. Semi-autos which are carried with the hammer in the rearward position shall be "cocked and locked" (hammer back and safety on) and carried in an approved holster. Holsters shall be approved by the Lead Range Officer or Chief of Police. iii. Minimum trigger pull weight: Factory pull weight not less than five (5) pounds. iv. Ammunition Capacity: five (5) round minimum. SER-05.7 v. The handgun shall be concealed (This does not include transportation of the weapon to and from the. officer's residence and the PD) and carried in a secure and safe manner. vi. Off duty weapons may be worn while attending court (with judge's approval) if the officer is in plain clothes and the weapon is concealed. 4. Authorized Automatic Weapons (see Appendix I) a. Specified Special Response Team (SRT) personnel may be authorized to carry a department issued automatic weapon. The member shall demonstrate proficiency for qualification as set forth by the range officer and approved by the Chief of Police. 5. Authorized Shotguns (see Appendix I) a. An approved shotgun is any department issued shotgun. 6. Authorized Rifle (see Appendix I) a. Specified SRT personnel and Patrol Rifle Operators may be authorized to carry a department issued rifle. The member shall demonstrate proficiency for qualification as set forth by the range officer and approved by the Chief of Police. 7. Authorized Projectile Launcher (see Appendix I) a. All officers who are assigned special weapons and ammunition shall successfully complete the applicable qualification courses and training provided by the firearms or less lethal instructor. 8. Firearms Records a. The Lead Range Officer shall maintain a record for each firearm approved by the Department for use under official color of duty which shall include: i. Initial date of service ii. Description iii. Manufacturer and Caliber iv. Serial number v. Repair, service and modification history vi. Officer and date approved vii. Proficiency qualification scores and dates. a. Proficiency qualification scores/dates shall be forwarded to the Training Unit. b. A copy of the firearm record shall be provided to the Commander of Field Operations. 9. Firearms Modifications and Repairs a. All department issued and department approved personally owned firearms shall not be modified from the manufacturer's specifications, except under the following circumstances: SER-05.8 All modifications or repairs shall be conducted by the manufacturer, manufacturer authorized service center, or department approved armorer. Exception: Officers may personally install aslip-on grip on their department issued or personally owned handgun. All other grip changes or modifications shall be conducted per section i. above. The Lead Range Officer shall be notified in writing of all modifications or repairs. Documentation shall be kept on file with the Lead Range Officer. 10. Firearms Maintenance a. Officers shall maintain all firearms issued to them, or approved for use by the Department, in proper working order. Officers shall not disassemble any Department issued firearm beyond field stripping, as per the manufacturer recommendations for proper maintenance and cleaning. All other disassembly shall be conducted by the manufacturer, manufacturer authorized center, or department approved armorer. b. Each repair or service transaction shall be documented and recorded as required in section 9. ii. above. 11.Ammunition a. Officers shall carry all department issued firearms or personally owned firearms approved for duty use loaded with department approved ammunition. (see Appendix I) This ammunition shall not be modified in any way. b. The Lead Range Officer shall be responsible for issuing all duty and training ammunition for all officers of the Department. i. All ammunition shall be produced by a major commercial manufacturer of such product. ii. All issued duty ammunition shall be rotated at least on an annual basis. iii. All issued duty and training ammunition shall be approved by the Chief of Police or designee. iv. All ammunition carried in a department approved, personally owned off-duty firearm shall be approved by the Chief of Police or designee. 12. Firearms Proficiency, Training and Testing Courses of fire and tests designed to require the officer demonstrate accuracy, safety, functionality and maintenance of the firearms the officer carries or uses and knowledge of laws and departmental regulations concerning the use of force and weapons shall be required on an annual basis. a. All persons utilizing range facilities shall follow the direction of the Lead Range Officer/Range Instructor at all times. SER-05.9 b. Courses of fire will be designed by firearms training personnel to include scores, target types, timing distance and practical conditions that meet the needs of the department. c. Scores will be documented as either pass/fail, or in annual firearms qualification courses, as a numerical score with a minimum of 80% required to pass and qualify. d. Proficiency tests will include demonstrated ability of the officer to accomplish the following: drawing, holstering, clearing stoppages, loading, unloading, and safe handling of the firearm as designated by the training staff. e. Target types will consist of, but not be limited to the following: i. Paper targets with printed design to represent areas to hit and be used in scoring accuracy. ii. Steel targets that present instant feedback to the officer on accuracy. iii. Shoot/don't shoot targets that represent the need for an officer to react appropriately. iv. Firearms Training System (FATS) f. Successful completion of a transitional training course conducted by the firearms training staff is required by any officer who changes from primary handgun of one design to a handgun of another design, prior to being approved to carry the new handgun. g. Annual handgun proficiency qualification requirements shall consist of successful completion of two courses consistent with ILEA for each issued handgun. h. All officers who are assigned special weapons and ammunition shall successfully complete qualification courses and training designed by the firearms training staff and those in charge of the affected units on an annual basis. i. Remedial training shall be required of those officers who fail to achieve the minimum scores or levels of proficiency that are required by the Department. i. Remedial training shall continue until the officer meets the standard, or upon a third failed attempt to qualify, the Firearms Instructor shall notify the officer's supervisor; Commander of Field Operations and Chief of Police. ii. Failure to meet the standard will result in immediate notification to the Commander of Field Operations and the Training Officer and may result in temporary reassignment to administrative duties that do not require the use of a firearm. This may continue until the standard is met, but will not exceed five (5) duty days without administrative review. iii. Continued failure to meet the standard may result in administrative action being taken against the officer. j. The Range Officer or Lead Range Instructor conducting the firearms training shall complete records documenting all firearms training for each officer. These records shall be retained by the Training Unit. k. All firearm instruction, training and qualification shall be provided by a certified instructor. SER-05.10 13. Less Lethal Impact Projectiles a. There are many projectiles considered "less lethal". The primary types used by the Iowa City Police Department are: i. "bean sock" round - 12 gauge ii. non-flexible - 37mm round b. Only rounds purchased by the department may be used during a deployment. Deployment shall be consistent with departmental directives on the Use of Force and the deployment of Less Lethal munitions. c. All 37mm less lethal munitions and delivery systems will be maintained by the SRT. This system will only be deployed by department members who have been trained and qualified in its use. d. Targeted subjects who have been struck by either of these projectiles shall be secured and transported to a medical facility for examination. e. Bystanders who are struck by less lethal munitions shall be encouraged to seek medical attention at a medical facility. f. Only those persons trained and qualifying with the device may deploy the device. 14. Impact Weapons Training will be designed to require the officer to demonstrate proficiency with the types of impact weapons carried and knowledge of the laws and directives concerning the use of impact weapons. When used as an impact tool, they are considered a level four use of force. Officers shall only carry impact weapons that are issued by the department. a. All officers will complete a basic course of instruction in the proper use and skill development of each type of approved impact weapon, prior to being authorized to carry such weapons on duty. b. Officers will complete annual in-service training in the use of impact weapons. c. All in-service training shall be approved by the training unit prior to implementation. d. Remedial training will be required of those officers who fail to achieve the minimum levels of proficiency that are required by the Department. i. If the officer fails to meet the standard, the Baton Instructor shall inform the officer's supervisor and Commanding Officer Field Operations. ii. Continued failure to meet the minimum standard may .result in administrative action against the officer. 15. Chemical Agents (see Appendix I) Chemical Agents will be available and may be used to incapacitate subjects when lower levels of force would have been inappropriate or have failed in the control or dispersal of these subjects. a. Uniformed and non-uniformed personnel will be limited to the use of Pepper Spray unless additional specialized training is received in the use of other chemical agents. SER-05.11 b. The deployment of Chemical Agents other than the use of pepper spray must be authorized by the Commander of Field Operations or designee. Examples of other agents and deployment methods include but are not limited to: i. 12 Gauge chemical munitions ii. 37 mm chemical munitions iii. Foggers iv. Pepper ball Systems 16. Conducted Energy Devices Training will require the officer to demonstrate proficiency with the use of conducted energy devices carried and knowledge of the laws and directives concerning the deployment of such weapons. Conducted energy devices are considered a level four use of force. Officers shall only carry conducted energy devices that are issued by the department. a. Officers will complete a basic course of instruction regarding conducted energy devices prior to being authorized to carry such weapons on duty. b. Officers will complete annual training in the use of conducted energy devices taught by a certified instructor. c. All in-service training shall be approved by the training unit prior to implementation. d. Remedial training will be required of those officers who fail to achieve the minimum levels of proficiency that are required by the Department. 17.Distraction Devices The use of distraction devices is limited to the SRT and may only be deployed by personnel who have received training in their use and deployment. 18.Less Lethal/Intermediate Impact Weapons Records The office responsible for Quartermaster function is responsible for maintaining a record for each issued weapon other than firearms. The Commander of Field Operations is responsible for maintaining a record of each special weapon (firearm, less lethal, delivery device, etc.) maintained in that unit. a. The record shall include: i. Type of weapon/munitions ii. Manufacturer iii. Model number if any iv. Serial number if any v. Number of units (munitions) vi. Address and location of storage vii. Name of personnel issued to. b. All weapons shall be inspected and found acceptable for use by the unit supervisor prior to deployment. SER-05.12 19. Proficiency Records At least annually, each employee shall receive in-service training on the Departmental Use of Force policy and demonstrate proficiency with each approved less lethal weapon that the officer is authorized to use. a. Such training shall be provided by a certified instructor. b. Proficiency training records shall include results from tests or demonstrations, dates, and rosters of attending officers. These records shall be maintained by the Training Unit. c. Remedial training shall be scheduled for employees who are unable to qualify with an authorized weapon. The weapons system instructor shall notify the immediate supervisor, the Training Officer and the Commander of Field Operations of the employee's remedial training status. i. Until the employee achieves full certification, s(he) will not be permitted to operate the specific weapons system other than in a training environment. Samuel Hargadine, Chief of Police WARNING ~iThis directive is for departmental use only and does not apply in any criminal or civil proceeding. The department policy should not be construed as a creation of a higher legal standard of safety or care in an evidentiary sense with respect to third-party claims. Violations of this directive will only form the basis for departmental administrative sanctions. SER-05.13 APPENDIX I Following is a list of weapons approved for use by members of the Iowa City Police Department. Asp brand Tactical Baton, 21 inch and 26 inch Defense Technologies MK-3, MK-9, MK-46 aerosol projectors (10% solution Oleoresin Capsicum) X26 Advanced Taser® Glock Model 22-.40 Caliber 15 Round Magazine Semi-Automatic Handgun Glock Model 23-.40 Caliber 13 Round Magazine Semi-Automatic Handgun Remington 11-87 12 Gauge Semi-Automatic Shotgun Remington 870 12 Gauge Pump Action Shotgun Mossberg 12 Gauge Pump Action Shotgun HK/Benelli 12 Gauge Semi-Automatic Shotgun HK MP5/40 Sub Machine Gun Gas Operated Semi-Automatic .223 Caliber Rifle with Box Style Magazine (Manufacturer Approved by Commander of Field Operations) Smith & Wesson Model 276 Less Lethal Launcher Federal Labs 1.5 Caliber Gas Launcher Royal Arms (Arwen Ace) 37mm Gas/Less Lethal Launcher Remington Model 700 .308 Bolt Action Long Rifle Remington Model 700 .223 Bolt Action Long Rifle Marlin .22 Caliber Bolt Action Rifle SER-05.14 Chemical Weapons: JayCor Pepperball SA200 Launcher w/ the following projectiles: Red (pepper) Purple (training) Clear (water) Green (marker) Glass shattering Defense Technologies MK-3, MK-9, MK-46 aerosol projectors (10% solution Oleoresin Capsicum) Defense Technologies #4 Continuous Discharge Pyrotechnic CS Grenade Defense Technologies #15 Stinger CS Grenade Defense Technologies #15 Stinger OC Grenade Defense Technologies T-16 Hand Toss CS Canister Defense Technologies T-16 Hand Toss OC Canister Following is a list of ammunition approved for use by members of the Iowa City Police Department. Handgun: Speer -Lawman .40 S&W 180 Grain TMJ (practice) Speer -Gold Dot .40 S&W 180 Grain GDHP (duty) Shotgun: Federal Classic Buckshot 12 ga., 2 3/ " 9 pellet Federal Law Enforcement 12 ga., 2 3/ " 9 pellet Federal Classic Rifled Slug 12 ga., 2 3/4 " 1 oz slug Federal 12 ga., 2 3/4 " #8 shot (phasing out) Remington Reduced Recoil 12 ga., 2 3/ " 8 pellet 00 buck (phasing out) SER-05.15 Rifle: Federal .223 Rem 55 gr. BTHP Federal .223 Rem 69 gr. Sierra Matchking BTHP Gold Medal Federal .308 Win 165 gr. Tactical load Federal .308 Win 168 gr. BTHP CCI .22 LR .22 cal long rifle Hollow Point Mini Mag Winchester .22 LR .22 cal Long Rifle Hollow Point high velocity Remington .22 LR .22 cal Long Rifle Std. Velocity Solid bullet Chemical Munitions: Defense Technologies #40 T-14 37mm - OC Defense Technologies #40 T-14 37mm - CS Defense Technologies #23 12g Shotgun - OC Defense Technologies #23 12g Shotgun - CS