Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-03POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City IA 52240 1826 319 356 5041 FROM Police Citizens Review Board 0 c c r CD 1en ID C 0 r 11iTU tJ c 0 JhNs m TO City Council Complainant Stephen Atkins City Manager Sam Hargadine Chief of Police Officer s involved in complaint RE Investigation of PCRB Complaint 05 03 DATE February 14 2006 This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board s the Board review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB 05 03 the Complaint Board s Responsibilitv 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 Chiefs professional expertise Section 8 8 7B 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 Sections 8 8 7B 2 a b and c Board s Procedure The Complaint was received at the Office of the City Clerk on 27 September 2005 As required by Section 8 8 5 of the City Code the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation The Chiefs Report was due on 27 December 2005 and was filed with the City Clerk on 21 December 2005 The Board voted to review the Complaint in accordance with Section 8 8 7B 1 a on the record with no additional investigation The Board met to consider the Report on 10 January and 14 February 2006 FindinQs of Fact The Complainant alleges Improper Conduct and Differential Treatment on the part of an Officer of the Iowa City Police Department On 22 August 2005 Officer A was off duty and in his personal vehicle but was not the driver He observed a traffic violation by the Complainant contacted the ICPD by telephone reported the violation and requested citations be issued The driver of the Officer s car continued to follow the car being driven by the Complainant until both vehicles pulled offthe street at a considerable distance from the alleged traffic violation Officer B arrived and began to question the Complainant At this time the versions of what happened are in dispute The Complainant alleges that Officer A got out of his personal vehicle and began to enter into the situation by accusing the Complainant of untruths using a loud tone of voice and raising his arm in the direction of the Complainant Officer A agrees that he did leave his vehicle in order to provide information about the alleged traffic offense Officers A and B and the driver of Officer A s personal vehicle maintain that while Officer A did enter into the situation the gesture with the arm was only for emphasis not done in a threatening manner Officers A and B agree the voice was not raised to an unusual pitch The Complainant further asserts that Officer A behaved in this improper manner because of the race of the Complainant Officer B wrote two traffic citations for the Complainant and the validity of these citations are not in dispute by the Complainant Conclusion The Police Citizens Review Board finds that there is no evidence to support the complaint that Officers A or B behaved in an improper manner because of the Complainants race which seems not to have been brought into the situation at all at the time the citations were written The PCRB finds that the Complainant seems to have no complaint about Officer S except in allowing Officer A in an off duty status to enter into the situation when Officer B was gathering information preparatory to issuing traffic citations The main thrust of the complaints is against the behavior of Officer A The Complainant believes that Officer A should not have inserted himself into the situation However the adopted policies of the ICPD Rules and Regulations Section 345 14 and the ICPD Policies and Procedures Manual Leg 05 01 IV C 2 do provide for the off duty conduct of officers and it does not appear that the conclusions of the Chief of Police s Report can be considered to be unsupported by substantial 85 evidence nor that the findings are unreasonable arbitrary or capricious Qat the findings are contrary to an ICPD policy or practice or any federal stat ocar I co aw m II f TdJ TJ r l I JN 10 m Complaint 05 03 Allegation 1 Improper Conduct is not sustained Allegation 2 Differential Treatment is not sustained Comment The Police Citizens Review Board considered ICPD General Order Number 00 05 Off Duty Conduct Powers of Arrest ICPD General Order Number 99 07 Traffic and ICPD General Order 01 01 Racial Profiling in coming to its conclusions 9 Qj r 007 cr rfT1co 0 II 1rn c 1 0 N N