HomeMy WebLinkAbout23-06
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
(319) 356-5041
DATE October 10, 2023
To: City Council
Complainant
City Manager
Chief of Police
Officer(s) involved in complaint
From: Community Police Review Board
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #23-06
This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board’s (the “Board”) review of the investigation of
Complaint CPRB #23-06 (the “Complaint”).
BOARD’S RESPONSIBILITY:
Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board’s responsibilities are as follows:
1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation. (Iowa
City Code Section 8-8-7(A).)
2. When the Board receives the Police Chief's report, the Board must select one or more of the
following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1):
a. On the record with no additional investigation.
b. Interview /meet with complainant.
c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers.
d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in the
board's own investigation.
e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses.
f. Hire independent investigators.
3. In reviewing the Police Chief's report, the Board must apply a “reasonable basis” standard of
review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chief's report, because of
the Police Chief’s professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2)).)
4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the Police
Chief reverse or modify the Chief's findings only if:
a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or
b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious; or
c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal, state,
or local law.
5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chief's report, the Board issues a public
report to the city council. The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of fact; and (2) a
clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint is either
"sustained" or "not sustained ". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(3)).)
6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline
the officer involved.
BOARD’S PROCEDURE:
The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on April 18, 2023. As required by Section
8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation.
The Chief’s Report was filed with the City Clerk on July 13, 2023. As per Section 8-8-6(D) of the City
Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chief’s report.
The Board voted on Tuesday, August 8, 2023, to apply the following Level of Review to the Chief's Report:
On the record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1)(a).
The Board met to consider the Report on August 8, 2023 and October 10, 2023.
Prior to the August 8, 2023 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint, the Police
Chief’s report, and to watch and listen to body worn camera and/or in-car camera footage showing the
interaction between the officers and the complainant.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
This is related to a previous allegation during the same event (Complaint 23-02).
Police stopped a vehicle which had made a right hand turn from the center lane. When the officer
approached the stopped vehicle, the driver refused to roll down his window. Unsure of the driver’s
intention, a “stop” belt was placed in front of the vehicle’s front tire. Complainant was asked several
times to lower the window. Complainant finally lowered the window a few inches. Police officer calmly
and repeatedly asked the complainant for an I.D. Complainant refused and shouted “no” numerous
times. After a few minutes the officer opened the vehicle’s driver side door. He reached in to remove
the keys. As he did so, the driver took hold of the officer’s arm to prevent that action. When the officer
ordered the driver to come out of the vehicle, the driver became physically and verbally confrontational
with the officer. During the entire episode police officers were subjected to verbal abuse and physical
abuse. The officer took him to the ground using appropriate action. As the driver was being pulled
from the vehicle, the passenger in the front seat grabbed the officer’s arm and the passenger in the
back seat also tried to physically prevent the officer from doing so. The front seat passenger received
an injured ankle when he tried to prevent his removal. When the officers were able to calm everyone
down, they explained the reason for the stop. The three men were placed in separate cars. The
person with the injured ankle was examined by paramedics and then transported to University
Hospital. The officer asked for a Breathalyzer test and the driver complied. The officer then asked for
consent to administer a blood and urine test. The driver refused. The officer read the driver what the
Iowa State Code stated. He read this information to the driver several different times during the
interview. The driver complained of being unable to see due to the spray that had been used. The
officer offered to take the driver to the eyewash area. The driver refused saying the officer was not
helping.
COMPLAINANT’S ALLEGATION #1 – Use of Force.
Chief’s conclusion: Not sustained
Board’s conclusion: Not sustained
Basis for the Board’s conclusion:
After viewing available videos, the complainant’s allegation is unsubstantiated. The officers’
were professional and courteous throughout their interactions. Officers were accommodating by
offering eye wash and opportunity to an attorney.
COMPLAINANT’S ALLEGATION #2 – Unprofessional Conduct.
Chief’s conclusion: Not sustained
Board’s conclusion: Not sustained
Basis for the Board’s conclusion:
After viewing available video footage, the complainant’s allegation is unsubstantiated. The
officers’ were professional and courteous throughout their interactions. Officers were
accommodating by offering eye wash and opportunity to an attorney.
COMMENTS:
None