Sixth Quarterly Report
of the
Independent Monitor
for the
Oakland Police Department
Robert S. WarshawIndependent Monitor
Office of the Independent Monitor Police Performance Solutions, LLCP.O. Box 396, Dover, NH 03821-0396August 2, 2011
Case3:00-cv-04599-TEH Document625 Filed08/02/11 Page1 of 83
Sixth Quarterly Report of the Independent Monitor for the Oakland Police DepartmentAugust 2, 2011 page 1
Table of Contents
Section One
Introduction
2
Compliance Assessment Methodology
4
Executive Summary
6
Section Two
Compliance Assessments
Task 2: Timeliness Standards and Compliance with IAD Investigations
8Task 3: IAD Integrity Tests 10Task 4: Complaint Control System for IAD and Informal ComplaintResolution Process13Task 5: Complaint Procedures for IAD 16Task 6: Refusal to Accept or Refer Citizen Complaints 25Task 7: Methods for Receiving Citizen Complaints 26Task 16: Supporting IAD Process - Supervisor/Managerial Accountability 28Task 18: Approval of Field-Arrest by Supervisor 30Task 20: Span of Control for Supervisors 32Task 24: Use of Force Reporting Policy 36Task 25: Use of Force Investigations and Report Responsibility 40Task 26: Use of Force Review Board (UFRB) 44Task 30: Firearms Discharge Board of Review 46Task 33: Reporting Misconduct 48Task 34: Vehicle Stops, Field Investigation, and Detentions 51Task 35: Use of Force Reports - Witness Identification 54Task 37: Internal Investigations - Retaliation Against Witnesses 56Task 40: Personnel Assessment System (PAS) - Purpose 57Task 41: Use of Personnel Assessment System (PAS) 62Task 42: Field Training Program 68Task 43: Academy and In-Service Training 71Task 45: Consistency of Discipline Policy 74
Supplementary Assessment:
Officers Pointing Firearms
Section Three
77
Conclusion: Critical Issues
80
Appendix
82
Acronyms
Case3:00-cv-04599-TEH Document625 Filed08/02/11 Page2 of 83
Sixth Quarterly Report of the Independent Monitor for the Oakland Police DepartmentAugust 2, 2011 page 2
Section One
Introduction
This is the sixth quarterly report of the Monitor of the Negotiated Settlement Agreement (NSA)in the case of
Delphine Allen, et al., vs. City of Oakland, et al.,
in the United States District Courtfor the Northern District of California. In January 2010, under the direction of Judge Thelton E.Henderson, the Parties agreed to my appointment as Monitor of the Oakland Police Department(OPD). In this capacity, I oversee the monitoring process that began in 2003 under the previousmonitor, and had produced 14 status reports. The current Monitoring Team conducted our sixthquarterly site visit from May 23, through May 26, 2011, to evaluate the Department’s progresswith the NSA during the three-month period of January 1, through March 31, 2011.In the body of this report, we again report the compliance status with the remaining active Tasksof the Agreement. By the end of the seven-year tenure of the previous monitor, the Departmentwas in full compliance with 32 of the 51 required Tasks, and in partial compliance with 16additional Tasks. As a result, the Parties agreed to reduce the number of Tasks under “active”monitoring to the current list of 22.During this reporting period, we continue to find the Department in Phase 1, or policy,compliance with all 22 of the remaining active Tasks. With regard to Phase 2, or fullcompliance, we find that OPD is in compliance with 13 of the remaining 22 Tasks – the samenumber as we reported in our last report. This is disappointing, as it was our expectation that theDepartment would advance in the aggregate. The status of some of the requirements has alsoshifted in this reporting period, and the bases for these shifts are described below. Further, inthis report, the Monitoring Team, as part of our comprehensive review of the agency, undertook a more concentrated look at an important issue that can be found in a SupplementaryAssessment. It is our hope that the Department be introspective as it carefully reviews thisserious issue.As noted previously, as a result of Court-ordered technical assistance, the Monitoring Team andOPD representatives have continued to meet and confer to explore ways to enhance theDepartment’s policies and procedures so that they better comport with the trends and innovationsin contemporary American policing.Chief (Ret.) Robert S. Warshaw
Monitor
Case3:00-cv-04599-TEH Document625 Filed08/02/11 Page3 of 83
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
