19th-quarterly-report.pdf
Figures extracted from this document
Extracted text
Nineteenth Quarterly Report of the Independent Monitor
for the Oakland Police Department
October 30, 2014
Page 16
and/or received by OPD personnel in the case file.
5.
OPD shall resolve each allegation in a complaint investigation using the
“preponderance of the evidence” standard. Each allegation shall be resolved by
making one of the following dispositions: Unfounded, Sustained, Exonerated, Not
Sustained, or Administrative Closure. The Department shall use the following
criteria for determining the appropriate disposition:
a.
Unfounded: The investigation disclosed sufficient evidence to determine
that the alleged conduct did not occur. This finding shall also apply when
individuals named in the complaint were not involved in the alleged act.
b.
Sustained: The investigation disclosed sufficient evidence to determine
that the alleged conduct did occur and was in violation of law and/or
Oakland Police Department rules, regulations, or policies.
c.
Exonerated: The investigation disclosed sufficient evidence to determine
that the alleged conduct did occur, but was in accord with law and with
all Oakland Police Department rules, regulations, or policies.
d.
Not Sustained: The investigation did not disclose sufficient evidence to
determine whether or not the alleged conduct occurred.
e.
Administrative Closure: The investigation indicates a service complaint,
not involving an MOR violation, was resolved without conducting an
internal investigation; OR
f.
To conclude an internal investigation when it has been determined that the
investigation cannot proceed to a normal investigative conclusion due to
circumstances to include but not limited to the following:
1)
Complainant wishes to withdraw the complaint and the IAD
Commander has determined there is no further reason to continue
the investigation and to ensure Departmental policy and procedure
has been followed;
2)
Complaint lacks specificity and complainant refuses or is unable to
provide further clarification necessary to investigate the
complaint;
3)
Subject not employed by OPD at the time of the incident; or
4)
If the subject is no longer employed by OPD, the IAD Commander
shall determine whether an internal investigation shall be
conducted.
5)
Complainant fails to articulate an act or failure to act, that, if true,
would be an MOR violation; or
6)
Complaints limited to California Vehicle Code citations and
resulting tows, where there is no allegation of misconduct, shall be
referred to the appropriate competent authorities (i.e., Traffic
Court and Tow Hearing Officer).
g.
Administrative Closures shall be approved by the IAD Commander and
entered in the IAD Complaint Database.
6.
The disposition category of “Filed” is hereby redefined and shall be included
under Administrative Dispositions as follows: