seventeenth-quarterly-report.pdf

Seventeenth Quarterly Report of the Independent Monitor for the Oakland Police Department April 28, 2014 Page 38 Officers Pointing Firearms: During this reporting period, we reviewed a total of 90 use of force incidents; 71 of those incidents involved officers pointing firearms. The 71 incidents included one Level 2, four Level 3, and 66 Level 4 uses of force; and involved 144 instances of OPD officers drawing and pointing their firearms.13 Overall, we determined officers’ pointing of their firearms to be appropriate in 137, or 95%, of the 144 instances we assessed.14We also noted with concern, the absence of justification for the pointing of a firearm in seven (5%) of the 144 events; specifically, there was no indication that the officer(s) or others faced imminent threat of harm. The total racial breakdown for the 71 use of force events reviewed is as follows: Black, 79%; Hispanic, 15%; White, 5%; Asian, 0%; and Other, 1%. We also tabulated the racial breakdown of the subjects involved in the events where, in our opinion, the pointing of a firearm was not necessary or appropriate and found the following: the seven unjustified pointing of firearms involved four Black subjects and one White subject. In all cases, the supervisory review found the officers’ use of force appropriate, objectively reasonable for a legitimate law enforcement purpose, and in compliance with OPD policy. While officers’ actions in particular cases are troubling, the continued unquestioned supervisory and command approval – of both the documentation of officers’ actions and the actions themselves – is illustrative of a need to address supervisory deficiencies. OPD is in compliance with Tasks 24.2 and 24.3. Task 24.4 requires that a supervisor respond to the scene upon notification of a Level 1, 2, or 3 use of force or an allegation of excessive use of force, unless community unrest or other conditions makes such response impracticable (compliance standard: 95%). Supervisors responded to the scene in all 17 applicable Level 2 and 3 incidents in our sample. This represents a 100% compliance rate. OPD is in compliance with Task 24.4. Tasks 24.5, 24.6, and 24.8 require certain notifications in uses of force relative to officer- involved shootings and the use of lethal force.15 Specifically, Task24.5 requires that following every use of lethal force resulting in death or injury likely to result in death, OPD notify the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office immediately or as soon as circumstances permit (compliance standard: 95%). Task 24.6 requires that following every use of lethal force resulting in death or injury likely to result in death, OPD notify the City Attorney’s Office as 13 The majority of the incidents we reviewed fell into one of the following categories: officers making high-risk vehicle stops; officers searching and entering buildings or premises with or without search warrants; and officers were attempting to detain subjects, either by foot pursuit or by searching areas such as alleys and yards. 14 As in our more in-depth assessment of such incidents during the sixth reporting period, we gave the benefit of the doubt to involved officers whenever there was a question as to whether an officer’s action was appropriate. We also assumed that the pointing of firearms was justified in cases where officers were responding to a burglary or criminal trespass involving an actual structure search, or when making a high-risk vehicle stop based on the legitimate belief that the vehicle was stolen. 15 Task 24.7 is no longer applicable. Case3:00-cv-04599-TEH Document979 Filed04/28/14 Page39 of 88