seventeenth-quarterly-report.pdf

Seventeenth Quarterly Report of the Independent Monitor for the Oakland Police Department April 28, 2014 Page 58 behavior was occurring, they shall be subject to the investigative, and if appropriate, the disciplinary process. (Negotiated Settlement Agreement VI. E.) Background: Following our review of retaliation cases in the fourteenth reporting period, we found OPD not in compliance with Task 37. In that report, we cited a case we regarded as involving serious retaliation after an officer provided information about another officer’s beating a handcuffed prisoner. We noted that not enough was done to identify the perpetrator or protect the reporting officer when the retaliation came to light. In the last reporting period, we found that in all three cases alleging retaliation, OPD conducted thorough investigations and concluded that the charge of retaliation was unfounded. Discussion: As previously reported, we have found OPD in continued Phase 1 compliance with this Task. OPD published Special Order 8092 on November 23, 2003, which incorporated the requirements of Task 37. This policy consists of two Manual of Rules (MOR) Sections: 398.73, Retaliation Against Witnesses; and 398.74, Retaliation Against Witnesses, Accountability. These MOR provisions (revised in lieu of a City policy on retaliation) incorporate the requirements of Task 37. OPD has trained at least 95% of relevant personnel on these policies. Task 37.1 requires that officers be held accountable for retaliating against employees or members who report misconduct or serve as witnesses in proceedings against other members/employees (compliance standard: 95%); and Task 37.2 requires that supervisors, commanders, and managers be held accountable if they knew or reasonably should have known that persons under their supervision engaged in retaliation (compliance standard: 95%). OPD identified five cases that it considered as containing allegations of retaliation during the period of October 1, through December 31, 2013. One of the cases was not yet complete, so we will review it in a future reporting period. Another case involved an allegation that an unidentified OPD officer would “retaliate” against a citizen. Inasmuch as Task 37 specifies instances of retaliation against members or employees of OPD we did not consider this case for this Task. We reviewed the remaining three cases; and found that OPD thoroughly investigated and concluded that the charge of retaliation was unfounded in all three. During the last few reporting periods, we faulted OPD for failing to respond fully to the most serious allegation of retaliation that we have observed. During this reporting period, we found that top OPD management gave attention to addressing the retaliation problem. The Chief provided training regarding retaliation to two Police Service Technician academies, the four most recent recruit academies, and the recent lateral academy. Case3:00-cv-04599-TEH Document979 Filed04/28/14 Page59 of 88