seventeenth-quarterly-report.pdf

Seventeenth Quarterly Report of the Independent Monitor for the Oakland Police Department April 28, 2014 Page 85 such delay is specifically authorized in writing by the Chief of Police (compliance standard: 90%). • Task 14.3: If the Chief of Police determines that concurrent civil litigation is likely to yield additional information relevant to an internal investigation, s/he may hold the findings of the internal investigation in abeyance. Such delay shall last no longer than necessary to obtain the relevant information. The reason(s) for any delay shall be documented in the Chronological Activity Log (CAL). The Chief of Police shall ensure the investigation continues on all areas of the internal investigation (compliance standard: 90%). To assess this Task, we requested and reviewed the litigation logs covering January 1, through December 31, 2013. For each entry, we queried the IAD database and reviewed available documentation to ensure that there was a corresponding IAD investigation. There were a total of 22 lawsuits listed on the logs, and we found a case corresponding with each. One of the cases was still under investigation at the time of our review; the allegations in the other 21 cases were investigated and resolved. From the documentation we reviewed, we determined that the litigation and IAD process were handled separately, as required; and none of the cases were delayed, halted, or modified. OPD is in compliance with Task 14. We will review this Task again in a future reporting period. During this reporting period, we also reviewed two audits recently conducted by an outside consultant retained by OIG – for inactive Task 22, Management Level Liaison; and inactive Task 47, Community Policing. Task 22 requires the following: • Task 22.1: OPD maintains a management-level member or employee to act as a liaison (MLL) to the courts, District Attorney’s Office, and the Public Defender’s Office (compliance standard: Yes/No). • Task 22.2: OPD tracks cases that are lost or dropped due to bad reports, defective search warrants, granted motions to suppress, contradictory evidence or testimony, or any other indication of performance problems or misconduct (compliance standard: Yes/No). • Task 22.3: The MLL meets with and cooperates with the IMT (compliance standard: Yes/No). • Task 22.4: The District Attorney’s Office and Public Defender’s Office attend meetings as they deem appropriate (compliance standard: Yes/No). Case3:00-cv-04599-TEH Document979 Filed04/28/14 Page86 of 88