fourteenth-report.pdf

Independent Monitoring Team Fourteenth Status Report of the Independent Monitor Delphine Allen, et al., v. City of Oakland, et al. July 31, 2009 to January 13, 2010 Page 16 Internal Affairs Policy & Procedure Manual (including Policies 05-01 through 05-04); and the Departmental Discipline Policy (Training Bulletin Index Number V-T) and Discipline Matrix. During the ninth reporting period, the IMT conducted an extensive assessment of OPD’s internal investigations process and the Internal Affairs Division. This review included the assessment of hundreds of internal investigation files; interviews with complainants; listening to tapes of IAD investigator conversations with complainants; observing IAD operations; on-site testing of whether officers had complaint forms in their cars or on their persons; visits to locations throughout the city to see whether complaint forms and brochures were available to the public; and numerous interviews and conversations with IAD investigators, command staff, and other OPD personnel. Our observations and analysis revealed that OPD’s system for investigating complaints of misconduct had vastly improved, although OPD was not yet in compliance with most of the NSA’s tasks related to internal investigations. As discussed below, OPD continues to improve in these areas. During the tenth reporting period, the IMT met with IAD and OIG to discuss in more detail the IMT’s positive observations regarding more recent internal investigations, as well as some of the ongoing problems the IMT has observed in its continuing review of internal investigations. Also during the tenth reporting period, OPD revised its Discipline Policy and Discipline Matrix based on concerns that, as originally crafted, it was overly punitive. In addition, OPD proposed a series of changes to General Order M-3 and to its internal investigations policies and procedures. The IMT committed substantial time and effort working closely with OPD and Plaintiffs’ Attorneys to help them reach agreement on these policies and procedures as well as related modifications to the Settlement Agreement. During the eleventh reporting period, the IMT conducted a review of cases IAD had closed as “service” or “no MoR (Manual of Rules) violation” complaints, and worked with IAD to improve its ability to ensure misconduct complaints are not incorrectly closed without sufficient investigations or proper findings. Subsequent to the IMT’s review, IAD audited and reopened many cases that it determined had been incorrectly closed as service complaints or “no MoR” cases. In addition, at OPD’s request, the IMT conducted a brief review of the IAD intake process and recommended measures to improve the efficiency and efficacy of IAD’s Intake Unit. These activities are part of the IMT’s larger effort to assist OPD’s efforts at improving its misconduct investigations and attaining compliance with the NSA. During this reporting period, the IMT continued to attend IAD’s weekly meetings with the Chief, offering assistance and insight regarding specific investigations and emerging trends. The IMT also continued to conduct ad hoc reviews of OPD completed investigations and to communicate any significant problems or trends to OPD. During this reporting period, the IMT completed actual practice reviews in a number of IAD-related areas. In particular, we completed assessments of the timeliness of OPD’s misconduct investigations; whether jail detainees are able to effectively lodge complaints of officer misconduct; and whether the supervisors of officers alleged to have committed