ninth-report.pdf

Independent Monitoring Team Ninth Status Report of the Independent Monitor Delphine Allen, et al., v. City of Oakland, et al. May 13, 2006, to November 30, 2006 Page 27 all relevant evidence; make credibility determinations where feasible; attempt to resolve inconsistencies in witness statements; employ the “preponderance of evidence” standard; and permanently retain all notes related to the investigation. This provision also defines six case dispositions (unfounded; sustained; exonerated; not sustained; filed and administrative closure). • By October 1, 2004, OPD must implement the above referenced policies. b. Status of Compliance and Assessment The implementation deadline for this task occurred in October 2004. OPD had previously drafted and published Manual of Rules insert 398.76, incorporating one part of this task (complainant access to a supervisor). The IMT determined this policy complies with the Settlement Agreement and, during the sixth reporting period, OPD provided the IMT with sufficiently reliable training data to enable us to confirm that OPD had trained 95% or more of relevant personnel on this policy. The remainder of this task is incorporated into General Order M-3.1, Informal Complaint Resolution Process; General Order M-3, Complaints Against Departmental Personnel or Procedures; the Internal Affairs Policy and Procedure Manual; and Policy C-2, Communications Division Policy and Procedure Manual. During the last two reporting periods, OPD completed these policies and trained its personnel on them. As reported previously, although OPD has closed its City jail, it has published Special Order 8270 to ensure that OPD complaints made at the Alameda County Jail are handled properly. During this reporting period, the IMT audited OPD’s actual practice compliance with this task. Tasks 5.1 through 5.5 involve procedures related to OPD’s response to complaints in the field. OPD is in the process of developing a system to document compliance with these tasks. The IMT agreed to refrain from auditing these provisions of this task until the next reporting period while that system is being implemented. Tasks 5.6 through 5.14 relate to complaints by Oakland City Jail inmates. Because the jail has been closed, OPD’s remaining responsibilities under these tasks require that an on-duty supervisor respond to the Alameda County Jail if there are complaints from inmates arrested by OPD, and that the complaints be processed in accordance with OPD policies. As above, OPD is in the process of developing a system to document compliance with this aspect of this task. The IMT agreed to refrain from auditing these provisions of this task until that system is implemented. Tasks 5.15 and 5.16 require that OPD gather all relevant evidence, and then adequately consider that evidence, to make credibility determinations and resolve inconsistent statements. OPD has made extraordinary gains in this area in every respect.