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 37 files. In addition, the Pitchess Officer has instituted a system of logging, tracking, and calendaring Pitchess Motions and responses. The Pitchess Attorney reports that the court has noted an improvement in the City’s response to Pitchess Motions. While our audit indicated that OPD appeared to be locating the vast majority of cases responsive to Pitchess Motions, using IAD’s database, we identified over 80 cases that were not identified in the City’s Pitchess responses, even though they appeared to fit the City’s criteria for identification. To its credit, OPD reviewed each of these cases to determine whether any of them should have been identified and/or produced but were not and, if so, why they were not. In July 2006, OPD produced a report to the IMT detailing its findings. The Department determined that human error, policy gaps, and outdated database entries caused improper omissions in some of OPD’s Pitchess responses. Based on its findings, the Department has implemented several new policies and procedures to help ensure that future Pitchess responses are complete and accurate. These enhancements include improvements in IAD’s database practices and revising the language used in its Pitchess responses to ensure that the responses accurately describe the responses’ contents as well as all cases that OPD determines need not be produced to the court for review (e.g., incidents occurring more than five years previously and incidents occurring after the date of the Pitchess incident). The Department also committed to conducting its own audit in January 2007, of its Pitchess responses to determine whether these and other remedial measures are working as intended. OPD also met with local judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys to explain its findings and committed to cooperating fully with the Public Defender’s Office to provide it with cases that should have been produced but were not. The IMT has been impressed by OPD’s efforts to improve its handling of Pitchess responses and will continue to work with OPD to address outstanding issues. During the upcoming reporting periods, the IMT will determine whether OPD’s actual practices continue to comply with this Settlement Agreement provision. 14. Investigation of Allegations of Manual of Rules Violations Resulting from Lawsuits and Legal Claims (Task 14; S.A. III.M.) a. Settlement Agreement Requirements • By June 15, 2004, OPD must develop and, by October 1, 2004, implement, a policy requiring that it investigate allegations of Manual of Rules violations resulting from certain lawsuits and legal claims, treating them in the same manner as other citizens’ complaints. The Settlement Agreement sets forth certain criteria that must be included in this policy.