Document of Interest Provided By Councilmember Hamann on Civilian Review Boards

Home Browse Search

C ITIZEN R EVIEW OF P OLICE: APPROACHES AND I MPLEMENTATION 29 THE CHIEF’S RESPONSE TO AN OMBUDSMAN INVESTIGATION A man arrested on a domestic violence charge filed a complaint with the ombudsman’s office alleging an officer punched him in the face after the citizen tried to headbutt the officer.The citizen also alleged that the officer threatened to beat him up for hitting a woman. An ombudsman’s investigator interviewed the complainant, his girlfriend, and the complainant’s brother as well as the subject officer and two other officers at the scene. Medical records indicated a 2 by 2-centimeter hematoma on the right cheek.The citizen’s girlfriend reported,“I heard him [the officer] say [to the citizen on the phone that] he was gonna kick his a--.” The citizen’s brother reported that “I heard one cop say that he [the com- plainant] hit [the officer].” The subject officer wrote to the ombudsman that some words were exchanged between him and the citizen, and when the citizen said “F--- you” and headbutted him, the officer immediately struck the man with a closed fist to the face.The other officers reported that the man was already handcuffed at the time the officer hit him.The officer said he hit the man because “With the quickness of the situation, I had no time to use my O.C. [oleoresin capsicum, or pepper spray] or any other methods to control [the man] from striking again.” The ombudsman’s report sent to the chief reproduced two department policies pertinent to the complaint, one on self-control and one on the use-of-force continuum.The latter policy includes the statement that “Above the holds and maneuvers [in the continuum of force] are the STRIKINGS.The striking points may be soft tissue, joints, or, in the extreme case, the suspect’s head.” The ombudsman’s office summarized the case by saying: Other methods available [to the officer for restraining the subject] would include verbal persuasion, touching or pushing away, O.C. spray, a compliance hold, the assistance of the other two officers to subdue Mr. [the complainant] . . . or simply stepping away from Mr. ____ to deescalate the altercation. It is the Ombudsman’s determination that Officer ____ could have used any of the above mentioned alternatives first, rather than punching Mr. ____ in the face. Officer did not indicate in any reports to the Ombudsman that he felt his safety or life were in danger. The report concluded by saying that “Officer ____’s actions violated the Flint Police Department’ Use of Force Continuum . . . [and] the police department’s policy on self control....Chief of Police Trevor Hampton should review Officer ____’s actions and issue the appropriate discipline.” The chief wrote the ombudsman’s office back as follows: I am in receipt of your critical report.Please be advised that Mr.____ did not file a complaint with the Flint Police Department regarding this incident. As a result of your report,I am initiating an investigation. If the findings of the internal investigation show violations by members of the Flint Police Department, appropriate action will be taken. Three months later, the chief wrote again to say: “The investigation involving the complaint of Mr. ____ has been reviewed and evaluated by me.The charge has been sustained against Officer ____ and appropriate disciplinary action will be taken.”