Laserfiche WebLink
investigator therefore tells the citizen the complaint will be <br />kept confidential unless the person makes it public. As a <br />result, the investigator cannot locate or interview witnesses <br />by telling people about the complaint unless the com- <br />plainant agrees to their being told about the complaint. <br />Because investigators can log onto the police depart- <br />ment’s computer, they can find the computer-aided dis- <br />patch data during the interview to identify which officers <br />were at the scene as well as to download the incident <br />report. Investigators also review the pertinent general <br />C ITIZEN R EVIEW OF P OLICE: APPROACHES AND I MPLEMENTATION <br />57 <br />ORGANIZATIONS MAY FILE COMPLAINTS <br />The San Francisco Bay Area chapter of the National Lawyers Guild provided legal support for a demonstration in <br />1997 on the anniversary of the Rodney King beating in Los Angeles. After the demonstration,the guild mailed a com- <br />plaint to OCC alleging that police officers arrested demonstrators who followed instructions to get onto the sidewalk <br />along with demonstrators who refused to move.OCC investigated the incident and notified the guild that it had not <br />sustained the allegation.In the meantime,the guild had received a positive judgment in small claims court for false <br />arrest and was awarded damages.Based on these new developments,the guild asked OCC to reopen the case,but <br />the oversight body denied the request because the director believed that a videotape clearly documented the demon- <br />strators to be in the wrong and that the OCC finding was therefore not in error.In addition,OCC determined that it <br />had investigated the case fully and was given no new evidence that would merit granting the appeal. <br />EXHIBIT 2–16. SAN FRANCISCO’S OVERSIGHT PROCESS <br />At police <br />department <br />Investigator <br />writes report <br />with <br />recommended <br />finding and <br />factual basis <br />IA agrees with <br />finding <br />Citizen files <br />complaint At OCC Case assigned <br />to investigator <br />At any city <br />agency (e.g., <br />mayor’s office) <br />Investigator conducts <br />initial telephone or <br />inperson interview with <br />citizen <br />Investigator <br />develops <br />investigation plan <br />and conducts <br />investigation <br />Investigator <br />interviews <br />subject <br />officer(s) <br />Senior <br />investigators, <br />chief <br />investigator, <br />attorney (if <br />sustained), <br />and <br />executive <br />director <br />review report <br />OCC <br />director <br />makes <br />decision as <br />to finding <br />and notifies <br />parties <br />OCC <br />forwards <br />case and <br />finding to <br />department’s <br />internal <br />affairs <br />division <br />IA disagrees with <br />finding <br />IA and OCC resolve <br />disagreement <br />IA <br />recommends <br />discipline <br />OCC <br />concurs with <br />or dissents <br />from <br />recommend- <br />ation <br />Chief’s <br />hearing: <br />OCC <br />prosecutes; <br />assistant <br />chief <br />disciplines <br />Police <br />commission <br />holds <br />administrative <br />trial; OCC <br />prosecutes <br />OCC prepares verified <br />complaint and asks <br />chief to file case with <br />police commission <br />IA and OCC cannot <br />resolve disagreement; <br />finding remains; no <br />discipline <br />OCC director <br />makes final <br />decision as to <br />finding <br />Complainant or <br />officer appeal <br />OCC rejects appeal <br />OCC arranges for independent hearing <br />Chief informs police commission of <br />his decision not to file case with <br />police commission <br />Chief files case <br />with police <br />commission <br />Commission reviews and accepts complaint