Laserfiche WebLink
Intake <br />The auditor’s full-time customer service representative <br />accepts complaints in person, in writing, by facsimile, or <br />by telephone. Citizen review board members (see <br />“Citizen Police Advisory Review Board”on page 65), <br />city council members, and community groups refer com- <br />plainants to the auditor. The auditor forwards complaints <br />to the police department’s internal affairs bureau. <br />Monitoring <br />Exhibit 2–18 shows the auditing process and its relation- <br />ship to the citizen review board. As shown, every week <br />the police department forwards a list of new complaints <br />to Liana Perez with the subject officers’names so she can <br />decide whether to sit in on any IA interviews before the <br />investigations have been completed. Perez monitors seri- <br />ous cases involving allegations of use of excessive force. <br />She monitors other cases based on: <br />1. Random selection. <br />2. A citizen’s request that she attend. <br />3. A request from the citizen review board to attend. <br />Sometimes Perez attends the interviews to make the com- <br />plainant feel more comfortable—for example, if a female <br />complainant wants another woman with her—or if a <br />complainant feels he or she will be unable to articulate <br />the complaint during a police interrogation. Perez sat in <br />on one investigation when a woman came to her with a <br />complaint that involved several officers. Because Perez <br />knew that the officers’statements would be critical to a <br />fair determination of responsibility, she wanted to ensure <br />that each officer would be interviewed immediately after <br />the other so they could not compare stories. <br />The city ordinance specifies that the auditor “cannot <br />question witnesses but may suggest questions to be <br />C ITIZEN R EVIEW OF P OLICE: APPROACHES AND I MPLEMENTATION <br />63 <br />EXHIBIT 2–18. CITIZEN OVERSIGHT PROCESS IN TUCSON <br />City manager <br />Audits <br />completed <br />cases <br />May sit in on <br />interviews <br />Independent police auditor <br />Accepts <br />complaints <br />Forwards to police <br />department <br /> Random <br /> All use-of-force cases <br /> Appealed cases <br />Investigation <br />was thorough <br />and fair <br />Additional investigation <br />needed <br />Recommends policy <br />or procedure change <br />IA <br />investigates <br />Captains <br />investigate <br />Refers <br />complainants <br />to auditor <br />Complainants have <br />5 minutes to explain <br />complaint or to <br />appeal IA finding <br />or auditor’s review <br />Reviews IA <br />cases and <br />auditor’s <br />audits <br />Recommends <br />policy or <br />procedure <br />changes <br />Holds meetings <br />(auditor attends) <br />Citizen Police Advisory Review Board <br />City council/mayor <br />Asks auditor to <br />review or <br />monitor IA <br />investigation <br />Denies <br />complaint <br />Schedules case for board <br />hearing at future meeting <br />Requests case file