Document of Interest Provided By Councilmember Hamann on Civilian Review Boards

Home Browse Search

• Many citizens simply want the satisfaction of express- ing their concerns face to face with the officer—letting the officer hear their side of the case or dissatisfaction with the officer’s behavior. A survey of 371 citizens who had filed com- plaints with New York City’s Citizen Complaints Review Board found that the desire for a direct encounter with the subject officer was “pervasive” and “significantly associated with complainant satisfaction.”3 • Citizens can learn about the basis for police officers’ actions in ways that can promote an improved understand- ing of the law enforcement officer’s job. — Many mediated cases involve incidents in which an officer stopped and interrogated a suspect who turned out to be innocent, and the person became angry at having been “falsely accused” or singled out “for no good reason.” Mediation lets officers describe how the information they had at the time led them to a reasonable suspicion that the person might have been the offender. (See “Two Successful Mediations.”) — Officers often have considerable discretion in what they do, and citizens become upset when an officer chooses a course of action that is inconven- ient (e.g., having their car towed) or embarrassing (e.g., pat searching them in front of neighbors). Alternatively, some citizens think officers have discretion in areas where they do not. For example, an officer may refuse to let a delivery truck drive down a street the driver normally uses to get to a retail store because the street is temporarily blocked off for a parade or local event. The officer could make an exception and let the driver go around the barricade, but, should the driver hit a pedestrian, the officer could be sued or disciplined. • Like everyone, officers can be “having a bad day” and lose their temper with cit- izens. In addition, citizens do not realize how frustrating it can be when officers encounter repeated instances of citizen venality, venting at officers, or attempts to break the rules (e.g., driving in the breakdown lane). Officers are not justi- fied in losing their temper and berating a citizen, but mediation can help citizens understand why officers did so. • If the case is likely to result in an exonerated, unfound- ed, or not sustained finding by the review board, the complainant can feel better about a successful media- tion than receiving one of these findings. Potential benefits to officers • Mediation can educate officers to the effects their words, behaviors, and attitudes can unwittingly have on the public. • If mediation is successful, nothing neg- ative appears in the officer’s record. In San Francisco, any mediation the Office of Citizen Complaints schedules has this result even if the com- plainant fails to show up and as long as the officer appears. In Rochester, officers who agree to mediation do not have to go to IA to be interviewed or answer written questions. An IA commander in another city C ITIZEN R EVIEW OF P OLICE: APPROACHES AND I MPLEMENTATION 77 If mediation is successful, nothing negative appears in the officer’s record. Citizens may: 1. Be encouraged to file complaints. 2. Gain the satisfaction of talking directly with the officer. 3. Gain a better understanding of police work and why the officer acted in a specific manner. 4. Learn why some officers are not always courteous. 5. Feel more satisfaction than if a hearing results in an exonerated, unfounded, or not sustained finding. Police officers may: 1. Learn how their words, behaviors, and attitudes can unwittingly affect the public. 2. Avoid having a complaint included in their files if mediation is successful. 3. Reduce the negative image some citizens have about officers. 4. Gain an understanding of why the complainant acted the way he or she did. EXHIBIT 3–4. POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF MEDIATION TO CITIZENS AND POLICE Many citizens simply want the satisfaction of expressing their concerns face to face with the officer—letting the officer hear their side of the case or dissatisfaction with the officer’s behavior.