CPRC: Semi-annual Report
Three council members met to be briefed on the Community Police Review Commission's semiannual report presented to them by current full-time executive manager, Pedro Payne.
Committee Chair Andrew Melendrez, Nancy Hart and Steve Adams, along with City Attorney Gregory Priamos and Asst. City Manager Thomas DeSantis, listened as Payne reported the most recent trends noted by the commission in terms of complaints received and disposed. Melendrez told the committee members that he had decided to include periodic briefings from the CPRC to the agenda of the public safety committee.
Payne said that the number of complaints had decreased in comparison to this same time last year, but was unable to explain the reasons behind this shift. The number of complaints sustained stood at around 13%, a rate slightly lower than that of last year.
Geographically, most of the complaints involved alleged incidents that occurred in the downtown area, a trend which has stood since the CPRC started receiving complaints in 2001.
Payne said that one area the CPRC was interested in working on was increasing the efficiency of complaint investigations. The time frame between the initiation of the complaint and when it was finally adjudicated was still a lengthy period of time. The average time a category 1 complaint spent at the police department being investigated and processed by the administrative chain of command was 167 days and for category 2 complaints, it was 136 days, according to information listed in the CPRC's monthly reports. Payne said that establishing dialogues with representatives in the department's Internal Affairs Division had been productive in addressing some of these issues.
Adams lauded his own idea of appointing a department representative, currently Capt. Pete Esquival, to serve as a liaison between the CPRC and the police department as helping in bridging the gap between the two entities. Police officers in the department had more positive feelings about the CPRC's role in their professional lives because its practices were no longer unknown to them, Adams said. Those were interesting comments coming from a council member who had received over $15,000 in campaign contributions from the RPOA's political action committee when he ran for city council in 2003. All of the political candidates except for Mayor Ron Loveridge who had received financial contributions from the RPOA had publicly voiced their opposition to the CPRC either before or after they were elected to office.
Perhaps this is a sign that the tide is turning in favor of the CPRC in civic circles and it has woven itself more permanently into the city's fabric.
CPRC Stats:
(Source: CPRC Semi-annual Report)
Number of complaints:
2005: 58
2006: 38
Disposition of complaints:
Sustained:
2005: 18%
2006: 13%
Not Sustained:
2005: 19%
2006: 28%
Unfounded:
2005: 38%
2006: 42%
Exonerated:
2005: 19%
2006: 13%
RPD investigation and administrative processing:*
(Source: CPRC Monthly Reports)
January 2006:
Category 1(serious allegations including excessive force): 138 days
Category 2(less serious allegations): 102 days
February 2006:
198 days
180 days
March 2006:
N/A
N/A
April 2006:
230 days
143 days
May 2006:
116 days
121 days
June 2006:
154 days
134 days
CPRC processing and review:
January 2006:
Category 1(serious allegations including excessive force): 71 days
Category 2(less serious allegations): 51 days
February 2006:
19 days
42 days
March 2006:
N/A
N/A
April 2006:
77 days
99 days
May 2006:
79 days
99 days
June 2006:
57 days
42 days
*RPD policy 4.12(sections 5,6) state that the established goal time frames for category 1 complaints is 60 days and for category 2 complaints, 30 days. For time extensions, a division commander will seek approval from the Personnel Services/Internal Affairs Commander.
Committee Chair Andrew Melendrez, Nancy Hart and Steve Adams, along with City Attorney Gregory Priamos and Asst. City Manager Thomas DeSantis, listened as Payne reported the most recent trends noted by the commission in terms of complaints received and disposed. Melendrez told the committee members that he had decided to include periodic briefings from the CPRC to the agenda of the public safety committee.
Payne said that the number of complaints had decreased in comparison to this same time last year, but was unable to explain the reasons behind this shift. The number of complaints sustained stood at around 13%, a rate slightly lower than that of last year.
Geographically, most of the complaints involved alleged incidents that occurred in the downtown area, a trend which has stood since the CPRC started receiving complaints in 2001.
Payne said that one area the CPRC was interested in working on was increasing the efficiency of complaint investigations. The time frame between the initiation of the complaint and when it was finally adjudicated was still a lengthy period of time. The average time a category 1 complaint spent at the police department being investigated and processed by the administrative chain of command was 167 days and for category 2 complaints, it was 136 days, according to information listed in the CPRC's monthly reports. Payne said that establishing dialogues with representatives in the department's Internal Affairs Division had been productive in addressing some of these issues.
Adams lauded his own idea of appointing a department representative, currently Capt. Pete Esquival, to serve as a liaison between the CPRC and the police department as helping in bridging the gap between the two entities. Police officers in the department had more positive feelings about the CPRC's role in their professional lives because its practices were no longer unknown to them, Adams said. Those were interesting comments coming from a council member who had received over $15,000 in campaign contributions from the RPOA's political action committee when he ran for city council in 2003. All of the political candidates except for Mayor Ron Loveridge who had received financial contributions from the RPOA had publicly voiced their opposition to the CPRC either before or after they were elected to office.
Perhaps this is a sign that the tide is turning in favor of the CPRC in civic circles and it has woven itself more permanently into the city's fabric.
CPRC Stats:
(Source: CPRC Semi-annual Report)
Number of complaints:
2005: 58
2006: 38
Disposition of complaints:
Sustained:
2005: 18%
2006: 13%
Not Sustained:
2005: 19%
2006: 28%
Unfounded:
2005: 38%
2006: 42%
Exonerated:
2005: 19%
2006: 13%
RPD investigation and administrative processing:*
(Source: CPRC Monthly Reports)
January 2006:
Category 1(serious allegations including excessive force): 138 days
Category 2(less serious allegations): 102 days
February 2006:
198 days
180 days
March 2006:
N/A
N/A
April 2006:
230 days
143 days
May 2006:
116 days
121 days
June 2006:
154 days
134 days
CPRC processing and review:
January 2006:
Category 1(serious allegations including excessive force): 71 days
Category 2(less serious allegations): 51 days
February 2006:
19 days
42 days
March 2006:
N/A
N/A
April 2006:
77 days
99 days
May 2006:
79 days
99 days
June 2006:
57 days
42 days
*RPD policy 4.12(sections 5,6) state that the established goal time frames for category 1 complaints is 60 days and for category 2 complaints, 30 days. For time extensions, a division commander will seek approval from the Personnel Services/Internal Affairs Commander.
posted by Five Before Midnight | 2:54 PM
1 Comments:
Dear Sandalou:
I don't know. It's summer time. More available sunlight, enhanced vitamin D production and warm(if not necessarily clean) air all tend to have mood enhancing affects on people who are often experiencing the doldrums. Medical conditions like SAD are also less prevalent in the summer months.
Maybe some of them are done with summer vacation and are returning to school again. After all, much of the maturity level shown here was somewhat on par with the chronological age of young teenage boys left to be babysat by the internet by parents who do not give them the attention they both need and want. If these individuals are indeed adults, hopefully they have sought counseling from behavioral specialists for their assorted emotional issues.
There were also those unidentified individuals who dropped by, who were upset with the police department's management and the police union's leadership, not necessarily in that order. The management puts their needs second, after those of risk management. The union's leaders are elected by those who vote and they serve at the will of the members. If they don't, then they get voted out, like in any democracy.
Just yesterday, there was another visitor who submitted a comment for another thread about some investigation involving a gang detective that was done last year. He closed off his comments by saying to trust him, that the true evidence will come out, but of course does not explain exactly what that is. Ah, another mystery guest in a season of them.
Well, for all I know, he could have written his comment after reading his tea leaves for the day.
Have a nice day,
Post a Comment
<< Home