Laserfiche WebLink
2017 Incident Reviews, Inquiries, Policy Complaints, and Service Complaints <br />Received <br />Date <br />Closed Date Time Open <br />(days) <br />Classification Summary Outcome <br />4/25/2017 4/28/2017 3 Incident Review: <br />Use of Force <br />RP alleged that officers used excessive force in <br />arresting her daughter. <br />ICV review showed that the officer's use of force was within policy. <br />4/24/2017 5/3/2017 9 Inquiry RP was upset that his 12 year old was served a <br />subpoena at school. <br />Supervisor found that the subpoena was served at the school in <br />the principal's office after a message was left with the mother. <br />Supervisor also looked into best practices and made a change that <br />would entail securing permission from parents. Supervisor spoke <br />with RP. <br />4/28/2017 5/9/2017 11 Performance RP was upset at the amount of time it took for <br />EPD to respond to a robbery in his store. <br />Lt. spoke with RP about the concern and apologized for the poor <br />customer service in this situation. <br />5/1/2017 5/2/2017 1 Inquiry RP alleged that officers arrested him and forced <br />him to go to the hospital with no probable cause. <br />Dismissed: Alternate Remedy Preliminary review by the <br />Auditor's Office found no policy violation. <br />5/1/2017 6/1/2017 30 Performance RP was upset that a bad check for over <br />$6,000.00 was considered a civil issue by EPD. <br />Sgt. reviewed the process that the officer and a detective took in <br />the matter and found that the issue was civil in nature. Sgt. spoke <br />with RP to explain the process taken and how to move forward. <br />4/19/2017 5/8/2017 19 Inquiry An officer self-reported a situation with another <br />agency. <br />Sgt. spoke with the agency and was able to determine the situation <br />had been resolved, with no policy violations by the officer. <br />5/1/2017 8/8/2017 97 Incident Review RP alleged that officers failed to allow his wife, <br />who had been involved in a traffic accident, to <br />leave with their child in the ambulance. RP felt <br />his wife's race had something to do with it. <br />A review of ICV, dispatch records and Medic notes found no <br />medical treatment was delayed and that the ambulance was <br />underway within 12 minutes with RP's wife. RP failed to cooperate <br />with further investigation. <br />5/1/2017 5/30/2017 29 Inquiry RP was unhappy that an officer told him he could <br />not take his service animal into an ice cream <br />store. <br />Sgt. reviewed BWV and found that RP was stopped for various <br />violations involving his animal. The officer patiently explained the <br />issues and and asked RP questions allowed under the ADA. RP's <br />animal did not meet any of the descriptors or service animal. RP <br />was warned, with no policy violation by the officer. RP did not <br />return voice messages left by the Sgt. <br />5/2/2017 6/26/2017 54 Courtesy RP was unhappy with an officer's demeanor <br />when he spoke with him at the park blocks, <br />accusing him of camping when he was only <br />hanging out until an appointment. <br />Sgt. reviewed bodycam of the officer's interaction with RP and <br />found that RP was sleeping under a blanket on top of a sleeping <br />bag at the time of the interaction. Sgt. noted that the officer was <br />patient and professional with RP as he explained the park rules <br />and gave RP a warning. (no citation). Sgt. spoke with RP about his <br />findings. <br />Appendix B Page 9 of 32 September 24, 2018, Work Session – Item 2