Item B: Meeting w/Police Comm. - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EUGENE POLICE EMPLOYEES ASSO CIA TION ~l' ~ 777High Street, Suite 120 · Eugene, OR 97401 · Office: (541) 342-1814 · Fax: (541) 342-1814 TO: Eugene Police Commission Members July 12'h, 2004 FM: Eugene Police Employees' Association SUB J: IA/Complaint Process I'd like to use this occasion to thank the Police Commission for allowing me the opportunity to address the subject of the Eugene Police Department's IA process, and for giving me the chance to provide input from the EPEA perspective. Hopefully, after reading this document, you will get a better understanding of our goals as an organization and how that can fit into plans to re-organize the internal process at the EPD. Contrary to what some may think, the Police Union has spent an enormous amount of time and energy over the years trying to bring this very subject to light. We view the problems not with the current policy, but how that policy has been applied. In order for an internal investigation and subsequent discipline to have any credibility it must be thorough, objective, lair, and consistent. I have outlined five points that I believe need to be included in any discussion regarding the reva~nping of the IA process, and more specifically how investigations are conducted and discipline rendered. I understand that this document is just one tool for you and ka~ow that further discussion will need to occur. Please keep in mind while reading that some of the details I discuss are already practice in many communities. It is our belief that complaints generated from outside the police department should be in writing and signed by the complaining party. Further, the complaining party should sign the document with the understanding that in cases where the complaint is malicious, they could be subject to arrest for false swearing. This provides a much needed filter for the complaint process and protection fbr the officer from malicious complaints. · The IA process needs to be open. The officer needs to be told the exact nature of the complaint against them. Complaints against police officers are very stressful for the involved officer as well as thek t:amily members. Officers are often distracted when complaints are brought against them making it difficult to focus on their job, which leads to obvious officer safety concerns. · There should be at least two investigators involved in a complaint against an officer. The initial investigators sole job should be to fact find. That investigators role isn't to determine the violations of policy, but to find out what facts occurred.