Agenda Packet 6-19-19 Work Session

Home Browse Search

11 • Most board members agreed the case was straightforward, thorough, and held all relevant information needed. Officer A admitted to his offense • A member wondered if there would be a different result had the Auditor’s Office followed up with witnesses instead of EPD. Ms. Pitcher said ordinances allowed the auditor to participate in the investigation and explained IA witness interviews were done a little differently for each witness. A board member thought it was good to have a strong working relationship with IA. 3) Relevant Department Policies and Practices a. 1101.1.B.25 Unbecoming Conduct • A member wished there was a policy where EPD officers had to report contact with outside agencies to their supervisors. The importance of holding people in power to a higher standard than civilians was also mentioned by another member. • A question was asked about policy for officers out of uniform and whether they were supposed to intervene in traffic violations when off duty. Ms. Pitcher stated that although not equipped, they may take action if a crime is committed in their presence or in an emergency. • A conversation was had about whether officers who were the subject in a case or investigation should tell their boss, and whether the expectation went against the notion of inn ocent until proven guilty. • Ms. Pitcher added that officers must obey all laws and they must immediately notify their supervisor if charged with a felony or a Class A misdemeanor. 4) Policy and/or Training Considerations • The fact that Officer A felt he could not talk to his supervisor brought up a climate issue within EPD for a board member. • A board member felt there should be training for when, why, and how an officer should intervene. • A member recognized that reporting all involvement with law enforcement was a balancing act. It’s important to manage officers and minimize risk, but they are also private citizens and not perfect. • Another board member still felt strongly about reporting, regardless of there being a charge. Without a specific policy requiring officers to inform supervisors, incidents could go under the radar for years. 5) Adjudication Recommendations • CRB members agreed with the adjudication recommendations of sustained. 6) Additional Comments or Concerns • The fact that Officer A admitted his mistake and expressed he learned from the situation was appreciated by a board member. • Officer A’s actions of stepping out of the car continued to be questioned, since most people would simply honk. A comment was made that Officer A could not expect someone to believe he was an officer simply because he stated he was. • RP’s inaccuracies were also mentioned, as well as EPD’s neutral narrative on what happened. • Mr. Gissiner mentioned that Officer A not receiving a citation might be perceived as preferential treatment from SPD, though a board member wondered what he would be cited for. June 19, 2019, Work Session – Item 2