Agenda Packet 6-19-19 Work Session

Home Browse Search

16 the bill, while another member agreed but pointed out the situation could have turned potentially dangerous. A member stated that EPD far exceeded national best practices in terms of handling crisis situations and that he had a lot of empathy for the workers of CAHOOTS and the officers in the scenario. Complaint #5: Inquiry • Two EPD employees arrested the RP on a warrant. The RP complained to a supervisor that one of the employees poked a wound on his wrist with the handcuff point. • The supervisor spoke with the the RP and the involved employee. He also looked at the wound on the RP’s wrist. • The employee stated that he had not noticed the wound until he moved a bracelet on the RP’s wrist and that he had not intended to poke the wound. The supervisor observed that the scab on the RP’s wrist was intact. • The supervisor took photos of the RP and his wrist and entered the complaint into BlueTeam. • Our office reviewed the complaint and closed it as handled by the supervisor. Decision making: Members thought the case was handled well and appreciated seeing what it looked like when everyone did the right thing. The officers documented the wound, because if it had been poked, the situation could be seen as use of force. The supervisor also took the extra step to be prepared for review, which was appreciated. A board member commented it was helpful to sample service cases and see how they are being handled by the chain of command. It was why the public demanded an auditor and a review board years ago; it was good to see some day to day activities. MAY CASE REVIEW: ALLEGATIONS OF EXCESSIVE FORCE, DISCOURTESY, AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL ARREST Summary of Facts • Officer A witnessed a man push a woman to the ground in a parking lot. Officer A contacted the woman (Reporting Party 2) while other officers detained the man. • Reporting Party 2 (RP 2) tried to walk away from Officer A and stated that she had fallen. • Officer A ultimately informed her that he was investigating something, and she was not free to go; he also instructed her to sit on a nearby curb. • Officer A asked RP 2 for her name several times; he later switched to asking for her ID. RP 2 accused the officer of pushing her. • Reporting Party 1 (RP 1) approached the scene and was stopped by Officer B. • Eventually, Officer A told RP 2 to shut up. He then stated, “Give me your ID, or you’ll be arrested for interfering.” He repeated this statement and then grabbed RP 2’s wrists and ultimately placed her in handcuffs. • Officer A continued to ask for RP 2’s name and reiterated that if she did not give him her name, she would go to the jail and be arrested for interfering. • Officer A placed RP 2 in the back of his patrol car. Someone on scene offered to help her with her shoe, and Officer A stated “No, she didn’t have to take it off.” • Officer A asked RP 2 about weapons or contraband, and then asked if she wasn’t going to answer him. She stated that she did not understand English. Officer A responded: “Yes you do, you answered tons of questions that I asked you in English.” RP 2 later asked Officer A if she could June 19, 2019, Work Session – Item 2