Item 6: Report to City Council from Police Auditor

Home Browse Search

1.A resident complained that she was denied the opportunity to use the bathroom when she was in custody of a male officer on a DUII arrest, causing her to urinate in her pants while handcuffed. The specific allegation was performance judgment: that the officer failed to take proper care of a subject in his custody. The supervising sergeant recommended that the complaint be unfounded, the supervising lieutenant recommended a finding of within policy, and the supervising captain recommended a sustained finding. The Auditor and the Chief agreed that the allegation should be sustained. While the officer reassured the complainant that after he concluded the DUII processing she could use the bathroom, and after receiving advice from a fellow officer, he continued to process the DUI. It was recommended by the Auditor and decided by the Chief that the officer needed to make reasonable accommodation to the complainant to use the bathroom when her need was clearly articulated and there were options available to the officer. After a lengthy discussion, the majority of the CRB (in a 3-2 vote) agreed with the sustained finding. A concern of the Board was the officer conferred with a more experienced peer officer and did not appear to act with malice. The IA representative shared there was much discussion among EPD employees and opinions varied greatly, thus needing attention by command staff. The Board suggested this issued be studied by command staff to see what changes to policy would be appropriate. 2.The CRB also reviewed a pursuit (internally reported) which was found to be a violation of policy. Two officers were dispatched to a call of a vehicle with stolen plates leaving a store; the officers initiated and continued the pursuit despite poor conditions and an identified suspect. Several violations of the pursuit policy were alleged, including initiating in violation of policy, continuing after the suspect began driving dangerously, failing to broadcast critical information, and broadcasting inaccurate and inadequate information. The case also included allegations of poor judgment (for engaging in the pursuit) and pursuit). The Auditor and the EPD chain of command agreed that the pursuit policy violations were sustained and the insubordination allegation was unfounded. On the judgment allegation, the supervising sergeant recommended that the allegation be unfounded; the command staff, and Auditor recommended sustained, the Chief concurred with the sustained allegation. July 2012 : The CRB reviewed two cases in July: 1.The CRB reviewed a case alleging an officer violated the abuse of position policy. The case concerned an allegation that an arrest was made for a noise violation when no noise was occurring when the officer arrived and that the officer had a personal relationship with the neighbor, an employee of the Eugene Fire Department. The Board discussed at length the policy surrounding arresting someone for noise based on a complaint when the noise is not present upon officer arrival. In this particular matter, the board concluded there was no abuse of discretion but a number of board members questioned whether the arrest made sense under the totality of the circumstances with so little investigation and lack of observed noise at time of contact and whether command staff should consider a policy that would require observed violation as a condition to arrest for low level misdemeanors. The Board also discussed classification and that if the matter had been classified as judgment rather than abuse of position, the outcome might have been different. Finally, the Board ϳ