Respectfully,

INTRADEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE

December 2, 20101.14

TO: The Honorable Board of Police Commissioners

FROM: Chief of Police

SUBJECT: REVIEW OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT ON BIASED POLICING

RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. That the Board REVIEW and APPROVE this review of the Supplemental Report on BiasedPolicing.

DISCUSSION

The top priority of the Los Angeles Police Department is to police in a constitutional manner.This report is a review of the Office of the Inspector General's supplemental report on BiasedPolicing and includes the steps the Department is taking to reduce, and ultimately eliminateallegations of biased policing.

If you have any questions please call me at (213) 486-0150.

CHARLIE BECKChief of Police

Attachments

REVIEW OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT ON BIASED POLICING

The Los Angeles Police Department’s basic tenet is the performance of its duties in a constitutional manner. The Chief of Police (COP) has stated that policing in a constitutional manner is the top priority of the Department. In a Chief of Police Notice, dated November 15, 2010, entitled “Constitutional Policing and Biased Policing,” distributed to all Department personnel, “Policing in a constitutional manner is the responsibility of each and every one of us. The purpose of this Notice is to reaffirm my commitment to Constitutional Policing...” It further states the Chief’s expectation that each and every sworn employee practices constitutionally sound policing. In some instances, allegations of biased policing are as much about courtesy and respect as they are about bias. The Chief expects the officers to explain the reasons to those stopped and the reasons for the actions taken when it is safe to do so (Addendum 1). The Chief has often stated that policing is the only profession where the results are not as important as the process. When the Consent Decree was negotiated in 2000, the Los Angeles Police Department was perceived by many as a Department that conducted police activities based on race, sexual preference, ethnicity or gender. Therefore, there was an emphasis in the decree on the intake, investigation and adjudication of complaints to ensure the fairness and thoroughness of the investigations and adjudications. By 2008, this perception had changed, as exhibited by the study conducted by the Harvard Kennedy School and a survey conducted by the Los Angeles Times. A greater percentage of those surveyed believe that Los Angeles Police Department officers treat all ethnic and racial groups fairly and with respect. However, there are still those who believe that officers treat people differently depending on their race, ethnicity, sexual preference or gender. It is therefore incumbent on the Department to further engender trust with community and one aspect of that is how it deals with complaints of biased policing.

One of the main objectives of the Consent Decree was to improve the acceptance, investigation and adjudication of the complaints and that all Biased Policing complaints would be investigated by Professional Standards Bureau (PSB). The decree was specific in its requirements to ensure that the complaints would be accepted, investigated thoroughly and fairly and the adjudication would be based on a preponderance of evidence standard. The Department has adopted these requirements and they are now part of the policies and procedures of the Department. One of the areas covered by the Transition Agreement is the continuation of these policies to prohibit biased policing and sets forth the requirement that the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) review the investigation and adjudication of complaints alleging biased policing.

The Consent Decree and the Transition Agreement envisioned strong civilian oversight by the OIG and the Police Commission. This has occurred and additionally there is a strong and cooperative working relationship between the Department and the Inspector General with a system of extensive review both internally and by the Inspector General reporting to the Police Commission. The report of the Inspector General is proof that the system works.

While the Department may disagree with some of the Inspector General’s comments and concerns about particular investigations and adjudications, it appreciates the input as it is consistently attempting to improve the manner of acceptance, investigation and adjudication of biased policing complaints.

The Honorable Board of Commissioners Page 2 1.14 The Department concurs with the OIG’s assessment that the Department and the OIG are committed to enhancing the overall quality of biased policing investigations. The Department’s commitment does not stop at investigations. The Department is fully committed to the ongoing prevention, detection and eradication of biased policing. Significant resources are expended by the Department and the City of Los Angeles in areas beyond complaint investigations including recruitment, new employee selection, and recruit and in-service training. The commitment to enhancing biased policing investigations is embraced at the highest levels of the Department. In addition to the Notice by the Chief of Police, the Office of Operations (OO) has issued a series of policies and procedures to the bureau, Area Commands, all lieutenants and sergeants, entitled “Constitutional Policing Initiatives,” dated November 15, 2010. It includes the review of all biased based policing complaints generated by the Office of Operations to be reviewed by the Assistant to the Director, OO, before returning to PSB. The notice places the emphasis of compliance with the anti-bias policy at the Area level (Addendum 2). This commitment is exemplified by the fact that immediately upon chosen as the Chief of Police, Chief Beck stated that constitutional policing is his top priority and devoted a substantial period of time to the issue of biased policing in his command staff retreat. He continued his efforts by creating the Constitutional Policing Unit (CPU) in March 2010. The investigative report was enhanced to include critical timeliness, better examination and description of evidence, facts not in dispute and those that are in dispute, and the transcription of all interviews as inclusion in the report. The use of transcribed statements was a significant improvement as it eliminated the inherent issue of accurate reporting of the statements. The Biased Policing Lesson Plan was revised to improve the investigations. The adjudication process was improved to include recommendations by the Commanding Officer of Internal Affairs Group as to the adjudication of the biased policing allegations and the inclusion of the Chief of Police in the process. Additionally, the Commanding Officer of Internal Affairs Group and the Inspector General have been discussing biased policing issues at the Bureau Staff meetings with all commanding officers. Internal Affairs Group (IAG) investigates each and every biased policing complaint. Although biased policing cases account for four to five percent, 200 out of 4,000 to 5,000 external complaints, the extraordinary resources and commitment are being expended on this front. This involvement ranges from the development of the CPU, revision of investigative reports, refinement of biased policing protocols, enactment of more thorough review, attendance at meetings and training sessions with command officers and frequent interaction with the OIG staff. Equally as important, the discourse between the IAG and the OIG is robust and transparent. The IAG is committed to the idea that transparent cooperation with civilian oversight is vitally important. The CPU investigators are in frequent contact with OIG staff. In nearly all cases, the CPU investigators enacted investigative strategies recommended by the OIG. The Department believes that the processes which are now in place coupled with the extraordinary review by the Department, personal attention by the COP and the oversight by the OIG have achieved the intent of the Consent Decree and the Transition Agreement. The nature and scope of the investigations and review are contained in Addendum 3.

The Honorable Board of Commissioners Page 3 1.14 One of the Department’s Core Values is “Quality Through Continuous Improvement.” Consistent with this value, the Department concurs with the OIG there is room for improvement but the Department also believes that the investigations reviewed demonstrate the commitment and importance placed on the determination of these complaints. In the past, many of these complaints were discouraged or adjudicated as Other Judicial Review or Unfounded if there was a determination that the violation for the basis if the stop actually occurred. The issues now examined and determined are not only what happened but why it happened. The core issue was whether the stop was made solely because of the race, ethnicity, sexual preference or gender of the individual, and were the actions that occurred after the stop the result of race, ethnicity, sexual preference or gender of the individual. It is the Department’s goal to not only improve the quality of the investigative process but also to reduce the number of biased policing complaints. The ultimate goal would be to have none. While the Inspector General commends the Department’s commitment and efforts, concerns were expressed in four areas:

1. Complaint Intake/Actions of the Responding Supervisor The Department concurs that the supervisor/sergeant can be the most important person in the process. The supervisor’s conduct can influence the complainant’s impression of the value the Department places on the complaint and will impact the complainant’s desire to cooperate and ultimately their view of the Department in general. It is important to have these individuals feel that their concerns are important to the Department. While the Department does not agree with each example cited by the IG, there is unquestionably a concern that must addressed, as seen in some of the interactions with the complainants. The Department concurs that it is important that every allegation of biased policing be stated as such. There should not be an attempt to discourage the complainant by emphasizing that the complainant admit that the violation occurred or agree that officers’ observations were possible. The Department does not concur with the examples cited relating to a failure to recognize that a biased policing complaint was being made and that relating to discrediting the complainant within the face sheet. The example used for the failure to recognize a biased policing complaint was a woman whose English was extremely difficult to understand, even a witness who wanted to help her stated he had trouble understanding her. The example of the face sheet being used to discredit the complainant ignores the fact the complainant may have made different statements to the supervisor and then to the investigator. The Chief’s Notice states “Treat each complaint of biased policing seriously and each person making the complaint with respect…” The Department will increase the training at Supervisors School and Police Training and Education will work with PSB to develop and implement a refresher Internal Affairs Investigation Course for employees with an emphasis on intake. This course will include peer

The Honorable Board of Commissioners Page 4 1.14 instruction from those supervisors who are considered proficient in the acceptance and processing of complaints. In addition, the Working Group, discussed below, will address this issue among others.

2. CPU Investigations

As acknowledged by the IG, the investigations have improved. The investigations no longer focus only on what happened but attempt to determine why it happened, examining the motive and bias of those involved. The IAG has developed protocols for the investigations and are being refined with each succeeding investigation. These investigations are not static but are ever improving with experience and will only get better. More probative questions are being asked and a greater understanding of the dynamics of these investigations being achieved. The investigations are thorough, consuming approximately 80 to 110 hours per investigation. The Department recognizes that these can always be improved and appreciates the suggestions made for improvement. As previously stated, the Department is constantly consulting with the Inspector General on investigations in general and on particular cases specifically. Investigations will never be perfect and it is always possible to find some deficiency. What is important is ensuring the material issues were sufficiently covered. The Inspector General expressed concern in a few areas relating to the investigations of the cases reviewed.

a. Evaluating the Credibility of the Officers’ Non-Race Based Justification for the Traffic/Pedestrian Stop

The Department understands the concern of the Inspector General in this area but does not agree with all of the examples given. There were investigations that should have probed more into the relative positions of the vehicles or inquired more as to the opportunity for the officer to observe the individual but some of the cases did not lend themselves to that type of inquiry. In other cases, such as Case No. 4, a motor officer observed erratic driving and pulled the person over, without any indication that race was an issue in that stop. Each investigation must be viewed in the context of the totality of circumstances to determine if it was sufficient and if further inquiry in any particular area was warranted. In some cases, the totality of circumstances will point to the significance of this issue. In others, it may not be of great significance. It would not be productive to do a case by case review of the cases cited by the Inspector General because reasonable people can differ on the importance or significance or thoroughness of any line of inquiry, but there is agreement that there always should be an attempt to conduct a complete and thorough investigation.

b. Assessing the Credibility of the Officers’ Claim that They Did Not Know the Race of the Complainant Before Conducting the Traffic Stop

The Honorable Board of Commissioners Page 5 1.14 The Analysis Group, as part of their study of the data the City collected as part of the Consent Decree, determined by ride-a-longs that even during the daylight, there is a percentage of the time when the officers could not identify the race of the individual being stopped. The area should be sufficiently explored and explored thoroughly but how this is done will depend on the facts and circumstances of the case.

c. Questions of Uncertain Probative Value

The Inspector General believes that asking a complainant if he/she would have similarly felt profiled or subject to bias policing if the officers were the same race as the complainant, is inappropriate due to the potential negative impact on the complainant’s perception of how his/her complaint would be treated by the Department. The Department disagrees, and believes that with this type of allegation and investigation, it is important to probe the racial bias, if any, of the complainant or any witnesses. An example of this is Case No. 4, where the officers are Black and the complainant is Caucasian, and the complainant made numerous comments about Blacks sticking it to “whitey.” It is true that any question can have a negative impact if asked in the wrong way but the Department believes that in the appropriate context, this is a legitimate line of questioning. Additionally, in another interview, the complainant was asked if he had ever been stopped by the same race as the complainant and then asked about if he was in a “Hispanic” or “Asian” neighborhood, would he have thought he was “being stopped in the same way.” The latter question is certainly inarticulate but that does not make the line of questioning automatically inappropriate. The issue of whether the violation occurred is germane to a biased policing complaint but that being said, the questioning should never rise to the level of making the complainant believe that is the total focus of the investigation or that it will be the determinative factor. d. Leading Questions An interview should be structured in a manner that requires the person interviewed to supply the information and not the interviewer. The interview must not be conducted in a manner that directs the person interviewed to the answers or in a particular direction. Particularly in biased policing complaints, it is important to allow the parties to speak freely due to the difficulty of determining motivation and credibility. This does not mean that interviewers cannot lead people to areas of concern but they should not provide the answer. Officers have employee representatives and lawyers present when they are interviewed and some of these representatives may try and interject themselves into the interview or try and lead the interview in a particular direction. The Constitutional Policing Unit has developed an admonition to warn the representatives and lawyers that they will be prohibited from remaining and that officer will be instructed to obtain another representative. Additionally, the investigators do not give credence to the answers to the leading questions of the representatives and lawyers.

The Honorable Board of Commissioners Page 6 1.14 The investigators are aware of the issue and understand the danger of leading questions. 3. Adjudications The standard of proof to be applied in adjudicating a complaint is preponderance of evidence. The problem that arises in reviewing any determination or adjudication is that different minds can differ on the relative strength of evidence and the conclusions to be drawn from that evidence. The important aspect that should be considered is that there is a robust system of review up to and including the Chief of Police. The Inspector General states that to Unfound an allegation, the adjudication has to determine that the act did not occur and that is a difficult standard to meet, even under the preponderance of evidence standard. The Inspector General’s view, as applied in this review, leads to the conclusion that almost every biased policing allegation will result in a Not Resolved determination. In reviewing the cases that were Unfounded by the Department, the Inspector General only agreed with Case No. 4, in the other five that were Unfounded, the Inspector General stated that the evidence did not support such a finding. These five Unfounded determinations were arrived at by the Area commanding officer, approved by the bureau and agreed to by the Commanding Officer of Internal Affairs Group, who reviews every biased policing complaint. As stated above, obvious people can disagree as to strength of the evidence. Rather than a detailed discussion of the differences, what will be the most productive is discussions between the captains and others making the adjudications so that both the Inspector General and the Department can understand the logic of the other and will impact further decisions. It should be noted that the 3 Not Resolved in this group of 10 is a marked departure from past adjudications and demonstrates the seriousness in which the Department handles these allegations. 4. Tone/Tenor of Officers’ Interaction with Complainant The Department concurs with the Inspector General that the tone and tenor of the interaction between the complainant and the officers is often the basis of the complainant’s belief that he/she was the victim of Biased Policing. In the Chief’s Notice (Addendum 1), he states that “Equally important, research has shown that in some instances, allegations of biased policing are as much about courtesy and respect as they are about bias. It is my expectation that when you stop someone, inconvenience them, etc., that you explain to them why you took the actions you did, when it is safe to do so.” It is understandable that officers, being human and in a tough job, will not always have the patience or understanding to make each and every person they stop or contact feel comfortable or understand the reason for the stop and the actions the officer took after the stop. This does not excuse the failure to act professional or with courtesy and patience. Beginning a conversation with the question “Are you on parole or probation?” or “Can we search your car?” or “Do you have any gang affiliation?” can create a belief on the part of the complainant that the stop was for

The Honorable Board of Commissioners Page 7 1.14 a reason other than the vehicle code violation. This is especially true with individuals who have the belief that officers in the Department treat people differently based on race, sexual preference, ethnicity or gender. The Department recognized this issue previously, after reviewing biased policing allegations and observed that most biased policing allegations involved issues of discourtesy. This led to the exploration and development of the mediation program. STEPS GOING FORWARD In addition to the Chief’s Notice (Addendum 1) and Assistant Chief Paysinger’s correspondence (Addendum 2), the Department intends to form Working Groups consisting of with Department personnel from Professional Standards Bureau, Office of Administrative Services, Training, Office of the Inspector General, Office of Operations, community representatives and outside subject matter experts to formulate training, policies and procedures in all areas relating to biased policing. These can include innovative training for officers in communication, awareness of their impact on others, improved investigation technique training, peer involvement so that officers who are proficient in the skills identified as necessary will be able to train their peers, debriefing after the event, the use of Digital In-car Video for examples of the positive and negative approaches and intake approaches previously discussed. This list is not exhaustive and the groups will certainly develop other ideas. The Department will examine whether it can increase the work load of CPU to include those cases that involve “high discretion stops.” The protocols of biased policing investigations shall be constantly reviewed to improve the process and revised from lessons learned. The Department will examine the intelligent use of data. Commander Webb has met with the Rand Corporation who has successfully designed systems in other jurisdictions for the use of data. This is another avenue to pursue. The Chief’s Notice (Addendum 1) was published on the Department Local Area Network and included in the Learning Management System for all sworn employees to review. The Chief will re-emphasize his commitment to constitutional and biased policing and his expectation by producing a video for all sworn employees to view. Additionally the Department would again like to address the issue of mediation. The mediation program would begin with a small select portion of biased policing complaints, as a pilot. A cross section of community members, police professionals and union representatives believe that mediation is not only a viable alternative to investigating some complaints, it is preferable. Mediation provides officers the opportunity to see how their behavior affects and is perceived by individuals they stop. This can be a transformative experience. This will also provide the person stopped with the officer’s perspective and how their conduct affected the officer. Oftentimes,

The Honorable Board of Commissioners Page 8 1.14 both sides will misunderstand each other due to a failure to accurately communicate their intentions. Even if just a few cases of mediation result in better police-community relations or a few mediations transform the understanding of an officer or a community member, this is far more beneficial than merely proceeding with an investigation and adjudication that results in a “Not Resolved” or “Unfounded.” classification. The Department intends to use mediation as a learning lesson for those involved and not as a method to avoid complaint investigations. CONCLUSION The Department intends to proceed with improving the handling of biased policing complaints and at the same time seek innovative methods to reduce the number of complaints, with the ultimate goal to reduce or eliminate these complaints.

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE

N YfICE November 15, 20101.1

TO: All Department .Personnel

FROM: Chief of Police

SUBJECT: CONSTITUTIONAL POLICING AND BIASED POLICING

Policing in a constitutional manner is the responsibility of each and every one of us.The purpose of this Notice is to reaffirir my commitment to Constitutional Policing, reiterate theanti-bias policy and communicate my expectations of you.

POLICY:

In summary, federal and state laws and Department policy prohibit conducting police actions solelyon the basis of race, color, ethnicity, national origin, gender, gender identity, gender expression,sexual orientation, or disability. Police-initiated stops or detentions, and activities following stopsor detentions, shall be unbiased and based only on le g itimate, articulable facts, consistent with thestandards of reasonable suspicion or probable cause, as required by federal and state laws(Department Ivlanual Section 11345).

Note: The fact that it is ultimately determined that the person you stopped committed a trafficviolation or equipment violation may still result in a finding that you violated this policy if it isdetermined that your initial decision to conduct the stop was based not on the violation itself, butrather on any of the prohibited factors listed above.

POLICE OFFICER'S..ND DETECTIVE'S EXPECTATIONS:

I expect you to practice constitutionally-sound policing and demonstrate your awareness andapplication of laws relative to detentions, arrests, searches and seizures. It is crucial that you hadreasonable suspicion or probable cause and are able to sufficiently articulate the reasons for yourpolice actions in a manner that demonstrates the constitutionality of all of your actions. l3qually asimportant, re.iearch has shown that in some instances, allegations of biased policing are as .i-riuchabout courtesy and respect as they are about bias. It is my expectation that when you stop someone,inconvenience them, etc., that you explain to them why you took the actions you did, when it is safeto do

SUPERVISOR'S EXPECTATIONS:

expect you to take issues of 'biased policing seriously. Do not allow joking about "profiling,"regardless of the settin g or who is involved, but especially when subordinates are present.

ADDENDUM 1

All Department PersonnelPage 21.1

Treat each complaint of biased policing seriously and each person making the complaint withrespect and keep these investigations confidential. When conducting personnel complaint "intake,"do a thorou gh job as possible by thoroughly interviewing the complaining party and all availablecivilian witnesses, collecting evidence, and taking photos, y iteri needed. Most importantly, insistthat your officers treat the community members With dignity and respect.

STAFF AND COMMANDING OFFICER'S EXPECTATIONS:

1 expect each of you to communicate to your commands the seriousness with which the Departmenttakes issues of bias. Ensure that everyone is aware of the policy and abides by its tenets.

When adjudicating personnel complaints involving issues of bias, it is incumbent upon you tothoroughl y e \amine the consi itutionality and appropriateness of the actions of your personnel, aswell. If you identify training issues, take immediate action to ensure that members of yourcommand understand and possess the tools needed to comply with my expectations regardingConstitutional Policing

Should you Imve questions in regard to this Notice, please contact my Chief of Staff,Commander Rick Jacobs, at (213) 486-8740.

CI IARLIEBFCKChief of Police

DISTRIBUTION "A"

INTRADEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE

November 15, 20101.11

TO: Chief of Police

FROM: Director, Office of Operations

SUBJECT: CONSTITUTIONAL POLICING INITIATIVES

In the wake of the 2001 Federal Consent Decree, our organization has made monumental strides inthe manner in which we provide quality service to the people of our City. Although theDepartment was ultimately found to be in substantial compliance with nearly all but a few of thereforms, one of these -- racial profiling (or Biased Policing), was determined by the Department ofJustice to require additional oversight by the Board of Police Commissioners for the purpose ofestablishing their ability to productively monitor and analyze how we address this important issue.

While the Department has been uniquely vigilant in the past year in its efforts to reinforce thestructural integrity of its policies and procedures that govern the Constitutional mannerin which we provide service, there remains several essential areas I believe require increased andsustained focus if we are to emphatically demonstrate to the public our determination to police in aconscientious and equitable way.

In an effort to advance this imperative, the essentials in this précis represents the foundation uponwhich the Office of Operations (00) will seek to enhance and preserve our commitment to andendorsement of the principles of Constitutional Policing.

Constitutional Policing — An Enduring Goal

To ensure that the fundamental ideology of Constitutional Policing permeates into and throughevery layer of each Bureau and Area command, it will be included - along with crime reductionand community enhancement, as one of our "Signature" goals for the Office of Operations. Inaddition to the broader aims directed by the Office, every command will also be responsible fordrafting a coherent set of indigenous strategies to which they will be compelled to adhere for theremainder of this year and beyond.

Pay-Grade Advancement

With the understanding that employees in positions of leadership play a crucial role instrengthening our commitment to equitable policing in every community, all interviews foradvanced pay-grade positions within the 00 will include question(s) and/or a written exercise thatwill require them to provide a thoughtful and intelligent response to this important agenda. Thisapproach will deepen the roots of our embrace of this philosophy by encouraging candidates tostudy the principles and then apply them as organizational leaders.

ADDENDUM 2

Chief of PolicePage 21.11

It also sends a powerful message concerning our efforts to create a new architecture of acceptance.The 00 Evaluation and Administration Section is currently updating the Task and CompetencyLists for advanced pay grade positions to include as a requirement, the articulation of theDepartment's Prohibition on Biased Policing and position-appropriate responsibilities related tobiased policing prevention.

Emphasis on "Community Heroism"

True acts of heroism by officers has always defined their willingness to make the ultimatesacrifice, is explanative of their dedication to the people and often brings as a by-productimportant and well deserved recognition. However, equally strong emphasis on andacknowledgment of momentous acts that highlight noteworthy work we do in the communityshould not be undervalued or ignored. As an added dimension of our campaign for change, muchgreater emphasis will be placed in the months to come on Department awards for service such asthe Police Commission Integrity Medal, Community Policing Medal and the Human RelationsMedal for presentation to patrol officers who serve at the line levels. Elevating the standing andstature of those who commit themselves to community enrichment will do much to "model" apositive way for others.

Discussion at Community Meetings

Our Constitutional Policing formula will also include a recurring agenda item at all establishedCommunity Forums, Community — Police Advisory Board meetings as well as other sessionswhere commanding officers meet regularly with members of the public. Our consistent messageto them concerning our mandate of fair and equitable treatment will establish a high watermark forus and prompt from them an even greater expectation of service and support from ourorganization.

Recurring Command Agenda Item

The broader topic of Constitutional Policing as well as the more specific theme of Biased Policingis now and will continue to be a required, continuing line item on the agenda of every meetingheld by staff and command officers within the 00. This sustained emphasis by the leadership inthe Office will ensure that commanding officers will not merely discuss, but also will helpinstitutionalize the philosophy of fair treatment within their commands.

Assessment of Biased Policing Investigations at the Office Level

The Assistant to the Director, Office of Operations, has been commissioned to review all biasedbased policing complaints generated within 00 prior to their transmittal to Professional StandardsBureau. This appraisal at the intake and again during random inspections of the adjudicationprocess will serve to enrich the investigations and validate the findings.

Chief of PolicePage 31.11

Meetings with the Inspector General

As yet another dimension of the effort of reaching our full potential, I will continue to meetpersonally with the Inspector General concerning the full range of bias policing issues. Havingbegun this single-purpose dialogue earlier this year, these "mini summits" have proven to beextraordinarily valuable in terms of her office and mine thoroughly understanding the issuesrelated to Biased Policing, identifying training and leadership concerns, providing clarity andinsight pertaining to the investigation of complaints alleging bias treatment and reaching accord ona clear and strategic path forward.

Inspector General Presentations

In an effort to provide greater clarity as to the role and responsibility of command officers as itrelates to training, complaint intake as well as the investigation of biased policing issues, I haveasked the Inspector General to attend and address command officers at a special Bureau staffmeeting. In these sessions, command personnel will have the opportunity to learn and"de-conflict" any imprecise perceptions or information related to this campaign.

Line Supervisory Education

With the understanding that first-line supervisors play a central role during the initial andinvestigative stages of complaints alleging bias, it is vitally important that every supervisor has aworking knowledge and full appreciation of Department policies related to this issue. Inasmuch aswe have recently relied upon computer-based learning methods to transmit information such asthis, I believe it of the utmost importance to guarantee that all of them have been personallyprovided policy materials and resources that govern the manner in which we do business. To thatend, all relevant and applicable directives that discuss Constitutional Policing topics will not onlybe re-issued to them, but each will also be required to sign an acknowledgment verifying theirreceipt.

Training of Mid-Management Personnel

Given the reality that Lieutenants are frequently tasked with the adjudication of the majority of ourcomplaint investigations and preparation of Letters of Transmittal, it is essential that they have adeep appreciation of all aspects of the Biased Policing investigative process. To that end, 00 willteam with the Inspector General as well as Professional Standards Bureau and Training Group toprovide the necessary tutoring and education over the next six months to every Lieutenantassigned to the Office. The investment in this academic effort will not only reap meaningfuldividends today, but we do so with the knowledge that it is from the ranks of these personnel thatour future leaders will be harvested. It is in them that we must embed this philosophy so that itwill not be de-prioritized or subject to compromise.

Chief of PolicePage 41.11

Notifications to Commanding Officers

In keeping with the import of complaints alleging bias treatment by officers and recognizing thatthe initial receipt of information by supervisors is essential to the Department conducting athorough and thoughtful investigation, immediate notification to their commanding officer by theon-duty Watch Commander will be required and a succinct notation to that effect made in theirdaily report. Since each Area receives, on average, a single biased policing complaint per month,this important advisement is not overly burdensome and will allow the concerned CO theopportunity to provide appropriate insight, direction and counsel without delay.

Quarterly Progress Reports

Quarterly reports will be submitted to the Office of the Chief of Police detailing the measurestaken and progress made as it relates to achieving the objectives delineated in this memorandum.

After your review, a copy of these mandates along with a personal message from me will beforwarded to every Lieutenant, Captain, Commander and executive officer presently assigned to00. Inasmuch as we normally rely upon a strict chain of command approach to disseminateinformation such as this, the magnitude of this venture compels me to broadcast it personally so asto eliminate any ambiguity associated with the goals articulated herein.

The initiatives presented in this memorandum are not merely a perfunctory exercise designed toachieve compliance with one of the final elements of the Consent Decree; doing so for thatsuperficial purpose would represent a pretense of the superior principles for which thisorganization stands. Rather, the objective of this blueprint is to provide Office of Operationspersonnel a legitimate means to profoundly enhance the manner in which our agency doesbusiness and in so doing sustain an innovative paradigm of service that has been — and willcontinue to be the hallmark of this great institution.

I am vailable

4 -

EARL C. PDirector,

er any questions you may have.

, Assistant Chiefrations

ADDENDUM 3

Biased policing cases are extraordinarily complex. Once a case is selected for investigation bythe CPU, the investigator must:

• Query Department computer systems (such as dispatch records and recordings, MobileDigital Computer logs, criminal history inquiries, etc.) locate all Department records suchas roll call worksheets and Daily Field Activities Reports and determine the status of anycriminal prosecutions.

• Conduct on-sight examination of the incident and photograph the scene if appropriate.• Develop the timelines, Standards of Review, etc. process any data or evidence.• Schedule and conduct interviews. Taking into account the necessity to facilitate

schedules of attorneys and accused officers, witnesses, etc.• Facilitate and review transcriptions for accuracy and "inaudibles."• Complete investigative report which includes amalgamating all the relevant information

and summarizing it into a readable document that accurately reflects the salient points ofthe case.

• Re-interview involved persons as necessary.

Once completed, the report is forwarded to the OIC of the CPU. The OIC, CPU:• Read the entire report and edit as necessary.• Proofread the report after final editing.• Provide the CPU investigator with written feedback on the quality of the investigation,

areas for potential improvement, etc.

JAG Review of Biased Policing Cases

All biased policing cases are subject to additional internal review at JAG.• The completed case is reviewed by an uninvolved lieutenant or detective III assigned to

JAG. A captain or lieutenant then writes a recommendation for adjudication to the chainof command on the biased policing allegation.

• The investigative package, including adjudication recommendation, is reviewed by theCO, JAG. On occasion, additional investigative efforts are directed.

Adjudication of Biased Policing Cases

• The investigative package, including the adjudication recommendation by IAG, is sent tothe accused employee(s)' commanding officer for review and adjudication.

• The commanding officer of the employee reviews the case and prepares a Letter ofTransmittal (LOT) making Recommendations to the Chief of Police for adjudication ofall allegations contained in the investigation.

• The commanding officer meets with the accused employee and provides the employeewith a copy of the investigative material. The employee may choose to provide a writtenor verbal response to the investigation.

• The investigation and LOT are sent to the bureau (headed by a Deputy Chief) for review.If the bureau concurs with the recommendations of the employee's commanding officer,the bureau will endorse the document and forward it to JAG.

1 of 2

• If the bureau disagrees with the employee's commanding officer, the Bureau writes whatis known as a Military Endorsement, which is a separate rationale explaining why thereshould be a finding that is different from the employee's commanding officer. Oncecompleted, the entire investigative package is forwarded to IAG.

• In Office of Operations, the assistant commanding officer, reviews all biased policingcases.

• IAG reviews the recommendations of the chain of command against therecommendations that were provided initially by IAG. If there is disagreement, then theCO, IAG contacts the Bureau Chief to discuss those differences. In cases where thedisagreement between JAG and the Chain of Command (Bureau) cannot be resolved, theChief of Police has directed that those cases be presented to him.

• If the employee's chain of command and JAG concur with the findings recommendationand there are no sustained allegations, then the investigation is closed.

• In all cases, if there are sustained allegations resulting in a penalty of Official Reprimandor higher, the Chief must review and approve those cases.

2 of 2