Evaluating Officer Complaints/Accountability- Ep7

Title: How to Save Millions of Dollars Resolving Complaints.

 Welcome back to Real Talk – Behind the Badge.  I’m Tim, a retired police Sergeant from Massachusetts, but I now reside in South Carolina.  This is our seventh podcast, and you can watch each one at RealTalkBehindtheBadge.com, on Facebook or on YouTube.  Today, we’re going to talk about how I believe we can actually save the taxpayers millions of dollars on lawsuit payouts by using an alternate, fair method of resolving complaints against police officers. So, let’s get going…

 In the last podcast we talked about how to save millions of dollars by changing the way payouts to complainants are made.  We now have to deal with how we are going to evaluate any complaint; how officer’s actions may be held accountable and the process we should use to evaluate those actions. In addition, we’re also going to see how we can deal with and punish those who make false complaints.

 We’re going to talk about the complaint forms we need to use, what is on the complaint forms, how it would be used, the complainant’s involvement and the procedures that would dictate any discipline.

 I am suggesting that states adopt new legislation that will be a remedy for illegal actions or major policy infractions by officers that will go far to bring fairness to those who have been illegally deprived of their civil, legal, or Constitutional rights.  It will also make officers think twice about what they are doing, be held responsible for their actions and be held responsible for any illegal actions they witness but take no action on.  It will give the public a sense of fairness; that their cities, counties and police department hears them and intends to follow all laws and policies.

 Let me be clear from the start, I am NOT in favor of taking away an officer’s immunity that they have for civil actions.  As I stated before, we all make mistakes, but we also have to be aware and take action against officers who continuously make serious mistakes or continuously violate the public’s rights.  Whereas “immunity” from civil lawsuits protects the officers from honest mistakes, an officer can lose their immunity for certain violations they knew or should have known were illegal. My suggestions also would not protect them from “fines” that may be levied against them by legislated entities that are enacted to determine the discipline of police officers.

 I believe using the actions outlined below will decrease federal and state civil actions against the cities, counties and police departments, as complainants will have an alternative course they can follow that would also be beneficial to them, governmental entities and the taxpayers.  It will decrease the huge payouts by the courts, decrease legal fees to the Insurance Funds and thereby decrease insurance costs to cities and counties.  In addition, by using the following recommendations, departments will be able to determine what training needs to be emphasized and which individual officers need to be trained and/or disciplined.

The following will also give the state a “partnership” with police agencies with a confidential database, open only to policing agencies, to help determine officers who need training or disciplining by keeping track of complaints and any discipline that the officer has been given, no matter what department they have been at or may be going to.

 Number 1 -- The state must create an “Office of Professional Policing” (I will call the OPP, but the name is optional), staffed with independent policing professionals.  Now this goes along with what we talked about in one of our earlier podcasts about making policing truly professional. No true professions investigate themselves with those whom they work with.

 Number 2 -- We have to have uniform statewide complaint forms mandated for all law enforcement that uses the IRF.  All law enforcement and accredited police organizations would be required to adopt two standardized complaint forms that are designed by the OPP: formal and informal. Both forms need to be available at every law enforcement department or state accredited police organization’s office, and on-line.

 Number 3—The state needs to adopt legislation that requires all complainants to submit FORMAL complaints before filing any lawsuits against policing agencies. This will accomplish a couple of goals:

1. It will let any complainant know that they don’t have to file a lawsuit in order to be compensated for any illegal acts by law enforcement.
2. It will result in many smaller payouts to compensate complainants by having professional insurance representative negotiate payments to a complainant without the use of $175/hour lawyers.

 So, let’s get into it….

INFORMAL- Informal complaints are for when the person may or may not wish to be identified or does not want any compensation, but wants the department to have knowledge of an alleged incident. It asks for complainant’s information, which isn’t required to be given, and then asks for information about the incident they are complaining about, along with any proof and other witnesses of the incident.  It may or may not be signed by the complainant.

The complaint may be turned into the department or sent to the OPP. This is also used for those who may fear retribution.

FORMAL- Formal complaints are for persons wishing to lodge a complaint and be acknowledged and/or compensated for what they believe are unjust or illegal actions by officers.  It asks for information about the incident they are complaining about, along with any proof and other witnesses of the incident.  The complaint must be signed under the penalties of perjury. Formal complaints must also include the complainant’s full name, DOB, address and telephone #.

 The formal complaint also asks if the person just wants to be acknowledged and informed of the outcome of the complaint or if they are intending to file a lawsuit or ask for compensation for damages. If they wish compensation for damages or intend to file a lawsuit they are asked if they would speak with an insurance representative.  They are further advised that if they retain an attorney, an insurance representative cannot speak with them, but if they are not satisfied with the insurance representative they can still retain an attorney.  The form also advises—MAKING A FALSE REPORT MAY SUBJECT YOU TO CRIMINAL AND/OR CIVIL PENALTIES!

 This is where the Insurance Reserve Fund would send an insurance representative to speak to the complainant after an investigation by the OPP is completed and the officer’s actions have been found to be illegal and the insurance fund is found to be liable.

 SO, how would the OPP and formal complaints work?

1. Formal complaints may be forwarded by the complainant directly to the OPP for investigation and shall contain the address, fax # and email address of the OPP office on the complaint form.
2. A Police Chief, or any head of a policing organization may also forward any informal complaint along with any evidence to the state office for an independent, neutral investigation.
3. All formal complaints submitted to a department or state accredited police organization’s office by a complainant are to be immediately forwarded to the OPP within (X??) business days along with all data outlined below.
   1. Complaints forwarded by a S/C/C/T, department or state accredited police organization’s office must include the officer(s) name, any and all corresponding videos, reports, documents, etc. by the department and the complainant.
   2. The OPP shall assign a case # to each complaint received.

• OPP shall send the complainant and the police organization a case number and instruct where and how to send any videos, photos or any evidence that may pertain to the complaint along with the case number.

1. If any formal complaints received by a department or state accredited police organization are not forwarded within the (X??) days, absent a waiver or extension, the OPP may fine the department and/or personnel responsible and may decline payouts by the IRF.

1. When a formal complaint is received by the OPP directly from a complainant:
   1. The OPP shall send the complainant a case number and instruct where and how to send any all information & evidence that may pertain to the complaint along with the case number.
   2. OPP shall send the complaint to the police organization along with a case number and instruct where and how to send any videos, photos or any evidence that may pertain to the complaint along with the case number within (X??) # of days. The police organization shall have (X??) amount of days to send all data requested and absent a waiver or extension, the OPP may fine the department and/or personnel responsible and may decline payouts by the IRF.
2. The OPP will be tasked with maintaining a professional, neutral, & independent review board that will evaluate the data and actions of the officer(s) in each formal complaint and recommend which complaints should go to a hearing for further actions.
3. The State, County, City, Town or department or state accredited police organization will notify the OPP of any investigation they intend to pursue relative to a complaint; State, County, City, or Town or department shall forward the full results to the OPP of any investigation they have instituted and any disciplinary actions they may have taken or intend to take against an officer.
   1. Any actions taken against an officer by a S/C/C/T, department or state accredited police organization’s shall not bind the OPP or the police certification authority to any outcome or actions they deem appropriate.

1. The OPP may hold an investigative hearing on the actions of any officer believed to have violated a law or a constitutional right of the complainant. 

1. The officer may be represented by council.
2. Complainants and witnesses shall be notified of and may attend any investigative hearing, and be allowed to testify in person or by video.

1. The OPP shall issue an opinion/finding on each formal complaint. It shall determine one of the following:

1. All actions of the officer are believed-to-be (BTB) legal and in accordance with all laws, court decisions and constitutional rights and no further action will be taken.
2. All actions of the officer were BTB legal and in accordance with all laws, court decisions and constitutional rights, but may be in violation of the officer’s departmental policies and procedures. Complaint shall be referred to the officer’s department for any action and disposition.

• Action(s) of the officer may be or is BTB in violation of law, court decisions or constitutional rights:
  1. The OPP may issue a fine or a letter of reprimand and/or refer the complaint to the certifying authority and/or back to the officer’s department for any further action.
     1. The officer may appeal to the certifying authority.
     2. The certifying authority may confirm the action of the OPP, reduce or increase the fine. They may also take any action in #2 below.
  2. The complaint and data may be forwarded to the certifying authority without action for further review and possible action.

• The OPP may also refer this complaint directly to the Attorney General’s office for possible criminal prosecution.

1. Complaint is unsubstantiated or undetermined by reason of insufficient evidence/documentation.
2. The complaint is false and may be referred for criminal or civil penalties.

1. Any complaint with a finding that warrants compensation will immediately be forwarded to the IRF for financial negotiations with the complainant.

 Actions forwarded to the certification authority by the OPP shall be reviewed by the certification authority and a determination shall be made on the actions of the officer. The certification authority may:

2. 1. Suspend the officer’s certification.
   2. Revoke the officer’s certification.
   3. Turn the complaint over to the individual S/C/C/T with any recommendations for any action they deem appropriate. (such as Letter of Reprimand, Suspension, etc.)
   4. Find no action to be taken.
   5. Exonerate the officer from any wrong-doing.
   6. The certification authority may also refer any complaint to the Attorney General’s office for possible criminal prosecution.
3. OPP will be required to maintain databases:
   1. OPP will be required to maintain a PUBLIC database on all substantiated formal complaints, and the results of such complaints, without the officer’s names included.
   2. OPP will be required to maintain a PRIVATE database on all substantiated formal complaints, and the results of such complaints, with the officer’s names included so that other police agencies may perform a search if needed.

1. The complainant shall be notified of the final outcome of a complaint.
2. All unsubstantiated complaints may NOT be made public.
3. Complainants that have (? - # of complaints TBD) or more unsubstantiated complaints will be sanctioned as a serial complainant and may be filed by the OPP w/o determination.

 The OPP shall make all rules and regulations governing the administration of the OPP, hearings and determinations.

 There may also be benefits for S/C/C/T’s by turning over officer discipline on major issues to the OPP.  It is believed that the liability and costs for hearings and discipline will reduce the S/C/C/T’s liability and legal costs as it will not be the S/C/C/T’s that are conducting any of the hearings or discipline.  While liability for an officer’s actions will still remain with the ILF and S/C/C/T’s, any liability and costs for hearings, depositions and defending lawsuits by the officers will fall on the OPP (the state) and the certifying authority.

 Make sure to Hit subscribe, share your thoughts, and let’s keep this conversation going.

This podcast is ground zero. I’m not here for theories or to hear myself talk—I want real answers and input from officers who’ve walked the walk. You, me, our brothers and sisters in blue—let’s cut through the bullshit. Academics can keep talking all they want but we have to build the cure. Join me at realtalkbehindthebadge.com. Drop your state, department (active or retired), what you’ve seen, and what solutions you have in mind. The answers are out there, we just need to find them.  Let’s hash out hard fixes—stuff we can shove in front of lawmakers and make stick.  We are just starting this journey and we’d be pleased to have you join us. Your voices fuel this.

If you’ve got answers you’d like to share and you want to do it live, let me know.  If you’d like to be a guest on our show, let me know.

Go to realtalkbehindthebadge.com, that’s realtalkbehindthebadge.com and drop a comment or rant; and if you can, drop a couple bucks to help us out and help keep this going. This podcast stuff ain’t cheap or easy on a cop retiree’s salary! 

You can view our podcasts on YouTube, “Real Talk Behind the Badge” as we make them.  If you hit subscribe, you’ll be notified of each podcast.  Please hit the like button also. We’re also on Facebook at Real Talk Behind the Badge, or at RealTalkBehindTheBadge.com  where you can also view all our podcasts.

Thanks to all our brothers and sisters behind the badge.  Keep it going and we’ll get this fixed!  Stay safe.

This is Real Talk.  Signing off until next time.

Thank you and be careful out there!