LAPD can't police itself, audit charges

Los Angeles Times ^ | Feb 12, 2008

[John Jorsett]

Los Angeles Police Department investigators routinely fail to fully investigate citizens' complaints against allegedly abusive officers, often omitting or altering crucial information in ways that help exonerate the officers, according to a report to be released today.

The 34-page report by the Police Commission's inspector general raises questions about the department's ability to police itself, adding to still-unresolved problems highlighted in previous reports.

The audit, which is expected to be presented to the civilian Police Commission today, examined how 60 complaints filed against officers in recent years were handled by the officers' supervisors and investigators in the department's internal affairs group. In 29 of the cases -- nearly half of the time -- it found some sort of flaw, including investigators who inaccurately recorded statements and failed to interview witnesses or identify accused officers. In some cases, investigators failed to address allegations of misconduct at all. "We are always concerned about the quality of our investigations," said Deputy Chief Mark Perez, head of internal affairs. "We take these findings very seriously."

Although Perez said the report's findings would be used to improve training of internal affairs officers, he dismissed the notion that the report amounted to a serious indictment of the quality of complaint investigations. Mistakes may be made, he said, but they rarely, if ever, affect the decision of whether to discipline officers.

"With the volume of cases we get each year, we cannot spend an infinite amount of time on every complaint," he said. "We make judgment calls that someone second-guessing us afterward might not like. . . . But I have a very high level of confidence that the adjudication at the end is right."

Inspector General Andre Birotte declined to comment on the report.

[thefactor]

hey, give a man a hammer and everything starts to look like a nail.

[TexasCajun]

I pray for anyone indicted from evidence presented by the Houston Crime Lab.

No Death Penalty should ever be carried out based on evidence from this lab where the technicians have to cheat to pass required tests.

[rocksblues]

"We are always concerned about the quality of our investigations," said Deputy Chief Mark Perez, head of internal affairs. "We take these findings very seriously."

Sure!

[FreePaul]

...where the technicians have to cheat to pass required tests.

And that's only part of the problem. But worst of all no one in city government will accept or even assign responsibility for the Houston crime lab disaster.

[Smogger]

In one complaint about excessive force, a witness said in a tape-recorded interview shortly after the incident that there had been too many officers surrounding the man to get a good view of what happened. But in their report, the internal affairs officers paraphrased the witness' comments much differently, writing that the man "had a clear and unobstructed view and did not see or hear the alleged acts occur."

Paraphrased? LOL!

[Grut]

Mistakes may be made, he said, but they rarely, if ever, affect the decision of whether to discipline officers.

Of course, that may be because the fix is already in.

[Don W]

EVERY investigation of police mistreatment of the public should be undertaken by a rival city’s police department. Or at the very least, a police dept from at least 90 miles away.