Boise Police Department Office of Internal Affairs

Transcription

1 Boise Police Department Office of Internal Affairs Annual Statistical Report January 1, 2008 December 31, 2008

2 Introduction The Office of Internal Affairs (OIA) is established within the Professional Development and Standards Division of the Boise Police Department (BPD). The commander of this office is a police Captain, who reports directly to the Chief of Police on Internal Affairs matters. Two Civilian Investigators and one law enforcement technician comprise the staff of this office. The investigators are responsible for conducting most internal investigations and the Law Enforcement Technician is responsible for primary complaint intake, office coordination, case tracking, maintenance of the OIA database and other administrative duties. The primary function of OIA is to ensure the highest level of professionalism within the Boise Police Department. This is accomplished through ongoing analysis of National trends, policy analysis and review of training methods. OIA also works to ensure the highest level of service is maintained by individual employees through the receipt, assignment and investigation of complaints received from citizens or initiated by department supervisors regarding the actions of employees. OIA investigators handle investigations of more serious complaints. Both OIA investigators and other department supervisors handle less serious complaints. OIA monitors all investigations for timely completion and reports the findings to the complaining citizen and subject employee(s). Other functions of OIA include critical incident investigations, assignment and investigation of citizen and administrative inquiries, and tracking of citizen commendations of employees. OIA also reviews and tracks reports of employee uses of force, pursuits, vehicular accidents, missed court appearances, administrative incident reviews, lawsuits, and tort claims and assigns them to staff for follow-up when required. Additionally, OIA manages and tracks the Department s discipline process as well as coordinates risk management and employee grievance matters. OIA is also responsible for maintaining the Department s Early Warning System. The Early Warning System identifies potential employee performance difficulties in their infancy stage and allows them to be addressed early in hopes of avoiding greater difficulties in the future. For purposes of this report, the term employee is used throughout to denote both sworn (officer) and non-sworn (civilian) members of the Boise Police Department. While most citizen complaints are lodged against sworn police officers, the increased amount of contact between non-sworn personnel and the public has resulted in some complaints of misconduct against civilian employees. Therefore, we have chosen to use employee as a generic term for all Boise Police Department members. There has been a significant downward trend in citizen complaints over the past five years as reflected in the chart on Page 3 of this report. This is certainly a positive trend. The Boise Police Department is committed to providing quality professional service to our community and we trust that this report reflects some success in that endeavor. 1

3 The Office of Internal Affairs instituted several improvements in 2008 and are listed below: Staff Study for Improvements to FTO program Website Staff Study Emergency Lighting System for slick top Compiled case information for Brady Law Complaints OIA defines a complaint as a singular incident which gives rise to one or more allegations of misconduct. A single complaint may allege misconduct by multiple employees and/or multiple violations of policy by a single employee. Therefore, the number of complaints filed will not equal the number of allegations and findings resulting from the complaint investigation. Citizen Complaints and Inquiries Citizen complaints are classified in one of two categories. Class II complaints include allegations of inadequate service, discourtesy, and minor performance issues, improper procedure and other less serious and non-criminal conduct. Class I complaints are more serious and include allegations such as excessive force, violations of criminal law, breach of civil rights, bias policing, patterns of similar Class II complaints and other more serious allegations. OIA also classifies some citizen concerns as citizen inquiries. In a citizen inquiry an employee has raised a question or complaint regarding department policy or procedure, rather than an allegation of misconduct. Department Initiated Complaints If a complaint is initiated by BPD supervisors or brought to supervisory attention by any BPD employee, it is classified as a department initiated complaint. Comparison of the Number of Investigations by Year Citizen Complaints - Class I Citizen Complaints - Class II Citizen Inquiries Departmentally Initiated - Class I Departmentally Initiated - Class II Total Investigations Total Investigations Citizen Complaints

4 BPD Citizen/Department Initiated Complaints (includes) Ombudsman s Citizen Complaints by Year Year #of Ombudsman Complaints #of Dept Initiated Complaints #of Citizen Complaints Boise Population / Total Complaints , Population 250, , , ,000 50, , , , , , Total Complaints Year Complaints to Calls for Service (below figures exclude NCO, SRO and CID Calls for Service) 220, , , , , , ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, , , , , , Total Calls for Service Total Complaints Year 3

5 Classification of Complaints As stated previously, a single complaint may result in multiple allegations of misconduct. Since the types of allegations may be vastly different, it is difficult to categorize complaints. However, it is possible to gain some insight into the concerns of citizens and the department by looking at the most serious allegation from each complaint. The following table represents the distribution of these allegations. Citizen Class I Complaints Citizen Class II Complaints Dept. Init. Class I Complaints Dept. Init. Class II Complaints Conduct Unbecoming Constitutional Rights Violation Criminal Conduct Demeanor / Rudeness Driving Violation Duty Performance Use of Force Failure to Report Failure to Take Action Failure to Tape Record Workplace Harassment Total Allegations and Findings Allegations represent a distinctly different category than complaints. They are assertions of an employee s behavior that, if proven, would amount to a violation of department policy. A single complaint may result in multiple allegations of misconduct against one employee, single allegations against multiple employees, or any combination thereof. Findings are issued for each allegation in an investigation, including those made by the complainant as well as any allegations of misconduct not included in the original complaint, but that may be discovered during the investigation. Findings are also issued when policy violations are discovered during a review of employee performance following an incident such as a pursuit, a use of force or an employee vehicular accident. For these reasons, the number of findings issued will exceed the number of complaints reported. 4

6 Although complaints are the primary basis for our statistical reporting, we also track the findings for each allegation, rather than a single overall finding for each individual complaint. Examining allegations separately from complaints is useful in gaining a more accurate understanding of areas of concern to citizens and to the department. Findings fall into one of five categories, which are explained in detail in Appendix A of this report. The following table represents the findings issued for 2008 cases. Findings from Allegations During 2008 Citizen Class I Complaints Citizen Class II Complaints Dept. Initiated Class I Complaints Dept. Initiated Class II Complaints All Other Types of Cases* Exonerated Not Sustained Sustained Unfounded No Finding Total *The category Other includes, employee vehicular accidents, missed court appearances, missed quarterly training, missed shoot as well as other incidents which are routinely reviewed to evaluate employee performance, such as pursuits, uses of force, etc. Distribution of Sustained Findings During 2008 Citizen Class I Complaints Citizen Class II Complaints 5 Dept. Init. Class I Complaints Dept. Init. Class II Complaints Other Types of Cases Conduct Unbecoming Criminal Conduct Constitutional Rights Violation Demeanor/Rudeness Driving Violations Duty Performance Failure to Report Failure to Take Action Failure to Tape Record Use of Force Workplace Harassment Total

7 As can be seen from examining the sustained findings from Class I citizen complaints, some violations such as rudeness and failure to record are listed as sustained findings but are not Class I violations of policy. In such cases, the citizen complained of a more serious violation, which caused the complaint to receive the Class I classification. However, the citizen also raised these less serious issues or they were uncovered during the course of the investigation. Therefore, all sustained findings reached in a Class I citizen complaint are not necessarily serious violations of policy. Citizen Commendation of Employees Citizens also frequently contact the Department to thank or commend employees for acts of service or their response to a particular incident. OIA also tracks this positive feedback on employee performance. These commendations are received in the form of letters, messages and phone calls as well as numerous face-to-face comments of appreciation. Written commendations are tracked however, most phone calls & personal contacts go unreported. The chart to the right reflects the five-year history of citizen commendations received for employees of the Boise Police Department. Critical Incidents Citizen Commendation A critical incident is an event in which an employee intentionally uses deadly force or in which death or life-threatening bodily injury result from the actions of an employee. When a critical incident occurs, the Office of Internal Affairs conducts an administrative investigation to determine whether employees complied with applicable policies and procedures, to evaluate the effectiveness of those policies and procedures, and to assess quality control issues. In addition to the investigation conducted by OIA, the Office of the Community Ombudsman conducts an administrative investigation and the Critical Incident Task Force, which is comprised of five area law enforcement agencies, conducts a criminal investigation. During 2008, the Boise Police Department experienced one officer involved critical incidents: On June 05, 2008, Boise Police Officers assigned to the Neighborhood Contact Unit, were at an apartment complex investigating the report of possible drug use by one of the tenants. As the officers were approaching the area of the apartment in question, a male subject was observed exiting a vehicle and running into the same apartment. The officers attempted to talk to the male, but were 6

8 unsuccessful. After numerous conversations with the tenant, officers were eventually allowed into the apartment. Once inside the officers observed that the unknown male had forcibly broken into the attic and now had access to the other apartments in the building. The Department s Special Operations Unit took over the search for the male subject. During the search it was determined the male had broken into other apartments in the building and was now in the basement. As the SOU officers searched the basement, they heard a male voice state something about having a gun. As the officers lifted a piece of plywood off the floor, a male subject came out of a trench holding an object in his hand that looked a handgun. Two officers fired their weapons striking the subject several times. The object in the males hand was later discovered to be a soldering gun, which had a black pistol type handle and two metal probes in the same location, as a gun barrel would be. The suspect survived his gunshot wounds. Uses of Force In any incident requiring the use of force, officers may employ a variety of techniques in an attempt to control the situation. The department conducts a review of an officer s use of force whenever any of the following occurs: The subject is injured or complains of injury A hard empty hand technique is used (see Appendix B) A lateral vascular neck restraint (LVNR) is used Intermediate weapons are used (includes baton, flashlight, less lethal flex round, OC spray, K-9, and Taser ) Firearms are discharged. A separate use of force report is completed for each subject upon whom the force is used; therefore, more than one use of force report may be generated from the same incident. These reviews of an officer s use of force are reflected in the table below. For tracking purposes, OIA categorizes use of force by the highest level of force used upon a subject. Thus, of the incidents listed, more than one type of force may have been deployed on a subject due to a lower level of force not being effective. In some instances when certain multiple techniques have been utilized on the same subject, the department has chosen to capture these incidents in a multiple techniques category. Use of force categories are explained in greater detail in Appendix B of this report. 7

9 Types of Force Used Number of Incidents for 2008 Number of Incidents for 2007 Number of Incidents for 2006 Hard Empty Hand Control Common Peroneal Suprascapular OC Spray LVNR Baton Taser Firearm K OC Spray and LVNR Multiple (More than 2 techniques used together) K-9 & Taser OC Spray & Taser LVNR & Taser Other Total Other Information Tracked by OIA In addition to Commendations, Complaints, and Departmentally Initiated Investigations, the Office of Internal Affairs also tracks other reported activities, which bear on the performance of the Police Department. These activities include administrative reports and legal claims and are listed below and are tracked for three years Administrative Incident Reviews Pursuits/Pursuit Terminations Tort Claims/Claims for Damage Employee Vehicular Accidents Failures to Appear Administrative Inquiries Lawsuits

10 Appendix A Classification of Findings The Boise Police Policy Manual specifies the following definitions for required findings in internal investigations: EXONERATED - The acts, which provided the basis for the complaint or allegation did occur, but were justified, lawful, and proper. This finding also may be used when the acts complained of did occur and were not proper or justified, but resulted from a lack of policy or training. NOT SUSTAINED - The investigation failed to discover sufficient evidence to clearly prove or disprove the allegations made. SUSTAINED - The investigation disclosed sufficient evidence to clearly prove the allegation(s) made. UNFOUNDED - The investigation conclusively proved that the act or acts complained of did not occur. This finding also applies when individual officer(s) or employee(s) named were not involved in the act or in acts, which may have occurred. NO FINDING - The investigation cannot proceed because the complainant failed to disclose promised information to further the investigation; or the complainant wishes to withdraw the complaint; or the complainant is no longer available for clarification. This finding may also be used when the information provided is not sufficient to determine the identity of the officer(s) or employee(s) involved. 9

11 Appendix B Use of Force Categories Hard Empty Hand Control - An empty hand technique that has a higher potential for injury than Soft Empty Hand techniques. Common Peroneal - A strike to the common peroneal nerve on the outside center of the thigh. This is normally accomplished by using a knee or fist. Supra Scapula - A strike to the area above the scapula, or shoulder blade. This is normally accomplished by using a fist and may be a strike to both sides of the upper back at the same time. OC Spray - Oleoresin Capsicum aerosol spray. Also known as pepper spray, the successor to Mace. LVNR - Lateral Vascular Neck Restraint. This is not a choke hold but is intended to diminish blood flow to the brain. LVNR is classified into three sub-levels which range from: receiving immediate compliance from the subject upon application of the maneuver without the use of compressions (level I), to continued resistance from the subject and the officer beginning compressions (level II), to prolonged or heightened resistance from the subject and the officer continuing compressions, leading to the subject being rendered unconscious (level III). The escalation to LVNR III requires an examination of the subject by medical personnel as soon as practicable following the application of the procedure. Baton - A strike to any part of the body using either the side-handled PR24 baton or the more common expandable baton. Taser - A conducted energy weapon which fires barbed projectiles up to 21 feet. The deployment generates an electrical current that causes motor dysfunction and pain compliance. Firearm - An authorized Department-issued or personally owned service weapon used by an officer in his/her capacity as a police officer. K-9 - The deployment of a police service dog for the purpose of locating and/or apprehending a suspect. 10

12 OFFICE OF THE COMMUNITY OMBUDSMAN 2008 ANNUAL REPORT January 1, 2008 December 31, 2008

13 OFFICE OF THE COMMUNITY OMBUDSMAN CONTACT INFORMATION Office of the Community Ombudsman Boise City Hall Third Floor 150 N. Capitol Blvd. Boise, Idaho Mailing Address Office of the Community Ombudsman P.O. Box 500 Boise, Idaho Phone: Fax: TDD/TTY: Website: ANNUAL REPORT

14 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.. 4 OFFICE OF THE COMMUNITY OMBUDSMAN 6 Message from the Ombudsman 6 Mission Statement...7 Guiding Principals....7 History.. 7 Staff... 8 Community Outreach....9 Education and Development Projects and Updates...10 Beyond Boise..11 OPERATIONS.12 Complaints About Conduct False Complaints Time Limits.12 Case Management...12 Work Flow Chart 13 Formal Case Types...14 Allegation Types.16 YEAR END STATISTICS Case Total..18 Formal Cases by Jurisdiction..19 Rapid Resolution Inquiries.19 Intake Method Complainant Gender...20 Contacts Not Resulting in a Formal Case...21 Cases in Excess of 90 Days...21 Reporting Districts Allegation Total OIA & OMB Combined BPD Complaints...26 Analysis of Closed Cases 26 Analysis of OMB Investigative Hours 27 Analysis of OMB Days Elapsed CASE SUMMARIES 28 Inquiries Class I.29 Class II...32 Critical Incidents FINDINGS..36 Types of Findings...36 Standards of Proof..36 Findings Issued in Case Summaries of 2008 Sustained Findings...38 Analysis of BPD Sustained Findings.41 RECOMMENDATIONS...42 Overall OMB Recommendations OMB Recommendations..43 AUDITS OF BPD INTERNAL AFFAIRS CASES..44 Class I Audits Class II Audits 45 APPENDIX...46 Commendations..46 Appeals...46 Critical Incidents Class I Complaints Class II Complaints Inquiries Other Agency ANNUAL REPORT

15 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is produced on a yearly basis and serves two primary purposes. It provides the residents of Boise and City officials with information about public feedback regarding the activities of City law enforcement agencies. These public reports also give the community and their elected representatives the opportunity to understand and evaluate the performance of the Office of the Community Ombudsman. The ombudsman and his staff are accountable to the Mayor and City Council, the elected representatives of the residents of Boise. They have an obligation to perform their duties as defined by ordinance in a professional, ethical, and service-oriented manner. The ombudsman position was created to maintain the public s trust in Boise City s law enforcement officers. This is to be accomplished through independent investigations of officer involved shootings, complaints and inquiries about police actions; as well as audits of internal investigations conducted by the police. Recognizing that no police department can operate effectively without the trust of those whom they serve, the Boise City Council empowered the community ombudsman to act independently in his investigations and to communicate his findings openly and directly to the public. By these means, the operations and actions of Boise s law enforcement agencies and their officers will be transparent to the community. The 2008 Annual Report is a comprehensive view of the Office of the Community Ombudsman. It is divided into multiple sections to explain the various functions of the office. A summary of these sections follows. OFFICE OF THE COMMUNITY OMBUDSMAN This section discusses the history of the office and provides insight into the principals it stands by. This section also introduces the dedicated staff and provides highlights of the past year. OPERATIONS This section offers insight into the workings of the Office of the Community Ombudsman. It includes information on how cases are managed and the how cases and allegations are classified. YEAR END STATISTICS While the primary focus of media reports about the ombudsman s office has been on the investigation of complaints and officer-involved shootings, these activities form only part of the ombudsman s daily work. The office spends a significant amount of time assisting people who either have questions about the actions of a Boise law enforcement officer or are dissatisfied with the service they received from the police. Since its inception, the Office of the Community Ombudsman has resolved more than a thousand inquiries. In 2008, it brought over 112 inquires to a successful resolution. The majority of these inquiries were addressed through the Rapid Resolution process. The Office of the Community Ombudsman has 7 separate case classifications and 17 different allegations it uses for its cases. This section provides details about the 145 formal cases opened in It includes charts and graphs to present specific information regarding these cases. CASE SUMMARIES Since the majority of the work the Office of the Community Ombudsman deals with is confidential information, it is important to provide a way of making its work known to the public without compromising the integrity of the office or the independence it thrives on. The ombudsman issues public reports for each of the Critical Incident and Complaint investigations conducted by the office. These reports are available on the internet. A sampling of case studies is included in this annual report to demonstrate the wide variety of cases received by the Office of the Community Ombudsman throughout the year. This section includes examples of the Inquiries, Class I and Class II Complaints, and Critical Incidents addressed in FINDINGS At the end of an investigation, the ombudsman issues a finding for each allegation. There are five (5) types of findings that can be issued based on the preponderance of the evidence. This section defines the types of findings and standard of proof used by the ombudsman, presents all findings issued in 2008, and analyzes the eight (8) cases that produced the 12 sustained findings issued in It includes a brief description of the complaint, the reason for the sustained finding issued by the ombudsman, and the response by the chief of police to each sustained finding ANNUAL REPORT 4

16 RECOMMENDATIONS In addition to the many hours spent investigating Complaints and Critical Incidents, the Office of the Community Ombudsman spends time researching best practices of other agencies in order to make value-adding policy recommendations. Over the years the ombudsman has issued over 68 policy or training recommendations. These recommendations are made public in both investigative reports and special policy reports. In 2008, three (3) recommendations were made to the chief of police. This section provides a summary of those recommendations. APPENDIX The Appendix includes a synopsis for each case opened by the Office of the Community Ombudsman in These cases are divided by the seven (7) case types used by the office: Commendation, Inquiry, Appeal, Class I Complaints, Class II Complaints, Critical Incidents, and Other Agency. AUDITS OF BPD OFFICE OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS CASES The Office of the Community Ombudsman is responsible for auditing complaints investigated by the Boise Police Department s Office of Internal Affairs (OIA). Each year, all Class I Complaints and at least half of the Class II Complaints investigated by OIA are audited by the Office of the Community Ombudsman. The ombudsman can make recommendations to the chief based on discoveries made during these audits. Information on the audits conducted during 2008 are presented in this section STATISTICAL HIGHLIGHTS Over 257 people contacted the Office of the Community Ombudsman in 2008, resulting in 145 cases opened. Since its inception in 1999, the Office of the Community Ombudsman has handled over 3200 contacts and has opened 2260 cases. In 2008, a total of 138 of the 145 cases involved the Boise Police Department. There were no cases opened in connection with Boise City Parking Control or Boise City Code Enforcement. Seven (7) cases involved agencies outside of the ombudsman s jurisdiction. 180 separate allegations, issues, and commendations were associated with the 145 cases opened in A total of 17 Complaints were opened in They are divided into 8 Class I Complaints and 9 Class II Complaints. One (1) Critical Incident case was opened in This case was still being investigated at the end of the year. 65 Rapid Resolution Inquiries were assigned to BPD for them to resolve. Most of these Rapid Resolution Inquiries involved the Valley Patrol Division. Most of cases opened in 2008 involved incidents that occurred in the downtown area of Boise. The majority of the complainants that contacted the Office of Community Ombudsman live in communities outside of Boise. A total of 56 findings were issued in This total includes 23 exonerated, 13 unfounded, and 12 sustained findings. The chief of police agreed with 8 of the 12 sustained findings issued by the ombudsman in However, disciplinary or corrective action was only taken for four (4) of the eight (8) sustained findings with which the chief concurred. The ombudsman issued three (3) formal recommendations during All three recommendations were adopted by the chief of police ANNUAL REPORT 5

17 OFFICE OF THE COMMUNITY OMBUDSMAN MESSAGE FROM THE OMBUDSMAN It is my honor to present to you the 2008 Annual Report of the Office of the Community Ombudsman. I am confident that this report will give you a greater insight into the work of the ombudsman s office. I also hope that this report generates feedback for our office, as well as public reflection on the value of the service we provide. The 2008 Annual Report is a comprehensive view of the work our office does. It details the types of formal cases opened during the year and explains how we classify cases and allegations. It also informs the community about the nature of the issues and concerns brought to our attention and the outcome of our in-depth investigations. Each year, we stride to add new information to our annual report. We enjoy trying to produce new ways of reflecting the work we do. This report includes a new section that shows how many contacts our office received that were documented, but no case opened. These contacts did not meet the standards required to open a formal case, but still required considerable time to address concerns and answer questions. Additionally, a new chart was added to present the types of actions that have resulted in Critical Incident cases over the past years. Since 1999, our office has investigated 35 separate Critical Incidents. In 2009, we look forward to celebrating our 10 year anniversary. It will be a time to reflect on how much we have achieved. Our office plans to review our policies, procedures, and processes in order to increase our efficiency in providing service to the public by conducting thorough investigations, researching recommendations, conducting audits, and community outreach. Sincerely, Pierce Murphy Community Ombudsman 2008 ANNUAL REPORT 6

18 MISSION STATEMENT The Office of the Community Ombudsman exists to promote confidence in the professionalism and accountability of Boise City s police and law enforcement employees through unbiased investigations of citizens complaints, independent review of police actions, thoughtful policy recommendations, and on-going public outreach. GUIDING PRINCIPALS The ombudsman s operating philosophy consists of the following guiding principles under which we strive to achieve our mission: We believe in providing equal, fair, and impartial access to the services of the Office of the Community Ombudsman; without regard to age, race, sexual orientation, disability, gender, creed, color, nationality, or station in life. We believe in treating all individuals, regardless of their attitude or demeanor, with the same courtesy, tolerance, sensitivity, and dignity we would expect if placed in a similar situation. We believe in providing quality, timely, objective, and responsive service to those persons who request the assistance of the community ombudsman. We believe in the empowerment of people to solve problems, provide service, and satisfy the needs of the community, coupled with accountability and responsibility for their conduct. HISTORY On July 20, 1999, the Boise City Council enacted the Ombudsman Ordinance which formally established the Office of the Community Ombudsman. The office exists to promote confidence in the professionalism and accountability of Boise City s police and law enforcement employees through unbiased investigation of complaints, independent review of police actions, thoughtful policy recommendations, and on-going public outreach. The Community Ombudsman provides information through radio, newspapers, television, and presentations at schools and community meetings. Complaints or Commendations can be made to the Office of the Community Ombudsman in person, by telephone, facsimile, , or in writing. The Community Ombudsman s office is independent from all other City departments and reports directly to the Boise City Council. City ordinance number 5930 was unanimously passed by the Boise City Council. This ordinance established Title 2, Chapter 22, of the Boise City Code to establish the Office of the Community Ombudsman specifying duties and responsibilities, requiring confidentiality of records, and authorizing mediation, recommendations, community outreach, and reporting. This ordinance was the result of extensive benchmarking of police oversight mechanisms throughout the United States and consultations with experienced practitioners and leading academics in the field ANNUAL REPORT 7

19 STAFF Pierce Murphy, Community Ombudsman - Mr. Murphy was appointed by the Mayor and the City Council on March 2, 1999, and began work on April 5, Mr. Murphy has extensive experience in human resource management, facilitation, mediation, and investigation. Mr. Murphy earned a Master of Pastorial Studies degree in theology from Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana, a Master of Arts degree in Counseling Psychology from Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington and a Bachelor of Science degree in Commerce from Santa Clara University in Santa Clara, California. He began his career in 1972 as a law enforcement officer with the City of Menlo Park in California. Following his graduate studies and from 1986 until 1994, Mr. Murphy maintained an active Human Resource Management consulting practice, with clients throughout the United States, Europe, Asia, and Latin America. In 1994, Mr. Murphy joined the Paper Division of the Boise Cascade Corporation as Manager of Human Resource Development. Mr. Murphy and his family make their home in Boise. Phoebe Smith, Deputy Ombudsman - Ms. Smith was appointed by the City Council on March 14, She brings to the position a significant background in law. She earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in English from Smith College and a Juris Doctorate degree from the University of Oregon School of Law. She is licensed to practice law in both Washington and Idaho. Following graduation from law school, Ms. Smith practiced in the area of insurance defense. Her public service includes an appointment as a deputy attorney general for the State of Idaho. She also served as a law clerk to the Idaho Court of Appeals and the Fourth District Court of Ada County. Ms. Smith actively contributes to the community and has held leadership positions in several non-profit organizations. She and her family are residents of Boise. Jennifer Butler, Investigative Analyst - Ms. Butler joined the Office of the Community Ombudsman in July Ms. Butler received her Bachelor of Arts degree in Education from Idaho State University. She has taught in Idaho, Nevada, and the Federated States of Micronesia where she served as a School and Community Coordinator in the United States Peace Corps. Her experiences have enhanced her ability to work with a variety of individuals with diverse backgrounds. Ms. Butler also has an extensive office administration background that makes her an asset to the position. Her skills are an integral part of the process of our daily operations. Ms. Butler and her husband reside in Boise. Dennis Dunne, Investigator (on-call) - Mr. Dunne began working in the ombudsman s office in 2005 as a volunteer. In late 2005, early 2006, he served for four months as acting deputy ombudsman. Mr. Dunne's expertise proved invaluable during this time and he now serves as an investigator with the office on a part-time basis. Mr. Dunne received a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from the University of California at Davis and a Master in Public Administration from the College of Notre Dame in Belmont, California. He began his career in law enforcement in 1970 and retired in 2002 at a supervisory level. He has experience working in patrol, traffic, personnel administration, investigations, and training. Mr. Dunne also served as an in-service coordinator and instructor for the police academy, teaching Supervision, Field Training Officer, Background Investigation, and Driving and Force Options Simulator courses. Mr. Dunne and his family currently live in Boise. Pictured left to right: Pierce Murphy, Jennifer Butler, Dennis Dunne, and Phoebe Smith 2008 ANNUAL REPORT 8

20 COMMUNITY OUTREACH Part of the mission of the Office of the Community Ombudsman is to provide on-going public outreach. The ombudsman is available to speak to service clubs, professional organizations, neighborhood groups, and schools. These contacts with members of our community allow the ombudsman to listen to the concerns and opinions community members have about both Boise law enforcement agencies and the operations of the ombudsman s office. In addition, the ombudsman is able to educate the community about the ombudsman s office and promote community support for professional and accountable law enforcement in our city. The ombudsman and his staff provide a real service to the community through the many questions they answer about the policies, procedures, and tactics of law enforcement. Even though the office receives an influx of contacts whenever there is extensive media coverage of police activities, it is not only highprofile situations that prompt people to call and ask for the ombudsman s help in understanding the details of police procedures and practices. Many of the contacts that are received involve minor interactions between community members and Boise law enforcement officers. In every instance, the ombudsman and his staff either answer the question posed, or put the person in touch with a specific individual who can provide an answer. As public servants, and especially as members of the Office of the Community Ombudsman, the staff believes that it is their duty to provide the public with the information they want about law enforcement in our community. In addition to the contacts with the community initiated by either the public contacting the office or the ombudsman speaking to organizations, the office provides brochures whenever possible and maintains a website that provides helpful information. PRESENTATIONS In 2008, the ombudsman and deputy ombudsman spent over 19 hours participating in community outreach activities. These activities included presentations to students at local schools, Boise State University Criminal Justice classes, BPD s Citizen Police Academy, Rotary Clubs, and orientations for new refugees with Mountain States Group. BROCHURES The Office of the Community Ombudsman has two brochures available to the public. Both brochures are available at the ombudsman s office, on their website, or by requesting that one be mailed to you. The second brochure was created as a joint project with the Boise Police Department. It is entitled, What to Expect Understanding the Law and Police Procedures. This brochure helps the reader know what to expect when interacting with a police officer, whether during a traffic stop, when reporting a crime, or during an arrest. WEBSITE The Office of the Community Ombudsman s website is an interactive site where the public can express their complaints, issues, or concerns regarding Boise City s law enforcement agencies. The homepage provides links to the Ombudsman Ordinance, staff information, the complaint process, commendations, and related websites. On-line publications include PDF versions of the office s brochures, investigative reports, policy reports, and mid-year and annual reports. This site is a valuable resource in assisting the community to understand and evaluate the available services. EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT As part of the office s commitment to ongoing education and training, the ombudsman and staff attended the following conferences and workshops in 2008: Pierce Murphy attended an Idaho Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) workshop entitled Walking Upstream Executive Seminar that covered topics in ethics and leadership. He also participated in a NACOLE training conference. Phoebe Smith attended workshops titled Mediation and Arbitration Theory and Strategy, Electronic Discovery and Other Traps for the Transactional Lawyer, and Idaho Summit on Sexual Assault. Jennifer Butler attended a seminar entitled Internal Affairs, Managing Citizen Complaints and Employee Discipline. The primary brochure provides a brief introduction to the office, includes information on how to file a complaint or commendation, and contains a form to be completed and returned. This brochure is created as business reply mail and can be folded and mailed with no postage ANNUAL REPORT 9

21 PROJECTS AND UPDATES EMS TRAINING FOR POLICE OFFICERS On April 30, 2008, the chief of police formally thanked the Ada County EMS personnel for their assistance in providing training in first aide and CPR to over 320 BPD officers. This was after BPD revised their department policy to state that when appropriate, officers are to render first aide or CPR to citizens at incidents in preparation for the arrival of emergency medical personnel. This policy change stemmed from a 2006 recommendation from the ombudsman that stated that BPD should, Clarify policy to clearly communicate a standard of care for all injured or ill persons encountered by BPD employees, regardless of the causation, and that adequate equipment and training should be provided. JOINT POLICY STUDY The Ombudsman's Office and the Boise Police Department have conducted a joint policy study each of the last two years. The 2006 project examined the Taser policy and the 2007 study focused on the application and use of the Public Intoxication ordinance. These joint studies allow both agencies to collaborate on issues of high importance to the community and to the officers, with the level of importance being determined by one of more of the following factors (among others): officer safety, potential liability, public safety, best practices, etc. The ombudsman and chief chose "Code Three Police Vehicle Operations as the 2008 joint policy study. This project was launched in March The emergency operation of a police vehicle that involves the use of emergency lights and/or sirens is also known as a code three response. Whenever police are called to an emergency situation and use their vehicles in a code three operation, the risk of a collision increases. This particular topic was chosen based on several different factors. The growth of Boise has led to an increased number of vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians on the road throughout the day. This growth has also led BPD to hire new inexperienced officers, who statistically are at an increased risk for being involved in traffic collisions. These issues increase the chance of injury to both officers and members of the public, as well as putting the City at an increased chance of liability exposure. A slight rise in the number of citizen complaints involving code three driving by BPD officers was noted and the fact that some officers in other states had been charged with felonies for their involvement with traffic collision deaths associated with code three driving. Since it had been more than five years since BPD conducted a review of its policies and protocols regarding code three response, this topic was chosen for the 2008 joint study. A team was assembled to begin research on this project. Part of this research included compiling policies, procedures, protocols, practices, and training related to the dispatching of units code three, as well as the code three operation of BPD police vehicles. The team sought out best practices, model polices, and consulted experts. They also gathered and analyzed data from the past three years ( ) involving the nature and frequency of code responses and any traffic collisions, property damage, and personal injuries reported in connection with code three responses. BPD policy sets guidelines for officer response to calls for service. The policy limits when an emergency response by an officer is authorized. Call response is determined in two ways. Some code three responses are initiated by officers in the field. This happens when an officer in the field requests the response of additional officers. However, the vast majority of code three responses are initiated by the Ada County Emergency Communications Center (Dispatch). When Dispatch employees receive calls for police, fire, and EMS services, they determine the nature of the incident and assign a specific call type to it. These call types have a predetermined call response to them. There were 36 different police call types that required a code three response. Thirteen of these call types have been in the top ten call types comprising 80% of the code three responses from the years During these three years, the top four call types requiring code three response were consistently in the same order. These top four calls were: 1. Traffic accidents involving injuries (however minor): resulting in an average of 982 calls per year over the last three years; 2. Paramedic Assists: averaging 440 calls; 3. Overdoses: averaging 362 calls; and 4. Wrong way drivers: averaging 324 calls per year. The team conducted an analysis of each of the top ten call types to explore the necessity or efficiency of maintaining the standards and/or protocol currently in place for BPD. They also collected data on injury accidents and the nature of those accidents. Finally, there was a review of the seven (7) citizen complaints about code three driving and the 13 vehicle collisions associated with code three driving during After analyzing the data compiled and considering the policies and best practices from other agencies, the team recommended that no changes be made to the current BPD policy regarding the operation of BPD vehicles in code three status. However, the review of the Dispatch call types requiring code three response led the team to evaluate the possibility of downgrading some of the default response codes. A meeting of leaders from law enforcement, fire, and EMS agencies within Ada County was held to discuss this possibility. As a result, recommendations were made to reduce the number of calls that automatically generate a code three or emergency response. These recommendations were accepted and implemented in February 2009, as consistent, standard protocols for the 911 Communications Center. Lastly, the team determined that the risk of property damage and personal injury could be reduced by providing BPD officers with annual refresher training in emergency vehicle operation. The report for this joint policy study can be found in its entirety on under policy reports ANNUAL REPORT 10

22 BEYOND BOISE The Office of the Community Ombudsman is often recognized for its success as a civilian oversight agency. As the concept of civilian oversight becomes more popular, cities throughout the United States turn to other agencies for implementation ideas and discussions on effective practices. Boise s own ombudsman has provided insight to other agencies around the U.S. Additionally, an excerpt written by Pierce Murphy, entitled, Police Ethics and Public Trust: Getting All The Systems Right is included in the book, Criminal Justice Management: Theory and Practice in Justice-Centered Organizations by Mary K. Stohr and Peter A. Collins, published in TETON COUNTY, IDAHO As Teton County struggled with community reaction to a sheriff deputy s action, Pierce Murphy was invited to speak at a Community Meeting and provide input in January SPOKANE, WASHINGTON Spokane began working on creating an ombudsman s office to provide oversight of their Police Department. In May 2008, Pierce Murphy was asked to speak to the Spokane City Council about his work as the ombudsman in Boise. While in Spokane, Mr. Murphy also gave the Keynote Address after the theater production, Crossing the Line an investigation of police power and people presented by the Whitworth Theater and the Center for Justice. CINCINNATI, OHIO As past president of the National Association of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE), Pierce Murphy remains active in the organization. In October 2008, Mr. Murphy attended the 14th Annual NACOLE Training Conference. CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT Civilian oversight is a term used to describe professionals who have the authority to oversee police conduct in their communities. There are three main models of oversight: Auditor/Monitor, Civilian Review Boards, and Investigative models. There are also models that combine characteristics of each of the three the main models. Civilian oversight agencies have come into existence to assist in preserving trust and creating police accountability. There are currently 137 civilian oversight agencies in the United States. A total of 71 of the 100 largest cities have some sort of civilian oversight system in place. These systems may be administered by either an individual person, such as a monitor, auditor, or ombudsman, or by a group, typically a commission or board, responsible for accomplishing the oversight. Whether managed by an individual or by a group, agencies are often limited in their authority. Typically their authority is dependent on their investigative power of either internal or external oversight. Some agencies have the ability to conduct investigations they initiated, while others can only monitor the adequacy of the investigations conducted by the internal affairs division within their jurisdiction. The Office of the Community Ombudsman in Boise, Idaho, is unique in its ability to do both. In Boise, the ombudsman is able to conduct his own investigations in response to concerns addressed by members of the community. The ombudsman also audits the police department s internal investigations into allegations of officer misconduct. The National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) is the professional organization for oversight of law enforcement in the United States. For more information about this organization visit their website: Pierce Murphy speaking to the Spokane City Council about his role as Boise s Community Ombudsman ANNUAL REPORT 11

23 OPERATIONS COMPLAINTS ABOUT CONDUCT Anyone may file a complaint about the conduct of Boise City law enforcement agencies with the Office of the Community Ombudsman. If you feel an employee of the Boise Police Department, Boise City Parking Enforcement, or Boise City Code Enforcement did not treat you properly or violated a policy, you may contact the office with your concern. When you contact the Office of the Community Ombudsman, details of your complaint will be assigned to an investigator for investigation. After a thorough investigation, the ombudsman will issue a finding and you will be notified of the outcome. FALSE COMPLAINTS The Office of the Community Ombudsman relies upon the truthfulness and good intentions of those community members who choose to file a complaint about the actions of a Boise law enforcement officer. A reasonable amount of allowance is made for the fact that multiple witnesses to the same event will have different memories of the event. Every person s impression of what occurred is colored by individual perceptions, emotions, biases, and a host of other factors. The ombudsman does not expect that every officer and every citizen at the scene of an incident will have exactly the same memory of the event, nor that they will all draw the same conclusions about the meaning and appropriateness of what took place. We do insist that every person who files a complaint with the Office of the Community Ombudsman provides information that he or she believes to be true and accurate. Intentionally and knowingly providing false information in the filing of a complaint is a serious matter. It is a breech of trust. It compromises the integrity of the community feedback process the office depends on. It also is unfair to an officer whose professional and personal reputation may be at stake. Evidence sufficient to form a reasonable belief that a complainant has knowingly made a false allegation of criminal conduct by a Boise law enforcement officer will be forwarded to the prosecutor for consideration of criminal charges against the complainant. TIME LIMITS The policy and procedures of the ombudsman s office include a time limit for filing Complaints and Appeals. In the case of Complaints, when a violation of policy, procedure, or law is alleged, the complaint must be filed within 90 days of the occurrence of the incident that gave rise to the grievance. The ombudsman may grant an exception to this time limit when the initial evidence presented constitutes a violation so severe that criminal charges, termination, or serious disciplinary action could result if the allegation were to be sustained, or when the complainant was unable to file a complaint during the 90 days due to an involuntary incapacity (e.g., hospitalization, incarceration, etc.). Citizens must file Appeals with the ombudsman within 30 days of receiving notification of a finding issued by the chief of police for a complaint the citizen filed directly with the police department. The ombudsman may grant an exception to the Appeal time limit in cases where the complainant was unable to request an Appeal during the 30 days. CASE MANAGEMENT The following work flow chart shows the process by which each type of case is addressed. After an investigation, the ombudsman issues findings on all Critical Incidents, Complaints, and Appeals. Occasionally, recommendations may be issued as a result of the investigations. All complainant-initiated cases result in a follow-up with the complainant in which the results of the investigation are explained. Investigative reports for all Critical Incidents and Complaints are available to the public. These reports are available at and include the findings issued by the ombudsman, as well as any recommendations. Most cases end with a final disposition from the chief of police or the appropriate department head ANNUAL REPORT 12

24 WORK FLOW CHART 2008 ANNUAL REPORT 13

25 FORMAL CASE TYPES The Office of the Community Ombudsman classifies cases using six (6) types of formal cases. The descriptions below explain how the decision is made to how a case is classified. A 5- year comparison shows how many cases of each type have been opened by the ombudsman. COMMENDATION The ombudsman opens a formal case every time a community member takes the time to praise the actions of officers in a specific incident. This type of case is called a Commendation. The Office of the Community Ombudsman gladly takes these commendations and forwards them to the officer and chief of police. Commendation Total Year Comparison APPEAL In those instances when an individual complains directly to the police, an Appeal can be filed with the ombudsman within 30 days after the complainant has received a response from an investigation conducted by BPD. Upon receipt of an Appeal, the ombudsman reviews the internal investigation conducted by BPD and determines whether or not the investigation was complete and thorough. The ombudsman may issue a finding based on the strength of the department s own internal investigation or he may conduct an additional investigation and then issue a finding. Individuals must file Appeals with the ombudsman within 30 days of receiving notification of a finding issued by the chief of police for a complaint the person filed directly with the Police Department. The ombudsman may grant an exception to the appeal time limit in cases where the complainant was unable to request an appeal during the 30 days due to an involuntary incapacity (e.g., hospitalization, incarceration, etc.) Appeal Total Year Comparison circumstances underlying the expressed concern or question. If possible, a satisfactory resolution of the problem is sought. The ombudsman often acts as a mediator between the person and the involved Boise City law enforcement agency. There are three (3) types of Inquiries: Policy Question, Service Quality, and Rapid Resolution. Rapid Resolution Inquiries were developed to be able to provide a response to inquiries in a shorter amount of time. Due to the large percent of inquiries opened by the ombudsman and the time involved seeking an answer or mediating a resolution, the ombudsman, with the cooperation of the police department, developed a process designed to resolve issues quickly by putting individuals in direct contact with first-line supervisors. This process improvement has reduced the average time to resolve an issue from weeks to just a few days. The rapid resolution process is initiated when an inquiry is filed by an individual. After reviewing the inquiry, the ombudsman decides if the resolution could be expedited by involving the police directly. A formal case is then opened and a division captain at BPD is contacted. The captains are requested to either contact the person themselves, or delegate the contact to the appropriate supervisor in order to provide a rapid resolution. This process allows a supervisor to find out quickly what happened and resolve any questions or concerns directly with the individual. The captain is obligated to contact the ombudsman once the Inquiry has been resolved. After receiving an explanation of the outcome, the ombudsman follows up with the individual. If for any reason the individual is not happy with the contact by the supervisor, or if they still have questions, the individual has 30 days in which to contact the ombudsman with their concerns. The Office of the Community Ombudsman takes special care in making sure that the complainants understand the process and are comfortable in speaking with a BPD supervisor. Many people have been eager to have the opportunity to speak directly to someone in BPD. Very few have indicated that they would feel uncomfortable speaking to someone from the police department. However, when such a preference is made known, the ombudsman will look into the Inquiry. Inquiry Total Year Comparison INQUIRY Inquiries constitute the largest percentage of formal cases. Inquiries are the name given to a question or a complaint that does not, on its face, contain an allegation of policy or law violation. Nonetheless, the person contacting the ombudsman is questioning the actions of a Boise law enforcement officer or agency. As such, the ombudsman is obligated to look into the CLASS I COMPLAINTS The ombudsman also opens a case whenever a person complains about the actions of one or more officers. If the actions being described by a complainant are such that, were they true, they would constitute a violation of either police policy or law, the case is classified as a Complaint ANNUAL REPORT 14

26 Complaints are then classified as either a Class I or a Class II Complaint. This distinction is related to the severity of the misconduct being alleged. In practice, all complaints receive a thorough and objective investigation and little or no practical distinction is made between the two different classes of complaints. A Class I Complaint includes more severe allegations along the lines of excessive force, violations of criminal law, or the abuse of authority. In the 8 Class I cases opened in 2008, 19 separate allegations were made. All of the Class I complaints involved the Boise Police Department. Class I Total Year Comparison CLASS II COMPLAINTS Class II Complaints are less serious and involve complaints of inadequate service, discourtesy, improper procedure, and noncriminal conduct. They are tracked in the same manner as Class I Complaints. When a person files either a Class I or a Class II Complaint, the ombudsman tracks each reported act of misconduct by each of the involved officers. Often, more than one officer is involved in the underlying incident. During the investigation, if additional misconduct is discovered, new allegations will be listed. Tracking allegations separately enables the ombudsman s office to report a finding for each complaint allegation and to track allegations by type and officer. In 2008, there were 9 Class II cases opened by the Office of the Community Ombudsman with 15 separate allegations. Class II Total Year Comparison CRITICAL INCIDENTS A Critical Incident is an event that involves the use of deadly force, or an event in which police actions result in death or serious bodily injury. They are specifically addressed in the City ordinance that governs the Office of the Community Ombudsman. It requires that the ombudsman be notified immediately whenever an employee of the Boise Police Department or the Boise Airport Police Department is involved in a Critical Incident. When a Critical Incident occurs, the ombudsman is required to act as an observer to any criminal, civil, or administrative investigation conducted by or on behalf of the police department. In addition, the ombudsman has the authority to conduct his own independent administrative investigation into the critical incident. Critical Incidents are defined by Boise City ordinance in the following manner: Use of force or any other department action that results in death or serious bodily injury (Serious bodily injury is an injury that results in the subject being admitted to a hospital.), or Use of Deadly Force where only minor bodily injuries occur, or Intentional use of Deadly Force but no injury occurs (excluding animals), or Vehicle pursuits, roadblocks or intercepts resulting in death or serious bodily injury, or when a Boise Police employee is involved in a traffic accident resulting in death or serious bodily injury, while operating either a city or a private vehicle while on City business. Critical Incident Total Year Comparison OTHER AGENCY Occasionally, the ombudsman receives complaints that are outside of his jurisdiction. Complainants who contact the Office of the Community Ombudsman are sometimes not clear about the ombudsman s jurisdiction. If, after the extent of the office s authority is explained, the complainant requests that the ombudsman forward a complaint to the appropriate agency, an Other Agency case may be opened. In some cases, it is unclear which agency has been involved and the ombudsman makes every effort to help identify the agency. If a case is originally opened as a Complaint or an Inquiry and it is later discovered that BPD employees were not involved, the case is reclassified as Other Agency and the complainant is given the option to either contact the appropriate agency themselves or have the ombudsman forward the complaint. Other Agency Total Year Comparison 2008 ANNUAL REPORT 15

27 ALLEGATION TYPES Each case tracks any allegations presented by the complainant. Additional allegations may be added as they are discovered in the course of an investigation. Some cases contain more than one allegation for a particular officer and/or contain allegations for multiple officers. A total of 17 different allegation categories are recorded by the Office of the Community Ombudsman. Allegation categories are also used to classify items that are not a complaint per se. For example, if a commendation is received, the allegation is reported as an Officer Commendation. Inquiries are classified in one of three ways: Service Quality, Policy Question, or Rapid Resolution. Other Agency is also an allegation classification. The other allegations all classify the type of complaint alleged or the potential policy violation and will be issued a finding at the end of an investigation. The following definitions are used to classify each of the following types of allegations: RUDENESS/DEMEANOR A Rudeness/Demeanor complaint is any allegation involving the behavior of an officer, in word or in deed, that can be considered rude, offensive, or disrespectful. Officers are expected to conduct themselves in a civil and respectful manner. They shall not use profanity, uncomplimentary speech, or intentionally antagonize any person. A Rudeness/Demeanor allegation does not include non-specific allegations of a general nature that may otherwise be classified as a Service Quality Inquiry. PERFORMANCE OF DUTY A Performance of Duty complaint includes any allegation involving the inefficiency of an officer in carrying out his or her duties. Examples include inadequate service, failure to take a report, inadequate investigation, and any other non-criminal conduct. However, Performance of Duty does not include failure to take action, as required by law or policy, or failure to record an enforcement contact. These two allegations are specifically addressed under Failure to Act and Failure to Record allegations. An officer s competency is demonstrated by adequate knowledge of the application of laws required to be enforced, the willingness and ability to perform assigned tasks properly, conformance to the work standards established for the law enforcement officer s rank, grade, or position, and taking appropriate and timely action when a crime, disorder, or other situation requiring police action occurs. USE OF FORCE A Use of Force complaint includes any allegation involving the unnecessary or unreasonable use of force or violence. The criteria for determining a reasonable amount of force includes the severity of the crime, the nature and extent of the threat posed by the suspect, the degree to which the subject resists arrest or detention, attempts by the subject to evade arrest by flight, and other factors including: the nature and quality of force used upon the individual, duration of the force, the severity of injuries inflicted, the officer s or subject s physical size or attributes, environmental considerations, reaction time, and the totality of circumstances. In all circumstances, officers must refrain from any unnecessary infliction of pain or suffering and may never engage in cruel, degrading, or inhumane treatment of any person. IMPROPER CONDUCT An Improper Conduct complaint includes any allegation involving the extreme or unwarranted action of an officer in carrying out his or her duties. This includes, but is not limited to, any acts or threats of violence, property damage, conduct unbecoming, cruelty, intimidation, or other actions which shock the conscience. An Improper Conduct complaint differs from a Performance of Duty complaint by focusing on an allegation that an officer acted in an excessive, undue, severe, or conflicting manner; as opposed to the insufficient, derisory, or poor action of an officer. ABUSE OF AUTHORITY An Abuse of Authority complaint includes any alleged action by an officer that can be construed as an exploitation or misuse of the authority granted to the officer. Examples include corruption, retaliatory arrest, biased policing, or use of one s position for personal gain and/or advantage. OFFICER HARASSMENT An Officer Harassment complaint includes any alleged actions by an officer that can be categorized as harassment in the form of intimidation, ridicule, or persecution. It also includes any stalking or pestering in any form that may be considered retaliation against a person for reporting misconduct, harassment, or complaining about the alleged retaliating officer. CRIMINAL CONDUCT A Criminal Conduct complaint includes an allegation that an officer violated the law or has been charged with a crime. A Performance of Duty complaint focuses on the inadequate or insufficient actions of an officer as contrasted by an Improper Conduct complaint which revolves around the excessive, unnecessary, or disproportionate action of an officer ANNUAL REPORT 16

28 VEHICLE OPERATION A Vehicle Operation complaint is an allegation that includes unsafe driving, driving violations, or unauthorized Code 3 response. Any employee-involved traffic collisions resulting in death or life-threatening bodily injury involving a law enforcement employee operating either a city vehicle or a private vehicle while on-duty do not fall under this allegation, but, rather, are classified as Critical Incidents. CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS VIOLATION A Constitutional Rights Violation complaint includes any allegations of a violation of rights included in the Constitution of the United States. Examples include unlawful search, unlawful detention, failure to provide Miranda warning, and harassment designed to infringe upon those rights guaranteed by the Constitution and applicable federal and state laws. Harassment not considered to be a Constitution Rights Violation but rather used for retaliation or intimidation is defined as an Officer Harassment allegation. Use of Force is also not included under a Constitutional Rights Violation complaint. FAILURE TO ACT A Failure to Act complaint includes any alleged failure to take action as required by law or policy. A Failure to Act complaint is separate from a Performance of Duty complaint, in which the officer s actions are considered insufficient. It also does not include Failure to Record. FAILURE TO RECORD A Failure to Record complaint is an allegation of an officer s failure to audio record an enforcement contact as required by policy. CRITICAL INCIDENT Critical Incidents include any event in which deadly force is used and results in death or life-threatening bodily injury, as well as any event in which deadly force is intentionally used but minor or no bodily injury occurs. OFFICER COMMENDATION An Officer Commendation is an acclamation providing recognition of an officer s exemplary conduct or meritorious actions, including attitude, accomplishments, or superior service. POLICY QUESTION A Policy Question Inquiry is any inquiry into the policy or procedures of the police department. This includes questions about whether the actions or behavior of an officer were consistent with policy, procedure, or law. However, allegations of specific actions or omissions that, if true, would be a violation of policy or law, are classified as a Complaint rather than an Inquiry and identified as some other type. SERVICE QUALITY A Service Quality Inquiry is any inquiry into the quality of service provided by an officer or the propriety of an officer s actions. This includes, but is not limited to, any question of behavior or action taken by an officer in response to a request for service. This type includes any behavior or action that can be questioned, but does not appear to be a violation of policy, taken at face value. RAPID RESOLUTION A Rapid Resolution Inquiry involves inquiries of a general nature sent to the police department for quick resolution. It can include inquiries into the quality of service provided by an officer or the propriety of an officer s actions that does not appear to be a violation of policy. It can also include any questions about department policy or procedure that can be better answered by the police department. OTHER AGENCY Other Agency is used when a complaint or inquiry involves an agency outside of the ombudsman s jurisdiction. Critical Incidents also include any vehicle pursuits, roadblocks, intercepts, or other police actions resulting in death or lifethreatening bodily injury. Employee-involved traffic collisions resulting in death or life-threatening bodily injury any time while operating a city vehicle or a private vehicle while on-duty are also classified as Critical Incidents and are separate from Vehicle Operation allegations ANNUAL REPORT 17

29 YEAR-END STATISTICS 2008 CASE TOTAL The Office of the Community Ombudsman opened 145 formal cases in The year began with 20 cases from 2007 still open. However, by the end of 2008, work had been completed on all but one of the 2007 cases. Additionally, work was completed on all but 9 of the 145 cases opened in Investigative reports are made public when the ombudsman s office conducts an investigation into a Complaint, Critical Incident, or Appeal. In 2008, 24 investigative reports were issued. They include 13 cases opened in These reports can be found on the website under Investigative Reports. Total Cases Opened by Month January 1, December 31, 2008 Total = January February March April May June July August September October November December Classification of Formal Cases All Jurisdictions January 1, December 31, 2008 Total = Class I Class II Inquiry Commendation Appeal Critical Incident Other Agency 2008 ANNUAL REPORT 18

30 FORMAL CASES BY JURISDICTION Of the 145 cases opened in 2008, 138 involved the Boise Police Department. No cases were opened involving Boise City Code Enforcement or Boise City Parking Control. A total of 7 cases were outside of the ombudsman s jurisdiction Formal Cases by Jurisdiction January 1, December 31, 2008 Total = Boise City Police Department Boise City Code Enforcement Boise City Parking Control Other Agencies RAPID RESOLUTION INQUIRIES Of the 112 Inquiries opened in 2008, a total of 65 were handled by BPD as Rapid Resolution Inquiries Rapid Resolution Inquiries by BPD Division Total = Administration Airport Bench Patrol Valley Patrol Criminal Investigation Community Outreach OIA 2008 ANNUAL REPORT 19

31 INTAKE METHOD The Office of the Community Ombudsman can be contacted in a variety of ways. The vast majority of contacts resulting in a formal case were made by phone. Intake Method January 1, December 31, 2008 Total : 145 E-m ail 21 Phone 94 In Person 20 Mail 10 COMPLAINANT GENDER Males account for 60% of the contacts that resulted in formal cases during On occasion, the ombudsman receives anonymous complaints resulting in the complainant s gender being unknown.. Complainant Gender January 1, December 31, 2008 Intake Total = Male Female Unknow n 2008 ANNUAL REPORT 20

32 CONTACTS NOT RESULTING IN A FORMAL CASE The Office of the Community Ombudsman receives numerous contacts throughout the year. Some of these contacts result in an immediate answer or a referral to another agency. However, other contacts require more time and consideration. Often these contacts do not meet the standards required to open a formal case. When this occurs, these contacts are documented with the reason they were not opened as a formal case. In 2008, there were 257 contacts that were documented. 145 resulted in a formal case, while 112 did not. The various reasons for why a case was not opened for those 112 contacts are shown below. Reason Why Formal Case Was Not Opened Contact was made in excess of 90 days after the incident 11 Results of the 257 Documented Contacts Recieved in 2008 Complainant was not directly involved in incident 10 Complaint is outside of the ombudsman s authority 34 Complainant already contacted BPD and awaiting response 18 Questions answered/issue resolved during contact 8 No allegation of policy violation 8 Cases Not Opened % Cases Opened % No further action required 23 Total 112 FORMAL CASES IN EXCESS OF 90 DAY TIMELIMIT Conversely, even though a formal case is opened, it may not always be investigated by the ombudsman. Although a case may not be opened due to the complainant not making contact with the Office of the Community Ombudsman within 90 days of the incident, occasionally a formal case number is assigned in order to provide a means of tracking the information received. This occurs primarily if a written statement is received from the complainant. In 2008, a total of nine (9) formal cases were opened in which the incident occurred over 90 days prior. Two (2) cases were classified as Other Agency and the appropriate referrals were made. The rest of the cases were classified as Inquiries. Two (2) of the inquiries were closed as being denied due to the 90-day rule and no further action was taken. However, three (3) cases were referred to the Police Department after it was agreed that BPD would be willing to address the issues raised by the complainants. Finally, the last two (2) cases were inquiries that the ombudsman agreed to review information and answer questions, although in one of the cases the complainant did not follow through and the ombudsman closed the case without taking any action. No cases were opened where the time-limit requirement were waived in order for a complaint to be investigated ANNUAL REPORT 21

33 REPORTING DISTRICTS The police department separates the City into Reporting Districts for tracking crime statistics. These reporting districts are divided by BPD s two patrol divisions: Valley and Bench. These two patrol divisions consist of multiple districts. The Boise River provides the dividing line between the two areas. Each area is divided by groups. The Valley area is divided into five groups: Northwest, Downtown, North End, Broadway, and Southeast. The Bench area is also divided into five groups: Cloverdale, Maple Grove, Central Bench, Orchard, and Vista. The Office of the Community Ombudsman uses these reporting districts in two ways. The location where an incident took place is tracked by reporting district, as well as, the residence of the complainant. This data shows trends and highlights specific areas of Boise in which incidents that result in a formal case occur. It is also helpful in showing which area of Boise the majority of our complainants live. This data can be useful in identifying areas of the City that may benefit from future outreach programs by the Office of the Community Ombudsman. Re porting District Incident Location January 1, December 31, 2008 Total = Unknow n Not in Boise City Limits Northw est (V1) Downtown (V2) North End (V3) Broadw ay (V4) Southeast (V5) Cloverdale (B1) Maple Grove (B2) Central Bench (B3) Orchard (B4) Vista (B5) Reporting District Complainant Residence January 1, December 31, 2008 Total = Unknow n Not in Boise City Limits Northw est (V1) Downtown (V2) North End (V3) Broadw ay (V4) Southeast (V5) Cloverdale (B1) Maple Grove (B2) Central Bench (B3) Orchard (B4) Vista (B5) 2008 ANNUAL REPORT 22

34 2008 ANNUAL REPORT 23