tv Hearing on Policing Practices Oversight CSPAN September 21, 2019 2:00am-5:43am EDT
see these folks behind us these folks behind us on both sides are amazing. the staff democratic and republican members have to put up with us, which is amazing to start with but in a committee role like this, susan, you've been a friend, you're probably the one i hear the name most often when i say johnny says well susan called, i said in my in trouble and he says no. susan, you're going to be missed. it will be hard to turn around and not see you here but i am so happy for you, the beneficiary here's what you've done for the committee but also at the administration of
officer courts are to do. they are gaining, we are losing, and we acknowledge that with that i yield back the chair. [applause] i will now recognize myself her opening statement. today's hearing furthers our committee's long-standing commitment to conducting meaningful oversight of state and federal law enforcement. as initiated by former chairman goodlad and his establishment of the bipartisan policing strategies working group.
without question, the vast majority of law enforcement officers served honorably under difficult conditions. both in risking and sometimes losing their lives to protect us. there have been, however, a disturbing number instances of excessive force used by police against civilians. many of whom were unarmed, most of whom were people of color and many of which resulted in tragic deaths. that had put incredible strain on the relationships between law enforcement and their local communities. for example, july 17, 2014 five new york city police department officers attempted to arrest eric garner, 42-year-old father of six who allegedly was selling loose cigarettes by tackling him to the ground and placing him in an illegal chokehold. he repeatedly told the officers, and can't breathe.
the officers ignored his plea as he slipped into unconsciousness and death. no one was held criminally responsible for mr. garner's death. we are fortunate to be joined by mr. garner's mother gwen carr and the criminal justice system and the justice system failed you, your son, and your entire family. shockingly the officer response responsible for placing mr. gardner in the pertinently banned chokehold remains on the force for five years. before being finally fired this past august. september 9, 2015 james blake and african-american professional tennis player was standing outside the grand hyatt hotel and midtown manhattan officer james respiratory for no apparent reason, charged him, wrestled him to the ground and placed him in handcuffs. new york civilian complaint review board an independent agency use complaints of police misconduct determined that he
used excessive force and recommended that the officer be punished with departmental disciplinary charges that could lead to suspension or dismissal. instead his only punishment was to lose five vacation days. mr. garner's death and the assault on mr. blake both at the hands of police officers sworn to preserve and protect protect and serve should alarm all americans regardless of party, regardless of political ideology, regardless of race religion or gender. this is not a partisan issue. there are no sides.
there can be no doubt unfortunately that communities of color perceive law enforcement as a threat to their everyday freedoms. these presumptions go back decades. re-dating both 1994 los angeles riots in the 1965 watts riots. both of which were sparked by lack of accountability for incidents of police brutality. these perceptions are reality for african-americans. according to the center for policing equity african-americans are 2 to 4 times more likely than white americans to have force used against them. far too long, police are more just and humane treatment from law enforcement have often fallen on deaf ears. claims of police misconduct coming from communities of color have often been ignored or not believed. mr. garner's killing in a series of others examples of
police misconduct against african americans many of which who were caught on video they can unmistakably clear the claims of police misconduct all too often real. to list just a few. august 5, 2014 john crawford was shot and killed by police officer in a walmart store in beavercreek ohio for holding a toy bb gun. 12-year-old tamir rice was armed was shot and killed by police in cleveland ohio. april 2, 2015 eric harris unarmed was shot and killed by police in tulsa on april 4, 2015 walter scott who was unarmed was shot and killed by police in north charleston south carolina. april 19 2015 freddie gray who was unarmed died in police custody in baltimore maryland.
july 6, 2016 samuel debose was unarmed and shot and killed by police in cincinnati ohio. the frequency of these killings in the absence of full accountability for those responsible sent a message to members of the african-american community that black lives do not matter. let me state clearly for the record that black lives do matter. or please off vilma cannot function knowing that the african-american ãbwe must also be able to put ourselves in the shoes of our law enforcement officers must be able to celebrate the service and sacrifices of our men and women in law enforcement who put their lives on the line day in and day out. we must recognize the psychological toll that serving such an inherently dangerous job to take an individual law enforcement officers and their
families. it's also critical that we not take law enforcement with a broad brush. the vast majority of officers execute their jobs with dignity, honor and respect for the citizens they serve and protect. every american should take pride in that.research shows that a small percentage of repeat offenders today's hearing presents a unique opportunity for us to hear from some of these individuals and families affected by police misconduct. i want to personally thank ms. gwen carr for speaking at this hearing on behalf of her son and mr. blake sharing his personal story with us. today presents an opportunity for us to explore bipartisan solutions to make policing a safe and more fulfilling job for law enforcement officers by restoring the trust and goodwill to employees and the communities they serve. and determine what further solutions are warranted. for example, we should consider
legislative proposers to end racial profiling and install trust between law enforcement and the community. we should explore ways to strengthen data collection on use of force and racial profiling so the police department can measure the practices they manage. the most important and we can all agree that too many lives are put at risk and have been lost in police citizen encounters. and that's incumbent upon each of us to work together as fellow americans to solve this problem. i think all of our witnesses for appearing and i look forward to their testimony. i now recognize the ranking member of the judiciary committee the gym and from georgia mr. collins for his opening statement. like thank you mr. chairman, i would like to add to the record a letter from the detectives
and dominant association new york and the national association of police organization. >> without objection. i appreciate the chairman's opening and i think you covered a great deal of stuff. i have a lot of notes in listing, i think one of the things to start off with is it's very important that excessive force were used ought to be punished. it should not be thought about, it should be punished and put before proper due process procedure needs to be processed and done in a fair way to all involved so that there is justice and ãbbut the one thing that i want to focus on in the chairman did a good job because it's very fair there's a lot of things that have happened in communities that raise a lot of concerns. on this committee they say how do we fix this there's officers
almost committee and i serve with and it ãis one of those that has done that but him in uniform and been out there. i com ed it as a different position.i think this is why we have this hearing today. i want to take it from a perspective i don't think anybody wants to see justice go unserved. i think the interesting perspective here is my perspective that there is no one that wants bad actors out of law enforcement more than law enforcement itself. and the son of a georgia state stripper. i made the joke before that i fought the law and the law won every time. six foot to 250 pounds in a blue and gray uniform with 357 on his hip and was a scrawny kid from gainesville, daddy loved us but he was in georgia he understood that and he would come home, and little kid that watched dad walked to work and when he would come home at night he would come in with his uniform torn, blood on his collar and how does that affect the eight-year-old nine-year-old kid?
my dad is a strong man. one of the interesting things i always found is when something would go wrong with an officer and we had an officer in georgia, a georgia state trooper who i knew personally and am tempted to call it a mistake, it's not, he committed a crime. he had a sexual encounter with someone in his custody and he is in jail. that's right. he was punished for it. what's even more amazing was my dad's reaction. my dad came home and he was upset, he was mad, i could tell it because the chairman talked about how this plays out in the police force, it played out at home. it played out because my dad come home and didn't talk about it. my dad was mad as he could be about somebody tarnishing the badge and the uniform that he
wore. when he was painted because of others, then it affects everybody. in a high risk, many times low reward areas. some of the things i would love to see us talk about, the thin blue line is a separation from order and chaos it should always be there. no one in our country should look at our police force and know this is what keeps us all safe no matter who we are or what our beliefs are what the color of our skin. it's what keeps us different than the rest of the world. a safe orderly police force that carries out our laws faithfully and execute them to the best of their ability.
because of pay, benefits, the issues of communities, i live in a rural community in north georgia, north georgia kids who live in some of my smaller counties go to work if they can with the sheriff's department but they are making an amount that they can go 40 miles down the road and doubled their salary. or if they can't make it to one of those they know they can go somewhere else and get a job no matter what their record is. as we come to this hearing today, it does need to be a hearing of what i will call the terrible acts. we need to acknowledge them and we need to admit that justice needs to be served. but there is nothing about this
hearing that the 98 or 99, whatever percent you want of those men and women who wake up every day with only one responsibility, taking care of their communities. taking care of the lives that they have and they want nothing more than these backpackers to go away so that they can do their job and when they laid her head down at night they know they've done their best, they want to be respected because they have done their job and not because somebody else's acted badly. when that happens then our law enforcement understands we respect them, we love them and we are going to help them where they need help when they see their dad or their mom upset because of their profession, they are calling is tarnished
by those who would tarnish it, justice must be swift, it must be firm and it must be fairly apply because if not, we lose who we are. we would not be who we are without our police force. we now need to help them make it better. with that i yield back. >> thank you gentlemen. without objection, all other opening statements will be included in the record. i want to note the jet lady from madison massachusetts ms. presley is here with us and we think are for attending. i will now introduce today's witnesses. gwen carr, the mother of eric garner who died during the course of his arrest by police officers. as a result of this tragic event she became a leading advocate for improving policing practices and currently facilitates the desktop today program to the nonprofit eri c eliminating racism and inequality collectively. she's here today to share her personal experience. ron davis, served as director
of the us department of justice community oriented policing services office from 2013 to 2017 in december 2014 he was appointed to serve as a direct executive director of the task force and 21st-century policing. prior to serving as cup director he was chief of police in east palo alto california for more than eight years and previously served 20 years of the oakland police department. doctor davis received his ba from southern illinois university included senior executive program at harvard university kennedy government. patrick yells, i hope it cannot separate captain patrick yells as a national president of the fraternal order of police. since 1984 he served in a variety of roles and st. charles sheriff's office in st. charles parish louisiana and currently the commander of special services department. in a bachelor of sizes from state university and associate of science from nichols state university. also a graduate of the fbi national academy. reverend al sharpton the founder and president of the
national action network national civil rights advocacy organization. he attended brooklyn college and received honorary doctorate divinity from bathroom cookman university virginia university mr. blake is here today to speak about his personal experience is with law enforcement. gina perkins has served more than 30 years in law enforcement and currently the chief of police for the fayetteville north carolina police department. she also serves as executive board member of the national organization of black law enforcement executives. received a bachelor of science from georgia state university and a master of science in john hopkins university. she is also a graduate of the fbi national associates
academy. ms. mcdonald received a ba from yale university or ma from claire college and jd from stanford university law school. philip and t for atif goff is the cofounder and president of the center for policing equity. also serves as the functional police equity john jay college of criminal justice. professor goff has written extensively in policing issues. he received his ab from harvard university in ma and phd and stanford university. finally, linda garcia is a
policing campaign director the leadership conference on civil and human rights. before joining the leadership conference ms. garcia which served as trial attorney in the special litigation section of the civil rights division and dein. do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury the testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge information and beliefs so help you god? >> you may be seated. let the record show the witnesses answered in the affirmative.please note each of your written statements will be entered into the record in its entirety. accordingly i ask you summarize your testimony in five minutes. to help you stay within that time there's a timing on your
table. but the light switches from green to yellow you have one minute to conclude your testimony. when the light turns red, signals here five minutes have expired. ms. gwen carr, you may begin. good morning. speak closely into the microphone. >> chairman nadler and members of the judiciary committee, i think you for having me this morning. my name is gwen carr, i'm the mother of eric garner. five years ago my beloved son eric was murdered by people who were supposed to serve and protect. on july 17 the nypd police officers approached my son, one of them put him in an illegal chokehold, eric cried out 11
times "i can't breathe", 11 times he said "i can't breathe" the officers that were on the scene that day didn't seem to care. eric died that day. there was a video that was captured the incident. including the chokehold and my sons cried saying that he couldn't breathe. this went viral around the world. so my thought is today, how come no one was held accountable no one was held in charge for my son's death. but not only the officer that murdered my son but all the officers who were on the scene need to stand accountable for his death that day. i would never forget that day in july. i got up that morning and spoke to eric, i spoke to him for about 10 minutes and afterwards
we said our goodbyes, he said i love you mom. i said i love you too eric. never knowing that would be our last and final conversation. my entire life was uprooted on that july day. i felt helpless in a dark place, scattered in millions of pieces. it is impossible to describe the pain that i felt that day. losing a child is just indescribable. having the burden of finding out exactly what happened to your child by the police who were responsible for his demise, how is a person supposed to get answers? who did she go to for help? most people can't even comprehend how difficult it is to suddenly lose a child and the fight for five years and
just get an ounce of accountability. it has impacted our lives in many devastating ways. almost 2 months ago i lost my husband. he was my partner in every sense of the word. he fought the long fight with me even though he wasn't in front of the cameras, he supported me and he really supported the cause. my granddaughter erica, she died december 17 of a heart attack. she was only 27 years old but when my son was murdered, she fought the good fight. she fought until she became
ill. i say she died of a broken heart. these are the wounds of the seen and unseen from the police brutality the loss of loved ones and no recourse, no accountability. the entire family is traumatized, each and every time we enter the courtroom or watch the officer responsible for my son's death get a pay raise or hear the department of justice saying they are not going to seek charges or when an officer who is the commanding officer of the person who was on the scene when my son was murdered that it was not a big deal that eric laid on the ground doa. i come before you today not only to share my son's story or the long quest of justice that we been seeking for five years,
but i urge you to take immediate action to apply the national standards toward policing. in 2015 i stood with representative hakeem jeffries as we introduced the bill that would make chokehold's illegal under federal civil rights law. once the bill is reintroduced, this season i call for you to support and vote for legislation. the excessive force used the excessive use of force prevention act of 2019, please vote for it. violent police have no place in this society. so like you said, mr. nadler, let's get them out of here.
no officer who is not there to do his job should be on the police force. again, i ask you, please please vote on this bill. >> ms. carr, thank you for your moving testimony. the committee understands how difficult this was for you and has agreed not to subject you to questions out of respect. we now invite you to join us for the remainder of the hearing in the front row if you so desire. ms. ãmr. davis. >> thank you mr. chairman, ranking member congress ãbi have the distinct honor of serving as director of the united states department of justice office of community and policing services and the obama administration. i also served as the executive director of personal double
president obama task force on 21st century policing. before my service in the administration i spent close to 30 years in local policing, 20 years in the great city of oakland california and eight years as police chief in the great city of east palo alto. my testimony is based on these perspectives as well as my perspective as a black man and a father of black children. first, as a 20 year police veteran i know firsthand the complex challenges and indignities nature of being a police officer. as a police chief have to tell a wife that her husband, one of my brave face officers were shot and killed in the line of duty. i lost friends and colleagues to suicide, a threat which is now growing at an exponential rate. i've also seen a lot of positive changes in policing and areas such as technology, crime reduction, diversity training and community policing. however, as a black man i know that despite these efforts, significant risk of disparity
still exists in our policing and criminal justice system. i do not believe the disparities exist because the profession is full of braces. i believe they exist because of structural racism. many of the systems and practices and policing that exist today were designed the 1950s and 60s to enforce discriminatory lars and impress black americans. we must acknowledge the history of policing in this country and the role police have played in enforcing discriminatory laws and continue to play through draconian discriminatory policing practices. i think it's fair to say that positive changes have started. especially for someone ãbwe
now know that these practices cause significant collateral damage and they did not work. what did work and hopefully other communities was policing and the use of evidence-based programs such as operation cease-fire and focused deter strategies. there will be those that argue that the tactics of the 90s did work and i guess it takes a lot of people to jail and to having statistical crime numbers go up and down for a couple months is success, then it work. in our democracy public safety is not just the absent of crime it must include the presence of justice and this idea taken from doctor king's quote on peace must serve as the foundation for how we evaluate all policing practices the american policing system is by
design sexualized and controlled locally so policing practices are accountable to local community values and their priorities. it's especially disheartening to hear the attorney ãbattack local mayors and prosecutors for their efforts to respond to their local community. it's also disheartening to hear people including those in this administration talk about how they support the men and women of law enforcement yet their actions do not practice rhetoric. don't tell me you support law enforcement and look to control police then threatened to take away grant funding and local police refused to enforce federal immigration laws. don't talk about cops having them resources necessary to do their job and go against the cop's office to hire and train more cops. do not demand community respect for law enforcement while advocating for the very policies you know will destroy that trust. i remind you that in new york it was first the officers and their union that was against stock question and frisk but implemented nonetheless and when it went bad, the officers were blamed.
no the justice department is advocating for return to those same types of policies, ignoring the lessons of the past while ignoring the voices from the field. once again, placing officers and the community in undependable for positions. that is why this hearing is so important, through its grant programs, technical assistance and civil rights enforcement the justice department can play a role to help the 16 to 18,000 police agencies of the united states. to make sure that weather department has four cops or 40,000 cops that there have access to the best policies and training and practices in the country. there's much the fellow government can do to help police and since i promise to give you a couple recommendations. the first recommendation is that we resend concessions memo and restore the ability for the civil rights department to conduct practice investigations. that we work collaboratively with local law enforcement and communities develop and implement new and innovative strategies to enhance public safety. but we restore funding to train officers and deputies and implicit bias and procedural
justice that we increase funding to the justice to expand capacity to conduct research and evaluate crime strategies. that we work with local prosecutors instead of criticizing them to reform the criminal justice system that we stand the efforts to develop strategies to enhance officer safety and wellness and we support the in all ãbas a black man and former cop i should be able to drive anywhere in this country and expect the same constitutional treatment it should not be dependent on how big the department is or how much money they have. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> chairman nadler, ranking member collins, distinguished members of the committee, i thank you for the opportunity to appear here today i can speak on behalf of the nearly 350,000 members a fraternal
order. my name is patrick yo is just over a month ago i was elected president of the national fraternal order of police. we are the nation's oldest and largest law enforcement organization my full testimony has been submitted for the record and with the chairman's permission i would like to summarize at this point. my profession is evolving. some of these changes are driven by technology, others by society, and of course by our own internal efforts to improve public safety and the services we provide to the communities. as a law enforcement officer i spent 35 years of my career answering calls for help. i'm here today to let you know that the fraternal order of police is ready to sit with anyone who generally wants to work collectively to help improve policing in this country, today we are calling on you for your help. law enforcement officers were once universally respected. parents were told their children if you need help find a police officer. this may no longer be true. recent events indicate that a growing percentage of the general public view officers
with suspicion and disdain. in far too many cases it's escalated to physical hostility.we are public servants we are not public anomalies. we live and raise our families in the same communities and are vested in the success of these communities. our jobs are becoming increasingly dangerous. ambush attack from law enforcement officers have been increasing. over the last eight years a recent study by the fbi concluded that many of these cases were motivated by the desire to hurt or kill a police officer. congress needs to act to reduce this type of target and violence by once again passing hr 1325 to protect and serve act introduced by representatives rutherford and demmings. chief, thank you. thank you for your steadfast support law enforcement. this would not make every attack on officer a federal crime. but what it will do is give the u.s. department of justice a tool in limited circumstances to fight back against targeted attacks like those that occurred in dallas texas and baton rouge louisiana and my home state. last year the committee passed the legislation unanimously.
in a house passed overwhelmingly to vote 382 ã 35. passing the legislation again would demonstrate that this house supports the men and women in law enforcement because right now we are feeling abandoned. these changes and attitudes are having an impact on our ability in our profession to retain and recruit the best and brightest. applications for positions in law enforcement have decreased this year by as much as 66 percent. leaving too many agencies short shifted and overworked. my organization is also working to improve we have engaged many of the organizations here today represented here today on issues of body cameras and improving law enforcement transparency while still protecting privacy rights.
some statistics suggest that a police officer will experience more traumatic events in a six-month period than an average person will experience in a lifetime. it can take a tremendous toll on a person's physical and mental well-being. first responders have five times more ptsd depression then a civilian. yet there is little has been done to address this in a number of police suicide seem to be grossly misunderstood reported.
in 2017 there were 140 officers took their own lives in contrast in that year 46 officers were fatally shot and killed in the line of duty. police officers run toward danger while most runaway. rather than cast them aside, we have a moral and, share responsibility to fix that what's been broken in our service our communities. the passage of legislation all ãbsupporting and treating of offices in crisis act also known as stoic will certainly help us grapple with this issue. finally, my profession must continue to work hard to build trust and respect for the communities we protect. there must be an open dialogue and willingness to build consensus. we cannot do it alone and i promise you the fraternal order of police will do its part. i think you for the opportunity to speak here today and i will be available for questions. >> thank you. rev. al sharpton. >> thank you chairman nadler and ranking member collins. as president of national network i've submitted my
testimony i would like to summarize it by saying that what we really seek is this committee to begin moving toward federal law and federal standards that would define clearly where the line is in terms of excessive force and take this argument from a state and local level to where there is a federal standard that all must abide by. what we've seen in the last several years is that in different cities where we are called in, in every case we have fought including the eric garner case and the cases we've submitted this morning, the mother of michael brown has submitted testimony from ferguson missouri, the mother of stephan clark submitted testimony. we have seen different counties react different ways. it reminds me of my study in the early cities of the 1960s
of the movement for civil rights until the federal government stepped in, they would have to fight state-by-state county by county against segregation. so it was the judgment of martin luther king jr. and others to appeal for federal government intervention rather than fight in alabama and then have to fight in georgia etc., etc. unless the federal government stepped in and deals with federal standards and federal laws, we will be subjected to the local politics and at the whims of local back and forward that could differ in another state. we need to have federal law that sets various unimpeded standards that would be ãwhat do i mean by that? federal government determines in several states several counties, several cities that they were going to place
certain police departments where the justice department would be over and supervise them because there was a pattern and practice that demonstrated excessive force. when this present administration came in, they immediately suspended that in several low cities. they had not been there long enough to make an investigation so what was the determination that made them decide that they would stop what had been determined by the justice department before them, after an investigation, this committee needs investigate why incoming attorney general sessions up ãbwithheld and removed this designation because it really sends the signal that we will allow practice to continue even though i justice department,
not national action network, not activist, but not black lives matter, the justice department said there was a pattern. i think we also must have certain standards when we talk about body cameras that they must be regulated where they can't cut the body came off. we must define what we look at a gwen carr, five years waiting in the decision from the federal government on whether charges would be brought. we read notices that the civil rights division wanted to charge but the locals didn't want to charge. for families that have to go through this, it shows how a nebulous and undefined the federal laws are. just as civil rights activists had to appeal to the federal government 50 years ago to
intervene and save us from states rights mentality, we need to rise above states rights mentality and law enforcement headset federal law. i'm hardly here the fop said they are willing to be at the table and in these discussions to see where there can be consensus because we do need consensus. let me repeat, when police are killed, we are standing firmly against that, ms. carr and i let a march 1 two police were killed.we are not anti-police, we are anti-police brutality but even when we stand up when police are killed, we have yet to see police unions stand up one time when one of their officers killed someone in the community unjustifiably. i'm not saying every policeman is wrong, the majority of them go out with many reasons to wonder whether they will come home and they protect all of us, but those that step outside the law must be punished and
the federal government must make that happen. this is not about anti-police, this is about upholding the law and no one should want get bad cops punished more than good cops whose names are smeared because people get to talk people on tape hearing 11 times "i can't breathe" and you got to go to five years of torment and finally be turned down and got to beg prey and march to just take his job. this is not what america should be about. the president and others can excuse it, i think it's on the congress to act. the president says ãbi hate cops, no i just dislike the >> thank you for this opportunity to speak here.
this is an extremely vulnerable and infuriating situation when i knew i had done nothing wrong and this is entirely abuse of power and intimidation. luckily for me, i made it out alive. what happened to me was unfortunate but could have easily been traffic with only minor changes. i was aware of the possibility as the news prior to this had been cases from alton sterling, terence crutcher, tamir wright, and the list goes on and on. those are tragedies that didn't need to happen. when i realized how common these occurrences were and still are and forced me into action i had to speak up to give voice to to those who didn't have that option. it was amazing to me as i was in new york after this incident occurred how many people came up to me with similar stories, where stories or repeated
incidents was written have the benefit to raise awareness or talk about the case on good morning america the next day. or meet with the mayor and police chief personally. i got the benefits because my previous career as an athlete unfairly aware that the video showing the attack clear as day made all the difference. before anyone was aware of the video the police murmur was already a damage control and stated they were investigating whether force was used and that i was only in cuffs for less than a minute. had it been no video it would been my word against the police.i think we all know how that goes no matter how credible the victim is. because there was a video and entirely back to my account of the incident there's public apology and meeting with the mayor and police chief. that gave me more responsibility to find a way to hold the city accountable. not all were able to have the benefit of video evidence and even with video evidence, too often family of deceased or undermined and not leave. as we tragically seen in the clear-cut cases including eric garner and ron smallwood police ãb accountability is an issue that strikes in there with me for this case. the state of this country and
right now is in a crisis with regard to the lack of police accountability. i'm confident there will be plenty of statistics and data to ãbi feel compelled to give my personal experience. i was attacked in broad daylight without it raising a hand or making any move to run. this was done by an officer already numerous complaints and even settlements for excessive force. this information was leaked to the press one in my opinion there should be national database public information for all officer abuse and brutality case. this led me to believe the solution should be determination from the nypd instead the hearing for discipline dragged out over nearly 2 years and lost five vacation days. one week of work. which i would've lost far more had i still ãball the while, still collecting a paycheck in the city of new york.
this gets at one of the serious problems i've seen.all consequences are based on past president. it's been set and at times police were placing themselves of the punishments were far too lenient. they let me know they could not and would not do that, my status would hinder any hope of getting that as it would look like preferential treatment for celebrity. i did not want preferential treatment i wanted justice and what was best for the city. i could a bit of a more appropriate case to set a new precedent was if this was what was supposed to be a deterrent, i cannot imagine to me this leaves blood on the hands of those in power that can do something to stop the abuses before they escalate. i'm just one example of the harm suffered by countless people at the hands of police in this country. there are numerous stories to remain untold until we know those stories it will be difficult to obtain police report. congress must require they collect data on all encounters congress must also advance
legislation. the pride act sponsored by congressman joaquin castro, these bills require reporting on law enforcement stocks researchers, use of force and other actions. i think about my encounter with the nypd and i think how lucky i was i had no flight or flight response.i think about those who weren't so lucky, eric garner was put on a chokehold by officer, that chokehold was band decades earlier but was still used. these acts can't change what happened to me they can't bring back walter scott or amari graham but they can hopefully make a difference in thwarting those kinds of situations before they happen and adding a
level of accountability if they do happen. thank you all for allowing me to use my voice to bring attention to possible solutions to save future lives and improve community and police relations. >> thank you very much chief huggins.>> committee chairman nadler, ranking member collins and members of the u.s. house of representatives committee on the judiciary. i bring greetings on behalf of the executive board and members of the national organization of black law enforcement executives noble. my name is gina hawkins and i'm the national treasurer of noble.and the chief of police for the fayetteville police department in fayetteville north carolina. it's an honor to be here to noble to provide written testimony on the topic of police oversight. noble has been at the forefront of promoting police accountability since the organization in session in 1976. our mission is to ensure equity and the administration of justice and the provisions of public service to all communities and to serve as the conscience of law enforcement by being committed to justice by action. law enforcement agencies and their leaders have a responsibility to ensure that
justice is administered fairly in all communities. noble member chiefs and sheriff hold ourselves and our agencies to high professional standard ensuring officers and communities we serve and protect our lives with a priority for everyone's safety. police are not perfect and we recognize the need to take steps to improve service, build trust in our communities and increase operational transparency. noble has been actively involved in national level discussions on the key areas of police accountability, use of force, and reducing gun violence. there has been universal recognition expressed by noble to the united states department of justice on the importance of maintaining a level of police accountability in the form of the previous model of the collaborative perform initiative or federal resources. law enforcement agencies that seek to improve their operation
used the nationally adopted blueprints for the 21st century policing and build trust and legitimacy with their communities should they afford the technical resources available for improvement without any punitive federal level recourse. agency leaders should also have access to high-quality policing professionals who can assist that agency with assessing areas for improvement and developing strategies to modernize their police operations and culture to best meet the needs of the 21st century policing as already outlined by the department of justice. as chief of the fayetteville police department, much predecessor use the technical assistance resources provided to the collaborative forum to help the agency develop a strategy to improving engagement at all levels of the department and particularly with community of color. our department did not shy away
from taking a close look at our training, traffic and pedestrian stock data and our citizen engagement to identify areas of improvement, today we are better informed and engaged in department because of the leadership that i and other noble leaders provide their agencies because we recognize the need to measure up to the expectation of our communities and ensure policing is a credible profession respected in our communities for being honest, trustworthy, fair to everyone we serve and protect. the federal government can play an important role in influencing local municipalities and their police agencies to address systemic issues that are adversely impacting their ability to protect and serve their communities. a key assumption that has been challenged by noble is that policing organizations can easily police themselves without the best practices and
following the nationally adopted blueprints for 21st century policing. as the data shows, it is very rare for the federal government to enforce a consent decree since 1997 there have only been 21 court enforced consent decree on law enforcement agencies compared to the over 18,000 agencies that serve our communities. moore's law enforcement agencies are filled with committed fair and honest men and women who put our police uniform on every day with the sole intent of keeping everyone safe. in the instant were deadly force is used, a third-party intervention could be beneficial in many states and even agencies have adopted policies that already implement this critical public trust component. the ultimate goal in police accountability is to strengthen trust and legitimacy between law enforcement and the community, a strong trustworthy legitimate agency can create a safer environment for law enforcement officers and the citizens of that community.
noble police chief and sheriff's provide law enforcement agency leadership to over half the largest cities in the nation. we are committed to effective community policing and holding our ac and officers to the highest standard in the policing profession. on behalf of the law enforcement leaders of noble, thank you for supporting law enforcement and our ability to maintain public safety while continuing to build strong relationships with our communities. our members stand ready to meet the needs of our diverse community, thank you again for this opportunity to provide testimony. >>. >> thank you chairman nadler, ranking member collins and committee members for the opportunity to speak today. my name is heather mcdonald, fellow and manhattan institute for policy research. since the 1990s felony crime in
the united states has dropped 50%. tens of thousands of lives the majority black and hispanic have been saved closing the life expectancy gap between whites and blacks by 17 percent. this crime drop with the result the policing revolution that began in new york city in 1994 and spread nationwide. upon taking office new york police commissioner william bratton dared something that few police chiefs have ever risked. he publicly set himself a target for crime reduction. bratton not only met his one year goal of 10%, he beat it with a crime decline of 12 percent the next year he upped the ante declaring the new york police department lower crime by 15 percent that years crime drop locked in at 16 percent. the idea that the police would take measurable responsibility for public safety was transformative. bratton accomplishes crime brought with three main strategies. timely information,
accountability, and proactive policing.deputy commissioner started demanding crime information in real time so that crime patterns could be addressed as they first broke out. top brass hold precinct commanders ruthlessly accountable for crime in their jurisdictions. and officers on the beat were asked to intervene proactively when they observed suspicious behavior. broken windows policing was a crucial aspect of this policing revolution. it addresses low-level social disorders such as loitering, unruly conduct and public drinking and drug use. broken windows policing is not just a crime strategy. it is a moral imperative. it's the hard-working law-abiding residents of high crime neighborhoods who seeks the police to address street disorder. go to any police community meeting in a high risk community and you'll hear the good people they are begged the police to get the drug dealers off the streets to clear the corners of rowdy use and
crackdown on loud music and illegal street parties. the residents know that it's out of such unchecked social disorder that more serious crime emerges. the 2015 quinnipiac poll found that 61 percent of black voters in new york city wanted the police to issue summonses or make arrests in their neighborhood for quality-of-life offenses compared to 59 percent of white voters. should the police ignore their voices because the activists say that broken windows policing is racist? we are also told we are living through an epidemic of racially biased police shootings of black men. this too is false. a study published this august in the proceedings of the national academy of sciences is just the latest research undercutting the media narrative about race and police shootings. if the rate of violent crime that determines police shootings the study found the more frequently officers encounter violent suspects from every given racial group the greater the chance that members
of that group will be shot by a police officer. in fact, black civilians are shot less compared to whites then their rates of violent crime would predict the study found. if there is a bias in police shootings it's against white civilians. the anti-police narrative deflects attention away from solving the real criminal justice problem which is high rates of black victimization. black die of homicide eight times the rate of whites. the homicide death rate for black males between the ages of 15 and 24 is 16 times higher than that of young white men. that is the civil rights problem that should most concern us. black victims are killed not by cops, not by whites, but by other blacks. blacks commit homicide nationally at eight times the rate of whites and hispanics combined.in 2017 there were nearly 8000 black homicide victims, more than all white and homicide victims combined,
only 2.8 percent of those black casualties the vast majority armed with gone or otherwise dangerous killed by a cop. the best solution to urban crime is to reconstruct the family. that's the long-term project, however. in the meantime, the policing revolution that began in new york in the 1990s and spread nationwide has given law-abiding residents of high crime communities greater freedom to take their children to school or go to the grocery store without fear and expectation that is the government's most fundamental obligation to meet.policing today is more professional and restrained then any time in its history. there is no government attempt agency more dedicated to the proposition that black lives matter than the police. thank you for your attention and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you doctor goff.
>>. >> thank you chairman nadler, distinguished members of the judiciary committee. i'm a professional nerd. i will also by disposition relatively conflict diverse person. but my love of country and respect for this body and mostly my vocation as a scientist will not allow me to move to my prepared remarks just yet. i feel i must at least correct the record on some statistical elements. the fall of crime over the course of the last quarter-century is abjectly not ãbin response to police behavior alone. if the members would like further reading on this i highly recommend pat sharkey's book uneasy peace which identifies quite clearly that community-based antiviolence work is a large and ãb
i believe that 2015 quinnipiac poll was just cited as evidence perhaps implying that black people actually like broken windows policing if memory serves that same poll showed that black people were concerned about racial bias within law enforcement, a trend that has escalated over that period of time since 2015. to suggest black people enjoy the treatment in new york or anyplace else, broken windows policing is what scholars weaver and hinton referred to as selective hearing. hearing only what is convenient to an ideological narrative and not the fullness of what those communities are calling for. which is safety and justice at the same time. surely not too high a bar for law enforcement. last in terms of clarification, a study in the proceedings national academy of sciences was just cited and i have to
say first of all, no, that's not what it said. most importantly, the authors of that study have recently acknowledged to the rest of the scientific community or to some members of the scientific community that their central causal claim is unsupported by the data and factually wrong. this committee hearing should not be of dumping ground ã >> we've heard a lot of witnesses and you are testifying now but essential cause of claim, could you just tell us which cause of claim you are refuting? what you're talking about? >> the study just cited by miss mcdonald the proceedings national academy of sciences does not show that white officers are less or more likely to be involved in deadly shootings. it simply does not. it's correlational study and the authors themselves have admitted to others in the scientific community that the central causal claim that they make, which is that there is no bias in this, is unsupported by the data that has been made public and have been publicly
analyzed by scholars like jonathan momo at princeton university. i do not like to be a part of anything where that becomes a laundromat for junk science for i apologize for stepping out of my character to say so. i would like to thank you for the privilege of being invited to testify. may i returned to my prepared remarks. in my day job a professor, i'm a nerd, ãb i'm likely best known for my work for the center policing equity. over the past decade i've had the pleasure of being president of center for police equity the largest research action of to focus on equity and policing in my testimony today is in that capacity.
cp is host to what is to our knowledge the largest collection of police behavioral data the national adjusted database funded by the u.s. national science foundation. today i've been asked to talk about what science has to say about public safety. so what is left to say? first as with all science it's important that we define the problem correctly. we speak only about the role that law enforcement has in keeping communities safe our conversations will never elevate about blaming people or communities for crime rates or violence. framing should be public safety, not just law enforcement. i cannot echo the comments mr. yost strongly enough, if we are talking about public safety both communities and law enforcement understand the officers that patrol these neighborhoods need to be of sound mind, they need to have the resources to make sure that mental health and officer wellness are central. having defined the problem as public safety, what are some solutions? the colleagues at cpe and the yellow justice collaboratory
recently articulated five policies rooted in science and practice called for by the large majority of our law enforcement partners that we believe have the best chance of the biggest returns and law enforcement reform. they are from the front to the back end of accountability and national model on policy for use of force similar to the one recently articulated by the camden police permit. previous research demonstrates this can reduce harm both by communities and officers not elevating risk. icm a lot of time because my impromptu remarks at the beginning. my of the five policies are also introduced into the record and i would encourage members to look at it, one last word, within the super long talk about data, they can support we move the conversation from data to analysis. i recently released ted talk this past september 9 we talked about an issue called constand for justice.
it's possible to measure crime and is mcdonald was quite right that comstock was a revolution in policing help reduce crime across the country. but you can measure not just racial disparities but the portion of those disparities for which law enforcement is responsible. importantly this initiative at cpe and somewhere else where were at the request of law enforcement. they walked to know and they want to lead on that. i would be remiss to find that out of here without saying that living with the impression there was already legislation that's been introduced that moves us forward obviously the ãb i look forward to your questions. >> him ms. garcia. >> chairman nadler, ranking member collins and members of the committee, my name is linda garcia i am the director of the policing campaign at the leadership conference education fund and the leadership conference civil and human rights. thank you for the opportunity to testify today and thank you chairman nadler for your leadership and calling this hearing to discuss policing back passages.
safety is civil and human rights with the watch site ãb yet in recent years the tragic incidents of police violence have deepened distrust in law enforcement and made people feel less safe. especially within communities of color. it's time to rethink antiquated approaches to public safety that rely on criminalization in which disproportionately affect black and brown people and failed to address public health issues. when police practices harm communities it sows mis-trounced and hinders community engagement. both are critical for realizing public safety. the federal government has a role and indeed a responsibility to promote the values of fairness, equity, procedural justice, transparency, and accountability within law enforcement agencies. however, the current administration has severely curtailed the department of justice's use of consent decree
to address police civil rights abuses. it all is also abandoned collaborative reform efforts of the office of community oriented policing services under which police departments voluntarily sought audits and recommendations to improve trust between the public and police. this does a disservice to the communities suffering from systemic misconduct and police officers who are left without the tools to police safely. high profile police shootings among armed black men and other incidents of police misconduct coupled with heavy enforcement of low-level offenses have eroded trust in law enforcement in many communities including those that are discriminated against on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, disability, proficiency with the english language, immigration status, and housing
status.where people perceive the criminal legal system to be arbitrary bias and unfair they are less likely to cooperate with police making us all less safe. in march 2019 the education fund launched a new era of public safety initiative and report to help build trust between communities and police departments restore confidence and reimagine a new paradigm of public safety. while much of the reform that's happened at the state and local levels success will require the leadership support and commitment of the federal government including you members of congress. every year congress provides millions of dollars to law enforcement agencies through federal grant programs to support police. this creates a duty for congress to conduct oversight to ensure that funds are not supporting police practices that harm public safety and erode community trust. additionally, this responsibility empowers congress to incentivize police department to adopt 21st-century best practices and community policing.to promote
transparency accountability and public safety leadership conference offers the following recommendations to the committee. prohibit discriminatory policing bypassing the end of racial and religious profiling act. mandate robust data collection. in the militarization of law enforcement agencies bypassing the stock militarizing law enforcement act. promote officer health and well-being by redirecting grant monies toward officer support programs and services. invest in nonpolice responses to crisis by expanding community-based mental health and substance use services.
you can provide the support and funding for jurisdictions to implement 21st-century policies and practices that are fair, safe, and effective. to realize this division of public safety communities and police department's must rebuild trust, the new era of public safety will require community driven solutions and investment in community services including education, housing, employment and healthcare. our coalition is committed to ensuring policing practices that respect the dignity and humanity of all people. we look forward to working with you until the day these reforms are signed into law. >> thank you very much. since one of our witnesses specifically commented on the testimony of another witness as we been asked by the minority if she can comment and i will grant 1.5 minute to miss macdonald purpose.
>> if i wanted to call a study in the proceedings of the national academy of sciences as junk science. the fact that it's correlational means that it's not a regression analysis, nevertheless, the findings remain accurate that the found no bison police shooting, this is a finding that's been supported by numerous other studies in a paper from 2017 harbor economist roland fryer found no evidence of racial discrimination in shootings, the most sophisticated lab study of police don't shoot decisions to date from the university of washington found officers were three times less likely to shoot unarmed black suspects and unarmed white suspects entered and took significantly longer to shoot. other don't shoot studies by the university of chicago josh correll and found no police bribes against black civilians. i submit that the belief we are
living through an epidemic of racially biased police shootings is a creation of selective reporting. in 2015 the same year for which the academy of national sciences report data came from the white victims of fatal police shootings 28-year-old driver in des moines iowa who exited his car and walked quickly toward an officer after a car chase and a 21-year-old suspect in a grocery store robbery in akron ohio who escaped on a bike did not remove his hand from his waistband when ordered to do so. had any of these victims been black the media and activist would have dumped. added their names to the room instead because they are white they are unknown. thank you for the opportunity. >> i think the i think the witnesses for their testimony.
we will proceed out of the five minute rule. i begin by recognizing my soul for five minutes. doctor gott. my first question would you you comment on we've heard on the evidence. >> i can say under my time none of that is true. the signing of the roland fryer study is a study that he's confessed to being embarrassed about. i should also clarify i believe the study you are talking about in terms of ãbwith an
infinite amount of time when you know you're being study for racial bias it turns out you can correct port. when you're under time pressure you have the harder time. that's why it didn't work through ãi should say that josh correll's research provided no racial bias. there's two forms of racial bias one is in the error rate and the other is in the terms of the length of time it takes. black suspects were shot more quickly white arm suspects were shot more slowly and was only the case that there was zero error weight for officers who'd been well trained newer officers has a rate of error that was as high if not higher than regular for civilians. all this is beside the point. the idea there is that bias is not a serious position when you look at the corpus of the science. where there is bias where there is bias and what the definition of bias is that's a worthy discussion. we've defined the racism and hearts of minds and we are looking at just the hearts and minds of officers you often do
not see it. i'm not saying because there's disparities on the street officers holding their heart defect of character. it's frequently not that but situation that produce desperate outcomes. we need to have a way to identify what the situations are. and then keep officers out of it. the way that you avoid that is don't put your car up next to someone you think is armed. you maintain a safe distance. the officers don't need to be bigoted in their hearts to have engaged in something that was detrimental at the pattern of detrimental findings toward black communities. as we defined that narrowly as the only problem we can't elevate to solving it.
the question of the science none of that was right to the question of how we move forward we should define the problem worse precisely. we are not debating whether officers are good or bad people. him reverend sharpton you have experience representing ãbcan you describe your process for filing and pursuing this conduct campaigns. >> i think the process begins first of all national action network never gets involved in unless we are asked. the first part is to try and pursue what the local authorities to convene a grand jury to deal with the possible criminality of the act. whatever resources we can and whatever help we can because they been traumatized.
i think they promise of fighting is one against those that may discriminate but also against. we are willing to fight for whites that are victims of excessive force. there was an orthodox jewish young man killed by police in new york named gideon bush, we went out and supported him. i'm here for white people and black people and any other people that are victims of excessive force.we talk about consent decree and body cameras, when we talk about the things we've said today, mr. chairman, were not talking about for blacks only, police ought not violate anybody's civil rights. i think that's what's
important. >> in your testimony can be remote command the sessions memo be rescinded. can you describe the sessions memo and describe its effects on policing practices and why it should be rescinded. the memo stopped the volunteer organization chief hawkins talked about in fayetteville. the impact of not having counter practice investigation not having organizational assessment means the departments cannot learn what's happening in their own organization. there is no transparency, you can't do an internal review or assessment and in many cases the agencies ask for the review.in fact, not only was the memo side that curtailed the activity there were at least four or five reports completed as i ended my
administration with president obama that they failed to raise these. we will not offer report that's critical to law enforcement is a disservice to law enforcement. when you talk to chiefs around the country they want to know what's inside the organization what's working, what's not working and to do so. the last thing i would make about the consent decree. people pick about the consent decree as a detriment to policing on attack on the officers. to make sure officers have the training and equipments are held accountable those 27 to current dissent decrees have serve as the foundation for
thousands of agencies to voluntarily 16,000 agencies in the united states and the average smaller than 100,000 officers. they do not have the capacity to do research and development and understand what's happening in the industry. we need to have national coherence national back practices and the countability. >> my time is expired the gentleman from georgia mr. collins. we had to put money back in this year because it was getting stripped out.
i consider crazily enough a nerd on the panel appear because i believe fax matters. we can deal on a motion all day long but let's hit some things. the one thing i'm seeing a lot of we hear this from smaller forces. you represent the national organization had we come to visit groups without national here's how you do it and leading it to states with how you come up with the system where we are better reporting i'm sure you as chief want the bad ones out now. how do we do that to give the smaller forces, the four-man forces, five-man forces. the big ones always get it. there's an underlying current
we don't talk about. how can we do this through the national organization to help police chiefs, police commissioners others in just a sheriff's get a better quality you can't be all money because we are all dealing with budgets. how do we do that? i would love to hear your comments. as i mentioned in the testimony, all agencies and all departments need to have the ability to ask for assistance in examples like the collaborative reform to be able to ask the question or ask another professional who figured out some things and provide resources. that's noble stands in regards to how we can go make the request to do best practices. smaller ac might not have resources but can make a phone call to the national
organizations. we share information consistently we can get some guidelines and that's what we need. >> i think the two of you were here on conditions of rubber hits the road. i'm concerned that not only credit but how much are we seeing this, i need a new officer i want to get rid of this one and see how you do? he's a good guy. click. we are missing this, is there any way we can look at that what georgia did and what north carolina says as well is clarification when any both certifications outline why they left and what's going on for the next organization. well aware of what the issues going on and why they been released. >> in georgia we've seen the
hip-hop one job to the next. ... i can tell you my experiences in law enforcement from agency to agency, every agency does and extensive background as determined the liability and every thing else associated with it. it determines that follow the officer in the certification within the state. most party, every state has its own standards, that are all based on the same criteria -- >> want to stop you, let's peel the onion back a little bit. that is the way it's supposed to happen. we also know if you're down to officers, it's harder sometimes,
you're tempted to hire the person who's already certified and don't have to send them to school or pay for the schooling, i get them and now and yeah they may have had a little bit, a police chief, but i know what the story is, the question, how does that sink down to the department that does not have the resources to do that and under pressure to keep up. >> i can only speak as a leader, as a police chief that there is no standard that will weigh out the need to have someone qualify and someone who will represent me because basically when i hire someone in all the backward investigations -- >> y'all have standards, that's why were all asking the question, and the bigger picture, we don't just look at the bigger picture and just discuss the problems, these are the real nuts and both issue, you have to find the mentality,
there's a temperament to a police officer, there is a temperament to this. because you have to take it into account, eat everything and still diverted fairly. a lot more stuff we can discuss, i am glad we're here. did your department use body cameras? >> yes, sir. >> have you ever had a call issue with storage or not? >> of course her. >> standard practice, you have a small community and that's a ton of stuff right there. and i do appreciate your intelligence overtime. i go back. >> the gentle lady from texas. >> thank you, mr. chairman for this hearing and let me say to all the witnesses, every aspect of your testimony is vital to construct that we in the judiciary committee now feel is long overdue as a policing agenda that acknowledges the basic facts that every human
being deserves to go home to the family. and i hope that is the most striking point into our friends in law enforcement, you are no more diminished to our right, you are no more diminished than air gardener who has his loving member said he was a son, father of six and a grandfather. maybe there is a grandchild now that he has missed is been added to this wonderful family. and i hope we do not have to take a witness test to tell you all of our friends in law enforcement, all of her neighbors, all of the press, the time in dallas when those officers fell in their duty. or the funerals and i've gone to to the men women and blue. but we won't get together if we fall into the divide of the
emerging white nationalism and white supremacy and to be artist separated from each other. i'm going to ask these questions to get us to the point that we can resolve this. president, your predecessor chuck committed rookie with the congress to ensure data collection and reporting on please community encounter. can you make the same commitment by ensuring police departments will comply with the custody reporting law and will you work with us in congress with advanced legislation, the law enforcement agenda that would require data collection and also into racial profiling. >> we are very much committed to data collection. it is valuable information for us to know how to move forward, how to police properly. in the ability to collect the available now.
and it's something that we can readily put her hands on and help us move in the right direction. one concern that we do have smaller agencies in the capacity to collect the data. in our concern would be agencies that are small having to collect that data may in essence affect their ability to be able to police. >> so to respond to that, the important thing is the collection of data needs to not be tied to any funding or anything like that because that is counterproductive. >> to believe law enforcement should not engage in racial profile? >> it's unconstitutional. i absolutely agree. >> so any legislation that would make the simple point you could take back and support? >> i think the constitution is clear is illegal and already there and exist. >> so with a have legislation that provides grant an opportunity to ensure that does not happen? >> it's unconstitutional the law
is already spoken. >> i take that as a yes and i thank you for that. let me ask the question to mr. blake, were speechless but were also speechless for the lives names that recall. you are racially profiled and you have encountered a language, or as tuning was or anything of the sort. >> i had that my open remarks but i did not have a response, if you watch a video closely which we don't need to do again, i was actually smiling do to my previous under the misguided opinion that this may have been someone coming to give me a hug or fan in some regard and i found myself extremely lucky because i thought of what could possibly happen had i thought this is someone coming to do me harm and after speaking to many officers i asked him what would happen if i would put my arms up
and made an effort to fight or a brother or my best friends was only my wife and had acted in anyway. >> you are a man of color standing in front of a prominent hotel in downtown manhattan. >> right outside of grand central station. >> racial profiling among initiatives. >> yes, absolutely. >> can i ask doctor goff, that we respect all the witnesses and thank ms. garcia for indicating black and brown women and other individuals who may be profiled in different ways. but when we have statistics, and i want reverend to answer this as well that indicates a higher number of african-americans that are killed by law enforcement, i think the point i want to distinguish is his whole question that comes back about black on black crime, what i hope it will pass hr 40 and the
reparations so we can address the issue and the impact of slavery. as it relates to the biased of all the block people kill themselves and make the distinction of color of law. we're talking about democracy, the response so the difference of law enforcement is gained in the lights of tamia rice and walter scott and michael brown and air gardener, the color of law. >> the general ladies time is expired and the witness may answer the question. >> thank you for the question. it is different because it feels different for the community. there is a difference between a neighbor who is violent and obviously it is scary when the state says it's okay and we see that both in the responses from
communities and in responses to law enforcement. one of the things you mention and i will put a point on this, the idea of black on black crime is in response to the idea that that's the reason why law enforcement is desperately using force and black communities. as distasteful as that may seem it's a statistical question, and maybe the car you are driving. there's no bias in law enforcement, it's an intimate question as well. and there's not a study that takes into account violent or otherwise, school achievement, housing inequality that yields anything other than those elements, crime and poverty cannot describe racial disparities. we should distinguish the two. >> i concur with doctor goff as i would also say when directed we have campaign against op and frisco new york saint was
discriminatory in the newer ministration came in and we boosted down to nothing, crime went down. crime is at an all-time low. i am not a nerd but i can read and write. crime went down with stop and frisk gone. and i think we need to be very clear about that. and as far as black on black crime, any community most people are the victim of the same race. the problem in the black community is we have fear of cops and robbers. >> the general ladies time is expired, the gentleman from a while. >> thank you, mr. chairman and i want to thank the witnesses for coming here today. we appreciate it. earlier this year we held a hearing on universal background checks in a few weeks ago this committee we held a red flag legislation and as i understand that the committee will hold a hearing on assault what bins in urban areas and while i
appreciate the majority focus. i think their efforts are misdirected, for buried under believer of the second moment rights and the laws that are proposed by the majority and unfortunately it would do little more than restrict the rights of a hard-working law-abiding going under gun owners. intensive focus on remedies which sound good but woody done little to stop the attacks that we seen occur in this nation and unfortunately i'm afraid we do little to do anything about future attacks that might occur. we need to work together that we can make americans safer. period you are the national president of the fop the
fraternal police is that correct? >> i want to thank you for being here and for representing the men and women across america who keep us all safe and thank you for that. in my home state of ohio, is a priority that those who should not have firearms cannot get access to those firearms and that's what we ought to work on guns should not be in the wrong hands. one way that this can be accomplished is to ensure the national instant criminal background check system is accurate, up-to-date, checked before the firearm really works. would you agree with the customer. >> i think everyone in law enforcement will share the same opinion that we would like to take guns out of the hands of people who mean harm who would rather fix it rather than to
explain white happen. and certainly were in favor of any process with a greater ability to do that. in the concern should be, it should have a stronger process to work through the issues. >> thank you. from sure you're familiar with the protection technology out there and including my city in cincinnati is currently using at the federal level, i would say we should try to help cities and counties invest in that technology to help reduce gun violence and is a technology where you have microphones or soundwave equipment who can identify very quickly where the shooting has taken place and he can quickly stop something will happen after criminal and pickup
casings from the gun has that been fired. you have an opinion? >> my opinion, the law enforcement officers have a very difficult job and any tools we can give them more effectively and efficiently doing their jobs should absolutely be a priority. effectiveness to respond accurately in times of very stressful or tense situations could be a matter of life and death. any tools we have available absolutely should be explored and made available. >> also, some of our most highly trained individuals about how to handle an active shooter situation whether in a school or place of worship, our law enforcement people are the highly trained people in our society, they tend to retire after 25 years or maybe in the 50s and often time seeking other employment.
it would seem that you have a source of trained people as school resource officers in the schools, do you have an opinion and have you thought about that? crymac rice served as a resource officer for several years working in the schools interacting with youth and changing attitudes toward full enforcement. i absolutely agree that it plays a pivotal role in my agency we started long before it became a trend across the country recognizing it was important to protect the safety of children in schools. and if you have a safe school environment you have learning occur. so i absolutely totally agree there are definitely positive elements to resource officers and that's the reason why across the country.
the ability to include other people into protecting schools, any effort we do to protect schools and protect the security within schools is well worth it. >> my time is expired but i want to think the committee and hope that we can work together to keep the market people safe as possible. >> we will certainly do our best to do that, and i think the gentleman. the gentleman from tennessee. >> thank you, mr. chair. i am deeply concerned about the crisis of law enforcement and communities that they serve in this is true in my home city of memphis unfortunately because were not a stranger to the issue. from my perspective there are several things we can do in congress. i've introduced bills to address many of these issues. one will be a way we can use technology to improve interactions. police camera act h.r.1 20 for state and local jurisdictions to purchase cameras for the officers. and we also need to collect data technology to be useful about
policing practice and as responsible and that's national statistics on deadly force transparency after 2019 h.r.1 19. and communities need to be safe as they are accountable for the actions and nobody is above the law. to shame the department of justice which is been effective in the past and step back from providing independent review and police practices. along with the police training and independent review act h.r.1 25 in a would like to introduce a letter of support for the act of the naacp of june of 2019. >> without objection. >> thank you's are. >> i would like to asked chief hawkins what our bill would do too have sensitivity it was a the law enforcement agency would determine if there should be a grand jury in determining a prosecution in a should come
from the jurisdiction other than that which the long person came. in my experience, i started my professional life after law school for the attorney police for memphis. there's no question as home cooking, many people from law enforcement going work as investigators for the da and it's almost like a farm team. so from my perspective, you can have absolute independence if the da has to go to the grand jury and if the d8 indicts a policeman and get him indicted in the places we saw in new york, i don't know if is a gardener case or the other one but the police went out against the da, they protested. >> are you saying change jurisdiction? >> yes, sir. >> you think that's a good idea? >> yes that gives an unbiased ability to gai gauge the facts f the case and get review of it. >> mr. davis give any thought of that concept?
>> two recommendations the 21st century policing, the investigation should be an investigation by the department not overseeing the officer who's involved in the shooting. >> is different total law enforcement agencies. >> my eye as a detective don't have to interview or investigate somebody worked with for 20 years. the second part, as prosecutors and police work together on a daily basis and the things that you see that you do not go outside the jurisdiction as well seeking of separate jurisdiction and look at the prosecution and i would agree, the level of independence is important to trust in the process that people think is so designed to benefit the officer that we need that. >> i'm going to take a long shot, you're not supposed to answer question when you don't have the interest, i appreciate your position and am a former
icp person but i do not see the benefit that that my gift to law enforcement as ever but he also sees as a first shake. >> i tell you that i think the collaborative effort on a local level which all agencies are based on local jurisdiction that that should be the very first part of reviewing any systemic part under problems in the process within each state of how they handle and we support those positions taken within the states to investigate crimes. >> thank you's are. >> later this week i will introduce a deadly force independent review act which provided when a federal law enforcement officer uses deadly force. i think that will help too. >> what do you think of the most reforms that we could take up to try to cure these problems, what works best i think what we need is clear legislation on where the police are to be dealing
with the federal chargers and excessive force, what raises to the bar of a federal crime, it is to nebulous now. secondly we would have measures in lights, cameras on playset cannot be turned off and when consent by the justice department they remain even if her ministrations changed that they remain. and that we have constant reviews for the justice department with the department on policing around the country particularly looking for practices. i think if we start with legislation, not just with programs but with legislation so police another countable legislatively not just on the local and state level which is what had to happen with voting
and other things in the civil rights era. >> thank you, sir, you'll back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from texas. >> thank you, mr. chairman i appreciate all the witnesses being here. and i appreciate the comments, if you have someone who's not bigoted or prejudiced against the person that they are pursuing her investigating and support the attorney general custom the independent reviewed the investigation and determinations made peter strzok at least the page obviously hates president trump but i was concerned about the exchange at the golf, offer for the record from th de ans and disparities
involved shootings, i did not know that would be made part of the record. >> without objection. >> and i had a couple articles about the truth from city journal summer of 1999 from august 31, 2000 manhattan institute for those at the record. >> without objection. >> in looking at this that my staff just brought me from the study ms. mcdonald references, i don't know the statistics underlying this, i'm just reading from the results, we find no evidence of any black or hispanics disparities across shootings and white officers are
not likely to shoot minority civilians the nonwhite officers and said race specific crimes strongly predicts civilian race, this increasing diversity among officers by itself is unlikely to reduce racial disparity i and police shootings. i don't know the underlying statistics but that's what it says. but, through my days as a prosecutor would but standing
outside the door to threaten to kill the people that you're with. knowing that person has an arsenal, and you're about to go in his home, and officers all around the country do that each day and put their lives at risk so that others hopefully do not end up killed and as a judge, i acknowledge not all officers are very gun virtue. but it seemed to me when i dealt with is a lower percentage of bad apples and law enforcement than in the general population. but one of the things that they said earlier about the family, i'll never forget testimony of a gang leader convicted of murder, his attorney advised him not to testify, but he refused the sentencings and took the stand
and made it very clear, i'm not following miller's instructions, i cannot sit there anymore, i sat through the whole trial and listening to people talk badly about my gang, he was a gang leader. he killed a guy. and he said i am sick of it. that is my family. i don't know my father, my mother is never around, that is my family and i cannot sit still and say something about people bad mouthing my family. and boy that comes home. he never knew his father, he never had a mother that was around, i cannot help but think if he had had one or both of those, he would not end up in my courtroom having a jury's and some to life in prison. so there were a lot of things we need to look at and i appreciate the effort of everybody trying to get back to more stability
but i hope we don't overlook the importance of the family and what it used to be in america. i appreciate your time, i read your statements and thank you for going to the trouble to be here. i go back. >> the gentleman from georgia. >> thank you, mr. chairman for holding this hearing and i want to thank each of the witnesses for the testimony, let me begin by saying the men and women who serve in law enforcement in this country are for the most part brave, beautiful, honorable and they keep us safe. that is not a question for debate. however, it is undeniable that there is an epidemic of police shootings of unarmed civilians in her country and by failing to recognize that we are contributing to the problem.
i want to point out the fact that i believe that plea should be accountable just as the citizens who they seek to hold accountable. so that means justice citizens have to be questioned by police after an incident happens, why should it be the police are protected from having to answer questions from law enforcement agencies when they have been involved in a police shooting, when they have killed somebody or killed someone to death. why should they have a week of a fight with the legal right to not be question about what happened because they have it in their employment agreement in their bargaining agreement. these kinds of rules that insulate police from accountability need to be removed from our practice and that's why i'm going to be filing the cool off.
elimination pack so we can make sure police officers are treated the same way citizens suspects are treated. with respect to investigating police misconduct, what happens is the same agency that employs them is the one that does the investigation, the same prosecution that would prosecute the case is the one that presents a case to a grand jury if it ever gets to that point but it usually takes in many cases years before it gets to that point in its letting the public to sleep and then you announce with regularity that there would be no prosecution into alleviate that and the terms of congress, i have the grand jury reformat, to cause
for a law enforcement authority. that would assume authority and also an independent would be appointed by the government to reside over these investigations and the result would have to be suited to a judge in open court, nonot a grand jury, and open cot for a preliminary hearing and that would be the way that these cases are disposed of and in the event that a jurisdiction declined to prosecute an officer for what might be an obvious offense like the eric garner situation live in on camera choked the man to death, why
should the federal government be able to prosecute for murder in that way you bring about accountability when police officers are held accountable it sends a strong message to others that they need to conform their conduct to society's norm and i look forward on the grand jury reform act in the place accountability act in the cool off. act. let me lastly say, a lot of our law enforcement officers are straight from the military and when they went to the military as youngman they were trained in terms of what instinct they should have, here is mad dogmatics, he got his nickname because he said it was during a training session that he told his marines to be polite,
professional but have a plan to kill everybody that you meet and he said a good soldier follows orders but a true warrior wears his enemy skin like a poncho. that is the military going into battle and when you have a police officer that is been trained in that way, it is hard when the police officer gets trained to be a police officer to put aside the instinct that has been bred into them and put into operation suddenly a protected serve mentality. we have a lot of local law enforcement who are military veterans and also national guardsmen who are trained to kill and occupy and destroy in roaming our streets in the more police officers that die every year of suicide than they do from being killed in the line of
duty. so are police officers are under a lot of stress out there, it plays out in terms of their reactions to situations, their overreactions and people of color are predominantly the victims of that. so i think we need to take a comprehensive view of mental health as apply to the law enforcement officers and with that, iran out of time and they will have a chance to ask for feedback but i want everyone to think about that carefully. let's work on the issue. >> gentleman yields back. >> i would like to briefly address the memories of the audience in the hearing room today. we welcome you and respect your right to be here. we ask in turn for your respect as we proceed of the business of
the committee today. and the intention of the committee to proceed with this hearing against the rules for the applause or for that matter negative applause or disruption of any kind. the gentleman from florida. >> thank you, mr. chairman and reverend sharpton, your current coworker is my former congressman and when he served in the congress, he had quite a bit to say about your contribution, it was 106 congress that he filed the house resolution 270 entitled condemning the racist and anti-semitic views of all sharpton. the revolution began by saying the reverend al sharpton has referred to the jewish faith as bloodsucking jews and jew pastors. does mr. assertion that you said those things or is it not true. >> they are untrue. i never said that you can finish
razor -- >> no it's actually my time. >> i thought you raised the question. >> cannot answer the question. >> since the question was asked on the witness -- >> you asked the truth and i said that. >> i can reclaim my time. >> the witness will be permitted to answer. >> you asked me whether that was true, no that was not true, and as you know we were very close and i think he's a great guy and we do each other shows often. >> the gentleman and the timekeeper will add 30 seconds to his time. >> and parliamentary inquiry. >> is it appropriate for a member of the body to personally
attack a witness before the body? >> or shall i say, can a congressman's word be taken down in the event that he cast aversions on a witness. >> we ask everyone to adhere to rules of the quorum with the gentleman will proceed. >> thank you mr. tolman, the reverend al sharpton has referred as white interlopers
and diamond merchants. have you ever referred to jewish faiths as that? >> no, sir, i refer to one in harlem, an individual but i did not know he was jewish and said i should never refer to his race. i said i was against those. we were boycotting those selling diamonds in south africa. >> and allowed to finish? smack u.s. to question and i'm answering. >> i have a few more answers. >> i can't wait. >> apparently you do because you don't want me too answer. >> i also talked -- [inaudible] >> everyone will suspend. the general lady will state a
parliamentary. >> this is a statement, is it appropriate for a member to do a constant attire rate of attacking the witness and then not allowing the witness to answer? >> that is not my personal opinion, that is not proper but thus not a parliamentary. >> the general controls the time. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the reverend al sharpton led a protest in the crown heights neighborhood and marched next to protester with a sign that read the white man is the double. did you marched next to a sign that said that? >> i watched many things where there were signs where i did or did not agree with and i would say if i was aware of that i would have not want to have that site. >> then you should not ask me questions if you don't want an answer. >> you could say yes or no. >> i cannot answer yes or no.
>> the witness is disrupted. >> first of all this has nothing to do with policing. >> if he wants to make the subject of joe and i, we are not members of the police department or have anything to do with it but i'm loving to engage if he lets me finish. >> it's a matter of opinion. the gentleman controls the time. >> 's are not going to restore my time? >> the reverend al sharpton had violence, riots and murder in the crown heights section of brooklyn, do you agree or disagree? >> the new york state did extensive study on the crown heights riots and that was not be in until there was death. i was not called by the family
until the day after. we had nothing to do, when i came to crown heights i led the first nonviolent march. >> have you refer to african-american to disagree with you as negroes. >> i have. >> have you ever referred to african-americans -- >> have a parliamentary inquiry. >> if a. >> does violate any rules of court room to read specifically verbatim from a document filed in the congressional records as a resolution?
>> the german from florida may proceed. >> have you refer to african-americans who disagree as yellow and then the inward. >> i don't know that, i have referred to people's names but i don't know if it's because they disagree with me, but i have said things about boxing like, and not only tax whites, have you ever referred to african-americans the disagree as negro militants? >> i did not know that was a derogatory statement. >> i did not say was. >> i don't recall. >> if the jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their llama because back and come over to my house. >> there was a man who is charged with terrorist acts and activist in new jersey you
cannot disrespect a witness and ask a witness under question and tell him he cannot answer. >> you are welcome to answer. [inaudible] i think of trying to answer your last question. >> the time has expired and the witness may answer a question. >> he may answer the question, the gentleman's time is expired.
>> a question that he raised what i was saying, was clearly i disagree with blacks and whites, i use the language graphically sometimes do so some of which i've grown beyond but none of which shows anything other than i'm an equal opportunity attacker and i'm glad that joe and i are equal opportunity attackers that work together. >> isp records for unanimous consent request. >> icq nano must consent for the resolution. >> i object. >> the gentleman from georgia is recognized. >> mr. chairman i have a motion. >> the addition is over. just checking.
mr. chairman how did we just waste five minutes had nothing to do with the subject how we make our community safer for black and white. how to make our officer safer. i want to start with him who is in my district and represent fraternal order of police. we messe met with fraternal ordf police and i thought we had a good meeting. but what i want to ask, on the record, we come together, those recommendations from the 21st century policing model, those of the booktv are behind, can you submit to us the recommendations the wonder for, against a neutral on so we will know where there is common ground and i think noble has adopted the entire report. if you could give us that then at least we know where the two
law-enforcement groups stand on the policing recommendation. >> i can forward that information to you, it is documented and prepared and i can send it we can make part of the record. second, doctor goff ric has recommendations, there are five recommendations, if you can look at those recommendations and get us your position on those five that would be very helpful. second, part of your testament, you talk about making it a federal offense to target law enforcement officers. which i agree with, you use this as an example dallas and baton rouge in baton rouge is very personal to us, what i want to point out, that is not necessarily apples to apples when you talk about community police relations.
that and rouge with citizens, domestic terrorist organization and they target police officers. so that has a lot less to do with community relationships with the police. i did not want it to seem that way. but since you did meant to mention baton rouge, i will point to next door to st. john parish where we lost two officers into were ambushed, the thing that both of those incidents have in common, defines the loss of multiple police officers, they were outgunned b by the perpetrator. they both had air fifteens. so when we mentioned assault weapons were the police outgunned by the perpetrator? >> sir thank you for bringing up brandon nielsen and jeremy trish, both were friends of mine and incident that occurred ten or 15 minutes from my house. i'm very much familiar with it.
and i would say absolutely they were armed with weapons and the officers were not prepared for what happened. in the baton rouge incident was also an air 15. so when we talk about assault weapons, we are talking about weapons of mass distraction and if they have a place on the street in a civilized community. and i will not put you on record whether you're for or against assault weapons but i would like to ask you, are you troubled by the fact that ordinary citizens are more equipped and more weapon iced than the police officers in the incidents? >> is a law enforcement officer i'm very much concerned about our ability and safety of the officers. >> the other thing i would point to, the mentality that we have in terms of police, we have a
more mentality and a guardian mentality, you are rewarded in terms of how many stops you make, how many tickets you issue, how many summons you give out. which encourages that mindset in the guardian mentality is how often you engage with citizens, so in the setting, my time is going to run out and i hope you comment. let's take the sterling case as an example, he sold dvds outside the same-store for years, so when there is a call to police officers to come check on what he is doing whether he may or may not have a weapon, where is the breakdown in community policing that the police never responded to that and does not know who he is? if you're the same person affronted the same-store, the please officer will never get a drink from those community stores, where is the breakdown, i've tried to
understand why did the police not already have a relationship with a guy who has a business set up in front of another business for years. if you can incident in terms of community policing and guardian relationship versus warrior. i yield back the rest of my ti time. >> in regards to the guardian and warrior mentality. the way that you described it, i believe it's false, i don't believe in that, i believe in the citizen that i am of my community. i am a mother, i will be a warrior of 70 comes from a family in that aspect, law enforcement are warriors and protecting the community, that's what we trained for and prepare for. if were outgunned and have better tactics but the minds of the guardians was there because were protective and having community policing is more than just a notion, except asked him knowing everyone that is selling
anything in the community whether be ice cream or a teacher. that comes with a lot of work or effort in the action and proactive discussion. in addressing all the biased and theories that you may have in your mind personally in training and acknowledging the fact that you might personally have some type of belief but when we address and have toxic discussions with her community members and bring out hard-core discussions, then we get past this. i believe personally there is the ability to have a warrior guarding a mindset that works together. >> the gentleman's time has expired. all consideration i will withdraw my previous objection that the document will be entered into the record. >> i yield to the gentleman to
the florida mr. gates. >> the contentment for yielding. reverend muir cited in the washington examiner piece jul july 30, 2019 of saying, if the jews want to get it on, tell them to pin the honor because back and get over to my house. in response to my question you said you were referring to one person. here is my limited question, were you misquoted in the story when you say the jews and them referring to a plural group of people rather than one person you had agreements with. >> am i allowed to answer? >> we know your name go ahead and answer. >> i was referring to an incident and a threat to come to my home into the homes of others
how you examine, i'm not looking at it so i do not know whether they quoted me or not. i do know what i said and who i refer to. >> did you say them? >> i just said i'm not looking at the statement, you are talking about a situation that happened in 1991. if i said them, the over those, i don't know. i know the incident and i know what i was referring to in a man threatening to come down who had that kind of criminal record and i had two young children under five years old. >> again let me talk. >> is it your belief -- >> if i said them or not without help the police? >> i think it's significant with nobody wants to preach to us -- [inaudible]
>> the gentleman will say his point. >> i don't believe you talk about the people becoming before you. >> the gentleman will suspend and make the polyp enter inquiry. >> when a witness is asked the question in a hearing before the judiciary committee, to the rules provide the witnesses permitted to answer the question? >> the witness is permitted to answer the question. >> the member can controls the time. >> if it suited to his satisfaction he may go on to another question. >> when a witness is attempting to answer the question, is it the rules of this committee of that the witness be allowed to answer the question and is also in the quorum of this committee to not badger the witness if it the witnesses attempted to answer the question. >> two answers, the member controls the time, if the member thinks of the question has been
answered to the satisfaction he may cut off the engine go to a further question. however, it is not permitted to badger the witness. we do afford numbers considerable attitude and witnesses federally inappropriatand.house rules reqm and i will do so. the judgment controls the time. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i believe in fighting, well fight then, eight nobody holding you, all off the man, well off him, plenty of crackers running around here tonight. >> i do not recall saying i will not march. i think for the last 40 years i have marched.
i think you are referring to when i was dealing with people that said that they do not want to march and they are going to off people and i said there's plenty of people walking around and they called the name that they're not offering anybody because they were trying to disrupt -- so in the context i was quoting as i said the reference made about the march. >> the greek home was ever got around to it? did you say that? two i talked about how we dealt with astrology as well as mathematics and philosophy and religion in africa. >> but you referred to people as greek homeowners. >> i do not recall how i refer to anyone.
>> you said your bigoted statements in 1991 are inexcusable? >> i think any statement that i made that was wrong and that i clearly said we should not make bigoted statements including me. i also think -- [inaudible] when you call three homos and you talk about white crackers those of bigoted statements. >> i made it clear that i was quoting, yelling and getting upset is unique and you should calm down. >> the gentleman will state his calpoint of order. >> once again mr. chairman, after a sustained attack on the character of a witness that has been called by people on this panel in that panel then attacks the witness in a sustained deliberate manner which is not germane to the subject at hand,
is it appropriate for a member to ask that the offending member's words be taken down? >> it is not under the rule of appropriate. >> thank you, mr. chairman, these are highly relevant to the issues we're facing. revenue and sharpton has come before the house of the committee as a reported expert on policing in his bigoted statements undermine the bipartisan work we should be doing to ensure that all citizens are able to come together and have safe communities. >> how is this line of inquiry germane and if it is not germane, is it appropriate? >> may i speak to the point?
[inaudible conversations] >> mr. chairman, we have had a series, a witness who came before us two days ago, mr. lewandowski who totally content to us we dealt with this panel and now we have a reverse of that and we have one of our members doing the same thing to a witness who we have called. i don't think it is within our best practices to allow our process to get down to the level that we have now sunk. i am asking the chairman and the
wise use of discretion to rule that the gentleman from florida line of inquiry with this specific witness who is trying to attack his character, no question about that. >> i am reading his own words back. >> is this a point of order? >> mr. gates you do not have the floor. >> he is being heard on a point of order. >> the gentleman is being heard on a point of order. >> not having uttered a single word of relevance to the issue at hand, is it appropriate for this committee to allow the misuse of this platform to attack the character of a witness? >> this is taken up a process
down to a level that we should never allow it to dissent to. and i'm objecting with these comments. it's not weathers true or false, it's non-germane. >> to appoint. >> the general rule on the point of order. although the gentleman's comments may be obnoxious, although. >> i object to that. >> they may be characterized to whatever you want to characterizes. >> i object and your words need to be taken down. >> the gentleman is under maintenance in the language that he uses and unfortunately under
the rules i cannot overrule him. the gentleman will proceed. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you sol sold your life story tor own charity, how much money did your charity pay you for the right to sell your story. >> this is an outrage and the question is whether you can imputed the motive or badger the witness or cost are characterized is present. >> the general lady was not recognized. >> stop the clock. >> i think the general lad gentm georgia in the character of destruction was on the course of your now not only be in germane but you're a pointedly attacking
the character in addition bringing up information in the inquiry. in bringing up information that is a character destroying the question in the questioning of a witness. can you use items that refer of the witnesses character and demeaning the witnesses character is not an appropriate line of questioning? >> whether it's appropriate line of questioning is not relevant, but to respect of the polymer tree inquiry, questioning a witness character and motives which may go to ascertaining the credibility of the testimony, we've given wide latitude in the answer has to be that i cannot object. >> the denman will proceed. >> how much money did your charity pay you, you personally
to tell your life story. >> my charity holds a certain amount of money to me and asked if they could use that money to have the right to sell any rights to my life be a documentary one man play or other items that they already began getting dividends. they would had to pay me the same some anyway because it was owed to me. >> was over half a million dollars? >> how much did they give you? >> the charity again owed me a certain amount of money. >> they would've had to pay anyway and they were agreed -- i allowed them to use those
funds -- >> the gentleman's time has expired the denman from new york is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chair. before i begin, let me think mrs. carr for her presence here today and sharing her thoughts from this committee and no parent should ever have to experience and particularly when the child has been killed by those who were sworn to protect and serve. i want to thank you for turning your pain into progress and for your willingness to share the story in such an authentic and compelling way. today i will be reintroducing the anti-chokehold legislation that you made reference to in your testimony and we will be renaming it the gardner excessive use of force
prevention act in tribute to your son. and thank you again for all that you've done. own aspirin and numinous consent, a tweet from joe scarborough from july 29th of 2019, the entire line of inappropriate questioning from matt gaetz was based reportedly on the resolution that have been introduced over 20 years ago by then congressman joe scarborough. thanks to those reminding me of how stridently al sharpton and i opposed each other 20 years ago. we take pride in our friendship today because of the history, recognizing jesus' words that all have fallen short of god's glory and we should forgive each other 70 times seven times.
>> without objection that will be entered into the record. >> let me think reverend sharpton for continuing to be a voice for the disenfranchised for all you've done got the country in the context of this issue, police violence and for the manner in which you stood with individuals over the years in new york, whether that was 42 shots at his doorstep unarmed african man whether patrick the security guard rudolph giuliani maligned. by releasing his juvenile records and turned out he was actually an altar boy who went to the same catholic school as the so-called mayor giuliani,
whether it was john bell who was shot dead, 50 shots on the of his wedding or omar edwards who is an off-duty black police officer who was killed in harlem or of course if that was eric gardner who is killed for all the world to see unarmed and given the death sentence of selling loose cigarettes. thank you reverend sharpton in all his incidents unfortunately there was no measure of justice to the officer who engaged in the act resulting in the death of those individuals. what can be done to create a greater degree of accountability, recognizing that the majority of police officers are there to protect and serve
with the best of intentions. but like any avenue of human endeavor in life there are bad apples, and when a bad apple engages in actions that result in the death of an individual, what can be done to make sure there's a greater degree of accountability? >> are you asking me? >> thank you for your comments on my work and i think the gentleman from florida for allowing me too straighten out the distortion and lies that i been misquoted, he's been a great service to my reputation. i want to say, the federal government has obligation in the congress can initiate that. into really set certain laws in place that become federal law the overrated state laws and
stop state prosecutors from mishandling police matters. one by having independent review of department of in the justice department a group in the justice department that can handle that and determine whether to go criminal or consent with the please forces and things like training much later must reach a certain bar or they violate the law. and then you have to have cameras on police that can be mandated on how to handle. there must be federal standards on policing subject to coronal or civil war that cannot change by administration. i think we've not answered what all of that has happened in the last decade or more. we have not answered that with any new federal legislation. it's important that we do and i'm glad beginning again with eric garner chokehold law. >> thank you mr. sharpton. >> the gentleman time has
expired. the gentleman from california. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i first observed that every police officer i spoke with on the subject strongly supports body cameras because they provide an ac accurate record of encounters. and that protects every honest officer in every citizen. i saw the video of the killing of eric garner and it's appalling. particularly considering the fact the only crime alleged was selling loose cigarettes. who would make that a crime to begin with ludlow one to be enforced by lethal force. it mr. blake, the attack on you, clearly if your unprovoked, what was the justification the officer used for the attack? >> apparently the suspect that i look like was making credit card fraud and ordering bags and expensive close to the hotel.
>> he thought you were somebody else when he attacked you like that. >> apparently. >> did he ask for id? >> no he did not declare he was an officer i only knew later when i saw badges on the other officers on scene. >> i don't know what the statistics are but i trust the accuracy of ms. mcdonald study, but clearly that is not the public perception among the significant portion of the population. i used to work for the former chief of the lapd, edward davis, and he was chief from 69 - 77 or 78. during the time he was chief, crime nationally exploded and went up 50% in los angeles under chief davis and actually went down. he was not adverse to the use of force. he had a unique philosophy of law enforcement and he told me,
it's not the job of the police department to enforce the law. that is the job of every citizen in police department is there to help. he is the chief who pioneered neighborhood watch in los angeles in introduced community base policing in the l.a. basic car plan because he viewed law enforcement as a partnership between citizens and police in the basic plans has we are going to become a partnership with the local neighborhoods and we will have the same officers and same neighborhoods to know people involved and that philosophy works, the essence of law enforcement in a free society and self-governing society, he was very much opposed to gun control laws that would disarm law-abiding citizens because he believed they were the first line of defense in an import part of the partnership to
enforce the law that are enacted on behalf of all of us. but ultimately the philosophy requires a mutual respect between the police officers in the neighborhoods in between the neighborhoods and the police officers. clearly we lost that. maybe too much aspirin this teenage woman can't agree on neutral respect among the committee. i would ask the committee, how do we go about restoring the mutual respect essential for law enforcement in a free society? >> i thank you for the question, i think that is the role of everything we should talk about. at the end of the day it doesn't matter who we do or what we are, it's about relationships. when you apply this to law enforcement goes back to the same community, the communities were were law to do certain
things and it why give us the right is the trust of the people. along the way we have clearly lost that. we've lost our way because we've gotten changes in technology changes in the way that we interact in social media, all these changes in our world and they changed drastically. >> dna, gps and surveillance cameras, it should make the job easier. >> i agree. i do not disagree with that, the point i am making, it comes down to the relationship. it's easy to point out and say there's us and them and the reality that people both sides of the issue. the relationship that we foster which will make the difference at the end of the day. it does not matter what were doing, were talking about law enforcement, we need to get back to the basics and have an understanding of what is important to law enforcement in our communities and we have the dialogue and understanding we can find solutions to real problems and turn down the walls of destruction we see across the country.
>> i assumed that does not involve the federalization and nationalization of police policy but getting back to the neighborhood level. >> i would argue that all politics are local in this case ever going to be policing our communities will gives us the power to trust those communities are the people in the community. it's how we do it and how we interact with the public will determine with the services we provide. and except the services we provide. >> thank you for the question, i'm in a start with the end first. i don't think it's whether federalize and or nationalizing, i don't agree with that, any profession whether your attorney, a doctor, the idea that the profession would not have national standards, i expect no matter what hospital i go to this country that the best evidence that you take is that's what you're going to dupree the failure to do that and cause me harm would be malpractice. we have 18000 agencies that are engaging in malpractice on a daily basis because of the lack of national standard. the idea that you said national
standards and accountability is not counter to the idea of centralized local policing in question on how to get back to that, i have to push back a little bit saying for many this is not a question that gives back to the trust that has never been there. it is now visible because of videos, because of demonstration, for many to do these at the trust level has always been strained based on abuses and current practices. i think it goes to the question congressman richman asked how do you not know, i think they did know. when you policy and practices that tell the officer that you shall enforce the law so these current ratecrime rates go downu talk about crime in numbers one of 1%, 2% in ignoring the people involved and counterproductive. the idea the police themselves
can reduce crime is false, is completely false, we had a lot of discussion about the issues the firm and not to get into the gun debate but as a black male i ask one simple thing, does my body how more privileged than a gun, why do we want to fight push back on anything that would restrict the second amendment but when it comes to the fourth, there's all kinds of reasons to do it. >> the time of the judgment has expired. the gentleman from rhode island. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. blake thank you for sharing your story i'm sorry you had the experience. i was a civil rights lawyer and criminal defense lawyer for became mayor of providence. i was responsible for the greatest number of cases against the police department civil rights cases, i then became the commissioner in the place
department is one of the best police department in america, we went from a department of two federal investigations including standard practices investigation to a fully accredited department in the lewis chromate 40 years. what i learned in the experience, the most powerful weapon that we have two reduce crime in the city is not guns or other equipment, it is the trust of the community. we built the community that divided the city of a substation were police officers want to be in the neighborhood and built relationships of community leaders. the challenge was we did not have a pleaser to th police depm wondering if you have any ideas of what congress can do to incentivize the diversity department, the recruitment, tension, challenges facing for communities they have not begun
part but are interested, what can we do as members of congress to help departments work aggressively to defect the diversity of the community that they serve. >> that is a very great question, trust me not only am i thinking of different ways to recruit and make it more diverse or more open for law enforcement alone, were being affected drastically without being able to recruit individuals and in regards to what congress can do, maybe incentivizing opportunity for funding, support and in the past in regards of being able to recruit a better salary, the equipment that is coming in being offered, even if there's a think tank with other
opportunities and incentives that can be offered. i'll be the first one to raise my hand and say i want to be apart and figure out what else we can do to recruit within our community. >> my other experience, a recent study, everyone recognizes the vast majority of law enforcement officers are doing it well and i never get enough credit for the good work that they do in in respect the number of incidents come from a small amount of these departments in a recent article published called good cop, bad cop using civilian allegations advances the theory of repeat offenders are responsible for the small number. if you consider the case of mr. garner mr. blake, you are saying officers had previous misconduct in one of the things we did in province was created in early detection system and what we learn sometimes these things start off as small things
which are evident to something else going on in the officer's life, the home, substance abuse, but it was the early system to detect that someone needed to intervene and find out what was going on to prevent a more serious problem. though we might incentivize the early detection systems so we can prevent things that are subject to hearings and whether or not your experience that it is a small subset with the most apartments where the problems persist. >> i would concur. most leading agencies have the and being able to offer more incentive and more awareness and more training not just for the system if we hav repeated the complaint they come into the internal affairs or the community. but other aspects giving the supervisor the oversight to offer wellness issues and ask
questions what is going on, you're correct it's an early warning that the departments would identify things that are outlined for those individual officers and extra training as well. >> i agree, i think there clearly needs to be inside the department of under the supervisors to monitor and guide a lot of the behavior of the officers they keep getting repeat complaints because those human factors outside of the job has a lot of what happened to the job in the truth becomes good and could become the ones that bear the brunt of whatever situation. >> all and where i begin, the issue about the trust development is a key and i knew we were successful in province when i drove down the street and saw two very big officers playing hopscotch with the little girl in the neighborhood
because they have become so much a part of the community and so respected, i think that is one thing we can work on to provide resources so the department can build the relationships. >> the gentleman yield back. the german from louisiana. >> thank you to everybody for being here. i want to thank you for your long service and law enforcement and congratulations on your well-deserved election is a national protection. you do all of us in louisiana great service and we are very proud of you. you shared statistics that i think are alarming, i want to re-iterate to those, 66% reduction in recruitment of new police officers nationwide? >> that's what i understand. >> and first responders have five times the rate of ptsd occurrence than the general population. these are alarming.
>> this is the elephant in the room, we don't like to talk about it because it's uncomfortable but if you think about the demands of law enforcement professionals, the level of calls that they respond to, the things that they see in deal with within their own lives, that takes a toll on the individual and far too long we refuse to talk about it. we wanted them to be strong and expect them to be strong and it was not until we realized were doing a disservice by not recognizing the impact and often will they officers that we think are acting out and we think about officers in a lot of cases we need to acknowledge that this reason, this assigns a much greater than that and i will argue and i feel strongly that when someone subjects their life, family and everything to the profession of law enforcement to do good within
the community we need to recognize these things and not push them aside, we need to find programs to help them. we will more responsibility to say if it was broken in the community that is very important to recognize, to focus on the fact that it does exist and we need to get serious consideration of thoughts to an approach of saving officers were damaged because of the type of work there during. >> i appreciate that, i grew up in a household of a first responder, my dad was assistant chief and permanently disabled, quickly injured in the fire in 1984 server real appreciation for first responders. my dad was a trained officer and i remember one time, it's pretty well known now, society divided into three groups of people, their sheep, peaceloving folks who not to harm to anybody else, the second is the wolves, these
are the evil men and sociopath the pram innocent without mercy and then the third category, the sheepdogs, they are called to protect the sheep a front the wolves, i'm so grateful we have sheepdogs in our society, the law enforcement, military, first responders, thank you all. have you your self or have you witnessed reduced reaction times by police officers confronted with violence because somewhere in the thought process is fired of being sued or prosecuted. does that effect their safety and by extension the safety of innocent bystanders? >> all speak in general terms if i can. i know having discussions with officers to wear their decision
to take action was delayed with the thought process and how it would affect their family, the good news, we were able to have that conversation because it turned out a piece of resolution and i can tell you a number of officers who found themselves in situations where noncompliance is escalating and because we have the noncompliance escalation it's an uncertain outcome. in the unde focus on the energyf de-escalation, techniques and training because really, look at all these situations that have elevated to a point because it has escalated, we need to improve on her skills because of the uncertain outcomes at times can be reversible. >> that is running all across the table and i think that's universally understood. do you see policing ultimately
being the responsibility of police and government or as the public as well? >> is both public employees. anything less would not be affected. >> amount of time i yield back. >> the gentlelady from washington. >> thank you for holding this important hearing. thank you all for being here. ms. carr thank you in particular for channeling your anger in your grief around the brutal killing of your son aaron garner. in giving inspiration with mother's love, and inspiration to the movement for justice and in and to this violence, i appreciate it. thank you mr. blake for sharing your story. i wanted to start by saying, and i think chief davis, you mention
this in your opening remarks, when we refuse to acknowledge the structural biases within our institution, when we refuse to acknowledge the racism that exists here in government, law enforcement and every system when we unfortunately have colleagues who mock and try to align witnesses and discredit the idea that were all working together to try to get to a solution but we have to acknowledge the biases that exist, if we don't acknowledge the white supremacy or the history of institutional racism, we cannot move forward. i do believe all of us, law enforcement community, we do want to find a way forward. i come to represent seattle, before being a member of congress i was the civil immigrant leader and we wrote to the letter that went to the department of justice asking for an investigation and please
propel thpolicebrutality. . . . >> deescalate washington initiative. and, ms. carr, you'll be happy to know it came from the families of those who were killed who came together and said we have to take on what is one of the most restrictive laws in the country that, essentially, made it impossible to have any accountability in police shooting incidents. because we needed to prove, according to our constitution, a standard of malice that was essentially impossible. and you know what happened is those families got together with law enforcement and put together an initiative that also has had
bumpy fits and starts but was passed, was passed. and part of that included deescalation. and i've heard, mr. yoes, i know you just spoke about this, i saw dr. goff nodding. but part of what i did in addition to changing the standard and making it very clear that we needed a different standard to hold police officers accountable, it also provided resources to the front-line officers. because i do think that our law enforcement is being forced to address issues on the front lines that are, frankly, the negligence of underfunding that the federal government has been doing, austerity spending that we have been doing that creates people who are homeless or creates, you know, hunger or creates all kinds of issues in our community. and so i wanted to ask, and maybe i'll direct this at both chief davis and mr. yoes, do you support an approach to policing that encourages deescalation and makes it clear that use of force is a last resort?
let me start with you, chief davis. >> thank you, congresswoman. yes, i do. i think a good policy to take a look at is camden, new jersey, and also the executive research forum guiding principles where that force should be a necessity. and although it's a last resort, doesn't mean that it's the first option, that it should be proportionate and that it should be with strong tactics of really sticking to time, distance and cover. so, yes, i do. >> mr. yoes, do you want to add anything to that? >> i agree that deescalation is going to be a very big key of stopping or preventing things from hurling in a very unpredictable way, and we clearly need to focus as much energy as we can to increase that. i think that there's no doubt that in in instances force is going to be required, and because of that there needs to be a balance. >> thank you. i should have mentioned that the initiative has the support of law enforcement, the black law enforcement association of
washington and our local sheriff both endorsed that initiative. my last question in my remaining time, ms. garcia, as a former doj official in the civil rights division, you conducted these investigations into law enforcement agencies to determine whether law enforcement actions were pattern and practice, and you helped to enforce consent decrees. in your experience, why e is that doj oversight so critical in addressing use of force in police? >> thank you. first of all, when doj initiates a pattern of practice investigation, it is because there has been such a severe breakdown at the state and local level to keep those departments accountable that they do need an outside federal agency to come and correct them. once doj finds a systemic violation, the consent decrees are court-enforceable and overseen by independent monitors. so that is what is crucial to
correcting all the problems that come with the constitution violations, everything from the training to resources, to to the policies, to officer wellness programmings. and, most importantly, the community engagement because community engagement is really going to take hold and help see that through once doj is gone. >> thank you. and our federal monitor is playing a big role in that still. thank you, mr. chairman. i to yield back. >> the gentle lady yields back. the gentlelady from arizona. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you all for being here today. i think both republicans and democrats would agree that we need to penalize bad actors and bad a actions. but what i am concerned about today and also in the media is that the sole focus has been on the relatively small number of bad actors and bad actions. we heard it from our chairman nadler at the beginning statement. he listed a whole bunch of
instances that were not a good outcome, and then we see on the screens all day today as we're talking just. but how about all of the good things that law enforcement has done? i really think we need to focus on that too. and because of that, i want to give you some examples of good things that have happened just recently that law enforcement has done in arizona. on august 26th, first responders in arizona including the arizona department of public safety rescued an 8-year-old girl who had a fallen about 75 feet into oak creek canyon in arizona. on august 23rd arizona police officers rescued a baby left in a car in 100-degree heat for nearly an hour, and she survived. on august 6th tucson police officers spotted a kitten locked inside a car in midtown parking lot on saturday and rescued it.
on july 11th there was a fire at mesa, arizona, apartment complex where officers bravely placed themselves in harm's way to rescue a family. in phoenix just the other day, there was a severe traffic collision where one of the motorists, unfortunately, lost his leg. due to the quick thinking of the police officers who were first to arrive prior to medical units, his life was preserved by the makeshift tourniquet that was applied. and one of the police, one of the things that the phoenix police is doing now is they have their newest units on the force is an ice cream truck. and they're using it in lower socioeconomic neighborhoods where they're concerned that there's a bad feeling about police officers. and so they're trying to mitigate it. yesterday afternoon a suspect entered a store full of customers and robbed the store
at knifepoint, and he fled the store. he car jacked another victim at knifepoint and was arrested. you know, these -- i just am saying we need to take care of bad actors, but let's not forget that our law enforcement are doing so many great things each and every day, so many he rowic things. -- heroic things. and i want to thank them for what they do. and i have a question for mr. yoes. previously, in previous testimony one of the witnesses suggested that we support a bill that would prohibit chokeholds. and i just want your professional advice on that. if we prohibited chokeholds, would it then lead to not having an option on the table and you'd actually have to use lethal force more? >> well, that's a very complicated and fluid question asking for an outcome that's
very much unpredictable. there's an escalation. the escalation causes actions, and it progresses up. at some point it becomes an issue of whether or not what is necessary in order to maintain or to not lose control of the situation. so it's a very, very fluid concern. it's not an easy answer. and i'm not too sure i can answer that. i can just tell you that everyone, every time that we find ourselves in a situation where it escalates to a point where it becomes some physical altercation, then i think the outcome's always going to be different. >> and, mr. yoes, this has been touched on a little bit, but do you think all of this pub histy -- publicity and focus on negativing actors actually hurts the morale of the law enforcement and causes problems with retention and hiring law enforcement officers? >> no, ma'am, i don't think so. i know so. i think we're in a point now
where it is easy to demonize law enforcement. often it's done without knowing all of the facts. we are a nation of laws, and those laws have due process, and we're quick to rush to judgment on making, making assertions on what's happening. and i think it's creating an atmosphere in this country that is making it very difficult for law enforcement officers to do their job. we were once very respected, now as you mentioned, there are incidents that we certainly should be reviewed and handled, but it doesn't reflect on every law enforcement officer. but every law enforcement officer's taking a burden for it. >> thank you. and, mr. chair, i'd like to yield any time i have left to mr. gates. >> chairman, i have a unanimous concept request -- >> the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from florida. >> thank you so much, mr. chairman, and thank you to all of our witnesses who are here today. as i've listened to your testimony, i feel very hopeful
about the subject that we are discussing today. this is a serious topic, and some of the statements today have been helpful, and some have been downright disgraceful and shameful. i think through all of the yelling and carrying on that we've seen, the theatrics, some of my colleagues forgot that ms. carr was in the room, they forgot there were other families in the room who lost their loved ones. and so on their behalf, because i know they forgot, i want to say we are sorry for your loss. we're talking about a profession that i love, the profession that i worked in for 27 years. my first floor speech as a member of congress, i thought it would be about health care or some other topic, it ended up being about a femaler is e jebt -- female sergeant, an
african-american sergeant who i promoted who was shot and killed trying to arrest a murder suspect who had shot and killed his pregnant girlfriend. i worked with some of the finest men and women who wear the badge. good police officers are like by family. but we've had some problems. and we have an obligation. republicans, democrats and every person in this room to work to make sure that police officers are celebrated, but bad cops are held accountable. the ranking member said it correctly, that there is no one who wants to get rid of bad cops more than good cops do. and i can tell you as a former chief of police, i spent every doggone day trying to get rid of the bad cops. we wear the badge. law enforcement wears the badge over our hearts, and we wear the
badge over our hearts as a constant reminder that you have to have the heart for the job, right? that we're dealing with people and families. mr. yoes -- or captain yoes, you talked about what the men and women go through. it's a tough job. i know it's tough from having done it. but if we're going to save this profession and get it back to the level which it deserves to be, we have got to work together to do that. i don't have a question for you today, but when i hear the discussion about federal -- what role can the federal government play, when we talk about leaving it up to individual states, that scares me. we tried that with the voting rights act. and look what's happening. i do believe the federal government can play a direct role in helping to create
standards. doesn't matter whether you're one officer department, four-officer, a thousand or 30,000. when you put on that badge and the gun, the standards in which you police with, there should be standards. and i believe you said it, chief davis, that if you were going for any other profession, there are some minimum standards that you should have. hiring standards. do we want anybody doing the job of a law enforcement officer, one where he or she will be out there on the streets by themselves making life and death decisions? we want the brightest and the best. and every agency should spend their time trying to hire the best and the brightest men and women to do the job. we know it's going to cost, ms. carr, to do that. but we need to work together and see how we can just get it done with training standards. we not only want the brightest and the best, captain, we want the best training so that when
our men and women -- if we want them to survive not just physically, but to survive their jobs and not be in front of a courtroom, then we have to give them the tools to survive. and training is one of those tools. use of force training, standardized training that involves use of force. across the nation. and then community partnerships. i can tell you in orlando where i served as the chief we would not have survived. i went to the community every time we had a good day -- [laughter] and every time we had a bad day and asked the community to help me create a police department that knew how to police the community in which they served. so i feel -- i don't have a question, mr. chairman. i feel extremely hopeful today. if we continue to work together, and i believe the people in this room who have endured and are still here want to get this done. so i thank you, god bless you
all. thank you very much. >> gentlelady's time is expired. the gentleman from florida has unanimous concept request to submit a document. without objection, the document has been submitted. they just called votes on the floor, but i hope we can finish so that we don't have to come back. the gentlelady from pennsylvania is recognized. >> thank you. i do want to thank ms. carr and mr. blake for being here and for all the families who are here to represent their experiences. i also want the thank the law enforcement officers who do lay their lives on the line every day including former chief demings, for their commitment to excellence. because i think that's what we're all looking for here. representative demings talked about the tools that we need our law enforcement officers to have. as a representative from philadelphia, i'm both familiar with and a huge supporter of the robust community-oriented policing work of charles ramsey. who was the former police chief in philly and d.c. and then, of
course, was one of the co-chairs of the 2016 presidential task force, i guess it was, on 21st century policing. that report, which i think is an excellent document to guide us forward and i wish we'd been able to work more robustly with that already, it sets forth six core principles starting with broad challenge to change the culture of policing but also including attention to officer wellness and safety and cutting edge technology. so in the limited time and with votes coming, i wanted to focus on some of the tools that the department of justice has used in the past which aren't currently available, and they were sort of a carrot and a stick. ms. garcia, can you comment on the impact of the department of justice's reversal of policy regarding consent decrees and how that makes it more difficult for the doj to obtain court
enforcement agreements to stop civil rights abuses? and this would with the carrot -- would be the carrot that could be held over us, a police force perhaps not meeting its obligations to the public. >> so jeff sessions' memo that he issued on the last day that he was overseeing doj severely undercut the efficacy of consent decrees by doing things such as placing time limitations on them of a couple years and really stripping the discretion of the career attorneys from crafting the remedies that are necessary for systemic reform. they're the folks that are doing the fact-finding ine query -- inquiry and talking to the communities and really handling the investigations. they're not political appointees. so they're really in the best position to actually, you know, deliver justice to the communities that need it because of systemic violations that have
occurred. >> okay. and i understand the u.s. commission on is civil rights has also been critical of that decision. >> that is correct. >> okay. mr. davis, but i also wanted to focus on the carrot which was the opportunity for police forces to request assistance, because the two major cities in my district -- philadelphia and chester -- both reached out and participated in the cri program. in chester there was a police shooting after a suspect was chased, and the man was killed after a hundred bullets were pumped into his car. so there was community outrage, there had been a series of police-involved shootings, but that police department reached out and requested help. my understanding is that the department of justice has ended that program which was designed to provide advice and recommendation on how police departments could do a better job of engaging their community. can you talk about that? >> yes. what the department has done was to, it remains that there's a
critical program, but it no longer does the type of organizational assessments, and philadelphia is a perfect example. we went into live in and spent close to a year at the commissioner's request looking from top to bottom at use of force training policies and found some serious deficiencies in training, found some deficiencies on what we call rep failures, when people were perceived to have a gun but didn't and were shot anyway. officer-involved shootings were down almost 15%. we did the same thing with chester, technical assistance. for a lot of departments the chiefs would call us saying, look, i really want to find out what's going on in the department, i need to find out what i need to fix and could you help. that is no longer there which means they're going to keep making the same mistakes, and depending on the size of the organization, there could be some systemic challenges or failures that may take years to get to the point where they're going to fix them.
so, i mean, i would strongly recommends such a program be brought back. and it's a good carrot too, what lynda's talking about, for the agencies that can't reform, won't reform, leadership's not committed to reform, you need a concept decree. some are prepared, they wanted to do it, the leadership's there. >> okay. and i would be fully supportive of having multiple tools. so thank you. i yield back. >> the gentlelady yields back. the gentlelady from texas. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank all the witnesses for be here, and apologize that i've had to step out a lot, but we have a mark-up next door in financial services where my vote was needed. mr. chairman, the relationship between law enforcement and the community is a very important one which is supposed to promote the safety e and well-being of all people. its awareness -- as awareness and activism increases, so must
our commitment to public safety and honor the humanity of all people. throughout my career i've spent time with community members, local leaders and police officers. i was a founding chair of the independent police oversight board appointed by former mayor elise parker in houston. so i'm familiar with the issues that involve the relationships between law enforcement and the communities they're supposed to protect. houston chief of police testified in this committee earlier this year. he shared that the hispanic e community has suffered a chilling effect in reporting violent crime since 2017 when our anti-immigrant racial profiling bill, s.b. 4, became law. unfortunately for many of us in houston and other parts of the country, driving while black has now turned into driving while brown. we have seen that even more against some of our immigrant
community. this forces local governments and law enforcement agencies to act as federal immigration officers. it diverts limited resources away from the communities, corrodes public trust in law enforcement and drives witnesses and victims of crime into the shadows. according to chief as said doe, undocumented immigrants, even lawful immigrants are now even afraid to report crimes. in houston women advocates, domestic violence shelter workers and immigrants share stories of women who are now afraid of contacting law enforcement because they're deportation threats and threat of abuse. authorities have documented crime reported by immigrants. the pain and frustrations are real. we're facing serious challenges and erosion of trust between the police and community, so we must do more. i thank the witnesses who have come here today, and i hope that
working together we can work on national standards and guidelines and policies to insure that when it comes to public safety, all will be protected. i want to start with you, ms. garcia, and i want to start with you because you're a cousin though i've not met you before. want to start with you. i read with some interest, you handed out this book, and i wanted to refer to you on the use of police oversight boards. like i said, i started the one in houston you should the guidance of -- under the guidance of mayor parker. other others call them police review boards, and you did list it in your book as one of the tools that would help along with, i guess, 14 or 15 others. how many cities are doing that, and are they working? we've only got less than two minutes. >> hi. in terms of whether they're working, they're actually one of the biggest tools for community engagement and transparency for
the community to be involved in that oversight process. and so they're extremely important. actually, in your home state, dallas, just recently the chief there worked with local community coalition to institute a community oversight review board. so they're really an important step. and we would encourage that they actually have the ability to also recommend discipline. some of them don't. in terms of the numbers, i would have to get back to you in terms of the total number across the country. >> okay. and i would ask the chief over there, sir, in your experience and in your discussions with others of your colleagues, are we seeing an increase only in the impact of the influence of the new white supremacy rhetoric and things that are going not only that are anti-jewish, anti-black, anti-people of color, anti-immigrant in terms of what is going on even in
policing? >> yes, i think we're seeing an increase in hate crime and violence external in the community, we're seeing, quite frankly, a infiltration of white supremacists into law enforcement which is also a challenge. and so we are seeing that. >> how can we get at that though? i guess that's -- you've made my point. i mean, how can we -- what do we do other than the cultural training and the things that some of the grants can to so that -- can do so that we can make sure we get that element out of policingsome. >> so one of the things i taught when i was in the administration, there's still significant underreporting of hate crimes. you look at the numbers, making sure there's clarity exactly what is and is not a hate crime, making sure officers are treating hate crimes for the severity that they represent. and police departments making sure we do thorough background investigations. most agencies do it, but they can't be superficial, they need
to do character references so they can find out some of the views and today can be on social media and others to make sure that the person they're hiring for the job -- congresswoman demings mentioned -- is prepared to make these independent life and death scenarios. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> gentlelady yields back. there's three minutes and 50 seconds left, but there are 321 people who haven't voted yet, i think we can have one more witness now. one more questioner. the gentlelady from florida. from georgia, sorry. >> thank you, chairman. and i don't have any questions today, so i will be brief. but i do have a statement i'd like to make. thank you, each and every one of youd today, for being here today. it's vitally important, and i know that i was running back and forth between other hearings as well, but i definitely wanted to make sure that i was here today. and i want to give an exceptional thank you and welcome to mama gwen, as i call
her, ms. gwen carr. she and i have worked together as one of the mothers of the movement traveling around the country on this very vitally important issue, and your testimony was powerful and just so invaluable. and i'll say more about that in just a minute. first, i want to say how much i appreciate the law enforcement officers who do put their lives on the line every day. for the communities that they serve. and those officers who serve their communities with the dignity and respect that they deserve. our officers do face difficult situations, and we must empower them to respond appropriately. it is imperative we give them evidence-based training and implicit bias. -- in implicit bias. we must also invest in commitment-based policing. most importantly, we must hold individuals accountable when they abuse the power that we the people have given them.
no doubt we have more work to do to build bridges that connect law enforcement and our communities. our communities must respect law enforcement as our protectors, not the enemy. but our police must continually earn that respect. police cannot see their commitments as the enemy -- communities as the enemy either. rather, they must respect the human dignity of every person that they encounter, even and especially when it is challenging for them to do so. that is much easier when our law enforcement officers look like the communities that they serve. and see that community as their brothers, their sisters and their neighbors. when that fails to happen, the costs are great. we know this from the personal stories that we have heard today, and we also know it from the data. in 2017, a study of over 1100
lawsuits against law enforcement -- the largest study of its kind to date -- found that our legal framework for these cases, the doctrine of qualified immunity, is not even achieving its stated goals. it is often raised as a defense at a trial not in the early stages of litigation as it was intended. of course, the human toll is the most significant reason for the need for reform. but the financial costs are also significant. contrary to what you might hear, a study found that taxpayers ultimately pay for 99.98% of the amount paid to victims and families when an officer abuses his or her power. those who abuse their power often serve no time and don't pay families a single cent for the immeasurable harms they have caused. but not enough can ever be said
about the lives that we have lost when officers dehumanize and devalue the life of another perp. and i want to say to my mother sister, i want to say to her, thank you for sharing your story, a story of injustice you and your family and your son, eric garner, should never have ever had to bear. and we will keep fighting for eric. we will honor his memory and all those that are taken from us by abuses of power. we will not forget eric, and we will not forget the stories of those who are speaking out. mama gwen, your voice is truly a catalyst for change, and i thank you for that. i speak to you mother to mother, and i hope that we can make sure that not another person ever bears the pain of losing a child such as you have or such as i have. until you suffer the death of your child, you can never truly understand the depth of iniquity
and inequality that we still face in this country. and i vow to you that we will take action. we will hold people accountable when they have the power to do right and choose instead to devalue life. and when our systems are failing to those who abuse power -- excuse me, and when our systems are failing to hold those who abuse power accountable, we must see to it that these systems change. s it is imperative our law enforcement and our citizens work together to build the trust, the respect and the community that every american in this country deserves. and i yield back the balance of -- >> the lady yields back. the gentlelady from florida. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you so much to the witnesses for coming here and to all of you in the audience. i know that you've come here today to this hearing seeking justice, seeking equal
treatment. it is okay to have these conversations despite what you hear from some of the minority party on the other side. it is not just okay to have this conversation, i think it is incredibly important for us to have this conversation today and all over america because the facts are that people of color are affected by act of police brew untillalty -- brutality two to four times more than others. i represent a district, it's a minority-majority district. and we have had those issues, but i also want to point out that i have met many members in law enforcement whom i respect greatly who understand the intricacies of our communities and who have been working so hard to build the trust which i think is so important. we know that there's tension
between communities and law enforcement, and we have seen through now social media which sheds light on the lack of trust between the police and the populations that they serve. and i think that most importantly we need to start building trust, but we can't do that without acknowledging that there's inherent racism in this country. we can't do that if we can't have an honest conversation which is why i think it's such an important moment for us to discuss this here today. so police involvement is more than just enforcing the law, it's more than just making arrests. i think that it is important to start building trust in these commitment -- communities. bringing police officers together to shape, to build an understanding of one another. and we have started those programs. i'm very proud to share with you that in my district in the
hammocks which are communities in my district, police district regularly puts on events designed to get the cops acquainted with the city's residents. the deputies hold regular coffee with cops at restaurants, and they schedule bike rides to engage with the people that they're protecting. events like these help foster real and open relationships in vastly different communities. at a federal level, i think that it is our duty to make sure that community policing initiatives are fully funded and continue to succeed. sadly though, many of the essential federal programs have been cut or pushed out of the existence under the current administration. so my first question is to chief davis. given the cuts to federal community cops programs over the past couple of years, especially the technical assistance program, what recommendations do you have for local communities and police departments to
continue to build these relationships even with, as we see, more decreased federal funding? >> thank you for the question. i will say in many cases, congresswoman, states have been stepping up. so in california, illinois where the department of justice walked away either from a concept decree or collaborative reform, the state attorney generals have stepped in. so i think you go to the state level, i would still talk to agencies, as chief hawkins mentioned, the agencies that have experience and have the best practices and get engaged with the national associations and organizations that are working to establish these national best practices. there definitely are senate gaps, but they can -- significant gap, but they can be filled in. the real challenge for many communities is most -- all the technical assistance provided was at no cost to that jurisdiction, both small and large could have access to it. the challenge now is most agencies now have to go out and pay for consultants, pay for that technical assistance, so it becomes a challenge.
but they can probably turn to the state, turn to associations and turn to their own group to understand what are the best practices. >> thank you for that. and, mr. goff, as members of congress, what do you think we can do or bring back to our communities to optimize the relationship between law enforcement and the communities that they serve? >> it's a great question, thank you for it. i would say that the department of justice has put forward an initiative that just concluded. the goal of that initiative was to take the science that we already knew worked in the laboratory and one-off, do it in six cities across the united states from focused deterrence to racial reconciliation, to both training and culture shifts and procedural justice, to training and culture shifts and the use of data to reduce racially disparate outlets. given the time, i'll say it's in the proposal and in the record. >> thank you, mr. goff. yield back my time.
>> dr. goff, i'm impressed by the remarkable work you're doing to advance security safety. the question that's been running through my mind is how america's vast and quite unique problem of gun violence complicates the problem of police-civilian relations. we've lost more than a million and a half of our citizens since 1968 to gun violation. the rates of gun violence in america are 25 times higher than the 22 other wealthy countries on average. so this must be a very serious problem in terms of community civil relations, and i'm wondering if you would opine on it. >> sadly, there's not as much good research as there should be, but i can tell you the things we know both from the science and from my exposure to law enforcement which is, of course, as a huge impact on it. if you look at chief as seed doe in houston, who every time there is a shooting understands his
officers are going out to a place where you can't escalate by simply putting hands on somebody because they might be armed, right? i think one of the elements that we're not talking about nearly enough is that just as much as gun violence, shooting other people, homicides, makes the job of law enforcement infinitely more dangerous, there's suicides that are responsible for a larger proportion of lost officers lives. so we have to go back to officer wellness. both as they're going out on the job and as they're having to live with it at home, the availability of guns and gun violence are epidemic in the private homes of law enforcement as well. >> thank you. can i ask one yes or no question? okay. i think this is for chief davis. you mentioned the problem of white supremacists entering police forces, and we've certainly heard reports of that. do you have any research suggesting that this is actually a conscious strategy by white supremacist groups to send people into local police forces?
cyber adviser. this is just under an hour. ♪ ♪ [applause] >> well, thank you very much and welcome back from lunch. if those who are in the exhibit hall, if you could begin to move back, we would greatly appreciate it. i want to give a special thanks to northrup grumman. so jennifer walsmith and chris valentino, i know, are here. if you could raise your hands? jennifer is here and chris