Skip to main content

tv   LIVE Police Commission  SFGTV  July 13, 2016 5:30pm-8:01pm PDT

5:30 pm
>> city of san francisco >> police commission. please stand by... >>
5:31 pm
5:32 pm
5:33 pm
5:34 pm
i will call the meeting to order. can we please rise for the pledge of allegiance. >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> commissioner, loftus, i would like to call roll. >> please do, sergeant. >> commission president loftus,
5:35 pm
here, commissioner turman in route. commissioner marshall, commissioner dejesus, commissioner mazzucco, commissioner huang, commissioner melara. >> you have chief toney chaplin and director of occ joyce hicks. >> good evening, everyone. welcome to the july 13, 2016, police commission meeting. i want to start off with under the agenda, the chief's report and the quarterly report we are putting off until august 3rd. some people from the bicycle coalition they have a big event tonight. we had a meeting today and went over the actual data and they wanted to be here tonight. we are going to put that off until august 3rd. and we are going to have
5:36 pm
mary help us with the sparks report depending on how we are going with item 1. we may have to take those out of order. please go ahead and read the rules of order. >> the rules of order. members of the public are entitled to comment on an item. in addition, the commission shall provide and adjust items which are available to the public which are under the jurisdiction and not the subject of public comment on other items on the agenda. the president may set a reasonable time limit for each speaker depending on the complexity of the item, the length of the agenda and the public comment. tonight's public comment is limited to 2 minutes. please speak clearly into the microphone. speakers are refrained from using profanity. members of the public
5:37 pm
should address questions of their remarks to the commission. either police personnel nor commissioners are required to respond to questions except when requested to do so by the president. individuals should refrain from entering in any debate or discussion with speakers during public comment. members of the public may not express vocal support or opposition to statements made by members of the public or occ staff or the commission. applauses and booing are prohibited. members of the public may not display signs where the commission members can't see. cameras are permitted to be brought into the room although flash may disrupt the meeting. the person shall be removed following any acts for disorderly conduct.
5:38 pm
disorderly conduct such as making noise, speaking out of turn or otherwise not in compliance of the rules. disobedience of any lawful order of commission president which shall include and order to be seated. any other unlawful with interference or during the course of the meeting. >> thank you, we can proceed with the meeting and hear from everyone. with that, please call the first item. >> item 1. chiefs report. this item is to allow the chief of police to rorpt on recent police department activities and make announcements. presentation of the safe streets for all quarterly report second quarter 2016. presentation of the
5:39 pm
department ace semi annual report regarding collection and analysis of the assault kit evidence and reporting of results to sexual assault victims per police commission resolution. >> i will start with the sexual assault kit evidence. >> this is as a result of the resolution set a few months ago around data collection and communication with victims of sexual assault. not only the kit being tested but timeframe for communication with the victim of sexual assault with regard to the results, and so this is our first presentation based on that resolution. so, welcome and good evening. >> also captain greg march is at the
5:40 pm
proceeding and oversees our crime lab. >> good evening president loftus and co-commissioners and occ director hicks, and of course chief chaplin. i'm captain bailey and here with lieutenant due drof who is the head of the sexual assault investigation team and the captain of the crime lab greg mar. we put together a presentation of the basically that pertains to the resolution, and i believe you have a copy of the powerpoint. we go to page 2 which gives an overview of what the whole process. when a sexual assault survivor comes into contact with us, we basically put together a step by step process they would experience in this round. it's kind of simplified so people can understand what the
5:41 pm
resolution, what our goals are as pertaining to the resolution. so, just to give a quick overview, we are looking at the sexual assault survivor comes to our attention in two ways. one, they come to directly to the police department or to the trauma recovery clinic. regardless of where they go, they have the option of having a rape kit done. that is their provision regarding that. once the sexual assault survivor comes directly to the police department, then the police department brings them to where that kit is performed with their permission. if they go directly to the trauma recovery center, again, they have the choice of having the kit done or not. sometimes they will choose to have the kit done, but choose not to have any police follow up or intervention. regardless, when a case is complete, it is
5:42 pm
always tested. what happens from there, the svu called the trauma recovery center and ascertain if there is any kit for pick up. from there the special victims unit respond and pick up any kits in their possession and bring it to the property control division. property control division then take it to the crime lab. in this very simplified flowchart. we try to give an overview of what happens there. the crime lab studies it from there and tries to get any dna profiles and goes into a combined dna system. we've given you a couple of scenarios in the flowchart. so that's just as i said you can use
5:43 pm
that as a reference. the next thing, next page. basically we just talked about the resolution what the resolution was about and directing the police department to complete a semi annual and annual report documenting the following: one is the collection of the analysis of the sexual assault evidence kits, secondly, the notification of survivors of the forensic investigative sets and notice to the survivors and the case which the notification was made and explanation as to why that notification was made. in addition to those, we also have to give information, the outcome information such as arrest and convictions. so basically the resolution, the
5:44 pm
special victims unit responsibility and the crime lab responsibility. we, the special victims unit responsibility basically was to document the days of the incident, the days evidence was collected from the survivor by the trauma recovery units, the day the evidence was collected from the custody of the trauma recovery unit and when it was taken from there to the to the property control. any other arrest or convictions despite it is not impeding with any on going investigation. in addition we also took note whether or not the survivors were notified of the testing and the investigation of their case as described in section 4-11 of the resolution. including days and manner of notification. in cases where those notifications were not provided to the survivor,
5:45 pm
an explanation as to why notification was not provided. we have that in our common section. i'm going to hand it over to the lieutenant in charge of the sexual assault investigation, lieutenant dude rolph. >> good evening, commissioners. why we are here because of the 680 penal code and the resolution. the 680 has to do with the bill of rights and sexual assault survivor and the legislation from the penal code and legislation refers to the survivor as a victim. we are going to refer to the victim as a survivor. so the legislature recommends that law enforcement agencies submit sexual assault rape kits to the crime lab within 5 days flt 5 days -- from the survivor. we are doing that. every morning, monday through friday
5:46 pm
when our psa or sergeant from our unit comes in, they make direct contact with the trauma recovery center and speak with the survivor on duty. that provider will tell our staff whether there is a sexual assault kit there or not. if there is a sexual assault kit available and we can pick it up based on their schedule because a provider is seeing a client, we are not going to disrupt that examination. if a kit is available for pick up, we are going to immediately pick it up. that set is taken to the property control division and we document that through a police recovery through the chain of custody. the special victims unit by us reviewing the data is in compliance with the police commission resolution. we try to make it a general rule that we pick it up in 1 day, if not, it's 2 days at
5:47 pm
the most. special victims unit order 16-003, details a specific step. if somebody new comes into our unit, they understand the steps taken when we pick up sexual assault kits and the importance of picking them up on time. in addition we have had conversations with the crime lab and at times they are not aware of specific kits coming their way through property control. as a new step, we are sending them an e-mail, fax, however it works out, a copy of the case number and the investigator signed to the case so there is a more one on one contact with the is investigator and the crime lab personnel to facilitate any questions or concerns they have. the results of the crime lab testing. we receive notification from the crime lab through e-mail
5:48 pm
about if there is presence of biological evidence, if a dna profile was developed, and if it was entered into a data base with combined dna system which is code us and we also are notified if an offender hit. the notification of the survivor. there is a number of different ways we notify them. the best practice is to notify the survivor in person. if the offender hit has to be an unknown person, we don't tell the survivor the name if the case is continuing. if we are told the case is
5:49 pm
moving forward, we don't want to jeopardize any part of the investigation. we notify them by phone, directly e-mail, us mail or the d. a. 's office. at times the notification isn't completed. why is this? well, as the captain mentioned early yes, -- the survivor wants no police action. we won't do that. if there is an offender hit, we will reach out to the trauma recovery center to make contact with that survivor. the trauma recovery center will tell the survivor there is an investigative lead and the police would like to talk to you. it is up to that survivor whether they want to talk to us or not. we are not forcing the issue. there is other times. one other time if it's a known offender. at the time of the
5:50 pm
incident, the survivor identifies the suspect, and through the dna process confirms who the suspect is and we don't make that notification. the special victims unit does not make contact with every survivor of a sexual assault. i covered some of the steps before. however they don't want contact. there is other times that the sexual assault is not reported. sexual assaults as we all know are under reported. so, we don't have the opportunity through contact information or anything else to make contact with that person. or if through the police report there is limited information as to how to make contact with that survivor. if the survivor is listed as transient or homeless, we do our best to get out into that area and make contact with the people around there and also the homeless
5:51 pm
shelters and the outreach to see if they know this person and the officers. we want to talk with that person. but sometimes it's somewhat impossible to find that person. >> so the question is what is special victims unit doing? one, as lieutenant mentioned we have put into place 1 unit of order which is the protocol to pick up the sexual assault kit delivery to the property control ensuring they are there in a timely manner. that we've had 100% success based on the 6 months that we are giving the dash base we are giving you. in addition to that, and as lieutenant said because of written unit orders, it's a protocol which has now been documented and
5:52 pm
can be followed by anyone in the unit. in addition we have another unit order, 16002, this documents what the expectation of the investigator when they in terms of notifying the victim, the survivor, their rights as it pertains to the resolution 680 penal code. so, what that unit order basically says is that each survivor upon initial contact with each investigator upon initially contact with the survivor has to immediately update the survivor on their rights in terms of all the different information they should get at particular times. they are given a choice at that time. if it's something they want or not. and the investigator has to document that in their chronological
5:53 pm
of their investigation. in addition to that, we also realized when we were looking at the resolution and trying to figure out how can we best serve both the survivor and adhere to what the expectations of the resolution were, we realize that probably the best place to update as many survivors as possible was actually at the recovery trauma unit because that's where we may not necessarily meet every survivor of a sexual assault goes to the sfth recovery trauma unit. we don't necessarily, if they choose not to have police intervention, we may not necessarily meet them. we thought it would be a good place to have this dna bill of rights available to get as many survivors as possible would be
5:54 pm
informed. so lieutenant has that and very excited to collaborate with them. we hope to make the dna bill of rights available at that particular entry point. in addition, i recently met with the district attorney's advocate and the sexual assault's response team, the san francisco women against rape and the status department on women. we were collaborating to put together an information leaflet for survivors which basically would tell the survivor what to expect from the time that they get to the recovery trauma unit right through the district attorney. so that they would have an overview of what the process was, and i believe this would be a really good place also to have that dna bill of rights and i know that i'm going to have the
5:55 pm
cooperation of the district attorney, etc. so in terms of when we are going to get that done, lieutenant and i believe we'll get that done by the end of the month. if you go to page 13, that list the dna bill of rights which is giving out working with the recovery trauma units to supply to the victims there at the time of when our investigators make the first initial encounter with the survivor returning them at that point and they will be getting the written format in both locations. >> so now regarding the data and the spreadsheet that's been supplied. when you look at the spreadsheet, there is going to be a number of sections and through the course of my happy fingers, i
5:56 pm
probably put a wrong number underneath what the code section is. what is this disposition code clearance. if you run down the column you may see no. 1, 5, 6, 13. they have an explanation. when we write police reports, that's how we clear cases for the ucr for the crime reporting. no. 1 would be unfounded. no. 5 would be a juvenile arrest, no. 6, an adult arrest, no. 13, an exceptional clearance whereas we bring the case to the district attorney's office for a warrant and they decline to file charges for a variety of reasons. that's how the case would be closed out 13. if you see a 13 and the next box over you see a 24l, 30, 31, it means they were presented with a
5:57 pm
warrant, and they declined the warrant for that specific reason. that's the code they use. if they chose 13, with nothing next to it, a blank box, is something that our investigators closed if the victim requested nothing further to be done. even though the case shows as cleared, we can always reopen it. >> so what does the 24 mean? >> 24 is a code that district attorney's office uses. 24 means lack of evidence, and 24 l is the traditional one they use for lack of collaboration. if 1 person is saying something happened and the other person is saying something else happened and they can't come to a conclusion, the evidence is not there to support
5:58 pm
both sides. sometimes it's like a he said she said ordeals with a consent issue. 24, 24l pretty much deal hand in hand. and 30, we can't locate that person, 31 the survivor declines to proceed with the case. the next slide, 14 or 15 is just a snapshot of one page of our data base which is redacted to a report that can lead to the victim of a sexual assault. on this form here, you will see in the comment sections, the reasons. some of those reasons are investigative notes that i took as to remind me if we have to do something else in the case. i redacted a juvenile arrest and redacted just other comments on the public part of it.
5:59 pm
any questions? >> i have a number of questions, but i know mary from the occ and a community partner who might want to address the commission. thank you inform are that presentation. i would love to hear from ms. marion. this is a result of combined work of the occ policies and many ways of our system of designing policies is designed to ensure we are taking steps to address things that are seen in patterns and problem with discipline. this resolution was passed between the occ and the department and to ensure this is an issue we keep an eye on through reporting and through data. this is the first time and i want to
6:00 pm
thank you. ms. marion, what would you like to say? >> i just want to put a human face to the data and the report and collaboration. there was a rape survivor who filed a complaint with our agency and also came in front of the commission to talk about wanting more information on her case. through that our agency made recommendations about how to comply with the penal code section and dealing with survivors. it's rare that crime victims ever file complaints. all they want are police services. the bravery, the courage it takes to come to our agency to file a complaint and go through that process, this is one situation where it's just not an ability to enhance for the one particular person, but it's really the opportunity to enhance the entire svu unit to look the entire process. i thank
6:01 pm
everyone for stepping up to the plate for working with us on all of this. it's great to see this report. thank you. also, there is a member here from san francisco women against rape. they are at the table every month at our lep meetings and svu units and involved in other processes as well. >> great. do they want to come up. thank you for being here. >> hello, my name is stephanie. i want to thank you all for being here. what we do in san francisco as far as rape is we are very survivor centered. sometimes they want to report or not. they meet with one of the advocates. i one of the advocates and we see where they are and what they want to do afterwards. part of it is making a police report. one of the struggles we have seen not knowing what the
6:02 pm
process is and what other steps take place. i work with survivors who often filed a police report and the perpetrator has been in jail and the survivor hadn't been informed if the perpetrator is out of jail and lack of response. we are going to have a more concrete procedures for survivors and they will know what is going on and somebody is going to give them a call. it's beneficial for us to give that information especially working with the bill of rights and providing that information for the survivors andre ethier empowering them with a police report or not a police report. thank you. >> thank you very much. c'mon back up. i'm sure my colleagues and i have questions. i certainly have questions, colleagues, any questions from my colleagues, commissioner
6:03 pm
hwang? >> i don't know if i'm reading this chart correctly. thank you for your presentation. is column g indicating whether or not the survivor was actually notified? >> g? yes. >> it looks for the vast majority of the survivors are still not being notified. >> well, no. 1, if you look at the date, you will see this is prior to the resolution. then no. 2, if you look over in the common section, that kind of give some explanations as to why they may not have been notified. >> let's see if there is no foreign dna. it wasn't something returning out of the dna testing would you let the survivor know that there was some kind of result. >> are you talking about the first line? >> i just picked a random one.
6:04 pm
regardless of the comments, would we let the survivor know either that the person, there was no foreign dna or there were no findings, to let them know it was inconclusive, basically. >> this one we went specific if there was a code hit. we have a unit order that addresses follow up with a survivor or any person who makes, who is a victim in a special victims unit. so when we inactivate a case or close a case, we let that victim or survivor know that their case has been inactivated or if it's a closed case. if there is an arrest, whoever the victim or survivor is, is aware that there is an arrest because normally they would be contacted with the d. a.'s office. our officers would say we made an arrest in the case. sometimes when
6:05 pm
there is an unknown suspect, we may not tell the survivor who the person is, but that we made an arrest in the case. >> i guess if the dna results come back inconclusive, would you let the survivor know that before you close the case. >> before we inactivate the case, because to close out the case, with ever -- we have to know who the offender is, the suspect is. >> and my second question, the data collection, is it still taking 5-6 months to run the dna test? >> i will let the crime lab answer that. >> we have 120 days. as soon as it comes in. >> can you introduce yourself? >> i'm sorry. chief chaplain, i'm captain mar, director of divisions. basically we have 120 days to develop and upload a
6:06 pm
profile, a valid profile into code it. if we have a profile that can be uploaded. if we out source, then when we get the return of the response back from our lab that we contract, we have 30 days to validate that profile to make sure everything was done properly before we upload that into code it which is to combine the dna index system. >> would you say the average length of time for testing right now? >> the average time is about 130-140 days out. we are committed to trying to meet that 120 days. we are in the process of hiring 5 dna criminalist, and we are expecting in about 9 months we can get them up and running solo after the training and after they
6:07 pm
complete the proficiency testing. >> that's a long time to wait for the dna results. if a suspect was actually arrest prior to the dna results, they didn't wave time they would get to trial before the dna results are back. >> right. maybe you can get a sense or appreciation of what goes on. once we get the sexual assault kit, the swabs, and other items, there could be up to 100 different items that need to be looked through. so what we need to do if we need to go through a screening process and with three possible genetic materials. these are from blood, semen or saliva, all of those take different types of presumptive testing. it's very laborious. they have to go through each swab each item and decide which
6:08 pm
to use for further testing and we have this extraction process that we have to go through and uploaded to the thermocycler. we can't rush the science behind that. and then we get the data and get the statistical breakdown. you have probably seen in the report, one in a million. it gives a statistical number where you can draw your conclusion. that's why it takes that much time. >> is it just a personnel issue. we don't have enough folks doing this or have we looked at other departments to see how they are processing these things. i don't think anyone else has this issue of 130 days and we have a mandate of 120. have we done any time of review of this process that
6:09 pm
>> yes, that's why we have done outsourcing. if we know we can't meet that deadline, we sent it out to a private lab to get that. >> what's the turn around from the private lab? >> there is based on their resources, but usually the turn around i want to say about 30 days or so. these labs have a lot more resources than what we have currently. but chief suhr and chaplin are giving us the resources that we need to move on these timelines. >> it seems there are some fields you are working on based on collecting pursuant to this document. >> right. a lot of us are still
6:10 pm
manually entering and we are in the process of developing a new software to help us do a better job of tracking this and it will give us a better way of communicating with the svu unit and also the internal tracking. that's from the justice track system. >> right, the design colleagues as we realized throughout the process during these past years with backlog and have identified the gaps. one of the gaps where a kit would come in and the tester would decide if it was tested. that is not the case anymore. and the graph, a lot of people didn't realize the kit could be sent to the property room and not the crime lab. the crime lab would say we don't have a backlog and you are unaware there is a kit in the property room. the audit we did a few
6:11 pm
years ago, identified some of those issues. i think the shared goal we all have is all of us being on the same page. where is the kit, how long is it taking. if there are more resources, we want to get them to because we know there is time to get the analyst up. the big thing here and the latest concern which took a long time was this notion that even when the kits were tested there was a break down about the communication with the survivors. this is the first of the report. i know there is a number of other fields that you need to fill in pursuant to our resolution. it really is designed to let you all know and let us know where we are seeing any further gaps or breakdowns. so, this is the first report, but i will say that i am concerned that, and i understand and want to make sure that part of the reason we wanted to have this on early so that if we had a
6:12 pm
miscommunication we could clarify it. even though there is a code us hit, there is no physical evidence that we can upload. it's so essential that there is some communication to the survivor. so when you are tracking a document, there is still a number of survivors going back to january for example where they just don't know. part of what we really care about is not put the burden on the survivor to call and say, because you had so many aspects which are clearly trauma in form. you are putting this survivor, this horrific thing happened. maybe if you can explain the plan for that communication going backwards and certainly going forwards. >> okay, i think part of challenge for us is we are looking at
6:13 pm
all the old cases, right. so in order for us to document exactly what notifications were made we have to go through each. we have done this to the best of our ability. from now forward we are doing this on a daily basis. it's going to be a lot easier. we are attending our investigators, it's part of the unit that are coming out that they have to notify upon initiating contact with the survivor. but, the part that we are trying to be really respectful of in the 680pc, the survivor has to want this information. what we'll be clarifying at the very beginning of the investigation is here are your rights, is this something you want us to notify? if you do, it will be noted in the chronological and they will be getting all the updates. some, like i said, if you go down to the comments, there are some reasons why they may not have been notified. because up until now what
6:14 pm
we were doing is if the survivor contacted us or the information with providers, we make sure the survivor knows what all of their rights are and they will be asked if this is what you would like us to do then we provide that. if they say no, we do not want that information, then we respect their wishes. >> what if their answer changes? >> they can absolutely notify us. i mean i think for them -- >> when you say notify, are they informed at that time, if you change your mind or you want to do this differently? >> you know, i have to review that bill of rights that we have. i will see if that is in
6:15 pm
there to make sense. without looking at that, but we can add that to the dna to say if at any time you change your mind, you can absolutely let us know. our role at the special victims unit is to the survivor. if the survivor wants a change, then we are absolutely on board to give them whatever they need. >> i appreciate that and i also appreciate sort of the ways that you were thinking about other places to put the dna bill of rights and get it in the hands of survivors. i hear what you are saying that you are want to respect where the survivor is at and at that point when that kit is taken, make sure they are aware of their rights.
6:16 pm
with that statute of limitations going backward, and going forward and looking at it. what happened at the situation that brought this to our attention was a kit that wasn't tested for years and notifications weren't made. we are doing the right thing moving forward and addressing cases when the statute of limitations and notifications weren't noted and you have a plan to when notifications were made. >> so you would like us to go retro active? >> right. >> you would like us to go as far as back as we can go. >> as many within the statute of limitations. >> i would have to review. of course i can do whatever we are directed to do. the timeframe would be the question. >> going back to what samra
6:17 pm
says, if we are putting the survivor at the center. again, you go back and put together a plan and we can talk about it. the reality is we addressed the backlog in that way and not going forward, what i appreciate is it highlights for all of us that there is an aspect of survivor notification which is a backlog. like with the kits, you have to set up a plan, i recognize that. but the concern of this commission and so many in the community is, with this issue. didn't we clear the backlog, how is there another one of these, so looking forward, if we know now that there are survivors who didn't benefit fl 680 or this resolution, it's incumbent upon us to develop a plan for how to reach out to them and ensure they are notified because certainly that would go a long way with the prosecution's office also. >> commissioner loftus, the
6:18 pm
backlog cases, we get the crime lab report. every crime lab report that comes in, a case file is started or we add to the case file that was old. my cold case investigator reaches out to that survivor and makes them aware if there is a hit or if there is anything new about it or anything else he or she wants to make us aware of. it's not reflected on that data sheet because we are going back to january 1st period of time resolution, but there is some contact when we get new evidence. >> that's one of the things, too, to meld those to ensure that that is reflected here. any other questions, colleagues? no. great. thank you for all of your work.
6:19 pm
>> we will be back on for the colleague report. we are still on the police report. >> update on cases. there was a shooting on 7-6-16 at 2200 hours in serrano drive. an arrest was made. a call regarding a possible explosion. upon arrival victim stated he was in his apartment when he saw an explosion. they did not report initially to the police. but later did report to the police and an injury was to the right calf. they spoke to someone and he said he accidentally discharged the firearm.
6:20 pm
the citizens signed a citizens arrest. a special investigation team is investigating that case. on the same date at 2300 hours an officer responded to a person who was shot in the leg. a 23-year-old victim suffered an injury to the right i think. the person walked into -- the male was i identified by the victim. the victim told the officers the victim was exiting the vehicle and the suspect pointed a dark handgun and the victim heard a loud bang. the suspect walked into that residence. and the officers conducted a sweep and located a seized a
6:21 pm
38-caliber revolver, 22-caliber rifle, ammunition and bb gun and the suspect in that incident was booked. the next and last shooting at 711 at 541 hours. a funeral service in progress. a plainclothes officer was in the area and heard several gunshots and saw a black vehicle leave the area and officers responded to the area. we located a victim who sustained a gunshot wound to the left but tocks. the officer indicated a black sedan was involved at the shooting. no are have been made in that case yet. there are no homicides for
6:22 pm
the 1 week period. moving on from that, this is a briefing on the july 6th, critical incident in the tenderloin incident, the one that made me late for this meeting last wednesday. at approximately 2:00 p.m., the office received a call that a suspect was seen with a firearm. officers responded and located a description of a suspect, a black male with no shirt. khaki pants. he refused to move his hands from his pocket. an officer could see what appeared to be a firearm concealed. the united established a perimeter and evacuated buildings in the area. our special tactics team arrived on the scene. the suspect continued to
6:23 pm
refuse to adhere to commands. this appeared to have little effect on the subject as he was still standing. the hostage negotiation team requested to respond code 3 while the officers began to communicate with the team. code 3 lights and sirens. information is provided from a family member that the suspect is using and high on methamphetamine. the ambulance is staged nearby. the suspect is believed that he maybe the subject of an arrest based on some contact at another location in san francisco county. at 2:35 p.m., a critical incident is declared. the hostage negotiation team continues to negotiate with the suspect who refuses to take his hands out of his pockets. over an hour later he's
6:24 pm
making remarks that he's saying they would rather shoot him and he would rather die. you might as well shoot me. he turns his back. at 4:09 p.m., the suspect says i only have this 6-shot 22. you know what's in my pocket. i would rather you shoot me than end up back in that cage. i would rather take the easy out. when he moves with a large gap he escapes into an area. flash bangs to stop his movement. officers showed injuries. an additional less lethal round was used. by 5:00 p.m., it was agreed the
6:25 pm
suspect was not complying with demands. the subject continues to be not compliant. they release the sign which is debilitating to most people. it has a scale from 1-10. the subject says he doesn't want to stop, but wants the noise to stop now. by 5:17 less lethal rounds and he moves towards the trash can. the officers observe what they believe the subject attempting to cock the gun. less lethal employed to stop his action. an arrest team assembled and team redeployed. at 5:40 p.m.. the suspect is arrested and a revolver and 34 rounds is recovered from his person. the suspect is transported
6:26 pm
to san francisco general hospital where he's being treated for his injuries. that concludes that particular incident. there is a second incident on campbell street on july 11th. it lasted for 22 hours into july 12th. the department received a call of a suicidal man. when the officers arrived they noticed a subject standing near a window with a wire around his neck. negotiations begin. we are notified by family members that the subject may have access to a rifle and handgun. we continue to negotiate. the subject shutdown and wouldn't talk for over 20 hours. negotiations finally resumed and the subject just wanted us to go away. at one point the subject wandered to his front yard. the subject was taken into custody.
6:27 pm
this is an update on the community's concerns regarding the officer involved shooting with regard to some comments an attributed to the district attorney with regards to the crime scene and officer involved shooting. this was at the last commission meeting a community member expressed concern regarding that and i was asked to report back after that meeting with the district attorney. that his comments were taken out of context and he did not remove the body. however, i want to address these concerns. following an officer involved shooting, we go out to these scenes and time is of the essence because of dna evidence. the body was removed by the time we arrived on the scene.
6:28 pm
that shooting incident occurred at 9:40 p.m. and within 15 minutes automatic notification was made to our personnel. we called the investigator leaving a voice mail within at a minutes within the incident. a follow-up phone call made at 10:30 p.m.. 90 minutes after the notification is made, an officer involved investigator is on the team. we could have gotten a hold of him faster than the times outlined. to ensure the proper notification is made. the department implemented procedure by which the officer of homicide is immediately contacted for the investigator for response to a critical incident scene. which basically means an investigator for a homicide immediately goes out to the scene so that notification is done
6:29 pm
at the time they are on scene. second, tampering with the evidence by removing the body. officers have the obligation to render themselves safe and including the public. in this particular case, the officer handcuffs the person and renders aid and cpr until the ambulance arrived. the ambulance arrived and who then took possession of the body and removal of examination by medical examiner personnel. the sf p.d. does not have control over the body. recovering evidence and conducting test and additional evidence. it's the medical examiner's responsibility to remove the body and does not take direction from anyone when it's time to remove the
6:30 pm
body. with that, i will say this, it's why we photograph these crime scenes and videotape the crime scenes and do measurements so in the event that anyone is not able to make it out to the scene and will investigate at a later date, that is a point of reference. generally speaking, the body is not stationery. generally the body falls or rolls, there is aid rendered. the best possible evidence is to secure video from the area or witnesses viewpoints to tell us whatever happened. so with that, that is the conclusion of those reports. >> thank you, chief. i just have a question with regard to the last report. that is
6:31 pm
the officer shooting involved perez lopez. did the district attorney in your meeting indicate whether or not when their office was going to make a charting decision because i do know last week we had father smith, a number of faith leaders and a number of folks. i keep reading the report is imminent. >> he had backed up issues and trying to get through his backlog as fast as he possibly can. >> okay. commissioner hwang? >> i have a question regarding the july 6th incident. i think the media referred to comments that there was a tank deployed. can you talk about what that might be? some kind of armored vehicle. was there armored vehicle on july 6th? >> i believe they call it
6:32 pm
bear cat. it's just a vehicle i don't know much about it, but i believe it was at the scene. >> is it a machine or just a shielded car? >> it is, and it's there because if a person has a weapon and you need to get in a position where you have to cross the line of fire, our patrol cars may not repel certain firearms, so you can use that weapon if you are in the line of fire. >> does it have shooting capability or just a vehicle? >> no. definitely not a tank, just a vehicle. >> thank you. >> other questions for the chief? chief, i want to say obviously that incident, it seems there was time that was created and certainly the whole theory upon which a number of the reforms we have been
6:33 pm
working on this idea of time. that's why we asked for more information. we would look to one of the ways that as we know change culture is really lift up officers who did extraordinary things on that day. i would ask that the department look at and with the cit working group. there were cit working group officers. they do that in many ways already, but that's really the direction of the department and a very dangerous situation resolved peacefully. please let the commission know which officers are involved to get special recognition for that. >> it's unfortunate because this is a life saving episode. under the definition of life saving you have to be rendering aid to the person at the time of save your life. because of this limited recognition, it was limited as to whether or not
6:34 pm
to recognize the officers. we'll have to look that up. >> going forward, more recognition has to be put on instead of -- sometimes you have to use lethal force, but we should recognize the folks that do other things to let them know that those other options are huge and just as important and if not more important. if we can change those definitions because they may some contributing factor to cultural issues. i think changing some of those definitions so we can recognize those people to appreciate the fact that you showed extraordinary restraint and patience in saving someone's life. >> do you have the same report from last year?
6:35 pm
>> i do for homicide we have 26 at 2016 right now. last year we had 24. we are tracking two more homicides this year. >> please call the next item. >> item 1d. director's report. >> good evening, chief chaplin, i'm pleased to announce that i have appointed steve ball and sarah, as officer of complaints and
6:36 pm
also appointed as an attorney. if you can stand up. thank you, i will provide a brief biography of each one. steve has worked for the office of citizens complaint since 2002. he's been an active senior investigator since 2014. prior to steve's tenure with the occ for over 14 years. he worked as a managing editor for the daily journal and the american lawyer media. steve has a bachelor's degree in journalism from the university of nevada, reno. next is sherrie fletcher. sherrie has worked for the office of citizens complaints since 2005. she has served as a highway patrol officer for 14 years where she was selected to serve as a
6:37 pm
member of the chp shooting investigation team to investigate officer involved shootings. upon retirement from the chp sherrie held positions with san mateo continued and has post license 1 and 2 certification and private investigator. she has a bachelor's degree in public administration in law enforcement leadership from the university of san francisco. sara has worked for the office of citizens complaints since 2012. prior she was a producer and reporter for latin media. a media solutions coordinator for retail. while there, sara supervised on air talent and production crews. she has a bachelor's from california
6:38 pm
berkeley, go bears, and a member of golden state bar. i appointed aaron visitor as a temporary attorney. i hired aaron to specifically evaluate our investigation processes and how to achieve greater efficiencies in the conduct of investigations using available resources. aaron will work closely with our newest permanent attorney hired johnal den to prepare the investigation processes. also to look at disciplinary processes when we make recommendations on discipline for police officers. i will give you a brief biography. he spent 12 years with the department of justice developing and leading cutting edge of
6:39 pm
investigative reforms and compliance monitoring including extensive interviews, reviewing policies, records and data and evaluation of internal investigation procedures and incident report. his practice with the justice department includes strong focus on correctional practices including use of force interactions with inmates and health crisis and community mental health and disabilities services including crisis intervention. aaron has a doctorate cum laude and a ba from uc berkeley, go bears and comparative literature in spanish and english. aaron is a member of the new york and california bar. aaron is a panelist at the national association for civilian oversight of law enforcement in
6:40 pm
albuquerque, new mexico. that conference will be held through the 21-29. i would like to thank sherrie, sara, steve and aaron. [ applause ]. >> welcome. very impressive group and we have plenty of work for all of you. some of you continuing it. but welcome to all of you. thank you very much. >> we are building teams of the various reports that have come out and the various ballot propositions that have been adopted and are being proposed. the occ is certainly in need of additional staff and we are building our team. with sarah, sherrie and steve's promotion, there are three vacancies for the 8124 journal
6:41 pm
investigators which we intend to fill as soon as possible from an existing list for 8124 that expires in october that can be extended if we determine that there are enough eligible individuals remaining on that list. we have filled an existing investigator vacancy and that appointee is set to start on august 1st. i will introduce that appointee if she's available at your next police commission meeting. finally, back to the conference in september. early registration ends july 31st. i would encourage the police
6:42 pm
department and the police commission to send representative to the conference. the theme of the conference is confronting systemic injustice. some of the topics panels will address include procedural justice, implementing change, improving policing and challenges to legitimacy. police and deescalation and training and use of force. tactic use of force through systemic review. policy analysis and law enforcement oversight. using research and data to improve accountability and practice, and finally scrutinizing investigations. also on motion -- monday, i like other members of this commission i'm sure received a 200 plus page report from the blue ribbon panel on transparency accountability and
6:43 pm
fairness in law enforcement. as i mentioned in my announcement of aaron vicer's appointment and will provide me a written response. will the -- although the report was somewhat inaccurate in the discipline process, other observations were of no surprise to me or my staff because my staff and i work diligently and as transparently as we could with the panel of attorneys assigned to receive the policies and tactics and statistics. during this review, ween insured the confidentiality of police records and did not share files including naming specific officers. finally, for the record in 2015, the occ investigated 2 cases which we planned to bring to the
6:44 pm
police commission. both of those cases involved very serious misconduct of unnecessary force, conduct reflecting discredit and untruthfulness in 1 case. but in one of the cases the officer retired and the other case, the officer resigned. that concludes my report. >> any questions for dr. hicks? dr. marshall? >> director hicks, referring to the conference, there is a lot of things we can talk about getting to what we are trying to do here. madam president, i would suggest we get somebody there. i'm sure somebody wants to be there to report on the progress we have been directing to here in san francisco regarding the use of force and as even more important because those teams don't get covered by the
6:45 pm
news because nothing does happen. early returns that we heard from the two incidents that the chief cited earlier, those things did not turnout like they may have turned out in the past. folks need to know that and hear that. naco would have been a perfect opportunity to say that we have encountered a number of crisis here and we are trying to move forward and we are having some successes. we know there is a long road to get there, but i would suggest we definitely get there and say the progress we are making and certainly to be able to say that it was a huge benchmark for us to pass our new use of force policy. that's my suggestion. >> thank you, dr. marshall. commissioner hwang? >> two things, the 2 cases that the investigation was making about the charges to the commission.
6:46 pm
i don't know if the commission was aware of those cases. i don't know if you can present them in closed session in case there is a pattern we need to be looking for, right? just a thought. >> yes, commissioner hwang, should the city attorney indicate that it's appropriate to bring those matters to closed session, certainly, i would be happy to report them. the investigations were completed. the allegations were sustained, and in both cases, the officers determined it was time to leave. but it's really important when even if we have a case and we see that an officer is going to retire,
6:47 pm
that we complete that investigation provide it to the police department so they can keep that in their files because officers, retired officers come back as reserve officers. additionally if an officer retires or resigns and goes to work for another law enforcement agency when a background check is done, then that information is in the officer's personnel file. >> thank you, dr. marshall? >> i think that's an excellent suggestion if we can do that because we know when a charge is filed by the department, that's what happens. we get to see them and we get to see a resolution and a lot of cases they do resign before the disciplinary process begins. i think we can get a ruling if that's possible. >> can i add something that i think the public has a right to
6:48 pm
know also. the reason these investigations continue is because even though they resign, if they did something criminal, they are still charged in criminal court. they may have walked out the door and avoided internal discipline, but they do not avoid criminal prosecution if the conduct was criminal. that process also continues. they are not just walking out of here . they are doing it to walk out but they are still being dealt with as far as prosecution. at that point they are leaving, they are not subject to being forced to answer questions internally by us. at that point, if it is a criminal case, they become a defendant and
6:49 pm
are afforded to rights as any other citizen to not make statements and that type of thing as opposed to be compelled to make a statement to us because they are still employed. >> commissioner mazzucco? >> i want to thank director hicks for telling us about the 2 cases. for members of the public, in the past when we had a very large disciplinary docket. when i came, there were 80 cases pending and now we are down to ten or so. in years past, the officers would have taken the charges and taken the chance of coming before the commission. i think this commission has made it perfectly clear what we are going to do with people like that and we are seeing more of these cases, an more of these cases were officers resigning rather than facing the commission. that's a change. >> thank you. anything further for
6:50 pm
director hicks? okay, thank you, director hicks. please call the next item. >> item 1c t commission reports, commission president's report, commissioners reports. >> a brief report from me. we did get the information on the transparency. it's 250 pages. we have that. i want to say thank you to the lawyers who spent time on that effort. it was clearly the result of a lot of work. i did connect with the usdoj. as the department said, the u.s. doj has the report and they are going through it and we have several grand jury cases done. the department of justice will benefit from private attorneys to private citizens providing feedback. that is going to be what
6:51 pm
they factor into their efforts when we get the reports from doj in early fall. we are in a very strong position. i want to thank the blue ribbon panel. it reminds me of the steph curry quote. "never pass up a chance to get better". >> they just did that. this is the time to get all the feedback. we are in collaboration. we'll take all of that feedback and be in a position to craftto pass forward. colleagues, any other reports?
6:52 pm
>> yes, i do. >> commissioner melara? >> to follow up with board of supervisors avalos. we will be there again. i was there with commissioner dejesus and sergeant and a couple of others, and smith were there. we are still talking, but there is no resolution yet. that's it. we'll be meeting on monday. if you have anything else to share. >> the mountain has gotten smaller. we are working with the officer to try to get some resolution and try to meet the goal. ultimately the goal is to get the police department to present and talk about the metrics that are outlined in the measure 1 of the things i try to impress upon the supervisor, if you
6:53 pm
can name one time, i will agree to this right now. if you can name one time when we are asked to come to the board of supervisors. we have not been requested to report. we have always reported and will continue to do the same thing. we'll have another meeting. i think we did get somewhere. we have a little bit more to go. >> thank you, any other reports from fellow commissioners? okay, sergeant, please call next line item. >> item 1d. commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration at future commission meetings. action. >> what announcements do we have? >> we are dark for 3 weeks. we will not be back until august 3.
6:54 pm
rd. three commissioners absent for august 3rd, but we will have a quorum. we will meet august 3rd. >> other items? >> commissioner hwang? >> is there way to calendar a report from the blue ribbon committee meeting. i received it as well, but it's a lengthy reading. i wonder if we can have a presentation to go over the highlights. >> there is a summary. >> i read the summary. it's like 24 pages. >> we'll look at when we can schedule that. we'll do our best. okay. we are now going to take public comment on items 1a through d. any public comment on items
6:55 pm
1a-d? good evening, welcome. public speaker: thank you. i just want to say that having to cover four items in 2 minutes, it doesn't feel fair. we are talking about rape and murder and i'm supposed to respond to this in 2 minutes on all four items? i think i should be able to respond to each item 1 of the people don't want a report or notification because of the way their treated. they want to be notified. if they were treated well and respected and believed and heard, they would want to be notified. i suggest to tell them we won't notify you. i think we need to make it pro actively offering that to them. i'm just an appalled at the backlog. i never had to wait for a doctors report in my life.
6:56 pm
i think they should separate the dna. that should be done in a timely fashion like a week. we all get a doctors report back. this woman has violated and hurt and she has to wait. it's not proactive. about the report, i'm going to have to make more comments on the next part. we have so many things to cover right now. it's heartbreaking that we are supposed to do this so shortly. i'm so upset about the rape thing that i can hardly think about anything else. i will comment during regular public comment. the blue ribbon task force is so incriminating and demand so much respect. you could have gone to the presentation he made. i was there. it was an incredible presentation with the people and the lawyers. it was in depth, it was
6:57 pm
important. we need to really pay attention and not to what the police officers association thinks about it. >> thank you, next speaker, please. good evening and welcome. public speaker: good evening, commissioners, david salz, for police accountability. i have to agree with my friend that 2 minutes is not enough time to deal with all of the agenda items. with regard to the rape kits it's a combination of where is walden and cops. 130 days for the sf p.d. to do what commercial labs can do in 30 days is a non-starter. we need to definitely up our game here. with regards to the jones standoff, there were reports that the victim is in critical condition. i'm not sure how non-violent the standoff resolution was if the victim is in critical condition. i don't know that that's a factor not. there were also reports from the community that officers
6:58 pm
fired rubber bullets at the victim at close range. again, that's not what i would consider to be a non-violent response. in regard to the meal card situation, the chief went through a very dense bunch of facts about it and luckily we have video of this hearing. we can go through it in detail. everything was done according to regs. the body was removed. we got it wrong. i'm not going to buy that. we'll look into this a lot more closely. this is a very important case. the forensic evidence shows he was shot six times in the back. we have some issues here.
6:59 pm
as for the panel, i feel the press release on the boa which came out with their typical bullying and stonewalling kind of a statement. i hope you read it. it's a bunch of videos. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. public speaker: good evening, lee with campaign for the democratic elected police commission. people's commission, not police. i was hearing what he said. i'm in my office and a first responder for the antipolice terror project. i was notified there was a standoff on golden gate and jones and i quickly went do there and stayed down there for about 4 hours. at the time i was down there, i witnessed police officers firing beanbag at the
7:00 pm
person laying on the ground. at one time i heard a grenade go off. it was very troubling. i don't agree with some of the assessments because of the changes of use of force. the golden sky is lucky, police commission is padding the sf p.d. officers on the back. this man is in critical condition. that may not be what we are experienced to in police brutality. but it is brutality. you folks keep talk about transparency and as i understand and other members of the community are concerned with we have not learned the identity of this person on july 3rd, on market street. we kind of want to know why haven't his name
7:01 pm
been published to the public at this time. we have justified and validating this body and the sf p.d. for lack of transparency. >> thank you. next speaker, please.. >> also, appointing the officer that killed gongora pointing him to this bureau where he is working on reform. >> thank you, sir. next speaker, please. good evening, sir and welcome. public speaker: thank you, i don't join you in go bears scandal. that's not the model i had. i had the did you tell sometime ago to investigate that athletic department. >> go bears is what you are saying.
7:02 pm
i got it. >> i'm from nebraska. on the question of the sexual assault question hopefully you will take it up. are the survivors regularly contacted. we heard some indication that they are contacted when it's appropriate and necessary. but it seems to me it's possible that for a regular contact especially when there is no information to share and folks are in the dark and not rely on the victims to press for information by having to call themselves. i would make that a suggestion as a route contact as you said we are talking about putting survivors at the center. that would be one way to keep survivors at the center for regular contact to be made. last week chief came in and you were late,
7:03 pm
i guess it was last week due to that incident. some good news is that nobody died. other news that struck me, the question, does the chief have to be there at every incident for nobody to die? that's kind of an unsettling proposition. so our question was that the reason that the chief was there that it didn't go worse? which then goes into the training of people who are there without the chief having to over see and control that situation. the open opportunity that you give at these meetings is sometimes stressful because there is a lot of business that comes before the public hearing and i think there is a reason that this public
7:04 pm
time exist. >> thank you. thank you, sir. next next. public speaker: good evening, panel. i came here for one thing. i just want to preface my original comment. i am a sexual assault survivor. in 1971, i was raped in san francisco. i welcomed the progress that is happening. i was victimized again as a minor in the court system and with the police because back then, they had the attitude, oh, what did she do? what did this minor do? so i don't want to be labor that. but i did want to say that maybe in order to leverage the
7:05 pm
monies for the lab with the san francisco police department, you might want to collaborate with ccfs city colleges biotechnology program. they do a phenomenal job with dna. that might be an option that you might want to explore, because san francisco city college and that way you can get some interns to help you with the backlog with the dna synthesis. i came here because i wanted to say, i wanted to jump through the television again when i saw what happened on jones street. it means that time space and distance does work, and then i want to commend you, chief, on not killing another brother, or the deescalation of that incident which was very dangerous, and,
7:06 pm
yeah, bean bags, if you would have just stopped at bean bags with mario woods, we would still have him here. i thank you so much for what happened, and you didn't end up, and the outcome was one that i can live with. thank you. >> next speaker, please. public speaker: good evening, my name is james jones. a couple weeks ago we were asked to give independent feedback after the perceived performance of the police department. i called the, contacted the commission and was given an e-mail by which to contact the department of justice a couple weeks ago and they have not go toen back to me. i thought you should know
7:07 pm
that from time to time the department is not diligent in this regard. >> we can get you information now, there are representatives from the department of justice tonight. there you go. next speaker, please.. good evening, sir. welcome back. public speaker: ladies and gentlemen of the audience, good evening and commissioners good evening. for the record, my name is emilio lawrence. i have spoken to this commission many times in the past. i missed the last few months because the taxi drivers have been battling uber which the police department refuses to deal with. i'm not here to talk about that. i think the issue is right now, a new chief of police. you have had a couple in
7:08 pm
the past. greg suhr, good comments. he screwed up in the end with bad police reports. he basically did a good job. before you hire someone from out of town, is to stop doing this, you need to let the public grill them. i would tell you as a taxi driver i watched him parade around san francisco in a chauffeured limousine with police escorts. he thought he was in cuba. too, i bring this up because it doesn't seem that this commission with older members and diversity is more concerned with their own personal lives than dying anything for the public at large. you can't
7:09 pm
even use the microphones properly. we would like to hear what you are talking about. half of us don't. we hear part of what you are talking about. i would like to see that vetted out properly. learn to use the mics, learn to speak properly. and talk about who you are going to hire. we would like to ask them questions and do our own background checks. i thank you for your time in this matter. >> thank you. i would like to remind members watching that statements made do not reflect the viewpoint of the commission. next speaker, please. welcome. public speaker: my name is daniel paiz. we finally have the report from the blue ribbon panel or commission whatever you want to call
7:10 pm
them. it shows just how bigoted and corrupt the sf p.d. is. along comes martin hall ran who compares gas conto the dallas shooter. it's politicized. years old williams who talked about sexism is now further blacklisted by
7:11 pm
the poa sf p.d. gangs. we talk with unit when we talk about these thugs and cowards that run the poa and scott wiener that cater to them that allow this corruption and bigotry and racism and brutality to continue. as long as installing these tactics of poa coming out to speak the truth about stuff that happens continues, the protest will only grow and so will the casualties. >> thank you, sir. next speaker, please. good evening. public speaker: good evening, i'm laura guzman translating for the family of -- murdered by sf
7:12 pm
p.d. april 7th. >> good evening, those in the commission. thank you for the opportunity to share what we feel. we are very alarmed about hearing about what's happening with the bureau of reform. we are really, we feel it's a drop in our faith that the sergeant who murdered our cousin is part of the bureau of reform of the sf p.d. we are really hoping that you
7:13 pm
as a commission and the new chief make sure that this does not continue. the community and the family are really alarmed and we would like sergeant, the sergeant to be removed from the bureau. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> good evening. [ spanish speaker ] >> it's really making us in despair to hear this news. we are not understanding how the police department and the commission are not taking at this point appropriate course of
7:14 pm
action. we know that sometimes it's not easy to assign that someone has murdered someone, but the video that murdered my husband, he can now be heading reforms in the city. do something. this is unconscionable. >> thank you. i'm very sorry for your loss. chief, do you want to respond? >> definitely. first of all, the officer
7:15 pm
being referred to. we reached out to him and he is voluntarily agreeing to be reassigned. that is already taking place. to be clear, he was part of a bureau which means there is a deputy chief. he was not in charge of reforms. there is a bureau, i don't know if i need to slowdown for the interpreter to communicate this to the family. he wasn't in charge of the reforms. he was part of a gigantic bureau that consisted of several people in several different units. he was in that particular bureau, but he understand the concerns the family has and agreed to be reassigned. so that is happening.
7:16 pm
>> did that happen today? >> yes. >> thank you for that response. thank you. next speaker, please. public speaker: tom burte. when we fire a bullet, that's a failure. that doesn't work. that's where our goal, that's where we want to get to. second, on the tenderloin incident, a tough call with a gun. suspect has a gun. crisis intervention team comes in. i presume the crisis intervention team doesn't have guns. at least i would like them not to have guns. again, they need to be angels and why they are not part of the police force. i want them to have their own identity. that's a tough call. third, transparency, i would like to see when we have a report of a killing
7:17 pm
or murder, the coroners report here so we can, the people in the audience and the citizens can. we heard a report that was fired six bullets in the back. we would like to have that clarified right here in this office. of the city labs for, i will give an applaud for that for the kits. if that could work out wonderfully, that could be great all the way around for the city, college and for the police department. new hires, i think when you apply to be a san francisco police officer, we have a standard that you are an open book. you are an open book before when you apply, you are an open book while you are working for us and if the there is an incident, that's an open book for the people to
7:18 pm
understand. if you don't want to be an open book, if you want to keep your files closed, go somewhere else and work. thank you. >> thank you, sir. next speaker, please. good evening and welcome. public speaker: good evening, thank you very much. i'm learning a lot. this is my first time at a meeting like this. i appreciate you being available to hearing us out. when i hear about the process about how long it's taking for these test to come back about the rape, it's kind of funny in a way. when i think about the issues that i came here to speak about, i think how can we even deal with that, when we can't even get some test back to us promptly to inform people. so it hurts my heart a bit. being a white heterosexual female in the city, i'm concerned about the safety of my black brothers and sisters where the incidents in the police force are not being
7:19 pm
held accountable on these situations and i learn about this abuse everyday and i learn how we can speak with the mayor and the police commissioners. thank you very much for the details. i'm saying the obvious. i want to say where i demand that the black community be respected. as a white face in this world, i want to be heard. people of color, latino community, asian american, ending this white supremacy that we have here. we all deserve to be safe and feel confident that the police will not terrorize us. the fact that i'm a white heterosexual person i don't feel this everyday and learning very clearly that we need to be empathizing with this. i think that's my time. basically just the behavior is so
7:20 pm
juvenile and abusive in some cases. it's being perpetuated in this city. i appreciate being heard. i hope we can focus on respecting our humanity. i know how hard your jobs are and i'm so grateful for your service. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please.. welcome. public speaker: i want to play this video. >> it is one thing to
7:21 pm
anticipate a death because of old age or a sickness. it is quite another to experience the sudden violent death of a loved one. [video] >> [gunshots] since 2004, san francisco has experienced an
7:22 pm
unprecedented number of homicides. >> 60% of the homicide victims are people of color. their loved ones living in neighborhoods of scarcity and neglect must deal with their personal tragedy while at the same time facing the crime and violence of unsafe neighborhoods surrounding them everyday.
7:23 pm
>> thank you, ms. brown. next speaker, please. good evening and welcome. public speaker: my name is kevin benedicto, one of the lawfirms that assisted the blue ribbon. we published off a report. i have hard copies here for the benefit of any commissioners who would like hard copies for director hicks or chief chaplin as well. i will leave them after my remarks. on behalf of the panel i would like
7:24 pm
to express our gratitude to the commission for their assistance and participation in the report process bl it watts interviewing and more importantly inviting the panel to be involved in the many use of force provisions. many of the recommendations of the report were adopted before this was even published which involves mostly the changes to use of force policies that is reflecting the willingness of the commission to work on the panel. the recommendations made are constructive and we want to be available as an on going resource. because the report is published, the judges are not washing their hands and walking away. to questions, i know that many panel representatives would be willing to at a later date if you wish to speak to panel representatives about our findings. we are definitely willing
7:25 pm
to do that. representatives from the panel from directors to judges to all attorneys are happy to serve as an on going resources for our report. >> thank you mr. benedicto for all of your hours that went into assisting us with the report. thank you, sir. vice-president turman? >> i need to respond to one thing. first of all, i have read the blue ribbon commission's report. i'm reading it now. i think a response from us is necessary and we should do so. i want to clarify something mr. benedicto said, many of the reforms that the chronicle noted we have been discussing with the chronicle and other community stakeholders since before the blue ribbon panel was created. so it's not as if we began working on these things because of the blue ribbon panel pointed it out.
7:26 pm
we have been working on many of the issues and many of the issues noted for the reform in the report were things already on our list. we are glad to take guidance and information from every available resource, but we are not sitting by waiting for the blue ribbon panel or anyone else to tell us what we need to do. we are reaching out and we are constantly working. >> thank you, vice-president. commissioner dejesus. >> i'm half way through it. there is 250 pages. i do want to say, we've gotten a lot of input from a lot of different groups and a lot of constructive criticism which is good. it's healthy. i think there are many recommendations that i have seen so far, things that were previously on our agenda and we haven't really gotten to and you also pointed out our policy. it's something we have
7:27 pm
tried to get in the past and with your help, hopefully we will get a policy analyst and will help with our resolutions and help with our strategies. there is a lot in there and i'm hoping to schedule in a report and having a discussion on this. this will help everybody from the grand jury. . everybody is concerned about the department at this point and i think there are good recommendations and we should discuss it. >> i want to follow up to say. we don't have seven law firms. we have a commission secretary and an assistant. we need some resources to help us get to work and implement these. i have asked the mayor's office for moran list to help us. >> hopefully the blue ribbon panel can help us get that. we are seeing
7:28 pm
what we are lacking and need. we hope they get us what we need. i agree with you. >> to remind the commission, this is one of the recommendations we put forward initially in this budget process. i will get an update for this commission on what report we are going to get policy wise. what i testified to at the blue ribbon panel was we were trying to get a policy analyst to support our work. mr. benedicto pointed out that a number of members shared because we have been in this inquiry about how to get to a better place for some time. we can certainly use advocates to get us to those resources. will is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. next line item. >> item 2, presentation of sf p.d. occ report on general orders policy
7:29 pm
proposals "sparks report". this is the sparks report. this used to be on our calendar to tell us where the reports and various policies are. this commission prioritized it as an individual item and did ask that occ and department work collaborative together to form around this commission around cit, around sexual assault testing. i would like to welcome you for this important report on the status of the various policy initiative that we are endeavoring to enact. >> good evening, again. mary from the office of citizens complaints. the report is 108 page document that the commission has put on the website. for members of the community, areas that are in blue are areas that our agency has worked on in the
7:30 pm
last 6 months. areas in yellow are areas that the police department has worked on and the areas if green have come before the commission. it's a cumulative report so you can see policy recommendations to work on the department of general orders since 2008. there has been a lot of work. there has been projects done and a lot more work to be done as you can see. my remarks are about a few things that while i worked on with the police department and community members over the last 6 months. use of force we've heard a lot about it. i in combination with many community stekdz stakeholders as well as the police department worked on many use of force department general order. i as member of the occ attended a lot of public hearings to listen to remarks from many members of the community so that we can
7:31 pm
add those comments and considerations and documents to the commission. on june 22nd, this commission adopted the use of force policy. i think it's one of the best in the country. it's the standard highest in the state. i looked across the country and what all police departments are doing and we are out in the forefront with really progressive policy. i think as a community we have a lot to be proud of. that's one big project that we've been working on for the last 6 months. i just want to underscore, we talked about the sexual assault resolution. there is one aspect that keeps coming up about communication that this police department has with survivors. i want to underscore as one of our agency recommendations once the police department is able to have regular communication with survivors on active cases and the department agreed and they issued a unit order for any as 30
7:32 pm
days for active investigators are required to have communication every 30 days. the other two things i want to highlight with crisis intervention teamwork, as usual, there is a whole coalition of individuals of members of different organizations. we meet monthly with the police department to move forward on cit. a huge part has been training. we finished the dgi. we finished it, it was a year long process and provided it to before chief suhr and now acting chief chaplin. it's in the very recent stage and i'm sure the department will be providing more information in the weeks to come whenever the department is looking for how to roll out true c it teams where there
7:33 pm
is truly a sergeant and team training for those teams that dispatch would be on board with rolling out c it teams to these calls. with that new program, there are some changes that have to happen with the c it dgo to finish those revisions. we are working on revisions to some of this curriculum and i know the department in combination with the mental health working group will be updating the commission in august about this new change. it's a good change and really moving forward to what we've all envisioned to the c it teamwork. the last thing i want to highlight is language access. there is many organizations. we meet monthly with the police department to talk about issues. there is a whole myriad of projects. since 2007 since the dgo
7:34 pm
was passed, they discussed data about how often are they using bilingual officers. finally the department has that capability in place. i received data for the next 3 months about bilingual officers. we are going to analyze that data. it's revolutionary that's happened. they are moving forward and it's successful. >> great. >> good evening, i just want to echo some of the things. the department has been working collaboratively with the office of citizens complaints. the many of the stakeholders whether through the lapd group and others on body worn cameras and the social media which is a general order that
7:35 pm
the commission has been asking for. i hope to have a social media policy before this commission within the next month. to give you an update on other general orders. on today's presentation regarding sexual assault kits. i have been working over the past four or 5 months to get unit orders to different understood involved in the process to make sure the point in 680 pc are codified within a unit policy to ensure we hold those units accountable and know what the specific responsibilities are. we have been working collaboratively with the occ to ensure the best policies are in place to help us better serve the community. >> great. questions, colleagues, dr. marshall? >> this is not so much of a question, but as one was here when the sparks report became
7:36 pm
the sparks report and at the time president sparks and commissioner sparks were in a black hole and they needed to come to a point where you have been working collaboratively and doing a great job. any suggestions that the two of you have for you know making us better and moving along faster? i'm sure i would appreciate and the commission would appreciate. we know you are doing the best you can. is it a staff thing, is there another model that would help? i would really appreciate it. the i really ask you to think about that and don't be afraid to make the recommendation. i would ask you to do that and really think about that. >> the other thing that i would suggest too is one of the things that this commission, part of what
7:37 pm
we are to do is set the priorities. we have certainly be very focused on. we had to do redistricting, body cameras and use of force. c it for me personally is the continuation of ensuring that it's such an essential piece and we finalize that after so much information from so many stakeholders. and worthwhile for this commission, one of two minds to have all that we can to give sufficient direction and also we will be receiving information from the department of justice in september. some will be ones we have the authority to act on and some will be under the authority of the chief. it might be worthwhile for us to have the conversation of what we have existing within priorities and some serious recommendations come this fall. i would ask for you all to
7:38 pm
have that prepared. we'll put this back on the agenda i think in august. we've got some pretty heavy agendas. it might be helpful for us to triage what we have now and be able to fit in what comes from department of justice in the fall. >> commissioner dejesus? >> i was thinking along the same lines. thank you for the hard business or occupation. -- work. there was a lot of work prioritized by this commission. we also need to have the flexibility about issues that do come up. we need to maintain flexibility and also what we want in the future with the doj may
7:39 pm
or may not be recommending. there is a question about staffing and you should give us some input on that. what is an appropriate size staff. >> chief chaplin? >> yeah, i want to give kudos to them for working on these policies. they are difficult. i understand what commissioner marshall said about speeding up the process. what i want to make sure we do when we stream line this process is we keep in place in keeping with community stakeholders during these process. it slows down. i think community input is a must. it's a new process for the police department. going down that road, that's going forward. that's one of the things that we have embedded in coming up with some new policies. so, when we looked at the process, i think one of the things we want to keep in place and keep in mind is meeting with the community stakeholders is a must to get that input into where
7:40 pm
they would like to see some of these orders going and get that in put the from them. >> great, thank you, chief. any questions for the chief or for this team? okay. thank you very much. any public comment on item no. 2? welcome. public speaker: sfrt from the san franciscans for police report. with regard to the sparks report. just a glance at it, it looks like a mostly useless document. a hodge podge for many years and nothing implemented and the status quo maintained over decades. i think you should toss it in the waste basket. it doesn't need to be this complicated. if you are going to have something like this in your website,
7:41 pm
please put it in an xl file so we don't have to go through the pdf to figure out what it means. i think this should be agendaized. it's no the that complicated. with regard to community input and stakeholders, you are turning it around as equivalent. we don't know the process with stakeholders with regard to the use of force was. but it's pretty much, first of all it was subcontracted out of the commission to the best of my knowledge, the aclu, the bar association, these folks are not from the community. the community is a justice for coalition, justice for mario woods, etc. we were not invited to the stakeholders meetings and that's a
7:42 pm
problem. you guys are mushing together stakeholders and community that is not really accurate as to who the real community is that you need to start paying attention to. by the way, the kinds of community meetings that we had in january where basically a bunch of people get up and read a bunch of things ignored, that is not a right process. of >> for clarification, the way stakeholders were decided we had a discussion here at the commission. it was agendaized and we discussed the various groups invited and asked the commissioners if there were any gaps and commissioners made recommendations and we got information from body worn cameras. that was a process and it happened here in room 400. for point of clarification. and the public defender and the blue ribbon working on body worn
7:43 pm
cameras. they expressed interest and they were added. we are constantly adding folks. that's the process. >> i'm sorry, i cannot let you characterize all the folks that i know from the community that worked on it as not being real. that's not true. now, you want to character them as not being real, i take offense to that. all of the young people involved in this process, they are real. >> next speaker. public speaker: on the cit's, again. it's a new system that's being planned growing and we are learning as we grow. just in the term of the negotiator, i would imagine that a negotiator is part of the police force
7:44 pm
preferably not with a gun on his belt. the crisis intervention team i would again hope has no gun belt. where you draw the line between the negotiator and a situation that has a man that's a little bit dearranged, fueled by a potent gasoline drug in his system and carrying a gun, that is a very dangerous situation for anybody. but when that's not, when we determine there is no gun involved . that's where the c it team comesen and they have to have a little bit difference than the police officers. they have to take care of somebody's that's damaged and broken. a gun is not going to aid in that process. while we are birthing this team, at some point in time
7:45 pm
i would like to see it separate from the police force, have it's own identity. it's much better when you guys lean into the microphones. >> thank you, lots of feedback for us these days. lean into the microphone. any further public comment? welcome back. public speaker: i'm kind of shocked at the defensiveness of the commissioners when i rarely hear good suggestions when we are looking at the time we are putting in and to hear you be so defensive is shocking. one was smiling and laughing and shaking her head. i cannot believe that happened. i really want to say if you want connection to the public, that you might affirm our commitment to why we are here. people have been murdered. this is serious. we are serious about doing
7:46 pm
what we can. i would say we are not always right, but i would not say that we should be the only time you speak is when you think something isn't true or wrong or doesn't feel like community relations. we are doing the best we can to understand what is happening and it's very painful to feel attacked and hear you be so defensive. let's all work together. >> i would like to say something because i think you are were referring to me. there were wrong translations. the person was very respectful in spanish and the translator was translating words that were not included in spanish. i speak spanish. i find it that sometimes
7:47 pm
people come here as advocates use people in the audience, with people who don't speak the language to translate for themselves, not for the person who is speaking. that's why i was going crazy thinking. thank you. >> is there any further public comment? >> i'm sorry, i just want to say, if we know people are coming, we should have translators available. maybe if we can -- if we know in advance, maybe we can have. we have money for translators. >> if communication helps. language access. okay. to request services, contact the police commission at 415-837-7070 at least 48 hours in advance
7:48 pm
of the hearing. late notices are possible. we would like to accommodate them so we avoid this in the future. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> item 3. presentation regarding the selection process for the chief of police discussion. >> okay, so, colleagues, i will welcome up members of anderson and associates. this is the first time we are having a chance to hear from them. this was the one firm to help us select our chief. welcome, i will let you introduce yourself. >> great, thank you very much. good evening, president loftus, commission, dr. hicks and chief chaplin. anderson and associates and my colleague gary peter son. we are your search team and we'll be working with you throughout this process. we have supplied you with
7:49 pm
documentation that we have put out for the preponderance. we would like to fairly quickly walk you through some of the highlights of the material. we'll start first with the recruitment schedule and i will say that we have designed a time line that is fairly aggressive that will have a recruitment period of about 45 days. we hope to be able to open up the search next week and we would like to make sure that the commission and the public are aware that concurrent with opening this search, we will have a very aggressive community input throughout the process and that will involve a variety of things and we would have an internet survey for the community to respond to characteristics and
7:50 pm
attributes that they would like to see in the next chief with a lot of ability to fill in some information. we'll also do a survey of the department and that will be kept separate as well. the commission would like to do five public meetings and we'll work with you to get those advertised and the announcements made for those various locations. those would start in mid-to late august. so those would run over about 3 different weeks with again five public meetings. we would also establish and e-mail specifically to our firm that would allow the contribution of comments that would not be restricted by a
7:51 pm
surveying type of system. those are the procedures for getting community input. after the 45 days, which will take us to the end of august, we will summarize that information and bring it back to you and share with you and also release that publically and posted online. the application period for potential candidates that we'll be reaching out to will go through the end of august and we'll come back to the commission as well following the review of the community input because that will give you a clear delineation as to what the community wants you to look for before you start your interviews. so we'll be able to help you shape that ideal characteristic even better. so that is what i wanted to put before you is that
7:52 pm
general timeframe. so that the commission potentially will do interviews during september. the commission has the charge of putting three names before the mayor. we anticipate that that would happen in early to mid-october. and at that point in time, that's when the selection period would take place. there would be a full post background done by an independent agency on the selective candidate. so that would be something again that needs to be wrapped in. so that the timeframe of that final selection would mean your new chief would start towards the end of the year potentially maybe in january depending on that timeframe and their transition. so that basically is the overview of the timeline. >> if i can just, thank you, nobody loves an aggressive
7:53 pm
timeline like me. so i appreciate this. but i do want to say to the public, because when you put out deadlines i also like to hold myself to them. this is a process where there are going to be dependent factors, how many applicants we get and whether the commission think we have enough applicants and the interviews. this is a goal, not a deadline. i want to make that clear to the public and the commissioners. this is a role we are playing in driving these things. this is a process that we need to make sure we get right and there might be some variables that might slow us down a bit. >> yes, that is a point well-taken. included in the brochure we put some language which means as candidates might be put
7:54 pm
through the process we may consider that. consider that a soft closing date and we'll be able to again move through that process on your behalf. the other documents in your package and provided for the public. we have prepared a draft brochure with some of the comments we've gotten from commission members and we still are in the process of talking to and scheduling some time. so we'll be able to fine tune this over the next few days and into next week. gary peterson will be doing some of those calls. we do hope to move forward in the became timeframe. the ideal candidate will be built in more thoroughness with the information from the public. we've also provided for you
7:55 pm
the draft surveys for the community and the department. so they are included in your information. i will also say that for those individuals that perhaps do not have access to a computer, we will make arrangements with staff to have hard copies of the community survey available at ten stations. so those will be available for everyone as well. also at your meetings, we will supply these cards and again around city hall and at the various stations and locations that encourage people to do the internet survey online or send us an e-mail with that information. with that, i would like to have gary peterson come to the podium here to
7:56 pm
speak to some of the qualifications. >> thank you for having us. i want to direct your attention to the brochure on the back it talks about education and on the inside the qualifying criteria that relates to experience. and i will take any questions you have relating to those two issues.
7:57 pm
>> a question i have about this process about the chief must live in the area. there are some constitutional limitation to that issue. i know we have a deputy attorney here. we want to make sure we don't have any qualifications to have anything to do with that. >> commissioner melara? >> yes, i went through the entire draft and there are a lot of concerns that i have. maybe you talked to the commissioners, but i have never been talked to. when it comes to cultural diversity and multicultural communities, this looks like it could be new
7:58 pm
york or kansas. it doesn't okay anything about who the multicultural could be in san francisco. the population is wrong, it's not 706,000. it was 864,000 last counted by the state bureau. in terms of the community it doesn't say what this community is about. it could say that we are from the bay area and collaborate with other police departments in the bay area that comprises a multicultural community of blah blah blah because we are very different from other places. i was in new york last week and the people look very
7:59 pm
different. the police department, the role of the commission, we are somewhat like l.a., but we are different from seattle. in terms of how this police chief would relate to where we are one of the unique commissions in the country. i'm just pointing that out because i think whoever applies for this job needs to know that. again, the cultural diversity issue is extremely important to me because people need to know what they are coming into. we are not the same as any other city. so, i went through it and the other minor changes that i would make, but they are not as driven as
8:00 pm
what i said. >> commissioner, i really appreciate your comments. this is in draft form and we will be updating the brochure as we speak with all the commissioners and get that feedback to make it right for the recruitment. >> i also want to point out that is what we are looking for. we are not going to start interviewing until september and that's the connections we need to have. please provide any comments. the brochure is a starting point and i agree with you that we can refine it. it's sort of your outline. your outline can be perfect, but the test is to use the criteria and we'll get through this through the


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on