PortlandOnline

POL Government Elected Officials Auditor Griffin-Valade Divisions IPR CRC CRC Meeting Information Public Meeting Minutes Citizen Review Committee Monthly Meeting Minutes 2003
March 4, 2003

INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW DIVISION
 
CITIZEN REVIEW COMMITTEE
 
MINUTES FOR March 4, 2003 (approved March 18, 2003)
 
CRC members present: Lopez (Chair) Stone (Vice Chair), Alexander, Browning, Butzbaugh, Miggins (arrived at 6:36 p.m.), Montgomery, Ueland.

Not present: Jaffe

IPR staff present: Blackmer (City Auditor), Rosenthal (Director), Stewart (Community Outreach), Rees (Deputy City Attorney – for supplemental hearing only).

IAD and Police Bureau staff present: Captain Schenck, Sgt. Kevin Warren (PPA Representative – for supplemental hearing only)
  1. Meeting was called to order at 5:40 p.m. by Chair Hector Lopez.
  2. Member Browning complained about unreasonable length of the agenda and asked for a time certain adjournment at 8:30 p.m. which was accepted by the committee.
  3. The IPR Director announced that the minutes from the February 18, 2003 meeting were not available for approval, but will be submitted to members before the next meeting.
  4. IPR Director’s Report:

    • The Police Bureau Training Division gave a report on the pilot project regarding the use of the tazer. The pilot project lasted for 5 ½ months, from July 1, 2002 to December 15, 2002. The tazer was deployed 88 times during that period with no injuries to any arrestees or any officers. 2 tazers were deployed at each Precinct. The IPR has, thus far received 4 complaints regarding the use of the tazer. 2 complaints have been declined by IAD and two are still pending review. Members should advise the IPR if they have not received training on the tazer.

    • Rapid Response training will be taking place on March 11-14, 2003. IPR will be providing a schedule of the training to the CRC members. Anyone interested in attending part of the training should let the Community Outreach Coordinator know.
  5. Supplemental Hearing Protocol was adopted by consensus subject to the IPR Director adding language between D. & E. allowing comments by the appellant and the Police Bureau with respect to any new information raised during the supplemental hearing.
  6. Case 02-17 Supplemental Hearing.
• The IPR Director presented 10 allegations that were referred to the Police Bureau for findings. One allegation was subsequently declined by the IPR
as untimely. The CRC has no jurisdiction over this allegation.
• Mia Butzbaugh spoke to each of the allegations.
• Judd Carusone, attorney representing Mr. Bonneau spoke on his behalf.
• Mr. Bonneau spoke and presented a list of new allegations.
• 6:36 p.m. CRC Member Miggins arrived.
• After discussion of the allegations, motions and votes took place as follows:
 
Allegation No. 1: Motion by Butzbaugh, second by Browning to recommend that the finding be changed from Exonerated with a Debriefing to Sustained.
Yes: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez, Alexander (5)
No: Ueland, Montgomery (2)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion passed 5-2.
 
Allegation No. 2: Motion by Butzbaugh, second by Browning to recommend that the finding be changed from Exonerated with a Debriefing to Insufficient Evidence.
Yes: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez, Alexander (5)
No: Ueland, Montgomery (2)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion passed 5-2.
 
Allegation No. 3: Motion by Butzbaugh, to recommend that the finding be changed from Exonerated to Insufficient Evidence. Motion failed for lack of a second.
 
Allegation No. 3: Motion by Ueland, second by Montgomery to recommend that the finding of Exonerated be affirmed.
Yes: Ueland, Montgomery (2)
No: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez, Alexander (5)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion failed 2-5.
 
Allegation No. 3: Motion by Browning, second by Stone to recommend that the finding be changed from Exonerated to Insufficient Evidence with a Debriefing.
Yes: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez, Alexander (5)
No: Ueland, Montgomery (2)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion passed 5-2.
 
Allegation No. 4: Motion by Butzbaugh, second by Browning to recommend that the finding be changed from Exonerated to Insufficient Evidence with a Debriefing.
Yes: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez (4)
No: Ueland, Montgomery, Alexander (3)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion passed 4-3.
 
Allegation No. 5: Motion by Butzbaugh, second by Stone to recommend that the finding be changed from Exonerated to Insufficient Evidence with a Debriefing.
Yes: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez (4)
No: Ueland, Montgomery, Alexander (3)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion passed 4-3.
 
Allegation No. 6: Motion by Butzbaugh, to recommend that the finding be changed from Exonerated with a Debriefing to Insufficient Evidence. Motion failed for lack of a second.
 
Allegation No. 6: Motion by Ueland, second by Montgomery to recommend that the finding of Exonerated with a Debriefing be affirmed.
Yes: Ueland, Montgomery (2)
No: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez, Alexander (5)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion failed 2-5.
 
Allegation No. 6: Motion by Browning, to recommend that the finding be changed from Exonerated with a Debriefing to Sustained. Motion failed for lack of a second.
 
Allegation No. 6: Motion by Alexander, second by Browning to recommend that the finding be changed from Exonerated with a Debriefing to Insufficient Evidence with a Debriefing.
Yes: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez, Alexander (5)
No: Ueland, Montgomery (2)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion passed 5-2.
 
Allegation No. 7: Motion by Butzbaugh, second by Browning to recommend that the finding of Exonerated with a Debriefing be affirmed.
Yes: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez, Alexander, Ueland, Montgomery (7)
No: None (0)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion passed 7-0.
 
Allegation No. 8: Motion by Butzbaugh, second by Browning to recommend that the finding of Exonerated with a Debriefing be changed to Sustained.
Yes: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez, Alexander, Ueland, Montgomery (7)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion passed 7-0.
 
Allegation No. 9: Not vote taken. Alexander commented that he had concerns about the IPR decline in this case. The IPR Director noted that the time to make a comment on that issue had passed. Butzbaugh commented on the reasons for the decline.
 
Allegation No. 10: Motion by Butzbaugh, second by Montgomery to recommend that the finding of Unfounded be affirmed.
Yes: Butzbaugh, Browning, Stone, Lopez, Alexander, Ueland, Montgomery (7)
No: None (0)
Not Voting: Miggins
Absent: Jaffe
Motion passed 7-0.
 
The IPR Director will discuss the CRC recommendations with the Police Bureau and may set up a conference committee to address the recommended changes.
  1. 10 minute recess.
  2. Request for appeal by community members relating to case#01-184 was heard.
• Motion to have the CRC hold a hearing on allegations that PPB officers used excessive force during the arrest of Mejia Poot in March 2001.
• Committee members, the IPR Director and the Auditor discussed the issues relating to the appeal, which was declined by the IPR with the concurrence of Lopez and Miggins on August 7, 2002 because the appellant was not involved in the incident as either a participant or a witness.
• Auditor Blackmer noted that the IPR/CRC program was not created to hold public hearings on issues relating to officer involved shootings. The IPR has hired the Police Assessment Resource Center to review officer involved shootings from 1997 through the future for policy and training issues. The Poot shooting was scheduled to be reviewed next year, but the IPR may be able to get the shooting (and other closed shootings that occurred between 1997 and April 1, 2001 (the date of the Poot shooting) in the first report due from PARC this summer. Even though this Internal Affairs investigation relates to the arrest that took place two days before the shooting, the arrest and the shooting are intricately related and the reason for the public interest in the arrest is the direct result of the shooting and the granting of police medals relating to that shooting.
• IPR Director Rosenthal noted that there are legal issues that need to be considered and that the CRC likely does not have jurisdiction to hold a hearing on the case because the appeal is untimely. Rosenthal and Blackmer noted that the CRC has other tools available to deal with community concerns relating to this issue: the CRC can hold a public forum on issues of concern to the Latino community; the CRC can hold public hearings on the PARC report after it is submitted to City Council; and the CRC can review the Internal Affairs investigation of the Poot arrest for policy and training purposes. The CRC is only limited in that it may not holding an untimely appeals hearing which would seek to overturn the Bureau’s Internal Affairs findings with respect to the arrest.

• Public comment was taken from Martin Gonzalez, Marta Guembes and Dan Handelman in favor of a CRC review of the arrest.

• Vote as follows:
Yes: Alexander, Browning, Butzbaugh, Lopez, Montgomery, Stone, Miggins (7)
No: Ueland
Absent: Jaffe
• The Auditor will confer with the City Attorney on the CRC’s jurisdiction with respect to hearing an appeal in this case. The IPR Director will report back to the committee.
• It was agreed by consensus that CRC will review the case for training and policy issues after the appeals hearing issue is resolved.
  1. It was agreed by consensus that CRC will meet April 1, 2003 for an additional meeting to deal with delayed agenda items. All other items on the agenda relating to the adoption of updated and new CRC protocols were continued to the April 1, 2003 meeting.
  2. Public comments were taken from Dan Handelman and Diane Lane.
  3. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.