- The affidavit requirement should be removed so that investigators can identify additional cases of police misconduct.
- Anonymous complaints should be allowed to encourage reporting by those who fear retaliation, including whistleblowers.
- Officers should not be informed of the complainant’s name prior to interrogation. There is little need for the officer to know the name of a complainant prior to interrogation if it is later disclosed during the resolution of the case.
- The provisions delaying interviews in shooting cases for at least 24 hours should be revised to ensure that officers are separated and remain separated from other officers until all officers have given statements. The Department of Justice’s Consent Decree with the Los Angeles Police Department contains such a requirement. When formal questioning begins, the inquiry will start with a recitation of any and all conversations that the officer has had with law enforcement between the shooting and the commencement of the interview.
- Officers should no longer have a right to amend statements if they have not been provided with the audio or video evidence, and reviews of the footage should not be pre-conditions to charging a Rule 14 violation.
- Investigations of complaints known to CPD for five years or more should not require Superintendent permission. This is an unnecessary rule, as the statute of limitation will apply for criminal matters, and, for administrative matters, the nature and severity of the conduct should determine whether the complaint should be investigated. Should an individual continue to make such decisions, the authority should be vested in someone outside of CPD, such as the Chief Administrator of IPRA (or its successor, CPIA).
- The provision requiring destruction of records should be eliminated. The rule is in tension, if not outright conflict, with general principles of public record-keeping, deprives the public of important information that is rightfully theirs, and may include the destruction of information that serves numerous operational and public policy objectives.
- The provision that forbids CPD from rewarding officers who act as whistleblowers should be removed.
- The CBAs should be amended to require police officers to disclose secondary employment, as other City workers are required to do.
- The CBA dictates the manner in which interrogators can ask questions, which presents an unnecessary burden on interrogators and potentially sets them up to violate the CBA for a technicality. The policy does not appear to comport with any best practices and should be eliminated.
- The CBA requires that officers must be informed of the nature of the allegation prior to interrogation. This provision is presently interpreted very specifically to mean a detailed recitation of the facts that support all possible charges. Moreover, if the officer lies to investigators during the investigation, new allegations must be presented to the officer. This provision should be amended to allow for more general recitation of allegations.
- Design an open and public selection process for a Chief Administrator.
- Establish selection requirements for the Chief Administrator and investigators to avoid bias.
- Provide a grant of jurisdiction that ensures that CPIA is informed by community complaints.
- Establish a clear, easy-to-understand mission statement.
- Remove barriers to accountability.
- Gather and leverage data generated by civil litigation and criminal motions to suppress to learn more about trends in citizen complaints.