Greetings from the men and women of the Los Angeles Police Department. The
following is the monthly update for April 2006. We hope you find the
information useful. You are encouraged to continue to visit our website at
www.lapdonline.org as it has recently been redesigned and updated.
CHIEF’S MESSAGE
Let’s Put It Into Perspective
In an effort to conduct Los Angeles Police Department business in the most
transparent way we can, the Department routinely releases information to the
public and to media outlets. This is especially important when the
information released is required under the conditions of the Consent Decree.
Although our intent is to be as open as possible, sometimes in a rush to
interpret the information, the media offers comparative analysis that is
neither sound nor logical. Such is the case in the release of the
Department’s 2005 Annual Complaint Report.
The Annual Complaint Report is a summary of internal and external
complaints. It is one of several auditing tools and resources we use to
monitor employees and ensure quality police service. Such practices speak
to our commitment to fostering public trust through transparency. The
report complements existing Department safeguards including Training
Evaluation and Management System (TEAMS); civilian oversight by the Police
Commission and its investigative arm, the Inspector General’s office, and
audit operations by Internal Affairs.
When the Annual Complaint Report was released last month and presented to
the Police Commission, the news media emphasized discrepancies in numbers
between 2005 and the previous year. Headlines read “Complaints Up,
Discipline Down,” and media analysis of the report created the perception
that complaints had risen and disciplinary action declined because we are
unwilling to “police the police.”
So let me try and put this into some kind of context for everyone, a
difficult thing when we are dealing with lots of numbers over lots of years
and with a lot of variables.
Here is a table that shows the number of complaints that came in, the number
of complaints that were sustained, and the number that were closed.
Year Total Complaints Sustained Complaints Complaints Closed During
the Year
2003 5,276 1,324 5,175
2004 6,471 1,630 6,252
2005 6,520 1,176 4,110
When you compare 2005, with an intake of 6,520 complaints, to the 6,471 in
2004, there is an increase: 49 complaints. In my opinion, hardly headline
material. In fact, when you look just at public complaints, our overall
number dropped by 34. When you factor in the number of police/public
contacts, which number in the millions, 6,520 filed complaints barely
registers as one percent. If you look at the resolution of those complaints
after they are investigated, roughly 20 to 25 percent of the total are
sustained or proven to be true. From my perspective, and as most cops
understand, the more we engage with the public—the more arrests we make, the
more traffic citations we write—the more opportunities there are for
conflict, dissatisfaction and public complaints. We may strive to make our
contacts positive and helpful, but aggressive, self-initiated policing that
drives down crime in this City to historic lows can in itself create a rise
in complaints.
Comparing fewer disciplinary actions from one year to the next is also a
problem when complaints received in one calendar year may not close in that
same year. Occasionally, they may take up to two years to clear. Cases can
be delayed for a number of reasons including pending Board of Rights
findings, criminal filing decisions by the District Attorney’s Office or
pending civil litigation. That said, the information in the Annual
Complaint Report does not represent patterns of misconduct over a specific
reporting year. One of the reasons that the 2004 figures on discipline are
high, which make the 2005 figures look low, is the fact that a concerted
effort was made in 2004 to clear a backlog of complaints from the previous
year. The media analysis, which never mentioned that they were comparing
different totals, was that the Department is reluctant to punish officers
found guilty of misconduct and so discipline is down.
Although lower disciplinary figures from one year to the next can appear
troubling if the public perceives heavy-handed and unfair enforcement, fewer
disciplinary actions is my goal. From my perspective, it shows that cops
are doing their jobs well: compassionately, consistently, and
constitutionally. Cops that are doing their jobs as they are trained to do
require little corrective action and receive fewer penalties.
We are doing the right thing in regard to discipline through a multi-pronged
approach. No good cop wants to work with a bad cop. No good cop wants a
bad cop in their Department. So we want to focus our internal affairs
efforts against that small group of officers that do engage in misconduct.
How do we do that? First, we want every complaint. You must take every
complaint and we, as a Department, document every complaint. To my
knowledge we are the only police department in the United States that
“tests” whether we are in fact taking complaints. But taking complaints and
documenting them just leads us to the second prong of our system.
With the Police Commission we created a non-disciplinary catalog of result.
If after taking the complaint and investigating it, we determine that it is
not valid or not misconduct, we can close it as non-disciplinary in nature.
Currently, we close almost 40% of our complaints as non-disciplinary. But
remember, even non-disciplinary does not automatically mean that we were
pleased with an officer’s actions. What it means is that the officer’s
conduct did not warrant a disciplinary investigation and sanction. When we
find that an officer’s conduct is lacking but not misconduct, we are taking
remedial actions. We then have the ability to focus our investigative
efforts on the matters that are more likely to bring us to problem officers.
Thirdly, we have dramatically reduced the number of Board of Rights that we
direct officers to by clarifying our approach to discipline. The intent of
discipline is to change behavior. I have adopted the approach that if a
22-day suspension will not modify an officer’s behavior then that officer
probably should not be a member of the LAPD. Our directed Board of Rights
have gone from 121 in 2002 to 68 in 2003 to 29 in 2004 and 53 in 2005.
These are historical lows.
The results are also historic: if found guilty, the penalty is much more
likely to be a removal. So officers should know that if they are directed
to a Board of Rights, it can and oftentimes is a true effort to remove an
officer from the Department. We are focusing our efforts on those few who
should not have the right to wear the LAPD badge and uniform. The table
below represents the number of Board of Rights held in each year that were
directed by the Chief of Police and Removals resulting from them.
Year Directed Boards of Rights Removal after Boards of Rights
2002 121 14
2003 68 18
2004 29 13
2005 53 27
Finally, playing a small but critical role in the multi-pronged approach to
discipline, and in reducing Board of Rights cases, is the concept of
settling cases. In 2003, we adopted a practice followed by virtually every
single department in this state: we allow for the settlement of some--let me
stress that, some--discipline cases. Since 2003, out of almost 20,000
complaints, we have settled less than 280 cases. What is significant about
this is that a number of them, if not settled, would have ended up in
officers opting for Board of Rights. It is a very small number and we only
do it after a great deal of review, discussion and agreement. This small
number of cases over the past three years has had a positive impact for both
the involved officers and the Department. It allows an officer to accept
responsibility for their actions while allowing the Department to document
corrective measures while getting the officer back to work quickly.
As this organization continues to change and improve, representative data
and official reports will often reflect anomalies and inconsistencies. I
expect that. “Business as usual” is no more, and trends will shift
dramatically as this organization continues to redefine itself. We have
seen the notable downward shift in our crime numbers. We are now witnessing
shifts in other areas as well.
In closing let me be very clear: I have no tolerance for intentional
misconduct and will deal with it very harshly. I have proven that over the
past three years. However, I understand that sometimes policing isn’t
pretty and there is little if any time for reflection and discussion before
action. I understand that well-intentioned police officers can and will
make mistakes and I will give them the benefit of the doubt. We will
continue to move forward, we will continue to treat and prevent misconduct
by providing training, good supervision and great leadership. And when we
find misconduct, we will deal with it swiftly, forcefully and aggressively.
CRIME STATISTICS - CITY-WIDE
Year to Date as of April 1, 2006
Homicide Down -24.2%
Rape Down -5.5%
Robbery Up 3.5%
Aggravated Assault Down -14.8%
---------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL VIOLENT CRIMES Down -6.7%
Burglary Down -10.0%
Burglary/Theft from Vehicle Down -15.2%
Personal/Other Theft Down -18.4%
Auto Theft Down -11.2%
---------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES Down -14.2%
TOTAL PART 1 CRIMES Down -12.6%
WILLIAM J. BRATTON
Chief of Police
To unsubscribe from this newsletter please click on this link
http://listserv.lacity.org/cgi-bin/wa.exe?SUBED1=lapd_monthly&A=1