by Mark Worth

The Free Press

Being that he technically works for the Seattle City Council and is not a sworn law enforcement officer, Carroll himself serves as a limited form of "civilian review." The former King County Superior Court judge recommended several ways that his powers should be expanded, but said "the literature strongly suggests that civilian review boards do not increase the likelihood of an officer being disciplined."

Lack of expertise by lay people, the specter of political cronyism in making appointments, a possible reduction in police morale and the likely bogging down of complaint investigations were reasons enough to rule out the formation of a civilian review board, Carroll said.

If you're a Seattle police officer, that's the good news.

The bad news is that Carroll didn't stop there. Using surprisingly harsh language, Carroll described a department whose internal investigations system is subject to meddling by top brass, whose officers appear to get off the hook too frequently, and where some light needs to be shed on a culture of secrecy.

Proposed Reforms Not New
Nearly all of Carroll's latest recommendations concerning his role and how IIS is run in general were holdovers from his first report issued in October 1992. For one reason or another, SPD hasn't gotten around to instituting the bulk of Carroll's ideas. At least one of the proposals likely won't go anywhere soon because it conflicts with the Seattle Police Officers Guild's labor contract with SPD. Other ideas remain inexplicably dormant.

Here are some of the reforms Carroll has been pushing for eight months now:

• Taking the chain-of-command - from sergeants and lieutenants, on up to majors and captains - out of the internal investigations pipeline. Investigating a complaint, Carroll says, is the job of IIS. Brass "are no better than anyone else in determining whether misconduct occurred," he wrote in his first report. "In fact, previous perceptions of an officer could warp their view," hinting that favoritism could be a factor in disciplinary decisions.

• Cross-referencing "resisting arrest" charges filed in Seattle Municipal Court with allegations of unnecessary force filed against SPD officers. (The idea here is to identify officers who abuse people and then lock them up on dubious charges to discredit their allegations of mistreatment.)

• Preventing an officer's superiors from investigating an allegation of "minor" misconduct that does not warrant a full-blown inquiry by IIS. In his first report, Carroll said he was "troubled" that a supervisor might not be objective in such investigations and that they should be stopped. "Frankly," Carroll wrote, "permitting discipline outside of IIS is asking for trouble."

• Allowing IIS officials, after their investigation is done, to tell Chief Patrick Fitzsimons whether they believe an act of misconduct has occurred and to recommend discipline. By relegating IIS to its current status of mere fact-finders, "we remove [from the process] the voice of those with the most knowledge and experience." Expanding IIS' power also would improve the image of a unit that "the department 'culture' does not hold in the highest esteem," Carroll said, hinting that the lack of clout may be marginalizing IIS' effectiveness.

• Computerizing IIS to enhance its ability to locate trends of abuse and frequently investigated officers. "There is no justification" for IIS not having a database, Carroll said. IIS staffers now must search through records by hand.

Police Capt. Toni McWashington, who runs the department's internal investigations sections, said she had not seen Carroll's new report as of the Free Press' deadline and could not comment on its recommendations until after she read it. She did, however, defend the way her unit is now run (see main story).

The president of the police union, Seattle Police Sgt. Ed Striedinger, did not respond to a request for an interview. He was, however, quoted in The Seattle Times as being pleased with Carroll's opposition to a civilian review board. "I'm glad ... he's reached the only reasonable conclusion." Striedinger - who recently made enemies over his controversial comments during a Senate Armed Services Committee debate over allowing gays and lesbians to serve in the military - hasn't made many friends among Seattle's civil-liberties activists because of his strident opposition to civilian review of internal investigations and other police practices.

The police establishment's opposition to civilian review remains strong despite SPD's tendency to accept the word of officers over that of complaining citizens. In 1992, 921 citizen complaints - an average of 2.5 a day - were lodged with the department. Of those, 50 were "sustained" - meaning that, in the department's opinion, there was enough evidence to show that an officer misbehaved.

Of the 130 unnecessary force investigations completed last year, two, or 1.5 percent, were sustained by the department. More than half of all complaints, 552, were not investigated at all; instead, they were entered in a log that is expunged every three years, making it tough for patterns of abuse to be established.

The overall 5.4 percent rate of sustained complaints - 50 out of 921 - is a concern to Carroll, who pointed out that "few" big-city police departments have rates below 10 percent. "How can the rate be improved?" he asked in his report. By doing many of the things he has been recommending since last fall, Carroll wrote.

Carroll Finds New Problems
Some of the reforms proposed in Carroll's latest report appeared for the first time. Among them, Carroll said:

• He should have the power to tell the chief whether he believes an officer was guilty of using excessive force, and to recommend how an officer should be disciplined whenever any complaint is sustained. Currently, Carroll can ask for further investigation of individual cases but can go no further.

• Investigations concluding that an officer was guilty of misconduct should be released to the public. "This would serve to increase greatly public confidence in the department," Carroll wrote. "I know of no valid reason to keep such information" secret. The police union does, however - its contract limits access to IIS files to certain police officials and people armed with a court order. This could be the most surprising of Carroll's recommendations and is bound to be hotly debated.

• SPD officers should be required to go to college. "Certainly college does not guarantee tolerance just as a lack of education does not prevent it," Carroll wrote. "However, an understanding of the world we live in can only enhance police work." Carroll did not specify how many years of college should be required. Some big-city police departments require at least a two-year degree.

During the six-month period leading up to his second report, Carroll apparently had a tougher time getting IIS officials to take his advice. In his first report from last October, Carroll said IIS agreed to look into all of the roughly 15 complaints Carroll said needed further investigation. This year, however, Carroll said 2 dozen to 3 dozen complaints needed more inquiry, but that IIS bucked his advice "on a handful of occasions." Carroll said at times he had to go to Chief Fitzsimons to settle disagreements with IIS.

In closing his report, Carroll strongly argues that SPD must improve the way it investigates its own people.

"Misuse of the authority by the police is a serious issue. I believe I have suggested changes that would streamline the discipline system [and] make it more accountable and more open," Carroll wrote. "If recent events have taught us anything, it must be that we need to listen to each other and that public confidence in the police department is essential."

[Home] [This Issue's Directory] [WFP Index] [WFP Back Issues] [E-Mail WFP]

---

Contents on this page were published in the June, 1993 edition of the Washington Free Press.
WFP, 1463 E. Republican #178, Seattle, WA -USA, 98112. -- [email protected]
Copyright � 1993 WFP Collective, Inc.