October 02, 2003
Portland Police Bureau Releases Status Of PARC Recommendations
As promised by Chief Foxworth, the Portland Police Bureau has released the status (pdf) of its implementation of the PARC report recommendations, breaking them down into the following categories: done; in review; in progress; and rejected.
See the PDF file itself for greater detail on each, but what follows is a reprint of the recommendations themselves but now including the status of each as expressed in the new Bureau document.
In all, the summary works out thusly: 40 recommendations are already adopted; 36 are in review; 10 are in progress; and 3 are rejected. It should be noted that prior to Chief Kroeker's departure, the Bureau had 8 of the PARC recommendations listed as rejected. I'll have to do some more work to see what shifted.
Portland's Deadly Force Policy
Recommendation 3.1: The PPB should add a preamble or mission statement to its written deadly force policy, underscoring the Bureau's reverence for the value of human life and its view that deadly force is to be used only where no other alternatives are reasonably available. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 3.2: The PPB should expand its written deadly force policy to provide that certain uses of force, such as strikes to the head or other vital areas with impact weapons, may not be used unless the officer is justified in using deadly force. -- Status: Done (2003).
Recommendation 3.3: The PPB should revise its deadly force policy to prohibit officers from using deadly force to stop a fleeing felony suspect unless they have probable cause to believe that the suspect (1) has committed an offense involving the actual or threatened infliction or threat of serious physical injury or death, and (2) is likely to endanger human life or cause serious injury to another unless apprehended without delay. In addition, the policy should make clear that even in those circumstances, deadly force should not be used where (1) other means of apprehension are reasonably available to the officers, or (2) it would endanger the lives of innocent bystanders. -- Status: In progress.
Recommendation 3.4: The PPB should consider whether it would be appropriate to revise its written deadly force policy to expressly require officers to refrain from taking actions that unnecessarily lead to the use of deadly force. -- Status: In progress.
Recommendation 3.5: The PPB should revise its deadly force policy to clearly articulate when officers may draw or point their firearms and when they should re-holster them. In addition, the PPB should require officers to report in writing each instance in which they draw and point a firearm at another. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 3.6: The PPB should require its officers to record their use of force on a separate Use of Force Report. The PPB should use the information from these reports to analyze and manage its officers’ use of force. The PPB should also log and track information from such reports in its early warning system. -- Status: In progress..
Investigation Procedures
Recommendation 4.1: The PPB should replace its current Homicide-only model of investigating officer-involved shootings and in-custody death cases with a broader, multidisciplinary approach, such as the Internal Affairs Overlay Model or the Specialist Team Model used by most major law enforcement agencies -- with the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department and Washington, D.C. systems serving as examples of best practice. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 4.2: The PPB should revise its investigative policies regarding firearms discharges at animals and non-injury accidental discharges to require supervisors arriving at the scene to immediately notify the PPB's deadly force investigation unit of the incident. The deadly force unit should either respond to the scene and take over the investigation, or be required subsequently to review the chain of command’s completed investigation for completeness and objectivity. -- Status: Done (2003).
Recommendation 4.3: The Bureau should revise its policies to make clear that investigators should always strive to obtain a contemporaneous, tape-recorded interview of involved officers. Such a policy would not only ease doubts about officer collusion, but place officers and civilians on the same footing. In addition, in those cases where an officer declines to provide a contemporaneous interview, investigators should be required to thoroughly document their efforts to obtain the interview, including (1) when the request was made, (2) to whom it was directed, and (3) the reason(s) for the declination. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 4.4: The PPB should meet with the leadership of the police unions to work out procedures for taking voluntary statements from involved officers in the hours immediately following a shooting or in-custody death incident. Interviews would not be conducted until after the officers have been given an opportunity to consult with a lawyer and/or union representative. The unions should encourage involved officers to provide investigators with contemporaneous statements, and likewise should encourage the lawyers they furnish to their members to facilitate such prompt statements. -- Status: In progress.
Recommendation 4.5: The PPB should study the Phoenix system of obtaining contemporaneous statements, in which all involved or witness officers are ordered to speak to Internal Affairs investigators no later than a few hours after the deadly force or in-custody death incident, regardless of whether they have already given a voluntary statement to Homicide investigators. The IA interview, which is walled off from Homicide and the District Attorney, is used solely in connection with the agency’s administrative and tactical review of the incident. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 4.6: The PPB should issue a policy expressly forbidding all officers who participated in or witnessed an officer-involved shooting or in-custody death from discussing the incident with any person (including other involved or witness officers) other than their immediate supervisor, unit commanding officer, union representative, attorney, a medical or psychological professional, and PPB investigators until they have completed comprehensive, taped interviews in the criminal and, if needed, administrative investigations. In discussing the incident with their immediate supervisor or unit commanding officer during this period, officers should provide only that information necessary to secure the scene and identify the location of physical evidence and witnesses. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 4.7: The PPB should issue a policy forbidding all officers from volunteering or communicating any information to involved or witness officers before the deadly force investigation has been completed. In addition, just as a judge may order jurors to avoid media and other discussions of a pending case, so too should the PPB issue a policy directing involved or witness officers to avoid exposure to other accounts of the incident (even if unsolicited) until they have provided investigators with a comprehensive, tape-recorded statement. In addition, the PPB should require its investigators to thoroughly cover in each officer interview what information the officer had received from other officers or outside sources. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 4.8: The PPB should require that supervisors arriving at the scene of an officer-involved shooting or in-custody death incident ask each officer at the scene what, if any, discussions regarding the incident have occurred prior to the supervisor’s arrival. The supervisor should then brief investigators immediately after they arrive at the scene concerning the answers to those inquiries. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 4.9: The PPB should require that involved and witness officers be physically separated immediately after the scene has been secured, and that the officers remain sequestered (i.e., unable to communicate with each other) until they have submitted to a comprehensive, taped interview by investigators. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 4.10: The PPB should memorialize in its policies the requirement that members of the TIC Team -- and any other officer not charged with securing or investigating the scene of an officer-involved shooting or in-custody death incident -- remain outside of the crime scene absent express authorization from on-scene PPB investigators. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 4.11: The PPB should memorialize in its policies a rule expressly prohibiting members of the TIC Team -- and any other officer not charged with securing or investigating the scene of an officer-involved shooting or in-custody death incident -- from discussing the incident with involved or witness officers until the officers in question have submitted to a comprehensive, taped interview with PPB investigators. -- Status: In progress.
Recommendation 4.12: The PPB should revise its deadly force policy to ensure that all persons who witnessed an officer-involved shooting or an in-custody death are interviewed on tape by investigators. The PPB should specifically eliminate its policy granting Homicide the discretion to forego interviews of witness officers and rely instead on written reports. Transcripts of all interviews should be included in the case file. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 4.13: If a civilian refuses to submit to a taped interview, investigators should (1) not begin the interview until the witness has signed a form acknowledging that he or she has refused to be interviewed on tape; and (2) present the civilian with a written copy of the investigator’s summary of the interview and allow the citizen to review and sign the investigator’s summary for accuracy. The civilian should be permitted to make any corrections or amendments to the statement he or she feels is necessary. A copy of both the original and corrected/amended witness summary should be included in the investigative file. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 4.14: PPB investigators should video- or tape-record all scene walk-throughs with involved or witness officers. Transcripts of all walk-throughs should be included in the case file. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 4.15: The PPB's policy and practice of conducting untaped "pre-interviews" of officers or civilians should be eliminated. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 4.16: The PPB should improve the already useful existing Deadly Force Interview Checklist by adding policy and tactical questions, including: (1) whether the officers can think of (a) alternative approaches that might have minimized risk to themselves and others, and (b) potential improvements in PPB training; (2) a description of when and why the officers decided to (a) draw their guns; (b) point their guns; or (c) lower or re-holster their guns; (3) describing the grip and shooting stance used by the officers, including gun/flashlight technique; (4) indicating whether the shots were sighted; (5) describing the availability and use of cover and concealment; and (6) identifying distances from suspects with weapons other than guns, and opportunities for tactical retreat. -- Status: In progress.
Recommendation 4.17: The PPB should also issue a policy requiring investigators to cover all areas on the modified interview checklist in all interviews. -- Status: In progress.
Recommendation 4.18: The PPB should prepare an Interview Checklist, similar to the Deadly Force Interview Checklist, to be used during in-custody death and serious force investigations. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 4.19: The PPB should establish policies that ensure that each officer who was involved in or witnessed an officer-involved shooting or in-custody death incident does not participate in a Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD) meeting prior to submitting to a comprehensive, tape-recorded interview in the investigation of the incident. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Quality of Homicide Investigations and Reports
Recommendation 5.1: The PPB should adopt strict rules forbidding nonessential personnel from entering or remaining within the inner or outer perimeter of an officer-involved shooting or in-custody death. By way of example, the PPB should provide that (a) involved parties and witnesses be removed from the crime scene immediately after the area has been secured; (b) personnel unrelated to the investigative unit, including union representatives, legal counsel, family members, and employee assistance-related officials may not enter the crime scene unless their presence is essential to the recovery or analysis of evidence and they have been requested or ordered to enter the crime scene by a properly authorized official within the investigative unit. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 5.2: The PPB should introduce mechanisms to ensure that officials investigating officer-involved shooting and in-custody death cases promptly collect all relevant physical evidence at the scene. Such mechanisms should include, without limitation, (a) written guidelines, such as an investigators’ manual, that specify investigators’ evidence collection duties; (b) annual refresher training for investigators (and their supervisors) in forensic techniques and crime scene investigation; (c) on-scene investigation checklists and Incident Summary Forms to be included within each case file; and (d) methods for holding investigators accountable for their errors or omissions. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 5.3: Criminalists should be required to bring to the scene of officer-involved shooting and in-custody death cases all tools necessary to identify and collect physical evidence at the scene. Such equipment should include, among other items, (a) metal detectors to help locate weapons and ammunition, and (b) bullet trajectory analysis equipment sufficient to track and document the trajectory of ammunition regardless of caliber or make. -- Status: Done (2001).
Recommendation 5.4: The PPB should seek to collect muzzle GSR evidence in officer-involved shooting or in-custody death cases in which the location and angle of gunfire fire is relevant. Such evidence should be collected not only from skin, hair, and clothing, but from hard surfaces believed to be in close proximity to the weapon at the time of discharge. In addition, the PPB should collect primer GSR evidence in all officer-involved shooting or in-custody death cases where there is (1) some dispute about the identity of the person(s) who fired a gun or (2) a claim by a civilian that an officer planted a gun at the scene. If the Oregon State Crime Laboratory remains unable to perform primer GSR analysis, then the PPB, like numerous agencies across the country, should seek to have the analysis performed at commercial or university laboratories. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 5.5: The PPB should enforce the requirement of Section 1010.10 that investigators conduct a bullet trajectory analysis for each shot in an officer-involved shooting case where the bullet strikes one or more areas of the crime scene. The PPB should do so even where there is no dispute among witnesses regarding the underlying incident. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 5.6: The PPB should develop detailed checklists or Incident Summary Forms -- one for officer-involved shootings and one for in-custody deaths -- along the lines of those used by the Miami-Dade Police Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, which require investigators to report key information regarding every officer-involved shooting and in-custody death case. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 5.7: In deadly force and in-custody death cases, PPB investigators should prepare detailed crime scene sketches of the entire crime scene (or scenes). Such sketches should identify physical evidence at the scene and provide all relevant measurements. In all cases, investigators should include the sketches in the investigative file. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 5.8: PPB investigators should be required to ask all involved parties and all witnesses to draw their own sketches of the scene (or annotate a sketch already prepared by the investigative team) during their taped interviews. In each case, the interviewing officers should ask the interviewees to use unique numbers or letters to show the location(s) of themselves and others at the scene. If, as is often the case, individuals at the scene moved from their original location, the interviewees should be asked to note the movement with unique identifiers as well (e.g., the positions taken by Officer A may be noted in chronological order as A-1, A-2, and A-3 in chronological order). In addition, the interviewers should contemporaneously note on tape when such markings are made (e.g., "The witness is now noting his initial location at the scene as B-1."). -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 5.9: Consistent with Recommendation 4.1, PPB investigations should focus not only on whether officers' use of deadly or high-risk force was appropriate, but also on the officers’ policy and tactical decisions that led to the incident. A principal goal of investigations should be to collect evidence sufficient for PPB managers and executives to assess whether the officers could have met legitimate law enforcement objectives in a manner less likely to have led to the use of deadly or other high-risk force. -- Status: In progress.
Recommendation 5.10: PPB investigators should identify and conduct thorough, unbiased, and tape-recorded interviews of all witnesses -- including emergency and medical professionals who performed examinations or rendered treatment -- in deadly force or in-custody death incidents. In addition, the PPB should also carefully monitor the quality and fairness of interviews conducted by members of the East County Major Crimes Team assisting them in such investigations.
To ensure compliance with these recommendations, the PPB should: (a) implement Recommendations 4.12 to 4.15 outlined in the previous chapter, (b) train investigators in approved advanced interviewing techniques and provide annual refresher training on the subject; and (c) adopt measures to hold accountable those investigators who fail to conduct thorough, impartial interviews. If a civilian refuses to submit to a taped interview, investigators should (a) not begin the interview until the witness has signed a form acknowledging that he or she has refused to be interviewed on tape, and (b) present the witness with a written copy of the investigator’s summary of statement and allow the witness to review the investigator’s summary for accuracy. The witness should be permitted to make any corrections or amendments to the statement he or she feels is necessary. A copy of both the original and corrected or amended interview summary should be included in the investigative file. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 5.11: The investigative file for an officer-involved shooting or in-custody death should include all relevant evidence and information, including, without limitation, (a) color copies of pertinent crime scene photographs; (b) all videotapes taken of the scene; (c) all autopsy, toxicology, and medical reports obtained by investigators (or a memorandum explaining why it was impossible to obtain such reports); (d) transcripts and audiotapes of all 911 calls and radio broadcasts (as well as relevant MDT transcripts); and (e) a memorandum presenting in summary fashion certain background information on the involved officers, including (i) date of hire and prior law enforcement experience; (ii) training history; (iii) assignment and promotion history; (iv) prior shootings or in-custody death cases, if any; and (v) a record of any discipline, pending investigations, and awards or commendations. -- Status: Done (2002).
Recommendation 5.12: Each investigative file should contain a detailed, comprehensive summary of the investigation. Although the summary should be impartial and take a neutral tone, it should also identify inconsistencies between statements and inconsistencies between statements and physical evidence. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 5.13: Completed investigative files should (a) number each page sequentially; (b) contain a detailed index; and (c) include an Investigator Log identifying each investigator's day-to-day work on the case. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 5.14: All records, documents, and materials obtained or created in connection with an investigation of an officer-involved shooting or an incustody death should be made, and should remain, a part of the official PPB file. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 5.15: The City of Portland should create an independent, professionally staffed, and adequately funded mechanism for civilian oversight of PPB investigations of administrative issues and analyses of tactical decisions arising out of officer-involved shootings and in-custody deaths. At a minimum the oversight mechanism would monitor:
(a) Crime scene processes and procedures (this would involve rolling out to the scenes of officer-involved shootings and in-custody deaths);
(b) Evidence collection and preservation;
(c) Witness identification and interviewing;
(d) Investigative file integrity and preservation; and
(e) Presentation of evidence to the Review Level Committee. -- Status: In review.
Internal Review
Recommendation 6.1: The PPB's policies relating to reviews of deadly physical force -- both after action reports and Review Level Committee -- should be explicitly extended to in-custody death incidents. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.2: The PPB should ensure that after action reports are completed in all officer-involved shooting and in-custody death cases, and that unit commanders are held accountable if the reports are not completed in a timely fashion. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.3: The PPB should enforce its policy that requires unit commanders, rather than their subordinates, to prepare and sign after action reports in deadly force cases. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.4: The PPB should create a model after action report -- from an actual or a hypothetical case -- to demonstrate to unit commanders both the form and type of analysis that such reports should employ. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.5: The PPB should ensure that after action reports rely on the facts developed by the investigation of the incident (unless the unit shows that those facts are erroneous or incomplete), and that copies are distributed to the detectives who investigated the incidents and their commanding officer. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.6: The PPB should devise an accountability process to ensure that after action reports comply with the content requirements of Section 1010.10 and engage in meaningful analysis. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.7: The PPB should revise Section 1010.10 to make the unit commander a non-voting member of the Review Level Committee when it reviews officer-involved shootings, other deadly force cases, and in-custody death incidents. -- Status: Rejected.
Recommendation 6.8: A civilian from outside the Bureau should be made a voting member of the Review Level Committee. The outside committee member should be chosen in a manner decided by the City’s elected officials. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.9: The PPB should amend its policy and its practice to make the commanding officer of the unit conducting administrative investigations of officerinvolved shootings and in-custody deaths, and the commanding officer of the Training Division, non-voting members of the Review Level Committee. -- Status: Done (9/11/2003).
Recommendation 6.10: All officer-involved shooting and in-custody death incidents should be presented to the Review Level Committee. The PPB should develop a tracking system to ensure that all such incidents are presented. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.11: PPB policy should be amended to require that full written findings be provided to the Chief to explain and document each Review Level Committee determination on officer-involved shooting and in-custody death cases. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.12: The PPB should develop procedures for the Review Level Committee that require members to vote based on their best judgment of the relevant facts and circumstances and that encourage dissent when appropriate. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.13: The investigators who conduct the administrative investigations should take the lead in presenting officer-involved shooting and in-custody death cases to the Review Level Committee. -- Status: Rejected.
Recommendation 6.14: The administrative investigators should present a complete file -- regardless of the form of the evidence, and specifically including video and audiotapes and photographs -- to committee members in advance of the committee meeting, and should likewise present all evidence they deem pertinent to the Review Level meeting, regardless of the form that evidence takes. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.15: Before a meeting of the Review Level Committee on an officer-involved shooting case or an in-custody death incident, the Training Division should prepare a written analysis of the tactical and training issues involved and circulate that analysis to committee members in advance of the meeting. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.16: The PPB should amend its policy to increase the options the Review Level Committee has for outcome determinations so that those options cover the different levels of review: legal, policy and tactical. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.17: The Review Level Committee should seek to obtain additional information whenever the committee determines that such information would assist it in fulfilling its responsibilities. -- Status: Done (2003).
Recommendation 6.18: The PPB should create systems that ensure that all lessons learned -- both successes and failures -- are systematically identified and followed up on. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.19: The PPB should revise its awards policy and procedures in officer-involved shooting and in-custody death cases to ensure that the Award Review Committee and the Chief are aware of all facts and circumstances relevant to the appropriateness of an award that were revealed in the investigation of the incident, in the after action report, and in the Review Level Committee proceedings. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 6.20: The PPB should revise its awards and Review Level policy and procedures in officer-involved shooting and in-custody death cases to require that the Awards Review Committee facilitator advise the Review Level Committee in writing of any information revealed in the awards review process that was not in the investigative file, the after action report, or the Review Level Committee’s records. Upon receipt of notice of such new information, the Review Level Committee should consider whether to reopen its review of the incident, with or without further administrative investigation. -- Status: In review.
Incident Reviews: Risk Management Issues
Recommendation 7.1: The PPB should ensure that operational personnel devise a sound plan before action is taken in response to critical incidents whenever it is feasible to do so. -- Status: Done (1997).
Recommendation 7.2: The PPB should ensure that the incidence of communications failures during police operations is minimized. -- Status: Done (2000).
Recommendation 7.3: The PPB should ensure that supervisors become involved in the management of critical incidents at the earliest opportunity whenever such incidents arise. -- Status: Done (2000).
Recommendation 7.4: The PPB should ensure that, whenever feasible, supervisors are responsible for the determination and coordination of strategic and tactical responses to critical incidents. -- Status: Done (2000).
Recommendation 7.5: The PPB should hold supervisors accountable for the performance of officers under their command during critical incidents. -- Status: Done (2000).
Recommendation 7.6: The PPB should identify all high-risk building searches, high-risk warrant services, and calls regarding armed civilians as "critical incidents." -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 7.7: The PPB should emphasize the relevance of supervisors' critical incident training to routine police operations. -- Status: Done (2003).
Recommendation 7.8: The PPB should ensure that field performance consistently reflects the Bureau's tactical training in all areas, and particularly in relation to identified problems relating to high-risk vehicle stops, the use of cover, crossfires and bystander endangerment. -- Status: Done (1999).
Recommendation 7.9: The PPB should ensure that supervisors consistently manage vehicle pursuits to a high standard. -- Status: Done (1997).
Recommendation 7.10: The PPB should ensure that its officers maintain sufficient distance when pursuing armed suspects in a vehicle. -- Status: Done (1997).
Recommendation 7.11: The PPB should adopt and enforce a policy mandating the use of sound foot pursuit tactics by its officers. -- Status: Done (2003).
Recommendation 7.12: The PPB should ensure that officers make appropriate use of cover when confronting threats. -- Status: Done (2003).
Recommendation 7.13: The PPB should ensure that the incidence of crossfires is minimized. -- Status: Done (2003).
Recommendation 7.14: The PPB should ensure that the incidence of endangerments to bystanders is minimized. -- Status: Done (2003).
Recommendation 7.15: The PPB should revise its existing policy on the use of firearms against moving vehicles. The revised policy should include a preface explaining that shooting at moving vehicles is dangerous and generally ineffective, and should embody the following guidelines:
* Officers shall not fire at moving vehicles except to counter an imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or another person.
* Officers shall only fire at a moving vehicle when no other means of avoiding or eliminating the danger it presents are available at that time.
* Officers shall not place themselves, or remain, in the path of a moving vehicle.
* Officers shall take account of risks to vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and to any other bystanders, before deciding whether to fire at a moving vehicle.
* Officers shall take account of risks to vehicle occupants, who may not be involved (or may be involved to a lesser extent) in the actions necessitating the use of deadly force before deciding whether to fire at a moving vehicle. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 7.16: The PPB should take steps to minimize the risk of accidental discharges. -- Status: Done (1996).
Recommendation 7.17: The PPB's Training Division should reconsider its current training in maneuvers that involve weak-handed shooting. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 7.18: The PPB should abandon use of term "lethal cover" in relation to less-lethal weaponry training and deployment. -- Status: Rejected.
Recommendation 7.19: The PPB should monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of all its less-lethal hardware, and should tailor the availability and deployment of that hardware to ensure officers’ access to effective and appropriate force options. -- Status: Done (2002).
Recommendation 7.20: The PPB should provide all operational personnel with a radio earpiece. -- Status: In progress.
Recommendation 7.21: The PPB should establish a helicopter unit. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 7.22: The PPB should ensure that CIT officers consistently exercise their specialist skills when dealing with CIT-related incidents. -- Status: Done (2000).
Recommendation 7.23: The PPB should examine its current CIT deployment practices in order to identify means of maximizing the rate at which appropriately skilled officers attend CIT-related incidents. -- Status: Done (1995).
Recommendation 7.24: The PPB should ensure that officers consistently follow the Bureau's training and policy in relation to sudden death syndrome and associated prisoner restraint issues. -- Status: Done (2003).
Management of Records and Information
Recommendation 8.1: The PPB should proactively study its data on officerinvolved shooting and in-custody-death incidents to assist its efforts to prevent avoidable shootings and deaths. -- Status: In progress.
Recommendation 8.2: The PPB should develop procedures and systems to accurately and completely capture and aggregate data on officer-involved shooting and in-custody death incidents in a manner that facilitates analysis of those data. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 8.3: The PBB should retain all records related to officer-involved shooting and in-custody death incidents for 25 years. Any otherwise applicable provision that requires longer retention than the period set for officer-involved shooting and in-custody death records should continue to be controlling. -- Status: Done (9/2/2003).
Recommendation 8.4: The PPB should create procedures and systems that allow it to locate whatever records it possesses. -- Status: In review.
Recommendation 8.5: IPR, in consultation with the PPB, should create procedures to obtain the records needed for future reviews of officer-involved shootings and in-custody deaths on a reasonably contemporaneous basis. IPR should store those records until needed for the review. -- Status: In review.