Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver

California's premier full-service law firm with an emphasis on the representation of peace officers in disciplinary, criminal, labor, workers' compensation, personal injury and other civil matters.

  • About Us
  • Practice Areas
    • Labor Representation
    • Civil Litigation
    • Personal Injury
      • Example of Case Results
    • Workers’ Compensation
    • Maritime Law
    • Estate Planning
    • DOE Security Clearance Hearings
    • Peace Officers
    • Firefighters
    • EMS Agency Investigations
    • Criminal Defense
    • CalPERS Appeals
  • Our Team
  • Classes
  • Media
    • Bulletins
    • RLS in the News
  • Resources
    • Links
    • Resources
    • Newsletters
  • Clients
  • Career Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer

High court decision forces police review board changes

October 27, 2006 by David Shirley

From: Oakland Tribune

Heather MacDonald

10/27/06

City officials are weighing three options designed to reinvent the Citizens’ Police Review Board after the state Supreme Court ruled officer misconduct cannot be investigated publicly.

The first option, and the one preferred by executive director Joyce Hicks, would have the nine-member board operate much as it did before the Aug. 31 decision — but behind closed doors, away from the public and media.

Hicks said that option would give the officer and the complainant a chance to be cross-examined by the opposing side and to fully recount the story.

“It allows the parties the right to confront each other,” Hicks said.

Rashidah Grinage of People United for a Better Oakland, a police watchdog group, said it was the best choice in the short run while reform advocates work to reverse the Supreme Court decision.

Another option would allow only board members, its staff and lawyers to question the officer, complainant and any witnesses during the closed-door session. That is similar to how such hearings are conducted in San Francisco, Hicks said.

The final option would be to hold a series of meetings where the board, its staff and lawyers question the officer, complainant and any witnesses separately.

The options are being vetted by the City Attorney’s office and were presented to the review board by Hicks on Thursday. The matter is scheduled to be discussed by the City Council in closed session Tuesday.

Todd Simonson, an attorney representing the Oakland Police Officers Association, said he had not been consulted about the options, but he said he favored the third option because it came the closest to following his interpretation of the Supreme Court decision.

Simonson said the review board should operate like a civilian- controlled Internal Affairs Division, which releases only final determinations and interviews the complainants and officers separately.

After the Supreme Court decision was handed down, the police union threatened to sue the city, prompting the review board to suspend all misconduct hearings and its Web site that identified officers who had been accused of misconduct changed.

However, the review board’s staff has continued to investigate allegations of officer misconduct and their findings have been submitted to City Administrator Deborah Edgerly, Hicks said.

Police reform advocates have blasted the 6-1 decision, saying it curbs the public’s ability to root out corruption and hold police officers accountable, while dealing a blow to the public’s right to know.

However, police unions praised the decision for protecting police officers from frivolous lawsuits and aiding plaintiffs.

The review board’s semi-annual report, presented Tuesday to the Oakland City Council’s public safety committee, no longer contains the names of the officers who had complaints filed against them.

In the first six months of 2006, complaints to the review board fell 36 percent, as compared with the same period a year ago, according to the report.

Only 8 percent of complaints alleged officers used excessive force, Hicks said. Excessive force complaints against officers began to decline last year, she added.

The most frequent complaint claimed officers failed to act, most frequently while enforcing restraining orders.

Nearly 80 percent of the allegations of misconduct were made by African-Americans, with African-American males filing more than half of all complaints, Hicks said. The greatest number of complaints stemmed from incidents in the Downtown-West Oakland council district, she said.

Police Chief Wayne Tucker said the police department’s Internal Affairs Division has recorded a significant increase in the number of complaints filed as compared with last year.

Filed Under: RLS In The News

Consultation Form

Offices across California to serve you.
Contact us now to schedule a consultation.
Contact form not loading? Click here!
Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver, PC publishes this website as a service to our clients and other friends for informational purposes only. It is not intended to be used as a substitute for specific legal advice or opinions, and the transmission of information through this website is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship between sender and receiver. Internet subscribers and online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

© 2023 Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver, PC. All Rights Reserved. | Disclaimer

We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
Do not sell my personal information.
Cookie settingsACCEPTREJECT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT
  • Contact Us

  • News Alerts

Official logo for Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver
Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver Logo
  • About Us
  • Practice Areas
    ▼
    • Labor Representation
    • Civil Litigation
    • Personal Injury
      ▼
      • Example of Case Results
    • Workers’ Compensation
    • Maritime Law
    • Estate Planning
    • DOE Security Clearance Hearings
    • Peace Officers
    • Firefighters
    • EMS Agency Investigations
    • Criminal Defense
    • CalPERS Appeals
  • Our Team
  • Classes
  • Media
    ▼
    • Bulletins
    • RLS in the News
  • Resources
    ▼
    • Links
    • Resources
    • Newsletters
  • Clients
  • Career Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
Hotline phone numbers. Northern California: 925-609-1699. Southern California: 310-393-1486.