Page 13 - February 2016

On Jan. 1 2016, the Police and Community Rela- tions Act (PCRA 50 ILCS 727) became law. In according with this act, each law enforcement agency shall have a written policy regarding the investigation of officer-related deaths that involve a law enforcement officer employed by that law enforcement agency. This new law changes the way officer-involved shootings are handled
and later investigated. The Lodge has one major issue with the policy the CPD has written relating to this law – the fact it has
not written any policy.
As of this writing, the Department has yet to come out with
a written policy in violation of the PCRA. As an aside, this was signed into law by Gov. Rauner Aug. 12, 2015.
The biggest component of the act focuses on investigator responsibility. The law states no investigator involved in the investigation may be employed by the law enforcement agency that employs the officer involved in the officer-involved death, unless the investigator is employed by the State Police and is not assigned to the same division or unit as the officer involved in the death. Simply put, Department members will have nothing to do with Department member-involved deaths.
In December, the new head of the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), Sharon Fairley, met with representatives from the Detective Division, Legal Affairs and the Cook County State’s Attorney Special Prosecution Bureau. (While we’re on the sub- ject, you know who the IPRA head hasn’t met with yet? The Lodge.) This meeting was called to discuss changes mandated by the PCRA. Two agreements that resulted from this meeting were that IPRA will now be the authority in any investigative activity that relates to a Department member-involved shooting and Department members will process scenes and collect evi- dence.
Give me a moment while I try and digest this. There’s a new state law on the books since Jan. 1 after being approved by the governor in August and the Department still has no written pol- icy in place? This should come as no surprise to anyone with time on this job. Did Legal Affairs not get the notification that this happened?
The issue that specifically makes my blood boil is that the sole responsibility of the investigation now lies on a civilian. Think about that for a minute. A civilian tasked with handling (arguably) the most traumatizing event any Department mem- ber will ever experience during his/her career. Not to mention that now we have an inexperienced crew going to investigate these matters. Does this make any sense?
In response to growing concerns about how police miscon- duct was being handled, the City of Chicago established IPRA in 2007. The idea that this relatively new, civilian department is now going to investigative officer-involved deaths is the most asinine thing I’ve heard in 21 years on this job.
The unknown is frightening because we have no control. The fact these changes have been ramping up since August, yet there
has been zero communication from IPRA, is crap. When did IPRA get into the business of handling officer-involved shoot- ings? Where and when did IPRA receive training on how to han- dle officer-involved shootings? What paperwork will IPRA be submitting on these investigations? Most importantly, where is IPRA’s new policy that outlines the specifics of handling officer-
involved deaths?
According to the PCRA Act, no investigator of the law
enforcement agency that employs the officer involved in the officer-involved death shall be involved in these cases. Therefore no Forensic Investigators or Evidence Techni-
cians should be involved in the handling of any officer- involved death. I hope IPRA investigators are cross-trained not only on how to collect evidence but also how to take photographs. Not to mention, what about housing all this evidence? Have they secured a location to store all the evidence from these scenes? There has to be some space at the old Goldblatt’s on Chicago
Avenue.
Any transportation of witnesses will also be handled by IPRA because the law clearly states that OUR involvement in officer- involved deaths is illegal. Does this mean we’ll soon see IPRA buses and vans around the City?
According to IPRA’s website, IPRA performs the intake function of all allegations of misconduct made against members of CPD. That mission statement alone should preclude IPRA from inves- tigating any officer-involved death. The fact that IPRA has only investigated allegations and now feels it should be the lead for officer-involved deaths is very scary. Where and when do IPRA investigations become objective and independent?
In response to this situation, the Lodge has filed a grievance stating the City is violating members’ rights under the collective bargaining agreement. I will keep you up to date as developments occur.
Strap on your seat belts kids; we are in for an extremely bumpy ride in 2016.
Welcome to the real world
According to a recently published article, Police Board President Lori Lightfoot said police are overburdened with large- scale community problems and have to deal better with changes demanded by the public in accountability and transparency. Does this mean the Department demands the fine citizens of Chicago also be held accountable for their actions? Can Depart- ment members disregard the calls for service when we’re asked to mediate a father–son dispute over the amount of food brought back from a holiday party? Hey Lightfoot, welcome to “our real world.”
After reading this article my head was spinning. Lightfoot stated, “the police are ill-equipped to address most of those communities’ actual needs,” including racial equality. Not sure what that statement means Ms. Lightfoot, but maybe you can enlighten us sometime during your travels. Later in the same article Lightfoot mentioned, “We unfairly expect the police to take care and solve these challenges.” At this point my head fell off. To be continued. d
IPRA shenanigans
FIELD REPRESENTATIVE REPORT
THOMAS MCDONAGH
CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ FEBRUARY 2016 13