Major Discipline Report On New Jersey Police Officers
https://www.njoag.gov/majordiscipline/
Beginning with the reporting period of January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024, Major Discipline must be reported via the Law Enforcement Reporting Portal.
Please contact reportingrequirements@njoag.gov if have additional questions.
Submit a Major Discipline Complaint
https://www.njoag.gov/major-discipline-reporting-form-submission-page/
Internal Affair Policies Procedures PDF
https://www.nj.gov/oag/iapp/docs/AG%20Directive%202021-6%20IAPP%20June%202021_All-Documents.pdf
2.2 Rules and Regulations 2.2.1 The agency's rules and regulations should form a "code of conduct" for employees. It should contain the broadly stated "do's and don'ts," without delving into specific details. For instance, an agency's rules and regulations should state that any use of force by an officer must comply with state and federal law, the Attorney General's and the County Prosecutor's policies, and the agency's S.O.Ps. The specific details of what is considered force, and what constitutes the acceptable use of force, should be found in the agency's use of force S.O.P
2.2.2 The rules and regulations should identify general categories of misconduct or inappropriate behavior that are subject to disciplinary action. An incident of misconduct or inappropriate behavior may fall into one or more of the following categories:
(a) Crime. Complaint regarding the commission of an illegal act that constitutes a violation of the criminal code including disorderly and petty disorderly persons offenses.
(b) Excessive force. Complaint regarding the use or threatened use of excessive force against a person.
(c) Improper arrest. Complaint that the restraint of a person's liberty was improper, unjust, or violated the person's civil rights.
(d) Improper entry. Complaint that entry into a building or onto property was improper or that excessive force was used against property to gain entry.
(e) Improper search. Complaint that the search of a person or property was improper, unjust, violated established agency procedures or violated the person's civil rights.
(f) Differential treatment. Complaint that the taking of police action, the failure to take police action or method of police action was predicated upon irrelevant factors such as race, appearance, age or sex.
(g) Demeanor. Complaint that an agency member's bearing, gestures, language or other actions were inappropriate.
(h) Serious rule infractions. Complaint for conduct such as insubordination, drunkenness on duty, sleeping on duty, neglect of duty, false statements or malingering.
(i) Minor rule infractions. Complaint for conduct such as untidiness, tardiness, faulty driving, or failure to follow procedures.
3.0.1 Prevention is the primary means of reducing and controlling inappropriate behavior and misconduct. Although disciplinary actions are properly imposed on officers who engage in wrongdoing, they have limited utility if they shield or obscure organizational conditions that permit the abuses to occur. Inadequate training and a lack of appropriate guidance too often are factors that contribute to inappropriate behavior and misconduct. An agency should make every effort to eliminate the organizational conditions that may foster, permit or encourage an employee’s inappropriate behavior. In the furtherance of this objective, special emphasis should be placed on the following areas.
Police Training
3.2.1 Basic and in-service training for law enforcement officers should emphasize the sworn obligation of those officers to uphold the law and ensure public safety. Police ethics should be a major component in the training curricula. In addition, the rules, regulations, policies and procedures of the agency, including the disciplinary process, should be stressed. There must also be a process to advise veteran officers of any new statutory requirements or significant procedural changes.
3.2.2 An agency’s supervisory personnel should always consider the need for training when officers engage in inappropriate behavior or misconduct. The question should be, “Could training have prevented this behavior and can training prevent it from happening in the INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 12 future?” Perhaps a particular officer or group of officers needs a refresher course in a certain subject. In addition, changes in the law, the agency or even within the community may trigger the need for a type of training never before given to the officer or agency. Training in this sense can be anything from informal counseling of an officer about a particular policy or procedure to formal agency-wide training. The agency may also take advantage of training offered by other agencies, including police academies, the County Prosecutors, the Division of Criminal Justice, other public or private entities or web-based programs.
3.3 Supervision
3.3.1 Proper supervision is critical to the discipline and management of a law enforcement agency. To maximize their effectiveness, agency supervisors should receive appropriate supervisory training as close as possible to the time of their promotion. Emphasis should be placed on anticipating problems among officers before they result in improper performance or conduct. Supervisors are expected to recognize potentially troublesome officers, identify training needs of officers and provide professional support in a fair and consistent manner.
3.4 Early Warning and Risk Management
3.4.1 Although the internal affairs process is frequently triggered by the filing of a civilian complaint, law enforcement agencies must also proactively work to detect troubling patterns in police conduct before that conduct escalates into more serious internal affairs issues.
3.4.2 To enhance its integrity, provide an optimal level of service to the community and reduce its exposure to civil liability, every law enforcement agency should establish procedures for dealing with problem employees. Law enforcement agencies have a duty to monitor their employees’ behavior, and establish mechanisms that provide the internal affairs function and the law enforcement executive with the ability to track the complaint records of individual officers and identify those officers with a disproportionate number of complaints against them. Law enforcement agencies must utilize the information developed by these mechanisms to prevent individual officers from engaging in conduct or behavior that violates the constitutional liberties every member of the community enjoys. It also is expected that law enforcement agencies will utilize the information to prevent development of patterns, practices or trends of inappropriate behavior or conduct.
3.4.3 Per AG Directive 2018-3 v2.0, also known as the “Early Warning Systems Directive,” law enforcement agencies are required to implement a specific mechanism to track employee behavior, commonly known as an "early warning system." An early warning system should be designed to identify any pattern or practice by any member of the agency that warrants intervention or remediation before it develops into a more serious problem.
Any mechanism or procedure a law enforcement agency establishes to monitor and track the behavior and performance of individual police officers must have as two of its linchpins quality supervision and an objective and impartial internal affairs process. Supervisors who have sufficient time and resources to properly perform their duties should be able to timely identify officers with performance and misconduct issues. Supervisors can react to problems they identify through direction, counseling and effective performance evaluations. Proper training of agency supervisors is critical to the discipline and performance of law enforcement officers. Emphasis should be placed on anticipating problems among officers before they result in improper performance or misconduct. Supervisors are expected to recognize potentially troublesome officers, identify training needs of officers and provide professional support in a consistent and fair manner.
3.4.5 Many different measures of officer performance can be regularly examined for any of these troubling patterns or practices. Law enforcement executives shall determine what performance measures are appropriate for the communities they serve, but at a minimum an agency must track the following performance indicators:
(a) Internal affairs complaints against the officer, whether initiated by another officer or by a member of the public;
(b) Civil actions filed against the officer;
(c) Criminal investigations of or criminal complaints against the officer;
(d) Any use of force by the officer that is formally determined or adjudicated (for example, by internal affairs or a grand jury) to have been excessive, unjustified, or unreasonable;
(e) Domestic violence investigations in which the officer is an alleged subject;
(f) An arrest of the officer, including on a driving under the influence charge; (g) Sexual harassment claims against the officer;
(h) Vehicular collisions involving the officer that are formally determined to have been the fault of the officer; (i) A positive drug test by the officer;
(j) Cases or arrests by the officer that are rejected or dismissed by a court;
(k) Cases in which evidence obtained by an officer is suppressed by a court;
(l) Insubordination by the officer;
(m) Neglect of duty by the officer; (n) Unexcused absences by the officer;
(o) Any other indicators, as determined by the agency’s chief executive.
3.4.6 This information should be maintained to facilitate analysis as to individual members, supervisors, squads, districts and assignments, and the agency as a whole. Depending on the size of the agency and the complexity of this data, computerized software that utilizes mathematical algorithms may be best suited to assist in revealing the presence of particular patterns of incidents. However, not all law enforcement agencies have the computer capabilities for such an in-depth screening process. At a minimum, every law enforcement agency should establish a protocol for tracking employee behavior and INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 14 reviewing all internal affairs complaints made against its officers, regardless of outcome, for evidence of a pattern or practice of inappropriate or unconstitutional conduct.
3.4.7 For further information regarding the Attorney General’s requirements for early warning systems, agencies should consult the Early Warning Systems Directive.
4 Internal Affairs Unit or Function
4.0.1 Every law enforcement agency shall establish, by written policy, an internal affairs unit or function. Depending upon the need, the internal affairs function can be full- or part-time. In either case, this requires the establishment of a unit or the clear allocation of responsibility and resources for executing the internal affairs function. The unit will consist of agency personnel assigned to internal affairs by the law enforcement executive. Personnel assigned to the internal affairs function serve at the pleasure of and are directly responsible to the law enforcement executive or the designated internal affairs supervisor.
4.1 Duties and Responsibilities
4.1.1 The purpose of the internal affairs function is to establish a mechanism for the receipt, investigation, and resolution of officer misconduct complaints. The goal of internal affairs is to ensure that the integrity of the agency is maintained through a system of internal discipline where an objective and impartial investigation and review assure fairness and justice.
4.1.2 The internal affairs function or officer will investigate alleged misconduct by members of the agency and review the adjudication of minor complaints handled by supervisors. In addition, internal affairs shall receive notice of:
(a) Any firearm discharge by agency personnel, whether on-duty or off-duty, unless the discharge occurred during the course of:
(1) a law enforcement training exercise;
(2) routine target practice at a firing range;
(3) a lawful animal hunt; or
(4) the humane killing of an injured animal;
(b) Any discharge of an agency-owned firearm by anyone other than agency personnel;
(c) Any use of force by agency personnel that results in injury to any person,
(d) Any vehicular pursuit involving agency personnel; and
(e) Any collision involving agency-owned vehicles. Upon receiving notification, the agency’s internal affairs function shall document the incident and determine whether additional investigation is necessary.
4.1.3 An internal affairs function also has an obligation to investigate or review any allegation of employee misconduct that is a potential violation of an AG Directive or Guideline, a Directive issued by a County Prosecutor in that jurisdiction, the agency's rules and regulations, or any allegation that indicates the employee is unable, unwilling or unfit to perform their duties. The obligation to investigate includes not only acts of misconduct that are alleged to have occurred while the subject officer was on-duty, but also acts of misconduct that are alleged to have occurred outside the employing agency's jurisdiction or while the subject officer was off-duty.
INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 16
4.1.4 An internal affairs function may conduct an internal investigation on its own initiative or upon notice to or at the direction of the law enforcement executive or the internal affairs supervisor. Internal affairs may refer investigations to the employee's supervisor for action as permitted by agency policy and procedures.
4.1.5 Internal affairs investigations must be considered as important to the agency as any criminal investigation. Members of the internal affairs function therefore should have the authority to interview any member of the agency and to review records and reports of the agency relative to their assignment. In addition, the agency's personnel should be instructed that the internal affairs function acts at the behest of the law enforcement executive in all internal affairs investigations. The agency's personnel should be further instructed that during an internal affairs investigation, every member of the agency, regardless of rank, shall treat an order or a request from a member of the internal affairs function as if the order or request came directly from the law enforcement executive.
4.1.6 The internal affairs function shall maintain a comprehensive central file on all complaints received, whether investigated by internal affairs or assigned to the officer's supervisors for investigation and disposition. In addition, internal affairs should establish protocols for tracking all complaints received by the agency and the conduct of all officers. The protocols must include criteria for evaluating the number of complaints received by the agency and the number of complaints filed against individual officers.
Internal Affairs Records
9.0.1 Every law enforcement agency shall maintain a system for documenting the work of its internal affairs function and preserving records of this work.
9.1 The Internal Affairs Report
9.1.1 At the conclusion of the internal affairs investigation, the investigator shall submit a written report consisting of an objective investigative report recounting all of the case’s facts and a summary of the case, along with conclusions for each allegation, and recommendations for further action.
(a) Investigative report. The first part of the report will be an objective recounting of all the relevant information the investigation disclosed, including statements, documents and other evidence. This part of the report is similar in all respects to a standard law enforcement investigative report, and should contain a complete account of the investigation.
(b) Summary and Conclusions. The investigator should summarize the case and provide conclusions of fact for each allegation. These conclusions of fact should be recorded as exonerated, sustained, not sustained or unfounded.
9.1.2 If the conduct of an officer was found to be improper, the report must cite the agency rule, regulation, or SOP violated. Any aggravating or mitigating circumstances surrounding the situation, such as unclear or poorly drafted agency policy, inadequate training or lack of proper supervision, shall also be noted.
9.1.3 If the investigation reveals evidence of misconduct not based on the original complaint, this too must be reported. An investigation concerning this secondary misconduct should be conducted.
9.2 Internal Affairs Index File
9.2.1 The purpose of the internal affairs index file is to serve as a record control device to maintain an inventory of internal affairs case files and to summarize each case’s status for authorized personnel. The instrument used for such an index file will vary by agency and could include a log book, index cards or a computerized data base.
9.2.2 All internal affairs complaints shall be recorded in the index file. Entries should record each case’s basic information, including the subject officer, allegations, complainant, date received, investigator assigned, disposition and disposition date for each complaint. A unique case number assigned to each internal affairs complaint will point to the complete investigation file’s location and will simplify case tracking.
INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 55
9.3 Investigation Files
9.3.1 An internal affairs investigation file is needed for all internal affairs reports. Given the wide range of internal affairs allegations a law enforcement agency receives, these investigation files might consist of only the initial report form and the appropriate disposition document. On the other hand, investigation files might include extensive documentation of an investigation.
9.3.2 The internal affairs investigation file should contain the investigation’s entire work product, regardless of the author. This includes investigators' reports, transcripts of statements, and copies of all relevant documents. The file should also include all related material from other agency incidents that may be applicable. For instance, if an allegation is made of excessive force during an arrest, the internal affairs investigation file should contain copies of the reports from that arrest.
9.3.3 Where an internal affairs investigation results in the filing of criminal charges, the file shall be made available to the County Prosecutor’s Office. It will be the responsibility of that office to decide which items are discoverable and which are admissible. In these cases, the agency must follow the County Prosecutor’s instructions.
9.4 Retention Schedule
9.4.1 Investigative records created during an internal affairs investigation are included in the "Records Retention and Disposition Schedule for Local Police Departments" issued by the New Jersey Division of Archives and Records Management. Under the schedule, files concerning a criminal homicide must be permanently maintained. The schedule also requires that any other file involving a criminal matter resulting in the subject officer’s arrest must be maintained for 75 years. While the schedule further suggests that all other criminal or administrative internal affairs investigative records be maintained for at least 5 years, agencies should maintain these files as they relate to a particular officer for that officer’s career plus 5 years.
9.4.2 Agencies are not required to purge their records at the intervals outlined above, and may adopt longer retention schedules if such schedules benefit the agency. In the case of internal affairs investigative records, longer retention times will provide agencies with the resources and evidence necessary to assist with defending civil lawsuits.
9.4.3 While the internal affairs records of other types of law enforcement agencies are not yet specified by the Division of Archives and Records Management, it would be appropriate for all law enforcement agencies to follow essentially the same retention schedule.
INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 56
9.5 Security of Internal Affairs Records
9.5.1 Internal affairs personnel shall maintain a filing system accessible only to unit personnel and the law enforcement executive. Other personnel may be given access based on a specific need, such as a deputy chief in the law enforcement executive's absence. Access to these records must be specifically addressed with agency policy and procedures. The list of those authorized to access these files must be kept to a minimum.
9.5.2 Physical security measures also should be taken, such as using securely locked filing cabinets in secured offices. If a law enforcement agency uses computers to maintain internal affairs records of any kind, special security measures must be taken. A stand-alone personal computer is the most secure system to limit unauthorized access to internal affairs records. If a stand-alone computer is not feasible, reasonable measures, including the use of fire walls and/or password protected software, should be utilized to control access to investigative files and related materials.
9.6 Confidentiality
9.6.1 The nature and source of internal allegations, the progress of internal affairs investigations, and the resulting materials are confidential information. The contents of an internal investigation case file, including the original complaint, shall be retained in the internal affairs function and clearly marked as confidential. The information and records of an internal investigation shall only be released or shared under the following limited circumstances:
(a) If administrative charges have been brought against an officer and a hearing will be held, a copy of all discoverable materials shall be provided to the officer and the hearing officer before the hearing;
(b) If the subject officer, agency or governing jurisdiction has been named as a defendant in a lawsuit arising out of the specific incident covered by an internal investigation, a copy of the internal investigative reports may be released to the attorney representing the subject officer, agency or jurisdiction;
(c) Upon the request or at the direction of the County Prosecutor or Attorney General; or
(d) Upon a court order. 9.6.2 In addition, the law enforcement executive may authorize access to a particular file or record for good cause. The request and the authorization should be in writing, and the written authorization should specify who is being granted access, to which records access is being granted and for what time period access is permitted. The authorization should also specify any conditions (i.e., the files may be reviewed only at the internal affairs office and may not be removed).
In addition, the law enforcement executive may order any redactions necessary to protect sensitive or privileged information, including an officer’s medical or mental health records or the details of an ongoing criminal investigation.
The INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 57
law enforcement executive should grant such access sparingly, given the purpose of the internal affairs process and the nature of many of the allegations against officers.
9.6.3 As a general matter, a request for internal investigation case files may satisfy the good cause requirement:
(a) If a Civilian Review Board that meets certain minimum requirements requests access to a completed or closed investigation file, subject to the conditions described in this section; or
(b) If another law enforcement agency requests the files because it is considering hiring an officer who was formerly employed at the agency with the internal investigation files.
9.6.4 Agencies may receive law enforcement or judicially sanctioned subpoenas directing the production of internal affairs investigative records. Before responding to the subpoena, the law enforcement executive or internal affairs investigator should consult with the agency's legal counsel to determine whether the subpoena is valid and reasonable. Courts may modify or quash invalid or unreasonable subpoenas, but will require the agency seeking to so modify or quash to file an appropriate motion. Similar considerations may provide grounds for opposing a records request from a Civilian Review Board that otherwise satisfies the minimum requirements described below. For that reason, the appropriate agency personnel should consult with legal counsel to determine under what circumstances it would be appropriate to provide notice to any individual who is referenced in records requested by a Civilian Review Board.
9.6.5 If the release of internal affairs documents is appropriate, the agency should inventory the reports released and obtain a signed receipt.
9.6.6 Law enforcement agencies may not waive, restrict, or otherwise limit the power of the County Prosecutor or Attorney General to direct that the information or records of an internal investigation be released or shared pursuant to
Section 9.6.1(c).
9.7 Coordination with Civilian Review Boards
9.7.1 Internal investigation case files generally are not releasable to Civilian Review Boards, but the “good cause” standard may be satisfied when a Civilian Review Board requests records from a completed or closed investigation file and the Civilian Review Board has in place certain minimum procedural safeguards, as described in Section
9.7.2, to preserve the confidentiality of the requested records and the integrity of the internal affairs function, in addition to complying with all other applicable legal requirements. A violation of any of these requirements may result in the revocation of a Civilian Review Board’s access to confidential law enforcement information, including internal affairs records, and potentially may result in other adverse or remedial actions under federal, state, or local law.
INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 58 9.7.2
For the purposes of satisfying the requirements of Section
9.7.1, a Civilian Review Board must implement the following minimum procedural safeguards:
(a) Avoidance of Interference with Ongoing Investigations or Proceedings The Civilian Review Board must establish policies to avoid interference with ongoing investigations or proceedings, similar to the policies that an internal affairs function must adopt to avoid interference with ongoing criminal investigations or proceedings. Specifically, the policy must make clear that the Board may not commence an investigation of a particular civilian complaint or incident until after any criminal and/or internal affairs investigations have concluded and any resulting discipline has been imposed. This requirement applies regardless of whether the Civilian Review Board is granted authority to recommend discipline, or request reconsideration of any findings or disciplinary decisions, or is limited in its authority to auditing completed investigations.
This requirement also applies regardless of whether, as a general matter, the Civilian Review Board is granted access to redacted or unredacted internal affairs records. After reviewing the relevant internal affairs records and conducting any other lawful investigation that the Civilian Review Board deems appropriate, the Board may, to the extent permitted by law, present its conclusions to the law enforcement executive or appropriate authority; request additional information or clarification regarding the findings or decisions made in the course of the internal affairs investigation; and/or request that the internal affairs investigation be re-opened. Whether to re-open an internal affairs investigation remains within the discretion of the law enforcement executive and, with regard to criminal matters, the County Prosecutor’s Office. The Civilian Review Board may not override any finding or decision made as part of the internal affairs process, impose discipline, require that another official impose discipline, or render any finding or decision that requires deference from any other official. If a law enforcement agency declines to re-open an investigation at the request of the Civilian Review Board, the Board may issue a final public report regarding the complaint or incident after appropriately redacting the report in accordance with instructions from the law enforcement executive. The personal identity of specific subject officers, complainants, or witnesses may not be disclosed to the public. Under no circumstances may a Civilian Review Board immunize any person from prosecution or take any other action that would have the effect of conferring immunity on any person.
(b) Confidentiality INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 59 The Civilian Review Board must establish and adhere to written policies and procedural safeguards to preserve the confidentiality of internal affairs records and other confidential information, which shall include at least the following requirements:
(1) Closed sessions for reviews or investigations. The Board must be in a closed session whenever the content of internal affairs records are discussed or testimony or other evidence regarding a specific incident is presented.
(2) Protection of internal affairs information. No part of any internal affairs file may be disclosed by the Civilian Review Board under any circumstances to any person who is not a Board member or employee, the law enforcement executive, or a member of the law enforcement agency’s internal affairs function, except in a final public report appropriately redacted in accordance with instructions from the law enforcement executive. This prohibition on disclosure includes any statement made by police officers to law enforcement investigators under the provisions of Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967).
(3) Personal identifiers. Even in the Civilian Review Board’s final public report, the Board may not disclose the personal identity of subject officers, complainants, or witnesses.
(4) Dedicated location for reviewing internal affairs records. Whenever Civilian Review Board members and staff are granted access to internal affairs records, that review shall take place only in a secure location designated by the law enforcement executive and no internal affairs records may be copied or removed from the designated location.
(5) Training. All Civilian Review Board members and staff shall undergo training approved by the County Prosecutor’s Office on the confidentiality of internal affairs records and other investigative material prior to being granted access to such information.
(6) Attestation. All Civilian Review Board members and staff shall receive a copy of the Board’s written confidentiality policies and sign a sworn statement that they will comply those policies prior to being granted access to internal affairs records. The law enforcement executive may condition the Civilian Review Board’s access to internal affairs records on the Board’s agreement to other protections that the law enforcement executive reasonably considers necessary to safeguard their confidentiality.
(c) Conflicts of Interest INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 60 The Civilian Review Board must adopt a written conflicts-of-interest policy that addresses both inherent conflicts—which preclude a person’s service entirely as a Board member or staffer—and incident-specific conflicts—which require a Board member or staffer’s recusal from particular matters. Prior to commencing their service, Board members and staff must sign a sworn statement that they will comply with the Civilian Review Board’s written conflicts-of-interest policy. The Civilian Review Board’s conflicts-of-interest policy must include, at a minimum, the following stipulations:
(1) Incident-specific conflicts. Any Board member or staffer with an incident-specific conflict must immediately recuse from all proceedings related to that matter.
(2) Inherent conflicts. At least the following categories of persons are considered inherently conflicted and may not serve as a Board member or staffer:
a. A sworn officer or employee of a law enforcement agency within the Board’s jurisdiction, or any person who has held such a position in the last five years;
b. A sworn officer or employee of any other state, county, or local law enforcement agency;
c. A prosecutor or criminal defense attorney currently practicing in the county within the Board’s jurisdiction; d. A relative of any of the aforementioned individuals, as defined in the New Jersey Conflicts of Interest Law at N.J.S.A. 52:13D-21.2(2)
(d); e. A current candidate for public office; or f. With respect to Board membership, a current officer or employee of the municipality.
(3) Duty to disclose. Board members and staff have an ongoing duty to affirmatively disclose any conflict of interest that they may reasonably become aware of, whether that conflict is inherent or incident-specific.
(4) Screening. If a Board member or staffer has a close personal or business relationship with an interested party or any individual who meets any of the criteria listed under the “inherent conflicts,” the Board member or staff should establish a screen to ensure the non-disclosure of sensitive information involving the Board.
(d) Criminal History of Board Members and Staff All Civilian Review Board members and staff who support the Board’s work, on a full- or part-time basis, must undergo a criminal history background check. A person who has been convicted of a crime or offense may not be granted access to the content of INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 61 internal affairs records unless both the law enforcement executive and the County Prosecutor consent to that person being granted such access.
10 The Responsibilities of County Prosecutors
10.0.1 County Prosecutors are responsible for conducting substantive oversight to ensure that the internal affairs functions of all law enforcement agencies within their jurisdiction are operating professionally and effectively. As specialists with deep experience in the criminal justice system and working in the community, prosecutors are well situated for identifying procedural deficiencies before serious issues emerge with an agency’s internal affairs function. As such, County Prosecutors must review the information they receive from law enforcement and the public regarding internal affairs, and swiftly follow up if there are any signs of trouble.
10.0.2 County Prosecutor Offices are an important alternative venue for the filing of internal affairs complaints against an officer of any law enforcement agency in their jurisdiction. Prosecutors must be especially alert to any indication from complainants or the public that the process for receiving and investigating complaints of misconduct is not operating in accordance with the guidelines in this document. For instance, any indication that a member of the public who attempted to file a complaint was turned away or dissuaded is extremely serious and must be immediately investigated.
10.0.3 It is also critical that County Prosecutors substantively review the summary reports that they receive from the internal affairs functions of agencies in their jurisdiction, including municipal police departments. The role of the prosecutor is not limited to ensuring that such reports are submitted on time. Instead, prosecutors must examine the reports, and conduct follow up investigation when concerning patterns emerge. For instance, if an agency consistently appears to summarily close administrative investigations in instances where criminal investigations are declined, then that would be cause for further investigation. Or, if an agency’s officers have been the subjects of numerous serious complaints over a long span of time, but no such complaint has ever been sustained, then that would merit a close review. County Prosecutors are at all times empowered to direct that an agency’s internal affairs files be shared with prosecutors for the purposes of facilitating further investigation.
10.0.4 County Prosecutors should conduct reviews of agencies with concerning patterns, as well as instituting a process for random reviews of the internal affairs functions of agencies in their jurisdiction. For instance, a County Prosecutor might direct a randomly selected agency to share all internal affairs files for cases that were closed in the previous quarter, so that the prosecutor can ascertain whether the internal affairs guidelines are being rigorously observed both in the procedures being employed and in the substance of the results. Likewise, if excessive force complaints are never sustained by an agency, the County Prosecutor may elect to review the body worn camera footage of force incidents to make an independent assessment.
Even if the County Prosecutor’s Office finds that there have been no substantive errors in an agency’s dispositions or disciplinary decisions, periodic reviews might uncover procedural deficiencies that, if allowed to continue, might INTERNAL AFFAIRS POLICY & PROCEDURES | June 2021 66 result in serious errors in the future. In instances where a County Prosecutor reviewed a matter for potential criminal prosecution, declined prosecution and referred back for administrative action, the County Prosecutor must review the ultimate disposition of those matters.
Comments
Post a Comment