Leaders Vow Better Police Monitoring

Responding to a critical report by a civilian police watchdog, Los Angeles Police Chief Bernard C. Parks and City Atty. James K. Hahn said Tuesday that they are taking steps to better monitor problem police officers.

While they bristled at some of the findings and recommendations in a report by Inspector General Katherine Mader, they agreed that they could improve the identification and tracking of officers who have been sued in court over duty-related actions.

Mader’s report, released publicly Tuesday, concluded that the LAPD does not properly monitor officers who have been sued nor adequately track officers who have been disciplined for lying, stealing, using excessive force and other problems.

The department lacks “some essential elements of a comprehensive risk management system,” the report said. The report also found that the city attorney’s office did not provide comprehensive information to the department about civil lawsuits involving LAPD officers.

Hahn said in a prepared statement Tuesday that Mader’s report asserted that his office has restricted information to the LAPD because of certain office policies, but that she failed to provide specifics. He said it was a misconception that his office was not willing share information with the LAPD.

“It gives me great concern that I, as the elected city attorney and administrative head of a department which is audited by the report, have not been contacted about the results of this report,” Hahn said in the statement.

Nonetheless, he told police commissioners that he will start submitting periodic reports to the chief identifying officers involved in civil litigation and summarizing lawsuit allegations.

Additionally, he and Chief Parks said that even before the report came out, they have been discussing risk management issues and are planning to assign a senior assistant city attorney to the department full time to provide legal assistance on personnel, discipline and other related issues.

Parks said he is strengthening systems within the department to better track employees who are the subject of criminal charges or are on probation. Additionally, he said his new management accountability program has placed more emphasis on holding command officers responsible for risk management issues, including the monitoring of “high-risk” officers.

“I am approaching the concept of risk management in a proactive and comprehensive manner,” Parks said.

Mader agreed that progress has been made under Parks. But Mader and Parks did not agree on some recommendations in the report.

Mader suggested that the LAPD reassign officers who were disciplined for recent and serious “integrity related” issues to positions where they would not arrest suspects, write reports and testify in court. Parks does not feel that it is appropriate to restrict field duty assignments after an officer has served his discipline because it doubly punishes the officer.

*

Additionally, Mader proposed abolishing a list of 44 problem officers that was compiled by the Christopher Commission, which studied the LAPD and recommended reforms after the 1991 beating of Rodney G. King. She said the list is outdated. Parks countered that it is unrealistic to get rid of the list.

“The department did not create it nor does it control its usage,” he said.

Several police commissioners voiced support Tuesday for Mader’s report, characterizing the findings as constructive criticism that encourages healthy debate on police reforms.

“I think the inspector general is to be applauded,” Commissioner T. Warren Jackson said at the weekly Police Commission meeting.

One commission source, however, said that Mader’s report had undergone several drafts and that earlier versions were “seriously flawed in both facts and logic.” The final version, the source said, was more evenhanded and balanced.

Mader countered: “Neither the facts nor the logic was changed one iota. The language was merely tightened and strengthened.”