Company Directory | HENDON PUBLISHING Homepage

Online Special Report

Officer-Involved Shooting Investigations

For decades, law enforcement agencies nationwide have been the center of controversy either justifiably or unjustifiably for incidents arising from a police officer’s use of deadly force or when a person dies while in police custody. The criticism and scrutiny often comes from the media, the public and special interest groups that target the investigation and facts surrounding the incident.

In any given year, the Los Angeles Police Department’s Force Investigation Division (FID) investigates an average of 80 officer-involved shooting (OIS) and in-custody death (ICD) incidents that are among the most critical investigations conducted by any law enforcement agency. Like many investigations, these draw attention because of the sensitive nature of the cause of bodily injury or death.

Certainly, the outcome of any such investigation can have an enormous impact upon the department, the morale of the agency, the involved officer(s), and the community’s perception of the agency that has vowed to protect and serve. This is magnified if the shooting has the potential of being perceived as controversial in any way.

Many of the investigations conducted by FID have involved a variety of circumstances such as: the shooting of youthful offenders, an encounter with someone mentally impaired, a “waistband” shooting, a shooting of a suspect who was handcuffed, incidents involving multiple shooters where numerous rounds were fired during the incident, and shootings involving lag-time where suspects were shot in the back.

Each of these incidents and those people who died while in police custody have the potential to—and in some cases did—inflame the community at the onset of the occurrence. Clearly, public trust and the trust of an agency’s sworn personnel are always at stake when an OIS or an ICD is the focus of an investigation by any law enforcement agency.

An apparently biased, seemingly secretive, incomplete or sloppy investigation can have a long-lasting and devastating impact upon the community and the law enforcement organization. The resulting distrust caused by a problematic investigation and fueled by negative media coverage can quickly impact an agency’s ability to effectively provide services to its stakeholders.

Likewise, any lack of trust or confidence in an investigation can often become the focus of the district attorney, the county grand jury or the civilian oversight board. These entities may ultimately have a responsibility for reviewing the investigation or recommending an appropriate adjudication relative to the legal justification of the officer’s actions or the administrative decision as to whether the action was in or out of policy.

Strong criticisms aimed at force-related investigations across the nation, and to the appropriateness of those agencies to investigate themselves, have continually made their way to the Internet, newspapers, talk radio programs and news programs on a weekly basis. Additionally, civilian oversight commissions have sharply criticized what they have termed less than thorough, sloppy or incomplete critical use-of-force investigations and have specifically focused on the fact that some agencies were accepting these incomplete investigations as a final product, upon which they based their administrative adjudications.

Moreover, these sharply criticized investigations have led community leaders and state prosecutors around the country to go on record with the position that it is completely inappropriate for law enforcement agencies to investigate themselves in such areas of critical importance.

With all of these issues continually in play, it is strongly recommended that any agency desiring to minimize concerns relative to the investigation of OIS and ICD incidents consider the development and implementation of investigative protocols. These protocols should be specifically designed to enhance transparency, provide clarity and ensure investigative thoroughness that support final adjudications.

After weathering a myriad of criticism, concerns and problems raised by several internal and external sources and faced with distrust associated with its critical force investigations, the Los Angeles Police Department now conducts its OIS and ICD investigations pursuant to strict investigative protocols. These highly transparent protocols are both externally mandated and internally developed to produce the most trustworthy, transparency, timely and professional investigations possible.

Ensuring Trust
As a consequence of the Federal Consent Decree agreed upon by the United States Department of Justice and the city of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Police Department is mandated to comply with specific investigative measures when conducting its highly critical force-related (OIS and ICD) investigations.

Specifically, investigators are required to record and transcribe all interviews with witnesses, suspects and officers at a time and place convenient for them. These transcribed interviews form the basis for the final summary of the use-of-force investigative report. These transcribed interviews are exhaustively reviewed and audited by external monitors such as the Federal Independent Monitor, the civilian Board of Police Commissioners, the District Attorney’s Justice System Integrity Division (JSID) and the Police Commission’s primary oversight component, the Office of the Inspector General (IG).

These monitor and oversight components ensure compliance with various Constitutional provisions, such as proper Miranda advisement, detention and search and seizure issues. Additionally, investigators are required by the Federal Consent Decree to conduct an extensive witness canvass of the incident scene to ensure anyone who can provide a statement or input about the incident has an opportunity to be interviewed.

While these requirements may seem extremely labor intensive and restrictive in nature, they have prevented community criticism of investigations, due to the understanding that the statements of all witnesses are reviewed, commented on and included in the investigation, rather than just reviewed, assessed for credibility, and selected by investigators because their accounts may favor the officer or the department position.

Thorough Investigations
Although each investigation has its own unique circumstances and requires an individual investigative approach, FID has implemented a mandatory investigative checklist for both its administrative and criminal investigations to ensure they contain all the elements required for thorough investigations.

The checklists include literally hundreds of critical investigative elements, including the all-important incident summary, suspect information, case filing presentation, autopsy results, firearms and evidentiary results, notifications, photographs, personnel at scene, injuries, witness canvass information and other required documentation. The assigned case investigators follow this completion format (checklist) during their six- to eight-month investigations to ensure that they have covered all of the required investigative points.

Moreover, the division’s civilian review staff also utilizes the checklist to provide a final audit of the investigation to ensure that it is complete for the administrative approval process. Closely associated with the investigative checklist is the development and implementation of the investigation’s “conflict matrix.”

This matrix is an integral part of the investigation’s addenda and provides a synopsis of each witness’ (suspect, witness and officer) statement, allowing the investigator and all subsequent reviewers to easily view the conflicts and/or similarities between all witness accounts of any given OIS or ICD incident.

In addition to the department’s own implemented investigative checks and balances, completed force-related and ICD investigations are meticulously audited by the independent monitor, as well as IG personnel, to ensure they are exhaustive in scope, legally proper and without bias, suggestive language or leading questions.

Technological Applications
Recent technological advancements have added preciseness to use-of-force investigations conducted by FID personnel; they have also enhanced visual presentations for use during the briefing and adjudication processes.

One of the most versatile pieces of technology used in use-of-force type investigations is the Total Station laser survey instrument. This tool is used to measure the exact locations of all evidence and shooting positions, and documents the physical surroundings at the crime scenes under investigation. It can also be used to create computerized to scale 2-D and 3-D diagrams for use in the review process. The Total Station diagrams are imported into PowerPoint presentations that are used by the investigators to present the incidents to the adjudication panels and board members.

PowerPoint presentations also often included video footage, a Panoscan 360-degree view of the crime scene, audible communication sound bites and overviews of incident scenes provided by aerial photographs or “bucket shots” taken from a hoist that provide a unique prospective to the reviewer. Vantage point photographs or positional perspective photographs that are imported into PowerPoint presentations provide reviewers with a realistic view of what the person saw during the incident, and they put the reviewer into that person’s shoes.

Another important tool used during force investigations is the light anemometer, which measures the amount of ambient lighting, barometric pressure, temperature, and wind speed present to record incident conditions at scene. In more problematic cases, FID detectives team up with well-respected contract engineering firms to develop computer-generated incident re-creations, providing the most scientifically accurate explanation of the incident.

Transparency Through Collaboration
Los Angeles Police Chief William J. Bratton has been quoted on the topic of transparency on many occasions, and he has directed the department to embrace the commitment transparency with the public in order to continue to enhance the public’s trust of law enforcement.

Traditionally, law enforcement agencies have closely guarded their critical investigations and resisted any outside involvement in a police incident. Even the fact that certain events involving department personnel occurred is typically not released or confirmed until well after the incident has been examined and investigated. A lack of overall transparency has the tendency to create serious trust issues in the communities law enforcement agencies serve, and a lack of information provided to the public forces people to engage in their own negative speculation, especially in communities where relationships are already tenuous.

In order to develop a solid trust in the community through openness of its operations, the Los Angeles Police Department has implemented the policy of releasing general information relative to OIS and ICD incidents to the media within 24 hours of the occurrence. This information includes a general overview of the incident, without compromising the investigation, and the names of the involved personnel and suspect(s).

To further the effort at transparency, FID personnel have established cooperative relationships with the two main oversight organizations, the IG and the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office JSID, and has involved them in all critical use-of-force investigations from the onset. Specifically, personnel from the IG and JSID are provided detailed briefings of the incident, invited to listen in on the initial public safety statement from the first arriving supervisor at scene and receive walk-throughs of the crime scene with the opportunity to view all the evidence.

Moreover, these oversight organizations are able to observe the interviews of witnesses and suspects, and the processing of the crime scene. These two oversight bodies are also invited to confidentially discuss any issues they may have regarding the investigation with the assigned investigators so that all concerns are addressed either through explanation or supplemental investigation. By opening up the investigative process to the critical oversight organizations of the IG and JSID, the public is provided with the assurance that the investigation is thorough, straightforward and under constant review.

Although the Federal Consent Decree imposed upon the department was originally viewed as incredibly labor intensive and overly burdensome, it was the impetus for the development of solid investigative protocols that help protect the department from the many criticisms inherent to critical deadly force and in custody death incident investigations.

Furthermore, the many implemented investigative protocols and mandates, along with the development of strong collaborative relationships with oversight entities, have dramatically increased the overall quality and timeliness of the department’s use-of-force presentations and investigations. These relationships have actually challenged the men and women of FID to bring their “A game” to each incident and produce a thorough and comprehensive investigation with every question answered.

Lessons Learned
The many lessons learned from conducting hundreds of critical use-of-force investigations and having them reviewed and exhaustively criticized by numerous reviewing entities prompted the development of an OIS Investigation School. The school, which was recently approved by the California State Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST), commenced instruction in February 2008 and is taught by seasoned detectives and lieutenants assigned to FID.

The instruction focuses on conducting OIS investigations and includes exposure to all of the technological applications used in the completion of an investigation. The school also convenes a panel of experts from the district attorney’s office, the department’s Scientific Investigation Division, the IG’s Office, the police officers’ union attorneys and the department’s administrative review board to provide insight into the issues associated with critical use-of-force investigations from their perspectives. Information regarding the school can be obtained by calling FID at (213) 485-4011.

Lieutenant Paul Hernandez II has provided service to the Los Angeles Police Department and the city of Los Angeles for more than 31 years. He has held the rank of lieutenant since 2004. He can be reached at 21663@lapd.lacity.org.

Captain Kris Pitcher has been with the Los Angeles Police Department for more than 20 years and has held the rank of commanding officer for more than seven years. He can be reached at kris.pitcher@lapd.lacity.org.