Page 100 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 100 of 223 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
88
debate over whether a consent decree was necessary became an important topic of
conversation in the City and especially in the local newspaper, the Press Enterprise.
In fact, Riverside issued a press release on November 30, 2000, announcing they
were in “discussions . . . with the California Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding
the investigation of the City’s Police Department.”48
City Councilwoman Joy Defenbaugh expressed frustration with the AG’s
demand for a consent decree. She said, “We have been aggressively pursuing reform
measures in the city. I don’t know what else we can do. It [consent decree] would
place a stigma on the city itself and I don’t think that is fair, given the efforts we
have made in the last two years” (Pitchford and O’Neill Hill 2000, B1). City
Councilman Ameal Moore also conveyed dissatisfaction, “We feel like most of the
things they are concerned about, we are already in various stages of implementing or
trying to bring about. We feel we’ve made some real good progress. I certainly
would not support a consent decree” (O’Neill Hill 2000, B8).
Other members of the community felt differently. The Rev. Paul S. Munford,
a leader in the African American community who also served on the Mayor’s
advisory group on police use of force, commented that the consent decree “can only
help. There is no harm in having double protection for the public” (Pitchford and
O’Neill Hill 2000, B1). Louis Hayes, vice chairwoman of the Riverside Human
Relations Commission agreed, remarking that “It seems like this would just be one
more good thing to commit to. Why not raise the mark?” (B1). Local activist Chani
48 The headline of the press release was “City Officials Praised for Cooperation with State Department
of Justice.”
Object Description
| Title | Policing accountability: an empirical investigation of state-sponsored police reform in Riverside, California |
| Author | Gomez, Jose Adolfo |
| Author email | jagclash@yahoo.com; jgomez@treasurer.ca.gov |
| Degree | Doctor of Philosophy |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Political Science |
| School | College of Letters, Arts and Sciences |
| Date defended/completed | 2008-08-01 |
| Date submitted | 2008 |
| Restricted until | Restricted until 13 Oct. 2010. |
| Date published | 2010-10-13 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Renteln, Alison Dundes |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Newland, Chester A. Wong, Janelle S. |
| Abstract | The police have the ability to detain, arrest, and use force when necessary. Police accountability is thus of paramount concern to the public. Numerous examples of police misconduct, including cases of excessive force, brutality, and corruption, appear regularly via the news media. These incidents often evidence systemic organizational problems in law enforcement agencies. Scholars have observed that attempts at police reform have placed too much emphasis on individuals behaving badly, rather than on the systemic problems of the police department.; Beginning in the second half of the 1990s, federal and state Attorneys General began employing institutional reform litigation, in the form of consent decrees, to reform law enforcement agencies and enhance police accountability. The consent decrees were crafted to address systemic organizational dysfunction in local police departments. The United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) conducted most of these reform interventions. However, a notable exception was the settlement agreement between the Attorney General of the State of California and the City of Riverside, California.; There has been little research on the efficacy of these efforts to rehabilitate law enforcement agencies. This analysis is a case study of the effectiveness of the institutional reform intervention by the California Attorney General into the Riverside Police Department (RPD). The detailed examination revealed that the intervention produced constructive changes in the way the RPD conducts its business. The RPD became more professional, effective, transparent and accountable as it implemented the provisions of the consent decree, demonstrating that institutional reform litigation can result in meaningful police reform. The shadow of the law was ever present, encouraging an ethos of cooperation and exerting pressure for meaningful organizational change. The Riverside experience suggests that a facilitative oversight style produces constructive collaboration between the parties, improving the likelihood of durable police reform. Moreover, consent decrees to correct systemic police misconduct should not be the exclusive purview of the USDOJ. State Attorneys General can effectively initiate police reform and in some cases state intervention is a more appropriate alternative. |
| Keyword | institutional reform; police reform; police accountability; state attorney's general; police misconduct; organizational change; consent decrees |
| Geographic subject (city or populated place) | Riverside |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Coverage date | 1993/2008 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m1664 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Gomez, Jose Adolfo |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Gomez-2358 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume29/etd-Gomez-2358.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 100 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 88 debate over whether a consent decree was necessary became an important topic of conversation in the City and especially in the local newspaper, the Press Enterprise. In fact, Riverside issued a press release on November 30, 2000, announcing they were in “discussions . . . with the California Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding the investigation of the City’s Police Department.”48 City Councilwoman Joy Defenbaugh expressed frustration with the AG’s demand for a consent decree. She said, “We have been aggressively pursuing reform measures in the city. I don’t know what else we can do. It [consent decree] would place a stigma on the city itself and I don’t think that is fair, given the efforts we have made in the last two years” (Pitchford and O’Neill Hill 2000, B1). City Councilman Ameal Moore also conveyed dissatisfaction, “We feel like most of the things they are concerned about, we are already in various stages of implementing or trying to bring about. We feel we’ve made some real good progress. I certainly would not support a consent decree” (O’Neill Hill 2000, B8). Other members of the community felt differently. The Rev. Paul S. Munford, a leader in the African American community who also served on the Mayor’s advisory group on police use of force, commented that the consent decree “can only help. There is no harm in having double protection for the public” (Pitchford and O’Neill Hill 2000, B1). Louis Hayes, vice chairwoman of the Riverside Human Relations Commission agreed, remarking that “It seems like this would just be one more good thing to commit to. Why not raise the mark?” (B1). Local activist Chani 48 The headline of the press release was “City Officials Praised for Cooperation with State Department of Justice.” |
