Letters between Angarella & Independent Commission, 1991 Apr.-May; Gates, memo, 1991-01-31, to Board of Police Commissioners |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 6 of 27 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
Warren Cbristopber OWll John A. Arguelles VICE CJiAIR MEMBERS Roy A. Anderson Willie R. Barnes Prof. Leo F. Estrada Mickey Kantor Richard M. Mosk INDEPENDENT COMMISSION ON THE Los ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT May 15, 1991 John W. Spiegel GENERAL COUNSa DEPUTY GENERAL COUN Slil. Percy Anderson Richard E. Drooyan Gary A. Feess Raymon d C. Fisher Ernest J . Getto Lawrence B. Gotlieb Thomas E. Holliday Andrea Sheridan Ordin JobJl Brooks Slaughter Robert E. Tranquada. M.D. Barbara J. Kelley Louise A. LaMotbe Yolanda Orozco Den.Dis M. Perluss Gilbert T. Ray EXEC\1J1VE DIRE.CTOll Prof. Bryce Nelson DlllECTOR FOR PRESS INFORMATION Steven V. Angarella, Esq. 1 2 121 Wilshire Boulevard, suite 1103 Los Angeles, California 90025 De ar Mr . Angarella: John B. She rre ll .Bri an A. Sun On behalf of Warren Christo pher and the Indepe ndent Commission on the Los Angeles Police De partment, I am writing to tha nk you for your letter of April 3, 1991 . With its very short deadline and heavy r e sponsibilities , the Commission hopes that you will understand that it is not p ossible to res pond in d e tail t o y o ur l e tter. However, your letter h as been r ead and will be ma de a part o f the Comm ission files for further r e view by the Commissioners and s taff. GTR We a gain thank you for writing. Very truly yours , ~~7 Gilbert T. Ray Executive Director Suite 1910 400 South Hope Street Lo s Angeles, California 90071-2899 Telephone (213) 622-5205 Facsimile (213) 622-73 18 . '\ t' ( L.AW OFrlCE:S OF" VASTANO & ANGARELLA A LAW PARTNERSH I P 12 12 1 W l\.SH I AC BOU \.CV AAO, S UITE 1103 LOS ANGELES, CALIP'ORNlA 90025 TC \.CPHONE C2 13 1 2 0 1 - ooee April 3, 1991 Warren Christ opher , Esq. O'MELVENY & MEYERS 400 south Hope Street Los Angeles, California 90071 RE : Panduro vs. Los Angeles Police Department, et. al. LASC Case No . BC009812 Dear Mr. Christopher: li£C£Jy£O APR 4 7997 W....c. ·~ 0.FFJc£ Congratulations on your appointment by Mayor Tom Bradley as Chairman of the Com.mission to investigate the operation and structure of the L . A. P.D. I understand that you will be looking into the officer training procedures. In that regard , I would like to bring to your attention the above referenced case against the L . A . P .D. This is a case where a rookie L.A.P.D. officer, approximately six months out of the academy and one half way through her probationary period, without any justification or necessity whatsoever, shot three times and killed Leon Panduro who was a college honor student who had excelled in both academics and athletics. In the civil action, the L . A. P.D . has been reluctant to turn over any documents . They have refused t o turn over the Officer Involved Shooting Report and the Shooting Review Board Report. We are currently i n the process of obtaining a court order to secure the production of these documents. However, we have recently received a report by Chief of Pol ice, Daryl Gates, to the Board of Police Commissioners regarding this shooting. I am enclosing a copy for your review. As you will note, officers Browne and Ortiz' conduct was found t o be " out of pol icy" and " improper and serious enough to require administrative disapproval. " However, no changes were recommended to the department standards . As indicated above, the officer who shot Leon Panduro was a rookie officer , approximately six months out of the academy. As you may expect, we have a very strong concern about the L .A.P.D.' s training policies and procedures. Thus, on behalf of John and Marina Panduro, we request that your commission investigate and evaluate the L . A. P . D. ' s training polices and procedures so that absolutely senseless police shootings like I I o.,,.,J r ( Warren Christopher , Esq . Apri l 3, 1991 Page 2 this one may be avoided in the future and other families may not have to experience t he pain and grief being experienced by John and Marina Panduro over the l oss of their son . We sincerely appreciate you l ooking into t his matter. Should you need any additional information, please do not hesitate to give a call. SVA:tb Enclosure cc: Mayor Tom Bradley City Hall Room 305 200 North Spring Street Los Angeles, California 90012 . - /' r ( ... Jarruary 31, 1991 1.2 '10: Honorable Board of ~lice Q:mnjssioners FR:M: Oli.ef of ~lice OIS # 24-90 Horx:>rable Members: I have reviewed arrl adcpted the U5e of Force Review Board Report for this incident. I hereby sul:ltlit my f irdirgs in accordan::e with ~lice canmission policy. ~ On March 2, 1990, at awroximately 2240 hcurs, Northeast Patrol Division, uniforne:l Officers G. Browne #26537, arrl R. Ortiz #17522, received a radio call of a lcu:i radio at 2910 Rosanna street. 'lhe officers resporrled to the location b.rt. foorrl no evidence of a lcu:i radio. 'lhey drove past the location a.rd saw eight to ten IXlSSible gan; nembers st.ard.i.n:J in front of 2919 Rosanna street. Officer ortiz stowed the police car to investigate. 'lhe ~began to slCMly disperse. Officer ortiz ~zed one of the in:lividuals who ~. intoxicated, as a local garq neirber. Officers Ortiz arrl Bro.rme exited the police car, takin;1 their flashlights . 'Ille officers did not take their batons with them. Officer ortiz told Officer BrC1#ne to stay with the intoxicated suspect 'While he fella.Ned three suspects to the rear of 2919 Rcsanna street. Officer Ortiz• s intention was to talk with the in:lividuals arrl evaluate their activities. A nale, subsequently identified as L. Panduro, 18 yea.rs of age, exited the back door of the residerx::e arrl awroadle:i Officer Ortiz, highly agitated. He walked past Officer Ortiz stati.rg, ''Ya.i got to do saneth.i.rg abc:-..rt: me officer. 11 Officer Ortiz f orm:rl the ~inion that the suspect was urrler the influeoce of drugs arrl,/or ala:hol. A seaJrrl nale, subsequently identified as F. P.ami.rez, 26 years of age, exited the ha.ise. Ramirez told Officer Ortiz that he wcW.d control Pan::iuro. He forcibly grabbed Panduro's arm an::l p.tlled him away fran Officer Ortiz. ·Honorable Board of Police O:mnissioners Page 2 1.2 Believirg the situatioo was \nrler' cc11tt-ol, Officer Ortiz prepared to leave the location. As he did so, Parrluro awroached hiJn arrl SlXX3enly gral:i:led the butt of his holstered weapon. Sinul taneo.lsly, Officer ortiz p.lShed Parrluro away arrl shoUted, ''Hey, ~y are you tryirq to take J1tj CJWl?", to alert Officer BrcMne. Parrluro readled for Officer Ortiz's weap:rl a secx::n::i ti.me arrl Officer Ortiz repelled his attenpt again. At that time, Officer Brc1Wne resparrled to the rear of the lc:x::atioo to assist her partner. As Officer Brc1Wne awroadled, she saw six to nine suspects gathered arcurrl Officer Ortiz. Ramirez was between Officer Ortiz arrl Pan:furo, attenptirg to p.111 Pan:luro away fran the officer. Officer Ortiz then told Officer Brc"'1ne to broadcast an officer needs help call. Officer ~ ccrrplied. She also drew her -weap:>n believirg that Parrluro had gained possession of her partner's "'1eap0n. Parrlu.ro turned away fran Officer Ortiz arrl focused his attention tcMard Officer Bro.ime. As Panduro approached Officer Bra..me, the officer ordered hi.In to stop; however, he failed to c:x:rrply. D.le to his irrational behavior, Officer Bra.me opined that Panduro was possibly un:Jer the influence of narcotics. Officer Brc1.me also noticed that he was unanned. When Parrluro awroached to within five feet of Officer Brc"'1ne, the officer noved backward. Parrluro followed the officer arrl made several attenpts to grab her. NOI'E: Officer Ortiz later stated that he did not intervene or atterrpt to stq:> Parrluro because he did not want to place himself in Officer Brc:1wne's shootirg backgram:l. Parrluro strldenly lurged at Officer Browne arrl attenpted to grab her weai:x:>n . Officer ~, believirg that Parrluro was aro.rt:. to OVerp:Mer her arrl gain possession of her \lleapCl'l, fired two rtU"rls at the suspect. Unaffected by the shots, Parrluro contirrued to advance to..rard the officer. Officer ~ cx:>ntinued to retreat as Parrluro l~ed at the officer's weapon a secon:i time. Still believirg that if Parrluro gained pcssession of her weapon, he wc:W.d shoot either Officer ortiz or herself, Officer Browne fired one nore ro..Irrl, her third, at the suspect. Parrluro then fell to the grourrl, m::>rtally WCU'rled. Officer Ortiz ordered the re.maini.rg suspects into a kneelirg p:lSi tian. Upon the arrival of additional off ice.rs, all of the in::ti viduals were taken into o..istcx:1y. · Fioti:>rable Board of Police Ccmui.ssicners Page 3 1.2 YINPm:;s After my perscnal review of the facts of this case arrl the Use of Force Review Board's report for this in::ident., my fi.rrlirgs are as folla..15: Tactics - Administrative djsar:proval, Officers B:r."UWne arrl Ortiz . Drawirq/Exhibi tirq/Holsterirq Weapa1 - o.rt: of policy, administrative disawrtMU., Officer B:r."UWne. Use of Force - o.rt: of policy, admi.nistrative dJ.sar.proval, Officer B:r."UWne. I have reviewed this iocident arrl I am ~ al:x:ut the tactics in the follc:M"in; areas: Up:>n stowi.rg at the location to cx::irrluct their investigation, Officers Ortiz arrl aro..me failed to OOtain their basic safety equipnent. To cx:riplicate the situation, the officers separated. Both officers placed themselves in tactically inferior positions for which they were unprepared. Upon seein;1 the CJaN3 lT'pJ!"b:>rs gathe.re:l tcx;Jether, the officers should have develc:p:d a plan for their awroach. 'llleY also shoold have considered requesting an acklitianal tm.it to assist them before confrorrt:.in;1 the suspects. As the officers exited their car, they shculd have stayed tcx;Jether, properly camunicated arrl worked as a team. 'Ilri.s did not~ · I am especially critical of Officer Ortiz in this area. Officer Ortiz is a sea.saned trainirg officer '#ho has beeri entrusted to teach new officers proper tactics. Officer ( Ortiz failed to do this. I f irrl the tactics of Officers Brchme arrl Ortiz to be inproper arrl serioo.s e.rx:ogh to require administrative disawroval. Policy: "An officer's decisicn to draw or e><hibit a firearm shoold be base::l on the tactical situatiai arrl t.he office.r's reascnable belief there is a substantial risk that the situatiai may escalate to the point where deadly force may be justified" (1/556.80). Officer Bra.me drew her weapc:n believin;J that Parrluro had possibly c:bta.ined her partner's weapon; hc:1«ever, she admitted seeirq Panduro tma.rmed. OD:e this fact was determined, Officer Broorme shculd have holstered her r,,ieapon . An officer should de-escalate the reascnable arrl necessary ano.mt of force as it directly pertains to the suspect's action. Officer Browne did not do this. ~ . , ·ijOQOrable Board of ' • · ~ ~l ioe a:mni.ssi<XlerS Page 4 1.2 I firrl the drawirg to be cut of policy, administrative dJ.sawroval. tEE OF Frnc:E Policy: "An officer is authorized the use of deadly force '#tlen it reasonably awears necessary to protect himself or others frcm an inm:rliate threat of death or sericus txxH Jy injury' (l/556.40). Offioer Browne failed to use all of the alternatives available to her before ezrploy~ the use of deadly force. ld:liticnally, she did not have sufficient information to believe that Pan:iuro presented the imrediate threat of death or sericus bcx:lily injury. I firrl the use of force by Officer Browne to be cm: of policy, administrative ciisawroval. Neither offioer was injured. 'lhe Coroner's office examined Panduro's remains arrl ascribed the cause of death to JIUltiple gunshot wo..nrls. 'Ihe trajectory of the \olO..lrrls was consistent with the officer's acx:::amt of this incident. A toxicolcqical analysis perfonned on Mardl 14, 1990, revealed no narcotics or alcrl'lol in Pan:hlro's blocxi . Officer Bro..me was anned with a Department authorized, 9lTln semi-aut.cmatic pistol, fully loade::l with Department-awrove:i anvm.mition. SUspect Parduro was unannerl at the time of this incident. Offioers Bra.me arrl Ortiz were on-duty arrl ~in3 bc:dy a.rnor. ~CN I do not reccmnen:l a:rry c:han;1es of Department starrlards as a resu1 t of th.is incident . 'Ihe fin:ii.rgs will be considered final unless notifie::l within 15 days that the Board has requested further review of th.is matter. Respectfully,
Object Description
Description
Title | Letters between Angarella & Independent Commission, 1991 Apr.-May; Gates, memo, 1991-01-31, to Board of Police Commissioners |
Description | Gilbert T. Ray (Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department), 400 South Hope Street, Los Angeles, California, letter, 1991 May 15, to Steven V. Angarella, 12121 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles; California. ❧ Steven V. Angarella (Vastano & Angarella), 12121 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, California, letter, 1991 April 3, to Warren Christopher (O'Melveny & Myers), 400 South Hope Street, Los Angeles, California, re Panduro vs. Los Angeles Police Department, et al., LASC case no. BC009812, re Excessive force. ❧ Los Angeles Police Department (Daryl F. Gates and Robert L. Vernon), memorandum, 1991 January 31, to Board of Police Commissioners, re OIS #24-90. |
Geographic subject (roadway) | 12121 Wilshire Boulevard; 400 South Hope Street |
Geographic subject (city or populated place) | Los Angeles |
Geographic subject (county) | Los Angeles |
Geographic subject (state) | California |
Geographic subject (country) | USA |
Geographic coordinates | 34.0440158,-118.4703889; 34.0516068,-118.255821 |
Coverage date | 1991-01-31; 1991-04-03; 1991-05-15 |
Creator |
Ray, Gilbert T. Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department Angarella, Steven V. Vastano & Angarella Los Angeles Police Department Gates, Daryl F. Vernon, Robert L. |
Contributor |
Angarella, Steven V., recipient Christopher, Warren, recipient O'Melveny & Myers, recipient Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners, recipient |
Date created | 1991-01-31; 1991-04-03; 1991-05-15 |
Type | texts |
Format | 7 p. |
Format (aat) |
correspondence memorandums |
Format (imt) | application/pdf |
Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
Series | Independent Commission File List |
File | Complaints, suggestions, and support |
Box and folder | box 23, folder 10, item 6 |
Physical access | Contact: Special Collections, Doheny Memorial Library, Libraries, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189; specol@dots.usc.edu |
Full text |
Warren Cbristopber
OWll
John A. Arguelles
VICE CJiAIR
MEMBERS
Roy A. Anderson
Willie R. Barnes
Prof. Leo F. Estrada
Mickey Kantor
Richard M. Mosk
INDEPENDENT COMMISSION
ON THE Los ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT
May 15, 1991
John W. Spiegel
GENERAL COUNSa
DEPUTY GENERAL COUN Slil.
Percy Anderson
Richard E. Drooyan
Gary A. Feess
Raymon d C. Fisher
Ernest J . Getto
Lawrence B. Gotlieb
Thomas E. Holliday
Andrea Sheridan Ordin
JobJl Brooks Slaughter
Robert E. Tranquada. M.D.
Barbara J. Kelley
Louise A. LaMotbe
Yolanda Orozco
Den.Dis M. Perluss
Gilbert T. Ray
EXEC\1J1VE DIRE.CTOll
Prof. Bryce Nelson
DlllECTOR FOR PRESS
INFORMATION
Steven V. Angarella, Esq.
1 2 121 Wilshire Boulevard, suite 1103
Los Angeles, California 90025
De ar Mr . Angarella:
John B. She rre ll
.Bri an A. Sun
On behalf of Warren Christo pher and the Indepe ndent
Commission on the Los Angeles Police De partment, I am writing
to tha nk you for your letter of April 3, 1991 .
With its very short deadline and heavy
r e sponsibilities , the Commission hopes that you will
understand that it is not p ossible to res pond in d e tail t o
y o ur l e tter. However, your letter h as been r ead and will be
ma de a part o f the Comm ission files for further r e view by the
Commissioners and s taff.
GTR
We a gain thank you for writing.
Very truly yours ,
~~7
Gilbert T. Ray
Executive Director
Suite 1910 400 South Hope Street Lo s Angeles, California 90071-2899 Telephone (213) 622-5205 Facsimile (213) 622-73 18
. '\
t'
(
L.AW OFrlCE:S OF"
VASTANO & ANGARELLA
A LAW PARTNERSH I P
12 12 1 W l\.SH I AC BOU \.CV AAO, S UITE 1103
LOS ANGELES, CALIP'ORNlA 90025
TC \.CPHONE C2 13 1 2 0 1 - ooee
April 3, 1991
Warren Christ opher , Esq.
O'MELVENY & MEYERS
400 south Hope Street
Los Angeles, California 90071
RE : Panduro vs. Los Angeles Police Department, et. al.
LASC Case No . BC009812
Dear Mr. Christopher:
li£C£Jy£O
APR 4 7997
W....c. ·~ 0.FFJc£
Congratulations on your appointment by Mayor Tom Bradley as
Chairman of the Com.mission to investigate the operation and
structure of the L . A. P.D. I understand that you will be looking
into the officer training procedures. In that regard , I would
like to bring to your attention the above referenced case against
the L . A . P .D. This is a case where a rookie L.A.P.D. officer,
approximately six months out of the academy and one half way
through her probationary period, without any justification or
necessity whatsoever, shot three times and killed Leon Panduro
who was a college honor student who had excelled in both
academics and athletics.
In the civil action, the L . A. P.D . has been reluctant to turn over
any documents . They have refused t o turn over the Officer
Involved Shooting Report and the Shooting Review Board Report.
We are currently i n the process of obtaining a court order to
secure the production of these documents. However, we have
recently received a report by Chief of Pol ice, Daryl Gates, to
the Board of Police Commissioners regarding this shooting. I am
enclosing a copy for your review. As you will note, officers
Browne and Ortiz' conduct was found t o be " out of pol icy" and
" improper and serious enough to require administrative
disapproval. " However, no changes were recommended to the
department standards .
As indicated above, the officer who shot Leon Panduro was a
rookie officer , approximately six months out of the academy. As
you may expect, we have a very strong concern about the
L .A.P.D.' s training policies and procedures. Thus, on behalf of
John and Marina Panduro, we request that your commission
investigate and evaluate the L . A. P . D. ' s training polices and
procedures so that absolutely senseless police shootings like
I
I o.,,.,J
r
(
Warren Christopher , Esq .
Apri l 3, 1991
Page 2
this one may be avoided in the future and other families may not
have to experience t he pain and grief being experienced by John
and Marina Panduro over the l oss of their son .
We sincerely appreciate you l ooking into t his matter. Should you
need any additional information, please do not hesitate to give
a call.
SVA:tb
Enclosure
cc: Mayor Tom Bradley
City Hall
Room 305
200 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, California 90012
. - /'
r
(
...
Jarruary 31, 1991
1.2
'10: Honorable Board of ~lice Q:mnjssioners
FR:M: Oli.ef of ~lice
OIS # 24-90
Horx:>rable Members:
I have reviewed arrl adcpted the U5e of Force Review Board Report for this
incident. I hereby sul:ltlit my f irdirgs in accordan::e with ~lice canmission
policy.
~
On March 2, 1990, at awroximately 2240 hcurs, Northeast Patrol Division,
uniforne:l Officers G. Browne #26537, arrl R. Ortiz #17522, received a radio call
of a lcu:i radio at 2910 Rosanna street.
'lhe officers resporrled to the location b.rt. foorrl no evidence of a lcu:i radio.
'lhey drove past the location a.rd saw eight to ten IXlSSible gan; nembers st.ard.i.n:J
in front of 2919 Rosanna street. Officer ortiz stowed the police car to
investigate. 'lhe ~began to slCMly disperse. Officer ortiz ~zed one
of the in:lividuals who ~. intoxicated, as a local garq neirber. Officers
Ortiz arrl Bro.rme exited the police car, takin;1 their flashlights . 'Ille officers
did not take their batons with them.
Officer ortiz told Officer BrC1#ne to stay with the intoxicated suspect 'While he
fella.Ned three suspects to the rear of 2919 Rcsanna street. Officer Ortiz• s
intention was to talk with the in:lividuals arrl evaluate their activities.
A nale, subsequently identified as L. Panduro, 18 yea.rs of age, exited the back
door of the residerx::e arrl awroadle:i Officer Ortiz, highly agitated. He walked
past Officer Ortiz stati.rg, ''Ya.i got to do saneth.i.rg abc:-..rt: me officer. 11 Officer
Ortiz f orm:rl the ~inion that the suspect was urrler the influeoce of drugs
arrl,/or ala:hol.
A seaJrrl nale, subsequently identified as F. P.ami.rez, 26 years of age, exited
the ha.ise. Ramirez told Officer Ortiz that he wcW.d control Pan::iuro.
He forcibly grabbed Panduro's arm an::l p.tlled him away fran Officer Ortiz.
·Honorable Board of
Police O:mnissioners
Page 2
1.2
Believirg the situatioo was \nrler' cc11tt-ol, Officer Ortiz prepared to leave the
location. As he did so, Parrluro awroached hiJn arrl SlXX3enly gral:i:led the butt of
his holstered weapon. Sinul taneo.lsly, Officer ortiz p.lShed Parrluro away arrl
shoUted, ''Hey, ~y are you tryirq to take J1tj CJWl?", to alert Officer BrcMne.
Parrluro readled for Officer Ortiz's weap:rl a secx::n::i ti.me arrl Officer Ortiz
repelled his attenpt again. At that time, Officer Brc1Wne resparrled to the rear
of the lc:x::atioo to assist her partner.
As Officer Brc1Wne awroadled, she saw six to nine suspects gathered arcurrl
Officer Ortiz. Ramirez was between Officer Ortiz arrl Pan:furo, attenptirg to
p.111 Pan:luro away fran the officer. Officer Ortiz then told Officer Brc"'1ne to
broadcast an officer needs help call.
Officer ~ ccrrplied. She also drew her -weap:>n believirg that Parrluro had
gained possession of her partner's "'1eap0n.
Parrlu.ro turned away fran Officer Ortiz arrl focused his attention tcMard Officer
Bro.ime. As Panduro approached Officer Bra..me, the officer ordered hi.In to stop;
however, he failed to c:x:rrply. D.le to his irrational behavior, Officer Bra.me
opined that Panduro was possibly un:Jer the influence of narcotics. Officer
Brc1.me also noticed that he was unanned.
When Parrluro awroached to within five feet of Officer Brc"'1ne, the officer noved
backward. Parrluro followed the officer arrl made several attenpts to grab her.
NOI'E: Officer Ortiz later stated that he did not intervene or atterrpt to
stq:> Parrluro because he did not want to place himself in Officer
Brc:1wne's shootirg backgram:l.
Parrluro strldenly lurged at Officer Browne arrl attenpted to grab her weai:x:>n .
Officer ~, believirg that Parrluro was aro.rt:. to OVerp:Mer her arrl gain
possession of her \lleapCl'l, fired two rtU"rls at the suspect. Unaffected by the
shots, Parrluro contirrued to advance to..rard the officer.
Officer ~ cx:>ntinued to retreat as Parrluro l~ed at the officer's weapon a
secon:i time. Still believirg that if Parrluro gained pcssession of her weapon,
he wc:W.d shoot either Officer ortiz or herself, Officer Browne fired one nore
ro..Irrl, her third, at the suspect. Parrluro then fell to the grourrl, m::>rtally
WCU'rled.
Officer Ortiz ordered the re.maini.rg suspects into a kneelirg p:lSi tian. Upon the
arrival of additional off ice.rs, all of the in::ti viduals were taken into o..istcx:1y.
· Fioti:>rable Board of
Police Ccmui.ssicners
Page 3
1.2
YINPm:;s
After my perscnal review of the facts of this case arrl the Use of Force Review
Board's report for this in::ident., my fi.rrlirgs are as folla..15:
Tactics - Administrative djsar:proval, Officers B:r."UWne arrl Ortiz .
Drawirq/Exhibi tirq/Holsterirq Weapa1 - o.rt: of policy,
administrative disawrtMU., Officer B:r."UWne.
Use of Force - o.rt: of policy, admi.nistrative dJ.sar.proval, Officer
B:r."UWne.
I have reviewed this iocident arrl I am ~ al:x:ut the tactics in the
follc:M"in; areas:
Up:>n stowi.rg at the location to cx::irrluct their investigation, Officers Ortiz arrl
aro..me failed to OOtain their basic safety equipnent. To cx:riplicate the
situation, the officers separated.
Both officers placed themselves in tactically inferior positions for which they
were unprepared. Upon seein;1 the CJaN3 lT'pJ!"b:>rs gathe.re:l tcx;Jether, the officers
should have develc:p:d a plan for their awroach. 'llleY also shoold have
considered requesting an acklitianal tm.it to assist them before confrorrt:.in;1 the
suspects.
As the officers exited their car, they shculd have stayed tcx;Jether, properly
camunicated arrl worked as a team. 'Ilri.s did not~ · I am especially
critical of Officer Ortiz in this area. Officer Ortiz is a sea.saned trainirg
officer '#ho has beeri entrusted to teach new officers proper tactics. Officer
( Ortiz failed to do this.
I f irrl the tactics of Officers Brchme arrl Ortiz to be inproper arrl serioo.s
e.rx:ogh to require administrative disawroval.
Policy: "An officer's decisicn to draw or e> |
Filename | indep-box23-10-06.pdf |
Archival file | Volume73/indep-box23-10-06.pdf |