HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-19-1999 ArticlesPage 3A
ocal
Wednesday,
January 13,
1999
Iowa City Press -Citizen
City adopts
PCRB rules
By Trevor R. Maxwell
The Press -Citizen
Despite opposition from a
representative of the Police
Citizens Review Board, the
Iowa City Council Tuesday
adopted a set of operating pro-
cedures fur the board.
In a 6-1 vote that belied divi-
sion among members, the coun-
cil opted to
Iowa City empower a set
of formal rules
that include revisions made by
city attorney Eleanor Dilkes.
However, PCRB co-chair-
man John Watson said that
some of Dilkes' revisions com-
promise the intent of the board.
Watson also said the board's
informal se! of procedures is
working fine.
"The board was charged
with drafting its own ruless,"
Watson told the council. "It is
gmsslY inaccurate to state or
imply that the PCRB has been
operating on an ad hoc basis.
The kcy disputed point ; :.e
bo.ud will not be provided with
the identification of officers.
Watson said the ahility to
track complaints against indi-
vidual officers is fundamental to
the board's chartered purpose:
to impartially monitor and keep
tabs on citizen complaints
against the police.
He asked the council to
delay a vote on procedures until
Feb. 11, when a full discussion
is scheduled between the coun-
cil and the PCRB.
Council member Dee
Norton, who originally opposed
adopting the rules, changed his
mind because he is concerned
that the council and PCRB
could take months to reach
agreemo,d on the specifics of.
the rules.
"My concern is we would be
into some kind of limbo here,"
Norton said. "I'm reluctantly.
going to go along with the city
attomey."
Councilor Karen Kubby was
the sole member to vote against
the rules adoption. She said the
action k not fair to the PCRB.
"It s much more important to
wait and have that discussion
before we approve anything,"
she said.
m
n
d
0
CL
R
0
m
�11
�I
i
N yam" GJ H U N N'O Ul
4,..,Pg mYm>=cm;d,�
m�F' 3 0
dA
3U C O ON U O G L. N Yro
^' Ua° wmo
A:: m o
Iio ia� co'y o,3A �y
royx° "bA0dy�a'on3
a C9A C
f. a+ Y Gl N • � O y
O rl O A .-. h m y M> E
m o obo�
El U F m °'Ott co
U L❑ N,Y CN N mm UNtpCi.m O d � 0 O
CO
m >' Om Nx 0 O
an U aOSUi.+. i. ��c db P4 �.oG d ca zN. db,w
m�m.d �3y �•GNa�i u`xY°ao�i�K
'Omm"z.�.:bod,o3 �000d
U
aoi zm.00 �y�F3,mtl0y �Wq'o"
U$3oT� �o°p �>° o���a0;r.
cm ,a°�3om 4ods.yya
3 m mY m 0 �
d o ouxw N Y
0 6 d' 09 F o q o
o m a'd .O m w aA'o 3 a m aA A F
om ,cP
rA a3 s > N o ° o
3 0 q A �3 b ti p A > o w" 0 3
oAm m"om ;od M.C: .omm
Nm'�
Y
�ooF 3�ro ocNc�Aou moo
N w
m C..CQ,,momN'3.5m
a N O o o o
�fOm�Y OyNomm3 opo �..", s.o
E"--rE'c-Fm'Fm� Fia�C3
c
n,�'oNmdmApm
U
Y��o� d dm Off., .-• ya"i s°'. ""C
m U A a �. d N m�!! >
N Y O m p
~;aPA'aP°A°Nd7�hcca
Oc(A.�d'�'mo3aNi�Ydd °N
y
'a 0
o ".a ro V c
rl
mUW o :md 3aai��'°3 °
m
K�a30 Y�o�uiN aNA...
LI
No public
http://www.pmssdomo.w"lmdpub/polandpjtS.httni
Police 04
baata tx�tt, fslitsaaFs public
Police review: Separate approaches - -
a9"
�� �tt,. Here are how each of the Bay Area's eight
�� "� examples of civilian oversight work
t Apr. 27, 1998
By BOB KLOSE
Press Democrat Staff Writer
SAN FRANCISCO
• Established: 1983
• Complaints in 1997: 1,126
• Staff:30
• Budget: $2.1 million
With a population of almost 800,000 and a police force of
some 2000 sworn officers, San Francisco leads the area in
the number of citizen complaints against police officers
and the size of the oversight mechanism.
The Office of Citizen Complaints, created by voters in
1983, received 1,126 complaints in 1997, each consisting
of one or more allegations; 983 cases were resolved and
179 allegations against officers were sustained for
misconduct.
"We handle complaints ranging from rudeness and invalid
traffic tickets to wrongful shootings," said Director Mary
Dunlap. "We investigate all shootings that result in death
whether there is a complaint or not."
Dunlap said the office is an investigative and prosecuting
authority. The police chief and civilian Police Commission
are the final judges. Most cases in which evidence
supports the allegations go to the police chief for
disposition, she said.
"But when we are seeking discipline higher than 10 days'
suspension, we have to go to the Police Commission.
Only the commission can fire or suspend for more than 10
days."
1 ord
18;29 31.16 PM
'the public hq:/Iwww.pressdomo.com/polandpuWpotandpibg.litn
The office has subpoena authority, and police officers are
required to cooperate with the agency or face further
discipline.
Hearings before the chief are closed. Commission
proceedings normally are open to the public.
Dunlap said her office has examined dozens of shootings,
and that in at least one case the shooting was found to be
unjustified and the officer resigned. She said investigations
are especially important to the officers.
"It's very important to exonerate officers when the facts
do so," she said.
OAKLAND
• Established: 1980
• Complaints in 1997: 43
• Staff:3
• Budget: $397,000
Oakland has half the population of San Francisco, but its
Citizens' Police Review Board staff is only about 10
percent the size of San Francisco's Office of Citizen
Complaints. The oversight body operated for almost 14
years without its own investigators, relying on evidence
submitted by the police department's own internal affairs
investigation. The council broadened the commission's
power and independent investigative function in 1996
after a critical report by the ACLU and People United for
a Better Oakland.
The Oakland staff, which investigates complaints of
excessive force and bias, has one full-time investigator and
is hiring a second.
After complaints are investigated, if the evidence
warrants, cases are taken to a nine -member civilian
commission that hears and decides the case in public and
recommends punishment or policy review to the city
manager, who consults with the police chief. The city
manager is the final authority.
Investigator Nancy Schmidt said Oakland received 43
complaints in 1997, and nine went before the commission.
Allegations in three of those cases were sustained, she
said,
Four civilians were slain by Oakland officers last year,
According to Assistant District Attorney Stacy Walthall,
d6
the public
http:/A w.pma9demo.com/poleudpublpolsadpab�..htt
no wrongdoing has been found in any officer -involved
shooting for more than 10 years.
BERKELEY
• Established: 1973
• Complaints in 1997: 42
• Staff; 4
• Budget: $247,000
Berkeley's Police Review Commission is the most public
of such agencies in the Bay Area.
Hearings are open and the public record remains available
for public inspection -- even in cases in which allegations
are not sustained.
However, the commission's findings are only advisory to
the city manager, who with the police chief sets
disciplinary measures based on the police department's
own internal affairs investigation and the commission
information.
And the actual disciplinary consequences for the officer, if
any, are not public.
"That is weakest part of the system," said Director
Barbara Attard.
The commission, established in 1983 and one of the
nation's oldest, is made up of nine civilians appointed by
the City Council and the mayor. The commission staff is
authorized to investigate complaints and policies and
procedures. Cases of deadly force are not automatically
investigated, Attard said.
Complaints are investigated by staff and submitted to a
three -person commission subcommittee called a board of
inquiry. Officers and complainants are questioned and
cross-examined in a quasi-judicial proceeding, and
findings are forwarded to the city manager.
Attard said 42 complaints were filed in 1997. Two
allegations were sustained.
RICHMOND
• Established: 1983
• Complaints in 1997: 24
• Staff.2
• Budget: $200,000
V
police end the public
http:/nvw.press4aemo.wnvpolmopuD,polannpa,,�•.0 i
Richmond's Police Review Commission, established in
1983 by the City Council following several
officer -involved shootings, investigates excessive force
and race -based disputes.
Commission investigator Don Casimere, a former
Berkeley police officer, conducts the inquiry and submits
his findings to the nine -member commission, which is
appointed by the City Council. The commission reaches a
conclusion and makes a recommendation to the police
chief. If the chief disagrees with the commission
recommendation, he submits the issue to the city manager
for final disposition. The commission also can review
policy.
SANTA CRUZ
• Established: 1994
• Complaints in 1997: 25
• Staff: 1
• Budget: $64,000
The seven -member civilian Santa Cruz Citizen Police
Review Board primarily reviews the police department's
own internal investigation.
Internal affairs investigates citizen complaints and sends
its findings to a deputy chief and the Police Review Board
for automatic review.
Board members discuss the findings in closed session and
send their recommendations to the police chief.
The chief weighs both the board's and deputy chiefs
recommendations and makes a decision. The city manager
is final authority.
NOVATO
• Established: 1992
• Complaints in 1997: 10
• Staff: None
• Budget: $8,500
Novato's 6-year-old Police Advisory and Review Board, a
five -member panel appointed by the City Council, reviews
citizen complaints only if the complaining party is not
satisfied with an internal affairs investigation and findings.
The panel has subpoena power, subject to City Council
approval, but has never used it, according to City
Manager Rod Wood.
4of6
1/9,99 :?F PM
and the public http://www.puWctno.com/polandpub/polwdlrjb8.lit
Police Chief Brian Brady said the Novato board rarely
differs from police investigators.
"In virtually all the cases, the board agreed with the
internal affairs investigation," he said.
"In one case we had a minor difference. Internal affairs
found one allegation unfounded. The board found that
there was no evidence to indicate one way or another."
SAN JOSE
• Established: 1993
• Complaints in 1997: 443
• Staff:4
• Budget: $320,000
An independent police auditor, paid $110,000 a year and
guaranteed job security unless she loses the support of 10
City Council members, provides civilian oversight for the
San Jose Police Department.
Under the San Jose formula, Teresa Guerrero -Daley
monitors investigations of citizen complaints conducted by
internal affairs.
"It is as extensive or as superficial as I decide to make it
and with the exception of use of force cases, which are all
monitored. We review about 60 percent of the rest," she
said.
San Jose audited 443 cases and sustained 22 allegations
last year. Two officers resigned while under investigation,
she said.
Gerrero-Daley said she takes her findings directly to the
police chief and attempts to reach an agreement on
disposition. But the police chief has final authority, and if
the auditor is not happy with his decision, she can discuss
the issue further with the chief and city manager, or go
directly to the council, which hires and fires the chief.
FAMULD
• Established: 1997
• Complaints in 1997: 35
• Staff: None
• Budget: None
Internal Affairs investigations are reviewed by a Citizen
Complaint Audit Committee that reports to the City
Police and the public
http://ww .pressdemo.wm/polandpub/poland fribE..htmi
Council quarterly. Members include one civilian appointee
and representatives from the police department and the
city manager's office, and a city insurance official.
It has no investigative budget.
PQlt�e
Public
Click here to ao back
Top Site info Feedback Subscribe Advertising Home
® 1998 The Press Democrat
z: .
Site Map .
6 of 6 Ila IN 3107 PM
Dallas Citizens/Police Review Board : Future Plans http://www.ci.dallas.tx.us/eso/cprb4dnxe.atnr
Dallas Citizens/Police Review Board
FUTURE PLANS
The Dallas Citizens/Police Review Board will continue to review complaints
against Dallas Police Department employees when requested to do so by a
citizen. If a citizen is dissatisfied with the results of the Internal Affairs
Division or Chain -of -Command investigation, he/she can request a hearing
to appear before the Review Board.
Training classes required by City Ordinance for Board members will be
conducted during the program year of October 1998 through September
1999.
Future training sessions will be conducted monthly and will include the
following topics:
A. Judiciary Ethics and Protocol
B. The Board's Enabling Ordinance
C. Robert's Rules of Order
D. IAD and Chain -of -Command Complaint Process/Findings and
Parameters
E. Deadly Force
F. Force Continuum
G. Family Violence
H. Excited Delirium
Additional training will be provided by guest speakers from the following
agencies:
• North Texas Councel of Government
• Dallas Police Association
• Texas Trail Lawyers Association
The Board will continue to enhance and perfect its operations and
procedures.
Mission Statement Objective Programs Success Indicators
Annual Summary Future Plans Recommendations
Schedule Organizational Chart
t < ;
of Knoxville, Tennessee, USA <PARC>
http://w .ei.imoxville.ta.us/boa?-,4,3'iz rc.htm
OPTIONS
Police Advisory and Review
Committee
Carol Scott, Executive Director
Mezzanine Level, Civic Coliseum
Building - (423) 215-2536
10 E-mail cscott(M—ci.knoxville.tn.us
Mayor Victor Ashe established this review committee by
executive order in September, 1998. The purpose of
PARC is to strengthen the relationship between the
members of the Knoxville Police Department and the
citizens they serve through an independent review of
police actions,
PARC reviews incidents involving police action following
the conclusion of the Internal Affairs investigations.
Citizen can either register formal or anonymous
complaints with PARC's executive director.
Members of PACR are:
Ms. Robyn Askew
Ms. Bridgett Bailey
Rev. Reginald Butler
Dr. Joe Johnson
Kann Kenyatta
Rev. James McCluskey
Sterling Owen, IV
Back to Boards & Commissions Pane
A
UP
or I
pERF Publications: Use of Force, Gun Viol..., Citizen Review and Other Current Issues http://wu ,.policefovum.org/home/public/u;efcrmhtml
20lears] Police Executive
Research
Forum
POLICE EXECUTIVE
RESEARCH FORUM
PERF Publications:
Use of Force, Gun Violence, Citizen Review and Other Current
Issues
How to order a PERF publication
Direct any questions about publications to Eugenia Gratto at 202.466.7820.
And Justice for All. Understanding and Controlling Police Abuse of Force
(William Geller and Hans Toch, eds., 1995) Product #237, 372 pp.
ISBN#: 1-878734-37-7
SALEI
Member Price: $26.95
Nonmember Price: $29.95
Police abuse of force is one of the most difficult and painful issues both for citizens interested in police
accountability and police departments seeking to forge partnerships with citizens. This collection of
essays from leading experts addresses such topics as public opinion about police abuse of force,
race -related issues, officer training, prevention strategies, lawsuits, resolution strategies that satisfy both
citizens and police, and much more.
Citizen Review of the Police, 1994. A National Survey
(Samuel Walker and Betsy Wright, 1995) Product #004, 20 pp.
SALEI
Member Price: $3
Nonmember Price: $4
Citizen review of the police has steadily increased in the United States over the past 25 years. In Citizen
Review of the Police, 1994, authors Walker and Wright examine citizen review in the United States,
addressing both its prevalence among cities and jurisdictions of various sizes and types of citizen review
procedures that now exist.
1 of) 1151101q 1 14 PM
PERF Publications: Use or Force, Gun Viol..., Citizen Review and Other Current Issues
http://www.pohwtorum.orginoma pum�u use<.n c<:.uuw
Citizen Review Resource Manual
(Samuel Walker, 1995) Product #802, 424 pp.
ISBN#: 1-878734-37-7
Member Price: $24.95
Nonmember Price: $27.50
As more and more jurisdictions, large and small, establish review committees of community members in
an effort to hold the police accountable for their actions, it is crucial that police leaders and policymakers
be familiar with the policies and procedures in place across the country. In the Citizen Review Resource
Manual, author Samuel Walker provides an overview of the state of citizen review today, including a
section of ordinances and statutes, executive and department orders, and other documents collected from
over 30 police departments nationwide.
Deadly Force: What We Know —A Practitioner's Desk Reference on Police -Involved Shootings
(William Geller and Michael Scott, 1992) Product #197A, 656 pp. (paperback)
ISBN#: 1-878734-30-X
SALE1
Member Price: $23
Nonmember Price: $25.50
Product #197B, 656 pp. (hardcover)
ISBN#: 1-878734-30-X
SALEI
Member Price: $29
Nonmember Price: $32.00
Published in 1992, Deadly Force remains the most comprehensive volume of information about
police -involved shootings, compiling data from hundreds of research studies conducted over the past 30
years. Its 187 detailed graphs and tables highlight the most important findings from prior landmark
research and present such previously unpublished information as national FBI data on justifiable
homicides by police and data from a dozen major American cities on all shots fired from 1970 through
1991. The book also provides data and practical advice on such critical issues as shootings of cops by
"friendly fire," justifying actions to local officials, averting a civil disorder after a controversial shooting,
creating sound policies and reducing civil liability.
The Force Factor: Measuring Police Use of Force Relative to Suspect Resistance
(Geoff Alpert and Roger Dunham, 1997) Product #821, 28 pp.
ISBN #: 1-878734-52-0
Member Price: $5
Nonmember Price: $5.50
In The Force Factor, authors Alpert and Dunham present a new concept for evaluating use -of -force
incidents. The "force factor" is a simple mathematical calculation that measures the difference between
the level of force used by police and the level of suspect resistance. Using existing use -of -force data from
three police departments, the authors illustrate the force factor concept and outline its potential use as an
evaluative and policy -guiding tool for police managers. This paper is a new addition to PERF's "Research
and Evaluation" series.
2 of I IN'T, !IN PM
116RF Publications: Use of Force, Gun Viol..., Citizen Review and Other Current lssues
lulp.rr www.pow:ewiwu.urp; uvwa vuun�i
Police Use of Force: A Statistical Analysis of the Metro -Dade Police Department
(Geoffrey P. Alpert and Roger G. Dunham, 1995) Product #801, 44 pp.
ISBN#: 1-878734-38-5
Member Price: $5.95
Nonmember Price: $6.50
Police Use of Force focuses on both purposeful and accidental firearms discharges in the Metro -Dade,
Fla., Police Department between 1988 and June 1994. Presented largely in tabular format, the data are
organized to compare variables such as the weapons used, training of officers involved, the situations in
which shootings occurred, and characteristics of involved officers and suspects. The study not only
provides a detailed picture of police shootings in one metropolitan area, but also illustrates the value of
statistical research in helping police departments to make policy decisions. Police professionals and
policymakers interested in analyzing their own departments' use -of -force policies and practices will find
this study a useful tool.
Toy Guns: Involvement in Crime & Encounters with Police
(David L. Carter, Allen D. Sapp and Darrel W. Stephens, 1990) Product #163, 50 pp.
ISBN#: 1-878734-21-0
Member Price: $5
Nonmember Price: $5.50
Toy guns are not just kid stuff. According to a PERF survey of nearly 706 large police agencies, a
significant number of crimes have been committed with such toy weapons as Uzi -style water guns. Toy
Guns: Involvement in Crime & Encounters with Police summarizes the results of this extensive survey,
assesses the severity of the problem and details the dynamics of typical toy gun incidents.
Under Fire: Gun Buy -Backs, Exchanges and Amnesty Programs
(Martha Plotkin, ed., 1996) Product #805, 234 pp.
ISBN#: 1-878734-47-4
Member Price: $18.95
Nonmember Price: $21
Frustrated by gun violence, communities nationwide have turned to gun buy -backs, exchanges and
amnesty programs to address gun -related crime. But are these programs effective? What outcomes
should be measured to determine their success? How do they fit into the larger issue of violence
prevention? Under Fire is the first publication to bring together the views of researchers, community
organizers, police practitioners, and public health professionals to assess how gun buy -backs, exchanges
and amnesty programs are promoted, implemented, evaluated, and perceived.
3 of 3 1 �1 14 ".A PM
Re: Glmks & Police - Seek Intommhon
Posted on: Tue Jul 15 1997
Re: Glocks & Police - Seek Information
original Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 00:54:02 -0700 (PDT)
>Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 07:28:51 -0700
>From: Aaron Handel <aaron@dsp.com>
>To: Michael Novick <mnovickttt@igc.org>
>Subject: Re: Glocks & Police - Seek Information
>Following an accidental shooting of a citizen by a Berkeley police
>officer using the Glock, the Police Review Commission called for the
>replacement of Glocks with a safer handgun. Today BPD uses the Smith and
>Wesson revolver. Police use of the Glock is not permitted.
>Aaron Handel
>Chair, Police Review Commission, City of Berkeley
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed
without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only.
Be PART of the solution -- People Against Racist Terror/PO Box 1055/Culver
City CA 90232-1055/ 310-288-5003/ Order our journal: "Turning the Tide."
The unjust verdict on Geronimo has been reversed! Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! Free
All P.O.W.'s and Political Prisoners! Abolish the Racist Death Penalty!
Keywords: cops
+eNet
1 of 1 1(8l99 3:0s PM
CCPA Coneemed Citizens for Police Ac :ouniablity
Home
CCPA Story
What are your
Rights?
Stories: Local
& National
Complaint
Center
Donations &
Membership
The CCPA Story
The Concerned Citizens for Police Accountability was formed September 4, 1997 in
the wake of two controversial police shootings which killed Ryan Hennessey age 20
and Justin Atkinson, age 21. John and Patricia Billington, stepfather and mother of
Ryan Hennessey formed the organization shortly after they attended a N-COPA,
National Coalition for Police Accountability conference at Temple University in
Philadelphia. On a local level in Boise, Idaho law enforcement claimed no wrong
doing when an off duty detective fatally shot their unarmed intoxicated son on
November 6th,1996. The Billingtons attended the conference looking for answers for
their concerns on police accountability and whether such a thing exists. What they
discovered was that there are many organizations across the nation already working
in the field of police accountability through citizen review of law administration and
the promotion of progressive law enforcement.
Mission Statement: Concerned Citizens for Police Accountability (CCPA) is an
Loss of Life organization of religious, community, and legal groups as well as progressive law
Stories enforcement representatives working to hold police accountable to their communities
through public education, community organizing legislation, litigation, and the
Suggestions promotion of empowered civilian oversight.
N-Copa
NACOLE
Women in
Policing
A Positive
Note:
Similar Links:
video clips
Idaho Police
Facts
How dangerous
is it?
Education
I0P3 t:?; „t. 3?V..
CCPA (Nacole)
http:/hvww.ccpa-idalio.conina,oia.litnn
Home
NACOLE
CCPA Story
What are your National Association for Civilian
ohs' Oversight of Law Enforcement
Stories: Local
& National
Complaint 1997 Conference
Center
Donations & "Civilian Oversight -Advancing the Blueprint for
Membership
Change".
Loss of Life
Stories At the invitation of the ACLU and the CCPA a small
Su,a,gestions delegation of Boisians attended the National Association
N_Cona for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement's,(NACOLE)
3rd annual conference last October in Oakland,
NACOLE California. One hundred and six people from nineteen
Women in states attended the conference. Boise law enforcement
Policing representatives were Lt. Jim Tibbs, BPD and Lt. Jim
A Positive Maxson, BPD. The CCPA sponsored two former Ada
Note: County Sheriffs, Chuck Palmer and Myron Gilbert (see
Similar Links: Myron Gilbert's letter at end). Representing the Boise
video clips City Council was Paula Forney. Also attending were
Jack Van Valkenburgh, executive director of the ACLU
of Idaho and John Billington, president and co-founder
of the CCPA.
NACOLE provides practitioners of civilian oversight
Idaho Police with the opportunity to dialogue and exchange
Facts information on questionable and unacceptable actions of
How law enforcement personnel. The NACOLE organization
as '? is is endorsed by the International Association for Civilian
1 o! I � ., .. 39 MA
CCPA (Rnwlc)
it?
Education
Information
Law suits
(settlements)
Current Police
complaint
procedures
Please sien
guest book
View our
guest book
Copyright
1996-97
Findusat.com
All rights
reserved.
hap .incNtotccpa- weu+) n-
Oversight of Law Enforcement, (IACOLE). ICAOLE
held its annual conference last September in Ottawa,
Canada. One hundred and eighty-six delegates (many
from the United States) from twenty-two countries
attended. The NACOLE conference in which Boise
delegates attended was beneficial to participants by
providing exposure to critical law enforcement issues
shaping our future as well as giving attendees
opportunities to meet and share ideas with leaders in
Civilian Oversight. Attendees learned that every city
which has implemented a review commission has a
different spin, however it was unanimous that the
citizens themselves, council people and law enforcement
need to be an equal partnership in regard to truth and
respect for the review commission to work.
Another key point from the conference was that the
police department maintain a pro -active not reactive
attitude and that the police chief must retain the power
to discipline his officers despite inevitable union
interference.
Sponsored by
Findusat.com Letter:
Former Ada County Sheriff Myron Gilbert returned
from the conference and expressed his concern with this
letter to the Boise City Council:
This is in response to your invitation to provide the
Council with information regarding the strangle hold the
Boise Police Union has upon the Police Department. As
we discussed last week, I believe the opportunity exists
at this very small window in time to bring an end to their
out of control reign.
MIA (Nacolc)
http:// oN .ucpa-idauo.con, a. I� 1111111
Over time, the Union Contract has been expanded to
include certain seemingly harmless benefits that have
rendered the Chief of Police powerless to properly
manage his department. The inability to assign officers
to shifts at the discretion of the Chief is only one of the
problems tying his hands. Sergeants who should be part
of management are members of the Union rendering
their usage practically worthless in terms of enforcing
discipline.
It stands to reason that if former Chief Church was
unable to discipline or fire rogue cops back in 1982 that
little has been done in the interim period to change
things for the better. Those officers whom Chief Church
described as brutes became the teachers of new officers
who are more likely to emulate the actions of the tough
cops or meat eaters, (as I like to describe them) instead
of the instructions they are given in academies such as
POST. Sometimes the meat eaters even find their way
into teaching positions in the academies. Chief Church
ordered his officers to send back what he considered to
be objectionable training films supplied by the Union
and not use them in the future. These films tend to
exaggerate danger to officers and teach them methods
more suitable for use by an invading army that those for
use in dealing with the citizens in your community. After
Church resigned it is likely that they went back to using
these types of training films; some of the recent
happenings would tend to support that theory.
I was appalled to witness upon my return to the
valley, police officers demonstrating in front of City
Hall. This is certainly not the proper behavior of those
sworn to protect and to serve.
3of4 1'II : �? `M
CCPA (Qncolc)
httP //w«w.ccpa-tdaho.com; nuoolo.htntl
As a former proud member of the Boise Police
Department, I hope you will take the necessary steps to
bring discipline back to a great Police Department. It
will never be great again until the Union strange hold is
released. The citizens of Boise will applaud you for your
courage if you take this stand and give us back a Police
Department worthy of our respect.
Respectfully,
Myron Gilbert
Former member Boise Police Department
Former Sheriff Ada County (three terms)
Former Deputy Ada County Sheriff, Inspector
rank under E.C. Palmer (1972-1984).
- 4 1 11 boa �, Art,
Wickersham Commission, Part 1
http://www.upapubs.com/guides/wickersham.htm
AmericaUniversity Publications
of
Copyright C 1997 by University Publications of America. All rights reserved.
Records of the Wickersham Commission
on Law Observance and Enforcement
Part 1: Records of the Committee on Official
Lawlessness
• Introduction /
• Scope and Content Note
• Note on Sources
• Editorial Note
[This item added to Web December, 1997.]
Introduction
The production of the 1931 Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement by the
Wickersham Commission is one of the most important events in the history of
American policing. It was the first systematic investigation of police misconduct and
became a catalyst for reforms involving new forms of accountability for the police.1
The Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement was one of the fourteen reports
published by the National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, known
popularly as the Wickersham Commission. The commission conducted the first national
study of the administration of justice in the United States and was a precursor to the
President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice
(1965-1967), popularly known as the President's Crime Commission.2
The material in this collection, involving the original files of the Committee on
Lawlessness in Law Enforcement, will be of interest to scholars specializing in a wide
variety of subjects, including the history of law enforcement, criminal justice, and
criminal procedure, as well as urban history, labor history, American race relations, and
the administration of President Herbert Hoover.
The Wickersham Commission
The National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement was appointed by
President Herbert Hoover on May 20, 1929. It completed its work and published
1ot10 1111V9ii1eAM
Wickersham Commission, Part I
http://e.upapubs.wni/suides/uickersham.htm
fourteen reports in June 1930.3
The commission was chaired by George W. Wickersham, who had served as U.S.
attorney general under President William Howard Taft. The other ten members
included some of the most prominent individuals in American law and public life. Most
notable was Roscoe Pound, dean of Harvard Law School and widely regarded as the
leading expert on American criminal justice. Also serving on the commission were
Newton D. Baker, a leading urban reformer during the Progressive Era and secretary
of war under President Woodrow Wilson, and Frank J. Loesch, a prominent Chicago
attorney and leader of the Chicago Crime Commission, who had led the fight to
prosecute Al Capone.
The fourteen reports of the Wickersham Commission covered the following subjects:
Prohibition; Enforcement of the Prohibition Laws of the United States; Criminal
Statistics; Prosecution; Enforcement of the Deportation Laws of the United States; the
Child Offender in the Federal System of Justice and the Federal Courts; Criminal
Procedure; Penal Institutions, Probation, and Parole; Crime and the Foreign Born; the
Cost of Crime; the Causes of Crime (two volumes); and the Police. A fourteenth
report, on the controversial Mooney -Billings case, was submitted to the commission
but not officially published. It is presently available in a reprint edition.4
Origins of the Wickersham Commission
The Wickersham Commission was the result of three different factors. First, it
represented an attempt by President Hoover to find a solution to the vexing problem of
Prohibition enforcement, which had deeply divided the country and the Republican
Party in particular.5
Second, it was an expression of Hoover's technocratic approach to governing. An
engineer by training, he had a deep faith in the capacity of a democratic society to
master social problems by mobilizing and applying scientific expertise. In this respect,
he had more in common with the pre -World War I Progressives than with the postwar
conservative Republicans (Presidents Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge) with
whom he is generally associated.6 Crime had begun to emerge as a national problem in
the late 1920s, in part because of the problems associated with Prohibition enforcement
and the publicity surrounding gang "wars" in Chicago and other cities.7 Hoover
believed that a scientific study of crime and the administration of justice would help to
solve both a general social problem and a specific political problem for him and his
party.
Third, the Wickersham Commission was the logical outgrowth of the crime
commission movement that had appeared in the 1920s.8 The Cleveland Survey of
Criminal Justice, which published its report in 1922, served as the model for the
Wickersham Commission.9 Codirected by Roscoe Pound (who later served on the
Wickersham Commission) and Felix Frankfurter, the Cleveland Survey was unique in
two important respects. First, it aspired to be an objective, scientific study of the
administration of justice. There had been many investigations of criminal justice in the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but they had been essentially partisan efforts
to expose existing problems and to identify the corrupt and evil persons who were
responsible. The Chicago Crime Commission, established in 1919, functioned as a
2 of 10 11111:99 1'r4s :AM
Wickersham Commission, Part 1 http://w .upapubs.wm/guidcs/vickersham.htm
"watchdog" of local criminal justice issues and did not have the social science
aspirations of the Cleveland Survey. Unlike previous efforts, the Cleveland Survey
undertook the study of an entire local criminal justice system from the police through
local penal institutions. The 1926 Missouri Crime Survey applied this approach to the
state level, encompassing county sheriffs and the state prison and parole systems.10
The Wickersham Commission extended this approach to the national level. In addition
to the three major components of the criminal justice system (police, courts, and
corrections), it investigated new areas, such as theoretical criminology, criminal
statistics, and the costs of crime.
The Wickersham Commission Reports and Their Impact
With one exception, the reports of the Wickersham Commission had little immediate
impact on public policy. That one exception was the Report on Lawlessness in Law
Enforcement, which is discussed in detail below.
The work of the Wickersham Commission was overtaken by events. By the time the
reports were published in 1931, the United States was in the second year of the Great
Depression. The president and the Congress were preoccupied with the problem of
economic recovery and had little time and energy for the reform of the administration
of justice.11 Prohibition, which had prompted President Hoover to create the
commission in the first place, was repealed in 1933 despite the fact that the deeply
divided commission recommended against this step.12
In several important respects, however, the commission's reports did have long-term
effects on the understanding of crime and criminal justice. The Report on Penal
Institutions, Probation, and Parole signaled an important shift in thinking about the
treatment of convicted offenders. In the 1920s, there was a powerful public backlash
against the optimistic, rehabilitation -oriented reforms of the Progressive Era. The
Missouri Crime Survey in particular expressed the widespread public and professional
disillusionment with parole and the sense that the criminal justice system was failing to
adequately punish criminal offenders.13 The Report on Penal Institutions, Probation,
and Parole gave both probation and parole strong endorsement and marked the revival
of an optimistic belief that effective programs for the correctional treatment of
offenders could be developed.14 This new movement slowly gained ground in
professional circles over the next few decades and achieved fi-uition in the 1960s, most
notably in the work of the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and
Administration of Justice, 15
The Report on Prosecution is particularly significant in that it came close to articulating
a "systems" approach to the administration of justice.16 Beginning with the Cleveland
Survey, the early crime commissions approached justice agencies as part of an
interrelated system but did not have a conceptual framework that would explain the
processes and problems they examined. The "systems" paradigm, which now dominates
professional thinking about the administration of justice, was developed by the
President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice.17 The
Report on Prosecution marked a tentative step in the direction of this intellectual
development but one that went unfulfilled for over three decades.
l at la
ll11i991',:48 AM
Wickersham Commission, Part 1
hUp://www.upapubs.com/guides/wickersham.htm
The two -volume Report on the Causes of Crime marked the coming -of -age of
American criminology. The scientific study of crime originated in Europe in the
nineteenth century and did not begin to engage American scholars until just before
World War I. The field blossomed in the 1930s, most notably with the work of urban
sociologists at the University of Chicago. The Wickersham Commission gave a strong
endorsement to the sociological approach to the study of crime, explicitly noting the
limitations of psychological and other approaches.18 The second part of the Report on
the Causes of Crime was devoted to Clifford R. Shaw and Henry D. McKay's study of
"Social Factors in Juvenile Delinquency," which became a highly influential work in the
field.19 Thus, the Wickersham Commission played a major role in shaping the
development of the field of criminology in the United States.
The Report on Criminal Statistics was the focus of a major controversy over the
development of a national system of crime data. The work of the Wickersham
Commission coincided with the development of the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR)
system under the control of the Bureau of Investigation (later the Federal Bureau of
Investigation). Key Wickersham Commission figures, notably Roscoe Pound and
Harvard Law Professor Samuel B. Warner, had serious criticisms of the new UCR
system.20 Their arguments did not prevail, however, and the UCR system was
established and remained essentially unchanged for decades. The Report on Criminal
Statistics, therefore, should be read in the context of this debate over the development
of a national crime data system.
The Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement
Origins
The origins of the Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement remain somewhat of a
mystery.21 While police misconduct was undoubtedly a serious problem in 1929 and
had been for nearly a century,22 there was no political constituency with any strength at
the national level demanding a federal investigation. The principal interest groups and
organizations concerned with the problem of police misconduct were small and
extremely weak. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was small, with little
political influence, and still operated under the cloud of suspicion that "free speech"
was a dangerous radical concept.23 The National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People (NAACP) was also small and lacking in political influence. In 1929, its
era of great impact on American law and life lay years in the future.24 Finally, the labor
movement was in serious disrepair by the late 1920s, reeling under the impact of a
concerted antilabor campaign by the business community.
Consequently, it does not appear that the Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement
was the result of conventional interest group lobbying. Had the commission not
undertaken this particular report it is likely that few people would have noticed, much
less complained. It is worth pointing out that the crime commissions (i.e., Cleveland,
Missouri) were silent on the subject of police misconduct. It is entirely possible that the
commission undertook this particular investigation out of a conventional sense of
"good government."
Adding somewhat to the mystery surrounding the origins of the Report on Lawlessness
in Law Enforcement is the identity of the three consultants who prepared it: Zechariah
Chafee Jr., Walter H. Pollak, and Carl S. Stern. All three were closely identified with
i or 10 li l tl99 11.4% AM
Wickersham Qommission, Part I
http:/Iwww.upapubs.wm/guides/wickershum.htm
civil liberties issues. Chafee's book, Freedom of Speech (1920) defined the field of free
speech law for a generation and was a severe critique of the Supreme Court's major
decisions denying the free speech rights of antiwar dissenters.25 Conservative Harvard
alumni had, in fact, attempted to have him fired for his allegedly radical views on free
speech.
Walter Pollak, meanwhile, was closely associated with the ACLU, and on behalf of the
organization had argued the case of Gitlow v. New York before the Supreme Court in
1925.26 Thus, he too must have appeared to many establishment figures as dangerously
radical. Carl Stern was an attorney with civil liberties concerns.
It was precisely the civil liberties orientation of the three consultants that shaped the
report. They were sensitive to abuses of power by government officials and believed
that formal legal controls were both necessary and proper. Thus, they designed a study
that was prepared to investigate the worst allegations of police misconduct and give
credence to reports of its existence. This view was noticeably out of step with
conventional views expressed in other crime commission reports of the period. The
Wickersham Commission Report on Criminal Procedure, for example, expressed little
concern for police abuse of citizens and emphasized the need to free police arrest
authority from procedural restraints.27 The 1929 Illinois Crime Survey adopted that
view.28 It should also be noted that Chafee, Pollak, and Stern prepared the report on
the controversial Mooney -Billings case, which the commission declined to publish.29
The Report and Its Impact
In uncompromising language, the Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement
concluded that "[t]he third degree --that is, the use of physical brutality, or other forms
of cruelty, to obtain involuntary confessions or admissions --is widespread. "30 Specific
tactics included protracted questioning, threats and methods of intimidation, physical
brutality, illegal detention, and refusal to allow access of counsel to suspects. The
report declared unequivocally that "the third degree is a secret and illegal practice.01
The documentation assembled by the consultants and their staff was impressive in
several respects. First, there was rich detail from both participants and observers.
Second, the survey was national in scope, with detailed evidence from fifteen cities
across the country. Only the southeastern region was not represented, an unfortunate
omission that undoubtedly left one pattern of race discrimination unexamined. Third,
the consultants considered arguments denying the existence of these abuses and, in
light of conflicting evidence, rejected them.
The report had an immediate and direct impact on American policing. Police officials
angrily denounced the report and denied its findings. With the exception of the issue of
Prohibition, no other commission report received the same degree of public attention.
Despite the response of police officials, the report put the problem of police
misconduct on the national agenda and pointed policymakers in the direction of
reform.32
One of the curious aspects of the report, however, is the extremely brief and vague
discussion of possible remedies. There is no separate section labeled "remedies," and
the discussion appears virtually as an afterthought. The report concludes that law
Wickersham Commission, Part I
http://w.upapubs.rom/guides/v,ickenham.htm
cannot really solve the problem of lawlessness and that the solution ultimately depends
on the "will of the community." This, in effect, represents a "good government" or
"concerned citizen" approach to the problem.
The brevity and vagueness of the suggested remedies may well have been the result of
a political compromise. As noted above, the basic thrust of the report was out of step
with the dominant thinking on the subject and even the commission's own Report on
Criminal Procedure. It is likely that the strong indictment of official lawlessness in the
body of the report was stronger medicine than the commission had been prepared for
and that it was unwilling to propose reforms that, in the context of the period, would
have been extremely controversial.
Several events in the years following publication of the report suggest its impact on
police reform. First, a new generation of police executives emerged in the 1930s.33 The
leader of this group was O. W. Wilson, prot6g6 of August Vollmer who had been the
foremost leader of the police professionalization movement. Far more than the first
generation of reformers, Wilson's generation was Willing to address the issue of police
abuse of citizens, and one of the results was the appearance of the first formal internal
affairs units designed to investigate police misconduct and to receive citizen complaints
about abuse.34 The publicity surrounding the Wickersham Commission report
undoubtedly strengthened the hand of these chiefs in dealing with this problem.
Perhaps even more important, the Supreme Court in the 1930s took the first tentative
steps in the direction of imposing constitutional standards on the criminal justice
system. The watershed was the 1932 decision in Powell v. Alabama (argued not
coincidentally by Walter Pollak).35 Although it did not relate to policing, the decision
clearly signaled that the Court was prepared to scrutinize criminal justice practices for
possible constitutional violations.36 Four years later, the Court overturned the
conviction of an African American suspect in Mississippi whose confession had been
brutally coerced.37 In the 1960s, the Court emerged as one of the principal instruments
of reform with respect to police misconduct.38 The famous decisions of this period had
their roots in the work of the Wickersham Commission's Report on Lawlessness in Law
Enforcement.
The Value of the Report on Lawlessness Files
The materials in this collection of original papers of the committee to investigate
lawlessness in law enforcement have great potential value for historians working in a
wide variety of fields. As indicated earlier, these fields include the history of the police,
criminal justice, and criminal procedure, as well as urban history, labor history,
American race relations, and the Hoover administration.
First, the materials offer some insight into the thinking of the consultants. As the
previous section suggested, the Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement
represented a very different perspective on police problems from the one that
dominated other Wickersham Commission reports and the reports of other crime
commissions. The materials here may provide insights into how the consultants defined
the problem, designed their investigation, and interpreted the data.
Second, the materials provide rich firsthand descriptions of local police practices. The
6 or 10
Wickersham Commission, Part 1
http://www.upapubs.com/guides/wickQrsliam.htm
most valuable materials are the interviews with individuals in different cities. These
individuals included current and former police officials, current and former judges,
prosecutors and defense attorneys, law professors, and journalists. The interviews
contain richly detailed accounts of such practices as "cold storage," the practice of
detaining arrested persons incommunicado for days. These materials offer insights not
just into local police departments but also into the local criminal courts, the legal
profession, and municipal politics.
Third, urban historians researching particular cities investigated by the consultants
(e.g., Buffalo, Seattle, and others) may find useful material related to local social and
political issues.
Fourth, because so much police lawlessness was directed at the poor, at racial
minorities, at labor union activists, and at members of radical political groups,
historians with interests in these subjects will find the materials extremely valuable.
Fifth, these materials offer a fresh perspective on the struggle to curb police
misconduct. In large part because the great breakthroughs in this struggle eventually
occurred in the U. S. Supreme Court (notably the Warren Court decisions in Mapp v.
Ohio and Miranda v. Arizona), historians (including this author) have tended to write
the story exclusively in terms of the Court. As a result, the early history of this struggle
has vanished from the record. In a similar fashion, the history of freedom of speech has
focused on post-1919 developments in the Supreme Court and neglects pre -World War
I developments.39 The materials in this collection (press clippings, citations to court
decisions, summaries of relevant state statutes) clearly indicate that the problem of
police misconduct was a major issue at the local level prior to the historical
breakthroughs in the Supreme Court. They may prove valuable in recapturing the role
that issue played in local politics during this earlier period and its relationship to issues
of justice, class, and race.
Samuel Walker
Professor, Department of Criminology
University of Nebraska at Omaha
Notes
1. Samuel Walker, Popular Justice: A History ofAmerican Criminal Justice, 2d ed., rev. (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1997), 154-157.
2. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, The Challenge of
Crime in a Free Society (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967).
3. James D. Calder, The Origins and Development of Federal Crime Control Policy: Herbert
Hoover's Initiatives (Westport: Praeger, 1993). chap. 4.
4. Wickersham Commission Reports (Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smith, 1968); Curt Gentry, Frame -Up:
The Incredible Case of Tom Mooney and Warren Billings (New York: Norton, 1967).
5. Calder, Origins of Federal Crime Control Policy.
6. Joan Hoff -Wilson, Herbert Hoover: Forgotten Progressive [19751 (Prospect Hts., IL: Waveland
Press, 1992).
7. Walker, Popular Justice, 157-161.
8. Walker, Popular Justice, 152-154. Virgil W. Peterson, Crime Commissions in the United States
(Chicago: Chicago Crane Commission, 1945).
9. Cleveland Survey of Criminal Justice, Criminal Justice in Cleveland (Cleveland: The Cleveland
Foundation, 1922).
10. Missouri Association for Criminal Justice, The Missouri Crime Survey (New York: Macmillan,
Id10
I i 11 rQ9 1.1_.,a: A1M
Wickersham Commissicm, Part I
http://www.upapubs.com/guides/v,ickersbam.htm
1926).
11. But see Calder, Origins of Federal Crime Control Policy.
12. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Report on the Enforcement of the
Prohibition Laws in the United States (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931).
13. Missouri Association for Criminal Justice, Missouri Crime Survey; Walker, Popular Justice,
153-154.
14. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Penal Institutions, Probation, and
Parole (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931).
15. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, Challenge of Crime
in a Free Society.
16. Samuel Walker, "Origins of the Contemporary Criminal Justice Paradigm: The American Bar
Foundation Survey, 1953-1969," Justice Quarterly 9 (March 1992): 47-76.
17. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, Task Force Report:
Science and Technology (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967).
18. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, The Causes of Crime, vol. 1
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931).
19. Ibid., vol. 2.
20. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Report on Criminal Statistics
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931), Calder, Origins and Development of Federal
Crime Control Policy.
21. The most detailed account of the Wickersham Commission does not explore this issue: Calder,
Origins of Federal Crime Control Policy, chap. 4.
22. Samuel Walker, A Critical History of Police Reform: The Origins of Professionalism (Lexington:
Lexington Books, 1977); Wilbur R. Miller, Cops and Bobbies: Police Authority in New York and
London, 1830-1870 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977).
23. Samuel Walker, In Defense ofAmerican Liberties: A History of the ACLU (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1990).
24. Mark V. Tushnet, Making Civil Rights Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994).
25. Zechariah Chalice, Freedom of Speech (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1920).
26. Louis H. Pollak, "Advocating Civil Liberties: A Young Lawyer Before the Old Court," Harvard
Civil Rights -Civil Liberties Law Review 17 (Spring 1982): 1-30; Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652
(1925).
27. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Report on Criminal Procedures
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931).
28. Illinois Association for Criminal Justice, Illinois Crime Survey [1929] (Montclair, NJ: Patterson
Smith, 1968).
29. Wickersham Commission Reports, Mooney -Billings Report (Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smith,
1968).
30. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Report on Lawlessness in Law
Enforcement (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931), 4.
31. Ibid., 21.
32. Walker, Popular Justice, 155-157.
33. Robert Fogelson, Big City Police (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1977).
34. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, Task Force Report:
The Police (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967).
35. Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932).
36. Yale Kamisar, Police Interrogations and Confessions (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,
1980), 95-112.
37. Richard C. Cortner, A "Scottsboro" Case in Mississippi: The Supreme Court and Brown v.
Mississippi (Jackson: University of Mississippi, 1986).
38. Walker, Popular Justice.
39. See, especially, David Rabban, Free Speech in Its Forgotten Years (New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1997).
Scope and Content Note
This edition reproduces five of the six series of records of the Committee on Official
Lawlessness on deposit at the National Archives. Each of these separate series is
clearly indicated in the Reel Index portion of the microfilm guide. The first series, the
9 or Id
Wickersham Commission, Part I http://w.upapubs.com/guides/wickersham,htm
Subject File of Research Materials, is by far the largest. This spans Reels 1 through 12
of the microfilm. The major subjects documented in the series include arrests, bail,
entrapment, evidence, search and seizure, third degree practices, wiretapping, foreign
law enforcement, immigration, deportation, labor, lawlessness by police and state
police, and lawlessness by officials, including bondsmen, U.S. commissioners, coroners,
detectives, Department of Justice and Customs Department agents, federal and state
district attorneys, judges, and magistrates. There are also files on state bar associations;
Prohibition and Prohibition killings; unfair prosecutions; personal rights; class prejudice
against aliens, negroes, and radicals; freedom of motion; freedom of the press; remedies
(for official lawlessness); violence and intimidation; police brutality; prosecution
reports; and third degree reports.
The subject files contain much of the research data that the committee used in drafting
its reports to the full Wickersham Commission. Several of the draft reports themselves
are reproduced on Reel 12. The subject files typically contain four kinds of data.
Bibliographies provide lists and in some cases digests of scholarship, which the
committee staff and members compiled. Newspaper clippings provide a record of
contemporary events concerning the subject. Interviews provide transcripts of
testimony obtained through conversations with professionals and observers in the
criminal justice system from many cities around the United States. Miscellaneous files
contain primary documents such as reports, rulings, and statutes governing the
respective subject. The larger subject files devote separate folders to each type of
document; the smaller subject files often combine them or include only one or two
kinds of data.
Among the most valuable files are the interviews, which contain candid observations by
persons knowledgeable of official lawlessness in the criminal justice system. These
interviews were conducted by journalist Ernest Hopkins. An apparently complete set of
the interviews appears on Reel 11 beginning at frame 0342. The subject files contain
reproductions of those portions of the interviews that pertain to the subject. Many of
Hopkins' findings proved to be controversial and some were vigorously disputed by
officials in the localities he investigated. A separate series of the collection, called
"Letters Sent," includes correspondence both challenging and defending the integrity of
Hopkins' interviews. The Letters Sent series begins on frame 0087 of Reel 15. This
series also includes background correspondence on administration of the Wickersham
Commission, including recruitment of the staff, methodology of the research, and the
wisdom of investigating extensively the Mooney -Billings case, as well as on several of
the areas covered by the subject files.
Although there is information in both the Subject File series and the Letters Sent series
about the Mooney -Billings prosecution, this famous case is the subject of a separate
series beginning on frame 0001 of Reel 13. This series, which covers all of Reel 13 and
half of Reel 14, documents extensively the determination of certain commissioners,
most notably Zechariah Chafee Jr., to investigate the prosecution, conviction, and
denial of criminal appeals of labor radicals Tom Mooney and Warren Billings for the
bombing of a pro -British Preparedness Day parade in San Francisco in 1916. The series
reveals that a majority of the commission disagreed with the need to conduct a major
investigation of this case, and the commission refused to issue the final report on the
case as one of its official documents. The report was published privately and
contributed to the pardon of Tom Mooney from a California prison. There is extensive
hofis Vi1199'_r "$Nm
Wickersham Commission, Part 1
http://www.upapubs.com/guides/wickersham.htm
correspondence to the commission from Mooney at Folsom Prison.
A fourth series of the collection is State Statutes. This series begins on frame 0492 of
Reel 14 and it compiles statutes of states, along with the District of Columbia and the
Territory of Hawaii, and the federal code that governed criminal procedures in 1930,
including arrest, bail, search and seizure, third degree practices, taking [a suspect]
before a magistrate, right to counsel, and wiretapping.
The fifth series in this microfilm collection is a single file of correspondence called the
General File. It includes correspondence on several instances of official lawlessness and
on criminal appeals based on allegations of official lawlessness.
A sixth series from the original collection, Financial Records, was not filmed for this
collection. The series contains vouchers and payments for routine office expenses.
Researchers may also want to consult Records of the Wickersham Commission on Law
Observance and Enforcement, Part 2: Research Reports and General Subject Files.
This companion edition includes the research files for the entire commission.
Note on Sources
The records microfilmed for this edition were selected in consultation with Professor
Samuel Walker, Department of Criminal Justice, University of Nebraska at Omaha.
Each file has been microfilmed in its entirety.
Editorial Note
This edition is drawn from National Archives Record Group 10, Records of the
National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, College Park, Maryland.
10 of 10
III 19G 1.. �43'w
Page 3A
OCUI Tuesday,
January 12,
1999
Iowa City Press -Citizen
City, PCRB
spar on rules
By Trevor R. Maxwell
The Press -Citizen
The Iowa City Council like-
ly will adopt tonight an over-
hauled set of
Iowa City operating pro-
cedures for the
Police Citizens Review Board
— a move that frustrates PCRB
members who say their opin-
ions are being overlooked.
The formal set of guidelines,
which include revisions sug-
gested by city attorney Eleanor
Dilkes, would update the work-
ing rules that have been evolv-
ing since the PCRB's inception
in 1997.
But PCRB members told the
council Monday that Dilkes'
revisions compromise the
board's purpose. They asked the
council to wait until Feb. 11,
when a full discussion between
the council and the PCRB is
scheduled.
"Mere is no compelling rea-
son for immediate action" said
PCRB co-chairman John Watson.
"It is just not right to make
changes without discussion:'
Dilkes and council members
in support of adopting rules
quickly said the council could
not wait until mid-Fehruary.
Because the PCRB deals with
controversial issues, they said,
rules need immediate clarifica-
tion.
"There may be only otSe
complaint pending, but what If
we get five tomorrowT' said
Dilkes. She said it is important
to get the rules in place, "even if
we have to change them down
the road."
Council members Mike
O'Donnell, Dean Thomberry,
Dee Vanderhoef and Mayor
Emie Lehman voted to make a
decision tonight, and then make
any necessary changes after the
Feb. I meeting.?
Karen Kubby, Conni¢
Champion and Dee Norton
voted to defer any decisior4
until a full discussion. ;
The rift between the citl
attorney's office and the PC"
formed because the bodies dis•
agree on how the board should
operate. o
Dilkes and Police Chief R.X
Winkelhake recommended it)
November that the PCRB cornk
plaint process be changed so thtr
board would not have access to
officer's names of identifying
information.
PCRB members, howevey"
say that the ability to track com;
plaints against officers is funda+
mental to the board's intended
watch-,iog role.
The Gazette, Cedar Rapids, Iowa: Tues., Jan. 12, 1999 1 —3aw
Council likely -to adopt
rules for police board
By Jim Jacobson
Gazette Johnson County Bureau
IOWA CITY — Over the
objections of the Police Citi-
zens Review Board, the City
Council is expected tonight to
adopt official rules for how the
16-month-old board does busi-
ness.
At last night's council work
IOWA CITY
session, board Vice Chairman
John Watson asked the coun-
cil to delay a vote until board
and council members could
discuss their differences about
the so-called Standard Operat-
ing Procedures.
"We're your appointed
board. We ask that you listen
to us," Watson said.
Council member Dee Van-
derhoef reflected the majority
viewpoint when she said she
agreed with City Attorney El-
eanor Dilkes that the board
needs to be operating under
an official policy.
"There's not one thing that
can't be changed in Febru-
ary," when the board and the
council are scheduled to meet,
said council member Mike
O'Donnell.
In addition to Vanderhoef
and O'Donnell, council mem-
ber Dean Thornberry and
Mayor Ernie Lehman said
they favor voting on the
board's operating procedures
and incorporating changes
Dilkes has recommended to
them.
For the most part, members
of the review board and Dilkes
agree on how the board should
operate, but two points remain
contentious.
Watson said board members
disagree with Dilkes about
■ Turn to 3B: IOWa City
Iowa City: Board wants to be able to track officers' behavior
■ From page 1B
whether complainants should be al-
lowed to appear and testify before the
board when a complaint is under
review for summary dismissal.
The board thinks they should, while
Dilkes contends that such testimony
will probably stray from the limited
scope of such a hearing and include
the merits of the case.
Second, Watson said part of the
board's job is to track misconduct by
officers to see if an officer requires
additional attention from superiors.
Until recently, each officer on the
force had a number the board used to
identify him or her. Only the officer's
number was used in investigation
reports. Police Chief R.J. Winkelhake
said last month he would no longer
use those numbers in his reports to
the board. Instead he would identify
officers in each report as "Officer 1,"
"Officer 2" and so forth, depending on
how many officers are included in a
complaint.
The chiefs move strips the board of
a very important power, Watson said
According to a memo from Dilkes to
the council, the board has requested
that the officers' names remain in the
initial complaint so officer behavior
can be tracked.
Following the council's work ses-
sion, board members had not decided
if they planned to attend tonight's
formal council meeting to express
their displeasure at the way the coun-
cil handled the process of adopting the
operating procedures.