Metro’s use-of-force board meets criticism

Karen Zekan

Wednesday, Feb. 5, 1997 | 11:59 a.m.

A Metro Police open forum intended to educate the public on its citizen review boards met everything from senior citizens' praise to criticism from vocal activists who derided the presentation as little more than propaganda.

More than 45 people packed the southwest area command's substation off West Spring Mountain Road Tuesday night for the monthly "First Tuesday" meeting -- a program Sheriff Jerry Keller started two years ago as a means to open communication lines between the department and the community.

Deputy Chief Kyle Edwards sailed through a breakdown of the Fiscal Affairs Committee, comprised of two City Council members, two county commissioners and a civilian chairman who for 15 years have overseen budgetary decisions made by the department.

Few comments were raised regarding the Civil Service Board, which oversees recruitment, policies and any major department changes.

Yet the use-of-force board, which Metro instituted in 1991, raised arms.

The use-of-force board convenes at the sheriff's or other supervisory personnel's request after an officer has used an excessive amount of force without necessarily killing someone, Edwards said. Such cases could involve shooting, baton beating or other means of physical restraint.

Seven people sit on the use-of-force board each time it meets: four citizens selected from a pool of volunteers who have applied for the post, and three commissioned officers -- a captain, a training bureau lieutenant and a peer officer of the same rank as the one being investigated.

Many of the civilians are graduates of Metro's citizens police academy, a layman's introduction to police work that includes ride-alongs, weapons use and lectures given by representatives of each division.

Based on the evidence, Metro's use-of-force board determines if the officer acted within the boundaries of police policy. Upon making their decision, which is binding, board members in turn can make a recommendation to the sheriff regarding correctional steps.

Officers' use of force has come under intense community scrutiny recently following the officer-involved homicides last year of Henry Rowe, a homeless man, and Gerry Waje, who was being treated for a mental illness; and of Charles Bush Jr. in 1990.

Another recent case that sparked citizen outrage was the Dec. 28 drive-by killing of Daniel Mendoza, allegedly by off-duty Metro Officer Ron Mortensen. Mortensen faces murder charges, but the driver involved in the shooting, Officer Chris Brady, has not been charged.

In each case last year, Metro's use-of-force board and a coroner's inquest determined the officers involved were justified in using lethal force. Metro has never had an officer-involved shooting ruled as a criminal homicide.

Edwards said that Metro's approach to its use-of-force board -- part civilian, part commissioned officer -- seems to work the best for as educated and effective an approach.

He contrasted it with an entirely civilian board operating in Washington, D.C., which, according to documented accounts, is at least 3 1/2 years behind in its caseload.

Studies on the effectiveness of citizen review boards have been going on since the 1960s, when the first such boards were activated in cities across the country.

Many departments operate without review boards; others exist with citizens only in an advisory position, as in Washington, D.C. Metro's is among the few that combines civilians and police to act with binding decisions.

"They (the studies) found that the review boards were more lenient on police officers than the internal police department was on its own people," Edwards said. "Why? Because most of you believe in what we do and want to give us the benefit of the doubt."

The Rev. James Rogers, president of the local NAACP chapter, commended Metro for the good they do, yet stressed that minorities are often treated unfairly by police.

"All of us agree we need law enforcement," he said, "but if all the people in this room think all police officers have a halo around their head, you're dreaming."

Linda Howard said she was disappointed with the meeting, having attended in hopes of hearing that citizens had greater power on Metro's boards.

"It's a pretty sad day when you're afraid of police officers," Howard said. "There should be more checks and balances in the system, and there should be a board where citizens have more control."

Her words echoed those of many attendees who demand police accountability, advocate a purely civilian board to review all police matters and simultaneous empowerment to take action in the event of questionable use of force.

Yet none in the crowd has yet to produce a concrete plan of how it can be done.

"I never realized that the police were so effective at putting out propaganda," said John Dellor, representing the Asian community. "You cannot have accountability when all we have is a voice and no actual control."