Civilian board proposed to keep an eye on Metro

Thursday, Jan. 30, 1997 | 5:02 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- The drive-by killing of a Hispanic gang member in Las Vegas allegedly by an off-duty police officer demonstrates the need for a civilian review board "to put the spotlight on police," says Sen. Joe Neal, D-North Las Vegas.

A bill sought by Neal was introduced Wednesday in the Senate. It would allow either a city or a county to create a review board to look at law enforcement issues. And Assemblyman Wendell Williams, D-Las Vegas, said he would introduce a similar bill today.

Both lawmakers, who are black, are echoing concerns raised over the years by minority groups that Metro Police has a history of being rough on citizens of poor, ethnic neighborhoods.

Williams and Neal said they do not want the bill to become a state mandate. They said they want local governments to have the authority of creating the review boards on their own.

"This is a diplomatic way to do it," Williams said.

The bills by Williams and Neal were spurred by the case of Metro Police Officer Ron Mortensen, who is accused of firing six shots from a pickup and killing Daniel Mendoza as the young man stood with a group of people in a neighborhood near Paradise and Flamingo roads in December.

Calls for a citizen review board have also been inspired by other cases, including those involving Charles Bush Jr. and Henry Rowe.

Bush died in 1990 as the result of choke hold by a Metro officer who entered his apartment at night while Bush was sleeping. That officer was fired and Metro settled with the mother of Bush's unborn baby for $1.1 million.

Rowe, a homeless man, was shot to death and his throat slit by Metro Officer George Pease. A coroner's inquest jury later found that the homicide was justified.

"I would say the citizens have a constitutional right to review the work of the police and see if they are doing their job correctly," Neal said. "Metro has an elected sheriff but he doesn't come up for review until every four years, and so this would act in the interim where we have situations and they can subpoena the officers."

The review board could not take any direct action, but it could subpoena officers.

"(A review board would) put the spotlight on the police and the police, you know, don't want to be questioned by the citizens," Neal said. "It gives some of the good officers an opportunity to talk about the things that are going on in the police department. Whereas if they spoke out without being under a subpoena, the sheriff might fire them."