Justice Department calls for deep reforms and a binding court order after finding systemic “constitutional violations” in the Seattle Police Department’s use of force.
By Tim Connor
In a sweeping and stunning rebuke to the Seattle Police Department, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) reports it has found “a pattern or practice of unnecessary or excessive force” in the way the state’s largest police force conducts itself.
The findings were announced Friday morning by U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan and Assistant U.S. Attorney General Thomas Perez as the two released the results of an 11-month investigation.
The 67-page report is addressed to Seattle Mayor Michael McGinn.
“We find that SPD engages in a pattern or practice of unnecessary or excessive force, in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution” and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, the two wrote to McGinn.
Their legal conclusion, they wrote, was based “on numerous factual findings,” including:
“• When SPD officers use force, they do so in an unconstitutional manner nearly 20% of the time. This finding (as well as the factual findings identified below) is not based on citizen reports or complaints. Rather, it is based on a review of a randomized, stratified, and statistically valid sample of SPD’s own internal use of force reports completed by officers and supervisors.
“• SPD officers too quickly resort to the use of impact weapons, such as batons and flashlights. Indeed, we find that, when SPD officers use batons, 57% of the time it is either unnecessary or excessive.
“• SPD officers escalate situations and use unnecessary or excessive force when arresting individuals for minor offenses. This trend is pronounced in encounters with persons with mental illnesses or those under the influence of alcohol or drugs. This is problematic because SPD estimates that 70% of use of force encounters involve these populations.
“• Multiple SPD officers at a time use unnecessary or excessive force together against a single subject. Of the excessive use of force incidents we identified, 61% of the cases involved more than one officer.
“• In any given year, a minority of officers account for a disproportionate number of use of force incidents. Over the more than two-year period reviewed, 11 officers used force 15 or more times, and 31 officers used force 10 or more times. In 2010, just 20 officers accounted for 18% of all force incidents. Yet, SPD has no effective supervisory techniques to better analyze why these officers use force more than other officers, whether their uses of force are necessary, or whether any of these officers would benefit from additional use of force training.”
“This pattern or practice,” they noted, “is also the product of inadequate policy, training and supervision. SPD fails:
(1) to properly monitor or investigate the use of force;
(2) to implement adequate policies on the proper use of various force weapons; and
(3) to adequately train its officers on the use of force, particularly the appropriate use of various force weapons. The chain of command does not properly investigate, analyze, or demand accountability from its subordinate officers for their uses of force. In particular, we further find that the secondary review process is little more than a formality that provides no substantive oversight or accountability. Tellingly, of the approximately 1,230 internal use of force reports we received, covering the period between January 1, 2009 and April 4, 2011, only five were referred for ‘further review’ at any level within SPD. Moreover, in our investigation, we found no case in which a first-line supervisor was held accountable for the inadequate investigation or review of a use of force incident.”
When SPD officers use force, they do so in an unconstitutional manner nearly 20% of the time. This finding (as well as the factual findings identified below) is not based on citizen reports or complaints. Rather, it is based on a review of a randomized, stratified, and statistically valid sample of SPD’s own internal use of force reports completed by officers and supervisors.–U.S. Department of Justice, Investigation of the Seattle Police Department.
On the subject of racially-biased policing, the report noted that while DOJ did not “make a finding that SPD engages in a pattern or practice of discriminatory policing,” its investigation “raises serious concerns on this issue.”
The report singled out three areas of practices that “undermine SPD’s ability to build trust among segments of Seattle’s diverse communities.”
“• SPD officers exhibit confusion between a casual, social contact and an investigative detention (a “Terry” stop). SPD must ensure its officers understand that, unless they have a sufficient factual basis to detain someone, a person is free to walk away from police and free to disregard a police request to come or stay. Officers should also understand that in such circumstances, the decision to “walk away” does not by itself create cause to detain. A person on the street is not always required to comply with police orders. While not conclusive, some data and citizen input suggest that inappropriate pedestrian encounters may disproportionately involve youth of color.
“• Of the cases that we determined to be unnecessary or excessive uses of force, over 50% involved minorities.
“• Analysis of limited data suggests that, in certain precincts, SPD officers may stop a disproportionate number of people of color where no offense or other police incident occurred.
The DOJ “pattern or practice” investigation was requested last December by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Washington and thirty other organizations and individuals. The letter specifically asked federal investigators to look at the use of force by Seattle police and, in particular, “force used against persons of color.”
ACLU of Washington Executive Director Kathleen Taylor attended this morning’s press conference. Taylor said she and others who took the lead in seeking the DOJ review were especially pleased by the announcement by Durkan and Perez that DOJ will require a legally-binding agreement to secure the reforms.
“Everybody should feel some relief that the Department of Justice confirmed the pattern and practice of excessive force that so much of the community in Seattle has suffered for a long time,” Taylor said.
Taylor had nothing but praise for Durkan, the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington. Investigations of this scope can take years but, Taylor said, “Jenny Durkan was determined to move it along and I give her credit for the thoroughness and speed with which the report was delivered.”
The investigation was conducted by the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division’s Special Litigation Section, headed by Perez, and Durkan’s office in Seattle.
“The heavy lifting begins now,” Taylor added. “We agree with the Justice Department that we need to make sure we’re putting in place the reforms that will result in long-term solutions that will change the department’s culture, training and leadership.”
–CFJ
