POSTED APRIL 14; UPDATED APRIL 17: IPA appointee’s brother is a San Jose Police officer, a fact not revealed at the time of his appointment. More below.
San Jose City Council unanimously voted to appoint city hall insider Chris Constantin as the city’s new Independent Police Auditor. Constantin currently serves as the Senior Program Performance Auditor in San Jose’s City Auditor’s Office, where he’s overseen recent reviews of police and other public safety programs.
In 2005, Constantin became a reserve police officer for the City of Hayward.
Constantin was hired more than four months after the council booted former IPA Barbara Attard in December. When the council decided not to renew her contract, according to Attard, the mayor said he didn’t want to spend the next four years debating her authority.
Attard was viewed as one of the city’s most aggressive independent police auditors who publicly challenged the current auditing practices and pushed the council to give her office more power to audit police shootings and other incidents.
UPDATE: Merc reporter Sean Webby reports online today that Constantin’s brother is a San Jose police officer, setting up “a potential conflict of interest that was not disclosed when the city announced his appointment earlier this week.”
Constantin reportedly told the Mercury News of the relationship in an interview, and said city officials knew about his brother’s job when they appointed him as SJPD’s watchdog. Councilmember Pete Constant, a former SJPD officer himself, told Webby that “the fact that his brother works for the department is not pertinent.’’—Editor
I guess I must not understand the term “independent.” To me it implies a neutral that IS NOT affiliated with ANYONE. If you look at who endorsed him for his run for the West Valley Mission Community College District, and the rest of his background, I don’t see him as any more “independent” than Attard.
Oh well, I wish this young man the best of luck in his new position.
I wonder if John Galt and Frustrated FinFan had fun at their Tea Bagging Party.
#3
I understand that you might mean well but the comment “Accountability in public office and Police duties is and should be under the watchful eyes of the Our National leader.” THAT MY FRIEND IS A VERY SCARY IDEA. I don’t think anyone needs to be under the watchful eye of any public leader, real or imagined…
So, was the Independent Police Auditor terminated becasue she was too independent, because she was too abrasive, or a combination of the two?
#5-JMO,
Attard wasn’t terminated her contract was not renewed. Attard had a serious problem with respecting the confines of her contract and the confines of her authority as IPA. She also had a bad habit of collaborating with anti Police groups, and side lining the Police Department in the press. Her lack of respect and willingness to work with the Police Department landed her out the door, and nothing else.
I watched the Mayor and Council caution her many times about her unwillingness to work collaboratively with the Chief, but she essentially just blew them off, and did what she dam well pleased. So, no big surprise they chose not to renew her contract.
I’m not too thrilled with their new choice either. Chris is a volunteer Police Officer, ran for West Valley Mission Community College District, and was endorsed by Pat Dando, and Pete Constant. See below:
http://www.smartvoter.org/2008/11/04/ca/scl/vote/constantin_c/
http://www.svcn.com/archives/saratoganews/01.06.99/ChrisConstantin.html
http://www.votescount.com/nov2k/pamphlet/wvmccdnov2k.htm
I personally think the Mayor and Council should have hired someone who is truly a neutral, and was not aliened with any one group. This choice is the reverse of the former Auditor and will cause just as many problems for our community. We need to get to the bottom of these accusations of Police profiling, and the alleged disproportionate arrests of Latinos in San Jose. That isn’t going to happen with an anti Police Auditor, or a PRO Police Auditor.
#6 Kathleen: I don’t understand your point in your 2nd paragraph.
Is there something wrong with 1) being a police volunteer, 2) running for public office, and 3) having both political and business community support?
If anything these attributes speak to the man’s qualifications for this job. I like the idea of someone with a good grasp of public policy and police procedures as the Independent Police Auditor. I also like the idea of an independent auditor who truly does have his own base of support, thus helping to ensure said independence. Attard had none of these attributes, and we saw the result.
Let’s also not forget that Constantin comes from the city auditor’s office which quietly sorts out a lot of the city’s controversies. That’s not a bad background for a police auditor to have.
Although Metro writer Erin Sherbet dismisses Constantin as a “city hall insider” that seems to be the worst rap she can come up with against the guy.
Let’s hope Metro and the Merc give the city’s new auditor a chance! Unfortunately, the hint of bias reflected in the above article suggests that Metro is already writing it’s agenda for Mr. Constantin. Then again, anti-police agendas seem to be what drives these publications lately at the expense of legitimate news coverage.
#4 Sweetness
I meant what I said. What is happening in the Down Town Is a very serious sickness that have infected many. Hatred has many faces. So Many places that serve alcohol in such a small area, is a sickness of it’s own. Add to that police that are ordered to enforce in such a oppressive way is the ultimate denial of correcting the real issues.Those that enable the politicions and the dispicable tactics of the men sworn to protect our community, are the real enemies. Get out of the closet Sweetness! Bring in the Feds! Put a stop to this madness!
There is a Civil Rights issue some where in this Madness. Enough! Accountability is a requirement, when politics and government is at the wheel. What say Ye President Obama?
D.O.A.
It appears that this police state has grown another horn. The Merc’s news on arrests of juvenials, leaves me with the thought that, is this the beginning of another era of persecution towards a group of people.
No doubt the Nazi era begin with suttle tactics we are seeing right here in our own city and hate mongers behind every dark corner.
Tony West and President Obama, is this happening in any other cities across this Nation? If so set conditions, as you have for the banks , etc. The Office of Civil Rights and other Federal agencies should be alerted. This is no longer about arresting a drunk on San Pedro Square.
Accountability in public office and Police duties is and should be under the watchful eyes of the Our National leader.
D.O.A.
#7-Reader,
There is nothing wrong with running for office, certainly is nothing wrong with being a Police volunteer, BUT there is clearly something wrong with putting someone in an “Independent Auditor’s” position with this guys ties.
The City needs to hire someone who is trained in Police policy etc., but has NO ties to ANY group that would sway, bias, or put pressure upon an individual who should be completely neutral and open to looking at complaints by the public. Someone with a law degree and one in Conflict Resolution would be ideal.
You know that I support our Police Department 100%, but I also believe in getting to the truth of things. If there are Officers out there abusing their power, and reflecting badly on these dedicated Officers, the Chief, and the SJPD, they need to go. I believe, by hiring this Chris guy, the City has already put the Department and the Chief at a disadvantage, and has once again betrayed our trust. He is NOT a neutral and seems to be a young politician looking to further his career. No shame in that, but if that is the case, and I think it is, he should not hold this position. This position should NOT be a political one by any means, or by any stretch of the imagination. Not if the City is truly seeking the “truth.”
Reader, if you look at how the IPA position is set up in the first place, and if you are honest about it, it is geared toward compliance to and the direction given them by the Mayor and Council. There is no real autonomy in the first place, now is there? So what is the point of having an IPA in the first place? There isn’t. It is just another way for the City to “look like” it is trying to do something to solve the problem. Hence, the reason for the Civil Grand Jury~
#9 Kathleen: I’m not sure which ties you find troublesome but I looked at the articles you cited and saw nothing that would suggest bias as a police auditor.
However, the Merc is now saying Constantin has a brother on the police force. If true, then he is a poor choice for this job.
Which raises the question: What the hell were they thinking?
Whoa!
I am finding myself agreeing with Kathleen in TWO posts… in the same sitting no less! As someone who is highly critical of the police, racial profiling, and arbitrary arrests that can really mess up peoples lives, I don’t think I or those as cranky as me should be viewed as providing “the truth”. However, a cop (volunteer, part time, or just “pro-cop”) should be responsible for getting to the truth either for the same reasons. If Constantin knows how policing works from the inside, he is probably bound by the informal code of defending fellow officers, and by definition, not independent.
Also, I fail to see how the IPA, a city employee, can be called “independent” but I understand that the intention and scope of the IPA were limited by the political reality of the moment. If trends of racial disproportionality continue, the political climate may shift such that a civilian police review board that is truly independent of the city may move from the margin to center of political thought in San Jose.
After firing the previous IPA for actually attempting to raise substantial issues about SJPD’s conduct (with the facts and figures continuing to be revealed showing that very real issues do exist), the council makes another gaffle by hiring a volunteer police officer to watch the full time police officers. And no doubt endorsed by ex-cop and supporter of the rabid right, Pete Constant.
Good one city council!
#10-Adam said,“the council makes another gaffle by hiring a volunteer police officer to watch the full time police officers. And no doubt endorsed by ex-cop and supporter of the rabid right, Pete Constant.”
You’d be very right about that!
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_12165594?source=rss
9 – You said “…This position should NOT be a political one…” There is no position that is appointed by the Council that is not political. Welcome to the neighborhood.
Below are the “IPA GUIDING PRINCIPLES” as posted at: http://www.sanjoseca.gov/ipa/
1. The IPA strives to ensure that all concerns reported by members of the public are classified and investigated at the appropriate level based upon the premise that any case brought forward containing misconduct issues will be classified as a complaint with associated allegations, findings and officer names tracked.
2. The IPA reaches out to inform the community about the complaint process and to listen and respond to broader community concerns.
3. The IPA carefully considers aggregate data from complaints, community concerns and public policy in crafting recommendations aimed toward improving the quality services of the San Jose Police Department.
Since the majority of the comments posted on SJI regarding the police auditor’s role have confused the auditing with investigating, I think some clarification is in order. Here is my attempt:
Principle #1 makes it clear that with complaints filed by the public, the auditor’s role is to make certain they are classified and investigated at the appropriate level. “At the appropriate level” does not mean investigated appropriately—the auditor is not a police investigator, not a private investigator, not a determiner of facts. This most misunderstood function of the office might be best understood by using the analogy of battlefield triage, where the function is not treatment, but the sorting of wounded so that they receive the proper level and type of care. The function of police auditor’s job might be best summed up as making sure that brutality allegations do not get glossed over and filed away under “rude conduct.”
Principle #2 is self-explanatory, although it must be recognized that the function of responding to “broader community concerns” is also part of the police chief’s job, and the good of this city is never served by dueling egos/ambitions.
Principle #3 describes the auditor’s reporting obligations, though I would opine that the use of the word “recommendations” suggests the auditor’s findings are intended for the council, the city manager, and the police chief, not the news media.
I challenge anyone out there to find, within this job description, any justification at all for the publicity-seeking, rabble-rousing antics of our previous auditor-activists. Of course, if liberals view job descriptions the way they do legal statutes, then I guess that the auditor’s job is whatever is politically expedient.
Before I make my comments I want to make sure I reveal some things:
I typically don’t make comments on public safety issues, but I’m a bit miffed at the claims that Chris C can’t be objective.
I’ve know Chris C. for 14 years (wow, has it really been that long.)
He’s my friend.
Being my friend I won’t hesitate to call him on any BS.
That being said. Chris has proven through his career that he is capable of an objective analysis of issues, be it from his work as an auditor with the City of San Jose or a member of the West Valley Mission Community College District Board of Trustees (I was a student there when he was on the board) for the past 15 years.
Clearly this is understood given his majority approval by the City Council. This includes Nora Campos, Sam Liccardo, and Rose Herrera all of which I think can safely be said don’t necessarily see eye to eye with Pete Constant.
I know Chris to be some one who will look at the issue, analyze it objectively and make a decision based on the facts (even if that means when I haven’t agree on a personal or professional level).
Any claims to the contrary are silly and unfounded.
#6 Kathleen wrote to me:“Attard wasn’t terminated her contract was not renewed.” Yes, Kathleeen, I know that’s the official term, but in reality, she was terminated. That’s the PC way to do it. I didn’t realize you are so naive.
#16-Paul,
You and your friend are mistaken if you think he won’t be pressured by his connections. He cannot be independent as long as he is and has been a reserve Police Officer, and has a brother on the force. He’s been a city employee for a while and you can’t wipe that a way. He also had the backing of people like Dando, and Constant when he ran for his seat at the college district. Connections to conservatives in a job like this only serves to create a problem for groups who are currently upset with the City, and ready to sue the City over vital issues like the supposed disproportionate arrests of Latinos and juveniles in SJ.
Independent means not having ties to any one group that could affect your viewpoint. I’m a mediator and have been for 26 years. Even I have refused to handle certain cases due to my need to be true to my profession, and my neutrality. Like any human being I have my own bias, but an IPA doesn’t get the luxury to pick and choose which complaint they’ll handle or which group they believe or disbelieve.
By the way, why did you leave Pete Constant’s Office so suddenly, were you fired?
#17-Steve,
” In reality there is no person that is truly independent.” I don’t agree with you there Steve. There are many neutrals with the credentials, and education needed to do this type of job.
#18-JMO,
“I didn’t realize you are so naive.” I’m not. I just want Raj and his buddies to realize the difference between being fired, and a contract that has expired and not renewed due to Attard’s performance on the job. They’ve been falsely accusing the City of “firing” her. Just setting the record straight.
Attard would still have her job if she had respected the guidelines of her mandate rather than bending the rules of her job and office. It is a great step that the city hired someone familiar with auditing and knows not only police procedure but has practical police street experience. In reality there is no person that is truly independent, and this candidate seems to have practical life experience and a good track record. A huge improvement over Attard.
#20 wrote:“Our first police auditor was married to a Palo Alto police officer and she did a very good job.” Yes, but she was SJ’s auditor, not Palo Alto’s auditor.
It is the fact that Mr. Constantin’s broither is an SJ police officer that may put him in an actual conflict of interest situation. Judges and jurors don’t decide cases where a relative or even a casual acquaintance is a party to the action, Steve.
I would not have a problem with the selection of Mr. Constantin to be the IPA of anyplace else but SJ & Hayward, where he is a reserve officer.
#19 Kathleen,
Nobody, including you or I, is totally neutral or independent. The question is if someone can set aside their bias and try to be impartial. That is what judges and jurors are suppose to do and what we should expect from a police auditor. Our first police auditor was married to a Palo Alto police officer and she did a very good job. It is good to have someone as a police auditor who has actual police experience. When there is questionable in other professions it is usually the peers of the accused that makes a judgement. A lawyer is judged by other lawyers of the Bar association, a doctor is judged by a panel of other doctors, etc etc. Why shouldn’t a police officer have someone with practical street police experience rather than someone from acadamia who has no actual experience? In your work as a mediator, if someone makes an accusation about your conduct, would you rather have someone make a professional assessment of your behavior who has had actual experience as a mediator or someone who had no practical idea of what your job entails?
#20-Steve,
I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one. JMO said it better than I could in #22, and on Rants and Raves. I am greatly disappointed in Mayor Reed and the Council for not only choosing this guy, but in their non-disclosure of his brother being on SJPD. I just don’t get why they can’t get it right. My trust in them doing the right thing has just gone wwaaayyy down.
Kathleen,
I’ve actually tried to respond to your inquiry via SJR but they haven’t been posted. The short response to your question is Pete and I mutually agreed to part ways with no harsh feelings towards one another.
For Chuck “Mr. Sunshine” Reed to keep this vital information about Mr. Constantin’s brother being on SJPD quiet, and then insist that there isn’t a problem is truly shocking to me. As a lawyer who has practiced for a few decades, Chuck knows, or should know, that the APPEARANCE of impropriety is the standard. The conspiracy of silence among the mayor and the council on this vital point is very Nixonian.
The failure to disclose this important fact eviscerates Chuck’s promise of sunshine & openness in government. It’s very Gonzo-esque.
The fact that Mr. Constantin is an otherwise good candidate in the abstratct is not meaningful in this debate. He’d be a good candidate for the job anywhere BUT SJ or Hayward, where he is a reserve office.
I wonder what Dave Cortese would have done were he still on the council???
I can’t believe it, but I actually favor Raj’s position over Chuck’s and the council’s.
Mr. Higgins #16—whether Mr. Constantin is the greatest guy since Jesus Christ just isn’t the point. He should not be the allegedly INDEPENDENT auditor of a police force of which his brother is an employee.
I have no quarrel with those questioning the political decision to appoint as police auditor someone with a brother on the police department, but I do have a bone to pick with those of you who refuse to acknowledge that the role of police auditor has nothing to do with either the investigating or deciding of complaints filed against the department. Please stop comparing the auditor’s role to that of a judge, jury, arbitrator, or supervisor. See post #15, (or follow the link there to the auditor’s website) if you remain unclear on this very important point.
On last thing: complaints against police officers are investigated by fellow officers/sergeants/lieutenants trained for this unique function. In those cases where a citizen or his/her attorney are dissatisfied with the conduct of the investigation or ruling made, they can appeal up the chain of command, seek criminal charges, file a civil suit, appeal to the federal government for prosecution, appeal to local politicians, or take their case to the media. These avenues constitute oversight; effective, objective oversight, and there is simply no reason to suspect that the police officers assigned to internal affairs units (typically ladder-climbers) are going to cavalierly jeopardize their career prospects, professional reputations, job security, or, in extreme cases, personal liberty, to cover up for a fellow officer. Decisions made in misconduct investigations are reviewed by superiors, reported up the chain, and filed for reference. The philosophy behind tolerating what some might consider a conflict of interest is simple: people with something important on the line are people who will toe the line, and by hand-selecting the staff, a police chief significantly improves the value of this safeguard.
If memory serves me, there has not been a single civil ruling in this city in which the integrity of our police department’s internal investigators has been discredited, despite the vigorous efforts of money-hungry attorneys, the scumbags at the ACLU, the finger-pointers at the NAACP, and the many half-assed, publicity-starved, anti-police groups that regularly crop up around here like the herpes virus. The concern about a conflict-of-interest can be, in some circumstances, absolutely legitimate, but it others it sometimes sounds like its coming from Chicken Little.
IPA MISSION
The mission of the Office of the Independent Police Auditor (IPA) is to provide independent oversight of and instill confidence in the complaint process through objective review of police misconduct investigations. By providing outreach to the San Jose community and making thoughtful policy recommendations to the City Council, the IPA works to promote accountability and to strengthen the relationship between the San Jose Police Department and the community it serves.
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/ipa/
Christian,
Don’t be misled by the Mission Statement; the grandiose wording changes nothing. The auditor does not investigate cases, interview officers, or make decisions. The guiding principles (which are on that same page) are consistent with the practices of the auditor.
I’ve asked the cops.
#22
“It is the fact that Mr. Constantin’s brother is an SJ police officer that may put him in an actual conflict of interest situation. Judges and jurors don’t decide cases where a relative or even a casual acquaintance is a party to the action”.
Well then as long as Mr. Constantin doesn’t involve himself with a case directly involving his brother this should not be a problem, John. The police auditor does not “decide” cases. Its role is to be sure the process is followed correctly.
Adam W.,
In my post I made it clear that “effective, objective oversight” of police internal affairs investigations was dependent upon the police investigator’s self interest AND the dissatisfied citizen’s right to appeal through the chain of command, to seek criminal charges or civil remedy, to appeal to local politicians or federal authorities, or to take the case to the media. The former is effectively energized by the latter. In the financial sector the two operative elements were self-interest and fate, and fate has always been a poor deterrent of greedy schemers. Your analogy doesn’t hold.
The question you must ask yourself is why you based your challenge to me on only half of what I said? If someone makes an economic prediction based on supply and demand, are you going to ignore the critical importance of demand when disputing the prediction? Are you a dishonest person, or is it that your position is so devoid of substance that you’ve learned to deceive yourself? Time and time again on this site my first task in replying to a challenge is to address its duplicity. I guess that’s the price of living amongst people overwhelmed by their beliefs.
Nothing about “effective, objective oversight” suggest perfection. The decision-making process often involves issues of dispute, where the perspective of the police might differ from that of others involved in the case or appeal. There will always be cases the city prefers to settle (often for financial or public relations reasons) and those that will go to court. That is the cost of doing business where one’s business involves arresting, injuring, and sometimes killing people.
If you are aware of a ruling in which the internal affairs unit has been found to have covered-up misconduct, please share it. That is the challenge I originally posed, and you are again invited to answer. But be forewarned, if you cannot provide such an example of a unit that oversees a department that makes hundreds of thousands of public contacts every year, then the pathetic, dishonest nature of your argument will be there for all to see.
I’m still afloat here, Adam W.—go ahead, sink my ship.
Hi finfan,
First, you didn’t reply to my previous query, so in the interests of transparency and the readership of this blog I’ll repeat it again for your benefit:
“You seem to have a lot of insider knowledge on how the process of internal affairs works, which implies that you either are or were a police officer yourself. While we’re on the subject of interests and who people currently or formerly work for, I think you should respond to the readers of this blog whether or not this is true.”
On the analogy between the police and the financial sector: Fair enough, analogies only stretch so far. But I think your counter misses my main point, which is that favoritism and corruption is a given when we allow a powerful group of people to oversee and regulate themselves. This is the same reason why politicians have term limits and why we have grand juries.
But apparently you believe that police are above the fray in all this. I believe your assertion that those police assigned as auditors have a self-interest to be “objective” and “provide oversight” is untrue. They *do* have an interest in creating the appearances of these, but any move towards raising serious issues would not realistically happen. The existence of a police “code of silence” or “blue wall of silence” is well known.
To start with why police internal auditing is ineffective is that first, it is not transparent in any sense. We can’t show that they’ve made objective decisions because we can’t even review the records, statements and evidence that they’ve gathered. Nothing they do is public in any meaningful sense. So Reed’s continuing support to effectively leave the police to their own devices effectively blows a whole in his “sunshine” campaign promises.
Second, each lawsuit settled by trial or out of court is proof that the internal auditor doesn’t work. As lawsuits require that parties first exhaust internal complaint mechanisms first, that means before each lawsuits is filed they tried to complain and reconcile with SJPD, but the auditor disagreed or they could not reach an agreement for redress. And lawsuits largely only award damages but cannot make a ruling that a given officer be fired for their conduct.
Finally, if the internal police auditor was effective in creating oversight, then it would THEM bringing up the issues of drunk in public arrests, racially disparate arrests and instances of police brutality rather than waiting for the Mercury News, the Metro or community activists.
I think your ship is still afloat, but you’ve drifted too far out to sea. Have you reached your own desert island yet?
Kathleen, glad we agree on this one. With this type of leadership from the city council, perhaps this gives you a better appreciation for why folks have a lack of trust with them and SJPD.
#25 finfan said:
“complaints against police officers are investigated by fellow officers/sergeants/lieutenants trained for this unique function… These avenues constitute oversight; effective, objective oversight, and there is simply no reason to suspect that the police officers assigned to internal affairs units (typically ladder-climbers) are going to cavalierly jeopardize their career prospects, professional reputations, job security, or, in extreme cases, personal liberty, to cover up for a fellow officer.”
By your arguement that police investigating and regulating their fellow officers constitutes “effective, objective oversight,” then we shouldn’t be in any sort of financial collapse at the moment right now. Under both Clinton and Bush, financial insiders were appointed to regulate Wall Street and the financial industry largely promoted the mantra of “self-regulation.” In the wake of numerous corruption scandles, I think we can see how well these approaches to regulating institutions work, ie not at all.
As far as SJPD not recieving “single civil ruling” against it (we assume that if a lawsuit has reached court it means that internal affairs does not agree with the class and supports the officers involved in a given claim), I seem to remember someone getting thrown through a plate glass window after a Sharks game which tore open his head getting a settlement in the last decade. Also there is a federal class action lawsuit underway right over unfair drunk in public arrests.
If you are taking the stance that there are not serious issues with SJPD and its practices that need correcting, then I think you are standing on a ship that has already sunk.
PS- Finfan: You seem to have alot of insider knowledge on how the process of internal affairs works, which implies that you either are or were a police officer yourself. While we’re on the subject of interests and who people currently or formerly work for, I think you should respond to the readers of this blog whether or not this is true.
Hi finfan,
Adam W.,
I will address your last post point by point.
Your Post: First, you didn’t reply to my previous query, so in the interests of transparency …
—My Reply: Excuse me, but did I somehow unwittingly apply for a job here? What possible reason would I have for sharing my résumé? I post opinions and facts here, and welcome other perspectives and outright challenges without giving any thought to the particular qualifications of others. I chose to blog anonymously for a number of reasons, one being that it has become common in public discourse to discredit opponents through personal attack rather than reasoned argument. Of course, I don’t need to tell you this, as you have repeatedly tried to soil Pete Constant by linking him to white supremacy groups, as you did in Erin Sherbert’s latest post. I expect your next move will be to link him with holocaust denial. The irony is that you engage in such scumbag tactics because you believe your values superior to those who promote family values or Christian traditions.
Your Post: On the analogy between the police and the financial sector …
—My reply: I posted nothing that would lead a reasoned person to conclude that I am in denial about the corruptive influence of power. My position is simple: the internal affairs model works because of the officers’ professionalism and self-interest, the former the product of the department’s values, the latter of society’s (as expressed by the three branches of government and the news media).
Your Post: But apparently you believe that police are above the fray …
—My Reply: What is “well known” to you has not been proven in a court of law despite the attempts of numerous lawyers over many decades. In recent memory, the police department has investigated and imprisoned a number of its own (for theft, sex crimes, drug sales, etc). Your suggestion that they are only creating the appearance of integrity is interesting, as you are apparently of the opinion that our police officers are so bold and crafty as to regularly pit their skills (and bet their futures) against the likes of the Grand Jury, the state Attorney General, the Justice Department, and a veritable army of courtroom lawyers. Not only is this absurd—police officers are not daredevils, but the level of risk inherent in such a scenario, one that would in each fictional “coverup” jeopardize everyone up the chain of command, is incongruent with human behavior.
Your Post: To start with why police internal auditing is ineffective …
—My Reply: Who is the “we” that can’t review the records? Is it you, the anti-police shit-disturber, or you the citizen complainant? If it’s the former, then the simple answer is that you are not a party to any case; if the latter, then you and your attorney should have no trouble accessing whatever it is you need to appeal to higher authority. As for the public in general, they pay a police chief plenty to insure the integrity of the system and a city manager to insure the integrity of the police chief, then elect a city council to make sure the city manager is doing her job.
Your Post: Second, each lawsuit settled by trial or out of court is proof that the internal auditor doesn’t work….
—My Reply: There is no requirement that a complaint be made with police internal affairs before a lawsuit is filed. The requirement is that a claim be filed with the city, not internal affairs. Internal affairs handles misconduct complaints, the city handles civil claims. If you are truly interested in determining the integrity of the internal affairs system, you will look to DOJ files and court records for the evidence you seek, however, if it is an anti-police campaign that interests you, then you will continue doing what you’re doing, which is making unsupported allegations, ignoring evidence, and dodging challenges to your own personal integrity.
Your Post: Finally, if the internal police auditor was effective in creating oversight, then it would THEM bringing up the issues of drunk in public arrests, racially disparate arrests and instances of police brutality rather than waiting for the Mercury News, the Metro or community activists.
—My Reply: The disproportionate figures with which you wage your war do not constitute proof of anything. Statistics require context, and when analyzing behavior there are many other factors to be considered, many of them quantifiable, such as age, education, employment status, criminal history, etc. For instance, the last figure I read for SJ schools is that half of the student population is Hispanic. That figure, when compared to the 30% figure cited for the city’s Hispanic population, is disproportionate, which suggests that the Hispanic population here is disproportionately young and disproportionately represented in the groups (young, unemployed, high school dropouts) most likely to be arrested for immature, stupid behavior.
The reason that the Mercury News, the Metro, and community activists broke this story is because they possess the requisite lack of integrity to irresponsibly defame a public agency and unnecessarily alarm the public. All three refuse to acknowledge that Hispanic disproportion in disorderly conduct is consistent with that groups disproportion in violent crimes and other social ills. In other words, if the cops weren’t locking up Hispanics by the cord, something truly would be amiss.
Your Post: I think your ship is still afloat, but you’ve drifted too far out to sea. Have you reached your own desert island yet?
—My Reply: If my opinions cause you to desire me stranded on an island (shades of the gulag, eh comrade?), then you’ll need to come up with some evidence. No show trials here at SJI… at least not yet.
Glad to read your post finfan and I hope we can come to some conclusions around these issues.
First off is the issue of transparency to the readership of this blog. You are welcome to call me names and hurl more accusations at me, but here are at least three threads where you accuse other posters or writers of bias on this site (http://tinyurl.com/crb4op and
http://tinyurl.com/dn62n4 and http://tinyurl.com/dzulrq).
So I think the question of whether you are or were a police officer is absolutely relevant so that readers can understand *your* own biases. And while I’m sure you are an interesting person, I don’t need to see your resume- a simple yes or no will do.
Again returning to the subject of whether letting the police regulate themselves is any smarter than letting Wall Street or the insurance industry regulate themselves. Finfan says “the level of risk inherent in such a scenario [police corruption], one that would in each fictional ‘coverup’ jeopardize everyone up the chain of command, is incongruent [sic] with human behavior.”
Apparently you have a lot of reading to do my friend, as this is plenty of this within human behavior and there are many documented examples. Check out this amazon.com key word search for “police corruption” and you will find a number of works by both academics and former police officers: http://tinyurl.com/ddpfbq
On the meaning of the recently revealed statistics showing racial disparate arrest figures and documented illegal uses of ‘attitude arrests’ by SJPD, I fully agree with you that “Statistics require context.” But I think the context that is meaningful here is that the police in San Jose, and other major cities for that matter, have a long history of poor and even oppressive relations with people of color and other folks who get the short end of the stick like youth. This is exactly why we have a police auditor- because of previous protest around these issues involving the practices of SJPD.
Continuing with your argument, you state that the real reason behind high arrests rates of Latinos is that the “Hispanic [sic] disproportion in disorderly conduct is consistent with that groups disproportion in violent crimes and other social ills.”
Could this have anything to do with lower wages, higher unemployment, higher poverty, lack of opportunity, our countries horrendous education system and our ‘lock em up’ approach to crime that simply turns young people into more hardened criminals? Of course even a cursory look into those questions might raise some critical issues about fundamental injustices in our society that I don’t think many are willing to confront or listen to; yourself included finfan. But those are exactly the context and underlying issues here and as a society we deny them at our peril.
I think you’ve reached your desert island of denial by wholly your own efforts. If you’re lucky maybe you can find an aloe plant for that gnarly sunburn on your face.