(C) Florida Phoenix
This story was originally published by Florida Phoenix and is unaltered.
 . . . . . . . . . .



Some of the most jarring statements in the DOJ report on Minneapolis police [1]

['Deena Winter', 'More From Author', '- June']

Date: 2023-06-20  

Attorney General Merrick Garland was in Minneapolis Friday to release a damning indictment of the Minneapolis Police Department after a two-year investigation into racist policing practices.

The investigation was triggered by MPD officers’ 2020 murder of George Floyd on the streets of south Minneapolis, and found that systemic problems in MPD “made what happened to George Floyd possible.”

Garland said he met with Floyd’s family Friday morning.

“George Floyd should be alive today,” he said.

Floyd’s murder sparked protests across the globe, calls to defund police, and some police reforms. About 300 employees have since left the MPD, many of them officers retiring early due to post-traumatic stress disorder.

Garland announced that the U.S. Department of Justice and Minneapolis have agreed to negotiate a consent decree that will be overseen by a federal judge. The DOJ found the MPD engages in a pattern or practice of policing that violates people of their rights under the U.S.Constitution and federal law.

After talking to MPD employees and residents and reviewing thousands of documents, police reports, body-worn camera videos and city data, federal investigators found the MPD:

Uses excessive force, including unjustified deadly force.

Unlawfully discriminates against Black and Native American people in its enforcement.

Violates the rights of people engaged in protected speech.

Discriminates against people with behavioral health disabilities when responding to calls for help.

As activists said afterward, they’ve been reporting these violations for years.

“Imagine if they went back decades,” civil rights lawyer and activist Nekima Levy Armstrong said during a press conference after the DOJ briefing. “This investigation was long overdue… We do not have trust in these systems or these individuals because they’ve failed us time and time again.”

Some of the most important findings, anecdotes and statements in the 89-page report include:

Excessive force

MPD officers routinely use excessive force, often when no force is necessary.

MPD officers routinely use excessive force, often when no force is necessary. For years, MPD used dangerous techniques and weapons against people who committed at most petty offenses and sometimes no offense at all.

MPD used force to punish people who made officers angry or criticized the police.

MPD patrolled neighborhoods differently based on their racial composition and discriminated based on race when searching, handcuffing or using force against people during stops.

Roughly three quarters of MPD’s reported uses of force (from January 1, 2016, through August 16, 2022) did not involve an associated violent offense or a weapons offense.

Quick to fire

MPD officers discharged firearms in situations where there was no immediate threat.

Of the 19 police shootings that occurred from January 1, 2016, to August 16, 2022… a significant portion of them were unconstitutional uses of deadly force.

MPD officers discharge firearms at people without assessing whether the person presents any threat, let alone a threat that would justify deadly force.

An off-duty officer fired his gun at a car containing six people within three seconds of getting out of his squad car. The off-duty officer had responded to a “shots fired” call.

Officers still use neck restraints

Until 2020, MPD did not consider neck restraints to be deadly force, instead classifying them as “less-lethal” force. MPD officers frequently used neck restraints in situations in which deadly force was not justified.

MPD officers often used neck restraints in situations that did not end in an arrest. MPD officers used neck restraints during at least 198 encounters from January 1, 2016, to August 16, 2022. Officers did not make an arrest in 44 of those encounters.

Officers often used neck restraints on people who were accused of low-level offenses, were passively resisting arrest, or had merely angered the officer. And, most troublingly, officers used neck restraints on people who were not a threat to the officer or anyone else.

MPD officers applied pressure to the necks of youth who did not pose a threat, including a 2017 incident involving Derek Chauvin.

MPD officers have continued using neck restraints since the city banned them.

Improper use of tasers

Officers do not appear to use tasers consistent with MPD policy.

An officer unreasonably used a taser eight times on a man suspected of a minor offense — breaking a fence on a public sidewalk — who had initially complied with their orders.

Officers fired their tasers seven times into a man having a behavioral health crisis. The man stood on a 16th floor apartment balcony holding two knives but did not approach or threaten the officers. Nevertheless, the officers tased the man despite the risk that he could fall from the balcony.

Unreasonable takedowns, strikes

Officers consistently used bodily force when they faced no threat or resistance.

Officers consistently used bodily force when they faced no threat or resistance. MPD officers aggressively confront people suspected of a low-level offense — or no offense at all — and use force if the person does not obey immediately.

Officers sometimes used force against people who were already compliant or handcuffed. In many instances, MPD officers shoved adults and teens — including bystanders — for no legitimate reason.

Using force against restrained people, violating Fourth Amendment

MPD officers frequently use “gratuitous force,” meaning the person has already been restrained, subdued and handcuffed.

An officer threw a handcuffed Black man to the ground face-first, claiming he had “tensed up” during a search, while other officers had him bent over the hood of a squad car. For several minutes before the takedown, the man had been compliant.

An MPD officer used force against an unarmed, handcuffed man reported to have been trespassing inside a vacant house. When the man attempted to go back inside the house, the officer grabbed the handcuffed man by the neck, dragged him down several steps, and threw him on his back. The supervisor concluded the use of force “follow[ed] policy.”

An officer expressed no remorse after using excessive force against a restrained person. A man experiencing a behavioral health crisis was handcuffed to a stretcher. The man spat on an officer, who slapped and punched him in the face. After the man had been transported to a hospital, the officer said on body-worn camera: “I’m really proud of myself; I only hit him twice.” The supervisor did not refer the officer for a misconduct investigation.

Unnecessary force for failure to comply with orders immediately

MPD officers handcuff people even when officers know the person was neither a threat nor a flight risk, which can be humiliating.

Officers used unreasonable force to make a man do something he had a right to refuse. Two officers were responding to a fight-in-progress call and confronted a man who was seated on a bench. One officer asked to examine the man’s nose because it was bleeding. “Do not touch me,” the man responded. The officer grabbed the man by the wrist, twisted it behind the man’s back and pinned his face to the bench. Meanwhile, the other officer grabbed and pulled the man’s ear and pushed him down. After they handcuffed the man, who is white, he asked, “Why are you doing this to me?” One officer responded, “We didn’t want to go this way, we wanted to go a different way, but you didn’t want to cooperate.”

Unreasonable use of pepper spray

MPD officers use chemical irritants on people in an unreasonable and retaliatory manner that violates the Fourth and First Amendments. The use of chemical irritants constitutes “significant force” that can cause prolonged pain.

Of particular concern are incidents where MPD officers pepper sprayed people in apparent retaliation for observing, questioning or criticizing police activity, in violation of the First Amendment right to free speech. For example, an officer pepper sprayed two bystanders to a potential suicide call after they questioned what officers were doing.

Teen pinned to hood of car for taking $5 burrito

Officers executing a traffic stop for a broken taillight sought to remove a Black teen from the backseat of the car because he had not been wearing his seatbelt. The teen requested over 20 times that officers call a supervisor to the scene, and the driver asked twice. Instead, an officer threatened the teen with a taser to try to get him out of the vehicle. After the officer (activated) his taser, the teen repeatedly said, “I’m scared! I’m scared!” Instead of engaging in an appropriate, de-escalating manner with the teen, officers forcibly removed him, pinned him to the ground, and handcuffed him.

An MPD officer drew his gun and arrested an unarmed Black teen for allegedly taking a $5 burrito without paying. The officer, who was wearing street clothes, reported that he followed the teen out of the restaurant, unholstered his gun, and pinned the teen to the hood of a car. Several witnesses called 911 to report the teen was being accosted by a “wacko who has a gun.” Other MPD officers then detained the teen in a squad car on charges of theft and obstructing legal process.

Failing to render medical aid to people in custody

Officers minimized complaints or denied aid, including for people who needed potentially life-saving aid. After MPD officers shot a Black man in 2018, body-worn camera video shows that no officer provided medical aid for at least 11 minutes after the shooting, when the video ended.

On numerous occasions, officers responded to a person’s statement that they could not breathe with a version of, “You can breathe; you’re talking right now.”

In 2018, officers “hog-tied” a compliant Black man, even though MPD policy has prohibited hog-tying since 2015.

Fellow officers fail to intervene

MPD officers often fail to intervene to prevent unreasonable force, despite their duty to do so.

Years before Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd, multiple other MPD officers stood by as Mr. Chauvin used excessive force on other occasions and did not stop him. In June 2017, an MPD officer failed to intervene when Mr. Chauvin slammed a handcuffed woman on the ground and held her down with his knee on her back and neck. The officer helped hold the woman down, then at Mr. Chauvin’s request, helped to put her in an ankle restraint.

Multiple MPD officers failed to step in as other officers repeatedly used unreasonable force against unarmed protesters.

Multiple officers fired tasers and a 40mm launcher repeatedly at a man who was experiencing a mental health crisis, even though he did not approach or threaten the officers, yet no officer intervened.

Despite MPD’s policy requiring officers to intervene, between 2016 and the present, the only officers who were disciplined for violating the failure-to-intervene policy during that time period were the officers who failed to stop Derek Chauvin from murdering George Floyd. During that entire period, no other officer was disciplined for standing by while their colleagues violated someone’s constitutional rights.

Inadequate use-of-force reviews

Supervisors often take an officer’s word for what occurred even when the video shows something different.

The inadequacies in supervisors’ force reviews may be due in part to insufficient training. MPD does not provide adequate specialized training to supervisors in conducting force reviews.

Unlawful discrimination against Black and Native American people

MPD employs different enforcement strategies in neighborhoods with different racial compositions.

MPD employs different enforcement strategies in neighborhoods with different racial compositions. MPD stops Black people at 6.5 times the rate at which it stops white people, given their shares of the population.

MPD stops Native American people at 7.9 times the rate at which it stops white people, given population shares.

Pretextual stops

MPD leadership has persistently encouraged using traffic enforcement and stops of “suspicious” people and vehicles as a way to reduce violent crime and get guns off the street.

One MPD presentation described traffic law enforcement stops as the “top tactic used by MPD for illegal gun recovery.” But only a small percentage of MPD’s traffic stops resulted in recovering guns.

MPD stopped but did not cite or arrest Black people at 5.7 times the rate at which it stopped but did not cite or arrest white people, given their shares of the population. And Native Americans were stopped but not cited or arrested at 5.9 times the rate.

From 2017 to 2019, when MPD relied heavily on low-level stops, officers spent thousands of hours per year on stops that did not result in a citation or arrest.

From 2020 to 2022, MPD stopped Black pedestrians and drivers at 7.8 times the rate at which they stopped white people, given their shares of the population. And for Native American pedestrians and drivers, the rate was 10 times higher.

Officers search and use force, neck restraints on Black and Native American people far more often than white people

MPD searches people during stops involving Black people at 12.8 times the per capita rate at which it searches people during stops involving white people.

MPD searches people during stops involving Native Americans at 19.7 times the rate for white people.

MPD used force against Black people at nine times the rate that it used force against white people, given their shares of the population.

MPD used force against Native American people at 13.9 times the rate.

MPD used neck restraints on Black and Native American people at per capita rates that were 9.6 and 12.2 times the rate for white people, respectively.

From May 25, 2020, to August 9, 2022, in the Third Precinct — where many Native Americans live and where supervisors say the “cowboys” want to work — MPD used force 49% more often during stops involving Black people and 69% more often during stops involving Native American people than they did during similar stops involving white people.

After Floyd murder, many officers stopped reporting race

Starting in late May 2020, after Floyd was murdered, officers suddenly stopped reporting race and gender in a large number of stops, despite MPD policy requiring officers to collect the data.

The percentage of daily stops with known race data recorded dropped from about 71% just before May 25, 2020, to about 35% afterwards, a drop of roughly 36 percentage points. This sudden decrease in MPD officers recording racial data continued throughout the next two years.

MPD seems not to have taken any action to address this widespread policy violation — a policy violation that can make it more difficult to detect and counter discrimination.

Neither the city nor MPD has tasked anyone with regularly and systematically assessing MPD’s enforcement data to identify and take action to avoid unwarranted disparities.

MPD failed to address bias

Some MPD officers, including supervisors, field training officers, trainers and even a former member of MPD’s command staff, have made discriminatory statements and committed discriminatory acts. An officer told DOJ investigators of overtly racist conduct by MPD members.

During a May 2020 protest following the murder of Floyd, a lieutenant (former Lt. Johnny Mercil) was caught on camera expressing racist assumptions about Black people: “I’d love to scatter ’em but it’s time to f***in’ put people in jail and just prove the mayor wrong about his white supremacists from out of state. Although, this group probably is predominantly white, ’cuz there’s not looting and fires.” Another officer agreed. The lieutenant oversaw MPD’s use of force training — a position where he had enormous influence.

One officer said MPD officers make degrading comments to Black detainees about their intelligence or their family, or by invoking racially charged stereotypes with statements like “We’ll get you Popeyes in a minute.”

One Black officer reported to DOJ investigators that fellow officers make statements condoning disrespectful racial stereotypes and tropes, such as calling Black people “ghetto,” and saying, “Black people don’t work,” and “You don’t have to worry about Black people during the day ’cuz they haven’t woken up — crime starts at night.”

This officer refrained from reporting the comments for fear of retaliation. The officer recalled not receiving backup on dangerous calls after reporting misconduct.

Some officers act as though they are unconcerned about being held accountable for even egregious discriminatory misconduct. In an anecdote first reported by the Reformer , a woman called MPD to ask about a man she believed was putting flyers on vehicles threatening Black Lives Matter supporters. She told DOJ investigators that the officer who answered said Black Lives Matter is a “terrorist” organization and stated: “We are going to make sure you and all of the Black Lives supporters are wiped off the face of the Earth.” He said, “I think you should file a complaint, and I want you to do it well, so let me spell my first and my last name so you get it right. Then I’ll give you my badge number.”

, a woman called MPD to ask about a man she believed was putting flyers on vehicles threatening Black Lives Matter supporters. She told DOJ investigators that the officer who answered said Black Lives Matter is a “terrorist” organization and stated: “We are going to make sure you and all of the Black Lives supporters are wiped off the face of the Earth.” He said, “I think you should file a complaint, and I want you to do it well, so let me spell my first and my last name so you get it right. Then I’ll give you my badge number.” MPD often held officers accountable for biased conduct only after public outrage, and even then, MPD failed to communicate a clear message to officers, supervisors and the public.

In 2015, MPD officers stopped a car carrying four Somali-American teens. According to an arbitrator assigned to review discipline, an officer approached the car with his gun drawn and ordered a teen to get out, threatening: “If you f*** with me, I’m gonna break your leg before you even get a chance to run.” When the teen asked why he was being arrested, the officer replied, “Because I feel like arresting you.” Later, when one of the teens told the officer, “[Y]ou’re a racist, bro,” the officer responded: “Yep, and I’m proud of it.” He added, “Do you remember what happened in Black Hawk Down when we killed a bunch of you folk? I’m proud of that . … We didn’t finish the job over there … if we had … you guys wouldn’t be over here right now.” None of the other officers present intervened or reported their colleague.

Counting the costs

Between 2018 and 2022, the city paid out $61,502,925 to settle claims of police misconduct.

Apart from the $47 million in settlements for the deaths of Justine Ruszczyk and Floyd, the city paid $14,502,925 for 69 claims or lawsuits from 2018 through 2022.

Sometimes, MPD pays for the repeated misconduct of certain officers. For instance, MPD paid $344,000 to settle claims related to one officer’s uses of force over a 12-year MPD career. This includes settlements of $140,000, $82,000, and $62,500 for the officer allegedly choking an 18-year-old developmentally disabled student unconscious; punching a woman in the face and knocking her unconscious; and beating a man unconscious outside of a bar.

MPD’s failure to address police misconduct allows officers’ serious violations of people’s rights to go unpunished. MPD’s flawed accountability system contributes to the unconstitutional and unlawful patterns or practices we found.

Needlessly complex, flawed system for dealing with misconduct

MPD’s accountability system has been needlessly complex… MPD produced an eight-page flow chart that illustrates the number of steps, decision points and mandatory delays built into the accountability process.

MPD investigated only 13.6% of the non-duplicate complaints received by the Office of Police Conduct Review. At intake, MPD dismissed roughly two-thirds of misconduct complaints, which included 19.8% of the complaints on the merits without any investigation; and referred 18.3% of the complaints for “coaching” in lieu of a formal investigation. A dismissal at intake can occur even when the misconduct is captured on video.

MPD dismissed a complaint as “no basis” and suggested to the complainant that there was an investigation when there was none. In 2018, MPD dismissed a man’s complaint of unlawful detention. He alleged that officers detained him for six hours, took his money, took his motorcycle, strip-searched him “more than one time,” and took DNA swabs. Finding nothing, the officers did not arrest him. The man said in his complaint that he “felt violated.” The OPCR file does not reflect any investigation or provide an explanation for the dismissal. Nevertheless, MPD advised the complainant that “an appropriate investigation” took place.

Even when an officer’s misconduct potentially injures someone, MPD does not always investigate. When an unarmed man said he was planning to file a complaint, an MPD officer pushed him backward so hard his head struck the sidewalk. The officer searched and handcuffed the man, who remained compliant and seated as he waited for EMS to respond. MPD did not investigate whether the use of force was retaliatory or excessive. Rather, MPD referred the officer for non-disciplinary training.

MPD frequently misclassifies complaints and fails to identify obvious misconduct that should trigger an investigation.

Coaching is used to address serious misconduct… maybe

Fewer than one in four OPCR complaints referred for coaching at intake actually resulted in coaching.

MPD refers for coaching many allegations that are far from “low-level.”

MPD referred for coaching a 2019 complaint that alleged an officer smacked, kicked, and used a taser on a teen accused of shoplifting… MPD dismissed the case one year later with the designation “Reckoning Period Expired.”

An MPD sergeant used her personal cell phone to communicate with a sexual assault survivor (a policy violation) and inadvertently sent a picture of a partially unclothed man. The survivor filed a complaint, and the sergeant was referred for coaching. There is no indication that the coaching occurred, and MPD dismissed the complaint four years later.

The coaching process is expected to be completed within 45 days of the referral. However, case files showed coaching documents were not completed for up to almost two years after the OPCR complaint was filed.

Failure to conduct timely misconduct investigations

When MPD does investigate a complaint, the investigations often skip key investigative steps and are significantly delayed. Complaints languish for no legitimate reason, sometimes for years.

Under OPCR policy, investigators delay interviewing involved officers, if they interview officers at all. Open investigations are abruptly closed and dismissed with designations of “reckoning period expired,” “failure to cooperate,” and “no basis.”

Several files indicate there was no investigation at all.

In 2019, MPD dismissed a two-year-old complaint that alleged an officer used excessive force by shoving and pepper spraying a person who was retreating. The investigator never interviewed the complainant, witnesses or the officer. Nevertheless, MPD closed it as “reckoning period expired” — an improper basis for dismissing a timely complaint.

In some cases, investigators’ conclusions bore little resemblance to what actually occurred.

Investigators also tend to draw inferences in favor of officers that the evidence does not support.

Failure to discipline police for misconduct

Discipline for MPD officer misconduct is rare. Between 2016 and 2021, approximately 2.9% of non-duplicate OPCR complaints resulted in a letter of reprimand, suspension, demotion or termination.

Even when officers admit policy violations, they may not be held accountable.

Systemic deficiencies in training

The Department of Justice found a range of problems across MPD’s recruit, in-service and field training programs, including the qualifications of instructors, poor training materials and chronic understaffing.

Instructors do not have formal training certifications, and MPD has not established criteria for selecting instructors or implemented mechanisms to evaluate how well instructors are performing. Many members in the training division lacked an understanding of best training practices and did not have strong training skills.

MPD training revealed an overreliance on using force during encounters. MPD staff favored training on defensive tactics over training on de-escalation options.

MPD officers and training staff expressed a wide variety of concerns about the field training officer program. (Chauvin was a field training officer.)

An FTO reported to DOJ investigators that MPD was using inexperienced FTOs. One FTO wrote that the biggest challenge of being an FTO is “watch[ing] other FTOs, who suck at their job, train a recruit, who now will pass . . . and suck at their job.”

Officers have served as FTOs even while under investigation for serious misconduct. For example, one officer served as an FTO following a 2016 incident in which he punched a handcuffed man in the face multiple times. While the incident was being investigated, he was initially suspended without pay, then brought back, first to “limited duty” then to patrol, where he served as an FTO, according to the DOJ. The officer was later fired, but the termination was overturned after appeal.

Officer exodus

Just before George Floyd’s murder, only 2.1% of sworn employees were on continuous leave. By the end of 2020, that number had grown to 18.6%.

The city paid out huge sums for MPD workers compensation claims for post-traumatic stress disorder. For injuries claimed in 2020 alone, for example, the city paid over $27 million.

This story was published earlier by the Minnesota Reformer, an affiliate of the nonprofit States Newsroom network, which includes the Florida Phoenix.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://floridaphoenix.com/2023/06/20/some-of-the-most-jarring-statements-in-the-doj-report-on-minneapolis-police/

Published and (C) by Florida Phoenix
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/floridaphoenix/