June 15, 2001 – The Consent Decree Bans Racial Profiling
This policy was already in place, but the Consent Decree directly addressed discrimination in paragraphs 102 to 105.
In summary, the Department must continue to prohibit discriminatory conduct on the basis of race, color, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or disability. Stops must be made on the basis of legitimate, articulable reasons consistent with reasonable suspicion or probable cause. If part of a description of a suspect, then only in combination with other identifying factors. STOP Data must be completed for both motor vehicle stops and pedestian stops and the requirements are laid out.
2006 – Problem is Studied
According to a Los Angeles Times article, the city contracted with an outside consulting group. The study found that Latino and African American motorists are significantly more likely than whites to be asked to leave their vehicles and be searched when stopped. The study concluded, however, that the data was too broad to determine if the disparitiy was racial profiling.
September 24, 2007 – Internal Affairs developes a Racial Profiling Investigation Protocol
In addition to all current protocols, racial profiling investigations were to follow the Racial Profiling Protocol. A list of questions to be asked was given as well as a suggestion to examine an officer’s work product as a potential indicator of racial profiling, if applicable.
February 7, 2008 – Inspector General Issues Report Critical of Internal Affairs Investigations
The Los Angeles Times reported that the Inspector General found fault with many Internal Affairs investigations finding that they frequently failed to fully investigate complaints and omitted or altered crucial information. This and media attention sparked review of the complaint investigation system, the Times said. IG Complaint Investigation Audit 2-7-08
April 30, 2008 – Year End Report Shows Zero Sustained Complaints on Racial Profiling
The Los Angeles Times published an article on the Police Commission’s reaction to the fact that there were more than 300 complaints of racial profiling and that none of them had merit. Commissioner John Mack was quoted as saying that it was “baffling.” Chief Bratton responded that “this is not a racist department.” LA Times 4-30-08
The Los Angeles Police Protective leage sent a letter of protest to the Police Commission objecting to their “ill-considered” public comments. League Letter to Commission
August 7, 2008 – Internal Affairs Publishes a Racial Profiling Fact Sheet
The fact sheet reflected the efforts that the Department had gone through to understand Racially Biased Policing including going to a seminar, intervewing academics, conducting data queries, and even a national survey of other departments. The survey found that other departments across the nation had also not sustained any racial profiling complaints. It also found out that LAPD had investigated twice as many racial profiling complaints as all of the other departments combined.
The report examined how the LAPD recruits candidates with special efforts of hiring with diversity in mind. Racial bias questions are part of the selection process as well as background checks that include looking for potential incidents of intolerance. The candidate is polygraphed on issues of intolerance and the psychological evaluation probes for it also.
Once hired recruit training is heavily weighted with topics relating to racial profiling including classes at the Museum of Tolerance. Once out of the academy, the recruit and all officers are given training of which 29 of the POST classes contain elements relating to racial profiling.
The term “racial profiling” was folded into the broader term of “biased policing” which also included other types of bias to facilitate the grouping of similar misconduct relating to police action taken because of ethnic, religious, gender, sixual orientation, or disability discrimination.
Finally, the ACR process was recommended to be expanded to be used in some biased policing cases as an education process for both the complainant and the officer. Racial Profiling Fact Sheet Aug 7 2008
Of special interest to officers are two quotes that reflect the opinion of Internal Affairs that would not be readily accepted by the Police Commission.
“Because intent must be proved, racial profiling is exceptionally difficult to prove and easily defended. If and when the LAPD does sustain such an allegation, the defense of that officer will mostly likely be exhaustive.”
“Using the sustained rate of racial profiling investigations as a measurement of effectiveness is neither productive nor instructive.”
August 19, 2008 – The Inspector General Completed Its Own Report on Racial Profiling
The 108 page IG Report of Aug 19, 2008 agreed that departments across the United States, whether the complaints were adjudicated by the law enforcement agency or a civilian oversight body, had a lack of sustained allegations on racial profiling complaints. It recommended more thoroughness, completeness and accuracy in the investigations. Monthly reports and the review of the New Jersey State Poice “model Investigative Plan: Racial Profiling” for investigative strategies or protocols.
August 19, 2008 – Police Commission Addresses Racial Profiling in its Regular Meeting
The deputy chief in charge of Professional Standards Bureau addressed the commission and summarized the program that was to be presented. He summarized some of the findings in the IA report. Concerns of the public were
specifically addressed by the deputy chief (1st video above). The commander in charge of Internal Affairs described the efforts made in contacting other agencies across the nation (2nd video above). A mediation type process was recommended for biased policing type complaints (3rd video above).
The Executive Director of the Inspector Generals Office then summarized the report that the IG had prepared.
He recommended monthly reporting and recommended looking at the New Jersey model (1st video above). The president of the police commission stated that his concern was the huge divide between people of color and the police department. He cautioned that we should notbe lead to a conclusion that we have a color blind law enforcement (2nd video above).
The chief of police asked Dr. Fridell, a professor at the Department of Crimonology at the University of South Florida, and who is an expert on racial profiling with twenty years of experience conduction research on law enforcement issues.
Dr. Fridell’s presentation is in two parts (above) to make the streaming video easier to view. Dr. Fridell advises that LAPD’s experience of zero sustained complaints is the national norm. Officers are human. Bias is often at a below conscious level that is found even in non-prejudiced people. Dr. Fridell favors mediation of complaints.
Commissioner Salzman believed the New Jersey model was valuable (1st video below).
Commissioner Ordin commented on the stop data reports and commented on it as being a valuable tool (2nd video above). She also commented on the pattern that should trigger a department response (3rd video above).
Commissioner Mack vowed not to throw in the towel (1st video below). During the public comment, the ACLU expressed that it was not satisfied (2nd video below).