The civilian committee was created last year to review how
the Sarasota Police Department investigates itself. It was formed last year
after a video showed a Sarasota Police officer kicking handcuffed inmate Juan
Perez outside the jail.
SARASOTA - The civilian committee
created last year to review how the Sarasota Police Department investigates
itself suffers from ineffectiveness, and last month a meeting devolved into a
near fistfight.
During a heated argument at the May 23 meeting of the city's
Police Complaint Committee — set up a year ago in the wake of a 2009 police abuse
and cover-up scandal — one committee member challenged another to step outside
and fight.
A third member scolded the pair, telling them they were
acting like kindergartners. No punches were thrown.
The group was initially touted by city officials as a way to
restore public confidence in the police department that was reeling after an
officer was caught on video kicking a handcuffed immigrant at the county jail.
The excessive force and a bungled payout to the man led to firing of the
officer. Then-Police Chief Peter Abbott resigned in 2010 amid calls for reform.
According to the city ordinance creating the panel, the
committee's purpose is "to advise the chief of police on policies,
procedures and practices pertaining to the processing of complaints made against
officers employed by the Sarasota Police Department."
In practice, however, the four members meet monthly to read
and discuss internal affairs investigations that are long-since closed, and in
almost all cases they have agreed with the findings and the discipline
described in the report. If they disagree, the police department is under no
obligation to change anything. They have no power to change discipline or
investigative outcomes; they can only advise the police chief of their response
One of the committee's harshest critics is also one of its
founding members, Frank Brenner, a gruff Harvard University Law School grad who
retired in Sarasota after 50 years as a prosecutor, criminal defense attorney
and judge in New York City.
Brenner, who once defended clients as diverse as subway
shooter Bernard Goetz and comedian Lenny Bruce, said the committee was
intentionally designed to be ineffective to offer the illusion of civilian
oversight, which was needed when scrutiny of the police department increased.
"It's window dressing. Nobody wants this thing to work,
to accomplish anything," Brenner said. "The committee hasn't been
embraced by the police or the City Commission. It's just out there. We look at
closed internal affairs cases, make recommendations and nothing happens after
that — nothing."
Last month, while discussing one of the half-dozen IA
reports they review at each meeting, Brenner said he was not satisfied with the
"slap on the wrist" an officer received for causing an accident while
speeding to a call.
When member Jerry Meketon, a retired psychologist, asked
internal affairs commander Lt. John LeBlanc, a non-voting member, for his
opinion about the discipline, Brenner questioned the relevance.
"I am not interested in your question of
relevance," Meketon told him. "I'm talking to John. If you don't like
it, come with me outside and we'll finish it off."
Peter Graham, administrator of both the Police Complaint
Committee and the similar Police Advisory Panel, described the outburst as
"undesirable," but pointed out that Meketon later apologized to the
chairman.
"I don't think the members, who are volunteers, need to
conduct themselves that way," Graham said. "But the efficacy of the
meeting was unblemished."
Meketon said Brenner has strong ideas that occasionally
interfere when he is trying to present his own.
Brenner saw it differently, saying Meketon "just went
nuts."
While the members receive no compensation for their time,
Graham is a city contract employee who is paid $65,000 per year, just over half
of what the city has budgeted for operations of the two groups.
The complaint committee is chaired by Ronald Riffel, a retired
social worker. Its fourth member is Glenda Williams, an X-ray technician who is
active in the community.
During their meetings, the members take turns reading the IA
reports to the group, many of which are not controversial.
Meketon told the committee about an officer who missed a
hearing because he was working nights and overslept. The officer received
verbal counseling. "Members endorsed the action taken," the minutes
state.
Another report examined by the committee involved an officer
who was accused of being rude while investigating a traffic accident —
allegations the officer denied. IA investigators sided with the officer.
"Members endorsed the conclusion that the allegation
was not sustained by investigation," the minutes state.
When the committee has tried to do more than simply
rubber-stamp closed investigations, it has not had much success.
In frustration, Brenner wrote a four-page report titled:
"Let Reason Prevail," in which he offered a way to cut down on the
number of officers interviewed by IA investigators during routine probes.
It was shot down by the City Attorney's Office, which found
that the risks "associated with revising our current procedures would
outweigh the benefits."
Brenner prepared a three-page rebuttal, but the idea was tabled.
He received a similarly tepid response to suggestions that
the department condense its reports, and that writing skills be improved.
Brenner said in its current form the committee should be
eliminated, and a new one with real authority created in its place.
Lt. LeBlanc said state statutory guidelines, like the Police
Officer Bill of Rights, restrict the committee to seeing only completed
internal investigations, which are public.
City Attorney Robert Fournier concurred, adding that if the
committee was given enhanced authority it could usurp the function of the
city's civil service board.
Neither Fournier nor LeBlanc could cite any policy or other
changes that came about as a result of the committee. Neither would say whether
the committee was needed, something both said was a decision best left to the
City Commission.
The Sarasota Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union,
which called for civilian oversight of the police, said that without real
authority, like the power to issue subpoenas and compel testimony, the group
was doomed from the start.
Michael Barfield, a paralegal who chairs the ACLU legal
panel, said it is misleading to think the committee is overseeing complaints
from the public.
"They have no power to do anything, therefore no
meaningful ability to make changes that are needed," Barfield said.