Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 1 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
TOWN OF EAST HAVEN AND THE EAST HAVEN BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL NO. 3:12-CV-1652

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

November 20, 2012

COMPLAINT 1. The United States of America, by its undersigned attorneys, brings this civil action
under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 14141 (“Section 14141) to remedy a pattern or practice of conduct by EHPD law enforcement officers that deprives persons of rights, privileges, and immunities secured and protected by the Fourth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment. 2. The United States seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to remedy the Defendants’ violations of the law and to ensure that EHPD implements sustainable reforms establishing police practices that are constitutional. Implementation of constitutional policing practices will enhance public safety for the people of East Haven. 3. The United States alleges the following:
DEFENDANTS 4. Defendant Town of East Haven is a political subdivision of the State of Connecticut.
EHPD is a sub-unit or agency of the Town of East Haven through which the Town fulfills its policing function. East Haven is responsible for funding and oversight of EHPD.

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 2 of 10
5. Defendant East Haven Board of Police Commissioners is the body responsible for making rules and regulations for EHPD and for appointing and removing all officers and employees of EHPD, with the exception of the Police Chief. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
6. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1345. 7. The United States is authorized to initiate this action against Defendants under the
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 14141. 8. Under Section 14141, the United States is authorized to bring suit against a state or
local government for equitable and declaratory relief in order to remedy a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or federal law. 9. Declaratory and injunctive relief is sought as authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 14141(b). 10. Venue is proper in the District of Connecticut pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). Defendants are located in Connecticut, and all events, actions, or omissions giving rise to these claims occurred in Connecticut.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS I. EHPD Unlawfully Discriminates Against Latinos in Violation of their
Constitutional Rights.
11. As set forth in the Department of Justice’s December 19, 2011, Letter of Findings, attached hereto as Exhibit A, EHPD officers unlawfully discriminate against Latinos and otherwise violate their constitutional rights through a range of police practices, including the following: a. Discriminatory targeting and unconstitutional detention of Latinos for routine traffic stops because of their race, color, or national origin; b. Unconstitutional detention of Latino drivers and passengers to determine immigration status when there is no lawful basis for the detention because of their race, color, or national origin.
2

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 3 of 10
12. These practices taken together constitute a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives Latinos of rights, privileges, and immunities secured and protected by the United States Constitution and federal laws.
13. The Defendants’ bias against Latinos is demonstrated not only by the disparate negative impact on Latinos of the discriminatory conduct described above, but by other practices, policies, and statements of the Defendants, including EHPD’s departure from standard law enforcement practices that help to prevent biased policing and ensure constitutional policing.
A. EHPD Engages in Discriminatory Enforcement of the Traffic Laws
14. EHPD officers unlawfully rely on race, color, or national origin in their enforcement of traffic laws.
15. Latino drivers are subjected to disparate treatment as compared to similarly situated non-Latino drivers.
16. An analysis of traffic stop data over a two year period revealed that almost 20% of all traffic stops conducted by EHPD officers were of Latinos, while only approximately 8.3% of drivers in East Haven are Latino.
17. If EHPD had adequate systems of oversight in place, it could have performed such an analysis, discovered this problem and corrected it. However, no such analysis was performed.
18. EHPD officers frequently target locations for their enforcement activity because of the presence of Latinos in those areas. For example, EHPD officers target Latino places of business by focusing traffic enforcement activity on customers leaving those businesses.
19. An analysis of traffic stops shows that EHPD officers use non-standard justifications for stops that are not employed against non-Latino drivers.
20. For example, with Latino drivers, EHPD officers will attempt to identify a facial defect on the car’s license plate, or will stop cars with out-of-state license plates.
3

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 4 of 10
21. EHPD officers also follow Latino drivers and wait for traffic violations to occur, a tactic they rarely use against non-Latino drivers.
22. EHPD officers cite speeding as a justification for stopping Latinos, but give no indication of how they know a car is speeding, contrary to standard police practice.
23. EHPD officers also treat Latino drivers more harshly than non-Latino drivers after a traffic stop.
24. For example, EHPD officers typically arrest Latino drivers and have their vehicles towed, a tactic not usually employed against non-Latino drivers.
25. This targeting of Latinos for routine traffic enforcement violates the Fourth Amendment and the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
B. EHPD Targets Latinos for Immigration Enforcement in a Discriminatory and Otherwise Unconstitutional Manner
26. EHPD does not have an agreement with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement delegating immigration enforcement authority to any EHPD officer.
27. Nevertheless, EHPD has allowed its officers to engage in haphazard and uncoordinated immigration enforcement efforts targeting Latino drivers. For example, while EHPD command staff has authorized officers to conduct immigration investigations if they make a felony arrest or if a detained individual provides a foreign passport, EHPD officers frequently seek immigration holds or check immigration status after arresting individuals for mere traffic infractions.
28. Such conduct can occur unchecked because there is no formal policy for immigration enforcement at EHPD, nor any adequate review of immigration enforcement.
29. EHPD enforcement of immigration law is conducted without conformity with federal priorities and without guidance, training, oversight, or consistent application.
4

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 5 of 10
C. EHPD has Significantly Departed from Standard Law Enforcement Practices that Protect Against Biased Policing
30. EHPD has failed to develop and implement policies and practices that would ordinarily be expected of law enforcement agencies to protect against discriminatory policing. There is no legitimate law enforcement purpose that explains these failures. These failures are evidence that EHPD’s discrimination against Latinos is intentional.
31. EHPD has inadequate systems of oversight, accountability, training, and policies. These institutional failures persist despite EHPD’s awareness of the risk of biased policing. EHPD fails to adopt the kinds of policies and practices to prevent and address biased policing that are successfully used in other parts of the country.
32. Connecticut law enforcement agencies are required by State law to document all traffic stops, including demographic information, and report this information to a State body.
33. Even though EHPD possesses sophisticated data terminals able to record the required information, EHPD failed to comply with this State law for many years.
34. EHPD did not promulgate a policy addressing biased policing until after it was subjected to a series of allegations of racial profiling in 2009. Even then, the policy issued was ambiguous and potentially misleading.
35. Officers are given no guidance regarding bias in policing other than a general prohibition against discrimination, which contains numerous deficiencies, such as a lack of guidance on how officers can communicate with Spanish-speaking members of the community.
36. EHPD officers are not given sufficient diversity or cultural sensitivity training, which would allow them to better understand and interact with members of the community.
37. EHPD fails to hold officers accountable through objective and thorough internal investigations.
38. EHPD has failed to establish procedures indicating the types of complaints that will immediately trigger an internal investigation, nor has it set meaningful standards to guide investigations.
5

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 6 of 10
39. Many investigations are handled informally, with no findings issued. 40. Investigations are not pursued thoroughly. For example, in an investigation involving
allegations of serious misconduct by an officer, the investigation was closed when complainants could not be reached, without a statement ever having been taken from the officer. 41. Reports reflecting investigations are also insufficient, as they do not reference any specific rules or policies that the target of the complaint has broken. 42. The superficial investigations completed by EHPD permit arbitrary decisions, which give rise to an inference that officers may engage in misconduct as long as they are supported by the relevant EHPD command staff. 43. EHPD fails to provide limited-English proficient Latinos with appropriate language access. For example, EHPD fails to use a language line for communication with persons who are not proficient in English and has no formal policies guiding EHPD officers in the field for encounters with such persons. If officers cannot communicate effectively with certain segments of the population, they cannot adequately conduct investigations of crimes. 44. EHPD fails to abide by individuals’ consular rights, and has adopted no training or policies assuring that consular notification rights of foreign nationals will be respected. 45. EHPD fails to collect data that will permit the identification of biased practices, despite the fact that such data collection systems are commonly used by police agencies throughout the country as a means of preventing discriminatory policing. EHPD has no system in place for tracking officer uses of force, complaints against officers, or other policing activity that would allow command staff to determine whether an officer has engaged in discriminatory policing. 46. EHPD is fully aware of the risk of biased policing created by its practices. Given that, the lack of adequate training, policies, supervision, and accountability mechanisms necessary to prevent the discriminatory treatment and abuse of Latinos reveals a
6

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 7 of 10
disregard for the rights of the Latino community, and stands as further evidence of bias against Latinos. D. EHPD Demonstrates Bias against Latinos through Anti-Latino Statements
47. EHPD has created and fostered institutional bias against Latinos, which underlies and further encourages the unlawful treatment of Latinos. EHPD’s bias against Latinos is demonstrated by expressions of hostility toward Latinos and the Latino community. These actions demonstrate invidious bias on the basis of race, color, or national origin.
48. EHPD officers have made statements that demonstrate bias toward Latinos, using derogatory and other inappropriate language.
49. This apparent endorsement of bias against Latinos conveys to EHPD personnel that discrimination and other unlawful conduct against Latinos is acceptable.
II. EHPD Engages in a Pattern or Practice of Conduct that Violates the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution
50. EHPD officers use excessive force against individuals who have already been taken into custody, handcuffed, or otherwise restrained. These uses of force are unjustified because of the diminished threat posed by the restrained subjects.
51. EHPD officers conduct unreasonable searches and seizures. 52. The pattern or practice of conduct that violates the Fourth Amendment results directly
from EHPD’s inadequate policies, procedures, training, and oversight. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
53. The United States is authorized under 42 U.S.C. § 14141(b) to seek declaratory and equitable relief to eliminate a pattern or practice of law enforcement officer conduct that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
7

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 8 of 10
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF: PATTERN OR PRACTICE OF DISCRIMINATORY CONDUCT THAT VIOLATES
THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT AND SECTION 14141
54. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-53 above.
55. Defendants, their agents, and persons acting on their behalf, including EHPD officers, have engaged in traffic stops and other law enforcement practices, with the intent to discriminate against Latino persons in East Haven on the basis of their race, color, or national origin.
56. The discriminatory law enforcement practices engaged in by Defendants, their agents, and persons acting on their behalf constitute a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers that deprives persons of rights protected by the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 14141(a). SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF:
PATTERN OR PRACTICE OF USE OF EXCESSIVE FORCE THAT VIOLATES THE FOURTH AMENDMENT AND SECTION 14141
57. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-53 above.
58. Defendants, their agents, and persons acting on their behalf, including EHPD officers, use excessive force against individuals who pose little or no threat of harm to the officers or others, and that is otherwise unreasonable under the totality of the circumstances. The use of excessive force includes physical force and unreasonable application of electronic control weapons and other implements.
59. The use of excessive force engaged in by Defendants, their agents, and persons acting on their behalf constitute a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers that deprives persons of their rights under the Fourth Amendment, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 14141(a).
8

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 9 of 10
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF: PATTERN OR PRACTICE OF UNREASONABLE SEARCHES, ARRESTS, AND DETENTIONS THAT VIOLATES THE FOURTH AMENDMENT AND SECTION 14141
60. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-53 above.
61. Defendants, their agents, and persons acting on their behalf, including EHPD officers, have unreasonably searched, arrested, and detained numerous persons in East Haven, including searches and arrests without probable cause or reasonable suspicion.
62. The unreasonable searches, arrests, and detentions lacking probable cause or reasonable suspicion engaged in by Defendants, their agents, and persons acting on their behalf constitute a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers that deprives persons of their rights under the Fourth Amendment, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 14141(a). PRAYER FOR RELIEF
63. WHEREFORE, the United States prays that the Court: a. Declare that Defendants have engaged in a pattern or practice of conduct by EHPD law enforcement officers that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 14141(a); b. Order Defendants, their officers, agents, and employees to refrain from engaging in any of the predicate acts forming the basis of the pattern or practice of unlawful conduct described herein; c. Order Defendants, their officers, agents, and employees to adopt and implement policies, procedures, and practices to remedy the pattern or practice of unlawful conduct described herein; d. Order Defendants to adopt systems that identify, correct, and prevent conduct that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and
64. Order such other relief as the interests of justice may require.
9

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 10 of 10

DATE: November 20, 2012.
DAVID FEIN United States Attorney District of Connecticut
s/John Hughes JOHN HUGHES, Civil Chief Assistant United States Attorney District of Connecticut Federal Bar No. ct05289
MICHELLE McCONAGHY Assistant United States Attorney District of Connecticut Federal Bar No. ct27157 U.S. Attorney’s Office 157 Church Street 23rd Floor CT Financial Center New Haven, CT 06510 Tel: (203) 821-3700 Fax: (203) 773-5373 Michelle.McConaghy@usdoj.gov

THOMAS E. PEREZ Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
ROY L. AUSTIN, JR. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
Jonathan M. Smith Chief
LUIS SAUCEDO Acting Deputy Chief
ANIKA N. GZIFA AARON S. FLEISHER Trial Attorneys U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Tel: (202) 514-6255 Fax: (202) 514-4884 Anika.Gzifa@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for the United States

10

 
 Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 1 of 55

l · · . _ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRJCT COURT FO~ ~ DISTRJCT OF CONNECTICUT " . Iilll Ot:C 2\ A \0: 5q UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff;

No. 3:12-CV-1652 (AWT)

v.

I

I

TOWN OF EAST HAYEN AND EAST

!

HAYEN BOARD OF POLICE

I
i

COMMISSIONERS,

I

. '';

Defendants.

AGREEMENT FOR EFFECTIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL POLICING
'
I. INTRODUCTION
I. The United States of America, the Town of East Haven, the East Haven Police Department, and the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners (collectively, "the Parties") enter into this Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing ("Agreement") to ensure that the East Haven Police Department provides effective and lawful policing to all East Haven residents, in accordance with the United States Constitution, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-4a ("Title VI''), and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968,42 U.S.C. § 3789d ("Safe Streets Act"). In particular, the provisions of this Agreement are designed to ensure that East Haven residents are not subject to discriminatory policing, unjustified stops and arrests, or use of excessive force. Central to the Agreement is the establishment of numerous systems ofinstitutional accountability, including a Joint Compliance Expert, which will provide the East Haven Police Department with a lasting structure enabling policing that is consistent with the United States Constitution, federal law, and professional police practices. The Parties jointly request that this Agreement be entered as an order of the Court and that the Town of East Haven be permitted flexibility to implement the Agreement consistent with its terms.
2. Plaintiff in this action is the United States of America ("United States").
·----...;;..·- ·-Defendants-in-thil!.aGtion-are-the:Alwn-9f:.East-Ra.venT-the-East-Iila.ven.FgJiGe-gepartrnent;--("EHPD"); and the East Haven Board ofPolice Commissioners ("Board") (collectively,
'~Town").

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 2 of 55
D. BACKGROUND
4. On September 30, 2009, the United States notified the Town and EHPD of the Civil Rights Division, Special Litigation Section's investigation into allegations that EHPD officers engage in discriminatory policing, unconstitutional searches and seizures, and use of excessive force.
5. In conducting its investigation, the United States, with the assistance of police practice consultants, interviewed EHPD personnel, Town officials, and members of the community, conducted multiple on-site tours, and reviewed numerous EHPD documents and data sources.
6. On December 19, 2011, the Civil Rights Division reported the findings ofits investigation. Specifically, the Civil Rights Division found that EHPD engages in a pattern or practice of systematically discriminating against Latinos, in violation of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, 42 U.S.C. § 14141 ("§ 14141 "),Title VI, and the Safe Streets Act. The Civil Rights Division also noted serious concerns that EHPD had failed to ensure that individuals in East Haven are free from unlawful searches and seizures and use ofexcessive force.
7. Following the release of the United States' investigative findings, the Mayor announced that the Town and EHPD were willing to rebuild EHPD through implementation of changes in policies and practices. The United States and the Town have accordingly determined that this Agreement, rather than costly and protracted litigation, is the most effective means to resolve its investigation.
8. In order to ensure that EHPD is providing law enforcement services consistent with the Constitution and federal law, this Agreement establishes seven focus areas detailing the requirements that the Town, EHPD, and the Board have agreed to undertake to ensure . constitutional and effective policing. These focus areas are: (a) General Policies and Training; (b) Bias-Free Policing; (c) Stops, Searches, and Seizures; (d) Use of Force; (e) Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations, and Discipline; (f) Supervision and Management; and (g) Community Engagement and Oversight. This Agreement also establishes a Joint Compliance Expert responsible for; (a) promoting constitutional and effective policing by EHPD; (b) evaluating EHPD's performance under this Agreement; and (c) reporting on EHPD's compliance with this Agreement.
ill. DEFINITIONS 9. The following terms and definitions shall apply to this Agreement:
a. "EHPD" or ''the Department" shall refer to the East Haven Police Department and its agents, officers, supervisors, and employees (both sworn and unsworn).
b. "Chiefof Police" shall refer to the East Haven Chief of Police, including all successors in office.
-!
c. "Board" shall refer to the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners, including all successors in office.
2

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 3 of 55

d. "Town" shall refer to the Town of East Haven, including its agents, officers, and employees.

e. "Mayor" shall refer to the Mayor of East Haven,.including all successors in

office.

•

f. "DOJ" shall refer to the United States Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division and its agents and employees.

g. "USAO" means the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Connecticut.

h. "Court" shall refer to the Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut presiding over this case.

i. "Active resistance" means a subject's physical actions to defeat an officer's attempt at control and to avoid being taken into custody. Verbal statements alone do not constitute active resistance.

j. "Apprehension" means the arrest, capture, or taking into custody of a person.

k. "Arrest" means a seizure of greater scope or duration than an investigatory stop or detention. An arrest is lawful when supported by probable cause.

I. "AVL" means "Automatic Vehicle Location," a system that automatically tracks the geographic position of a vehicle and transmits that information to a receiver.

m. "Bilingual staff" means a staff person who has demonstrated and verified proficiency, pursuant to generally accepted objective criteria, in both spoken English and at least one other language as authorized by EHPD. Bilingual staff must voluntarily agree to be assessed and serve as a bilingual employee on behalf ofEHPD.

n. "Civilian Employee" means any non-sworn personnel employed by EHPD, on

either a temporary or permanent basis, in either a paid or unpaid capacity.

i

0, "Complainant" means any person, including an EHPD officer or employee, who makes a complaint against EHPD or an officer or employee of EHPD.

i
I

i

p. "Complaint" means any complaint made to EHPD by a member of the public, an

EHPD officer, or a civilian employee, regarding EHPD services, policy or

procedure, or any claim for damages or criminal complaint that alleges

misconduct by an EHPD officer or civilian employee.

1

3

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 4 of 55
'

q. "Critical frreann discharge" means a discharge of a fireann by an EHPD officer, including ac.cidental discharges, discharges at animals, and discharges at persons where no one is struck, with the exception of range and training discharges.

r. "Defendant-directed compliance period" means the time period following the Effective Date, lasting no more than 270 days, during which the Parties will request a stay of proceedings. During the Defendant-directed compliance period, the Defendants shall work to gain substantial compliance with the provisions of this Agreement.

s. "Demographic Category" means race, color, ethnicity, or national origin.

t. "Discipline" means a personnel action for violation ofan established law, regulation, rule, or EHPD policy, including, but not limited to, an admonishment, written reprimand, suspension, demotion or dismissal.

u. "Discriminatory Policing" means selective enforcement or non-enforcement of the law, including the selecting or rejecting of particular policing tactics or strategies, based on membership in a demographic category specified in this Agreement. Discriminatory policing does not include using membership in a demographic category as part of a reliable suspect-specific description.

v. "ECW'' means Electronic Control Weapon, a weapon designed primarily to discharge electrical charges into a subject that will cause involuntary muscle contractions and overrides the subject's voluntary motor responses.

w. "ECW application" means the contact and delivery of electrical impulse to a subject with an Electronic Control Weapon.

x. "Effective Date" means the day this Agreement is entered by the Court.

y. "EIS" means the Early Intervention System.

z. "Exigent circumstances" means emergencies in which a reasonable person would
believe that imminent bodily hann to a person or persons or the destruction of evidence is likely.

aa. ''Fireann" means a pistol, revolver, shotgun, carbine or machine gun, as well as any instrument capable of discharging a bullet or shot.

bb. "Implement" or "implementation" means the development or putting into place of

polic_y or procedure, including the !IJll!Iopriate training of all relevant personnel.

j

and the. consistent and verified performance of that policy or procedure in actual

' '

practice.

!

cc. "Including," "includes," and ''include" mean "including, but not limited to,"

4

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 5 of 55
dd. "lAO" stands for Internal Affairs Officer, the EHPD officer or officers charged with conducting internal and administrative investigations of EHPD officers, agents, and employees, including investigations of serious uses of force, uses of
force by EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or uses of force
reassigned to the lAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the lAO.
ee. "Interpretation" means the act of listening to a communication ln one language (source language) and orally converting it into another language (target language}, while retaining the same meaning.
ff. "Joint Compliance Expert" means a person or team of people with specialized
expertise who shall be selected to independently assess and report on the
Defendants' implementation of this Agreement.
gg.. "Less-lethal force" means a force application not intended or expected to cause death or serious injury and which is commonly understood to have less potential for causing death or serious injury than conventional, more lethal police tactics. Nonetheless, use of less-lethal force can result in death or serious injury.
hh. "Less-lethal weapon" means any apprehension or restraint tool that, when used as designed and intended, is less likely to cause death or serious injury than a conventional lethal weapon (e.g., firearm).. Nonetheless, use of a less-lethal weapon may result in death or serious injury.
ii. "Lethal force" means any use offO'rce likely to cause death or serious physical injury, including, the use of a firearm, neck hold, or strike to the head, neck or throat with a hard object, including a fist.
.ii. "LEP" means Limited English Proficient, and refers to a person who does not
speak English as his/her primary language and has a limited ability to read, write, speak, or understand English. LEP individuals may be competent in certain types of communication (e.g., speaking or understanding), but still be LEP for other purposes (e.g., reading or writing).
kk. "Misconduct complaint" means any allegation of improper conduct by an officer
or other BHPD employee, whether the complaint alleges corruption or other criminal misconduct; a violation of law; or a violation of EHPD policy or procedure. EHPD shall document and evaluate expressions of dissatisfaction regarding the service provided by EHPD officers or employees to determine whether these complaints include allegations of misconduct and are therefore misconduct complaints, or are purely service complaints.
5

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 6 of 55

II. "Neck hold" refers to one of the following types of holds: (I) bar-ann control hold: a hold that inhibits breathing by compression of the airway in the neck; and (2) carotid restraint hold: a hold that inhibits blood flow by compression of the blood vessels in the neck; (3) a lateral vascular neck constraint; or (4) a hold with a knee or other object to the backof a prone subject's neck. A neck hold shall be considered lethal force.

rnrn. ''Non-disciplinary corrective action" refers to action other than discipline taken by an EHPD supervisor to enable or encourage an officer to improve his or her
performance.

nn. "EHPD unit" means any designated organization of officers within EHPD, including patrol shifts and investigative components.

oo. "EHPDAI" means EHPD Authorized Interpreter, a bilingual EHPD employee who has been authorized to interpret for others in certain situations, such as interviews, interrogations, or taking and responding to civilian complaints.

pp. "Passive Resistance" means non-compliance with officer commands that is nonviolent and is Jess aggressive than active resistance.

qq. "Personnel" means EHPD officers and employees.

rr. "Police officer" or "officer" mean any law enforcement agent employed by EHPD, including supervisors and cadets.

ss. "Policies and Procedures" means written regulations or directives, regardless of

the name of the regulation or directive, describing the duties, functions, and

obligations of EHPD officers and/or employees, and providing specific direction

in how to fulfill those duties, functions, or obligations.

I

tt. "Pretext stop" refers to a stop made by an officer for an observed infraction, such

I '

as a traffic infraction, where the officer's object is to conduct a criminal

' '

investigation unrelated to the observed infraction. ·

uu. "Probable cause" means reasonably trustworthy facts and circumstances that, within the totality of the circumstances, lead an officer to reasonably believe that an individual bas committed or is committing a crime.

vv. "Professional police practices" refers to police practices that are endorsed by

credible, professional policing organizations and/or are generally accepted, standard practices used by a wide variecy of competent PQlice departments. For the purposes of this Agreement, whether a particular practice constitutes a

i
I
-1

"professional police practice" shall be determined by the Joint Compliance Expert

in consultation with the Parties.

6

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 7 of 55

ww. "Reasonable Force" means that force which an ordinary, prudent and reasonable
officer placed in the same position with the same knowledge would find to be reasonable. In determining whether the force used by a police officer in effectuating an arrest was reasonable under the circumstances, factors to be considered are: (I) the known character of the arrestee; (2) the risks and dangers faced by.the officers and third parties; (3) the nature of the offense involved; (4) the chance of the arrestee's escape if the particular means are not employed; (5) the existence of alternative methods of arrest; (6) the physical size, strength, and weaponry of the officers as compared to the arrestee; and (7) the exigency of the moment. Force that is not "reasonable" is "unreasonable."

xx. "Reasonable suspicion" means articulable facts that, withinthe totality of the circumstances, lead an officer to reasonably suspect that criminal activity has been or is about to be committed.

yy. "Seizure" or "detention" mean any restriction on the liberty interest of an individual. A seizure occurs when an officer's words or actions convey to a reasonable person that he or she is not free to leave.

zz. "Serious use of force" means: (I) all uses offorce by an EHPD officer that create a substantial risk of death, serious disfigurement, disability or impairment oft)le functioning of any body part or organ; (2) all critical firearm discharges by an EHPD officer; (3) all uses of force by an EHPD officer resulting in a significant injury, including a broken bone or an injury requiring hospitalization; (4) all head, neck, and throat strikes; (5) all neck holds; (6) all uses offeree by an EHPD officer resulting in a loss of consciousness; (7) all other uses of force by an EHPD officer apparently resulting in death; (8) all canine apprehensions; (9) more than two applications of an ECW on an individual during a single interaction, regardless of the mode or duration of the application, and whether the applications are by the same or different officers, or ECW application for longer than 15 seconds, whether continuous or consecutive; and (I 0) any strike, blow, kick, ECW application, or similar use of force against a handcuffed subject. ·

aaa. "Service firearm" means any fireann· issued to sworn personnel by the Department.

bbb. "Shall" means that the provision imposes a mandatory duty.

ccc. "Supervisor" means a sworn EHPD employee at the rank of sergeant or above (or

anyone acting in those capacities) and non-sworn employees of EHPD with

oversight responsibility for other personnel.

·

ddd. "Supervisory investigation" means an investigation conducted by a subject officer's supervisor or higher level official within the officer's chain-ofcommand.

7

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 8 of 55
eee. "Supervisor's Investigation Report" means a written report documenting the supervisory investigation.
fff. "Training" shall comport with best practices and include adult-learning methods that incorporate role-playing scenarios and interactive exercises, as well as traditional lecture formats. Training shall also include testing and/or writings that indicate that the officer comprehends the material taught.
ggg. "Translation" means the replacement of written text from one language (source language) with an equivalent written text in another language (target language).
hhh. "Use of force" means any physical·coercion used to effect, influence, or persuade an individual to comply with an order from an officer above escorting or unresisted handcuffing, including unholstering a firearm.
iii. "Use of force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer" means that force which a reasonable and trained supervisor would conclude could result in criminal charges due to the apparent circumstances of the use of force, such as the level of the force used as compared to the resistance encountered or discrepancies in the use of force as described by the officer and the use of force as evidenced by any resulting injuries, witness statements, or other evidence. It includes all strikes, blows, kicks, ECW applications, or other similar uses of force against a handcuffed subject, absent exigent circumstances.
jjj. "Use of Force Report" means a written report documenting all force above un· resisted handcuffing.
kkk. "Vehicle stop" means any instance where an EHPD officer directs a civilian operating a motor vehicle of any type to stop and the driver is detained for any length of time. IV. POLICIES AND TRAINING GENERALLY
10. EHPD's policies and procedures shall reflect and express the Deparnnent's core values and priorities, and provide clear direction to ensure that officers lawfully, effectively, and ethically carry out their law enforcement responsibilities. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all EHPD officers are trained to understand and be able to fulfill their duties and responsibilities pursuant to EHPD policies and procedures. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that supervisors have the knowledge, skills, and ability to provide close and effective supervision to each officer Wlder the supervisor's direct command; provide officers with the direction and guidance necessary to improve and develop as police officers; and to identify, correct, and prevent officer misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.
1
8

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 9 of 55

I

A. Policy Development, Review, and Implementation
II. EHPD shall develop and implement comprehensive and agency-wide policies and procedures that ensure consistency with, and full implementation of, this Agreement, and incorporate each requirement herein. Unless otherwise noted, all policies, procedures, and manuals shall be developed within 270 days of the Effective Date.
12. EHPD policies and procedures shall define terms clearly, comply with applicable law and the requirements of this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices.
13. EHPD shall review each policy or procedure related to this Agreement 180 days after it is implemented, and armually thereafter, to ensure that the policy or procedure provides effective direction to EHPD personnel and remains consistent with the Agreement, professional police practices, and current law, including incorporating mechanisms to promote and measure accountability and community engagement. EHPD also shall review policies and procedures as necessary upon notice of a policy deficiency dwing audits or reviews. Within 60 days of that review EHPD shall revise the policy or procedure and consult with the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert shall provide the same review and approval ofrevised policies and procedures as with the initial policies and procedures to ensure consistency with this Agreement.
14. EHPD's Department-wide policies and procedures shall be collected in a Departmentlevel policy and procedure manual, and unit-wide policies and procedures (or standard operating procedures) shall be collected in unit-level policy and procedure manuals. · EHPD shall develop and implement policy and procedure manuals that include the following EHPD functions:
a) Field operations, including patrol, supervision task forces, and special operations; b) Internal investigations, including case and records management, administrative
investigations, confidential investigations, parallel criminal and administrative investigations, audits, and officer drug testing; c) Use afforce reporting, reviews, and investigations, including both Supervisor and IAO force investigations and reviews; and in-custody death reviews; d) Criminal investigations; and e) Field and in-service training.
These manuals shall incorporate and otherwise be consistent with the requirements of this Agreement.
15. EHPD shall expressly prohibit all forms of retaliation, whether subtle or direct, including discouragement, intimidation. coercion. or adverse action, against any person, civilian or officer, who reports misconduct, makes a misconduct complaint, or cooperates with an investigation of misconduct. The default penalty for retaliation shall be termination.
9

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 10 of 55
16. EHPD shall develop a policy governing its obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and its progeny. As part of this policy, EHPD shall track and maintain records of all officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make these records available to prosecutors.
17. EHPD shall submit all new and revised policies, procedures, or manuals related to this Agreement to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ for review and comment prior to publication and implementation within 270 days of the Effective Date. If~e Joint Compliance Expert or DOJ object that the proposed new or revised policy, procedure, or manual does not incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, or is inconsistent with this Agreement or the law, it shall note this objection in writing to all parties within 15 business days of the receipt of the policy from EHPD. If neither the Joint Compliance Expert nor DOJ object to the new or revised policy, procedure, or manual, EHPD agrees to implement it within 30 days of it being provided to DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert.
18. EHPD shall have 15 days to resolve any objections to the new or revised policies, procedures, and manuals implementing the specified provisions. If, after this 15-day period has run, DOJ maintains its objection, then the Joint Compliance Expert shall have an additional 15 days to resolve the objection. If either party disagrees with the Joint Compliance Expert's resolution of the objection, either Party may ask the Court to resolve the matter. The Joint Compliance Expert shall determine whether in some instances an additional amount oftime is necessary to ensure full and proper review of policies. Factors to consider in making this determination include: I) complexity of the policy; 2) extent of disagreement regarding policy; 3) number of policies provided simultaneously; and 4) extraordinary circumstances delaying review by DOJ or the Joint Compliance Expert. In determining whether these factors warrant additional time for review, the Joint Compliance Expert shall fully consider the importance of prompt implementation of policies, and shall allow additional time for policy review only where it is clear that additional time is necessary to ensure full and proper review. Any extension to the above timelines by the Joint Compliance Expert shall also toll EHPD's deadline for policy completion.
19. EHPD shall apply policies uniformly and hold officers accountable for complying with EHPD policy and procedure.
20. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall formalize a common template to use for all EHPD policies and General Orders. The template shall include a method for updates and revisions that permits all parties to keep track of former versions of policies and General Orders While clearly labeling ct.UTently operative policies and General Orders. All EHPD policies and General Orders shall be made to conform to this template.
21. Within 365days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall make all new and revised EHPD policies freely available for public review on the Town website, unless there is a reasonable basis for maintaining a specific policy or procedure confidential or unless an
10

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 11 of 55

exemption from disclosure is allowed under State or Federal Freedom of Information law or any other applicable law.

22. EHPD shall review and revise its Code of Conduct within 180 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter, to:

a) describe with specificity permitted and prohibited officer conduct; b) be consistent with the requirements of professional police pmctice and this
Agreement; and c) have an absolute requirement of officer honesty and make termination the
default penalty for dishonesty.

23. EHPD shall submit proposed revisions to its Code of Conduct to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ for review and comment at least 60 days before the implementation of any revision to ensure consistency with this Agreement. The dispute resolution process and associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 of this Agreement shall apply to DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert's review of any new or revised Code of Conduct.

B. Trainin~ on Revised Policies, Procedures, and Practices

24. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall ensure that each officer and employee attends a 2-4 hour training on the content of this Agreement and the responsibilities of each officer and employee pursuant to it.

25. Within 30 days after issuing a policy or procedure pursuant to this Agreement, EHPD shall ensure that all relevant EHPD personnel have received, read, and understand their responsibilities pursoant to the policy or procedure, including the requirement that each officer or employee report violations of policy; that supervisors of all ranks shall be held accountable for identifying and responding to policy or procedure violations by personnel under their command; and that personnel will be held accountable for policy and procedure violations. EHPD shall document that each relevant EHPD officer or other employee has received, read, and sufficiently understands the policy. Training beyond roll-call or similar training will be necessary for many new policies to ensure officers understand and can perform their duties pursuant to the policy.

26. EHPD shall ensure delivery of the one-time and recurrent in-service training

requirements set out throughout this Agreement. As set out herein, EHPD shall provide a

minimum of32 hours ofin-service training each year to each officer, in addition to any

specialized training for officers in certain units, supervisors, etc., and in addition to the

one-time training required by this Agreem"ent. Training in related areas may be delivered

together. (For example, aspects of training in effective community engagement and bias· free policing may be incorpomted into stop, search, and arrest training). The in-service

!
i

training shall not include any firearms training required by the state. The frequency and

subject areas for initial one-time and recurrent in-service training are set out in the

sections below; however, it is anticipated that the frequency and subject areas for in-

II

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 12 of 55

service training in the future will be determined by the training plan this Agreement requires EHPD to develop.

27. EHPD shall provide mandatory supervisory, leadership, and command accountability

training, tailored to each level of supervision and command, of24- 40 hours. All EHPD

supervisors shall receive supervisory training prior to assuming supervisory

responsibilities or serving as an acting supervisor, and shall receive no fewer than 40

hours of supervisory in-service training annually thereafter.

i

28. The supervisory training program shall include instruction in the following topics:

a) techniques for effectively guiding and directing officers and promoting effective and ethical police practices;
b) de-escalating conflict; c) evaluation of written reports; d) reviewing and investigating officer uses of force; e) responding to and investigating allegations of officer misconduct; f) risk.assessment and risk management; g) evaluating officer performance; h) appropriate disciplinary sanctions and non-disciplinary corrective action; and i) using the Risk Management System to facilitate close and effective supervision.

29. EHPD shall submit training curricula and lesson plans, revised pursuant to this Agreement, to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ for review and comment at least 90 days prior to the scheduled date of training delivery. The Joint Compliance Expert shall provide the Parties with written comments regarding the training. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall review all EHPD training curricula and lesson plans promulgated pursuant to this Agreement to determine whether they are consistent with and incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices. The dispute resolution process and associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 of this Agreement shall apply to DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert's review of training curricula and lesson plans.

30. Unless otherwise noted, the training required pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered within 365 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall set out a schedule for delivering all training required by this Agreement.

31. Within 270 days of the Effective _Date, EHPD shall develop and implement documented and approved testing policies and procedures regarding training to ensure that that all testing is valid, reliable, fair, and legally defensible. Both knowledge-based and performance-based tests shall be designed, developed, administered, and scored according to established professional standards ofpractice. Testing policies and procedures shall include detailed test security measures. All tests shall be job-related, testing knowledge and skills required for successful job performance.

12

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 13 of 55

V. BIAS-FREE POLICING

32. EHPD shall deliver police services that are equitable, respectful, and free of unlawful bias, in a manner that promotes broad community engagement and confidence in the Department. In conducting its activities, EHPD shall ensure that members of the public receive equal protection of the law, without bias based on demographic category, and in accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.

A. Bias-Free Policing Training

33. EHPD shall provide all officers with 4 hours of comprehensive and interdisciplinary training on bias-free policing within 180 days of the Effective Date, and 2-4 hours annually thereafter, based on developments in Connecticut or federal law and EHPD policy. Such training shall emphasize that discriminatory policing, in the form of either selective enforcement or non-enforcement of the law, including the selecting or rejecting
of particular policing tactics or strategies, is prohibited by policy and will subject officers
to discipline. This training shall address:

a) methods and strategies for more effective policing that relies upon non-

discriminatory factors;

b) police and community perspectives related to discriminatory policing;

c) constitutional and other legal requirements related to equal protection and

unlawful discrimination, including the requirements of this Agreement;

d) the protection of civil rights as a central part of the police mission and as essential

to effective policing;

e) the existence and impact of arbitrary classifications, stereotyping, and implicit

bias;

f) instruction in the data collection protocols required by this Agreement;

g) identification ofkey decision points where prohibited discrimination can take

effect at both the incident and strategic-plarming levels; and

_

h) methods, strategies, and techniques to reduce misunderstanding, conflict, and

complaints due to perceived bias or discrimination, including problem-oriented

policing strategies.

B. Ensuring Bias-Free Policing

34. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of demographic category in EHPD police practices. This policy shall have the following elements:

a) EHPD's policy on bias-free policing shall prohibit officers from using demographic category (to any extent or degree) in conducting stops or detentions, or activities following stops or detentions, except when engaging in appropriate suspect-specific activity to identify a particular person or persons.

13

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 14 of 55
b) EHPD shall prohibit officer use of proxies for demographic category, including language ability, geographic location, or !J,lanner of dress. c) When officers are seeking one or more specific persons who have been identified or described by their demographic category, or any proxy thereto, officers may rely. on these descriptions only when combined with other appropriate identifying factors, and may not give exclusive attention or undue weight to demographic category. d) Data collection, as set forth in Paragraphs 64(c) and 65 of this Agreement.
35. EHPD shall conduct quarterly analysis, as well as analysis on a cumulative basis, consistent with the methodology employed by the Joint Compliance Expert, of its traffic enforcement activities to ensure officer, squad, and Department compliance with the biasfree policy.
36. EHPD shall develop a formalized procedure for officers to notify arrested foreign nationals of their right to contact their consulate, or to contact the appropriate consular official directly.
37. EHPD shall refer any complaint plausibly implicating the bias-free policy to the lAO and to the Joint Compliance Expert. EHPD shall treat any violation of the bias-free policy as a serious violation. Officers who engage in discriminatory policing will be subjected to discipline, and, where appropriate, possible criminal prosecution.
38. Within I80 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall incorporate concrete requirements regarding bias-free policing and equal protection into its hiring, promotion, and performance assessment processes, including giving significant weight to an individual's documented history of bias-:free policing, as well as using interviews and other methods to assess the individual's ability and willingness to effectively practice bias-free policing. EHPD's hiring plan shall also include steps to encourage qualified minority and other candidates who have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities to apply for positions in EHPD
C. Language Assistance
39. EHPD shall ensure effective communication with and provide timely and meaningful access to police services to all members of the community, regardless of their national origin or limited ability to speak, read, write, or understand English. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:
a) develop and implement a comprehensive language assistance plan and policy that complies, at a minimum, with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.) and other applicable law, and comports with professional policing practices;
b) ensure that all EHPD personnel talfe reasonable steps to provide timely, meaningful language assistance services to LEP individuals they encounter and whenever an LEP individual requests language assistance services;
14

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 15 of 55

c) identity and assess demographic data, specifically the number of LEP individuals

within its jurisdiction and the number of LEP victims and witnesses who seek

EHPD services;

d) use collected demographic and set\lice data to develop and meet specific hiring

goals for bilingual staff;

e) regularly assess the proficiency and qualifications of bilingual staff to become a

EHPD Authorized Interpreter ("EHPDAI");

.

f) ensure that 911 call-takers identity an EHPDAI to respond to an incident

involving an LEP individual. If no EHPDAI is available, the personnel shall

contact a telephonic interpretation service provider. The call-taker shall note in

information to the radio dispatch that the 911 caller is an LEP individual and

indicate the language;

g) develop protocols for interpretation for interrogations and interviews of LEP

individuals, including requiring and ensuring the use of a qualified interpreter for

the taking of any formal statement that could adversely affect a suspect or

witness' legal rights;

h) develop and implement a process for taking, responding to and tracking civilian

complaints and resolutions of complaints filed by LEP individuals;

i) implement a process for recruitment of qualified bilingual personnel to meet

demonstrated service needs. As part of this process, EHPD shall establish

significant and sustained relationships with local and state-wide institutions and

community organizations that can serve as the source of qualified bilingual

applicants and facilitate outreach to such advocates; and

j) implement effective incentives for bilingual employees to become EHPDAls,

such as pay differentials and consideration in performance evaluations,

assignments, and promotions.

40. EHPD shall translate the language assistance plan and policy into Spanish and other

languages as appropriate, and post the English and translated versions in a public area of

the police department building, as well as online, and in any other locations throughout

the Town where individuals go to seek police assistance. EHPD shall distribute the

language assistance plan and policy to a variety of community organizations serving LEP

communities encountered by EHPD.

·

41. EHPD shall distribute its LEP plan and policy to all staff and police personnel, and, within 180 days of the Effective Date provide a minimum of one hour of training to all personnel on providing language assistance services to LEP individuals. This training shall include:

a) EHPD's LEP plan and policies, and the requirements of Title VI and this Agreement;
b) how to access EHPD-authorized, telephonic and in-person interpreters; c) how to work with interpreters in the field; d) cultural diversity and language barrier policing; and e) basic command Spanish for officers assigned to patrol areas with significant LEP
populations.

15

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 16 of 55
42. Within 60 days of Effective Date, the Town shall designate a language access coordinator who shall coordinate and ensure EHPD 's compliance with its language assistance plan.
43. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a process of consultation with representatives of the LEP community to develop and at least annually review: implementation of the language assistance plan, including areas of possible collaboration to ensure its effectiveness; identification of additional languages that would be appropriate for translation of materials~ accuracy and quality of EHPD language assistance services; and concerns, ideas, and strategies for ensuring language access.
VI. STOPS, SEARCHES, AND ARRESTS
44. EHPD shall ensure that all EHPD investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are conducted in accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. EHPD shall ensure that investigatory stops,
searches, and arrests are part of an effective overall crime prevention strategy; are
consistent with community priorities for enforcement; and are carried out even-handedly. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.
A. Investigatory Stops and Detentions
45. EHPD officers shall conduct investigatory stops or detentions only where the officer has reasonable suspicion that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in the commission of a crime.
46. EHPD officers shall not use "canned" or conclusory language in any reports documenting investigatory stops, detentions and searches. Articulation of reasonable suspicion and probable cause shall be specific and clear.
47. EHPD officers shall not use or rely on information known to be materially false or incorrect in effectuating an investigatory stop or detention.
48. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category as a factor, to any extent or degree, in establishing reasonable suspicion or probable cause, except as part of an actual and credible description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.
B. Searches
49. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category in exercising discretion to conduct a warrantless search or to seek a search warrant, except as part of an actual and credible description ofa specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.
50. Where an officer seeks consent for a search, the officer shall affrrmatively inform the subject of his or her right to refuse and to revoke consent at any time, articulate and document the independent legal justification for the search, and document the subject's consent on a written form that explains these rights.
16

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 17 of 55
51. EHPD shall ensure that the consent to search form includes separate signature lines for · civililllls to affirm that they understlllld they have a right to refuse, Md for officers to certify that they have read IUld explained the right to refuse to the civilillll.
52. An affidavit or sworn declaration supporting llll application for a search warrant shall provide lUI accurate, complete, IUld clear description of the offense, the place or thing to be searched, scope of the search, and time and method of the search.
53. A supervisor shall review each request for a search or arrest warrant, including each affidavit or declaration before it is filed by an officer in support of a warrant application, for appropriateness, legality, and conformance with EHPD policy and this Agreement. The supervisor shall as~ess the information contained in the warrant application and supporting documents for authenticity, including an examination for "canned" or conclusory language, inconsistent information, and lack of articulation of a legal basis for the warrant.
54. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those warrllllt applications that are legally unsupported, are in violation ofEHPD policy or this Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The supervisor shall tske appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. The quality and accuracy of search warrants and supportive affidavits or declarations shall be tsken into account in officer performance evaluations.
55. A supervisor shall review the operational plan for the execution of a search warrant Md, absent exceptional circumstances, shall be present for execution of the search warrant. A supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her presence. Once executed, a supervisor shall review the execution of the search warrant. Supervisors shall memorialize their reviews in writing within 24 hours of the execution of a search warr!Ult. The quality of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor's performance evaluations.
56. EHPD shall maintain centrally a log listing each search warrant, the case file where a copy of such warrllllt is maintained, the officer who applied for, Md each supervisor who reviewed the application for a search warrllllt.
C. Arrests
57. EHPD officers shall only arrest an individual where the officer has probable cause. In effectuating llll arrest, EHPD officers shall not rely on information known to be materially false or incorrect. Officers may not consider demographic category in effecting an arrest, except as part of an actual and credible description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.
58. An officer shall inunediately notify a supervisor when effectuating a felony arrest, an arrest where the officer used force, an arrest for obstructing or resisting an officer, My disorderly conduct type arrest, or a custodial arrest for a vehicle infraction, IUld the
17

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 18 of 55

supervisor shall, absent exceptional circumstances, immediately respond to the scene. A supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her presence,

59. The responding supervisor shall approve or disapprove the officer's arrest recommendation, based on the existence ofjustifiable probable cause and EHPD policy. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in the officer's arrest recommendation, including releasing the subject, recommending nondisciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation.

60. At the time of presentment at EHPD headquarters, a watch commander or supervisor shall visually inspect each detainee or arrestee for injury, interview the detainee or arrestee for complaints of pain, and ensure that the detainee or arrestee receives medical attention from an appropriate medical provider, as necessary. The watch commander or supervisor shall document the results of the visual inspection inwriting.

6I. EHPD officers shall complete all arrest reports before the end of shift. EHPD field supervisors shall review each arrest report of officers under their command and shall memorialize their review in writing within 12 hours ofthe arrest, absent exceptional circumstances. Supervisors shall review reports and forms for "canned" or conclusory language, inconsistent information, lackofarticulation of the legal basis for the action, or other indicia that the information in the reports or forms is not authentic or correct.

62. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in making arrests, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall iTack each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken, to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each violation or deficiency is noted in the officer's performance evaluations. The quality of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor's own performance evaluations. EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to conduct reviews ofadequate and consistent quality.

63. A command-level official shall review, in writing, all supervisory reviews related to

arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in ·violation of EHPD policy or this

Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy,

__________,s,tr"'a,.te,gy, tactics, or training,_ The commander's review shall be completed within seven

J

days of receiving the document reporting the event. The commander shall evaluate the

corrective action and recommendations in the supervisor's written report and ensure that

I

all appropriate corrective action is taken, including referring the incident to the lAO for

investigation.

18

t

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 19 of 55

D. Stop and Search Data Collection and Review

64. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy on stops, searches and aeizures. This policy shall have the following elements:

a) A requirement that prior to making traffic stops, officers notify dispatch about known information, including the number of occupants of the vehicle, the perceived race or ethnicity of the occupants, and a description of the basis for the stop;

b) A detailed description of the justification necessary for officers to make stops and arrests;
c) A requirement that all stops, searches, and seizures be documented in an Incident Report that records:

i.

the officer's name and badge number;

ii. date, time, and location of the stop;

iii. duration of the stop;

iv. the apparent race, color or ethnicity of the individual, based on the police

officer's reaSonable observation and perception;

v. the suspected violation that led to the stop;

vi. whether any contraband or evidence was seized from any individual, and

nature of the contraband or evidence;

vii. the post-stop action taken with regard to the violation (including a

warning, a citation, an arrest, or a use of force); and

viii. whether any search was conducted, the kind of search conducted, the basis

for the search, whether the search was consensual or non-consensual, and

the outcome of the search.

65. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a system to collect data on all ·investigatory stops and searches, whether or not they result in an arrest or issuance of a citation. This system shall allow for analysis and searches and also shall be integrated into the EIS. EHPD's stop and search data collection system shall be subject to the review ofthe Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall require officers to document all required information.

66. Officers shall submit documentation of investigatory stops and detentions, and any searches resulting from or proximate to the stop or detention, including a complete and accurate inventory of all property or evidence seized, to their supervisors by the end of the shift in which the police action occurred. Absent exceptional circumstances, within 12 hours of receiving a report on an investigatory stop and detention or search, a supervisor shall review the report and shall document: (a) those investigatory stops and detentions that appear unsupported by reasonable suspicion, (b) those searches that appear to be without legal justification; (c) stops or searches in violation ofEHPD policy or this Agreement, or (d) stops or searches that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training.

19

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 20 of 55

67. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address all violations or deficiencies in investigatory stops or detention or executing a search, including recommending nondisciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for adininistrative or criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken, ifany, to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each violation or deficiency is noted in the officer's performance evaluations. The quality and completeness of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor's own performance evaluations. EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to conduct complete, thorough, and accurate reviews ofofficers' investigatory detentions and searches.

68. EHPD shall develop a protocol for comprehensive analysis, on at least a quarterly basis, of the stop and search data collected. This protocol shall be subject to the review of the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall identify and incorporate appropriate benchmarks for comparison.

69. On at least a semi-annual basis, EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall · issue a report sununarizing the stop and search data collected, the analysis of that data, and the steps taken to correct problems and build on successes. The report shall be publicly available.

70. EHPD shall ensure that all databases containing individual specific data comply fully with federal and state privacy standards governing personally identifying information. EHPD shall develop a process to restrict database access to authorized, identified users who are accessing the information for a specific and identified purpose.

E. First Amendment Right to Observe and Record Officer Conduct

71. EHPD shall ensure that onlookers or bystanders may witness, observe, record, and/or comment on officer conduct, including stops, detentions, searches, arrests, or uses of force in accordance with their rights, immunities, and privileges secured or protected by tlie Constitution or laws of the United States. Officers shall respect the right of civilians to observe, record, and/or verbally comment on or complain about the performance of police duties occurring in public, and EHPD shall ensure that officers understand that exercising this right serves important public purposes.

72. Individuals observing stops, detentions, arrests and other incidents shall be permitted to

remain in the proximity of the incident unless there is an actual and articulable law

enforcement basis to move an individual, such as: an individual's presence would

jeopardize the safety of the officer, the suspect, or others in the vicinity; the individual

violates the law; or the individual incites others to violate the law.

l

73. Individuals shall be permitted to record police officer enforcement activities by camera,

;

video recorder, cell phone recorder, or other means, unless there is an actual and

articulable law enforcement basis to deny pet;mission.

20

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 21 of 55

74. Officers shall not threaten, intimidate, or otherwise discourage an individual from remaining in the proximity of or recording police officer enforcement activities.

75. Officers shall not detain, prolong the detention of, or arrest an individual for remaining in
the proximity of, recording or verbally commenting on officer conduct directed at the individual or a third party, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement bBSis for the detention.

76. Officers shall report to their supervisors whenever they believe they have been recorded by a member of the public.

77. Officers shall not seize or otherwise coerce production of recorded sounds or images, without obtaining a warrant, or order an individual to destroy such recordings. Where an officer has a reBSonable belief that a bystander or witness has captured a recording of critical evidence related to a felony, the officer may secure such evidence for no more than three hours while a legal subpoena, search warrant, or other valid order is obtained.

F. Stop, Search and Arrest Training

78. EHPD shall provide all officers with comprehensive training on stops, searches and arrests, including the requirements of this Agreement, of no fewer than 8 hours within
180 days of the Effective Date and between 4 - 6 hours on an at least an annual basis thereafter. Such training shall be taught by a competent legal instructor with significant experience litigating, or teaching at an accredited law school, Fourth Amendment issues,
and shall:

a) address Fourth Amendment and related law; EHPD policies, and requirements in

this Agreement regarding searches and seizures;

b) address First Amendment and related law in the context of the tights of

individuals to verbally dispute, observe, and record officer conduct;

c) address the difference between various police contacts by the scope and level of

police intrusion; between probable cause, reBSonable suspicion and mere

speculation; and voluntary consent from mere acquiescence to police authority;

d) provide guidance on the facts anil circumstances that should be considered in

initiating, conducting, terminating, and expanding an investigatory stop or

detention;

e) provide guidance on proper and improper use ofpretextual stops.

f) provide guidance on the level of permissible intrusion when conducting searches,

such as "pat-downs" or "frisks";

g) provide guidance on the legal requirements for conducting searches, with and

without a warrant;

h

rovide guidance on the nature and scope of searches bBSed on the level of

permissible intrusion on an individual's privacy interests, including searches

conducted pursuant to probation or parole release provisions;

i) specify the procedures for executing searches, including handling, recording, and

taking custody of seized property or evidence;

21

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 22 of 55
j) provide guidance on effecting an arrest with and without an arrest warrant; and k) provide guidance regarding the nature and scope of searches incident to an arrest.
VII. USE OF FORCE
79. EHPD shall develop and implement force policies, training, and review mechanisms that . ensure that force by EHPD officers is used in accordance with the rights, privileges, and immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that any unreasonable uses of force are identified IUld responded to appropriately. EHPD shall ensure that officers use non-force techniques to effect compliance with police orders whenever feasible; use physical force only when strictly necessary; use physical force in a manner that avoids unnecessary injury to officers and civilians; and de-escalate the physical use of force at the earliest possible moment. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements set out below.
A. Use ofFon:e Prinl!iples
80. EHPD uses of force, regardless of the type of force or weapon used, shall abide by the· following requirements:
a) officers shall use advisements, warnings, and verbal persuasion, when possible, before resorting to physical force;
b) physical force shall be de-escalated immediately as resistance decreases;
c) supervisors shall determine whether the action or inaction of officers using physical force, or of other EHPD officers on scene, resulted in the need to use physical force;
d) officers will use disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a
subject, summoning reinforcements, IUldlor calling in specialized units, when possible, in order to reduce the need for physical force IUld increase officer and civilian safety; e) officers shall allow individuals time to submit to arrest before physical force is used wherever possible;
0 officers shall not use neck holds or a strike to the head with a hard object, except
where lethal force is authorized; g) using physical force against persons in handcuffs is prohibited except in
emergencies in which a reasonable officer would believe that bodily harm to another person or persons is imminent; h) unholstering and pointing a firearm at an individual constitutes a use of force and shall be limited accordingly; IUld i) immediately following a use of physical force officers IUld, upon arrival, a supervisor, shall inspect and observe subjects for injury or complaints of pain and obtain immediately any necessary medical care. This may require an officer to provide emergency medical care until professional medical care providers are onscene.
22

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 23 of 55
B. General Use of Force Policy
81. EHPD shall develop and implement an overarching agency-wide use offorce policy that complies with applicable law and comports with professional police practices. The comprehensive use offorce policy shall include all force techniques, technologies, and weapons, both lethal and less-lethal, that are available to EHPD officers. The comprehensive use offurce policy shall clearly define and describe each force option and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The general use of force policy will incorporate the use of force principles articulated above and shall specify that the unreasonable use of force will subject officers to discipline, possible criminal prosecution, and/or civil liability.
82. In addition to a primary agency-wide use of force policy, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and protocols for each authorized weapon, includiog each of the types of force addressed below. No officer shall carry any weapon or use force that is not authorized by the Department. EHPD use of force policies shall include training and certification requirements that each officer must meet before being permitted to carry and used the authorized weapon.
C. Use of Firearms
83. Officers shall not possess or use unauthorized firearms or ammunition, or obtain service ammunition from any source, except through official EHPD channels. All officers' firearms shall be filled with the capacity number of rounds while on duty.
84. Officers shall not fire at or from a moving vehicle, unless use oflethal force is justified by something other than the threat from the moving vehicle; shall not intentionally place themselves in the path of or reach inside a moving vehicle; and where possible shall attempt to move out of the path of a moving vehicle before discharging their weapon.
85. Officers shall successfully qualify with each firearm they are authorized to use or carry on-duty pursuant to Connecticut requirements. Officers who fail to qualify shall immediately relinquish those firearms on which they failed to qualify. Those officers who still fail to qualify after remedial training within a reasonable time shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment.
86. Critical firearm discharges by officers on- or off-duty shall be reported and investigated. Data and analysis related to critical firearm discharges shall be tracked in EIS and EHPD's Use of Force Annual Report.
D. Electronic Control Weapons
87. EI-ll'D shall limit the use of ECWs to only those situations in which such force is necessary to protect the officer, the subject, or another party from immediate physical harm.
23

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 24 of 55

88. Unless it would present a danger to the officer or others, officers shall issue a verbal warning to the subject that the ECW will be used prior to use. Where feasible, the officer will defer ECW application a reasonable time to allow the subject to comply with the warning.
89. ECWs will not be used where such deployment may cause serious injury or death from situational hazards, including falling, drowning, losing control of a moving vehicle, or becoming ignited from the presence of a potentially explosive or flammable material or substance, except where lethal force would be permitted.
90. After one standard ECW cycle (5 seconds), the officer shall reevaluate the situation to determine if subsequent cycles are necessary. Officers shall be trained in the risks of prolonged or repeated ECW exposure, including that exposure to the ECW for longer than IS seconds (whether due to mnltiple applications or continuous cycling) may increase the risk of death or serious injury. Officers shall clearly articulate and justifY each and every cycle used against a subject in a written Use of Force Report.
91. ECWs shall not be used irt drive stun mode as a pain compliance technique.. ECWs shall . be used in drive stun mode only to supplement the probe mode to complete the incapacitation circuit, or as a countermeasure to gain separation between officers and the subject so that officers can consider anoth~ force option.
92. ECWs may not be used against pregnant women, elderly persons, children, visibly frail persons or persons with a slight build and persons in medical or mental crisis, except where lethal force would be permitted, or the officer has reasonable cause to believe there is an inuninent risk of serious bodily self-harm and lesser force options are not feasible. Officers shall be trained in the increased risks ECWs may present to the above listed vulnerable populations.
93. ECWs may not be applied to a subject's head, neck, and genitalia, absent exigent circumstances. ECWs shall not be used on handcuffed persons, except in emergencies in which a reasonable officer would believe that serious bodily harm to another person or persons is inuninent.
94. Officers shall receive annual ECW certifications, which should consist of physical competency; weapon retention; EI-IPD policy, including any policy changes; technology changes; and scenario-based training.
95. Officers shall be trained in and follow protocols developed by EHPD in conjunction with medical professionals, on their responsibilities following ECW use, including: (a) the removal ofECW probes, including requiring medical or specially-trained EHPD personnel to remove probes that are embedded in a subject's skin, except for probes that are embedded in a subject's head, throat, groin, or other sensitive area, which should be removed by medical personnel only; (b) transporting to a hospital for evaluation all subjects who: have been exposed to prolonged application (more than 15 seconds); are a member of one of the vnlnerable populations listed above; had an ECW used against them in circumstances presenting a heightened risk of harm; or were kept in prone
24

I I
····- _,

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 25 of 55

restraint after ECW use; and (c) monitoring all subjects who have received ECW application while in police custody.

96. Officers shall report all ECW discharges, except for training discharges, to their supervisor and the communications command center as soon as possible.

97. EHPD shall develop and implement integrity safeguards on the use ofECWs to ensure compliance with EHPD policy, including conducting random and directed audits ofECW deployment data. The audits should compare the downloaded data to the officer's report on use of force. Discrepancies within the audit should be addressed and appropriately investigated.

98. EHPD shall include the number of ECWs in operation and the number ofECW uses as elements of the EIS. Analysis of this data shall include a determination of whether ECWs result in an increase in the use afforce and whether officer and subject injuries are affected by the rate ofECW use. ECW data and analysis shall be included in EHPD's Use of Force Annual Report.

E. Use of Force Reporting Policy and Use of Force Report

99. EHPD shall develop and implement a single, uniform, reporting system pursuant to a Use of Force Reporting policy and using a single, uniform, Use of Force Report. All officers using or observing force above un-resisted handcuffing shall report in writing, before the end ofshift, the use of force in a Use ofFOJCe Report. The Use of Force Report shall include: (a) a detailed account of the incident from the officer's perspective; (b) the reason for the initial police presence; (c) a specific description of the acts that led to the use of force; (d) the level of resistance encountered; and (e) a description of every type of force used. The use of force reporting policy shall explicitly prohibit the use of "canned" or conclusory language in all reports documenting use of force.

100. Officers who use or observe force and fail to report it, shall be held strictly accountable, and face discipline up to and including termination, regardless of whether the force was reasonable.

101. Each officer in a position to see or hear a use of force shall complete a Use of Force Report, before the end of the shift, documenting the officer's own actions and observations.

102. Officers' Use of Force Reports (whether primary or supplemental) shall completely and accurately describe the use offorce. Officers shall be held strictly accountable for material omissions or inaccuracies in the Use of Force Report.

I 03. Officers who use or observe force shall notify their supervisors immediately following

any use of force or upon receipt of an allegation of unreasonable or unreported use of

force by any officer.

·

25

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 26 of 55

104. Use of Force Reports shall be maintained centrally by the lAO for tracking and analysis purposes, as required by this Agreement.

105. At least annually, EHPD shall analyze the year's force data, including force-related outcome data, to determine significant trends; identify and correct deficiencies revealed by' this analysis; and document its findings in a public report.

F. Force Reviews by Supervisors

106. Absent exceptional circums1ances, the direct supervisor ofany officer using force, upon notification ofa use of force or allegation of excessive force, shall respond to the scene of the use of force. If a supervisor is unable to respond to the scene, the supervisor shall document in the case file the exigent circums1ances preventing his or her presence. The direct supervisor of any officer using force shall review all uses of force except those incidents involving a serious use of force, a use of force that appears potentially unjustified or criminal, a use of force by EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or a use of force reassigned to the lAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the lAO. No supervisor who was involved in the incident, including by participating in or ordering the force being investigated, shall be responsible for the investigation of the incident.

I 07. The reviewing supervisor shall:

a) respond to the scene, examine the subject of the force for injury, interview the

subject for complaints of pain, and ensure that the subject receives medical

attention from an appropriate medical provider;

b) notifY the lAO immediately of the use afforce and obtain a use of force tracking

number;

·

c) identifY and collect all relevant evidence and shall evaluate that evidence to

determine whether the use of force: (i) was consistent with EHPD policy and/or

(ii) raises any policy, training, tactical or equipment concerns;

d) ensure collection ofall evidence to establish material facts related to the use of

force, including aUdio and video recordings, and photographs and other

documentation of injuries or the absence of injuries;

e) ensure ,the canvass for and interview of civilian witnesses. In a,ddition, civilian

witnesses should be encouraged to provide and sign a written report in their own

words;

f) ensure that all officer witnesses provide a statement regarding the incident.

Officers involved in a use afforce incident shall be separated until they are

interviewed. Group interviews shall be prohibited. Supervisors shall ensure that

all use offorce reports identifY all officers who were involved in the incident or

were on the scene when it occurred. Supervisors shall not ask officers or other

witnesses leading questions that improperly suggest justifications for the

officers' conduct, when such questions are contrary to appropriate law

enforcement techniques. Reviewing supervisors shall record all interviews with

subjects and civilian witnesses and all follow-up interviews with officers;

g) review all Use of Force Reports and ensure that all reports include the information

required by this Agreement and EHPD policy; and

26

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 27 of 55

h) consider all relevant evidence, including circumstantial, direct, and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations, if feasible. Supervisors will make all reasonable efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between the officer, subject, and witness statements, as well as inconsistencies between the level of force claimed by the officer and the subject's injuries. EHPD will train all of its supervisors on the factors to consider when evaluating credibility. Where a reasonable and trained supervisor would determine that there may have been misconduct, the supervisor shall immediately notifY the lAO to respond to the scene.

I08. Each supervisor shall provide a written report to the shift commander by the end of the shift documenting the supervisor's preliminary determination of the appropriateness of the use afforce, including whether the force was reasonable and within policy; whether the injuries appear proportionate to the use of force described; and summaries ofsubject, witness, and officer statements.

I09. Each supervisor shall complete and document a use offorce supervisory review using a Supervisor's Force Review Report, within 72 hours of learning ofthe use afforce. This Report shall include:

a) the supervisor's narrative description ofthe incident, including a precise

description of the evidence that either justifies or fails to justifY the officer's

conduct based on the supervisor's independent review of the facts and

circumstances of the incident;

b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone

numbers, and addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there

are no known witnesses, the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations

in which witnesses were present but circumstances prevented the author of the

report from determining the identification, phone number or address of those

witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should also include

all available identifYing information for anyone who refuses to provide a

statement;

c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use afforce;

d) the reviewing supervisor's evaluation of the basis for the use afforce,

including a determination of whether the officer's actions appear to be within

EHPD policy and consistent with state and federal law; whether there is any

evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of the incident for

tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have

been avoided through the use of de-escalation techniques or lesser force options;

. .

and

~

e) documentation of any non-disciplinary corrective action taken.

of 110. Upon completion the Supervisor's Force Review Report, the investigating supervisor

I

shall forward the report to the patrol commander, who shall review the report to ensure

that it is complete and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

27

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 28 of 55

I .

The patrol commander shall order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant evidence that may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the findings.

Ill. Where the fmdings of the Supervisory Force Review Report are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the patrol commander shall modify the findings after consultation with the reviewing supervisor, and document the reasons for this modification, including the specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification. The patrol commander shall counsel the reviewing supervisor regarding the modification and of any investigative deficiencies that led to it, and order corrective action where appropriate. The patrol commander shall be held accountable for the accuracy and completeness of Use of Force Supervisory Review Reports completed by supervisors under the command ofthe patrol commander.

112. Where a reviewing supervisor repeatedly conducts deficient investigations, the supervisor shall receive the appropriate corrective action, including training, demotion, and/or removal from a supervisory position.

113. Whenever a reviewing supervisor or patrol commander finds evidence of apparent criminal conduct by an officer, he or she shall suspend the investigation immediately and notify the Chief of Police, the lAO, the State Attorney's Office, and the State Police. The lAO shall immediately notify the FBI and USAO, where appropriate.

114. When the patrol commander finds that the supervisor force review is complete and the

fmctings are supported by the evidence, the force review file shall be forwarded to the

Chief of Police and the IAO. The Chief of Police and the lAO shall review the force

review to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by the evidence.

At the dis~"retion of the Chief of Police, his designee, or the lAO, a use of force review

may be assigned or re-assigned to another supervisor, whether within or outside of the

shift in which the incident occurred, or may be returned to the patrol commander for

further review or analysis. This assignment or re-assignment shall be explained in

wn.ti.ng.

l

115. Where, after 11 force review, a use of force is found to be out of policy, the Chiefof Police shall direct and ensure appropriate discipline, including forwarding the outcome of the force review to the Board of Police Commissioners for disciplinary action. Where the use of force indicates policy, training, tactical, or equipment concerns, the Chief of Police shall ensure also that necessary training is delivered and that policy, tactical or equipment concerns are resolved.

G. Force Investigations by Internal Affain

116. EHPD shall establish a single, uniform reporting and investigation/review system for all serious uses offorce, including critical firearm discharges.

117. EHPD shall ensure that all serious uses of force are investigated fully and fairly by individuals with appropriate expertise, independence and investigative skills to ensure
28

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 29 of 55

that uses of force that are contrary to law or policy are identified and appropriately resolved; that policy, training, equipment, or tactical deficiencies related to the use of
force are identified and corrected; and that investigations of sufficient quality to ensure
that officers are held accountable as necessary. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:

a) Provide for an lAO to conduct administrative investigations of serious uses of force, uses of force by EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or uses of force reassigned to the lAO by the Chiefof Police or designee or the lAO.

b) Within 90 days from the Effective Date, EHPD shall recruit, assign, and train a sufficient number of lAOs to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement. Prior to performing lAO duties, lAOs shall receive a minimum of 24 hours of force investigation training; call out and investigative protocols; and proper roles of on· scene counterparts such as crime scene technicians, State Attorney's Office, State Police EHPD detectives, and Joint Compliance Expert; and investigative equipment and techniques. lAOs shall also receive annual in·service training on proper force investigations.

c) EHPD shall create a force investigation procedural manual to ensure consistency with this Agreement. The procedural manual shall include:

i.

definitions of all relevant terms;

ii. clear statements of the mission and authority of the lAO regarding force

investigations;

iii. procedures on report writing;

iv. procedures for collecting and processing evidence;

v. procedures to ensure appropriate separation of criminal and administrative

· investigations in the event of compelled subject officer statements;

vi. procedures for consulting with the State Attorney's Office and the State

Police, including ensuring that administrative investigations are not

unnecessarily delayed while a criminal investigation is pending;

vii. scene management procedures; and

viii. management procedures.

118. Where appropriate to ensure the fact and appearance ofimpartiality, investigations of serious uses of force or force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer shall be referred for investigation to an independent and highly competent entity outside EHPD.

119. In every incident involving a serious use offorce, or any use offorce indicating apparent

criminal conduct by an officer, the supervisor shall immediately notify the lAO and obtain a use offorce tracking number.

·~

120. The lAO shall respond to the scene of every incident involving a serious use of force,

I

any use offorce indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer, any use of force by

I

an officer of a rank higher than sergeant, or as ordered by the Chief of Police or designee.

'

29

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 30 of 55

121. The lAO shall immediately notify and consult with the State Attorney's Office, State Police, FBI and USAO regarding any use offorce incident indicating apparent criminal conduct by EHPD personnel, or any use of force in which an officer discharged his firearm, or where an individual has died while in or proximate to the custody ofEHPD.

122. If the case may proceed criminally, or where EHPD requests a criminal prosecution, any compelled interview of the subject officers shall be delayed, consistent with Paragraphs 148 and 150 of this Agreement. No other part of the investigation shall be held in abeyance unless specifically authorized by the Chief of Police in consultation with the agency conducting the criminal investigation.

123. The lAO shall complete its administrative use of force investigation within 60 days from the use of force. At the conclusion of each use of force investigation, the lAO shall prepare a report on the investigation. The rcp<>rt shall include:

a) a narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the evidence that either justifies or fails to justify the officer's conduct based on the lAO's independent review of the facts and circumstances of the incident;
b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone
numbers, and addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there
are no known witnesses, the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations
in which witnesses were present but circumstances prevented the author of the
report from determining the identification, phone number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a statement; c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force; d) the lAO's evaluation of the basis for the use of force, including a determination of
whether the officer's actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent with
state and federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have been avoided through the use of deescalation techniques or lesser force options;
e) if a weapon was used, documentation that the officer's certification and training
for the weapon are current; and f) documentation of any disciplinary and/or non-disciplinary corrective action
recommended.

H. Review by Chief of Police

124. The Chief of Police shall review all force reviews by supervisors and force investigations

by the lAO. The Chief of Police shall:

·

a) review each force review and investigation within 30 days ofreceiving the force review/investigation report to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence;

30

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 31 of 55
b) order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant evidence that may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the findings. Where the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the Chief of Police or his/her designee shall modify the findings and document the reasons for this modification, including the SPecific evidence or analysis supporting the modification;
c) determine whether the force violated EHPD policy. If the force violated EHPD policy, the Chief of Police of his/her designee shall take appropriate disciplinary action, including referring the review or investigation report to the Board of Police Commissioners for appropriate disciplinary action;
d) detemiine whether the incident raises policy, training, equipment, or tactical concerns, and refer such incidents to the appropriate commander or supervisor .within EHPD to ensure they are resolved;
e) direct shift supervisors to take and document non-disciplinary corrective action to enable or encourage an officer to improve his or her performance; and
f) document his or her findings within 45 days of receiving the force review or investigation.
J. Use of Force Training
125. EHPD shall provide all EHPD officers with 4-8 hours of use of force training within 365 days of the Effective Date, and 4 - 8 hours of use offeree training on at least an annual basis thereafter, including information on developments in applicable law and EHPD policy. EHPD shall coordinate and review all use of force policy and training to ensure quality, consistency, and compliance with the Constitution, Connecticut law, this Agreement and EHPD policy. EHPD's use of force training shall include the following topics:
a) EHPD's use of force model, as described in this Agreement; b) proper use of force decision-making; c) use of force reporting requirements; d) the Fourth Amendment and related Jaw; e) role-playing scenarios and interactive exercises that illustrate proper use of force
decision-making, including training officers on the importance and impact of ethical decision making and peer intervention; f) the proper deployment and use of all intermediate weapons or technologies, including canines and ECWs; g) de-escalation techniques that encourage officers to make arrests without using force, and instruction that disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a subject, summoning reinforcements, calling in specialized units, or delaying arrest may be the appropriate response to a situation, even when the use of force would be legally 'ustified· h) threat assessment; i) basic crisis intervention and interacting with people with mental illnesses, including instruction by mental health practitioners and an emphasis on deescalation strategies; j) factors to consider in initiating or continuing a pursuit;
31

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 32 of 55
k) appropriate training on conflict management; and I) supervisors of all ranks, as part of their initial and annual in-service supervisory
training, shall receive additional training in conducting use offorce reviews and investigations; strategies for effectively directing officers to minimize uses of force and to intervene effectively to prevent or stop unreasonable force; and supporting officers who report unreasonable or unreported force, or who are retaliated against for using only reasonable force or attempting to prevent unreasonable force.
126. Included in the use afforce training set out above. EHPD shall require firearms training for all officers within 365 days of the Effective Date and at least twice yearly thereafter. EHPD firearms training shall:
a) require officers to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and other service firearms on a semi-annual basis;
b) require cadets, officers in probationary periods, and officers who return from unarmed status to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and other service firearms before such personnel are permitted to carry and use firearms;
c) incorporate professional night training, stress training (e.g., training in using a firearm after WJdergoing physical exertion) and proper use of force decisionmaking training, including continU'ous threat assessment techniques, in the annual in-service training program; and
d) ensure that firearm instructors critically observe students and provide corrective instruction regarding deficient firearm techniques and failure to utilize safe gWJ handling procedures at all times.
VID. CIVILIAN COMPLAINTS, INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS, AND DISCIPLINE
127. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all allegations of officer misconduct are received and are fully and fairly investigated; that all investigative findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence and documented in writing; and that all officers who commit misconduct are held accountable pursuant to a disciplinary system that is fair and consistent. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD and the Town shall implement the requirements below.
A. Reporting Mis~onduct
128, EHPD shall require that all officers and employees report apparent misconduct by another EHPD officer or employee to a supervisor or directly to the lAO for review and investigation. Where apparent misconduct is reported to a supervisor, the supervisor shall immediately document and report this information to the lAO. Failure to report or document apparent misconduct or criminal behavior shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination of employment. The default discipline for a failure to report criminal behavior shall be termination.
32

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 33 of 55

B. Complaint Information

129. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, the Town and EHPD shall develop and implement a program to ellSUl'e broad knowledge throughout the East Haven community about how to make misconduct complaints, and the availability of effective mechanisms for making misconduct complaints. The requirements below shall be incorporated into this program.

130. The Town and EHPD shall make complaint forms and informational materials, including

brochures and posters, available at appropriate government properties, including EHPD

headquarters, EHPD and Town websites, Town Hall, and the public library. Individuals

shall be able to submit misconduct complaints through the EHPD and City websites and

these websites shall include complaint forms and information regarding how to file

I

misconduct complaints.

I

131. At the locations listed above, EHPD shall post and maintain a permanent placard

!

describing the external complaint process that includes relevant contact information, such as telephone numbers, email addresses, and Internet sites. EHPD will require all officers

I
! '

to carry complaint forms, containing basic complaint information, in their department

vehicles at all times. Officers shall also provide complaint forms and the officer's name

and badge number upon request. If an individual objects to an officer's conduct, that

officer will inform the individual ofhis or her right to make a complaint and shall provide

the complaint form, informational brochure, and the officer's name and badge number. If

the individual indicates that he or she would like to make a complaint, the officer shall

immediately inform his or her supervisor.

132. Complaint forms and related informational materials shall be made available and posted in English and Spanish.

C. Complaint Intake, Classilillation, and Tra11king

133. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall revise policy and train all officers and supervisors to ensure that all officers properly handle complaint intake, including how to properly provide complaint materials and information; and the consequences for failing to take complaints; and strategies for turning complaints into positive police-civilian interactions.

134. The refusal to accept a misconduct complaint, discouraging the filing of a misconduct complaint, or providing false or misleading inf9rmation about filing a misconduct complaint, shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination.

135. EHPD shall accept all misconduct complaints, including anonymous and third-party

complaints, for review and investigation. Complaints may be made in writing or verbally, in person or by mail, telephone (br TDD), facsimile, or electronic mail. Any

I

LEP individual who wishes to file a complaint about an EHPD officer or employee shall

be provided with a complaint form in Spanish or, for less common languages in East Haven, EHPD will make arrangements to ensure that the LEP person is able to make a complaint. Such complaints will be investigated in accordance with this Agreement.

I
i

33

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 34 of 55
I
136. All officers and employees who receive a misconduct complaint in the field shall immediately inform a supervisor of the misconduct complaint so that the supervisor can ensure proper intake of the complaint. All misconduct complaints received outside of EHPD headquarters shall be forwarded to the lAO before the end of the shift in which it was received.
137. EHPD shall ensure that allegations of officer misconduct made during criminal prosecutions or civil lawsuits are identified and investigated as misconduct complaints.
138. Within three business days of the receipt of a misconduct complaint, the lAO shall determine whether the complaint will be assigned to the subject officer(s)' supervisor(s) or retained by the lAO for an administrative investigation. The lAO shall also determine whether the misconduct complaint warrants a referral to the State Attorney's Office and/or USAO for a criminal investigation. EHPD shall develop and implement a complaint classification protocol that is allegation-based rather than anticipated outcomebased to guide the lAO in determining where a complaint should be assigned. This complaint classification protocol shall ensure that the lAO investigates allegations · including:
a) serious misconduct, including but not limited to: criminal misconduct; unreasonable use of fotce; discriminatory policing; false arrest or planting evidence; untruthfulness/false statements; unlawful search; retaliation; sexual misconduct; domestic violence; and theft;
b) misconduct implicating the conduct of the supervisory or command leadership of the subject officer; and
c) any other violations as determined by the Chief of Police.
139. The Chiefof Police shall not be authorized to personally conduct an investigation of officer misconduct or violation of policy, nor prevent the conduct ofsuch an investigation. A misconduct complaint investigation may not be conducted by any officer who used force during the incident; whose conduct led to the injury of a person; who authorized the conduct that Jed to the reported incident or complaint; or who was on the scene of the incident leading to the allegation of misconduct.
140. EHPD shall track, as a separate category of misconduct complaints, allegations of discriminatory policing, along with characteristics of the complainants. EHPD shall ensure that complaints of discriminatory policing are captured and tracked appropriately, even if the complainant does not specifically label the misconduct as such.
141. Within 180 days of the Effective date, the lAO shall develop and implement a centralized numbering and tracking system for all misconduct complaints. Upon the receipt of a complaint, the lAO shall promptly assign a unique numerical identifier to the complaint, which shall be provided to the complainant at the time the complaint is made. Where a misconduct complaint is received in the field, a supervisor shall obtain the unique numerical identifier and provide this identifier to the complainant.
34

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 35 of 55

142. EHPD's centralized numbering and tracking system shall maintain accurate and reliable data regarding the number, nature, and status of all misconduct complaints, from initial intake to final disposition, including investigation timeliness and notification to the complainant of the interim status and final disposition of the investigation. This system shall be used to determine the status of complaints and to confirm that a complaint was received, as well as for periodic assessment of compliance with EHPD policies and procedures and this Agreement, including requirements on the timeliness of administrative investigations.

143. Where a supervisor receives a misconduct complaint in the field alleging that misconduct has just occurred, the supervisor shall gather all relevant information and evidence and provide this information and evidence to the lAO. This information includes the names and contact information for all complainants and witnesses, the names of all EHPD officers and employees on the scene at the time of the alleged misconduct, and any available physical evidence such as voluntarily provided video or audio recordings, or documentation ofthe existence of such recordings where the witness chooses not to provide the recording. The supervisor shall take photographs of apparent injuries or the absence thereof.

D. Investigation of Complaints

144. Investigations of officer misconduct shall be as thorough as necessary to reach reliable

and complete findings. The misconduct Complaint investigator shall interview each

complainant in person, absent exceptional circumstances, and this interview shall be

i

recorded in its entirety, absent specific, documented objection by the complainant. All

officers in a position to hear or see an incident, or any significant event before or after an

incident, shall provide a written statement regarding their observations, even to state that

they did not see or hear anything.

145. Where the alleged misconduct is particularly serious or information from an officer or other witness may be necessary to resolve an allegation, the investigator shall conduct an in-person interview of the officer or other witness. Each officer, witness, and complainant shall be interviewed separately. An EHPDAI not involved in the underlying complaint will be used when taking statements or conducting interviews of any LEP complainant or witness.

146. All officer and civilian witness statements should be documented in their entirety,

including any statement that the witness saw or heard nothing. All interviews should be

i

recorded. All recordings shall be stored and maintruned in a secure location within lAO.

I

147. EHPD shall require officers to cooperate with administrative investigations, including

I

appearing for an interview when requested by an EHPD investigator and providing all

J

requested documents and evidence. Supervisors shall be notified when an officer under

their supervision is summoned as part of an administrative investigation and shall

facilitate the officer's appearance, absent extraordinary and documented circumstances.

35

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 36 of 55

148. The subject offic~r shall not be compelled to provide a statement to administrative investigators where there is a potential criminal investigation or prosecution of the officer, until consultation with the criminal investigative agency (e.g. State Attorney's Office or USAO) and approval by the Chief of Police. BHPD, the Town, and the State Attorney's Office shall develop and implement protocols to ensure that the criminal and administrative investigations are kept appropriately separate after a subject officer has provided a compelled statement.

149. Nothing in this Agreement or BHPD policy shall hamper an officer's obligation to provide a public safety statement regarding a work related incident or activity. EHPD shall make clear that all officer statements in incident reports, arrest reports, use of force reports and similar documents, and statements made in interviews such as those conducted in conjunction with BHPD's routine use offorce review and investigation process, are part of each officer's routine professional duties and are not compelled statements. Where an officer believes that providing a verbal or written statement will be self-incriminating the officer shall affirmatively state this and shall not be compelled to provide a statement without prior consultation with the criminal investigative agency (e.g. State Attorney's Office or USAO), and approval by the Chiefof Police.

150. If at any time during complaint intake or investigation the investigator determines that there may have been criminal conduct on the part of any officer or employee, the investigator shall immediately notify the Chief of Police and the Joint Compliance Expert, and shall consult with the State Attorney's Office, USAO and the local office of the FBI regarding the initiation of a criminal investigation, as appropriate. Where an allegation is investigated criminally, the lAO shall continue with the administrative investigation of the allegation, except that it may delay or decline to conduct an interview of the subject officer(s) or other witnesses until completion of the criminal investigation unless, after comultation with the investigating agency and the Chief of Police, such interviews are deemed appropriate.

151. In each investigation, EHPD shall consider all relevant evidence including circumstantial, direct and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations based upon that .evidence. There will be no automatic preference for an officer's statement over a nonofficer's statement, nor will EHPD disregard a witness' statement merely because the witness has some connection to the complainant or because of any criminal history. During its investigation, EHPD may take into account the criminal history of a complainant that involves a crime of dishonesty. EHPD may also take into account the record of any involved officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between witness statements.

152. The misconduct investigator shall explicitly identify and recommend one of the following dispositions for each alleg!ltion of misconduct in an administrative investigation:

--'i' i

a) "Unfounded," where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the

i

evidence, that the alleged misconduct did not occur or did not involve the subject

officer;

36

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 37 of 55

b) "Sustained," where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alleged misconduct did occur;
c) "Not Sustained," where the investigation is unable to determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, whether the alleged misconduct occurred; or
d) "Exonerated," where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alleged conduct did occur but did not violate EHPD policies, procedures, or training.

153. In addition to determining whether the officer committed the alleged misconduct,

administrative investigations shall assess and document whether: (a} the police action

was in compliance with training and legal standards; (b) the use of different tactics should

or could have been employed to achieve a potentially better outcome; (c) the incident

indiCijteS a need for additional training, counseling or other non-disciplinary corrective

measures; and (d) the incident suggests that EHPD should revise its policies, strategies,

tactics, or training. This information shall be shared with the relevant commander{s) who

shall document the commander's disagreement or agreement with these findings; refer

any recommendations to the appropriate individual to implement the recommended

change; document the implementation of these recommendations; and return the

documentation to the lAO.

·

154. EHPD shall respond to each complaint within 48 hours and shall resolve each stage of a complaint investigation in a reasonable time frame. EHPD shall complete all investigations of civilian complaints within 60 days of receiving the complaint. Upon a showing of good cause, officers may receive no more than two extensions of up to 30 days each. Requests for extensions must be in writing and approved by the Chief.

155. A misconduct investigation shall not be closed simply because the complaint is withdmwn or the alleged victim is unwilling or unable to provide additional information beyond the initial complaint, or because the complainant pled guilty or was found guilty of an offense.

156. Each misconduct complainant will be kept informed periodically regarding the status of the investigation. The complainant will be notified of the outcome of the investigation, in writing, within ten business days of the completion of the investigation, including regarding whether any disciplinary or non-disciplinary action was taken.

E. Discipline

157. EHPD shall ensure that discipline for sustained allegations of misconduct is based on the nature of the allegation and defmed, consistent, mitigating and aggravating factors, rather than the identity of the officer or his or her status within EHPD or the broader communicy. EWD and the Town shall develop and implement procedures to ensure that discipline is fair and consistent including:

158. EHPD, in consultation with the Board ofpoJice Commissioners and the Town, shall create a disciplinary matrix that:

37

------ ·-j

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 38 of 55

a) establishes a presumptive range of discipline for each type of rule violation; b) increases the presumptive discipline based on both an officer's prior violations of
the same or other rules; c) sets out defined mitigating·or aggravating factors; d) requires that any departure from the presumptive range of discipline must be
justified in writing; e) · provides that EHPD shall not take only non-disciplinary corrective action in cases
in which the disciplinary matrix calls for the imposition of discipline; and f) provides that EHPD shall consider whether non-disciplinary corrective action also
is appropriate in a case where discipline has been imposed._

159. EHPD, the Board of Police Commissioners, and the Town shall establish a unified

i .

system for reviewing sustained fmdings and assessing the appropriate level of discipline

pursuant to EHPD's disciplinary matrix to facilitate consistency in the imposition of

discipline. All disciplinary decisions shall be documented, including the rationale behind

any decision to deviate from the level of discipline set out in the disciplinary matrix.

160. EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall develop and establish written policies and procedures to ensure that the Town Attorney provides close guidance to EHPD and the Board at the disciplinary stage to ensure that EHPD's and the Board's · disciplinary decisions are as fair and legally defensible as possible.

IX. SUPERVISION AND MANAGEMENT

161. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that EHPD supervisors provide the close and effective supervision necessary for officers to improve and grow as police officers; to police actively and effectively, and to identify, correct, and prevent misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.

A. Duties of Supervisors

162. EHPD supervisors shall provide, and shall be held accountable for providing, the close and effective supervision necessary to direct and guide officers. Close and effective supervision requires that supervisors: (a) respond to the scene of certain arrests; (b) review each arrest report; (c) respond to the scene of uses afforce; (d) investigate each use afforce (except those investigated by the lAO); (e) confirm the accuracy and completeness of officers' written reports; (f) respond to each complaint of misconduct; (f) ensure officers are working actively to engage the community and increase public trust and safety; and (g) proVide counseling, redirection, support to officers as needed, and are held accountable for performing each of these duties.

163. On-duty field supervisors shall be available throughout their shift to respond to the field to provide supervision to officers under their direct command and, as needed, to provide supervisory assistance to other shifts.

I I

I

i

38

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 39 of 55
164. Shift commanders shall closely and effectively supervise the officers tulder their command. All EHPD Commanders and supervisors shall ensure that all supervisors and officers tulder their command comply with EHPD policy, state and federal law, and the requirements of this Agreement.
165. EHPD shall hold commanders and supervisors directly accountable for the quality and effectiveness of their supervision, including whether commanders and supervisors identify and effectively respond to misconduct, as part of their performance evaluations and through non-disciplinary corrective action, or through the initiation of formal investigation and the disciplinary process, as appropriate.
166. Within twelve months of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement an EHPD-specific system td accurately evaluate officer performance in areas related to integrity, community policing, and critical police functions on both an ongoing and annual basis that comporta with professional police practices and the requirements of this Agreement. As part of this program, EHPD shall establish a formalized system documenting annual performance evaluations of each officer by the officer's direct supervisor which shall include assessment of:
a) community engagement and communication with the public; b) use of community-policing and problem-solving strategies; c) civilian commendations and complaints; d) disciplinary actions; e) compliance with policies on usage of sick leave and other leave; f) compliance with policies on secondary employment; g) safety (e.g., POST officer safety standards and vehicle operations); h) training; i) report-writing; and j) decision-making skills.
167. Annual performance evaluations shall be based upon work performance completed during the specific rating period. The officer's current direct supervisor shall complete the performance evaluation, but all supervisory personnel who supervised the officer during the rating period should provide written input, which shall be considered by the officer's current supervisor and incorporated into the performance evaluation.
B. Early Identification System
168. EHPD shall develop, implement and maintain an early identification system ("ElS") to support the effective supervision and management of EHPD officers and employees, including the identification of and response to potentially problematic behaviors as early as possible. EHPD will regularly use EIS data to promote ethical and professional police practices; to manage risk and liability; and to evaluate the performance of EHPD employees across all ranks, units and shifts.
39

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 40 of 55
169. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a protocol setting out which fields in EIS shall include historical data; deadlines for inputting data related to current and new information; and the individuals responsible for capturing and inputting data.
170. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a protocol for using the EIS and information obtained from it. The protocol for using the EIS shall address data storage, data retrieval, reporting, data analysis, pattern identification, identifying officers for intervention, supervisory use, supervisory/departmental intervention, documentation and audit. Among protocol requirements EHPD shall include:
a) comparative data analysis, including peer group, shift and unit analysis, to identify patterns ofactivity by individual officers and groups of officers;
b) EHPD commander and supervisor review, on a regular basis, but not less than biweekly, of EIS reports regarding each officer under the commander or supervisor's direct command and, at least quarterly, broader, pattern-based reports;
c) EHPD commanders and supervisors to initiate, implement, and assess the effectiveness of interventions for individual officers, supervisors, and shifts, based on assessment of the information contained in the EIS;
d) require an array of intervention options to facilitate an effective response to identified problems. Interventions may take the form of counseling or training, or ofother supervised, monitored, and documented action plans and strategies designed to modify activity. All interventions will be documented in writing and entered into the automated system;
e) specify that the decision to order an intervention for an employee or group using EIS data shall include peer group analysis, including consideration of the nature of the employee's assigrnnent, and not solely on the number or percentages of incidents in any category of information recorded in the EIS;
f) prompt review by EHPD commanders and supervisors of the EIS system records ofall officers upon transfer to their supervision or command;
g) evaluation of EHPD commanders and supervisors based on their appropriate use of the EJS to enhance effective and ethical policing and reduce risk; and
h) mechanisms to ensure monitored and secure access to the EIS to ensure the integrity, proper use, and appropriate confidentiality of the data.
171. The EIS shall include all relevant information available to EHPD to assess the conduct of each officer, including:
a) all awards and commendations received by employees; b) investigations of the officer; c) complaints (including civil lawsuits) against the officer and their dispositions; d) data collected regarding the officer's stops, search and seizures and uses of force; e) data about officer's arrests, including arrests for interfering with a police officer,
resisting arrest, assault on a police officer, and disorderly conduct; f) training history;
40

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 41 of 55
g) supervisory reviews; h) all vehicle pursuits and tl'affic collisions involving EHPD equipment; i) all loss or theft ofEHPD property or equipment in the custody of the employee,
including currency, fire!ll'llls, force instruments, and identification cards; and j) any disciplinary or other corrective action taken against the officer.
172. The EIS shall include appropriate identifying information for each involved officer (i.e., name, badge number, shift and supervisor) and civilian.
173. EHPD shall maintain all personally identifiable information about an officer included in the EIS for at least five years following the officer's separation from the agency. Information necessary for aggregate statistical analysis will be maintained indefinitely in the EIS. On an ongoing basis, EHPD will enter information into the EIS in a timely, accurate, and complete manner, and shall maintain the data in a secure and confidential manner. No individual within EHPD shall have access to individually identifiable information that is maintained only within EIS and is about an officer not within that individual's direct command, except as necessary for investigative, technological, or auditing purposes.
174. The EIS, including any computer programs and hardware, will be operational, fully implemented, and be used in accordance with policies and protocols that incorporate the requirements of this Agreement within 365 days of the Effective Date. Prior to full implementation of the new EIS, EHPD WJ111 continue to use existing resources to the fullest extent possible, to identify patterns of conduct by employees or groups of officers.
c. Visual and Audio Document11tion of Police Activities i
175. EHPD shall maintain and operate video cameras and AVL in all police vehicles and shall repair or replace all non-functioning video cameras or AVL units. EHPD shall ensure that that recordings are captured, maintained, and reviewed as appropriate by supervisors, in addition to any review for investigatory or audit purposes, to assess the quality and appropriateness of officer interactions, uses offorce, and other police activities.
176. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and procedures regarding AVL, in-car recorders, ECWs, and similar equipment that require:
a) activation of in-car cameras for allll'affic stops and pursuits until the motor
vehicle stop is completed and the stopped vehicle departs, or until the officer's · participation in the motor vehicle stop ends; b) activation of ECW cameras when the ECW is unholstered; c) activation of in-car cameras for incidents in which a prisoner being transported is violent or resistant; d) supervisors to review AVL, in-car,·camera recordings, and ECW recordings of all officers listed in any EHPD report regarding any incident involving injuries to a prisoner or an officer, uses of force, vehicle pursuits, or misconduct complaints; e) supervisors to review recordings regularly and to incorporate the knowledge gained from this review into their ongoing evaluation and supervision of officers;
41

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 42 of 55
f) that .EHPD retain and preserve recordings for at least five years, or, if a case remains under investigation or litigation longer than five years, at least three years after the ftnal disposition of the matter, including appeals; and
g) that an officer notify a supervisor immediately when an event was not recorded.
177. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a schedule for testing AVL, in-car recorder, and ECW camera recording equipment to confirm that it is in proper working order. Officers shall be responsible for ensuring that recording equipment assigned to them or their car is functioning properly at the. beginning and end of each shift and shall report immediately any improperly functioning equipment.
178. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall provide each supervisor with handheld recording devices and require that supervisors use these devices to record complainant and witness statements taken as part of use of force or misconduct complaint investigations.
X. COMMUNlTY ENGAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT
179. EHPD shall create robust community relationships and engage constructively with the community to ensure collaborative problem-solving, ethical and bias-free policing, and increase community confidence in the Department. EHPD shall establish community and problem-oriented policing principles in its'policing operations. EHPD shall also engage the public in the reform process through the dissemination of public information on a regular basis. EHPD and the Town shall develop, implement, and maintain systems to ensure comprehensive, effective, and transparent oversight ofEHPD that will be sustained ·after the completion of this Agreement. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. ·
180. EHPD shall, in all of its policing operations, adopt the professional police practices of community oriented and problem-solving policing, including robust community partnerships, cooperative strategies, and promoting trust in the community.
181. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall appoint and/or hire a Community Liaison Officer who is a sworn officer fluent in English and Spanish. The Community Liaison Officer shall also have formalized training in the nature and scope of federal and state civil rights law as applied to law enforcement activity.
182. EHPD shall make the contact information and duty hours of the Community Liaison Officer public on its website and on any EHPD document generally available to the public. The Community Liaison Officer shall be directly available for public contact during normal business hours. The Community Liaison Officer shall have the following duties:
a) The Community Liaison Officer shall arrange for a monthly meeting of East Haven residents designed to permit residents to voice their concerns and ask questions. The meeting shall be conducted as follows:
42

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 43 of 55
i. The meeting shall be attended by the Community Liaison Officer, at least one senior EHPD command staff member, and by officers responsible for patrolling, or supervising patrol, in each of the three East Haven districts. All EHPD personnel present shall be identified, in uniform, and available for responses to questions from residents of East Haven.
. ii. Names shall not be required of persons attending the meeting, nor shall any investigative law enforcement action be taken at or after this meeting that involves attendees in any way, absent an emergency. EHPD may act based on information explicitly communicated at the meeting for that purpose.
iii. EHPD shall notify the public of this meeting and the requirements of this provision, including anonymity, regarding this meeting in the local press two weeks in advance of the meeting.
iv. The meeting shall rotate among the three East Haven districts, so that the meeting is held in each district every three months.
b) The Community Liaison Officer shall review, on a monthly basis, all complaints submitted to EHPD by members of the community to assess community concerns. For those complaints that do not rise to the level of requiring formal action under EHPD policy, code of conduct, and the terms of this Agreement, the Community Liaison Officer shall notify the complainant of the availability of the Community Liaison Officer to answer the complainant's questions and respond to any further concerns.
c) The Community Liaison Officer shall meet monthly with the Chief of Police, the Mayor, and the Board. During these meetings, the Community Liaison Officer shall communicate the concerns that the Community Liaison Officer has received during the previous month, along with any other relevant information pertaining to the relationship of EHPD with East Haven residents.
183. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a strategic recruitment plan that includes clear goals, objectives, and action steps for attracting high-quality applicants for employment across all levels ofEHPD, sworn and civilian. EHPD's strategic
· recruitment plan shall establish and clearly identify the duties and goals ofEHPD's recruitment efforts. The strategic recruitment plan shall include specific strategies for attracting a diverse pool of applicants, including members of groups that have been historically underrepresented in EHPD and applicants fluent in Spanish.
184. All EHPD audits and reports related to the implementation of this Agreement shall be made publicly available via website and at the Police Department, Town Hall, and other public locations, in English and in Spanish, to the fullest extent permissible under law.
185. EHPD shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to facilitate and ensure transparency and wide public access to information related to EHPD decision making and activities, as permitted by law.
43

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 44 of 55

XI. AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT

A. Role ofthe Joint Compliance Expert

186. The Parties shall select a Joint Compliance Expert ("JCE'~ to assist the Parties in determining whether the terms of this Agreement have been fully and timely implemented, including reviewing and making recommendations on new or revised policies, training curricula, standard operating procedures, plans, protocols, and other operational documents related to this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall also assess and report whether the requirements of this Agreement have been implemented, and whether this implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD.

187. The Joint Compliance Expert shall only have the duties, responsibilities and authority conferred by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not, and is not intended to, replace or assume the role and duties of the Mayor, Board, Chief of Police, or EHPD.

188. In order to assess and report on the Town's implementation of this Agreement and whether implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct the compliance reviews and audits, outcome assessments, and incident reviews specified below, and such additional audits, reviews, and assessments as the Joint Compliance Expert or the Parties deem appropriate.

B. Compliance Reviews and Audits· _,
189, The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct compliance reviews or audits as necessary to determine whether the Town has implemented and continues to comply with the material requirements of this Agreement. Compliahce with a material requirement of this Agreement requires that the Town has: (a) incorporated the requirement into policy; (b) trained all relevant personnel as necessary to fuifill their responsibilities pursuant to the requirement; and (c) that the requirement is being carried out in actual practice. Compliance reviews and audits shall contain both qualitative and quantitative elements as necessary for reliability and comprehensiveness.

C. Outcome Assessments

190. In addition to compliance reviews and audits, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct

qualitative and quantitative outcome assessments to measure whether the Town's

implementation of this Agreement has promoted effective and constitutional policing.

These outcome assessments shall include collection and analysis, both quantitative and

qualitative, of the following outcome data:

i

-;

'

a) Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement measurements, including:

44,

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 45 of 55

i. A reliable, comprehensive, and representative annual survey of members of the East Haven community regarding their experiences with and perceptions ofEHPD and of public safety. This comprehensive community survey shall include measures to ensure input from individuals of each significantly represented demographic category;
ii. Number and variety of community partnerships, with particular consideration of partnerships with youth, and qualitative assessment of the depth and effectiveness of those partnerships.

b) Stop, Search and Arrest measurements, including:

i. The number and rate of arrests for which there is articulated reasonable suspicion for the stop and probable cause for the arrest, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category;
ii. The number and rate of arrests which are prosecuted, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category; and
iii. The number and rate of searches which result in a finding of contraband, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category.

c) Use of Force measurements including:

i. Rate of force used per arrest by EHPD overall and by force type;

geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic

category;

ii. Rate of force complaints that are sustained and rate that are not sustained,

overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); source of

complaint (internal or external); type of arrest; and demographic category;

iii. Uses of Force that were found to violate policy overall and by force type;

geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic

category;·

'

iv. Number and rate of Use of Force administrative investigations/reviews in

which each finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence; and

v. Number of officers who frequently or repeatedly use force, or have more

than one instance of force found to violate policy.

d) Recruitment and Training measurements, including:

i. Number of highly-qualified recruit candidates that have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities;
ii. Number of candidates with Spanish language fluency; iii. Officer and agency reports of adequacy of training in type and frequency;
and iv. Role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by
performance trends.

45

~
....

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 46 of 55

e) Supervision measurements, including:

i. Initial identification of officer violations and performance problems by supervisors, and effective response by supervisors to identified problems.

f) Accountability measurements, including:

i. The number ofmisconduct complaints, with a qualitative assessment of whether any increase or decrease appears related to access to the complaint process;
ii. Rate of sustained, not sustained, exonerated and unfounded misconduct complaints;
iii. Number and rate of misconduct complaints in which the finding for each allegation is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;
iv. Number of officers who are subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, or have repeated instances of sustained misconduct complaints.
v. Number and nature of civil suits against EHPD officers for on or off duty police conduct, regardless of whether the Town or EHPD is a defendant in the litigation, and settlement or penalty amounts;
vi. Arrests/Summons of officers for on or off duty conduct; and vii. Criminal prosecutions of officers for on or off duty conduct.

191. In conducting these outcome assessments the Joint Compliance Expert may use any relevant data collected and maintained by EHPD, provided that it has determined that this data is reasonably reliable and complete. To conduct the annual community survey, the Joint Compliance Expert shall retain an individual or entity which shall:

a) develop a baseline of measures on public satisfaction with policing, attitudes

among police personnel, and the quality of police-citizen encounters;

b) conduct baseline surveys of Town residents, police personnel, and detained

arrestees, and follow-up surveys on at least an annual basis;

,

c) ensure that the resident surveys are designed to. capture each demographic

category; and

d) conduct the survey in English and 'spanish.

D. · Outcome Assessment Plan and Review Methodology

I

I

192. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan

for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and

shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:

a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be !ISSessed for

I

compliance, indicating which requirements will be assessed together;

b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment

1

occurring within 18 months of the Effective Date; and

'

46

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 47 of 55
c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement of this Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each requirement at least annually thereafter.
193. Where the Joint Compliance Expert recommends and the Parties agree, the Joint Compliance Expert may refrain from conducting a compliance audit or review of a requirement previously found to be in compliance by the Joint Compliance Expert pursuant to audit or review, or where outcome assessments indicate that the outcome intel)ded by the requirement has been achieved.
194. At least 90 days prior to the initiation of any outcome measure assessment or compliance review or audit, the Joint Compliance Expert shall submit a proposed methodology for the assessment, review or audit, to the Parties. The Parties shall submit any comments or concerns regarding the proposed methodology to the Joint Compliance Expert within 45 days of the proposed date of the assessment, review or audit. The Joint Compliance Expert shall modify the methodology as necessary to address any concerns or shall inform the Parties in writing of the reasons it is not modifying its methodology as proposed.
E. Review of Use of Foree and Milleonduct Investigations
195. EHPD shall provide each completed investigation of a serious use of force or use of force that is the subject of a misconduct investigation, and each misconduct complaint report, to the Joint Compliance Expert. The Joint Compliance Expert shall review each use of force investigation or review and each misconduct investigation and recommend for further investigation any use afforce or misconduct complaint investigations the Joint Compliance Expert determines to be incomplete or for which the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
F. Joint Compliance Expert Recommendations and Technical Assistance
196. The Joint Compliance Expert may make recommendations to the Parties regarding measures necessary to ensure timely, full and effective implementation of this Agreement and its underlying objectives. Such recommendations may include a recommendation to change, modify, or amend a provision of the Agreement, a recommendation for additional training in any area related to tllis Agreement, or a recommendation to seek teclmical assistance. In addition to such recommendations, the Joint Compliance Expert may also, at the request ofDOJ or the Town and based on the Joint Compliance Expert's reviews, provide technical assistance consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert's responsibilities under this Agreement.
G. Comprehensive Re-Assessment
197. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct a comprehensive assessment two years after. the Effective Date to determine whether and to what extent the outcomes intended by this Agreement have been achieved, and any modifications to the Agreement that are necessary for continued achievement in light of changed circumstances or unanticipated
47

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 48 of 55
impact (or lack of impact) of the requirement. This assessment shall address also areas of greatest achievement and the requirements that appear to have contributed to this success, as well as areas of greatest concern, including strategies for accelerating full and effective compliance. Based upon this comprehensive assessment, the Joint Compliance Expert shall recommend modifications to the Agreement necessary to achieve and sustain intended outcomes. Where the Parties agree with the Joint Compliance Expert's recommendations, the Parties shall stipulate to modify the Agreement accordingly. This provision in no way diminishes the Parties' ability to stipulate to modifications to this Agreement as set out below.
H. Joint Compliance Expert Reports
198. The Joint Compliance Expert shall file with the Court semi-annual written, public reports covering the reporting period that shall include:
a) a description of the work conducted by the Joint Compliance Expert during the reporting period;
b) a listing of each Agreement requirement indicating which requirements have been: (i) incorporated into implemented policy; (ii) the subject of sufficient training for all relevant EHPD officers and employees; (iii) reviewed or audited by the Joint Compliance Expert to determine whether they have been fully implemented in actual practice, including the date of the review or audit; and (iv) found by the Joint Compliance Expert to have been fully implemented in practice;
c) the methodology and specific findings for each audit or review conducted, redacted as necessary for privacy concerns. An unredacted version shall be filed under seal with the Court and provided to the Parties. The underlying data for each audit or review shall not be publicly available but shall be retained by the Joint Compliance Expert and provided to either or both Parties upon request;
d) for any requirements that were reviewed or audited and found not to have been fully implemented in practice, the Joint Compliance Expert's recommendations regarding necessary steps to achieve compliance;
e) the methodology and specific findings for each outcome assessment conducted; f) qualitative assessment of EHPD's progress in achieving the· desired outcomes for
each area covered by the Agreement--noting issues of concern or particular achievement; and g) a projection of the work to be completed during the upcoming reporting period and any anticipated challenges or concerns related to implementation of the Agreement.
199. The Joint Compliance Expert shall provide a copy of semi-annual reports to the Parties in draft form at least ten business days prior to Court filing and public release of the reports to allow the Parties to informally comment on the reports. The Joint Compliance Expert shall consider the Parties' responses and make appropriate changes, if any, before issuing the report.
48

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 49 of 55

200. The Joint Compliance Expert shall maintain regular contact with the Parties in order to ensure effective and timely communication regarding the status of the Town's implementation of and compliance with this Agreement.

I. Public Statements, Testimony, Records, and Conflicts oflnterest

20 I. Except as required or authorized by the terms of this Agreement or the Parties acting together: neither the Joint Compliance Expert, including, for the pll!JlOSes of this paragraph, any agent, employee, or independent contractor thereof, shall make any public statements or issue findings with regard to any act or omission of the Town or its agents, representatives, or employees; or disclose non-public information provided to the Joint Complillllce Expert pursUilllt to the Agreement. Any press statement made by the Joint Complillllce Expert regarding its employment or assessment activities under this Agreement shall first be approved by the Parties.

202. The Joint Compliance Expert may testifY as to observations, findings, and recommendations before the Court with jurisdiction over this matter, but the Joint Compliance Expert shall not testifY in any other litigation or proceeding with regard to any act or omission of the Town or any of its agents, representatives, or employees related to this Agreement or regarding any matter or subject that the Joint Compliance Expert may have received knowledge of as a result of his or her performance under this Agreement. This paragraph does not apply to any proceeding before a court related to performance ofcontracts or subcontracts for monitoring this Agreement.

203. Unless such conflict is waived by the Parties, the Joint Compliance Expert shall not accept employment or provide consulting services that would present a conflict of interest with the Joint Compliance Expert's responsibilities under this Agreement, including being retained (on a paid or unpaid basis) by any current or future litigant or claimant, or such litigant's or claimant's attorney, in connection with a claim or suit against the Town or its departments, officers, agents or employees.

204. The Joint Compliance Expert is not a state or local agency, or an agent thereof, and accordingly the records maintained by the Joint Compliance Expert shall not be deemed public records subject to public inspection.

205. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not be liable for any claim, lawsuit, or demand arising out of the Joint Compliance Expert's performance pursUilllt to this Agreement.

J. EHPD Compliance Coordinator

206. Within 30 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall identifY a compliance coordinator to

serve as the single point of contact to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. The

.,

Compliance Coordinator shall coordinate the Town's compliance and implementation

activities; facilitate the provision of data, documents, materials, and access to the Town's

personnel to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, as needed; ensure that all data,

documents and records are maintained as provided in this Agreement; and assist in

49

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 50 of 55

assigning implementation and compliance related tasks to EHPD personnel, as directed by the Chiefof Police or his/her designee.

K. Implementation Assessment and Report

207. The Town shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to: (a) document implementation of and compliance with this Agreement, including data and records necessary for the Joint Compliance Expert to conduct reliable outcome assessments, compliance reviews, and audits; and (b) perform ongoing quality assurance in each of the areas addressed by this Agreement.

208. Beginning with the Joint Compliance Expert's first semi-annual report, the Town shall provide to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ a status report no later than 45 days before the Joint Compliance Expert's semi-annual report is due. The Town's report shall delineate the steps taken by the Town during the reporting period to implement this Agreement; the Town's assessment of the status of its progress; plans to correct any problems; and response to any concerns raised in the Joint Compliance Expert's previous semi-annual report.

L. Access and Confidentiality

209. To facilitate its work, the Joint Compliance Expert may conduct on-site visits and assessments without prior notice to the Town. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to.all necessary individuals, facilities, and documents, which shall include access to Agreement related trainings, meetings, and reviews such as critical incident reviews; use offorce revieWs, and disciplinary hearings. EHPD shall notify the Joint Compliance Expert as soon as practicable, and in any case within twelve hours, of any critical firearms discharge, arrest of any officer, or any other potentially high-profile serious incident.

210. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have timely, ful) and direct access to all of the Town's staff, employees, and facilities that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall cooperate with the Town to access people and facilities in a reasonable manner that, consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert's responsibilities, minimizes interference with daily operations.

211. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have full and direct access

to all of the Town's documents and data that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably

deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this

'

Agreement, except any documents or data protected by the attorney-client privilege.

Should the Town decline to provide the Joint Compliance Expert access to documents or

data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform the Joint Compliance

Expert and DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide

the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.

I

50

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 51 of 55
212. To the elctent necessary to ensure proper implementation of this Agreement, DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall have full and direct access to all of the Town's staff, employees, facilities, documents and data. DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall cooperate with the Town to access involved personnel, facilities, and documents in a reasonable manner that, consistent with DOJ's responsibilities to enforce this Agreement, minimizes interference with daily operations. Should the Town decline to provide DOJ with access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.
213. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall provide the Town with reasonablenotice of a request for copies of documents. Upon such request, the Town shall provide in a timely manner copies (electronic, where readily available) of the requested documents to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. ·
214. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all records and information relating to criminal investigations of EHPD officers as permissible by law. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all documents in criminal investigation files that have been closed by EHPD. The Joint Compliance Expert shall also have reasonable access to all arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications whether or not contained in open criminal investigatipn files. Where practicable, arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications shall be obtained from sources other than open criminal investigation files.
215. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall maintain all non-public information provided by the Town in a confidential manner. This Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any privilege or right the Town may assert, including those recognized at common Jaw or created by statute, rule or regulation, against any other person or entity with respect to the disclosure of any document or communication.
M. Selection and Compensation of the Joint Compliance Expert
216. ·Within 60 days of the Effective Date, the Town and DOJ shall together select an independent Joint Compliance Expert, acceptable to both, which shall assess and report on EHPD's implementation ofthis Agreemeqt. The selection of the Joint Compliance Expert shall be pursuant to a method jointly established by the Town and DOJ, and will not be governed by any formal or legal procurement requirements. The Joint Compliance Expert and his/her team shall be individuals of the highest ethics.
217. If the Parties are unable to agree on a Joint Compliance Expert or an alternative method of selection within 60 days of the Effective Date, they reserve the right to seek the Court's assistance by asking the Court to select a Joint Compliance Expert. In that case, each Party shall submit the names of three candidates, or three groups of candidates, along with resumes and cost proposals, to the Court, and the Court shall select a Joint Compliance Expert from among the qualified candidates/candidate groups.
51

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 52 of 55
218. The Joint Compliance Expert shall be appointed for a period of four years from the Effective Date and shall have its appointment extended automatically should the Town not demonstrate full and effective compliance at the end of this four-year period.
219. The Town shall bear all reasonable fees and costs of the Joint Compliance Expert. In selecting the Joint Compliance Expert, DOJ and the Town recognize the importance of ensuring that the fees and costs borne by the Town are reasonable, and accordingly fees and costs shall be one factor considered in selecting the Joint Compliance Expert. In the event that any dispute arises regarding the reasonableness or payment of the Joint Compliance Expert's fees and costs, the Town, DOJ, and the Joint Compliance Expert shall attempt to resolve such dispute cooperatively prior to seeking the assistance of the Court to resolve such dispute.
220. The Town shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert with permanent office space and reasonable office support such as office fumitore, telephones, access to internet, secure document storage, photocopying and scanners.
221. The Joint Compliance Expert, at any time after its initial selection, may request to be allowed to hire or employ or contact with such additional persons or entities as are reasonably necessary to perform the tasks assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement. Any person or entity hired or otherwise retained by the Joint Compliance Expert to assist in furthering any provision ofthis Agreement shall be subject to the provisions of this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall notify the Town and DOJ in writing if the Joint Compliance Expert wishes to select such additional persons or entities. The notice shall identify and describe the qualifications of the person or entity to be hired or employed and the task to be performed. Ifthe Town and DOJ agree to the Joint Compliance Expert's proposal, the Joint Compliance Expert shall be authorized to hire or employ such additioilal persons or entities. The Town or the DOJ have ten business days to disagree with the proposal. If the Town and DOJ are unable to reach agreement within ten business days of receiving notice of the disagreement, the parties reserve the right to seek the Court's assistance to resolve the dispute.
222. Should any of the Parties to this Agreement determine that the Joint Compliance Expert's individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors have exceeded their authority or failed to satisfactorily perform the duties required by this Agreement, the Party shall meet and confer to resolve outstanding concerns. ·If the Parties are unable to agree on a solution, either Party may petition the Court for such relief as the Court deems appropriate, including replacement of the Joint Compliance Expert, and/or any individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors.
N. Court Jurisdiction, Modification of the Agreement, and Enforcement
223. This Agreement shall become effective upon eotry by the Court.
224. The Parties agree jointly to file this Agreement with the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. The joint motion shall request that the Court enter the Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 (a)(2), conditionally dismiss
52

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 53 of 55

the complaint in thi~ action, and retain jurisdiction to enforce the Agreement. Should the United States determine that the Town has failed to comply with the Agreement, the case will be reinstated for the purposes of enforcing the Agreement only. The Town may not challenge liability nor the necessity for Agreement terms.

225. To emure that the requirements of this Agreement are properly and timely implemented, the Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for enforcement purposes until such time as the Town has achieved full and effective compliance with this Agreement and maintained such compliance for no less than two years. If the Town believes it has reached full compliance and moves the Court to tenninate this Agreement, the Town shall bear the burden of demonstrating full and effective compliance with this Agreement.

226. The United States acknowledges the good faith of the Town in trying to address the remedial measures that are needed to promote police integrity and ensure constitutional policing in East Haven. The United States, however, reserves its right to seek enforcement of the provisions of this Agreement if it determines that the Town has failed to fully comply with any provision of this Agreement. Prior to initiating any enforcement proceedings in Court for an alleged failure to comply with any provision of this Agreement, the United States will notify the Town in writing of the facts supporting its belief that the Town is not in compliance. The Town will investigate the allegations and respond in writing within 30 days. If the dispute remains unresolved, the parties will conduct negotiations to resolve the issue{s). If the parties are unable to resolve the issue(s) satisfactorily within 30 days of the Town's written response, the United States may move the Court for any relief permitted by law or equity and demonstrate that the relief is necessary to implement this Agreement.

227. Failure by any Party to enforce this entire Agreement or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other provision herein shall not be construed as a waiver, including of its right to enforce other deadlines and provisions of this Agreement.

228. Any modification of this Agreement shall be executed in writing by the Parties, shall be filed with the Court, and shall not be effective until the Court enters the modified agreement and retains jurisdiction to enforce it.

229. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as an acknowledgement, an admission, or evidence of liability of the Town under the Constitution of the United States, federal or state law, and this Agreement may not be used as evidence of liability in this or any other civil or criminal proceeding.

230. The Parties agree to defend the provisions of this Agreement. The Parties shall notify

each other of any court or administrative challenge to this Agreement. In the event anx--,-----

J

provision of this Agreement is challenged in any Connecticut court, removal to a federal

court shall be sought by the Parties.

53

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 54 of 55

231. The Town agrees to promptly notifY DOJ if any term of this Agreement becomes subject to a collective bargaining dispute and to consult with DOJ in a timely manner regarding the position the Town takes in any collective bargaining dispute connected with this Agreement.

232. The Town shall require compliance with this Agreement by its respective officers, employees, agencies, assigns, or successors.

0. Termination of the Agreement

233. The Parties anticipate that the Town will have reached full and effective compliance with this Agreement within four years of its Effective Date. The Parties may agree to jointly ask the Court to terminate this Agreement prior to or after this date, provided that the Town has been in full and effective compliance with this Agreement for two consecutive years. "Full and Effective Compliance" shall be defined to require both sustained compliance with all material requirements of this Agreement and sustained and continuing improvement in constitutional policing and public trust, as demonstrated pursuant to the Agreement's outcome measures.

234. If after four years from the Effective Date the Parties disagree whether the Town has

been in full and effective compliance for two years, either Party may seek to terminate

this Agreement. In the case of termination sought by the Town, prior to filing a motion

to terminate, the Town agrees to notifY DOJ in writing when the Town has determined

that it is in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and that such compliance

has been maintained for no less than two years. Thereafter, the Parties shall promptly

confer as to the status of compliance. If, after a reasonable period of consultation and the

completion of any audit or evaluation that DOJ and/or the Joint Compliance Expert may

wish to undertake, including on-site observations, document review, or interviews with

the Town's personnel, the Parties cannot resolve any compliance issues, the Town may

file a motion to terminate this Agreement. If the Town moves for termination of this

Agreement, DOJ will have 60 days after the receipt of the Town's motion to object to the

motion. IfDOJ does not object, the Court may grant the Town's motion. IfDOJ does

make an objection, the Court shall hold a hearing on the motion and the burden shall be

on the Town to demonstrate that they are in full and effective compliance with this

Agreement ffl_d have maintained such compliance for at least two consecutive years.

Agreedtothis /? dayof 1/t~

,2012.

For the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

United S ates Attorney for the District of Connecticut

Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
54

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 11 Filed 12/21/12 Page 55 of 55

JOHN B. HUGHES, Civil Chief MICHELLE McCONAGHY, AUSA United States Attorney's Office District of Connecticut
For the TOWN OF EAST HAVEN:

JONATHAN M. SMITH, Chief LUIS E. SAUCEDO, Acting Deputy Chief ANIKA N. GZIFA, Trial Attorney AARON S. FLEISHER, Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section

For the EAST HAYEN BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS

It is so ordered. Dated this 21st day of December, 2012, at Hartford, Connecticut.
Alvin W. Thompson United States District Judge
55

 
 Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 17 Filed 06/28/13 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
TOWN OF EAST HAVEN AND THE EAST HAVEN BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL NO. 3:12-CV-1652 (AWT)

)

)

)

)

)

) June 28, 2013

JOINT STATUS REPORT

The parties to the above-captioned action hereby provide the Court with a joint

status report on the implementation of the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional

Policing (“Agreement”) entered by the Court on December 21, 2012. In accordance with

the provisions of the Agreement, a Joint Compliance Expert (“JCE”) was retained and has

been fulfilling the responsibilities required by the Agreement. The JCE is Kathleen

O’Toole of O’Toole Associates which is comprised of a team of monitoring specialists.

The JCE submitted a Plan to the parties describing how the JCE would conduct

outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits (¶ 192). As part of that Plan the

JCE addressed the report schedule set forth in the Agreement. The Agreement requires the

JCE to report semi-annually on the progress, or lack of progress, of the East Haven Police

Department (“EHPD”) achieving compliance with the requirements and set forth in the

Agreement deadlines. The Plan noted that a number of the deadlines for the EHPD are tied

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 17 Filed 06/28/13 Page 2 of 4
to the mark of 180 days after the effective date of the Agreement. This mark was June 21, 2013. The first semi-annual report by the JCE also was tied to the 180 day mark (¶ 198). In order to allow the first JCE semi-annual report to address and comment upon the compliance reports submitted by the EHPD it was recommended by the JCE and agreed to by all the parties that the first JCE report be re-scheduled for approximately one month later, or about July 22, 2013. Under the new schedule the draft of the JCE report would be circulated among the parties by July 12, 2013 for comment. The parties also agreed on modified dates for the second and third reports of the JCE.
It is the intention of the parties and the JCE to submit a formal motion to the Court to modify the report dates, along with several other modifications which the parties have agreed upon. In the interim, the parties and the JCE wanted to advise the Court that the first JCE report will be filed by July 22, 2013.
In all other respects, the parties and the JCE hereby report that the implementation of the Agreement is going very well. The EHPD has initiated several of the training requirements and has drafted new policies and procedures for ultimate submission to the Board of Police Commissioners. The JCE has met with EHPD, Town officials and community leaders. The JCE has begun the review of training materials and draft policies and has taken steps to initiate a community survey. The parties and the JCE have conducted bi-weekly calls for several months. Details of these events will be set forth in the JCE Report to be filed on or before July 22, 2013.
2

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 17 Filed 06/28/13 Page 3 of 4

Respectfully submitted this 28th day of June, 2013, 2012.

DEIRDRE M. DALY Acting United States Attorney District of Connecticut
s/John Hughes JOHN HUGHES, Civil Chief Assistant United States Attorney District of Connecticut Federal Bar No. ct05289
MICHELLE McCONAGHY Assistant United States Attorney Federal Bar No. ct27157 District of Connecticut U.S. Attorney’s Office 157 Church Street 23rd Floor CT Financial Center New Haven, CT 06510 Tel: (203) 821-3700 Fax: (203) 773-5373 Michelle.McConaghy@usdoj.gov

THOMAS E. PEREZ Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
ROY L. AUSTIN, JR. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
Jonathan M. Smith Chief
LUIS SAUCEDO Acting Deputy Chief
ANIKA N. GZIFA Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Tel: (202) 514-6255 Fax: (202) 514-4884 Anika.Gzifa@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for the United States

3

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 17 Filed 06/28/13 Page 4 of 4
/s/ Lawrence C. Sgrignari LAWRENCE C. SGRIGNARI Federal Bar No. ct09010 SHEILA HALL Federal Bar No. ct22566 Gesmonde, Pietrosimone and Sgrignari, LLC 3127 Whitney Avenue Hamden, CT 06518 Tel: (203) 407-4200 Fax: (203) 407-4210 lsgrignari@gpsp.com Attorney for Defendants
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that on June 28, 2013, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s CM/ECF System.
A copy of the foregoing was mailed to: Kathleen O’Toole O’Toole Associates
s/John Hughes JOHN B. HUGHES CHIEF, CIVIL DIVISION
4

 
 Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 1 of 13
Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing East Haven, CT
Joint Compliance Expert Report
Prepared by O’Toole Associates, LLC July 2013
Introduction O’Toole Associates, LLC, the Joint Compliance Expert (JCE) overseeing the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing (Agreement) between the Town of East Haven, CT (Town) and East Haven Police Department (EHPD), and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), submits this report of the JCE’s findings with respect to implementation during the first six months of the Agreement, ending June 21, 2013. As outlined in the JCE plan of March 2013, the JCE understands its task to be three-fold. First, the JCE must insure that the EHPD is meeting all material requirements and deadlines specified in the various paragraphs of the Agreement. Second, the JCE must, over time, make a more generalized assessment of whether or not the process outlined in the Agreement is achieving the desired outcomes, namely “constitutional policing, increased community trust, and professional treatment of individuals by the EHPD officers.” Third, the JCE must review and evaluate all serious and significant incidents involving the EHPD. These include any serious uses of force, any complaints alleging significant misconduct, or any other event that the JCE or the parties deem appropriate.
The following is a summary of activity since the appointment of the JCE on February 19, 2013:
• The JCE has visited East Haven on eight occasions and has worked to establish strong working relationships with all parties to the Agreement and a variety of community representatives.

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 2 of 13
• The JCE attended an introductory meeting with the Mayor, Chief of Police, Counsel representing the Town of East Haven for the Agreement (Counsel), senior members of the Mayor’s staff, and representatives of the East Haven Police Commission.
• The JCE has established a good rapport with members of the clergy who represent diverse congregations in East Haven. The JCE has attended several group and individual meetings with clergy.
• The JCE met with two of the original victims/complainants to learn more about their experiences with EHPD, as well as with representatives of the Latino business community.
• The JCE attended and addressed a meeting of the East Haven Police Commission.
• The JCE addressed East Haven business leaders at a meeting hosted by the police and fire chiefs and attended by the Mayor and other town officials.
• The JCE introduced representatives of the DOJ Community Relations Service (CRS) to Counsel representing the Town. The JCE later attended a follow-up meeting with CRS, the Mayor, the Police Chief, Counsel, and the Town Attorney. During the meeting it was agreed that CRS would provide cultural awareness training for all town department heads. The training took place on July 10, 2013.
• The JCE was accompanied by representatives of DOJ Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorney’s office when conducting ride-alongs with East Haven police officers and a meeting with a representative of the Latino business community.
• The JCE met with recently appointed Acting U.S. Attorney Dierdre Daly. Her perspective was informative as she was previously a member of the prosecutorial team handling the pending criminal cases against East Haven officers.
2

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 3 of 13
The JCE continues to maintain strong lines of communication with all parties to the Agreement through the following means: • Bi-weekly conference calls including EHPD, Counsel for the Town, the
Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office. • Multiple calls with the Chief of Police each week and meetings at least twice
monthly. • Regular calls with Counsel for the Town and meetings at least twice monthly. • Regular calls and two meetings with representatives of the U.S. Attorney’s Office. • Regular calls and one in-person meeting with representatives of the U.S.
Department of Justice Civil Rights Division.
The JCE is very appreciative of the level of cooperation it has received from all parties, and has been particularly impressed by the commitment of Chief of Police Brent Larrabee and his management team. The JCE has met several high quality EHPD personnel who have expressed their commitment to change and their eagerness to move forward.
Unfortunately, the East Haven Police Department has experienced a significant setback resulting from an incident that occurred in New Haven on January 17, 2013. The allegations of police misconduct are very troubling, as they relate directly to the type of conduct referenced in the Agreement. The facts of the incident, as provided in the EHPD Internal Affairs report, reflect the type of activity and poor supervision that caused DOJ intervention in East Haven in the first place. The JCE is satisfied with the response of Chief Larrabee and the Town to date.
The JCE remains pleased with current progress toward compliance with the Agreement and optimistic about a positive outcome for overall implementation. Although concerned that the January incident is a setback, the JCE wishes to reassure the East Haven community that the incident has been handled properly to
3

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 4 of 13
date. The JCE will continue to monitor closely the disciplinary process related to the incident and all EHPD efforts to comply fully with the terms of the Agreement.
The remainder of this report is organized into sections concerning each of the three tasks described in the opening paragraph: Material Compliance, Outcome Assessments, and Reviews of Specific Incidents. The JCE is in receipt of the EHPD Compliance Report dated June 21, 2013 and supporting documents, and would characterize the EHPD report as a thorough and complete response to the EHPD’s obligations under the Agreement.
I. Material Requirements of the Agreement
This section reviews the material requirements due for completion by 180 days from the effective date of the Agreement.
Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement
1) Bias-Free Policing Practice and Training – All EHPD employees have received 15 hours of in-service training as required in Paragraph 33. This training was provided by the Spector Training Network and taught by Eliot Spector, a highly respected attorney and lecturer. The training included bias-free policing practices and stop, search and arrest procedures. The lesson plans, which reflect the Agreement’s requirements, were approved by the JCE. All participants in the training were tested by Attorney Spector at the end of each training session and the written test results are on file at the EHPD. Two persons who missed the classes will be rescheduled to attend the training once the class is available in the summer or fall of 2013 .
2) Language Access Plan (LAP) and Language Assistance Coordinator – As required by paragraph 42 of the Agreement, the EHPD has established a Language Assistance Plan (LAP) and appointed a Language Access Coordinator (LAC). The plan is described in detail in Policy and Procedure 301.01, which is a thorough
4

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 5 of 13
and complete document mandating: 1) the appointment of the Language Assistance Coordinator, 2) procedures for notifying the public about the EHPD’s language services, 3) hiring goals for bilingual staff at the EHPD, and 4) the qualifications for members of the department authorized to act as EHPD interpreters (EHPDAI). It also establishes protocols for hiring contract interpreters to provide interpretation and translation service as necessary, currently through Language Line Solutions, but also from other vendors should Language Line Solutions be no longer available. The policy prescribes one hour of training for all EHPD personnel in how to assist limited English proficiency (LEP) individuals in conducting their business with the department. Procedures for conducting interrogations and interviews of LEP individuals, as well as taking complaints against the department from, and reporting dispositions of complaint investigations to, LEP individuals are also established by the policy. A Language Assistance Coordinator, Lieutenant David Emerman, has been appointed. Lt. Emerman is a fluent Spanish speaker, who also serves as the Community Liaison Officer, required by paragraph 181 of the Agreement.
Stop, Search, and Arrest Measurements
1) Stop, Search and Arrest Training – As noted above, the Spector Training Network has provided eight hours of stop, search, and arrest training as required in Paragraph 78 of the Agreement, including instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law, as well as First Amendment and related law.
2) Stop, Search, and Arrest Data – Paragraph 65 of the Agreement stipulates that the EHPD must provide data on stops, searches and arrests within 270 days of the Agreement date, including types of arrests and arrest data broken down by geographic area and demographic group, as well as the proportion of stops to arrests. Some data of this type are available already on traffic stops between December 21, 2012, the effective date of the Agreement, and June 21, 2013, six months later. There were 909 traffic stops in the six-month period, with 95.3 percent of stops resulting in some form of police intervention, although the
5

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 6 of 13
majority of these interventions (558) were either verbal or written warnings. There were five arrests resulting from these stops, or slightly more than one half of one percent of the total. The five arrests were attributable to five different officers. Misdemeanor summonses resulted from nine percent of the stops, and infraction tickets from 26 percent. Twenty-nine stops, or 3.3 percent of total stops, resulted from officer suspicion of criminal activity. The vast majority of stops, 771 or 78 percent of stops, were attributable to motor vehicle violations, and 36 other stops were attributable to equipment violations. Eighteen vehicles were searched; slightly less than two percent of the total. The racial, ethnic, and gender characteristics of the drivers stopped were as follows: • 16.5 percent were minorities. • 5.8 percent were Black. • 8.9 percent were Latino. • 82.2 percent were non-Latino whites. • 38.6 percent were women. In a letter to Mayor Maturo dated December 19, 2011, outlining its investigative findings concerning the EHPD, the Department of Justice cited an excessive number of traffic stops by the EHPD of Latino drivers, a rate of 19.9 percent of all stops, significantly higher than the estimated percentage of Latino drivers in East Haven and surrounding towns, which was approximated at 15.5 percent (U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division Findings Letter 12-19-2011, page 7). It was also estimated that in East Haven, the percentage of Latino drivers was 8.3 percent. The current stop data represents a marked improvement from the statistics of 2011. The percentage of Latino drivers stopped (8.9 percent) is no longer significantly larger than the estimated percentage of Latino drivers (8.5 percent) in East Haven and significantly smaller than the estimated percentage of Latino drivers (15.5 percent) in East Haven and surrounding towns. The total number of Latino drivers stopped in the sixth-month period was 83. In addition, whereas a single officer was cited in the 2011 letter as having a stop rate of Latino drivers of 40.5 percent, the
6

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 7 of 13
current data shows that six officers, of the 38 evaluated, have stopped six or more Latino drivers in the six-month period. Thirty-two officers have stopped fewer than six, or less than one Latino driver per month. No officer, among the six officers who have stopped six or more Latino drivers, has a Latino-driver stop rate higher than 19 percent, four officers in this group have Latino-driver stop rates higher than 15 percent, and five officers in this group have Latinodriver stop rates higher than 10 percent. The most active traffic-stop officer, with 112 stops in the six-month period, stopped nine Latino drivers, or a Latinodriver stop rate of eight percent.
Pursuant to Paragraph 69 of the Agreement, the EHPD and Board of Police Commissioners shall, on at least a semi-annual basis, issue a report summarizing the stop and search data collected, the analysis of that data, and the steps taken to correct problems and build on successes. The report shall be publicly available. The EHPD and the Board have confirmed that they will meet this requirement of the Agreement.
Recruitment and Training
1) Recruitment Plan – In compliance with Paragraph 183 of the Agreement, the EHPD has developed a recruitment plan that includes goals, objectives, and steps for attracting high-quality applicants for employment. Police recruitment in East Haven is not managed by the police, but is handled by the East Haven Civil Service. Recruitment ads will be published in English and Spanish. The JCE will track the recruitment process to ensure that qualified Spanish-speaking officers are sought and hired. The testing policy required under paragraph 31 is included in the recruitment plan, but the JCE will seek additional details prior to the 270-day task deadline.
7

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 8 of 13
2) Training Plan and Schedule – All training required during the 180-day period has been completed, including the following: • Two to four hours of training in the terms of the East Haven/DOJ Agreement. • Twenty-four hours of Internal Affairs training for Internal Affairs investigators. • Four hours of Bias-Free Policing Training, completed by June 21, 2013. • One hour of training in the Limited English Proficiency Plan and Policy, completed by June 21, 2013. • Eight hours of Stop, Search and Arrest training, completed by May 30, 2013. • Training of all supervisors and officers in the complaint intake procedures, including the provision to citizens of informative materials about the complaint process, the consequences for police officers failing to register a complaint, and techniques for using the complaint process to achieve positive police/citizen interactions, all completed by June 21, 2013. • All supervisors and potential supervisors have taken a forty hour supervisory training course at either the first line or management level. This training was completed by June 21, 2013.
Other training in 2013 is scheduled to take place in accordance with the following schedule:
• Four to eight hours of Use-of-Force Training will be completed by 365 days from the effective date. Training is currently scheduled for summer and autumn 2013.
• Firearms training for all officers within 365 days of the effective date and twice yearly thereafter. Training is currently scheduled for summer and autumn 2013.
8

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 9 of 13
• All supervisors, potential supervisors and the IAO (Internal Affairs Officer) have completed forty hours of Internal Affairs (IA) training that includes all aspects of IA investigations. (force, post-shooting, criminal administrative, etc.). No further IA training is planned in 2013.
• Thirty-two hours annually of In-service Training, in addition to Special Unit Training and training required by the Agreement. Annual in-service training will be completed by December 2013.
• Electronic Control Weapons Certifications, including EHPD ECW policy and policy changes, physical competence with the weapon, weapon retention, and scenario-based training, are scheduled for summer and autumn 2013.
The JCE has reviewed all training materials and found them to be consistent with the requirements of the Agreement and to comport with professional police practices.
Accountability Measures
1) The Civilian Complaint System and the Early Identification System (EIS) • In compliance with Paragraph 129 of the Agreement, the EHPD has developed a system for receiving complaints, has conducted complaint intake and policy training for all personnel, and is publicizing the complaint process in the East Haven community, on the EHPD website and via a link from the Town website, at Town Hall, at EHPD headquarters and at the Hagaman Memorial Library. Officers are required to carry civilian complaints forms in EHPD vehicles. • In compliance with Paragraph 141 of the Agreement, the EHPD Internal Affairs Office (IAO) has developed a centralized numbering and tracking system that will allow the prompt assignment of a unique numerical identifier to each civilian complaint and insure that complainants are informed of this number at the time the complaint is made. • In compliance with Paragraph 169 of the Agreement, the EHPD has begun implementing protocols for designing the data fields for an Early
9

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 10 of 13
Identification System (EIS) that will capture both historical data and emerging information about all sworn employees, automatically drawing data from the EHPD’s Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS). The EIS is a longer-term project that must be fully operational within 365 days of the effective date. When fully operational, it will provide a single repository of all relevant information about each sworn employee, both positive and negative. The system will be designed to identify patterns and will establish thresholds in such areas as civilian complaints, uses of force, firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive absences, and other factors to identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct and in need of supervisory intervention. • In compliance with Paragraph 178 of the Agreement, EHPD supervisors have been equipped with iPhones capable of functioning as recording devices and suitable for recording the statements of witnesses and complainants in the field in use-of-force cases and other cases.
2) Policy and Procedure Manual – As required by Paragraph 20 of the Agreement, the EHPD has designed and formalized a template for all EHPD policies and procedures that will allow the clear numbering and labeling of policies going forward, as well as reference previous policies that have been rescinded or amended. The format is orderly, graphically attractive, and easy to read. The EHPD is required to develop a full set of policies and procedures for review by the JCE and the DOJ within 270 days of the effective date and to publish a full manual by the 365-day mark. This is an enormous challenge for a small agency, but the project is reported to be on track.
3) Code of Conduct – In compliance with paragraph 22, the EHPD has submitted a revised Code of Conduct to both the JCE and the DOJ. The code is presented in the form of a policy and procedure, numbered as 201.01, and will ultimately be included as one of the policies in the Policy and Procedure Manual. The JCE reviewed the Code of Conduct and found it to be a clear and comprehensive
10

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 11 of 13
statement of EHPD’s expectations for it officers’ conduct on and off duty. The Code of Conduct draft was completed and submitted to the JCE and DOJ by the June 21, 2013 deadline. The DOJ responded with comments on June 28, 2013. When the DOJ and the EHPD agree upon a final draft, the JCE will review it.. The Code of Conduct will then be submitted to the East Haven Police Commission for approval.
4) Automatic Vehicle Locators, In-car Video Recorders, and Electronic Control Weapons Camera Policy – In compliance with Paragraph 176 of the Agreement, the EHPD has established a policy and procedure governing Automatic Vehicle Locators (AVL), In-Car Video Recorders, and Electronic Control Weapons (ECW) Cameras. The policy requires full use of these devices and establishes disciplinary penalties for failure to deploy this equipment as required and for any action to disable it. The EHPD had also established a protocol, within 90 days of the effective date, for daily testing of this equipment by appropriate supervisors as required by Paragraph 177 of the Agreement.
II. Outcome Assessments
Public and Police Opinion Surveys
Paragraph 191 requires opinion surveys of East Haven community members and of EPHD personnel to collect baseline data on public satisfaction with policing, on attitudes among police personnel, and on the quality of police/citizen encounters. The community, police department personnel and detained arrestees are to be surveyed early in the Agreement process, and then annually. The JCE, in coordination with the Agreement parties, is in the process of contracting with a local university professor, Dr. John DeCarlo. He has received permission to modify a survey instrument that was developed by the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University for use in Los Angeles to help assess the impact of a consent decree that was in place in that city until May 2013.
11

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 12 of 13
Using an existing survey instrument has reduced costs and expedited the survey development process. The process for identifying and contracting with a survey provider has taken longer than anticipated because an original request for proposals resulted in two vendor submissions with costs that were thought, by both the JCE and the Agreement parties, to be excessive. The current survey instrument includes a number of questions related to public and police attitudes prior to the Agreement to capture and document baseline data. It is expected that the survey will be administered in the autumn 2013.
JCE Interviews and Encounters
In addition to the survey, the JCE intends to monitor community sentiment and attitudes within the EHPD regularly, by means of one-on-one interviews, focus groups, public meetings and other face-to-face encounters. To date, these encounters have revealed mostly positive and optimistic attitudes about the Agreement process both in the community and in the EHPD. Members of the East Haven community, including Latino residents, and police have been forthright in describing the problems of the past, but are also generally committed to moving beyond past problems.. Many, including clergy, observe that conflicts between the EHPD and the Latino community were reflective of issues within the broader community as it adapted to significant demographic change. There is always a temptation to paint a police organization that has undergone a DOJ investigation with a broad brush, but the JCE has encountered good, committed, capable people in the EHPD who are receptive to the implementation of the Agreement. So far, open resistance to the Agreement inside the EHPD has been negligible. Chief Larrabee and his leadership team are actively engaging the Latino community and their efforts have been well received. The Community Liaison Officer/Language Access Coordinator has established good lines of communication and cooperation with Latino residents and businesses. A prime example is a collaborative effort under way with Latino bar owners. In the
12

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 20-1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 13 of 13
coming six months the JCE intends to engage further with the community and the police in one-on-on encounters and focus groups.
III. Specific Incident Reviews As noted in the introduction, the JCE is closely monitoring the investigation and disciplinary process related to the incident in New Haven on January 17, 2013. Although the investigation is largely complete, the adjudication and disciplinary process is still underway. The JCE will refrain from specific comment on the incident until all disciplinary proceedings are concluded to avoid prejudicing the cases in any way. Conclusion The JCE would like to acknowledge the professionalism and collaborative spirit of all parties to the Agreement during the first six months of implementation. All requirements have been met to date. There is much more work to be done, but there is strong evidence of continuing focus and momentum. The next JCE update report will be distributed in draft form to all parties to the Agreement for review and comment by January 13, 2014 and will be finalized and filed no later than January 24, 2014.
13

 
 United States of America v. Town of East Haven and East Haven Board of Police Commissioners
Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing 365 Day Compliance Report
Prepared by: Kathleen M. O’Toole, Joint Compliance Expert January 24, 2014
1

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….…………………..Page 3 Section I – Compliance Overview: Tasks and Milestones……………….………………. Page 4 Compliance Tasks…………………………………………………………………………….………….... Page 4 Settlement Agreement Milestones…………………………………………………….………….. Page 6 Section II – Compliance Chart………………………………………….…………………….…….…Page 17
2

Introduction
O’Toole Associates, LLC, the Joint Compliance Expert (JCE) overseeing the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing or Settlement Agreement (Agreement) between Town of East Haven and East Haven Police Department (EHPD) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), submits this report of the JCE’s findings with respect to the first 12 months of the Agreement ending on December 21, 2013.
As outlined in the JCE plan of March 2013, the JCE understands its task to be three-fold: 1) The JCE must insure that the East Haven Police Department is meeting all material requirements and all deadlines specified in the various paragraphs of the Agreement; 2) The JCE must, over time, make a more generalized assessment of whether or not the process outlined in the Agreement is achieving the desired outcomes, namely “constitutional policing, increased community trust, and professional treatment of individuals by the EHPD officers;” and 3) The JCE must review and evaluate all serious and significant incidents involving the EHPD. These include any serious uses of force, any complaints alleging significant misconduct, or any other event that rises to the level of being newsworthy or notorious.
As agreed in discussions with the parties, to accomplish these tasks, the JCE will provide both qualitative and quantitative measurements of outcomes 365 days after the Agreement effective date of December 21, 2012. This report has two sections. Section 1 presents a narrative overview of compliance milestones achieved or in the process of being completed by the EHPD during the past year. In Section 2, the JCE tracks the current compliance level, discusses the progress to-date, makes recommendations for enhancements and describes the basis upon which this assessment is made for each of the 223 paragraphs (numbered 10-233) in the Agreement through December 21, 2013.
3

I. Compliance Overview: Tasks and Milestones
The following is a summary of activity and compliance milestones since the appointment of the JCE on February 19, 2013. Please note that some of the information in the 365 day report is restated from the 180 day report as the 365 day report is a cumulative assessment.
A. Compliance Tasks The JCE conducted the following tasks to assess compliance since being appointed in February 2013:
 The JCE visited East Haven on thirteen occasions and has worked to establish strong relationships with all parties and a variety of community representatives;
 The JCE attended an introductory meeting with the Mayor, Chief of Police, counsel representing the Town of East Haven for the Agreement, senior members of the Mayor’s staff, and representatives of the East Haven Police Commission. Since that initial meeting, the JCE has met on several occasions with all of the aforementioned parties.
 The JCE has established a good rapport with members of the clergy who represent diverse congregations in East Haven. The JCE has attended several group and individual meetings with clergy or where clergy have been present.
 The JCE met with two of the original victims/complainants to learn more about their experiences with East Haven Police, as well as representatives of the Latino business community.
 The JCE attended and addressed a meeting of the East Haven Police Commission.  The JCE addressed East Haven business leaders at a meeting hosted by the police and fire chiefs
and attended by the Mayor and other town officials.  The JCE introduced representatives of the DOJ Community Relations Service (CRS), to counsel
representing the town. The JCE attended a follow-up meeting with CRS, the Mayor, the Police Chief, outside counsel, and town counsel, resulting from the introduction provided by the JCE. During the meeting it was agreed that CRS would provide cultural awareness training for all town departments. The training took place in the summer of 2013. The CRS conducted additional training at the EHPD. The JCE also attended a meeting with CRS officials in Boston to discuss additional resources that may be available to assist the Town of East Haven going
4

forward. There is ongoing discussion about getting CRS involved with the East Haven School Department. CRS and clergy members have noted that some of the EHPD behavior that led to this Agreement may be a reflection of broader community attitudes. As a result, town leaders, clergy, CRS and the JCE agreed it may be beneficial to introduce CRS to the school superintendent to explore opportunities for CRS to engage with students and faculty in East Haven schools. In a recent conversation between Town officials and the JCE, it was agreed that the JCE will contact CRS and work with counsel representing the Town to facilitate the introduction.  The JCE was accompanied by representatives of DOJ Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorney’s office when conducting ride-alongs with East Haven police officers and a meeting with a representative of the Latino business community.  The JCE met with the recently appointed Acting U.S. Attorney Dierdre Daly. Her perspective was very helpful as she was previously a member of the prosecutorial team that handled the federal criminal cases against East Haven officers.  The JCE introduced the EHPD to representatives of the Office of Justice Programs Diagnostic Center. The Center has committed to assisting the EHPD in support of its rebuilding efforts. The EHPD is requesting assistance with identifying best practices and potential funding for the effective implementation of body cameras. The EHPD is also seeking assistance from the Center in implementing problem-oriented policing as part of its community-oriented policing framework, and in leveraging data to inform deployment of resources to meet its community policing goals.
The JCE continues to maintain strong lines of communication with all parties through the following means:  Bi-weekly conference calls with all parties, including EHPD, counsel for the town, the Department of
Justice Civil Rights Division, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office. (As of January 1. 2014, conference calls will take place once every three weeks.)  Regular calls and meetings with the Chief of Police.  Five meetings with the Mayor of East Haven.  Regular calls and meetings with counsel representing the town.  Regular calls and three meetings with Assistant U.S. Attorneys.
5

 Regular calls to, and one in-person meeting with, representatives of the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division in Washington, D.C.
 A meeting with the EHPD Union President during which a commitment was made to engage regularly with Union leadership and members.
The parties worked collaboratively with the JCE to request modifications to eleven paragraphs in the Agreement during 2013 which were approved by the Court. The modifications clarified expectations, aligned EHPD’s operational needs with the goals of the Agreement, streamlined the review process, and amended paragraphs on use of force to facilitate implementation. The modifications did not alter the fundamental purpose of the Agreement. The JCE commends all parties for a cooperative and practical problem solving approach. There has been little conflict, and when small disagreements have emerged, they have been promptly settled to the satisfaction and collective advantage of all parties. A very positive tone has been struck during year one and the JCE predicts that this productive, collaborative effort will continue.
B. Agreement Milestones Overall, the JCE has been very impressed by the commitment of Chief of Police Brent Larrabee and his management team, especially Lt. Edward Lennon, who was designated as the Compliance Coordinator for the Agreement. The JCE was pleased to provide a reference for Lt. Lennon in his application to attend an Executive Program at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. In addition to Lt. Lennon, the JCE has worked with many highly qualified and professional EHPD personnel. Many members of the Department have expressed their commitment to change and their eagerness to get beyond the challenges of recent times.
The JCE also appreciates the extraordinary commitment of all Department of Justice representatives; those representing the Civil Rights Division in Washington, DC and those representing the US Attorney’s Office in CT. They have been readily available to assist the EHPD and the JCE. Their contributions have been very substantial and helpful.
Mayor Joseph Maturo, Town Legal Counsel and outside counsel contracted by the Town to address the Agreement have been very engaged as well. They have been readily accessible and supportive
6

throughout the year. The JCE also acknowledges the Mayor’s willingness to meet with CRS and his invitation to them to work with other town departments beyond the EHPD.
Feedback and input from the community, including clergy and business leaders, has been particularly helpful and valuable during the first year of implementation. The JCE will continue to interact and consult with members of the East Haven community going forward.
The JCE attributes all success to date to a truly collaborative effort.
Although much progress has been made, the JCE must again note the incident involving certain East Haven police officers that occurred in New Haven on January 17, 2013, approximately one month prior to the selection of the JCE. The facts of the incident, as they appear in the EHPD Internal Affairs report, are troubling and reflect the type of misconduct and poor supervision that originally led to USDOJ intervention in East Haven. The internal affairs investigation has been completed. One of the officers, a police detective, retired during the course of the investigation. All of the discipline has been handed down and one officer is appealing.
While the incident was a serious setback for the EHPD less than a month after the Agreement was executed, the JCE is very satisfied with the response of Chief Larrabee and the Town. A comprehensive internal investigation was conducted. The investigative and disciplinary processes have been transparent. The JCE was briefed regularly by the Chief during the course of investigation.
The JCE notes that the Agreement was very useful in providing guidance to the EHPD in this case. The EHPD used the Agreement as a tool in guiding them through this investigation. As demonstrated by the handling of this case, there is clear evidence that the EHPD is committed to holding its officers accountable for constitutional policing. The JCE will continue to monitor closely any developments related to this case, as well as any future police misconduct or activities that could undermine effective and constitutional policing in East Haven.
The Agreement is divided into seven focus areas. 1) General Policies and Training; 2) Bias-Free Policing; 3) Stops, Searches, and Seizures; 4) Use of Force; 5) Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations, and
7

Discipline; 6) Supervision and Management; and 7) Community Engagement and Oversight. Milestones in these seven areas are presented below:
1) General Policies and Training
Policy Manual Development – By the 270 day mark, the EHPD submitted to the JCE and USDOJ 82 policies for comment and review. By the 365 day deadline, the EHPD, JCE and USDOJ reviewed and revised 83 policies, and are in the process of reviewing two additional policies submitted by the EHPD on December 20, 2013. The Code of Conduct Policy #201.1 was rescinded and the Code of Conduct Policy #201.2 was developed and approved, which is why the number of policies increased by one. Currently, 82 policies in the EHPD Policy Manual have been approved by the JCE, USDOJ and East Haven Board of Commissioners. It is anticipated that the two additional policies will be revised and approved in January 2014.
Within 365 days, the EHPD posted new and revised EHPD policies for public review on the EHPD website, unless there was a reasonable officer-safety basis for maintaining a specific policy or procedure confidential or unless an exemption from disclosure was allowed under State or Federal Freedom of Information law or any other applicable law. The JCE has also asked the EHPD to make printed copies of the policy manual available in the police station as well as in the local public library.
Policy Implementation – Although some training occurred prior to final approval of policies, additional training will occur in early 2014, during the months of January and February. Policy training that occurred before the policy manual was completed relied on early drafts of new policies. Refresher and revised training curricula will be developed for future training now that the policy manual is complete. The EHPD has agreed to provide the JCE with a list of attendees by March 1, 2014, their associated job titles and the trainings they attended in early 2014 relevant to the revised policies and procedures.
After all training is completed and all policies become official in accordance with the “effective date” printed on each approved policy, the JCE will commence formal compliance monitoring. Prior to formally tracking the 84 policies, the JCE will work in coordination with the EHPD and USDOJ to develop appropriate metrics to track policy compliance as required in the Agreement.
8

Recruitment Plan – The EHPD has developed a recruitment plan that includes goals, objectives, and methods for attracting high-quality applicants for employment. Recruitment for the EHPD is managed by the East Haven Civil Service. The JCE will seek additional detail regarding the staffing challenges facing the EHPD and will work with the parties to assess if the Town’s recruitment plan adequately addresses those challenges.
Training completed between December 2012 and September 2013 (per EHPD Training Goals and Objectives report)
1. Initial Training on the Agreement (2-4 hours) - All police department employees attended one training session each. This training was completed in January-February 2013.
2. Internal Affairs Training (40 hours) - This training was completed in two phases. The Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) and some members of the command staff and supervisory staff completed this training in March 2013. The remainder of the command staff, along with all supervisors, and all officers on the current eligibility list for sergeant completed this training in June 2013.
3. Line Supervisor Training (40 hours) - Sergeants and all officers on the current eligibility list for sergeant attended this training in May 2013.
4. Management Training (40 hours) - This training was completed in two phases. The Captain, most Lieutenants and one Sergeant on the current eligibility list for Lieutenant completed this training in June 2013. One Lieutenant completed an executive management course at Harvard’s Kennedy School , in lieu of management training.
5. Harvard Kennedy School (135 hours) – One Lieutenant attended the three-week Executive Education Program in State and Local Government at the Harvard Kennedy School instead of the standard management training listed above. This training was completed in June 2013.
6. Stop, Search, and Arrest Training (8 hours) - All sworn police department employees attended two sessions each. This training was completed in May-June 2013.
7. Bias Free Policing Training (5 hours) - All police department employees attended one session each. This training was completed in May-June 2013.
8. Eyewitness Identification Training (2 hours) - All sworn police department employees attended a two hour session. This training was completed in May-June 2013.
9. Limited English Proficient Training (1 hour) - All police department employees attended one session each. This training was completed in June 2013.
9

10. Civilian Complaint Intake Training (1 hour) - All police department employees attended one session each. This training was completed in May-June 2013.
11. DOJ Community Relations Service (DOJ CRS) Responding to Allegations of Racial Profiling and Bias Policing Training (8 hours) - All police department employees attended one session each. This training was completed in August 2013.
12. CT POST Mandatory Recertification Training (52.5 hours) – A small number of personnel whose CT POST certification was expiring on June 30, 2013 completed this mandated training in April 2013.
Training completed between September 2013 and December 31, 2013 (per EHPD Training Goals and Objectives report)
1. Semi-Annual Firearms Qualification Training (7-8 hours) - All sworn police department employees attended one training session. The training consists of deadly force training review, firearms safety, and firearms qualification. This training meets all required regulations as set forth by CT POST.
2. Use of Force Training (16 hours) – All sworn police department employees attended classroom and physical training on the following topics:  Electronic Control Weapon (Taser©)  Baton  Oleoresin Capsaicin (OC) Pepper Foam/Spray  Handcuffing and Control Tactics  Officer Safety  Diffusion Techniques to Avoid Physical Encounters
3. Tactical Firearms Training (7-8 hours) – All sworn police department employees attended one training session. The training consists of both classroom and hands-on training addressing shoot/don’t shoot situations, low light/tactical/active shooter situations, and simunitions training.
4. CT POST Mandated and Agreement Specified Training (20 hours) – All sworn police department employees attended classroom training on the following listed topics. These classes fulfill part of
10

each officer’s required CT POST triennial re-certification requirements and also address some of the updated training standards set forth in the Agreement. a. Use of Force (Legal) b. Domestic/Family Violence c. Rape/Crisis (Sexual Violence) d. Juvenile Law Update e. Missing Persons f. First Responders in Child Sex Abuse Cases g. Stress Management
By the 365 day mark, the EHPD addressed Agreement training requirements in paragraphs 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 41, 78, 79, 82, 90, 94, 97, 112, 117, 123, 125, 126, 133, 166, 170, 181, 186,189, 190 , 196, 198, and 209.
Moreover, at the completion of the first year of training, all police department employees have exceeded the minimum hourly standards of training as set forth by the Agreement. The Agreement required that all sworn police department employees receive at a minimum 32 hours of training plus firearms training. In addition, the Agreement requires that all sworn police department supervisory employees receive 40 hours of supervisor related training. Since the EHPD had to establish baseline training, particularly in the areas related to use of force and defensive tactics, the 32 hour minimum required was significantly exceeded.
The JCE commends the EHPD for exceeding hourly requirements of training in a number of areas in the Agreement, as well as for their stated intention to exceed all future training requirements, while also meeting the police officer re-certification requirements set forth by the CT POST Council. During the first 365 days, each sworn employee received between 60-100 hours of training (depending on assignments) to comply with all of the requirements of the Agreement and also to maintain CT POST certification.
Personnel that were/are on long term leave or injury leave will make up any of trainings missed in 2013 when they return to full duty.
11

Although some of the use of force training occurred before the policies were completed, the EHPD incorporated aspects of the emerging policies into their training. Since the policy manual is now complete, the EHPD will review and expand use of force training in early 2014.
At times, the JCE found it challenging to review curricula and training materials provided in different formats and containing inconsistent levels of detail. The JCE has worked and will continue to work with the EHPD Compliance Coordinator to develop a more efficient tracking system or matrix to ensure that future curricula, related training materials, training dates and attendance are presented and tracked in an organized manner. It will be particularly important to document the training that preceded the implementation of the 82 new policies and procedures.
2) Bias-Free Policing Language Access Plan and Language Assistance Coordinator – As required in paragraph 42 of the Agreement, the EHPD has established a Language Assistance Plan (LAP) and appointed a Language Access Coordinator, Lt. David Emerman. Lt. Emerman is fluent in Spanish. The JCE has observed his interaction with members of the East Haven Latino community in different settings and it is clear that he has established some solid lines of communication. The JCE will work with the parties in the coming weeks to agree on specific metrics that will allow objective assessment of the Language Access Plan going forward.
3) Stops, Searches and Seizures Please see additional milestones referenced in the training section above on pages 9-12.
Stop, Search, and Arrest Data – In its letter to Mayor Maturo of December 19, 2011 (page 7), outlining its investigative findings concerning the EHPD, the Department of Justice cited an excessive number of traffic stops by the EHPD of Latino drivers, a rate of 19.9 percent of all stops, significantly higher than the estimated percentage of Latino drivers in East Haven and surrounding towns, which was approximated at 15.5 percent. It was also estimated that in East Haven proper, the percentage of Latino drivers was 8.3 percent.
The Agreement requires that the EHPD provide data on stops, searches and arrests within 270 days of the agreement date, including types of arrests and arrest data broken down by geographic area and
12

demographic group, as well as the proportion of stops to arrests. Some data of this type was provided to the JCE for the period December 21, 2012 to June 21, 2013:
There were 909 traffic stops in the six-month period, with 95.3 percent of stops resulting in some form of police intervention, although the majority of these interventions (558) were either vocal or written warnings. There were five arrests resulting from these stops, or a little more than one half of one percent of the total. The five arrests were executed by five different officers. Misdemeanor summonses resulted from nine percent of the stops, and infraction tickets from 26 percent. Twenty-nine stops, or 3.3 percent of total stops, resulted from officer suspicion of criminal activity. The vast majority of stops, 771 or 78 percent of stops, were related to motor vehicle violations, and 36 other stops were attributed to equipment violations. Eighteen vehicles were searched, or slightly less than two percent of the total. The racial, ethnic, and gender characteristics of the drivers stopped were as follows:
 16.5 percent were minorities.  5.8 percent were Black.  8.9 percent were Latino.  82.2 percent were non-Latino whites.  38.6 percent were women.
This report at the 270 day mark represented a marked improvement from the situation in 2011. The percentage of Latino drivers stopped (8.9 percent) is no longer significantly larger than the estimated percentage of Latino drivers (8.3 percent) in East Haven proper and significantly smaller than the estimated percentage of Latino drivers (15.5 percent) in East Haven and surrounding towns. The total number of Latino drivers stopped in the sixth-month period was 83. In addition, whereas a single officer was cited in the 2011 letter as having a stop rate of Latino drivers of 40.5 percent, the current data shows that six officers, of the 38 evaluated, have stopped six or more Latino drivers in the six-month period. Thirty-two officers have stopped fewer than six, or less than one Latino driver per month. No officer, among the six officers who have stopped six or more Latino drivers, has a Latino-driver stop rate higher than 19 percent, four officers in this group have Latino-driver stop rates higher than 15 percent, and five officers in this group have Latino-driver stop rates higher than 10 percent. The most active
13

traffic-stop officer, with 112 stops in the six-month period, stopped nine Latino drivers, or a Latinodriver stop rate of eight percent.
Additional data representing the 365 day mark, was sent to the JCE on January 13, 2014. The JCE and USDOJ are in the process of reviewing the data and EHPD report. Unfortunately, however, the EHPD installed a new computer program on October 1, 2013 that is linked to the EHPD Computer Aided Dispatch System to automatically collect and categorize stop, search and arrest data (Based upon CT Public Act 12-74 - http://www.ctrp3.com/). The EHPD has experienced difficulty with the new system as it is recording some data incorrectly. Upon initial review, the JCE finds that the traffic stops from July 2013 through December 2013 are in-line with the racial and ethnic make-up of East Haven’s driving population and overall population as measured by the 2010 U.S. Census. However, as noted by EHPD in their report, there are data categorization issues that need to be addressed. The JCE may request additional information and revisions of the July-December 2013 Stop and Search Data report. The JCE will discuss the report with the parties during a phone conference on January 31, 2014.
4) Use of Force Please see milestones referenced in the training section above on pages 9-12.
Use of Force compliance reporting will begin after new use of force polices training and implementation are completed in early 2014. Details relative to use of force requirements are presented in the Agreement paragraphs 79 through 126.
5) Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations and Discipline The Civilian Complaint System and the Early Identification System (EIS) under Agreement paragraph 129 have been developed and implemented. The EIS is a system for receiving complaints. The EHPD has conducted complaint intake and policy training for all personnel, and is publicizing the complaint process. Initial results will be available in early 2014.
The JCE notes one incident reported to the US Attorney’s Office by a woman who was the target of a fraud scheme with respect to her bank account/credit card. The woman claimed EHPD was unresponsive when she tried to file a report with respect to the incident. The woman also became frustrated with the civilian complaint process when she had difficulty navigating the on-line complaint system which was
14

not functioning properly to accept complaints via the internet. An Assistant US Attorney (USAO) aided the woman in finding the on-line complaint form and advised her to hand-deliver the completed complaint to the EHPD. The USAO also notified the JCE of the problem with the civil complaint process. The JCE brought the issue to the attention of the Police Chief and it was addressed immediately. It was determined that the on-line link to the civilian complaint system was in the process of being upgraded. That upgrade has now been completed and is functioning properly. The Chief also took a personal interest in resolving the woman’s concerns about the treatment she received at the station. In the end, the complainant, the Chief, the ASAO and the JCE were all satisfied that the issues were addressed properly.
6) Supervision and Management New policies outlined in the 233 Agreement paragraphs below have been developed detailing updated EHPD supervisory and management processes. Many of these requirements were addressed in the extensive training described above.
7) Community Engagement and Oversight The first community meeting required under the Agreement was held on October 15, 2013, 7:00 pm at the East Haven Senior Center. Four members of the EHPD and two Department Chaplains were in attendance.
A second community meeting was held on November 21, 2013, 7:00 pm at the East Haven Firehouse Volunteer Company 3 Hall. The meeting was attended by three EHPD members.
A third community meeting was scheduled for December 17, 2013, 7:00 pm at the East Haven Beach House/Police Substation but had to be postponed until December 26, 2013 due to severe weather.
The community meetings took place on the north and south side of East Haven and were advertised on the EHPD website, Facebook page and in local publications such as in the East Haven Courier. Lt. Emerman is developing other strategies for attracting more community members to future meetings. He hopes to schedule meetings farther away from major holidays and anticipates more residents will attend in nicer weather. The JCE looks forward to attending some of the community meetings during the coming year.
15

The JCE has contracted with a local researcher, Dr. John DeCarlo to develop and implement a community survey (as well as an EHPD survey and a detainee survey). The JCE anticipates the first survey report will be available in early 2014. The JCE is in receipt of the EHPD 365 day Compliance Report and supporting documents, and would characterize the EHPD report as a thorough and complete response to the EHPD’s obligations under the Agreement. Summary The JCE concludes that the milestones accomplished in year one are quite remarkable. A solid foundation has been established, particularly with the development of the new Policies and Procedures Manual. All members of the EHPD were provided with extensive training during the first year of the Agreement. During year two, the JCE will monitor and assess compliance with the new policies to determine if the policies, training and other products of the Agreement are leading to the desired outcome of professional, constitutional policing in East Haven.
16

II. Compliance Progress Chart for Modified Settlement Agreement Paragraphs 10 through 233, filed on December 23, 2014
CIVIL NO. 3:12-CV-1652 (AWT)

KEY:

Partial Compliance – The Town of East Haven has taken verified and meaningful steps to implement the requirement, including incorporating the requirement in policy, commencing sufficient training to relevant staff on the requirement, and/or carrying out the requirement in actual practice.
Substantial Compliance – The Town of East Haven has implemented the requirement in policy, training, and actual practice to a level and degree that satisfies the material elements and objectives of the requirement, based on the JCE’s qualitative and quantitative assessments.
Full Compliance – The Town of East Haven has achieved substantial compliance with the requirement and sustained such compliance for two years.
Non-Compliance – The Town of East Haven has made little or no progress to implement the requirement or has otherwise failed to take meaningful and verifiable steps to achieve compliance.
Deferred - Requirements were not reviewed, audited, or assessed during the relevant rating period.
IV. POLICIES AND TRAINING GENERALLY

10. EHPD’s policies and procedures shall reflect and express the Department’s core values and priorities,

and provide clear direction to ensure that officers lawfully, effectively, and ethically carry out their law enforcement responsibilities. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all EHPD officers are trained to

understand and be able to fulfill their duties and responsibilities pursuant to EHPD policies and procedures. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that supervisors have the knowledge, skills, and ability to provide close and effective supervision to each officer under the supervisor’s direct command; provide officers with the direction and guidance necessary to improve and develop as police officers; and to

identify, correct, and prevent officer misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. (Overview paragraph for policy manual development)

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the policies

and training section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

This paragraph and paragraphs 11 through 23 relate to the revised EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. The revised policies and procedures manual was completed and submitted to the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners for their approval and is on the EHPD website. A printed manual has been distributed to all EHPD members. The JCE commends the EHPD for undertaking and completing this substantial task within the Agreement time frame.

17

Recommendations The JCE recommends that a printed copy of the manual be made available to the public at the police station and in the Hagaman Public Library per Agreement Paragraph 184.

Evidentiary Basis

To fully implement revised/new policies and procedures, the department must complete the policies and procedures manual training, which EHPD has scheduled in early 2014. 83 policies were reviewed and one was rescinded. 82 policies have been approved by the JCE, USDOJ and Board of Police Commissioners and comprise the East Haven Police Department Policies and Procedures Manual. There are two policies that still need to be reviewed/revised by the JCE and USDOJ ( 209.1 Discipline Guidelines and 215.1 Performance Evaluation). Thus, the new policies and procedures manual has 82 approved policies and two soon-to-be approved policies.

Of the 83 policies that were reviewed, three were approved on August 27, 2013 and became effective on September 30, 2013. Forty-nine were approved on November 20, 2013 and become effective on February 1, 2014. Thirty-one were approved on December 11, 2013 and become effective on March 1, 2014. (Policy 201.1 Code of Conduct was approved on August 27, 2013 was rescinded and rewritten. Policy 201.2 was approved on December 11, 2013 and is included in the manual.)

Two training sessions are scheduled for January and February 2014 with additional roll call and supervisory training occurring simultaneously. A third and fourth training will be added in February 2014 as needed. Seventy-seven policies form the manual are on the EHPD website. There are five policies that were withheld from the public due to confidentiality and officer/public safety reasons.

A. Policy Development, Review and Implementation

11. EHPD shall develop and implement comprehensive and agency-wide policies and procedures that ensure consistency with, and full implementation of, this Agreement, and incorporate each requirement herein. Unless otherwise noted, all policies, procedures, and manuals shall be developed within 270 days of the Effective Date.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

Agency-wide policies and procedures have been developed, but officer training must be completed. The JCE, UDSOJ and EHPD agreed to consider the policies together as part of a revision of the entire EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. The first draft

of the policies and procedures was developed by the 270 day mark. From the 270 to 365 day mark, the JCE and USDOJ reviewed and made recommendations for revisions. All of the 82 policies and procedures were completed by 365 day mark.

Two policies still need final review and Board of Commissioner’s approval. Training is necessary to insure full and effective implementation of the new policies and procedures.

Recommendations The EHPD must complete all the policies and procedures and training, which EHPD has scheduled in early 2014.

18

Evidentiary Basis

83 policies were reviewed, revised and approved by JCE, USDOJ and Board of Police Commissioners. One policy was rescinded. 82 policies are in the East Haven Police Department Policies and Procedures Manual. Two policies are still under review by the JCE and USDOJ.

12. EHPD policies and procedures shall define terms clearly, comply with applicable law and the requirements of this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

This paragraph is covered in the above status reports on paragraphs 10 and 11. The JCE and USDOJ reviewed and approved 83 policies and procedures. One policy has been rescinded. The final two policies must be reviewed. Policy review should be completed promptly.

Evidentiary Basis Following extensive review, 83 policies and procedures were review and approved by the JCE, USDOJ and the Board of Police Commissioners.

13. EHPD shall review each policy or procedure related to this Agreement 180 days after it is

implemented, and annually thereafter, to ensure that the policy or procedure provides effective direction to EHPD personnel and remains consistent with the Agreement, professional police practices, and current law, including incorporating mechanisms to promote and measure accountability and community

engagement. EHPD also shall review policies and procedures as necessary upon notice of a policy deficiency during audits or reviews. Within 60 days of that review EHPD shall revise the policy or procedure and consult with the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert

shall provide the same review and approval of revised policies and procedures as with the initial policies and procedures to ensure consistency with this Agreement.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

EHPD shall review each policy and procedure 180 days after it is implemented, and annually thereafter. Within 60 days of that review EHPD shall review policies and

procedures upon notice of a policy deficiency. Training and policy implementation will not take place until early 2014. The 180 day mark will be determined after all training is completed.

Recommendations The EHPD should complete training as early as possible in 2014. The EHPD shall present a date that all training will be completed so that the 180 day and 60 day marks can be determined and agreed by the JCE and parties.

Evidentiary Basis The EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual and EHPD proposed January and February 2014 training schedule.

14. EHPD’s Department-wide policies and procedures shall be collected in a Department-level policy and procedure manual, and unit-wide policies and procedures (or standard operating procedures) shall be collected in unit-level policy and procedure manuals. EHPD shall develop and implement policy and procedure manuals that include the following EHPD functions:
a) Field operations, including patrol, supervision task forces, and special operations; b) Internal investigations, including case and records management, administrative
investigations, confidential investigations, parallel criminal and administrative investigations, audits, and officer drug testing; c) Use of force reporting, reviews, and investigations, including both Supervisor and

19

IAO force investigations and reviews; and in-custody death reviews; d) Criminal investigations; and e) Field and in-service training.

These manuals shall incorporate and otherwise be consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

These policies and procedures are included in the manual.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The completed policies and procedures manual.

15. EHPD shall expressly prohibit all forms of retaliation, whether subtle or direct, including discouragement, intimidation, coercion, or adverse action, against any person, civilian or officer, who reports misconduct, makes a misconduct complaint, or cooperates with an investigation of misconduct. The default penalty for retaliation shall be termination. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Agreement

paragraph will be tracked by the JCE in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 201.2 and 208.1

16. EHPD shall develop a policy governing its obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and its progeny. As part of this policy, EHPD shall track and maintain records of all officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make these records available to prosecutors. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Agreement paragraph will be tracked by the JCE in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 201.2 and 214.1

17. EHPD shall submit all new and revised policies, procedures, or manuals related to this Agreement to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ for review and comment prior to publication and implementation within 270 days of the Effective Date. If the Joint Compliance Expert or DOJ object that the proposed new or revised policy, procedure, or manual does not incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, or is inconsistent with this Agreement or the law, it shall note this objection in writing to all parties within 15 business days of the receipt of the policy from EHPD. If neither the Joint Compliance Expert nor DOJ object to the new or revised policy, procedure, or manual, EHPD agrees to implement it within 30 days of it being provided to DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations

Substantial Compliance
This requirement was substantially completed by September 17, 2013. The JCE and USDOJ worked with EHPD to make typographical, grammatical and substantive edits to 83 policies that comprised the department’s policies and procedures manual by December 21, 2013; Two remaining policies must be reviewed. None

20

Evidentiary Basis EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual on the EHPD website.

18. EHPD shall have 15 days to resolve any objections to the new or revised policies, procedures, and

manuals implementing the specified provisions. If, after this 15-day period has run, DOJ maintains its objection, then the Joint Compliance Expert shall have an additional 15 days to resolve the objection. If either party disagrees with the Joint Compliance Expert’s resolution of the objection, either Party may ask

the Court to resolve the matter. The Joint Compliance Expert shall determine whether in some instances an additional amount of time is necessary to ensure full and proper review of policies. Factors to consider in making this determination include: 1) complexity of the policy; 2) extent of disagreement regarding

policy; 3) number of policies provided simultaneously; and 4) extraordinary circumstances delaying review by DOJ or the Joint Compliance Expert. In determining whether these factors warrant additional time for review, the Joint Compliance Expert shall fully consider the importance of prompt implementation of

policies, and shall allow additional time for policy review only where it is clear that additional time is necessary to ensure full and proper review. Any extension to the above timelines by the Joint Compliance Expert shall also toll EHPD’s deadline for policy completion.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The 15 day requirement was never invoked

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

19.EHPD shall apply policies uniformly and hold officers accountable for complying with EHPD policy and procedure.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Agreement

paragraph will be tracked by the JCE in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

20. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall formalize a common template to use for all EHPD policies and General Orders. The template shall include a method for updates and revisions that permits all parties to keep track of former versions of policies and General Orders while clearly labeling currently operative policies and General Orders. All EHPD policies and General Orders shall be made to conform to this template. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 2/19/13 deadline

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis EHPD delivered the template by the deadline to the JCE; The template is posted on the EHPD Website.

21. Within 365 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall make all new and revised EHPD policies freely available for public review online, unless there is a reasonable basis for maintaining a specific policy or procedure confidential or unless an exemption from disclosure is allowed under State or Federal Freedom of Information law or any other applicable law. All new and revised policies shall be displayed on the EHPD website which shall also be available through a link on the Town website. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance
21

Discussion Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis

The online requirement was completed by the 12/21/13 deadline.
The JCE also recommends that the community have easy access to review the policies in a neutral location in early 2014, such as at the Hagaman Public Library per Agreement Paragraph 184. The EHPD and USDOJ are also researching cost-effective options for Spanish speakers. The EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual is available online at on the EHPD website.

22. EHPD shall review and revise its Code of Conduct within 180 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter, to:

a) describe with specificity permitted and prohibited officer conduct; b) be consistent with the requirements of professional police practice and this
Agreement; and c) have an absolute requirement of officer honesty and make termination the default penalty for
dishonesty. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180 day deadline of 6/19/13 and will be reviewed annually. The original Code of Conduct policy was rescinded and replaced by a rewritten and updated version.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The JCE and USDOJ received and reviewed and the East Haven Board of Commissioners approved the revised EHPD Code of Conduct Policy # 201.2

23. EHPD shall submit proposed revisions to its Code of Conduct to the JCE and DOJ for review at least 60 days before the implementation of any revision. The dispute resolution process and associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 shall apply to DOJ and the JCE's review of any new or revised Code of Conduct. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

The original Code of Conduct has been revised and approved by the JCE and USDOJ. It was included in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Training and subsequent implementation on the new Code of Conduct still need to occur. The JCE recommends this be scheduled in early 2014. Policy 201.1 completed JCE approval memo dated 8/23/13 Final redlined version reviewed and approved by USDOJ and JCE on 12/5/13, as noted in emails and at bi-weekly team meeting on 12/6/13.

B. Training on Revised Policies, Procedures and Practices

24. EHPD shall ensure each officer and employee attends a 2 - 4 hour training on the content of this Agreement and the responsibilities of each officer and employee pursuant to it. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

Within 60 days of the effective date (E.D.); 2/19/13

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis EHPD provided documentation that this training was provided to all sworn and

22

civilian department members by the 60 day mark.

25. Within 30 days after issuing a policy or procedure pursuant to this Agreement, EHPD shall ensure that all relevant EHPD personnel have received, read, and understand their responsibilities pursuant to the policy or procedure, including the requirement that each officer or employee report violations of policy;

that supervisors of all ranks shall be held accountable for identifying and responding to policy or procedure violations by personnel under their command; and that personnel will be held accountable for policy and procedure violations. EHPD shall document that each relevant EHPD officer or other employee

has received, read, and sufficiently understands the policy. Training beyond roll-call or similar training will be necessary for many new policies to ensure officers understand and can perform their duties pursuant to the policy

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

This is currently ongoing with the completion and issuance of the new EHPD Policies

and Procedures Manual December 21, 2013.

Recommendations By March 1, 2014, EHPD shall provide the JCE and USDOJ with a list of attendees, their associated job titles and the trainings they attended relevant to the revised

policies and procedures.

Evidentiary Basis The JCE and USDOJ will review training materials and the training list with associated attendees.

26. EHPD shall ensure delivery of the one-time and recurrent in-service training requirements set out

throughout this Agreement. As set out herein, EHPD shall provide a minimum of 32 hours of in-service

training each year to each officer, in addition to any specialized training for officers in certain units,

supervisors, etc., and in addition to the one-time training required by this Agreement. Training in related

areas may be delivered together. (For example, aspects of training in effective community engagement

and bias-free policing may be incorporated into stop, search, and arrest training). The in-service training

shall not include any firearms training required by the state. The frequency and subject areas for initial

one-time and recurrent in-service training are set out in the sections below; however, it is anticipated that

the frequency and subject areas for in-service training in the future will be determined by the training plan

this Agreement requires EHPD to develop.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD has completed all of the training required by this document. The trainings

as required in paragraphs 24, 26, 27, 33, 41, 78, 117b, 125, 126, and 133 have been

substantially completed. To set a baseline standard and understanding by all

employees, the EHPD exceeded the hourly requirements of most training referenced

in the aforementioned paragraphs of the Agreement. During years 2-4, the EHPD

plans to meet or exceed all of the requirements of the Agreement, while also

meeting the police officer re-certification requirements set forth by the CT POST

Council. During the first 365 days, each sworn employee received between 60-100

hours of training (depending upon their respective assignments) to comply with all of

the requirements of the Agreement and also to maintain CT POST certification. Each

supervisory or potential supervisory employee received an additional 80 hours of

training, consistent with their respective ranks and on completing internal affairs

investigations. All non-sworn civilian employees received a total of approximately 18

hours of training.

Although all training for 2013 has been completed, the JCE has found it challenging

23

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

to track all training as it relates to specific Agreement paragraphs as well as verify all training and training materials. In the EHPD compliance reports it is sometimes difficult to determine if training reports are cumulative or simply cover the period since the last report was due. The JCE will continue to track training in 2014. The JCE will work with EHPD to develop a matrix or check-list of materials that need to be reviewed and approved by the JCE for future training. An update to the EHPD Training Goals and Objectives report should be made in 2014. EHPD Training Goals and Objectives report dated 9/17/13

27. EHPD shall provide mandatory supervisory, leadership, and command accountability training, tailored to each level of supervision and command, of 24 – 40 hours. All EHPD supervisors shall receive supervisory training prior to assuming supervisory responsibilities or serving as an acting supervisor, and

shall receive no fewer than 40 hours of supervisory in-service training annually thereafter.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

All EHPD supervisors received the required number of hours of training. Specialized training classes were approved for individual officers after the JCE reviewed the

curriculum. For example, the EHPD Lt. in charge of the overseeing the Agreement received specialized training at the Kennedy School of Government Senior Executives in State and Local Government three-week training.

Recommendations For future training, the EHPD should send the JCE and USDOJ 2014 all supervisory, leadership and command accountability training curricula and related materials as outlined in the training matrix identified in paragraph 26 recommendations above.

Evidentiary Basis Supervisory training curricula were reviewed by the JCE.

28. The supervisory training program shall include instruction in the following topics:

a) techniques for effectively guiding and directing officers and promoting effective and ethical police practices;
b) de-escalating conflict; c) evaluation of written reports; d) reviewing and investigating officer uses of force; e) responding to and investigating allegations of officer misconduct; f) risk assessment and risk management; g) evaluating officer performance; h) appropriate disciplinary sanctions and non-disciplinary corrective action; and i) using the Risk Management System to facilitate close and effective supervision. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

These required topic areas were included in the training materials reviewed and

approved by the JCE and USDOJ.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Supervisory training curricula 2013 (from Institute of Police Technology and Mgt. )

29. EHPD shall submit training curricula and lesson plans, revised pursuant to this Agreement, to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ for review and comment at least 45 days prior to the scheduled date of training delivery. The Joint Compliance Expert shall provide the Parties with written comments regarding
24

the training. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall review all EHPD training curricula and lesson plans

promulgated pursuant to this Agreement to determine whether they are consistent with and incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices. The dispute

resolution process and associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 of this Agreement shall apply to DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert’s review of training curricula and lesson plans.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

This requirement was modified and approved by the court from 90 days. Since there is so much training associated with the first 365 days of the Agreement, all agreed 45

days was a more realistic time frame.

Recommendations Working with the EHPD, the JCE will request a better tracking sheet be developed for listing and documenting all training sessions and associated curricula review deadlines in 2014.

Evidentiary Basis Training curricula and/or relevant training materials for the first 365 days were reviewed and approved by the JCE and USDOJ.

30. Unless otherwise noted, the training required pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered within

365 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall set out a schedule for delivering all training required by this Agreement.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

Required training, with the exception of the policies and procedures manual training, was delivered on time within the 365 days of the Agreement Effective Date. A

training plan/schedule was also delivered by the 180 day mark.

Recommendations Working with the EHPD, the JCE will request a better tracking sheet or training matrix be developed for listing and documenting all training sessions and associated

curricula and relevant materials and deadlines in 2014.

Evidentiary Basis EHPD provided documentation that all training was delivered within the 365 day mark and provided a training schedule at the 180 day mark.

31. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement documented and approved testing policies and procedures regarding training to ensure that that all testing is valid, reliable, fair, and legally defensible. Both knowledge-based and performance-based tests shall be designed, developed, administered, and scored according to established professional standards of practice. Testing policies and procedures shall include detailed test security measures. All tests shall be job-related, testing knowledge and skills required for successful job performance. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 270 day mark, however, additional training on this new policy issued November 2013 will occur in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 106.1

V. BIAS FREE POLICING
32. EHPD shall deliver police services that are equitable, respectful, and free of unlawful bias, in a manner that promotes broad community engagement and confidence in the Department. In conducting its
25

activities, EHPD shall ensure that members of the public receive equal protection of the law, without bias based on demographic category, and in accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. (Overview Paragraph) Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the Bias Free Policing Section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

A. Bias- Free Policing

33. EHPD shall provide all officers with 4 hours of comprehensive and interdisciplinary training on bias-

free policing within 180 days of the Effective Date, and 2 – 4 hours annually thereafter, based on developments in Connecticut or federal law and EHPD policy. Such training shall emphasize that discriminatory policing, in the form of either selective enforcement or non-enforcement of the law,

including the selecting or rejecting of particular policing tactics or strategies, is prohibited by policy and will subject officers to discipline. This training shall address:
a) methods and strategies for more effective policing that relies upon non-discriminatory factors;

b) police and community perspectives related to discriminatory policing;

c) constitutional and other legal requirements related to equal protection and unlawful

discrimination, including the requirements of this Agreement;

d) the protection of civil rights as a central part of the police mission and as essential to effective

policing;

e) the existence and impact of arbitrary classifications, stereotyping, and implicit bias;

f) instruction in the data collection protocols required by this Agreement;

g) identification of key decision points where prohibited discrimination can take effect at both the

incident and strategic-planning levels; and

h) methods, strategies, and techniques to reduce misunderstanding, conflict, and complaints due to

perceived bias or discrimination, including problem-oriented policing strategies.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

This training was provided by the Spector Training Network and taught by Eliot Spector, a highly respected attorney and lecturer. The training included bias-free policing practices and stop, search and arrest procedures. The lesson plans, which

reflect the Agreement’s requirements, were approved by the JCE. An officer and a Lt. missed the training and were rescheduled. The Lt., however, was unable to attend the make-up training as well. The Lt. has since documented evidence that he

has received this training from other sources (Kennedy School of Gov’t at Harvard University)

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Training test results for attendees on file at the EHPD; Discussion with EHPD

Compliance Coordinator; Kennedy School of Government classroom materials

26

B. Ensuring Bias-Free Policing

34. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of demographic category in EHPD police practices. This policy shall have the following elements:

a) EHPD’s policy on bias-free policing shall prohibit officers from using demographic category (to any

extent or degree) in conducting stops or detentions, or activities following stops or detentions,

except when engaging in appropriate suspect-specific activity to identify a particular person or

persons.

b) EHPD shall prohibit officer use of proxies for demographic category, including language

ability, geographic location, or manner of dress.

c) When officers are seeking one or more specific persons who have been identified or described by

their demographic category, or any proxy thereto, officers may rely on these descriptions only when

combined with other appropriate identifying factors, and may not give exclusive attention or undue

weight to demographic category.

d) Data collection, as set forth in Paragraphs 64(c) and 65 of this Agreement.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

This is the bias-free policing policy # 203.1

Bias-Free policing training occurred in 2013 as noted in paragraph 33 prior to the policy being completely approved and implemented.

Recommendations Additional review training on this policy should be included in the policies and

procedures manual training in early 2014.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 203.1 in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

35. EHPD shall conduct quarterly analysis, as well as analysis on a cumulative basis, consistent with the methodology employed by the Joint Compliance Expert, of its traffic enforcement activities to ensure officer, squad, and Department compliance with the bias-free policy.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis

Partial Compliance
This requirement was first completed at the 180 mark, however, subsequent reports have been delayed due to a software problem with a new CAD-based program that automatically tracks and analyzes these data. Submit quarterly reports to be received by the JCE and USDOJ by the last day of the calendar year quarter March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31. Data problems in the two reports that have been submitted to date must be resolved. First report submitted at the 180 mark. Second report submitted on January 13, 2014.

36. EHPD shall develop a formalized procedure for officers to notify arrested foreign nationals of their right to contact their consulate, or to contact the appropriate consular official directly. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

Training on this new policy will be completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 304.1

27

37. EHPD shall refer any complaint plausibly implicating the bias-free policy to the IAO and to the Joint Compliance Expert. EHPD shall treat any violation of the bias-free policy as a serious violation. Officers who engage in discriminatory policing will be subjected to discipline, and, where appropriate, possible

criminal prosecution.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The East Haven Police Department experienced a significant setback resulting from

an incident that occurred in New Haven on January 17, 2013, less than one month after the execution of the Agreement. The facts of the case were very troubling, as they related directly to conduct referenced in this paragraph. The JCE is satisfied with

the response of Chief Larrabee and the internal affairs investigation. All discipline been handed down and one officer is appealing. The JCE will continue to monitor developments related to this case.

Recommendations Continue to keep the JCE and USDOJ apprised of any complaints or violations in a timely manner.

Evidentiary Basis Chief’s immediate notification to JCE and DOJ.

Regular and ongoing case briefings. Comprehensive internal affairs investigation and report.

38. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall incorporate concrete requirements regarding biasfree policing and equal protection into its hiring, promotion, and performance assessment processes, including giving significant weight to an individual’s documented history of bias-free policing, as well as using interviews and other methods to assess the individual’s ability and willingness to effectively practice bias-free policing. EHPD’s hiring plan shall also include steps to encourage qualified minority and other candidates who have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities to apply for positions in EHPD. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180 day mark.

Recommendations JCE will work with parties to develop metrics

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

C. Language Assistance

39. EHPD shall ensure effective communication with and provide timely and meaningful access to police services to all members of the community, regardless of their national origin or limited ability to speak, read, write, or understand English. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:
a) develop and implement a comprehensive language assistance plan and policy that complies, at a minimum, with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.) and other applicable law, and comports with professional policing practices;
b) ensure that all EHPD personnel take reasonable steps to provide timely, meaningful language assistance services to LEP individuals they encounter and whenever an LEP individual requests language assistance services;
c) identify and assess demographic data, specifically the number of LEP individuals within its jurisdiction and the number of LEP victims and witnesses who seek EHPD services;
d) use collected demographic and service data to develop and meet specific hiring goals for bilingual staff;
28

e) regularly assess the proficiency and qualifications of bilingual staff to become a EHPD Authorized

Interpreter (“EHPDAI”); f) ensure that 911 call-takers identify an EHPDAI to respond to an incident involving an LEP individual.

If no EHPDAI is available, the personnel shall contact a telephonic interpretation service provider. The call-taker shall note in information to the radio dispatch that the 911 caller is an LEP individual and
indicate the language;

g) develop protocols for interpretation for interrogations and interviews of LEP individuals, including requiring and ensuring the use of a qualified interpreter for the taking of any formal statement that could adversely affect a suspect or witness’ legal rights;
h) develop and implement a process for taking, responding to and tracking civilian complaints and

resolutions of complaints filed by LEP individuals; i) implement a process for recruitment of qualified bilingual personnel to meet demonstrated service needs. As part of this process, EHPD shall establish significant and sustained

relationships with local and state-wide institutions and community organizations that can serve as the source of qualified bilingual applicants and facilitate outreach to such advocates; and

j) implement effective incentives for bilingual employees to become EHPDAIs, such as pay differentials and consideration in performance evaluations, assignments, and promotions.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180 day mark; The plan is described in detail in Policy and Procedure 301.1, which is a thorough and complete document

mandating: 1) the appointment of the Language Assistance Coordinator, 2) procedures for notifying the public about the EHPD’s language services, 3) hiring goals for bilingual staff at the EHPD, and 4) the qualifications for members of the

department authorized to act as EHPD interpreters (EHPDAI). It also establishes protocols for hiring contract interpreters to provide interpretation and translation service as necessary, currently through Language Line Solutions, but also from other

vendors should Language Line Solutions be no longer available. The policy prescribes one hour of training for all EHPD personnel in how to assist limited English proficiency (LEP) individuals in conducting their business with the department. Procedures for conducting interrogations and interviews of LEP individuals, as well as

taking complaints against the department from, and reporting dispositions of complaint investigations to, LEP individuals are also established by the policy. A

Language Assistance Coordinator, Lieutenant David Emerman, has been appointed. Lt. Emerman is a fluent Spanish speaker, who also serves as the Community Liaison Officer, required by Agreement Paragraph 181.

Recommendations JCE will continue to monitor bilingual staff hiring and processes and procedures for

assisting LEP individual conducting business with the EHPD.

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan Hiring Language Assistance Coordinator

Policy 301.1

40. EHPD shall translate the language assistance plan and policy into Spanish and other languages as appropriate, and post the English and translated versions in a public area of the police department building, as well as online, and in any other locations throughout the Town where individuals go to seek police assistance. EHPD shall distribute the language assistance plan and policy to a variety of community organizations serving LEP communities encountered by EHPD.
Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

29

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

This requirement was completed by the 180 day mark. Provide the JCE with a list of community organizations who have received the plan. Language Assistance Plan Policy 301.1

41. 44 41. EHPD shall distribute its LEP plan and policy to all staff and police personnel, and, within 180 days of the Effective Date provide a minimum of one hour of training to all personnel on providing language assistance services to LEP individuals. This training shall include:

a) EHPD’s LEP plan and policies, and the requirements of Title VI and this Agreement; b) how to access EHPD-authorized, telephonic and in-person interpreters;

c) how to work with interpreters in the field; d) cultural diversity and language barrier policing; and

e) basic command Spanish for officers assigned to patrol areas with significant LEP populations.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180 day mark.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan and Training Report.

42. Within 60 days of Effective Date, the Town shall designate a language access coordinator who shall

coordinate and ensure EHPD’s compliance with its language assistance plan.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 60 day mark.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Lt. Emerman assigned

43. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a process of consultation

with representatives of the LEP community to develop and at least annually review: implementation of

the language assistance plan, including areas of possible collaboration to ensure its effectiveness;

identification of additional languages that would be appropriate for translation of materials; accuracy and

quality of EHPD language assistance services; and concerns, ideas, and strategies for ensuring language

access.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

According to EHPD, this requirement was completed by the 60 day mark.

Recommendations JCE will work with parties to agree metrics

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

VI. STOPS, SEARCHES, AND ARRESTS
44. EHPD shall ensure that all EHPD investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are conducted in accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. EHPD shall ensure that investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are part of an effective overall crime prevention strategy; are consistent with community priorities for enforcement; and are carried out even-handedly. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance
30

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the stops, searches, and arrest section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces. None n/a

A. Investigatory Stops and Detentions

45. EHPD officers shall conduct investigatory stops or detentions only where the officer has reasonable suspicion that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in the commission of a crime.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Partial Compliance The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, searches and arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed. None Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Agreement.

46. EHPD officers shall not use “canned” or conclusory language in any reports documenting investigatory

stops, detentions and searches. Articulation of reasonable suspicion and probable cause shall be specific

and clear.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops,

detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies

and procedures throughout the Agreement.

47. EHPD officers shall not use or rely on information known to be materially false or incorrect in

effectuating an investigatory stop or detention.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops,

detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies

and procedures throughout the Agreement.

48. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category as a factor, to any extent or degree, in establishing

reasonable suspicion or probable cause, except as part of an actual and credible description of a specific

suspect in an ongoing investigation.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops,

detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

31

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed. None Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Agreement.

B. Searches

49. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category in exercising discretion to conduct a warrantless

search or to seek a search warrant, except as part of an actual and credible description of a specific

suspect in an ongoing investigation.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops,

detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies

and procedures throughout the Agreement.

50. Where an officer seeks consent for a search, the officer shall affirmatively inform the subject of his or

her right to refuse and to revoke consent at any time, articulate and document the independent legal

justification for the search, and document the subject’s consent on a written form that explains these

rights.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops,

detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies

and procedures throughout the Agreement.

51. EHPD shall ensure that the consent to search form includes separate signature lines for civilians to

affirm that they understand they have a right to refuse, and for officers to certify that they have read and

explained the right to refuse to the civilian

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops,

detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies

and procedures throughout the Agreement.

52. An affidavit or sworn declaration supporting an application for a search warrant shall provide an

accurate, complete, and clear description of the offense, the place or thing to be searched, scope of the

search, and time and method of the search.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops,

detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

32

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed. None Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Agreement.

53. A supervisor shall review each request for a search or arrest warrant, including each affidavit or

declaration before it is filed by an officer in support of a warrant application, for appropriateness, legality,

and conformance with EHPD policy and this Agreement. The supervisor shall assess the information

contained in the warrant application and supporting documents for authenticity, including an examination

for “canned” or conclusory language, inconsistent information, and lack of articulation of a legal basis for

the warrant.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops,

detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies

and procedures throughout the Agreement.

54. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those warrant

applications that are legally unsupported, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that

indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The

supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies, including recommending

non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative

or criminal investigation. The quality and accuracy of search warrants and supportive affidavits or

declarations shall be taken into account in officer performance evaluations.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops,

detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies

and procedures throughout the Agreement.

55. A supervisor shall review the operational plan for the execution of a search warrant and, absent exceptional circumstances, shall be present for execution of the search warrant. A supervisor shall

document in the case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her presence. Once executed, a supervisor shall review the execution of the search warrant. Supervisors shall memorialize their reviews in

writing within 24 hours of the execution of a search warrant. The quality of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s performance evaluations.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Agreement.

33

56. EHPD shall maintain centrally a log listing each search warrant, the case file where a copy of such warrant is maintained, the officer who applied for, and each supervisor who reviewed the application for a search warrant. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Agreement.

C. Arrests

57. EHPD officers shall only arrest an individual where the officer has probable cause. In effectuating an arrest, EHPD officers shall not rely on information known to be materially false or incorrect. Officers may not consider demographic category in effecting an arrest, except as part of an actual and credible description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

58. An officer shall immediately notify a supervisor when effectuating: a felony arrest; an arrest where the officer used force; an arrest for obstructing or resisting an officer; any arrest for the violation of interfering with an officer; any arrest for violation of either breach of the peace in the second degree or

disorderly conduct in which the violative conduct is (a) a reaction to police presence or officer conduct, or (b) targeted towards a police officer; or a custodial arrest for a vehicle infraction, and the supervisor shall, absent exceptional circumstances, immediately respond to the scene. A supervisor shall document in the

case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her presence.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and measure outcomes in 2014 after training

is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

59. The responding supervisor shall approve or disapprove the officer’s arrest recommendation, based on the existence of justifiable probable cause and EHPD policy. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in the officer’s arrest recommendation, including releasing the subject, recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the

34

incident for administrative or criminal investigation.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Partial Compliance
The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed. None
Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

60. At the time of presentment at EHPD headquarters, a watch commander or supervisor shall visually inspect each detainee or arrestee for injury, interview the detainee or arrestee for complaints of pain, and ensure that the detainee or arrestee receives medical attention from an appropriate medical provider, as necessary. The watch commander or supervisor shall document the results of the visual inspection in writing. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

61. EHPD officers shall complete all arrest reports before the end of shift. EHPD field supervisors shall review each arrest report of officers under their command and shall memorialize their review in writing

within 12 hours of the arrest, absent exceptional circumstances. Supervisors shall review reports and forms for “canned” or conclusory language, inconsistent information, lack of articulation of the legal basis for the action, or other indicia that the information in the reports or forms is not authentic or correct.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

35

62. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those arrests

that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The

supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in making arrests, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or

deficiency and the corrective action taken, to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each violation or deficiency is noted in the officer’s performance evaluations. The quality of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s own performance evaluations. EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to

conduct reviews of adequate and consistent quality.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and measure outcomes in 2014 after training

is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

63. A command-level official shall review, in writing, all supervisory reviews related to arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that indicate a need

for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The commander’s review shall be completed within seven days of receiving the document reporting the event. The commander

shall evaluate the corrective action and recommendations in the supervisor’s written report and ensure that all appropriate corrective action is taken, including referring the incident to the IAO for investigation.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

D. Stop and Search Data Collection and Review

64. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy on stops, searches and seizures. This policy shall have the following elements:
a) A requirement that prior to making traffic stops, officers notify dispatch about known information, including the number of occupants of the vehicle, the perceived race or ethnicity of the occupants, and a description of the basis for the stop;
b) A detailed description of the justification necessary for officers to make stops and arrests; c) A requirement that all stops, searches, and seizures be documented in an Incident Report that
records: i. the officer’s name and badge number; ii. date, time, and location of the stop;
36

iii. duration of the stop;

iv. the apparent race, color or ethnicity of the individual, based on the police officer’s reasonable observation and perception;

v. the suspected violation that led to the stop; vi. whether any contraband or evidence was seized from any individual, and nature of the contraband or evidence;

vii. the post-stop action taken with regard to the violation (including a warning, a citation, an arrest, or a use of force); and viii. whether any search was conducted, the kind of search conducted, the basis for the search, whether the search was consensual or non-consensual, and the outcome of the search.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

Policy 409.1 and 420.1 were informed by and completed after training by 1) the Spector Training Network. as required in Paragraph 78 of the Agreement,
including instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law, as well as First

Amendment and related law.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1 Motor Vehicle Stops and Policy 420.1 Search and Seizure and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and

Procedures Manual.

65. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a system to collect data on all investigatory

stops and searches, whether or not they result in an arrest or issuance of a citation. This system shall allow for analysis and searches and also shall be integrated into the EIS. EHPD’s stop and search data collection system shall be subject to the review of the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall require

officers to document all required information

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE reviewed the first stop and search data collection system at the 270 mark. Please see page 12-13, focus area # 3 for discussion on Stop, Searches, and Seizures.

Recommendations The JCE needs to verify that the new computer system is up and running and review the reports it generates after current computer software problems are fixed. The JCE will review a new report on the system and outcomes after all policy training

is completed in early 2014

Evidentiary Basis The on-site database and EHPD reports.

66. Officers shall submit documentation of investigatory stops and detentions, and any searches resulting

from or proximate to the stop or detention, including a complete and accurate inventory of all property or evidence seized, to their supervisors by the end of the shift in which the police action occurred. Absent exceptional circumstances, within 12 hours of receiving a report on an investigatory stop and detention or

search, a supervisor shall review the report and shall document: (a) those investigatory stops and detentions that appear unsupported by reasonable suspicion, (b) those searches that appear to be

without legal justification; (c) stops or searches in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or (d) stops or searches that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops,

detentions and searches any were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

37

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed. The JCE in coordination with USDOJ and EHPD will develop a process measuring compliance on this paragraph in early 2014. To be determined.

67. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address all violations or deficiencies in investigatory stops or detention or executing a search, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for

the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken, if any, to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each violation or

deficiency is noted in the officer’s performance evaluations. The quality and completeness of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s own performance evaluations. EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to conduct complete,

thorough, and accurate reviews of officers’ investigatory detentions and searches.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches any were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE will track and

measure outcomes in 2014 after training is completed

Recommendations The JCE in coordination with USDOJ and EHPD will develop a process measuring compliance on this paragraph in early 2014.

Evidentiary Basis To be determined.

68. EHPD shall develop a protocol for comprehensive analysis, on at least a quarterly basis, of the stop and search data collected. This protocol shall be subject to the review of the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall identify and incorporate appropriate benchmarks for comparison.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

A report covering these data for December 2012 through June 2013 was completed. A new computer program to collect and analyze these data was added. The software is having problems causing data to be incorrectly categorized. The EHPD sent the JCE a report covering data July –December 2013, but there are still problems with how data is categorized that the JCE will discuss with EHPD in January 2014. The JCE will review the protocol and work with EHPD to understand the new computer software. Report and discussion with Compliance Coordinator and data reports.

69. On at least a semi-annual basis, EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall issue a report summarizing the stop and search data collected, the analysis of that data, and the steps taken to correct problems and build on successes. The report shall be publicly available.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

From the EHPD 270 Day REPORT “In compliance with Item #4 (Page 20, Paragraph 69), on September 21, 2013, the EHPD submitted to the DOJ and JCE its first stop analysis report for the time period of January 1, 2013 through June 30, 2013. A second report covering July – December 2013 was submitted, but is not complete as there are still data categorization issues that the JCE will discuss with EHPD in January 2014.

38

Recommendations EHPD to deliver a corrected report to the JCE for the period July through December 2013 in February 2014.
Evidentiary Basis Report #1 and #2 and conversations with EHPD Compliance Coordinator.

70. EHPD shall ensure that all databases containing individual specific data comply fully with federal and state privacy standards governing personally identifying information. EHPD shall develop a process to restrict database access to authorized, identified users who are accessing the information for a specific and identified purpose. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure

compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1

E. First Amendment Right to Observe and Record Officer Conduct

71. EHPD shall ensure that onlookers or bystanders may witness, observe, record, and/or comment on officer conduct, including stops, detentions, searches, arrests, or uses of force in accordance with their

rights, immunities, and privileges secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. Officers shall respect the right of civilians to observe, record, and/or verbally comment on or complain

about the performance of police duties occurring in public, and EHPD shall ensure that officers understand that exercising this right serves important public purposes.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

Policy 204.1 was issued in November and December 2013. All Department members will be trained on this and other policies and procedures in the new EHPD Policy and

Procedure Manual in early 2014. The JCE will review compliance after the training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1

72. Individuals observing stops, detentions, arrests and other incidents shall be permitted to remain in the proximity of the incident unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to move an individual, such as: an individual’s presence would jeopardize the safety of the officer, the suspect, or others in the vicinity; the individual violates the law; or the individual incites others to violate the law. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

All Department members will be trained on all policies and procedures in the new EHPD Policy and Procedure Manual in early 2014. The JCE will review compliance after the training is completed. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this Agreement paragraph in the field. Policy 204.1

73. Individuals shall be permitted to record police officer enforcement activities by camera, video recorder, cell phone recorder, or other means, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to deny permission.
39

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
This policy was issued in November 2013 and will be fully implemented after training occurs in early 2014 The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. Policy 204.1

74. Officers shall not threaten, intimidate, or otherwise discourage an individual from remaining in the proximity of or recording police officer enforcement activities.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure

compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1

75. Officers shall not detain, prolong the detention of, or arrest an individual for remaining in the proximity of, recording or verbally commenting on officer conduct directed at the individual or a third party, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis for the detention.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure

compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1

76. Officers shall report to their supervisors whenever they believe they have been recorded by a member of the public.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure

compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1

77. Officers shall not seize or otherwise coerce production of recorded sounds or images, without obtaining a warrant, or order an individual to destroy such recordings. Where an officer has a reasonable belief that a bystander or witness has captured a recording of critical evidence related to a felony, the officer may secure such evidence for no more than six hours while a legal subpoena, search warrant, or other valid order is obtained. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion Recommendations

Modified from three hours from the original Agreement under July 17, 2013 Order Modification, because three hours would not be long enough time to draft search warrant affidavit, review by a supervisor and prosecutor, and submit to judge. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1

40

F. Stop, Search and Arrest Training
78. EHPD shall provide all officers with comprehensive training on stops, searches and arrests, including the requirements of this Agreement, of no fewer than 8 hours within 180 days of the Effective Date and between 4 – 6 hours on an at least an annual basis thereafter. Such training shall be taught by a competent legal instructor with significant experience litigating, or teaching at an accredited law school, Fourth Amendment issues, and shall:
a) address Fourth Amendment and related law; EHPD policies, and requirements in this Agreement regarding searches and seizures;
b) address First Amendment and related law in the context of the rights of individuals to verbally dispute, observe, and record officer conduct;
c) address the difference between various police contacts by the scope and level of police intrusion; between probable cause, reasonable suspicion and mere speculation; and voluntary consent from mere acquiescence to police authority;
d) provide guidance on the facts and circumstances that should be considered in initiating, conducting, terminating, and expanding an investigatory stop or detention;
e) provide guidance on proper and improper use of pretextual stops. f) provide guidance on the level of permissible intrusion when conducting searches, such as “patdowns” or “frisks”; g) provide guidance on the legal requirements for conducting searches, with and without a warrant; h) provide guidance on the nature and scope of searches based on the level of permissible intrusion on an individual’s privacy interests, including searches conducted pursuant to probation or parole release provisions; i) specify the procedures for executing searches, including handling, recording, and taking custody of seized property or evidence; j) provide guidance on effecting an arrest with and without an arrest warrant; and k) provide guidance regarding the nature and scope of searches incident to an arrest.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance Training was provided by June 19, 2013, the 180 day mark. The Spector Training Network has provided eight hours of stop, search, and arrest training as required in this Agreement paragraph, including instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law, as well as First Amendment and related law. This training was provided prior to the completion and approval of the policy manual. Additional review may be presented in early 2014. This training should be listed in the EHPD training tracking sheet as noted in paragraph 29. The JCE should be notified of any additional review or new training in this area in early 2014. Training curricula reviewed by JCE and USDOJ.

41

VII. USE OF FORCE

79. EHPD shall develop and implement force policies, training, and review mechanisms that ensure that

force by EHPD officers is used in accordance with the rights, privileges, and immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that any unreasonable uses of force are identified and responded to appropriately. EHPD shall ensure that officers use non-force techniques to

effect compliance with police orders whenever feasible; use physical force only when objectively reasonable; use physical force in a manner that avoids unnecessary injury to officers and civilians; and deescalate the physical use of force at the earliest possible moment. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements set out below

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the use of force section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

A. Use of Force Principles

80. EHPD uses of force, regardless of the type of force or weapon used, shall abide by the following requirements:

a) officers shall use advisements, warnings, and verbal persuasion, when possible, before resorting to

physical force;

b) physical force shall be de-escalated immediately as resistance decreases;

c) supervisors shall determine whether the action or inaction of officers using physical force, or of

other EHPD officers on scene, resulted in the need to use physical force;

d) officers will use disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a subject, summoning

reinforcements, and/or calling in specialized units, when possible, in order to reduce the need for physical

force and increase officer and civilian safety;

e) officers shall allow individuals time to submit to arrest before physical force is used wherever

possible;

f) officers shall not use neck holds or a strike to the head with a hard object, except where lethal force

is authorized;

g) using physical force against persons in handcuffs is prohibited except in emergencies in which a

reasonable officer would believe that bodily harm to another person or persons is imminent;

h) unholstering and pointing a firearm at an individual constitutes a use of force and shall be limited

accordingly; and

i) immediately following a use of physical force officers and, upon arrival, a supervisor, shall inspect

and observe subjects for injury or complaints of pain and obtain immediately any necessary medical care.

This may require an officer to provide emergency medical care until professional medical care providers

are on-scene.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure

compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations n/a

42

Evidentiary Basis Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1 B. General Use of Force Policy

81. EHPD shall develop and implement an overarching agency-wide use of force policy that complies with applicable law and comports with professional police practices. The comprehensive use of force policy

shall include all force techniques, technologies, and weapons, both lethal and less-lethal, that are available to EHPD officers. The comprehensive use of force policy shall clearly define and describe each force option and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The general use of force

policy will incorporate the use of force principles articulated above and shall specify that the unreasonable use of force will subject officers to discipline, possible criminal prosecution, and/or civil liability.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1

82. In addition to a primary agency-wide use of force policy, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and protocols for each authorized weapon, including each of the types of force addressed below. No officer shall carry any weapon or use force that is not authorized by the Department. EHPD use of force policies shall include training and certification requirements that each officer must meet before being permitted to carry and used the authorized weapon. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1

C. Use of Firearms

83. Officers shall not possess or use unauthorized firearms or ammunition, or obtain service ammunition from any source, except through official EHPD channels. All officers’ firearms shall be filled with the capacity number of rounds while on duty.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Partial Compliance
Although use of force training was completed in 2013, there are new policies that will require additional training in early 2014. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. None
Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1

43

84. Officers shall not fire at or from a moving vehicle, unless use of lethal force is justified by something other than the threat from the moving vehicle; shall not intentionally place themselves in the path of or reach inside a moving vehicle; and where possible shall attempt to move out of the path of a moving vehicle before discharging their weapon. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1

85. Officers shall successfully qualify with each firearm they are authorized to use or carry on-duty pursuant to Connecticut requirements. Officers who fail to qualify shall immediately relinquish those firearms on which they failed to qualify. Those officers who still fail to qualify after remedial training within a reasonable time shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1

86. Critical firearm discharges by officers on- or off-duty shall be reported and investigated. Data and analysis related to critical firearm discharges shall be tracked in EIS and EHPD's Use of Force Annual Report. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will also review data via the EIS and EHPD’s Annual Use of Force report due in 2014. Since policies were just approved and go into effect in 2014, there is not enough use of force data to analyze yet. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1

D. Electronic Control Weapons

87. EHPD shall limit the use of ECWs to only those situations in which such force is necessary to protect the officer, the subject, or another party from immediate physical harm. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field.

44

Recommendations None Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

88. Unless it would present a danger to the officer or others, officers shall issue a verbal warning to the subject that the ECW will be used prior to use. Where feasible, the officer will defer ECW application a reasonable time to allow the subject to comply with the warning. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

89. ECWs will not be used where such deployment may cause serious injury or death from situational hazards, including falling, drowning, losing control of a moving vehicle, or becoming ignited from the presence of a potentially explosive or flammable material or substance, except where lethal force would be permitted. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

90. After one standard ECW cycle (5 seconds), the officer shall reevaluate the situation to determine if subsequent cycles are necessary. Officers shall be trained in the risks of prolonged or repeated ECW exposure, including that exposure to the ECW for longer than 15 seconds (whether due to multiple

applications or continuous cycling) may increase the risk of death or serious injury. Officers shall clearly articulate and justify each and every cycle used against a subject in a written Use of Force Report.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force

policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

91. ECWs shall not be used in drive stun mode as a pain compliance technique. ECWs shall be used in drive stun mode only to supplement the probe mode to complete the incapacitation circuit, or as a countermeasure to gain separation between officers and the subject so that officers can consider another force option. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

45

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None
Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

92. ECWs may not be used against pregnant women, elderly persons, children, visibly frail persons or persons with a slight build and persons in medical or mental crisis, except where lethal force would be permitted, or the officer has reasonable cause to believe there is an imminent risk of serious bodily selfharm and lesser force options are not feasible. Officers shall be trained in the increased risks ECWs may present to the above listed vulnerable populations. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

93. ECWs may not be applied to a subject’s head, neck, and genitalia, absent exigent circumstances. ECWs shall not be used on handcuffed persons, except in emergencies in which a reasonable officer would believe that serious bodily harm to another person or persons is imminent.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

94. Officers shall receive annual ECW certifications, which should consist of physical competency; weapon retention; EHPD policy, including any policy changes; technology changes; and scenario-based training.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

95. Officers shall be trained in and follow protocols developed by EHPD in conjunction with medical professionals, on their responsibilities following ECW use, including:
(a) the removal of ECW probes, including requiring medical or specially-trained EHPD personnel to

46

remove probes that are embedded in a subject’s skin, except for probes that are embedded in a subject’s head, throat, groin, or other sensitive area, which should be removed by medical personnel only; (b) transporting to a hospital for evaluation all subjects who: have been exposed to prolonged application (more than 15 seconds); are a member of one of the vulnerable populations listed above; had an ECW used against them in circumstances presenting a heightened risk of harm; or were kept in prone restraint after ECW use; and (c) monitoring all subjects who have received ECW application while in police custody.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Partial Compliance
New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. The EHPD should train officers on the protocol works re working with fire department paramedics. The JCE will review and discuss this paragraph with the EHPD. Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

96. Officers shall report all ECW discharges, except for training discharges, to their supervisor and the

communications command center as soon as possible.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

97. EHPD shall develop and implement integrity safeguards on the use of ECWs to ensure compliance with

EHPD policy, including conducting random and directed audits of ECW deployment data. The audits should compare the downloaded data to the officer’s report on use of force. Discrepancies within the audit should be addressed and appropriately investigated.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force

policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

98. EHPD shall include the number of ECWs in operation and the number of ECW uses as elements of the EIS. Analysis of this data shall include a determination of whether ECWs result in an increase in the use of force and whether officer and subject injuries are affected by the rate of ECW use. ECW data and analysis shall be included in EHPD's Use of Force Annual Report.

47

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Partial Compliance
ECW data and analysis shall be included in EHPD's UOF Annual Report. The first annual report will be produced in 2014 after all new policy training is completed and data is collected. None
Policy 406.1 and To Be Determined

E. Use of Force Reporting Policy and Use of Force Report

99. EHPD shall develop and implement a single, uniform, reporting system pursuant to a Use of Force Reporting policy and using a single, uniform, Use of Force Report. All officers using or observing force

above un-resisted handcuffing shall, absent exigent circumstances report in writing, before the end of shift, the use of force in a Use of Force Report. The Use of Force Report shall include: (a) a detailed account of the incident from the officer’s perspective; (b) the reason for the initial police presence; (c) a

specific description of the acts that led to the use of force; (d) the level of resistance encountered; and (e) a description of every type of force used. The use of force reporting policy shall explicitly prohibit the use of “canned” or conclusory language in all reports documenting use of force.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force

policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Future Use of Force Annual Report

100. Officers who use or observe force and fail to report it, shall be held strictly accountable, and face discipline up to and including termination, regardless of whether the force was reasonable.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None

Evidentiary Basis All EHPD use of force policies and future Use of Force Annual Report

101. Each officer in a position to see or hear a use of force shall complete a Use of Force Report, before the end of the shift, documenting the officer’s own actions and observations.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations

Partial Compliance
New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph. None

Evidentiary Basis All EHPD use of force policies and procedures and tracking processes

48

102. Officers' Use of Force Reports (whether primary or supplemental) shall completely and accurately describe the use of force. Officers shall be held strictly accountable for material omissions or inaccuracies in the Use of Force Report. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis All EHPD use of force policies and procedures and tracking processes

103. Officers who use or observe force shall notify their supervisors immediately following any use of force or upon receipt of an allegation of unreasonable or unreported use of force by any officer.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph. None

Evidentiary Basis All EHPD use of force policies and procedures and tracking processes

104. Use of Force Reports shall be maintained centrally by the IAO for tracking and analysis purposes, as required by this Agreement.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. None

Evidentiary Basis Future use of Force Reports maintained centrally by the IAO

105. At least annually, EHPD shall analyze the year’s force data, including force-related outcome data, to determine significant trends; identify and correct deficiencies revealed by this analysis; and document its findings in a public report. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. None

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force Annual Report

49

F. Force Reviews by Supervisors

106. Absent exceptional circumstances, the direct supervisor of any officer using force, upon notification of a use of force or allegation of excessive force, shall respond to the scene of the use of force. If a supervisor is unable to respond to the scene, the supervisor shall document in the case file the exigent circumstances preventing his or her presence. The direct supervisor of any officer using force shall review

all uses of force except those incidents involving a serious use of force, a use of force that appears potentially unjustified or criminal, a use of force by EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or a use of force reassigned to the IAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the IAO. No supervisor who was

involved in the incident, including by participating in or ordering the force being investigated, shall be responsible for the investigation of the incident.

Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force

policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

107. The reviewing supervisor shall:
a) respond to the scene, examine the subject of the force for injury, interview the subject for complaints of pain, and ensure that the subject receives medical attention from an appropriate medical provider;
b) notify the IAO immediately of the use of force and obtain a use of force tracking number; c) identify and collect all relevant evidence and shall evaluate that evidence to determine whether the use of force: (i) was consistent with EHPD policy and/or (ii) raises any policy, training, tactical or equipment concerns; d) ensure collection of all evidence to establish material facts related to the use of force, including audio and video recordings, and photographs and other documentation of injuries or the absence of injuries; e) ensure the canvass for and interview of civilian witnesses. In addition, civilian witnesses should be encouraged to provide and sign a written report in their own words; f) ensure that all officer witnesses provide a statement regarding the incident. Officers involved in a use of force incident shall be separated until they are interviewed. Group interviews shall be prohibited. Supervisors shall ensure that all use of force reports identify all officers who were involved in the incident or were on the scene when it occurred. Supervisors shall not ask officers or other witnesses leading questions that improperly suggest justifications for the officers’ conduct, when such questions are contrary to appropriate law enforcement techniques. Reviewing supervisors shall record all interviews with subjects and civilian witnesses and all follow-up interviews with officers; g) review all Use of Force Reports and ensure that all reports include the information required by this Agreement and EHPD policy; and
h) consider all relevant evidence, including circumstantial, direct, and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations, if feasible. Supervisors will make all reasonable efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between the officer, subject, and witness statements, as well as inconsistencies between the level of force claimed by the officer and the subject’s injuries. EHPD will train all of its supervisors on
50

the factors to consider when evaluating credibility. Where a reasonable and trained supervisor would

determine that there may have been misconduct, the supervisor shall immediately notify the IAO to

respond to the scene.

Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force

policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is

completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and

EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

108. Each supervisor shall provide a written report to the shift commander by the end of the shift documenting the supervisor’s preliminary determination of the appropriateness of the use of force, including whether the force was reasonable and within policy; whether the injuries appear proportionate to the use of force described; and summaries of subject, witness, and officer statements. Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

109. Each supervisor shall complete and document a use of force supervisory review using a Supervisor’s Force Review Report, within 72 hours of learning of the use of force. This Report shall include:

a) the supervisor’s narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the evidence that either justifies or fails to justify the officer’s conduct based on the supervisor’s independent review of the facts and circumstances of the incident;
b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers, and addresses

of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses, the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but circumstances prevented the

author of the report from determining the identification, phone number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a statement;

c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force; d) the reviewing supervisor’s evaluation of the basis for the use of force, including a determination of whether the officer’s actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent with state and federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of the incident for

tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have been avoided through the use of de-escalation techniques or lesser force options; and

e) documentation of any non-disciplinary corrective action taken.

Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and

51

EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. Recommendations None
Evidentiary Basis Supervisor’s Force Review Report

110. Upon completion of the Supervisor’s Force Review Report, the investigating supervisor shall forward

the report to the patrol commander, who shall review the report to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The patrol commander shall order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant evidence that may assist in resolving

inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the findings.

Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and

EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Supervisor’s Force Review Report and review process

111. Where the findings of the Supervisory Force Review Report are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the patrol commander shall modify the findings after consultation with the reviewing supervisor, and document the reasons for this modification, including the specific evidence or analysis

supporting the modification. The patrol commander shall counsel the reviewing supervisor regarding the modification and of any investigative deficiencies that led to it, and order corrective action where appropriate. The patrol commander shall be held accountable for the accuracy and completeness of Use

of Force Supervisory Review Reports completed by supervisors under the command of the patrol commander.

Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force

policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Supervisor’s Force Review Report and To Be Determined

112. Where a reviewing supervisor repeatedly conducts deficient investigations, the supervisor shall receive the appropriate corrective action, including training, demotion, and/or removal from a supervisory position. Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.1

52

113. Whenever a reviewing supervisor or patrol commander finds evidence of apparent criminal conduct by an officer, he or she shall suspend the investigation immediately and notify the Chief of Police, the IAO, the State Attorney’s Office, and the State Police. The IAO shall immediately notify the FBI and USAO, where appropriate. Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.1

114. When the patrol commander finds that the supervisor force review is complete and the findings are

supported by the evidence, the force review file shall be forwarded to the Chief of Police and the IAO. The Chief of Police and the IAO shall review the force review to ensure that it is complete and that the findings

are supported by the evidence. At the discretion of the Chief of Police, his designee, or the IAO, a use of force review may be assigned or re-assigned to another supervisor, whether within or outside of the shift in which the incident occurred, or may be returned to the patrol commander for further review or analysis. This assignment or re-assignment shall be explained in

Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and

EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

115. Where, after a force review, a use of force is found to be out of policy, the Chief of Police shall direct and ensure appropriate discipline, including forwarding the outcome of the force review to the Board of Police Commissioners for disciplinary action. Where the use of force indicates policy, training, tactical, or equipment concerns, the Chief of Police shall ensure also that necessary training is delivered and that policy, tactical or equipment concerns are resolved. Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph. None

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

G. Force Investigations by Internal Affairs

116. EHPD shall establish a single, uniform reporting and investigation/review system for all serious uses of force, including critical firearm discharges.

53

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Partial Compliance
New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. The JCE and USDOJ should receive a copy of the reporting and investigation/review system template in early 2014 for their review/approval. Use of Force Reports

117. EHPD shall ensure that all serious uses of force are investigated fully and fairly by individuals with appropriate expertise, independence and investigative skills to ensure that uses of force that are contrary to law or policy are identified and appropriately resolved; that policy, training, equipment, or tactical deficiencies related to the use of force are identified and corrected; and that investigations of sufficient quality to ensure that officers are held accountable as necessary. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:

a) Provide for an IAO to conduct administrative investigations of serious uses of force, uses of force by EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or uses of force reassigned to the IAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the IAO.

b) Within 90 days from the Effective Date, EHPD shall recruit, assign, and train a sufficient number of IAOs to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement. Prior to performing IAO duties, IAOs shall receive a minimum of 24 hours of force investigation training; call out and investigative protocols; and proper roles of on-scene counterparts such as crime scene technicians, State Attorney’s Office, State Police EHPD detectives, and Joint Compliance Expert; and investigative equipment and techniques. IAOs shall also receive annual in-service training on proper force investigations.
c) EHPD shall create a force investigation procedural manual to ensure consistency with this Agreement. The procedural manual shall include:

i. definitions of all relevant terms; ii. clear statements of the mission and authority of the IAO regarding force investigations; iii. procedures on report writing; iv. procedures for collecting and processing evidence; v. procedures to ensure appropriate separation of criminal and administrative
investigations in the event of compelled subject officer statements; vi. procedures for consulting with the State Attorney’s Office and the State Police, including
ensuring that administrative investigations are not unnecessarily delayed while a criminal investigation is pending; vii. scene management procedures; and viii. management procedures.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations

Partial Compliance The Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) and some members of the command staff and supervisory staff completed Internal Affairs training in March 2013. The remainder of the command staff, along with all supervisors, and all officers on the current eligibility list for sergeant completed this training in June 2013 The JCE should review the EHPD force investigation procedural manual to ensure it is consistent with new policies and procedures

54

Evidentiary Basis Training and EHPD force investigation procedural manual Policy 208.1; All training done.

118. Where appropriate to ensure the fact and appearance of impartiality, investigations of serious uses of force or force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer shall be referred for investigation to an

independent and highly competent entity outside EHPD.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

Following the January, 2013 incident in New Haven, the Chief consulted with federal officials to determine if there was interest in conducting an independent investigation. At that time, officials indicated they would monitor the results of the

EHPD internal investigation. The JCE is satisfied with the quality and thoroughness of the internal investigation.

Recommendations The JCE and parties should further discuss the language in this provision of the

Agreement to ensure it is clearly understood. For instance, is it mandatory or discretionary?

Evidentiary Basis Chief’s briefing of federal government officials

119. In every incident involving a serious use of force, or any use of force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer, the supervisor shall immediately notify the IAO and obtain a use of force tracking number. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force numerical tracking system

120. The IAO shall respond to the scene of every incident involving a serious use of force, any use of force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer, any use of force by an officer of a rank higher than sergeant, or as ordered by the Chief of Police or designee. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. None

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

121. The IAO shall immediately notify and consult with the State Attorney’s Office and State Police regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent criminal conduct by EHPD personnel, or any use of force in which an officer discharged his firearm, or where an individual has died while in or proximate to the custody of EHPD. The IAO shall immediately notify and consult with the FBI and the USAO regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent criminal conduct by EHPD personnel that violates federal law. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

55

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective. None
n/a

122. If the case may proceed criminally, or where EHPD requests a criminal prosecution, any compelled interview of the subject officers shall be delayed, consistent with Paragraphs 148 and 150 of this Agreement. No other part of the investigation shall be held in abeyance unless specifically authorized by the Chief of Police in consultation with the agency conducting the criminal investigation. Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

Unaware of any relevant incident to date

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

123. The IAO shall complete its administrative use of force investigation within 60 days from the use of force. At the conclusion of each use of force investigation, the IAO shall prepare a report on the investigation. The report shall include:

a) a narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the evidence that either justifies or fails to justify the officer’s conduct based on the IAO’s independent review of the facts and

circumstances of the incident; b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers, and addresses
of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses, the report shall

specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone number or address of those
witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should also include all available

identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a statement; c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force; d) the IAO’s evaluation of the basis for the use of force, including a determination of whether the

officer’s actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent with state and federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have been avoided through the use of de-

escalation techniques or lesser force options; e) if a weapon was used, documentation that the officer’s certification and training for the weapon are current; and

f) documentation of any disciplinary and/or non-disciplinary corrective action recommended.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Investigation report

56

H. Review by Chief of Police

124. The Chief of Police shall review all force reviews by supervisors and force investigations by the IAO. The Chief of Police shall:

a) review each force review and investigation within 30 days of receiving the force

review/investigation report to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by a

preponderance of the evidence;

b) order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant evidence that may

assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the findings. Where the

findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the Chief of Police or his/her designee

shall modify the findings and document the reasons for this modification, including the specific evidence

or analysis supporting the modification;

c) determine whether the force violated EHPD policy. If the force violated EHPD policy, the Chief of

Police of his/her designee shall take appropriate disciplinary action, including referring the review or

investigation report to the Board of Police Commissioners for appropriate disciplinary action;

d) determine whether the incident raises policy, training, equipment, or tactical concerns, and refer

such incidents to the appropriate commander or supervisor within EHPD to ensure they are resolved;

e) direct shift supervisors to take and document non-disciplinary corrective action to enable or

encourage an officer to improve his or her performance; and

f) document his or her findings within 45 days of receiving the force review or investigation.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force

policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is

completed and policies become effective.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Interview with Chief of Police

J. Use of Force Training

125. EHPD shall provide all EHPD officers with 4 – 8 hours of use of force training within 365 days of the Effective Date, and 4 – 8 hours of use of force training on at least an annual basis thereafter, including information on developments in applicable law and EHPD policy. EHPD shall coordinate and review all use of force policy and training to ensure quality, consistency, and compliance with the Constitution, Connecticut law, this Agreement and EHPD policy. EHPD’s use of force training shall include the following topics:

a) EHPD’s use of force model, as described in this Agreement; b) proper use of force decision-making; c) use of force reporting requirements; d) the Fourth Amendment and related law; e) role-playing scenarios and interactive exercises that illustrate proper use of force decision-making, including training officers on the importance and impact of ethical decision making and peer intervention; f) the proper deployment and use of all intermediate weapons or technologies, including canines and ECWs; g) de-escalation techniques that encourage officers to make arrests without using force, and instruction that disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a subject, summoning

57

reinforcements, calling in specialized units, or delaying arrest may be the appropriate response to a

situation, even when the use of force would be legally justified; h) threat assessment;

i) basic crisis intervention and interacting with people with mental illnesses, including instruction by mental health practitioners and an emphasis on de-escalation strategies;
j) factors to consider in initiating or continuing a pursuit;

k) appropriate training on conflict management; and l) supervisors of all ranks, as part of their initial and annual in-service supervisory training, shall receive additional training in conducting use of force reviews and investigations; strategies for effectively directing officers to minimize uses of force and to intervene effectively to prevent or stop unreasonable

force; and supporting officers who report unreasonable or unreported force, or who are retaliated against for using only reasonable force or attempting to prevent unreasonable force.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

All required use of force training was completed in 2013.

Recommendations The JCE will track use of force training on an annual basis.

Evidentiary Basis Training report and curricula.

126. Included in the use of force training set out above. EHPD shall require firearms training for all officers within 365 days of the Effective Date and at least twice yearly thereafter. EHPD firearms training shall:

a) require officers to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and

other service firearms on a semi-annual basis;

b) require cadets, officers in probationary periods, and officers who return from unarmed status to

complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and other service firearms

before such personnel are permitted to carry and use firearms;

c) incorporate professional night training, stress training (e.g., training in using a firearm after

undergoing physical exertion) and proper use of force decision-making training, including continuous

threat assessment techniques, in the annual in-service training program; and

d) ensure that firearm instructors critically observe students and provide corrective

instruction regarding deficient firearm techniques and failure to utilize safe gun handling procedures at

all times.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

All required use of force training was completed in the first 365 days. Additionally,

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover use of force

policies and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is

completed and policies become effective.

Recommendations The JCE will review new training re the policy manual and twice yearly training

requirements annually.

Evidentiary Basis Training schedule and curricula

VIII. CIVILIAN COMPLAINTS, INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS, AND DISCIPLINE
127. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all allegations of officer misconduct are received and are fully and fairly investigated; that all investigative findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence and documented in writing; and that all officers who commit misconduct are held accountable pursuant to
58

a disciplinary system that is fair and consistent. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD and the Town shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance Rating Partial

Discussion Recommendations

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the civilian complaints, internal investigations and discipline section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces. None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

A. Reporting Misconduct

128. EHPD shall require that all officers and employees report apparent misconduct by another EHPD officer or employee to a supervisor or directly to the IAO for review and investigation. Where apparent misconduct is reported to a supervisor, the supervisor shall immediately document and report this

information to the IAO. Failure to report or document apparent misconduct or criminal behavior shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination of employment. The default discipline for a failure to report criminal behavior shall be termination.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

New Policy Manual training will take place in early 2014 and will cover Reporting

Misconduct and related issues. The JCE will track compliance after all training is completed and policies become effective.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Training and Deferred processes and outcomes

B. Complaint Information

129. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, the Town and EHPD shall develop and implement a program to ensure broad knowledge throughout the East Haven community about how to make misconduct complaints, and the availability of effective mechanisms for making misconduct complaints. The

requirements below shall be incorporated into this program.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The Civilian Complaint System and the Early Identification System (EIS): In compliance with this Agreement paragraph, the EHPD has developed a system for receiving complaints, has conducted complaint intake and policy training for all

personnel, and is publicizing the complaint process in the East Haven community, on the EHPD website and via a link from the Town website, at Town Hall, at EHPD

headquarters and at the Hagaman Memorial Library. Officers are required to carry civilian complaints forms in EHPD vehicles.

Recommendations The JCE will review the EIS on-site in East Haven and verify compliance in EHPD vehicles.

Evidentiary Basis Complaint System on Website and EIS

130. The Town and EHPD shall make complaint forms and informational materials, including brochures and posters, available at appropriate government properties, including EHPD headquarters, EHPD and

59

Town websites, Town Hall, and the public library. Individuals shall be able to submit misconduct

complaints through the EHPD and City websites and these websites shall include complaint forms and information regarding how to file misconduct complaints.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

During the first 365 days, additional edits were proposed by the JCE and USDOJ to

the complaint process and implemented by EHPD. The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available in hard copy and on the website. The JCE noted a complaint referred by the US Attorney’s Office by a woman

who required assistance accessing the on-line form and was frustrated from the inability to submit her civilian complaint via the internet. The JCE informed the Chief of the complaint. He immediately and appropriately addressed the situation to

the eventual satisfaction of the complainant.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to check to ensure information and forms are easily accessible to the public in a neutral location.

Evidentiary Basis Complaint system on website. The civilian complaint form is also available at the

EHPD, at the library, and at East Haven Town Hall.

131. At the locations listed above, EHPD shall post and maintain a permanent placard describing the external complaint process that includes relevant contact information, such as telephone numbers, email addresses, and Internet sites. EHPD will require all officers to carry complaint forms, containing basic complaint information, in their department vehicles at all times. Officers shall also provide complaint forms and the officer’s name and badge number upon request. If an individual objects to an officer’s conduct, that officer will inform the individual of his or her right to make a complaint and shall provide the complaint form, informational brochure, and the officer’s name and badge number. If the individual indicates that he or she would like to make a complaint, the officer shall immediately inform his or her supervisor. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available at locations and via officers.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to check compliance re these materials with specific information at specific locations

Evidentiary Basis Visual inspection

132. Complaint forms and related informational materials shall be made available and posted in English and Spanish.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are

available and posted in English and Spanish.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to check compliance in East Haven.

Evidentiary Basis Visual inspection

C. Complaint Intake, Classification, and Tracking

133. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall revise policy and train all officers and supervisors to ensure that all officers properly handle complaint intake, including how to properly provide complaint

60

materials and information; and the consequences for failing to take complaints; and strategies for turning complaints into positive police-civilian interactions.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Partial Compliance
There was one legitimate civilian complaint about the process during the first year of the Agreement. The JCE is satisfied that the Chief eventually addressed the complaint properly. The EHPD must underscore the importance of this paragraph and management should closely monitor the complaints process. Policy 208.1 and training

134. The refusal to accept a misconduct complaint, discouraging the filing of a misconduct complaint, or providing false or misleading information about filing a misconduct complaint, shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE will continue track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014. The complaint referred to in the previous paragraph is also relevant to this requirement. The EHPD must underscore the importance of this paragraph and management should closely monitor the complaints process. Policy 208.1

135. EHPD shall accept all misconduct complaints, including anonymous and third-party complaints, for review and investigation. Complaints may be made in writing or verbally, in person or by mail, telephone (or TDD), facsimile, or electronic mail. Any LEP individual who wishes to file a complaint about an EHPD officer or employee shall be provided with a complaint form in Spanish or, for less common languages in East Haven, EHPD will make arrangements to ensure that the LEP person is able to make a complaint. Such complaints will be investigated in accordance with this Agreement. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual

training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

136. All officers and employees who receive a misconduct complaint in the field shall immediately inform a supervisor of the misconduct complaint so that the supervisor can ensure proper intake of the complaint. All misconduct complaints received outside of EHPD headquarters shall be forwarded to the IAO before the end of the shift in which it was received. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual

training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

61

137. EHPD shall ensure that allegations of officer misconduct made during criminal prosecutions or civil lawsuits are identified and investigated as misconduct complaints.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual

training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

138. Within three business days of the receipt of a misconduct complaint, the IAO shall determine whether the complaint will be assigned to the subject officer(s)’ supervisor(s) or retained by the IAO for an administrative investigation. The IAO shall also determine whether the misconduct complaint warrants a referral to the State Attorney’s Office and/or USAO for a criminal investigation. EHPD shall develop and implement a complaint classification protocol that is allegation-based rather than anticipated outcomebased to guide the IAO in determining where a complaint should be assigned. This complaint classification protocol shall ensure that the IAO investigates allegations including:

a) serious misconduct, including but not limited to: criminal misconduct; unreasonable use of force; b) discriminatory policing; false arrest or planting evidence; untruthfulness/false statements; unlawful
search; retaliation; sexual misconduct; domestic violence; and theft; c) misconduct implicating the conduct of the supervisory or command leadership of the subject d) officer; and c) any other violations as determined by the Chief of Police.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Partial Compliance
The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph, including the timeframe, after all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014. None
Policy 208.1

139. The Chief of Police shall not be authorized to personally conduct an investigation of officer misconduct or violation of policy, nor prevent the conduct of such an investigation. A misconduct complaint investigation may not be conducted by any officer who used force during the incident; whose conduct led to the injury of a person; who authorized the conduct that led to the reported incident or complaint; or who was on the scene of the incident leading to the allegation of misconduct.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual

training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

140. EHPD shall track, as a separate category of misconduct complaints, allegations of discriminatory policing, along with characteristics of the complainants. EHPD shall ensure that complaints of discriminatory policing are captured and tracked appropriately, even if the complainant does not specifically label the misconduct as such. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

Working with EHPD, the JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after

62

all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014. Recommendations None
Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

141. Within 180 days of the Effective date, the IAO shall develop and implement a centralized numbering

and tracking system for all misconduct complaints. Upon the receipt of a complaint, the IAO shall promptly assign a unique numerical identifier to the complaint, which shall be provided to the complainant at the time the complaint is made. Where a misconduct complaint is received in the field, a

supervisor shall obtain the unique numerical identifier and provide this identifier to the complainant.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

In compliance with this Agreement paragraph, the EHPD Internal Affairs Office (IAO) has developed a centralized numbering and tracking system that will allow the prompt assignment of a unique numerical identifier to each civilian complaint and

insure that complainants are informed of this number at the time the complaint is made. The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy

Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to monitor compliance to ensure that the unique numerical identifier is used for all complaints

Evidentiary Basis EHPD compliance report; Policy 208.1

142. EHPD’s centralized numbering and tracking system shall maintain accurate and reliable data regarding the number, nature, and status of all misconduct complaints, from initial intake to final disposition, including investigation timeliness and notification to the complainant of the interim status and final disposition of the investigation. This system shall be used to determine the status of complaints and to confirm that a complaint was received, as well as for periodic assessment of compliance with EHPD policies and procedures and this Agreement, including requirements on the timeliness of administrative investigations. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

Working with EHPD, the JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after

all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

143. Where a supervisor receives a misconduct complaint in the field alleging that misconduct has just

occurred, the supervisor shall gather all relevant information and evidence and provide this information and evidence to the IAO. This information includes the names and contact information for all complainants and witnesses, the names of all EHPD officers and employees on the scene at the time of the

alleged misconduct, and any available physical evidence such as voluntarily provided video or audio recordings, or documentation of the existence of such recordings where the witness chooses not to provide the recording. The supervisor shall take photographs of apparent injuries or the absence thereof.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

Working with EHPD, the JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

63

D. Investigation of Complaints

144. Investigations of officer misconduct shall be as thorough as necessary to reach reliable and complete findings. The misconduct complaint investigator shall interview each complainant in person, absent exceptional circumstances, and this interview shall be recorded in its entirety, absent specific, documented objection by the complainant. All officers in a position to hear or see an incident, or any significant event before or after an incident, shall provide a written statement regarding their observations, even to state that they did not see or hear anything.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will work with USDOJ and EHPD to track compliance on this paragraph after

all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Thoroughness of investigation re January 2013 New Haven incident

145. Where the alleged misconduct is particularly serious or information from an officer or other witness may be necessary to resolve an allegation, the investigator shall conduct an in-person interview of the officer or other witness. Each officer, witness, and complainant shall be interviewed separately. An EHPDAI not involved in the underlying complaint will be used when taking statements or conducting interviews of any LEP complainant or witness.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will work track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training

is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Thoroughness of investigation re January 2013 New Haven incident

146. All officer and civilian witness statements should be documented in their entirety, including any statement that the witness saw or heard nothing. All interviews should be recorded. All recordings shall be stored and maintained in a secure location within IAO.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will work to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual

training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Thoroughness of investigation re January 2013 New Haven incident.

147. EHPD shall require officers to cooperate with administrative investigations, including appearing for an interview when requested by an EHPD investigator and providing all requested documents and evidence. Supervisors shall be notified when an officer under their supervision is summoned as part of an administrative investigation and shall facilitate the officer’s appearance, absent extraordinary and documented circumstances.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is

completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

64

148. The subject officer shall not be compelled to provide a statement to administrative investigators where there is a potential criminal investigation or prosecution of the officer, until consultation with the criminal investigative agency (e.g. State Attorney’s Office or USAO and approval by the Chief of Police. EHPD, the Town, and the State Attorney’s Office shall develop and implement protocols to ensure that the criminal and administrative investigations are kept appropriately separate after a subject officer has provided a compelled statement. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is

completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

149. Nothing in this Agreement or EHPD policy shall hamper an officer’s obligation to provide a public safety statement regarding a work related incident or activity. EHPD shall make clear that all officer statements in incident reports, arrest reports, use of force reports and similar documents, and statements

made in interviews such as those conducted in conjunction with EHPD’s routine use of force review and investigation process, are part of each officer’s routine professional duties and are not compelled statements. Where an officer believes that providing a verbal or written statement will be self-

incriminating the officer shall affirmatively state this and shall not be compelled to provide a statement without prior consultation with the criminal investigative agency (e.g. State Attorney’s Office or USAO),

and approval by the Chief of Police.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

150. If at any time during complaint intake or investigation the investigator determines that there may have been criminal conduct on the part of any officer or employee, the investigator shall immediately notify the Chief of Police and the Joint Compliance Expert, and shall consult with the State Attorney’s

Office, USAO and the local office of the FBI regarding the initiation of a criminal investigation, as appropriate. Where an allegation is investigated criminally, the IAO shall continue with the administrative investigation of the allegation, except that it may delay or decline to conduct an interview of the subject

officer(s) or other witnesses until completion of the criminal investigation unless, after consultation with the investigating agency and the Chief of Police, such interviews are deemed appropriate

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is

completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Notification following January 2013 New Haven incident; Policy 208.1

151. In each investigation, EHPD shall consider all relevant evidence including circumstantial, direct and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations based upon that evidence. There will be no automatic preference for an officer’s statement over a non-officer’s statement, nor will EHPD disregard a witness’ statement merely because the witness has some connection to the complainant or because of
65

any criminal history. During its investigation, EHPD may take into account the criminal history of a complainant that involves a crime of dishonesty. EHPD may also take into account the record of any involved officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between witness statements. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will work with USDOJ and EHPD to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

152. The misconduct investigator shall explicitly identify and recommend one of the following dispositions for each allegation of misconduct in an administrative investigation:

a) “Unfounded,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the b) alleged misconduct did not occur or did not involve the subject officer; b) “Sustained,” where
the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alleged misconduct did occur; c) “Not Sustained,” where the investigation is unable to determine, by a preponderance of the d) evidence, whether the alleged misconduct occurred; or e) “Exonerated,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alleged conduct did occur but did not violate EHPD policies, procedures, or training.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is

completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

153. In addition to determining whether the officer committed the alleged misconduct, administrative investigations shall assess and document whether: (a) the police action was in compliance with training and legal standards; (b) the use of different tactics should or could have been employed to achieve a

potentially better outcome; (c) the incident indicates a need for additional training, counseling or other non-disciplinary corrective measures; and (d) the incident suggests that EHPD should revise its policies, strategies, tactics, or training. This information shall be shared with the relevant commander(s) who shall

document the commander’s disagreement or agreement with these findings; refer any recommendations to the appropriate individual to implement the recommended change; document the implementation of these recommendations; and return the documentation to the IAO.

Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

The JCE will work with USDOJ and EHPD to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

154. EHPD shall respond to each complaint within 48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays, and shall resolve each stage of a complaint investigation in a reasonable time frame. EHPD shall complete all

66

investigations of civilian complaints within 60 days of receiving the complaint. Upon a showing of good cause, officers may receive no more than two extensions of up to 30 days each. Requests for extensions must be in writing and approved by the Chief. Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is

completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

155. A misconduct investigation shall not be closed simply because the complaint is withdrawn or the alleged victim is unwilling or unable to provide additional information beyond the initial complaint, or because the complainant pled guilty or was found guilty of an offense. Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

The JCE will work with USDOJ and EHPD to track compliance on this paragraph after

all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

156. Each misconduct complainant will be kept informed periodically regarding the status of the investigation. The complainant will be notified of the outcome of the investigation, in writing, within ten business days of the completion of the investigation, including regarding whether any disciplinary or nondisciplinary action was taken.

Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is

completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

E. Discipline

157. EHPD shall ensure that discipline for sustained allegations of misconduct is based on the nature of the allegation and defined, consistent, mitigating and aggravating factors, rather than the identity of the officer or his or her status within EHPD or the broader community. EHPD and the Town shall develop and implement procedures to ensure that discipline is fair and consistent. Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

158. EHPD, in consultation with the Board of Police Commissioners and the Town, shall create a disciplinary matrix that:
a) establishes a presumptive range of discipline for each type of rule violation;

67

b) increases the presumptive discipline based on both an officer’s prior violations of the same or other rules;
c) sets out defined mitigating or aggravating factors; d) requires that any departure from the presumptive range of discipline must be justified in writing; e) provides that EHPD shall not take only non-disciplinary corrective action in cases in which the
disciplinary matrix calls for the imposition of discipline; and f) provides that EHPD shall consider whether non-disciplinary corrective action also is appropriate in
a case where discipline has been imposed.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Partial Compliance Policy 209.1 was completed, but is still being reviewed by the JCE and USDOJ. All parties will work together to measure compliance on this paragraph after all policy training takes place and Policy 209.1 becomes effective in 2014. None Policy 209.1

159. EHPD, the Board of Police Commissioners, and the Town shall establish a unified system for reviewing

sustained findings and assessing the appropriate level of discipline pursuant to EHPD’s disciplinary matrix to facilitate consistency in the imposition of discipline. All disciplinary decisions shall be documented, including the rationale behind any decision to deviate from the level of discipline set out in the disciplinary

matrix.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014 and Policy 209.1 is effective.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 209.1

160. EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall develop and establish written policies and procedures to ensure that the Town Attorney provides close guidance to EHPD and the Board at the disciplinary stage to ensure that EHPD’s and the Board’s disciplinary decisions are as fair and legally defensible as possible.

Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph after policy 209.1 is reviewed and

approved and all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 209.1

IX. SUPERVISION AND MANAGEMENT

161. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that EHPD supervisors provide the close and effective supervision necessary for officers to improve and grow as police officers; to police actively and effectively, and to identify, correct, and prevent misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the

68

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

supervision and management section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces. None
n/a

A. Duties of Supervisors

162. EHPD supervisors shall provide, and shall be held accountable for providing, the close and effective supervision necessary to direct and guide officers. Close and effective supervision requires that

supervisors: (a) respond to the scene of certain arrests; (b) review each arrest report; (c) respond to the scene of uses of force; (d) investigate each use of force (except those investigated by the IAO); (e) confirm the accuracy and completeness of officers’ written reports; (f) respond to each complaint of misconduct;

(f) ensure officers are working actively to engage the community and increase public trust and safety; and (g) provide counseling, redirection, support to officers as needed, and are held accountable for performing each of these duties.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

Although the JCE has witnessed and learned about effective supervision inside the

EHPD during the past nine months, the JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis On-site observations in the EHPD; Discussions about supervisory response to use of

force and misconduct cases with Chief Larrabee.

163. On-duty field supervisors shall be available throughout their shift to respond to the field to provide supervision to officers under their direct command and, as needed, to provide supervisory assistance to other shifts.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual

training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 215.1

164. Shift commanders shall closely and effectively supervise the officers under their command. All EHPD Commanders and supervisors shall ensure that all supervisors and officers under their command comply with EHPD policy, state and federal law, and the requirements of this Agreement.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual

training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis To Be Determined

69

165. EHPD shall hold commanders and supervisors directly accountable for the quality and effectiveness of their supervision, including whether commanders and supervisors identify and effectively respond to misconduct, as part of their performance evaluations and through non-disciplinary corrective action, or through the initiation of formal investigation and the disciplinary process, as appropriate. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all Policy Manual

training is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Investigation related to January 2013 incident in New Haven

166. Within twelve months of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement an EHPD-specific system to accurately evaluate officer performance in areas related to integrity, community policing, and critical police functions on both an ongoing and annual basis that comports with professional police practices and the requirements of this Agreement. As part of this program, EHPD shall establish a formalized system documenting annual performance evaluations of each officer by the officer’s direct supervisor which shall include assessment of:

a) community engagement and communication with the public; b) use of community-policing and problem-solving strategies;

c) civilian commendations and complaints; d) disciplinary actions; e) compliance with policies on usage of sick leave and other leave;

f) compliance with policies on secondary employment; g) safety (e.g., POST officer safety standards and vehicle operations);

h) training; i) report-writing; and j) decision-making skills.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

Although policy 215.1 establishes a formal EHPD annual performance system, it has not been approved or implemented. The JCE will continue to track compliance on

this paragraph after it is approved and all training on this policy is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations THE EHPD should finish the approval process for Policy 215.1 and schedule training

in early 2014.

Evidentiary Basis Draft Policy 215.1 submitted to JCE on Dec. 20, 2013.

167. Annual performance evaluations shall be based upon work performance completed during the specific rating period. The officer’s current direct supervisor shall complete the performance evaluation, but all supervisory personnel who supervised the officer during the rating period should provide written input, which shall be considered by the officer’s current supervisor and incorporated into the performance evaluation. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after Policy 215.1 is

approved and all training on this policy is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Draft policy 215.1

70

B. Early Identification System

168. EHPD shall develop, implement and maintain an early identification system (“EIS”) to support the effective supervision and management of EHPD officers and employees, including the identification of and response to potentially problematic behaviors as early as possible. EHPD will regularly use EIS data to promote ethical and professional police practices; to manage risk and liability; and to evaluate the

performance of EHPD employees across all ranks, units and shifts.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

At the 180 day mark, the EHPD had begun implementing protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS). At the 365 day mark, the EHPD

has started using/implementing the EIS to automatically draw information from the Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS), the in house computer reporting system. According to a report by EHPD, the EIS can capture the following fields and

thresholds: • Any firearm discharge or use. • Taser deployment or use; two within a 60 day period.

• Baton or O/C use; two within a 60 day period. • Non- compliant handcuffing. • Physical use of force: three within a 30 day period.

• Pursuits; two within a 30 day period. • Officers arrests, including interfering with police, obstructing a police officer, resisting arrest, and assault on a police officer; two within a 60 day period.

• Traffic accidents involving EHPD equipment; three within 12 month period. • Civil lawsuits; two within a 12 month period. • Excessive absences; 8 unscheduled occurrences in any 12 month period.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

The EIS will be monitored by the IAO and bi-weekly by the officer’s supervisor. IAO and supervisors will initiate and implement any intervention deemed necessary for the officer and document same in writing on the Departmental Review reporting area of LEAS consistent with the East Haven Police Department Policies and Procedures # 207.1 The JCE will track compliance on the completed EIS after all training for Policy 207.1 is completed in 2014. None
Policy 207.1; Supplemental Report on EIS by EHPD Officer James Naccarato and JCE on-site observation.

169. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a protocol setting out which fields in EIS shall include historical data; deadlines for inputting data related to current and new information; and the individuals responsible for capturing and inputting data. Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

In compliance with this Agreement paragraph, the EHPD has begun implementing protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS) that will capture both historical data and emerging information about all sworn employees, automatically drawing data from the EHPD’s Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS). When fully operational, the EIS will provide a single repository of all relevant

71

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

information about each sworn employee, both positive and negative. The system will be designed to identify patterns and will establish thresholds in such areas as civilian complaints, uses of force, firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive absences, and other factors to identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct and in need of supervisory intervention. Although this paragraph requirement has occurred on time, the JCE wants to visually confirm the EIS operations and fields being used on-site in East Haven in 2014. Policy 207.1 and completed EIS

170. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a protocol for using the EIS and information obtained from it. The protocol for using the EIS shall address data storage, data retrieval, reporting, data analysis, pattern identification, identifying officers for intervention, supervisory use, supervisory/departmental intervention, documentation and audit. Among protocol requirements EHPD shall include:

a) comparative data analysis, including peer group, shift and unit analysis, to identify patterns of

activity by individual officers and groups of officers;

b) EHPD commander and supervisor review, on a regular basis, but not less than bi-weekly, of EIS

reports regarding each officer under the commander or supervisor’s direct command and, at least

quarterly, broader, pattern-based reports;

c) EHPD commanders and supervisors to initiate, implement, and assess the effectiveness of

interventions for individual officers, supervisors, and shifts, based on assessment of the information

contained in the EIS;

d) require an array of intervention options to facilitate an effective response to identified problems.

Interventions may take the form of counseling or training, or of other supervised, monitored, and

documented action plans and strategies designed to modify activity. All interventions will be documented

in writing and entered into the automated system;

e) specify that the decision to order an intervention for an employee or group using EIS data shall

include peer group analysis, including consideration of the nature of the employee’s assignment, and not

solely on the number or percentages of incidents in any category of information recorded in the EIS;

f) prompt review by EHPD commanders and supervisors of the EIS system records of all officers upon

transfer to their supervision or command;

g) evaluation of EHPD commanders and supervisors based on their appropriate use of the EIS to

enhance effective and ethical policing and reduce risk; and

h) mechanisms to ensure monitored and secure access to the EIS to ensure the integrity, proper use,

and appropriate confidentiality of the data.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

In compliance with this Agreement paragraph, the EHPD has begun implementing

protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS) that will

capture both historical data and emerging information about all sworn employees,

automatically drawing data from the EHPD’s Law Enforcement Administrative System

(LEAS). When fully operational, the EIS will provide a single repository of all relevant

information about each sworn employee, both positive and negative. The system

will be designed to identify patterns and will establish thresholds in such areas as

civilian complaints, uses of force, firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive

absences, and other factors to identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct

and in need of supervisory intervention.

72

Recommendations The JCE will review the completed system on-site. Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.1, completed EIS and JCE on-site observation.

171. The EIS shall include all relevant information available to EHPD to assess the conduct of each officer, including:

a) all awards and commendations received by employees;

b) investigations of the officer; c) complaints (including civil lawsuits) against the officer and their dispositions; d) data collected regarding the officer’s stops, search and seizures and uses of force;

e) data about officer’s arrests, including arrests for interfering with a police officer, resisting arrest, assault on a police officer, and disorderly conduct;
f) training history; g) supervisory reviews;

h) all vehicle pursuits and traffic collisions involving EHPD equipment; i) all loss or theft of EHPD property or equipment in the custody of the employee, including currency,

firearms, force instruments, and identification cards; and j) any disciplinary or other corrective action taken against the officer.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

According to Professional Standards Officer Naccarato’s report, the EIS includes some of information required by this Agreement paragraph. Other information required

in this paragraph is included in Policy 207.1. Tracking compliance for this paragraph is a bit confusing as the information is presented in two different places.

Recommendations The JCE will review and assess the EIS in its entirely in early 2014 to determine if it meets all requirements of this Agreement paragraph.

The JCE will reassess Policy 207.1 to determine if it need to include the language from this paragraph as well.

Evidentiary Basis Officer Naccarato’s 365 day supplemental report and Policy 207.1

172. The EIS shall include appropriate identifying information for each involved officer (i.e., name, badge number, shift and supervisor) and civilian.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE has not reviewed the EIS in it’s entirely.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

The JCE will review and assess the EIS in early 2014 to determine if it meets the requirements of this Agreement paragraph. Policy 207.1, Lt. Lennon’s 365 day report and Officer Naccarato’s 365 day supplemental report

173. EHPD shall maintain all personally identifiable information about an officer included in the EIS for at least five years following the officer’s separation from the agency. Information necessary for aggregate statistical analysis will be maintained indefinitely in the EIS. On an ongoing basis, EHPD will enter information into the EIS in a timely, accurate, and complete manner, and shall maintain the data in a secure and confidential manner. No individual within EHPD shall have access to individually identifiable information that is maintained only within EIS and is about an officer not within that individual’s direct command, except as necessary for investigative, technological, or auditing purposes. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance
73

Discussion Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis

The JCE has not reviewed the EIS in it’s entirely.
The JCE will review and assess the EIS in early 2014 to determine if it meets the requirements of this Agreement paragraph. Policy 207.1, Lt. Lennon’s 365 day report and Officer Naccarato’s 365 day supplemental report.

174. The EIS, including any computer programs and hardware, will be operational, fully implemented, and

be used in accordance with policies and protocols that incorporate the requirements of this Agreement within 365 days of the Effective Date. Prior to full implementation of the new EIS, EHPD will continue to use existing resources to the fullest extent possible, to identify patterns of conduct by employees or

groups of officers.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

According to the EHPD 365 day report on December 20, 2013, the EIS system that

was custom built for the EHPD by our CAD/RMS vendor is operational. However,

the JCE has not reviewed the system in its entirely.

Recommendations The JCE will review and assess the EIS in early 2014 on-site to determine if it meets the requirements of this Agreement paragraph.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.1, Lt. Lennon’s 365 day report; Officer Naccarato’s 365 day supplemental report and JCE on-site review.

C. Visual and Audio Documentation of Police Activities

175. EHPD shall maintain and operate video cameras and AVL in all police vehicles and shall repair or replace all non-functioning video cameras or AVL units. EHPD shall ensure that that recordings are captured, maintained, and reviewed as appropriate by supervisors, in addition to any review for investigatory or audit purposes, to assess the quality and appropriateness of officer interactions, uses of force, and other police activities.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all training on this

policy is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.1

176. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and procedures regarding AVL, in-car recorders, ECWs, and similar equipment that require:
a) activation of in-car cameras for all traffic stops and pursuits until the motor vehicle stop is completed and the stopped vehicle departs, or until the officer's participation in the motor vehicle stop ends;
b) activation of ECW cameras when the ECW is unholstered; c) activation of in-car cameras for incidents in which a prisoner being transported is violent or
resistant; d) supervisors to review AVL, in-car camera recordings, and ECW recordings of all officers listed in any
EHPD report regarding any incident involving injuries to a prisoner or an officer, uses of force, vehicle pursuits, or misconduct complaints;

74

e) supervisors to review recordings regularly and to incorporate the knowledge gained from this

review into their ongoing evaluation and supervision of officers;

f) that EHPD retain and preserve all recordings for at least three years; however if a case is reasonably

anticipated to lead to litigation or remains under investigation or litigation longer than three years,

EHPD shall retain and preserve the recordings for at least three years after the final disposition of the

matter, including appeals; and

g) that an officer notify a supervisor immediately when an event was not recorded.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

The policy was completed and went into effect in September 2013. The JCE will

continue to track compliance on this paragraph after all training on the policy manual

is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.1

177. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a schedule for testing AVL, in-car recorder, and ECW camera recording equipment to confirm that it is in proper working order. Officers shall be responsible for ensuring that recording equipment assigned to them or their car is

functioning properly at the beginning and end of each shift and shall report immediately any improperly functioning equipment.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

In compliance with this paragraph, Officer James Naccarato formulated a schedule to test all items specified. Subsequently, a memo was issued by Deputy Chief John

Mannion advising all sworn personnel of the testing schedule. The testing schedule for each technology was to have been integrated into each policy. The JCE has asked

the EHPD Compliance Coordinator for a copy of the testing schedule in the policy or

memo.

Recommendations EHPD provide copy of Deputy Chief Mannion’s report and testing schedule.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.1

178. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall provide each supervisor with handheld recording devices and require that supervisors use these devices to record complainant and witness statements taken as part of use of force or misconduct complaint investigations

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

In compliance with Paragraph 178 of the Agreement, EHPD supervisors have been equipped with iPhones capable of functioning as recording devices and suitable for recording the statements of witnesses and complainants in the field in use-of-force cases and other cases. The JCE will continue to monitor the use of the iPhones to record complainant and witness statements per Policy 401.1. Policy 401.1

X. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT

179. EHPD shall create robust community relationships and engage constructively with the community to ensure collaborative problem-solving, ethical and bias-free policing, and increase community confidence in the Department. EHPD shall establish community and problem-oriented policing principles in its
75

policing operations. EHPD shall also engage the public in the reform process through the dissemination of public information on a regular basis. EHPD and the Town shall develop, implement, and maintain systems to ensure comprehensive, effective, and transparent oversight of EHPD that will be sustained after the completion of this Agreement. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the community engagement and oversight section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces. None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

180. EHPD shall, in all of its policing operations, adopt the professional police practices of community oriented and problem-solving policing, including robust community partnerships, cooperative strategies, and promoting trust in the community. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

The EHPD has made considerable progress in this area. This paragraph will continue to be monitored by the JCE. The Chief and his leadership team have been visible in the community. The importance of constant community engagement must be underscored. Chief continues to emphasize the importance of formal and informal community engagement throughout all ranks. Group and individual meetings with residents, businesses and faith-based members of the community and EHPD

181. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall appoint and/or hire a Community Liaison Officer who is a sworn officer fluent in English and Spanish. The Community Liaison Officer shall also have formalized training in the nature and scope of federal and state civil rights law as applied to law enforcement activity Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion Recommendations

Lieutenant David Emerman was been selected as both the language access coordinator and the community liaison officer. Sergeant Emerman is bi-lingual and fluently speaks English and Spanish. Sergeant Emerman from his educational and life experiences is very cultured in fostering good community relationships with various community groups, especially the local Latino community. None

Evidentiary Basis THE EHPD 90 day Compliance Report; Meetings with Lt. Emerman

182. EHPD shall make the contact information and duty hours of the Community Liaison Officer public on its website and on any EHPD document generally available to the public. The Community Liaison Officer shall be directly available for public contact during normal business hours. The Community Liaison Officer shall have the following duties:
a) The Community Liaison Officer shall arrange for a monthly meeting of East Haven residents designed to permit residents to voice their concerns and ask questions. The meeting shall be conducted as follows:
76

i. The meeting shall be attended by the Community Liaison Officer, at least one senior EHPD command staff member, and by officers responsible for patrolling, or supervising patrol, in both the north and south sections of the Town. All EHPD personnel present shall be identified, in uniform, and available for responses to questions from residents of East Haven.
ii. Names shall not be required of persons attending the meeting, nor shall any investigative law enforcement action be taken at or after this meeting that involves attendees in any way, absent an emergency. EHPD may act based on information explicitly communicated at the meeting for that
purpose. iii. EHPD shall notify the public of this meeting and the requirements of this provision, including
anonymity, regarding this meeting in the local press two weeks in advance of the meeting. iv. The meeting location shall alternate between the north and south sections of the Town so that
the meeting is held in each section every other month.

b) The Community Liaison Officer shall review, on a monthly basis, all complaints submitted to EHPD by members of the community to assess community concerns. For those complaints that do not rise to the level of requiring formal action under EHPD policy, code of conduct, and the terms of this Agreement, the Community Liaison Officer shall notify the complainant of the availability of the Community
Liaison Officer to answer the complainant’s questions and respond to any further concerns.

c) The Community Liaison Officer shall meet monthly with the Chief of Police, the Mayor, and the

Board. During these meetings, the Community Liaison Officer shall communicate the concerns that the

Community Liaison Officer has received during the previous month, along with any other relevant

information pertaining to the relationship of EHPD with East Haven residents.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

This paragraph was modified from the original Agreement to clarify where meeting

should be held in town to make the meetings more convenient to residents

throughout the town.

The first EHPD community meeting was held on October 15, 2013, 7:00 pm at the East Haven Senior Center located at 91 Taylor Avenue. In attendance were Lt. Emerman, Lt. Lennon, Sgt. Murgo, and Officer Michalowski, who was on patrol in the center district. Two of our Department Chaplains were also in attendance.

The second community meeting was held on November 21, 2013, 7:00 pm at the East Haven Firehouse Volunteer Company 3’s hall located at 1420 North High Street. The meeting was attended by Lt. Emerman, Lt. Lennon, and Officer Klarman who was on patrol in the Foxon area of town.

The third community meeting was scheduled for December 17, 2013, 7:00 pm at the East Haven Beach House/Police Substation. However, due to severe weather, the meeting was postponed to December 26, 2013 to be held at the same location and time.

As required, meetings have alternated between the North and South sides of town.

According to EHPD participants, the attendees seem pleased that their voices and concerns are being heard directly by Department personnel. Topics of interest and
77

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

concerns of the residents have been discussed at the meetings, and the attendees have gained a better knowledge of how the Department operates. Command staff, supervisors, the community liaison and patrol officers have been present to provide meaningful responses to the questions posed to them by the community. The JCE will continue to monitor compliance with this paragraph. None 365 day supplemental report and JCE on-site meetings and interviews

183. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a strategic recruitment plan that includes

clear goals, objectives, and action steps for attracting high-quality applicants for employment across all

levels of EHPD, sworn and civilian. EHPD’s strategic recruitment plan shall establish and clearly identify

the duties and goals of EHPD’s recruitment efforts. The strategic recruitment plan shall include specific

strategies for attracting a diverse pool of applicants, including members of groups that have been

historically underrepresented in EHPD and applicants fluent in Spanish.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

In compliance with this paragraph, Chief Brent Larrabee, Attorney Larry Sgrignari,

and Lt. Lennon attended the February 20, 2013 meeting of the East Haven Civil

Service Commission. After consulting with the commission members along with Chief

Examiner Andrea Liquori, the commission requested the submission of various

recommended changes to their rules by their next meeting in order to comply with

the Agreement. These changes support the department’s goals of moving towards a

highly competent professional law enforcement agency. On March 11, 2013, the Civil

Service Commission implemented the rule changes for the recruitment and hiring of

both sworn and unsworn EHPD employees. These changes include a tiered point

system to encourage the recruiting of a more professional and well suited applicant.

Although the hiring provisions required to hire police officers is regulated by the

Connecticut General Statutes § 7-294 and the regulations of the CT POST Council, the

encouragement for recruitment of a diverse applicant pool is driven by exceptional

recruiting. The tiered point system grants additional testing points to applicants that

provide proof of higher education, veteran’s points for military service, or the ability

to fluently speak languages other than English. In addition the Civil Service

Commission is in the process of adopting a recruitment plan. Pursuant to the plan,

the EHPD will also actively advertise its upcoming recruiting using various media

sources. All advertisements will be in both English and Spanish. Some of the locations

for advertisement will be:

• All local newspapers (both English and Spanish)

• Postings on EHPD and town website

• Multiple and frequent announcements on the EHPD’s Facebook© and Twitter©

Pages

• Online media advertisements on local news sources such as the East Haven Patch

Recommendations The JCE will continue to monitor EHPD recruitment efforts per this paragraph.

Evidentiary Basis The EHPD 90 Day Compliance Report and phone conferences with Chief Larrabee

184. All EHPD audits and reports related to the implementation of this Agreement shall be made publicly available via website and at the Police Department, Town Hall, and other public locations, in English and in Spanish, to the fullest extent permissible under law. Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

78

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Although the major compliance reports marking 60, 90, 280, 270 and 365 day after the Agreement effective date are posted on the websites, the JCE will review additional materials related to EHPD policies and procedures and may make additional recommendations for adding materials. The JCE will work with Lt. Lennon to identify additional materials for posting on the public website at the Police Department, Town Hall and Hagaman Public Library. East Haven PD Website and JCE on-site observations.

185. EHPD shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to facilitate and ensure transparency and wide public access to information related to EHPD decision making and activities, as permitted by law.

Compliance Rating Deferred

Discussion

The JCE will work with USDOJ and EHPD to track compliance on this paragraph after

all training on the new Policy Manual is completed in early 2014.

Recommendations Metrics to illustrate compliance with this paragraph will need to be developed

Evidentiary Basis n/a

XI. AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT

A. Role of the Joint Compliance Expert

186. The Parties shall select a Joint Compliance Expert (“JCE”) to assist the Parties in determining whether the terms of this Agreement have been fully and timely implemented, including reviewing and making recommendations on new or revised policies, training curricula, standard operating procedures, plans,

protocols, and other operational documents related to this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall also assess and report whether the requirements of this Agreement have been implemented, and whether this implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional

treatment of individuals by EHPD.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Kathleen M. O’Toole was selected as JCE in February 2013 and is in the process of assessing and reporting on the requirements of the 233 paragraphs that comprise this Agreement. The JCE will track specific policies and procedures after the new

Policy Manual training is completed and those policies are implemented beginning in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis JCE written reports, bi-weekly USDOJ and EHPD phone conference updates and interviews with members of the East Haven community and EHPD.

187. The Joint Compliance Expert shall only have the duties, responsibilities and authority conferred by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not, and is not intended to, replace or assume the role and duties of the Mayor, Board, Chief of Police, or EHPD.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE clearly understands her role. She has worked to earn trust and promote a collaborative approach among the parties. She recognizes the importance of holding the EHPD accountable for meeting its obligations under the Agreement, but has

79

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

attempted to do so in a supportive, reassuring manner. None
JCE written reports, bi-weekly USDOJ and EHPD phone conference updates and regular informal phone conversations. Collaborative meetings and interviews with the Mayor, his staff, the Police Chief, members of the EHPD and the community.

188. In order to assess and report on the Town’s implementation of this Agreement and whether implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct the compliance reviews and audits, outcome assessments, and incident reviews specified below, and such additional audits, reviews, and assessments as the Joint Compliance Expert or the Parties deem appropriate. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Overview Paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

B. Compliance Reviews and Audits

189. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct compliance reviews or audits as necessary to determine

whether the Town has implemented and continues to comply with the material requirements of this Agreement. Compliance with a material requirement of this Agreement requires that the Town has: (a) incorporated the requirement into policy; (b) trained all relevant personnel as necessary to fulfill their

responsibilities pursuant to the requirement; and (c) that the requirement is being carried out in actual practice. Compliance reviews and audits shall contain both qualitative and quantitative elements as necessary for reliability and comprehensiveness.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE is in the process of developing metrics for which to assess compliance as the

new EHPD Policy Manual has been completed and training and formal implementation of 82+ new policies will begin in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis EHPD Policy Manual December 2013.

C. Outcome Assessments

190. In addition to compliance reviews and audits, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct qualitative and quantitative outcome assessments to measure whether the Town’s implementation of this Agreement has promoted effective and constitutional policing. These outcome assessments shall include collection and analysis, both quantitative and qualitative, of the following outcome data:
a) Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement measurements, including: i. A reliable, comprehensive, and representative annual survey of members of the East Haven
community regarding their experiences with and perceptions of EHPD and of public safety. This comprehensive community survey shall include measures to ensure input from individuals of each significantly represented demographic category;
ii. Number and variety of community partnerships, with particular consideration of partnerships
80

with youth, and qualitative assessment of the depth and effectiveness of those partnerships.
b) Stop, Search and Arrest measurements, including: i. The number and rate of arrests for which there is articulated reasonable suspicion for the stop
and probable cause for the arrest, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category;
ii. The number and rate of arrests which are prosecuted, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category; and
iii. The number and rate of searches which result in a finding of contraband, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category.
c) Use of Force measurements including: i. Rate of force used per arrest by EHPD overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street
address); type of arrest; and demographic category; ii. Rate of force complaints that are sustained and rate that are not sustained, overall and by force
type; geographic area (i.e. street address); source of complaint (internal or external); type of arrest; and demographic category;
iii. Uses of Force that were found to violate policy overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic category;
iv. Number and rate of Use of Force administrative investigations/reviews in which each finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence; and
v. Number of officers who frequently or repeatedly use force, or have more than one instance of force found to violate policy.
d) Recruitment and Training measurements, including: i. Number of highly-qualified recruit candidates that have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse
communities; ii. Number of candidates with Spanish language fluency; iii. Officer and agency reports of adequacy of training in type and frequency; and iv. Role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by performance trends.
e) Supervision measurements, including: i. Initial identification of officer violations and performance problems by supervisors, and effective
response by supervisors to identified problems.
f) Accountability measurements, including: i. The number of misconduct complaints, with a qualitative assessment of whether any increase or
decrease appears related to access to the complaint process; ii. Rate of sustained, not sustained, exonerated and unfounded misconduct complaints; iii. Number and rate of misconduct complaints in which the finding for each allegation is supported
by a preponderance of the evidence; iv. Number of officers who are subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, or have repeated
instances of sustained misconduct complaints. v. Number and nature of civil suits against EHPD officers for on or off duty police conduct,
regardless of whether the Town or EHPD is a defendant in the litigation, and settlement or penalty amounts;
vi. Arrests/Summons of officers for on or off duty conduct; and vii. Criminal prosecutions of officers for on or off duty conduct.
81

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

n/a The JCE has collected some initial outcome data, but will collect the vast majority of outcome data starting in 2014 as new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual was just completed in December 2013. After training and formal implementation of policies, in early 2014, the JCE will work in collaboration with USDOJ and EHPD to develop metrics to measure the outcomes listed throughout the Agreement and in this paragraph. None On-site and off-site interviews and meetings with the community, EHPD and town officials, EHPH Policy Manual and data provided to the JCE by EHPD.

191. In conducting these outcome assessments the Joint Compliance Expert may use any relevant data collected and maintained by EHPD, provided that it has determined that this data is reasonably reliable and complete. To conduct the annual community survey, the Joint Compliance Expert shall retain an individual or entity which shall:

a) develop a baseline of measures on public satisfaction with policing, attitudes among police personnel, and the quality of police-citizen encounters;

b) conduct baseline surveys of Town residents, police personnel, and detained arrestees, and followup surveys on at least an annual basis;
c) ensure that the resident surveys are designed to capture each demographic category; and

d) conduct the survey in English and Spanish.

Compliance Rating Partial Compliance

Discussion

Researcher Dr. John DeCarlo, formerly of New Haven University and now of John Jay College, has been retained to develop, analyze and report back to the JCE, USDOJ and EHPD on a community survey, EHPD survey and detainee survey. Dr. DeCarlo is

the process of conducting the first set of surveys to gather baseline data prior to the full implementation of the policy manual. A second round of survey will be administered in approximately one year to compare with baseline data. The JCE has

developed complementary materials for the EHPD survey to encourage officers to take it. The JCE and USDOJ is working with EHPD to encourage the community to take their survey as the initial community response has not been adequate.

Recommendations Additional materials form the JCE to encourage the community to take the survey on-line or via paper submission may be needed. ( i.e. the community survey will need to be promoted more in the community so that the sample size is adequate .)

Evidentiary Basis EHPD Community Survey, EHPD Survey and the Detainee Survey instruments

D. Outcome Assessment Plan and Review Methodology

192. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:
a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be assessed for compliance, indicating which requirements will be assessed together;
b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment occurring within
82

18 months of the Effective Date; and

c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement of this

Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each

requirement at least annually thereafter.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE Plan was submitted to USDOJ and EHPD in July 2013

Recommendations The JCE will revise the plan schedule as needed.

Evidentiary Basis The JCE Plan

193. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:

a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be assessed for compliance, indicating which requirements will be assessed together;
b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment occurring within 18 months of the Effective Date; and c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement of this Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each requirement at least annually thereafter. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE Plan was submitted to USDOJ and EHPD in July 2013. Additional details re the metrics to be used to measure compliance for the policies and procedures in the new EHPD Policy Manual will be forthcoming in early 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The JCE Plan

194. At least 90 days prior to the initiation of any outcome measure assessment or compliance review or audit, the Joint Compliance Expert shall submit a proposed methodology for the assessment, review or

audit, to the Parties. The Parties shall submit any comments or concerns regarding the proposed methodology to the Joint Compliance Expert within 45 days of the proposed date of the assessment,

review or audit. The Joint Compliance Expert shall modify the methodology as necessary to address any concerns or shall inform the Parties in writing of the reasons it is not modifying its methodology as proposed.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The proposed methodology was presented in the JCE Plan in July 2013 and approved

by the Parties. However, additional details re metrics will be discussed with UDSOJ and EHPD in early 2014 after the training on the new EHPD Policy Manual is completed.

Recommendations The JCE will work collaboratively with USDOJ and EHPD to develop metrics re tracking compliance for the Agreement requirements after policy manual training and policy implementation is completed in early 2014.

Evidentiary Basis JCE Plan

83

E. Review of Use of Force and Misconduct Investigations

195. EHPD shall provide each completed investigation of a serious use of force or use of force that is the subject of a misconduct investigation, and each misconduct complaint report, to the Joint Compliance Expert. The Joint Compliance Expert shall review each use of force investigation or review and each misconduct investigation and recommend for further investigation any use of force or misconduct

complaint investigations the Joint Compliance Expert determines to be incomplete or for which the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Pursuant to this paragraph, when the disciplinary process related to the January

2013 incident in New Haven has been completed, the JCE expects that the Chief of Police will forward a report outlining the facts, findings and dispositions of the case.

Recommendations Chief to forward report to JCE following completion of discipline.

Evidentiary Basis Chief has provided regular briefings on case to date.

F. Joint Compliance Expert Recommendations and Technical Assistance

196. The Joint Compliance Expert may make recommendations to the Parties regarding measures necessary to ensure timely, full and effective implementation of this Agreement and its underlying

objectives. Such recommendations may include a recommendation to change, modify, or amend a provision of the Agreement, a recommendation for additional training in any area related to this Agreement, or a recommendation to seek technical assistance. In addition to such recommendations, the Joint Compliance Expert may also, at the request of DOJ or the Town and based on the Joint Compliance

Expert’s reviews, provide technical assistance consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert’s responsibilities under this Agreement.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE in collaboration with USDOJ and EHPD have developed some modifications

to the Agreement which were approved by the Court in December 2013. The JCE team has also provided and will continue to provide EHPD with technical assistance related to securing additional grant funding to support some of the Agreement requirements

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Modified Agreement and BJA Diagnostic Center materials

G. Comprehensive Re-Assessment

197. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct a comprehensive assessment two years after the Effective Date to determine whether and to what extent the outcomes intended by this Agreement have been achieved, and any modifications to the Agreement that are necessary for continued achievement in light of changed circumstances or unanticipated impact (or lack of impact) of the requirement. This assessment shall address also areas of greatest achievement and the requirements that appear to have contributed to this success, as well as areas of greatest concern, including strategies for accelerating full and effective compliance. Based upon this comprehensive assessment, the Joint Compliance Expert shall recommend modifications to the Agreement necessary to achieve and sustain intended outcomes. Where the Parties agree with the Joint Compliance Expert’s recommendations, the Parties shall stipulate to

84

modify the Agreement accordingly. This provision in no way diminishes the Parties’ ability to stipulate to modifications to this Agreement as set out below.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Will occur at the two-year mark

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

H. Joint Compliance Expert Reports

198. The Joint Compliance Expert shall file with the Court semi-annual written, public reports covering the reporting period that shall include:

a) a description of the work conducted by the Joint Compliance Expert during the reporting period;

b) a listing of each Agreement requirement indicating which requirements have been: (i) incorporated

into implemented policy; (ii) the subject of sufficient training for all relevant EHPD officers and employees;

(iii) reviewed or audited by the Joint Compliance Expert to determine whether they have been fully

implemented in actual practice, including the date of the review or audit; and (iv) found by the Joint

Compliance Expert to have been fully implemented in practice;

c) the methodology and specific findings for each audit or review conducted, redacted as necessary

for privacy concerns. An unredacted version shall be filed under seal with the Court and provided to the

Parties. The underlying data for each audit or review shall not be publicly available but shall be retained

by the Joint Compliance Expert and provided to either or both Parties upon request;

d) for any requirements that were reviewed or audited and found not to have been fully implemented

in practice, the Joint Compliance Expert’s recommendations regarding necessary steps to achieve

compliance;

e) the methodology and specific findings for each outcome assessment conducted;

f) qualitative assessment of EHPD’s progress in achieving the desired outcomes for each area covered

by the Agreement--noting issues of concern or particular achievement; and

g) a projection of the work to be completed during the upcoming reporting period and any

anticipated challenges or concerns related to implementation of the Agreement.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE submitted a timely 180 day report which was subsequently filed by the

parties.. The JCE now respectfully submits this first annual report to be reviewed by

the parties and then filed by them with the Court.

Recommendations The parties review the report and subsequently file it with the Court.

Evidentiary Basis JCE 2nd Semi-annual Report

199. The Joint Compliance Expert shall provide a copy of semi-annual reports to the Parties in draft form at least ten business days prior to Court filing and public release of the reports to allow the Parties to informally comment on the reports. The Joint Compliance Expert shall consider the Parties’ responses and make appropriate changes, if any, before issuing the report. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE has provided copies of semi-annual reports in the required timeframe.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The JCE provided the 180 day report draft on July 12, 2013 and the 365 day report

85

draft on January 13, 2014; The final 180 day report was due on July 22, 2013 but completed on July 19, 2013 by the JCE. The report was filed by the parties as the JCE has no authority to file reports with the Court. The 365 day report is due to be filed by the parties on January 24, 2014.

200. The Joint Compliance Expert shall maintain regular contact with the Parties in order to ensure effective and timely communication regarding the status of the Town’s implementation of and compliance with this Agreement.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE continues to hold regular phone conference update meetings with USDOJ and EHPD parties. In year one, these phone meetings occurred every two weeks. In year two, these phone meetings will take place every three weeks. Between these meetings, the JCE remains in contact touch with all parties in person and via telephone and email. None

Evidentiary Basis Phone Meeting Agendas, Scheduled Visits and Meetings to East Haven

I. Public Statements, Testimony, Records, and Conflicts of Interest

201. The Joint Compliance Expert shall maintain regular contact with the Parties in order to ensure effective and timely communication regarding the status of the Town’s implementation of and compliance with this Agreement.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE maintains strong lines of communication with all Parties.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Continuation of scheduled conference calls. Continuation of formal and informal calls with individual parties. Regular meetings in East Haven in 2014, with primary focus on monitoring implementation of new policies and procedures. Scheduled group calls, individual calls and scheduled meetings

202. The Joint Compliance Expert may testify as to observations, findings, and recommendations before the Court with jurisdiction over this matter, but the Joint Compliance Expert shall not testify in any other

litigation or proceeding with regard to any act or omission of the Town or any of its agents, representatives, or employees related to this Agreement or regarding any matter or subject that the Joint Compliance Expert may have received knowledge of as a result of his or her performance under this

Agreement. This paragraph does not apply to any proceeding before a court related to performance of contracts or subcontracts for monitoring this Agreement.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

To date, the JCE has not been required to testify before the Court with jurisdiction over this matter. The JCE has not testified in any other litigation or proceeding

regarding this Agreement.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to follow the requirements of this paragraph.

Evidentiary Basis n/a

86

203. Unless such conflict is waived by the Parties, the Joint Compliance Expert shall not accept employment or provide consulting services that would present a conflict of interest with the Joint Compliance Expert’s responsibilities under this Agreement, including being retained (on a paid or unpaid basis) by any current or future litigant or claimant, or such litigant’s or claimant’s attorney, in connection with a claim or suit against the Town or its departments, officers, agents or employees. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE has not undertaken any professional or personal activities that would present a conflict of interest

Recommendations The JCE will continue to follow the requirements of this paragraph.

Evidentiary Basis n/a

204. The Joint Compliance Expert is not a state or local agency, or an agent thereof, and accordingly the records maintained by the Joint Compliance Expert shall not be deemed public records subject to public inspection. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Overview Paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

205. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not be liable for any claim, lawsuit, or demand arising out of the Joint Compliance Expert’s performance pursuant to this Agreement.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Overview Paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations NONE

Evidentiary Basis n/a

J. EHPD Compliance Coordinator

206. Within 30 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall identify a compliance coordinator to serve as the

single point of contact to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. The Compliance Coordinator shall coordinate the Town’s compliance and implementation activities; facilitate the provision of data, documents, materials, and access to the Town’s personnel to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, as

needed; ensure that all data, documents and records are maintained as provided in this Agreement; and assist in assigning implementation and compliance related tasks to EHPD personnel, as directed by the Chief of Police or his/her designee.

Compliance Rating Substantial Compliance

Discussion

Lt. Lennon has been and continues to be an exceptionally hard working and effective

compliance coordinator for the EHPD.

Recommendations Lt. Lennon should be commended for his efforts.

Evidentiary Basis This compliance report

87

K. Implementation Assessment and Report

207. The Town shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to: (a) document implementation of and compliance with this Agreement, including data and records necessary for the Joint Compliance Expert to conduct reliable outcome assessments, compliance reviews, and audits; and (b) perform ongoing quality assurance in each of the areas addressed by this Agreement.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion Recommendations

The Town has collected, maintained and continues to share needed records and data with the JCE and USDOJ. Additional data and records will be required after the Policy Manual is fully implemented in early 2014 and the JCE tracks new outcomes. None

Evidentiary Basis Data provided to JCE and USDOJ

208. Beginning with the Joint Compliance Expert’s first semi-annual report, the Town shall provide to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ a status report no later than 30 days before the Joint Compliance Expert’s semi-annual report is due. The Town’s report shall delineate the steps taken by the Town during the reporting period to implement this Agreement; the Town’s assessment of the status of its progress; plans to correct any problems; and response to any concerns raised in the Joint Compliance Expert’s previous semi-annual report. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The Town has provided the JCE with timely status reports at 60, 90, 180 and 365 day

marks

Recommendations Additional materials to supplement the reports may be requested for each JCE semiannual report.
Evidentiary Basis Summary reports on EHPD website

L. Access and Confidentiality

209. To facilitate its work, the Joint Compliance Expert may conduct on-site visits and assessments without prior notice to the Town. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all necessary individuals, facilities, and documents, which shall include access to Agreement related trainings, meetings, and reviews such as critical incident reviews; use of force reviews, and disciplinary hearings. EHPD shall notify the Joint Compliance Expert as soon as practicable, and in any case within twelve hours, of any critical firearms discharge, arrest of any officer, or any other potentially high-profile serious incident.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

n/a
The JCE has conducted numerous on-site visits and assessments. As this has been an effective, collaborative process, to date the JCE has always given prior notice. The Chief has provided timely notification of all significant incidents. Continue strong lines of communication
Regularly scheduled and unscheduled conversations and scheduled visits

210. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have timely, full and direct access to all of the Town’s staff, employees, and facilities that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems

88

necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall cooperate with the Town to access people and facilities in a reasonable manner that, consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert's responsibilities, minimizes interference with daily operations. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The Town has ensured complete and open access to the JCE throughout the Agreement process. In addition to the Chief and police personnel, Mayor Maturo has been readily accessible and has met formally on four occasions with the JCE.

Recommendations Continue strong lines of communications and regular meetings.

Evidentiary Basis Meetings with Town officials, EHPD and community members

211. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have full and direct access to all of the Town’s documents and data that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement, except any documents or data protected by the attorney-client privilege. Should the Town decline to provide the Joint Compliance Expert access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The Town has readily provided all documents requested by the JCE in this highly

collaborative process.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

212. To the extent necessary to ensure proper implementation of this Agreement, DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall have full and direct access to all of the Town’s staff, employees, facilities, documents and data. DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall cooperate with the Town to access

involved personnel, facilities, and documents in a reasonable manner that, consistent with DOJ’s responsibilities to enforce this Agreement, minimizes interference with daily operations. Should the Town decline to provide DOJ with access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide DOJ with a log

describing the documents or data.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

USDOJ has had full and direct access to the Town and needed documents throughout this collaborative process

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Ride-alongs and meetings in East Haven; Documents shared with USDOJ and JCE

213. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall provide the Town with reasonable notice of a request for copies of documents. Upon such request, the Town shall provide in a timely manner copies (electronic, where readily available) of the requested documents to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The Town has provide the JCE and USDOJ copies as needed. Some of the training materials have been difficult and costly to copy and send. The parties have worked together to find alternative and more cost-effective means to share materials for

89

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

review. The JCE and USDOJ have requested both electronic and hard copies of the new EHPD Policy Manual; The JCE and USDOJ would also like to have copies of future training curricula, however, strategies for EHPD to provide this information in a timely and cost-effective manner need to be developed. Training curricula materials and final Policy Manual after printed in early 2014.

214. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all records and information relating to criminal investigations of EHPD officers as permissible by law. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all documents in criminal investigation files that have been closed by EHPD. The Joint Compliance Expert shall also have reasonable access to all arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications whether or not contained in open criminal investigation files. Where practicable, arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications shall be obtained from sources other than open criminal investigation files.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE will review documents related to the January 2013 incident in New Haven

following completion of the disciplinary process.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

M. Selection and Compensation of the Joint Compliance Expert

215. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall maintain all non-public information provided by the Town in a confidential manner. This Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any privilege or right the Town may assert, including those recognized at common law or created by statute, rule or regulation, against any other person or entity with respect to the disclosure of any document or communication. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The JCE is complying with this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

216. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, the Town and DOJ shall together select an independent Joint Compliance Expert, acceptable to both, which shall assess and report on EHPD’s implementation of this Agreement. The selection of the Joint Compliance Expert shall be pursuant to a method jointly established by the Town and DOJ, and will not be governed by any formal or legal procurement requirements. The Joint Compliance Expert and his/her team shall be individuals of the highest ethics. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

This was completed with the hiring of Kathleen M. O’Toole on February 19, 2013

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis JCE contract

217. If the Parties are unable to agree on a Joint Compliance Expert or an alternative method of selection within 60 days of the Effective Date, they reserve the right to seek the Court’s assistance by asking the Court to select a Joint Compliance Expert. In that case, each Party shall submit the names of three candidates, or three groups of candidates, along with resumes and cost proposals, to the Court, and the
90

Court shall select a Joint Compliance Expert from among the qualified candidates/candidate groups.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

n/a n/a agreement was reached n/a n/a

218. The Joint Compliance Expert shall be appointed for a period of four years from the Effective Date and shall have its appointment extended automatically should the Town not demonstrate full and effective compliance at the end of this four-year period. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

219. The Town shall bear all reasonable fees and costs of the Joint Compliance Expert. In selecting the Joint Compliance Expert, DOJ and the Town recognize the importance of ensuring that the fees and costs borne by the Town are reasonable, and accordingly fees and costs shall be one factor considered in selecting the Joint Compliance Expert. In the event that any dispute arises regarding the reasonableness or payment of the Joint Compliance Expert’s fees and costs, the Town, DOJ, and the Joint Compliance Expert shall attempt to resolve such dispute cooperatively prior to seeking the assistance of the Court to resolve such dispute. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

220. The Town shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert with permanent office space and reasonable office support such as office furniture, telephones, access to internet, secure document storage, photocopying and scanners. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

To date, the JCE has not required permanent office space or other formal support,

but will ask the Town for this support in the future if needed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

221. Should any of the Parties to this Agreement determine that the Joint Compliance Expert’s individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors have exceeded their authority or failed to satisfactorily perform the duties required by this Agreement, the Party shall meet and confer to resolve outstanding concerns. If the Parties are unable to agree on a solution, either Party may petition the Court for such relief as the Court deems appropriate, including replacement of the Joint Compliance Expert, and/or any individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Has not occurred

91

Recommendations None Evidentiary Basis n/a

N. Court Jurisdiction, Modification of the Agreement, and Enforcement

222. This Agreement shall become effective upon entry by the Court. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

223. The Parties agree jointly to file this Agreement with the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. The joint motion shall request that the Court enter the Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), conditionally dismiss the complaint in this action, and retain jurisdiction to enforce the Agreement. Should the United States determine that the Town has failed to comply with the Agreement, the case will be reinstated for the purposes of enforcing the Agreement only. The Town may not challenge liability nor the necessity for Agreement terms. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

224. To ensure that the requirements of this Agreement are properly and timely implemented, the Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for enforcement purposes until such time as the Town has achieved full and effective compliance with this Agreement and maintained such compliance for no less than two years. If the Town believes it has reached full compliance and moves the Court to terminate this Agreement, the Town shall bear the burden of demonstrating full and effective compliance with this Agreement. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

225. The United States acknowledges the good faith of the Town in trying to address the remedial measures that are needed to promote police integrity and ensure constitutional policing in East Haven. The United States, however, reserves its right to seek enforcement of the provisions of this Agreement if it determines that the Town has failed to fully comply with any provision of this Agreement. Prior to initiating any enforcement proceedings in Court for an alleged failure to comply with any provision of this Agreement, the United States will notify the Town in writing of the facts supporting its belief that the Town is not in compliance. The Town will investigate the allegations and respond in writing within 30 days. If the dispute remains unresolved, the parties will conduct negotiations to resolve the issue(s). If the parties are unable to resolve the issue(s) satisfactorily within 30 days of the Town’s written response, the United States may move the Court for any relief permitted by law or equity and demonstrate that the relief is necessary to implement this Agreement.
92

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

n/a To date, this has not occurred. None n/a

226. Failure by any Party to enforce this entire Agreement or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other provision herein shall not be construed as a waiver, including of its right to enforce other deadlines and provisions of this Agreement. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

To date, this has not occurred.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

227. Any modification of this Agreement shall be executed in writing by the Parties, shall be filed with the Court, and shall not be effective until the Court enters the modified agreement and retains jurisdiction to enforce it. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Two Modifications to the Agreement were made with the consent of all Parties and filed with the Court on July 17 and December 3, 2013.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The modified Agreement

228. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as an acknowledgement, an admission, or evidence of liability of the Town under the Constitution of the United States, federal or state law, and this Agreement may not be used as evidence of liability in this or any other civil or criminal proceeding. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

229. The Parties agree to defend the provisions of this Agreement. The Parties shall notify each other of any court or administrative challenge to this Agreement. In the event any provision of this Agreement is challenged in any Connecticut court, removal to a federal court shall be sought by the Parties.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

230. The Town agrees to promptly notify DOJ if any term of this Agreement becomes subject to a collective bargaining dispute and to consult with DOJ in a timely manner regarding the position the Town takes in any collective bargaining dispute connected with this Agreement. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

To date, this has not occurred.

93

Recommendations None Evidentiary Basis n/a

231. The Town shall require compliance with this Agreement by its respective officers, employees, agencies, assigns, or successors.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

The Town has supported this requirement

Recommendations The JCE will continue to monitor this paragraph

Evidentiary Basis EHPD Compliance Reports at 60, 90, 180 and 365 days

O. Termination of the Agreement

232. The Parties anticipate that the Town will have reached full and effective compliance with this Agreement within four years of its Effective Date. The Parties may agree to jointly ask the Court to terminate this Agreement prior to or after this date, provided that the Town has been in full and effective compliance with this Agreement for two consecutive years. “Full and Effective Compliance” shall be defined to require both sustained compliance with all material requirements of this Agreement and sustained and continuing improvement in constitutional policing and public trust, as demonstrated pursuant to the Agreement's outcome measures. Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

n/a

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

233. If after four years from the Effective Date the Parties disagree whether the Town has been in full and effective compliance for two years, either Party may seek to terminate this Agreement. In the case of termination sought by the Town, prior to filing a motion to terminate, the Town agrees to notify DOJ in

writing when the Town has determined that it is in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and that such compliance has been maintained for no less than two years. Thereafter, the Parties shall promptly confer as to the status of compliance. If, after a reasonable period of consultation and the

completion of any audit or evaluation that DOJ and/or the Joint Compliance Expert may wish to undertake, including on-site observations, document review, or interviews with the Town’s personnel, the Parties cannot resolve any compliance issues, the Town may file a motion to terminate this Agreement. If

the Town moves for termination of this Agreement, DOJ will have 60 days after the receipt of the Town’s motion to object to the motion. If DOJ does not object, the Court may grant the Town’s motion. If DOJ does make an objection, the Court shall hold a hearing on the motion and the burden shall be on the

Town to demonstrate that they are in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and have maintained such compliance for at least two consecutive years.

Compliance Rating n/a

Discussion

n/a

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

94

 
 Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31 Filed 08/29/14 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

:

Plaintiff,

:

:

v.

:

CIVIL NO. 3:12-CV-1652 (AWT)

:

TOWN OF EAST HAVEN AND THE EAST

:

HAVEN BOARD OF POLICE

:

COMMISSIONERS,

:

Defendants.

:

August 29, 2014

NOTICE OF FILING OF THE 18-MONTH COMPLIANCE REPORT
In accordance with Paragraph 198 of the Modified Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing (“Agreement”) entered by the Court on December 23, 2013, the parties, on behalf of the Joint Compliance Expert Rafael E. Ruiz of O’Toole Associates, hereby file the 18-Month Compliance Report prepared by the Joint Compliance Expert. For future reference, this Report is entitled “Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing 18-Month Compliance Report Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing.”

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31 Filed 08/29/14 Page 2 of 4

Respectfully submitted this 29th day of August 2014.

DEIRDRE M. DALY United States Attorney District of Connecticut
/s/ Michelle L. McConaghy____________ Michelle L. McConaghy, ct27157 Assistant United States Attorney District of Connecticut 157 Church Street 25th Floor New Haven, CT 06510 Tel: (203) 821-3700 Fax: (203) 773-5373 Michelle.mcconaghy@usdoj.gov

MOLLY J. MORAN Acting Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
MARK KAPPELHOFF Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
Jonathan M. Smith Chief
Luis Saucedo Acting Deputy Chief
ANIKA N. GZIFA Trial Attorneys U.S. Department of Justice Special Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Tel: (202) 514-6255 Fax: (202) 514-4884 Anika.Gzifa@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for the United States

2

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31 Filed 08/29/14 Page 3 of 4
/s/ Lawrence C. Sgrignari LAWRENCE C. SGRIGNARI Federal Bar No. ct09010 SHEILA HALL Federal Bar No. ct22566 Gesmonde, Pietrosimone and Sgrignari, LLC 3127 Whitney Avenue Hamden, CT 06518 Tel: (203) 407-4200 Fax: (203) 407-4210 lsgrignari@gpsp.com Attorney for Defendants
3

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31 Filed 08/29/14 Page 4 of 4
CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that on August 29, 2014, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s CM/ECF System. A copy of the foregoing was mailed to: Rafael Ruiz O’Toole Associates
____/s/ Michelle L. McConaghy____ Michelle L. McConaghy Assistant United States Attorney
4

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 1 of 120
United States of America v. Town of East Haven and East Haven Board of Police Commissioners
Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing 18-Month Compliance Report
Prepared by: Kathleen M. O’Toole, Joint Compliance Expert (through June 22, 2014)* Joan Brody, JCE Team Coordinator August 29, 2014
*Kathleen O’Toole was sworn in as Police Chief in Seattle, Washington on June 23, 2014. The US Department of Justice approved the appointment of Rafael Ruiz as the new Joint Compliance Expert in East Haven, Connecticut on August 4, 2014.

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 2 of 120
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction......................................................................................................................................2 Section I. JCE Summary .................................................................................................................3
A. From Outgoing JCE .......................................................................................................3 B. JCE Transition ...............................................................................................................4 Section II. Compliance Overview: Tasks and Milestones ..............................................................5 Section III. Compliance Chart ......................................................................................................17
1

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 3 of 120
Introduction
O’Toole Associates, LLC, the Joint Compliance Expert (JCE) overseeing the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing or Settlement Agreement between Town of East Haven and East Haven Police Department (EHPD) and the U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ), submits this report of the JCE’s findings with respect to the first 18 months of the Settlement Agreement ending on June 30, 2014.* As outlined in the JCE plan of March 2013, the JCE understands its task to be three-fold:
1) The JCE must ensure that the EHPD is meeting all material requirements and all deadlines specified in the various paragraphs of the Settlement Agreement;
2) The JCE must, over time, make a more generalized assessment of whether or not the process outlined in the Settlement Agreement is achieving the desired outcomes, namely “constitutional policing, increased community trust, and professional treatment of individuals by the EHPD officers;” and
3) The JCE must review and evaluate all serious and significant incidents involving the EHPD. These include any serious uses of force, any complaints alleging significant misconduct, or any other event that rises to the level of being newsworthy or notorious.
As agreed in discussions with the Parties, to accomplish these tasks, the JCE will provide both qualitative and quantitative measurements of outcomes 18 months after the Settlement Agreement effective date of December 21, 2012. This report has two sections. Section 1 presents a narrative overview of compliance milestones achieved or in the process of being completed by the EHPD during the last 18 months. In Section 2, the JCE tracks the current compliance level, discusses the progress to-date, makes recommendations for enhancements and describes the basis upon which this assessment is made for each of the 223 paragraphs (numbered 10-233) in the settlement Agreement through June 30, 2014*.
*Parties agreed that since the exact date of the 18-month mark is June 21, 2014, it makes sense to include data and information for the full month of June, which is also the end of the calendar quarter. From this point forward, the Parties will include data and information through the last day of the reporting month.
2

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 4 of 120
Section I. JCE Summary
A. From Outgoing JCE
As the outgoing JCE, I would like to say it has been a privilege to serve in this capacity in East Haven, CT. It was clear to me early on that the EHPD required serious operational and cultural change. In retrospect, nearly eighteen months later, the change that has emerged is truly remarkable. I attribute this to many factors, including the following:
1. Total commitment on the part of the Town of East Haven. Mayor Joseph Maturo, Chief Brent Larrabee, Deputy Chief Edward Lennon, Attorney Larry Sgrignari and members of the EHPD have been focused and engaged. They have not wavered once on their commitments under the Settlement Agreement. It is clear that they are determined to meet the requirements of the Settlement Agreement and to drive the necessary cultural and operational reforms required to meet the full spirit of the Settlement Agreement.
2. The Department of Justice has engaged in a robust, but collaborative manner. The U.S. Attorney’s Office has been particularly helpful and hands-on in their day-to-day interaction with the JCE and East Haven parties.
3. In meetings with the JCE, many members of the community have expressed the need for change beyond the police department in East Haven. Other town departments, including the School Department, have engaged in meetings with the USDOJ Community Relations Service to seek programs that will lead to greater cultural awareness and respect.
4. The faith-based community has been engaged and committed to assisting with police training, but also with spreading greater cultural awareness and mutual respect among their followers.
5. The current union executive board has engaged in helpful and constructive dialogue with the JCE.
6. Many problem and/or disgruntled personnel have moved on.
When recently visiting the EHPD, I was struck by the dramatic shift in attitudes among officers. It was a stark contrast to those I witnessed during the winter of 2012. During the early days, a
3

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 5 of 120
number officers exhibited attitudes of cynicism and frustration. More recently, the majority exhibit pride, camaraderie, and greater professionalism.
The JCE concludes that the milestones accomplished in the first eighteen months are impressive. A solid foundation has been established, particularly with the development, training and ongoing review of the new Policies and Procedures Manual. During the next six months, the JCE will continue to monitor and measure compliance as agreed upon by the Parties to determine if all are leading to the desired outcome of professional, constitutional policing in East Haven. The JCE will continue to monitor and review EHPD progress on completing the Settlement Agreement paragraphs below during quarterly site-visits and ongoing communications with the Parties.
While I am heartened by the objective and subjective data that has led to my conclusions, I understand the importance of close monitoring and verification going forward. I am confident that my former colleagues Rafael Ruiz, Joan Brody and their support team will continue to conduct robust compliance inspections through the duration of the Settlement Agreement.
B. JCE Transition
The USDOJ notified the Parties on August 4, 2014 that Rafael Ruiz’s appointment as the new JCE for the East Haven Settlement Agreement had been approved. Mr. Ruiz has worked on Kathy O’Toole’s JCE team from the start of her tenure in February 2013. On June 23, 2014, Ms. O’Toole was sworn in as Chief of Police in Seattle, WA and is no longer involved in the East Haven Settlement Agreement project. Kathy O’Toole has also divested all interest in O’Toole Associates, the firm that is administering the JCE contract.
To date, three court approved revisions to the Settlement Agreement have been made. It is anticipated that during the next six months, the Parties will request a fourth Settlement Agreement modification to make minor language fixes and change the reporting dates to coincide with calendar quarters.
4

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 6 of 120
Section II. Compliance Overview: Tasks and Milestones
The Settlement Agreement is divided into seven focus areas: I. General Policies and Training; II. Bias-Free Policing; III. Stops, Searches, and Seizures; IV. Use of Force; V. Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations, and Discipline; VI. Supervision and Management; and VII. Community Engagement and Oversight. Milestones in these seven areas are presented below:
A. General Policies and Training
Policy Manual Development - By the 365-day deadline, the EHPD, JCE and USDOJ reviewed and revised 84 policies. During the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual training sessions that took place in January and February 2014, specific issues and concerns, primarily related to policy language changes and how policies were presented in the common template, were raised by attendees. EHPD Command staff reviewed all concerns and developed a more user-friendly template. They also determined that 46 policies and procedures should be revised in order to help the EHPD, both operationally and administratively, remain in compliance with the Settlement Agreement. The 46 policies and procedures were submitted to USDOJ and the JCE for review on April 21, 2014. The revised policies were reviewed and approved by the Parties and will be voted on by the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners at the July 29, 2014 Board Meeting. All 46 are presented on the revised common template. Additionally, the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners will vote on approving 34 other policies that have no substantive changes, but have been revised to fit the new common template.
Three other policies: Performance Evaluation - Policy 215.1, Automatic Vehicle Locators and Officer Video Camera Use and Operation - Policy 401.2, and the Secure Communities Program Policy 428.2, are presented in the new template and have been approved. These three (3) policies went into effect in June and July 2014. Only the EHPD Disciplinary Matrix - Policy 209.1 is still being reviewed and revised by EHPD, USDOJ and the JCE.
5

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 7 of 120
The EHPD has placed copies of the Policies and Procedures Manual at the Hagaman Public Library, East Haven Town Hall and in the Police Department. The JCE will continue to monitor that all copies are current.
Policy Training - The EHPD provided the JCE with a roster of attendees that completed the policy trainings in February and March 2014. The JCE and all Parties met in East Haven in March 2014 to discuss and reach an agreement on how to measure compliance for all 223 paragraphs of the Settlement Agreement and related 84 polices in the Policies and Procedures Manual. All Policies and Procedures Manual Training took place in January and February 2014. All EHPD Officers completed an on-line Power DMS training for Performance Evaluation Policy 215.1. Although some of the use of force training occurred before the policies were completed, the EHPD incorporated aspects of the emerging policies into their training. The Disciplinary Matrix training will be scheduled once this policy is completed and approved.
There are currently six (6) recruits who will graduate from the Training Academy in September 2014. They will be trained on all polices in August 2014.
Other Training - The EHPD has continued to provide the training to officers pursuant to the requirements of the Settlement Agreement. As in the past, the EHPD has split employees into three (3) different training squads with approximately twenty (20) people in each. These squads consist of full‐time sworn and non‐sworn employees as well as part-time employees. Civilian staff are only required to attend training sessions that relate to their roles or assignments at the EHPD. By splitting the department into three squads, management is able to balance staffing levels and mitigate overtime costs.
The Settlement Agreement requires in part the following training, which was conducted between April 1, 2014 and June 30, 2014:
1. On April 16, 2014, April 24, 2014 and May 1, 2014, the EHPD hosted trainings on the topics of Crimes Motivated by Bigotry & Bias, Gangs Update, Drug Update, and Citizens with Special Needs. Each officer attended one of the three sessions.
6

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 8 of 120
2. On June 11, 2014, June 18, 2014 and June 25, 2014, the EHPD hosted trainings on the topics of Investigative Stops and Arrest, Search and Seizure, and Use of Force. Each officer attended one of the three sessions.
3. During the month June of 2014, officers received training on the TASER Axon Body Cameras.
Personnel that were/are on long-term leave or injury leave in 2013 completed required training when they returned to full duty. There are no EHPD members at this time that have missed a class.
B. Bias-Free Policing
As required in paragraph 42 of the Settlement Agreement, the JCE has observed Language Access Coordinator, Lt. David Emerman, who is fluent in Spanish, interact with members of the East Haven Latino community in different settings and it is clear that he has established solid lines of communication. The JCE met with Lt. Emerman during several site visits, attended community meetings and discussed ideas for enhancing and expanding communication with the East Haven Latino community.
The Department has complied with all Settlement Agreement requirements related to Language Assistance through utilizing EHPD Authorized Interpreters (EHPDAI’s) and the Language Line service. The EHPD has effectively communicated with and provide timely and meaningful access to police services for all members of the community, regardless of their national origin or limited ability to speak, read, write, or understand English. In continued compliance with paragraph 40 of the Settlement Agreement, Lt. Emerman has distributed the Language Assistance Plan (translated to Spanish) to community groups/organizations, including the Spanish American Merchant Association (based in New Haven, CT), the Ecuadorian Consulate (located in New Haven, CT), and La Voz Hispana de Connecticut (Spanish language newspaper, based in Hartford, CT and New Haven, CT). Additionally, an English and Spanish version of the Language Assistance Plan is available in the lobby of Police Headquarters, Town Hall and at the
7

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 9 of 120
public library. Lt. Emerman plans to review and revise the Language Assistance Plan in the next six (6) months.
Data collected from Law Enforcement Administration System (LEAS) CAD/RMS as reported by Lt. David Emerman, Access Coordinator/Community Liaison Officer The “language assistance required” function was added to LEAS and became operational during the update to LEAS version 12.6.01 on or about May 23, 2013. The first documentation of “language assistance required” recorded in LEAS on an EHPD call for service was on May 30, 2013. When the function was initially added to LEAS, no capability existed to document the language that was required for the particular call for service. Since this function (Language Dropdown Menu) was added to LEAS on July 17, 2013, thirty (30) calls for service requiring language assistance (with no language selected) were recorded from the initiation of the function through July 16, 2013. From July 17, 2013 through December 31, 2013, 56 calls for service required language assistance, of which 53 required Spanish.
From the initiation of the feature through December 31, 2013 inclusive, 86 calls for service have been documented as requiring language assistance. Of those, 53 have been recorded with the target language of Spanish. According to Lt. Emerman, the majority of calls for language assistance with ‘no language selected’ also required interpretation in Spanish. From January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2014, there were an additional 39 calls for service requiring language assistance, of which 37 were recorded with the target language of Spanish.
These data verify that Spanish is the primary language of the LEP community and that Spanish speakers are the most likely residents requiring language assistance when having contact with police personnel. While incidents of requests for assistance in other languages have occurred, they have accounted for only 5% of calls that required language assistance (since the initiation of the language selection dropdown menu on July 17, 2013 through June 30, 2014, 95% of requests are for Spanish).
Calls for service requiring language assistance (other than Spanish as the target language) have included Italian, Greek, Russian, Punjabi, Cambodian and Bengali. It should be noted that EHPD
8

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 10 of 120
has continued its efforts of recruiting new police officers who speak languages in addition to English. Additional points are granted on the application for those who score high on a language test provided by Language Testing International on the application for employment. Language Testing International is the exclusive licensee of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) and is renowned for its testing services. Language Testing International provides testing services for private businesses and government, including federal government agencies. In addition to the existing Spanish speaking officers already employed, the Department has one officer fluent in Greek and officers who are fluent in several different languages including Arabic, French, Luganda and Italian. The new EHPD recruits speak Arabic, Swahili, Luganda, Italian, Spanish and French.
C. Stops, Searches and Seizures
The EHPD has provided the JCE the third report on stop and search activities of the Department. The EHPD is committed to providing bias-free policing in its contacts with the community and ensuring that UNLAWFUL profiling to determine who to stop does not occur. The stop and search data collected by the EHPD provides a picture of these important policing activities. On July 1, 2013, the EHPD submitted the first report following the EHPD training of all personnel in bias-free policing to the JCE. Continuing education and refresher training in bias-free policing will be held in August 2014. The EHPD will release data on stops and searches immediately after the end of each calendar quarter bi-annual basis so the community receives an accurate picture of how the Department is performing against the metrics associated with biasfree policing.
Excerpted from the EHPD Report: The analysis of the data in this report addresses the time period beginning January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2014. These data meet all of the requirements under Connecticut Public Acts (PA) 13-75 and 12-74. In addition, it is consistent with the requirements set forth in the Settlement Agreement (SA) between the U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ) and the Town of East Haven.
9

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 11 of 120
ANALYSIS – JANUARY 1, 2014 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2014 During the period beginning January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2014, 689 traffic stops were conducted by officers of the EHPD. Of these 689 traffic stops in the six-month period, 411 EHPD stops resulted in either a verbal or a written warning. There were five (5) custodial arrests resulting from these stops. Misdemeanor summons arrests resulted from 8.4 percent of the stops and infraction tickets from 28.3 percent. 2.9 percent of the stops resulted in no enforcement action taken. The majority of stops, 584 or 84.8 percent of stops, were attributable to motor vehicle violations, and 78 stops or 11.3 percent were attributable to equipment violations. 3.6 percent of the total vehicles stopped were searched. Only one vehicle that was stopped and searched was operated by a Hispanic driver.
A review of the stop data collected and analyzed indicates that traffic stops from this reporting period are generally consistent with the racial and ethnic make-up of the driving population in East Haven, CT as reported in the DOJ Civil Rights Division Findings Letter dated December 19, 2011. The finding letter states that the percentage of Hispanic drivers in East Haven was 8.3 percent. Additionally, data from the 2010 U.S. Census shows East Haven’s Hispanic population to be estimated at 10.3 percent. The percentage of Hispanic drivers stopped by EHPD officers for the six-month period from January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2014 was 12.3 percent. Just over 92 percent (92.1 percent) of total motor vehicle stops were non-Hispanic white drivers, Hispanic white drivers, or white drivers of an unknown ethnicity. The 92.1% consists of someone who is identified as race white and could fall into any of the three ethnicity choices: Hispanic, Middle Eastern, or Not Applicable. Just as someone could be black, Asian, etc. and fall into one of those ethnicity categories. Hispanic operators are classified as an ethnicity, not a race, in the state data collected by EHPD. Therefore, the statistical categories referenced herein, will not add up to 100% because the data is obtained from two different data sets. To add up to 100% for ethnicity, it would have to be calculated only from the ethnicity category and not include the information from the race category. The JCE will discuss with EHPD how to best collect this data during future site visits.
These stop data statistics for the reporting period do not reveal a significant disproportion of traffic stops of Hispanic drivers based on the DOJ Findings Letter and the U.S. Census Bureau
10

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 12 of 120
data for the Town of East Haven. An analysis of the stop data broken down by individual officers also appears to show enforcement consistent with the driving population by race and ethnicity. No individual officer data revealed an anomaly in data that required any further analysis, corrective action, or additional training.
Although these data are helpful, getting an accurate picture of these data is difficult because a Hispanic driver can be either black or white. Deputy Chief Lennon often had to revert to other data to reconcile the information and determine an accurate percentage. Going forward, it is important to pay attention to this category. First, it should be determined if there is an easier way to compile this data so the system is more user-friendly. It was difficult to determine the actual number of Hispanic drivers. Once the JCE did, the JCE reached two conclusions. 1) The percentage of Hispanic drivers aligns closely with the percentage in the community. 2) Reviewing the data in depth indicated that Hispanic drivers are more likely to get formal and more substantial enforcement sanctions. As a result, the JCE conducted a random review of several incidents involving Hispanic drivers to assess the nature of the stop and appropriateness of the enforcement action. The JCE determined in each instance that the action taken was appropriate. Several cases involved unlicensed drivers or unregistered/uninsured vehicles. It is understandable that police cannot give warnings in those instances and/or allow operators to drive away. However, this category, as outlined in Settlement Agreement paragraph 190, should be monitored closely going forward. For example, in the future JCE will review whether there were any white drivers stopped for no license and/or no insurance, and whether those drivers received formal sanctions.
While the JCE was pleased to see that the enforcement is proportionate, the JCE should continue to drill down to ensure that the actual sanctions are properly aligned with the infractions. There has been much discussion among the Parties about motor vehicle stop data and the JCE will continue to monitor these data very closely.
Search Warrants: The JCE reviewed all and they were proper. There is a very small number. From January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014, fifteen (15) search warrants were issued. Rather than a
11

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 13 of 120
random review going forward, the JCE will continue to review all search warrants. No issues in this have been identified by the JCE.
D. Use of Force
The EHPD Use of Force Policy became effective March 1, 2014. Data is collected from the Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS), the EHPD in-house computer system, and used to track and monitor the Use of Force data.
During the period from January 1, 2014 to March 31, there were 14 incidents of use of force. This new use of force policy was put into effect on March 1, 2014. From April 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014, there have been 19 incidents where the use of force was reported. The JCE reviewed all use of force reports. The vast majority were for physical use of force. The JCE was told that officers are erring on the side of caution and filling out reports when there is any suggestion that force was utilized.
Of the 19 incidents, there were 51 separate total uses of force reported, which are: • 25 Physical (hands on) • 13 Non-Compliant Handcuffing • 7 Firearm (no discharge) • 4 Taser (no discharge) • 2 Taser (discharge)
Twenty-one (21) arrests and eight (8) emergency medical committals resulted from these 19 incidents. From April 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014, there were a total of 209 arrests. The 51 reports for 19 incidents were written by different officers and include reporting on the same incident. The JCE will continue to look monitor and review all use of force reports in depth on future site visits.
The JCE reviewed all Taser incidents and determined that the officers and supervisors followed policy for each.
12

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 14 of 120
The Early Intervention System (EIS) would also include information about Taser incidents and other use of force incidents. The EIS is monitored by the IAO daily while on duty. The EIS has not triggered a review of any employee (as of June 30, 2014). The JCE was given a demonstration of the EIS.
E. Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations and Discipline
As required by the Settlement Agreement, within 180 days of the Effective Date, the IAO developed and implemented a centralized numbering and tracking system for all misconduct complaints. Upon receipt of a complaint, the IAO promptly assigns a unique numerical identifier to the complaint, which shall be provided to the complainant at the time the complaint is made. When a misconduct complaint is received in the field, a supervisor shall obtain the unique numerical identifier and provide this identifier to the complainant. (Settlement Agreement paragraph 141)
In compliance with paragraph 141, the EHPD uses a Departmental Review Reporting System that sequentially generates identifying case numbers that convert to Internal Affairs numbers when needed. The numbering system resets every January 1. This same recording system is used by the IAO as well as supervisors receiving misconduct complaints. The system is secure with limited access and cannot be viewed or altered by officers not authorized for use. Upon receipt of a complaint, the complaining citizen receives a Department Review case number.
From January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014, the EHPD received two (2) Civilian Complaints. On April 16, 2014, a Civilian Complaint was e-mailed to the EHPD pertaining to an officer’s attitude. It was found that the officer had not violated any policies or procedures and he was professional in his dealings with the complainant. On April 20, 2014, a Civilian Complaint Form was given to an individual complaining of a Taser being drawn and pointed at him. The supervisor on scene spoke to the individual and gave him a Civilian Complaint Form which was not returned. A Use of Force Review showed the officer used the force necessary to control the situation.
13

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 15 of 120
The Civilian Complaint System and the Early Identification System (EIS) under Settlement Agreement paragraph 129 have been developed and implemented. The EIS is a system for identifying officers whose conduct indicates emerging problems affecting the quality of their work performance. The EHPD has conducted complaint intake and policy training for all personnel, and is publicizing the complaint process.
The EIS captures the following fields and thresholds: • Any firearm discharge or use • Taser deployment or use; two (2) within a 60-day period • Baton or O/C use; two (2) within a 60-day period • Non- compliant handcuffing; three (3) within a 30-day period • Physical use of force; three (3) within a 30-day period • Pursuits; two (2) within a 30-day period • Arrests including interfering with police, obstructing a police officer, resisting arrest, and assault on a police officer; two (2) within a 60-day period • Traffic accidents involving EHPD equipment; three (3) within 12-month period • Civil lawsuits; two (2) within a 12-month period • Excessive absences; eight (8) unscheduled occurrences
For the reporting period, none of the thresholds established in policy 207.1 were triggered.
F. Supervision and Management
The JCE randomly reviewed arrest reports from January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2014 and found them to be in order. The JCE also reviewed a large sampling of detainee questionnaires signed by those taken into custody. We paid particular attention to two questions:
1. Were you taken into custody by force? 2. Have you been treated properly while in the custody of the East Haven Police
Department?
14

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 16 of 120
We reviewed incident reports in cases where force was used and also for one case where the arrestee did not feel he was treated properly. The JCE determined that the police performed according to policy in all the cases reviewed. Going forward, the JCE recommends a random sampling of the detainee reports, but would also ask to see ALL where there is an indication that force was used and/or arrestees indicated they were not treated properly. Then incident reports and supervisors' reports for those should also be reviewed.
G. Community Engagement and Oversight
Community Outreach: Lieutenant Emerman continues to meet with members of the Latino community on a regular basis. He proactively reaches out to Latino community leaders on a monthly basis. He discusses issues with them that affect their community and gauges how they and other community groups from the residential, business and faith-based communities feel about their interactions and relationships with the EHPD. Lt. Emerman has reported receiving overwhelmingly positive response from his community contacts with whom he has built trust. However, he also reports that some Hispanic residents still remain somewhat fearful of the police. Lt. Emerman feels this sentiment is changing over time and that some may be attributed to cultural issues related to interacting with police in their native countries. In his continuing effort to deliver a positive message to the community, Lt. Emerman met with Hernando Diosa, Editor at La Voz Hispana de Connecticut, the only Spanish language newspaper widely distributed in this area. Mr. Diosa interviewed Lt. Emerman about the Settlement Agreement, the various changes that are taking place in the Department, and several noteworthy policies of particular interest to the Hispanic community relating to paragraphs 179, 180, and 182 of the Settlement Agreement. The EHPD noted that the March 7, 2014 front page, full page article was well received in the East Haven community.
Lt. Emerman has continued to hold monthly community meetings. The meetings have been advertised in various print and online media outlets and have attracted residents with a great variety of questions, suggestions, and interest in learning how officers carry out their duties and how it will affect members of the community. The meetings have rotated between the north and
15

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 17 of 120
south side of town in compliance with the modified Settlement Agreement. Overall, the response at meetings has been positive, but unfortunately a limited number of community residents have attended. Lt. Emerman will continue to work with the Parties to develop new strategies for increasing attendance.
Lt. Emerman also met with Raul Erazo, head of the Ecuadorian Consulate in New Haven, CT, to discuss ongoing changes to the Department and relations with the Hispanic community. They agreed to continue discussions and have future meetings. In April 2014, the President of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, visited the New Haven area on a non-diplomatic visit for speaking engagements at Yale University. Mayor Maturo met with President Correa. Lt. Emerman helped with logistics and also had a short meeting with the President.
The JCE and USDOJ/US Attorney's Office attended a community meeting in March 2014. It is recommended that future JCE site visits coincide with the date of a community meeting so the JCE can attend when possible.
During the past six to nine months, the JCE team has worked with EHPD to collect and analyze survey data from the community, Department members and arrested detainees in order to assess their attitudes and experiences about and in the EHPD. Unfortunately, the sample size for the first attempt at an online and department survey were not large enough, despite numerous attempts to boost participation. After unsuccessfully working with a number of evaluators to help boost the sample size, the Parties and JCE are currently in the process of discussing how to fulfill the survey requirements to collect baseline data 18 months into the Settlement Agreement. During the next month, additional options for collecting community survey will be decided. The Parties will also agree upon next steps for analyzing current EHPD survey data and design an effective/efficient process for collecting information from detainees when they are released. A report will be developed and disseminated. It is anticipated that the JCE will conduct a one-year follow-up similar in scope to compare progress as requirements of the Settlement Agreement continue to be fulfilled.
16

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 18 of 120
Section III. Compliance Progress Chart for Modified Settlement Agreement Paragraphs 10 through 233, filed on August 29, 2014 CIVIL NO. 3:12-CV-1652 (AWT)
KEY:
Partial Compliance – The Town of East Haven has taken verified and meaningful steps to implement the requirement, including incorporating the requirement in policy, commencing sufficient training to relevant staff on the requirement, and/or carrying out the requirement in actual practice.
Substantial Compliance – The Town of East Haven has implemented the requirement in policy, training, and actual practice to a level and degree that satisfies the material elements and objectives of the requirement, based on the JCE’s qualitative and quantitative assessments.
Full Compliance – The Town of East Haven has achieved substantial compliance with the requirement and sustained such compliance for two years. (Please note one exception. There are a few paragraphs where a one-time requirement has been met and no longer requires active monitoring. These paragraphs are now marked as having achieved full compliance.)
Non-Compliance – The Town of East Haven has made little or no progress to implement the requirement or has otherwise failed to take meaningful and verifiable steps to achieve compliance.
Deferred - Requirements were not reviewed, audited, or assessed during the relevant rating period.
The Joint Compliance Expert (JCE) is using the compliance ratings defined above. The JCE is relying on the following four criteria to assess East Haven’s progress on implementing each paragraph of the Settlement Agreement. These criteria are based on requirements included in paragraph 198 of the Settlement Agreement.
1. Policy: Is there a policy in place relevant to the paragraph requirement? 2. Training: Have all required East Haven Police Department staff been trained on this
paragraph? 3. Practice: Is the East Haven Police Department performing the requirement of the
paragraph? 4. Verification: Have the requirements of the paragraph been audited, reviewed and verified
by the JCE?
17

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 19 of 120
When all four criteria are met, the paragraph will be rated as “substantial compliance.” After substantial compliance has been sustained for a two-year period, the JCE will mark the paragraph in “full compliance.”

IV. POLICIES AND TRAINING GENERALLY

10. EHPD’s policies and procedures shall reflect and express the Department’s core values and

priorities, and provide clear direction to ensure that officers lawfully, effectively, and ethically

carry out their law enforcement responsibilities. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all EHPD

officers are trained to understand and be able to fulfill their duties and responsibilities pursuant to

EHPD policies and procedures. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that supervisors have the

knowledge, skills, and ability to provide close and effective supervision to each officer under the

supervisor’s direct command; provide officers with the direction and guidance necessary to

improve and develop as police officers; and to identify, correct, and prevent officer misconduct.

To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. (Overview paragraph

for policy manual development)

Compliance

Substantial Compliance.

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the policies and training section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the subparagraphs that it introduces. This paragraph and paragraphs 11 through 23 relate to the revised EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. The revised policies and procedures manual was completed and submitted to the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners for their approval and is on the EHPD website. A printed manual has been distributed to all EHPD members. The JCE commends the EHPD for undertaking and completing this substantial task within the Settlement Agreement time frame.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

By the 365-day deadline, the EHPD, JCE and USDOJ reviewed and revised 84 policies. During policy training, attendees determined that 46 policies and procedures needed to be revised in order to help the EHPD both operationally and administratively remain in compliance with the Settlement Agreement (Agreement). The 46 policies and procedures were submitted to USDOJ and the JCE for review on April 21, 2014. The revised policies were reviewed and approved by the Parties and will be voted on by the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners at the July 29, 2014 Board Meeting. All 46 are presented on the revised common template. Additionally, the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners will vote on approving 34 other policies that have no substantive changes, but have been revised to fit the new common template.

18

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 20 of 120

SITE VISIT NOTES

Three (3) other policies: Performance Evaluation - Policy 215.1, Automatic Vehicle Locators and Officer Video Camera Use and Operation - Policy 401.2, and the Secure Communities Program - Policy 428.2, are presented in the new template and have been approved. These three (3) policies went into effect in June and July 2014. Only the EHPD Disciplinary Matrix - Policy 209.1 is still being reviewed and revised by EHPD, USDOJ and the JCE. All personnel participated in policy manual field training. The JCE will discuss plans for refresher and/or new training on future site visits.

A. Policy Development, Review and Implementation

11. EHPD shall develop and implement comprehensive and agency-wide policies and procedures

that ensure consistency with, and full implementation of, this Agreement, and incorporate each

requirement herein. Unless otherwise noted, all policies, procedures, and manuals shall be

developed within 270 days of the Effective Date.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Agency-wide policies and procedures have been developed and officer training completed. Eighty (80) policies were revised and are about to be approved by the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners. Three (3) policies were already approved and one (1) policy (Disciplinary Matrix Policy 209.1) is still being revised and reviewed by the Parties. None

Evidentiary Basis Eighty-four (84) policies were reviewed, revised and all but one (Disciplinary

Matrix Policy 209.1) are about to be approved and put into effect. New

policies on new template will be posted on the website since the Board gave

final approval at the July 29, 2014 Board meeting. At this meeting the Board

unanimously approved 80 revised policies to be effective September 1, 2014.

The Board had previously approved three other revised policies.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to check that current revised editions of the hard copy policy manual is accessible to all during site visits. It is anticipated that the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual will be constantly updated as new issues, technologies, training etc. are introduced in policing and in the community.

12. EHPD policies and procedures shall define terms clearly, comply with applicable law and the

requirements of this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This paragraph is covered in the above status reports in paragraphs 10 and 11. The JCE and USDOJ reviewed and approved 84 policies and procedures. One (1) policy remains to be reviewed/revised.

19

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 21 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Following extensive edits, all EHPD policies and procedures were reviewed and approved by the JCE, USDOJ and the Board of Police Commissioners. The JCE will review future revisions to EHPD policies and procedures.

13. EHPD shall review each policy or procedure related to this Agreement 180 days after it is implemented, and annually thereafter, to ensure that the policy or procedure provides effective direction to EHPD personnel and remains consistent with the Agreement, professional police practices, and current law, including incorporating mechanisms to promote and measure accountability and community engagement. EHPD also shall review policies and procedures as necessary upon notice of a policy deficiency during audits or reviews. Within 60 days of that review, EHPD shall revise the policy or procedure and consult with the JCE and USDOJ. USDOJ and the JCE shall provide the same review and approval of revised policies and procedures as with the initial policies and procedures to ensure consistency with this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

EHPD shall review each policy and procedure 180 days after it is implemented, and annually thereafter. Within 60 days of that review, EHPD shall review policies and procedures upon notice of a policy deficiency. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The training for the EHPD Policies and Procedures was completed by March 1, 2014. The JCE reviewed training curriculum and classroom rosters. Some language, administrative and presentation changes were made to 83 policies. Questions/Next Steps New training required for any revised policies will continue to be monitored.

14. EHPD’s Department-wide policies and procedures shall be collected in a Department-level policy and procedure manual, and unit-wide policies and procedures (or standard operating procedures) shall be collected in unit-level policy and procedure manuals. EHPD shall develop and implement policy and procedure manuals that include the following EHPD functions:

a) Field operations, including patrol, supervision task forces, and special operations; b) Internal investigations, including case and records management, administrative
investigations, confidential investigations, parallel criminal and administrative investigations, audits, and officer drug testing; c) Use of force reporting, reviews, and investigations, including both Supervisor and IAO force investigations and reviews; and in-custody death reviews; d) Criminal investigations; and e) Field and in-service training.

These manuals shall incorporate and otherwise be consistent with the requirements of this

Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

20

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 22 of 120

Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

These policies and procedures are included in the manual. None The completed policies and procedures manual. Questions/Next Steps None

15. EHPD shall expressly prohibit all forms of retaliation, whether subtle or direct, including discouragement, intimidation, coercion, or adverse action, against any person, civilian or officer, who reports misconduct, makes a misconduct complaint, or cooperates with an investigation of misconduct. The default penalty for retaliation shall be termination.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Settlement Agreement paragraph will be tracked by the JCE in 2014 after training is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 201.2 and 208.1 JCE community and police officer interviews (anonymous and nonanonymous) JCE review of all citizen complaints and use of force reports during site visits JCE attendance at community meetings and interactions with community during site-visits and via email and telephonic communication

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps Review all complaints and misconduct allegations

16. EHPD shall develop a policy governing its obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83

(1963), and its progeny. As part of this policy, EHPD shall track and maintain records of all

officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding,

Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make these records available to

prosecutors.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Settlement Agreement paragraph will be tracked by the JCE in 2014 after training is completed. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 201.2 and 214.1

SITE VISIT

Question/Next Steps Review all relevant cases; None so far.

17. EHPD shall submit all new and revised policies, procedures, or manuals related to this Agreement to the JCE and USDOJ for review and comment prior to publication and implementation within 270 days of the Effective Date. If the JCE or USDOJ object that the
21

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 23 of 120

proposed new or revised policy, procedure, or manual does not incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, or is inconsistent with this Agreement or the law, it shall note this objection in writing to all Parties within 15 business days of the receipt of the policy from EHPD. If neither the JCE nor USDOJ object to the new or revised policy, procedure, or manual, EHPD agrees to implement it within 30 days of it being provided to USDOJ and the JCE.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
This requirement was substantially completed by September 17, 2013. The JCE and USDOJ worked with EHPD to make typographical, grammatical and substantive edits to 83 policies that comprised the Department’s policies and procedures manual by December 21, 2013; One(1) remaining policy must be reviewed and enacted. (Disciplinary Matrix – Policy 209). None EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual on the EHPD website. Questions/Next Steps None

18. EHPD shall have 15 days to resolve any objections to the new or revised policies, procedures,

and manuals implementing the specified provisions. If, after this 15-day period has run, USDOJ

maintains its objection, then the JCE shall have an additional 15 days to resolve the objection. If

either party disagrees with the JCE’s resolution of the objection, either Party may ask the Court to

resolve the matter. The JCE shall determine whether in some instances an additional amount of

time is necessary to ensure full and proper review of policies. Factors to consider in making this

determination include: 1) complexity of the policy; 2) extent of disagreement regarding policy; 3)

number of policies provided simultaneously; and 4) extraordinary circumstances delaying review

by USDOJ or the JCE. In determining whether these factors warrant additional time for review,

the JCE shall fully consider the importance of prompt implementation of policies, and shall allow

additional time for policy review only where it is clear that additional time is necessary to ensure

full and proper review. Any extension to the above timelines by the JCE shall also toll EHPD’s

deadline for policy completion.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The 15-day requirement was never invoked.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps None

19. EHPD shall apply policies uniformly and hold officers accountable for complying with EHPD

policy and procedure.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

22

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 24 of 120

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Settlement Agreement paragraph will continue to be tracked by the JCE. None
During quarterly JCE site visits, the JCE reviewed all internal affairs cases and related complaints; JCE also has reviewed all use of force reports and a random sampling of all arrest reports. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to monitor on future quarterly site visits and via email/telephonic communication.

20. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall formalize a common template to use for all

EHPD policies and General Orders. The template shall include a method for updates and revisions

that permits all Parties to keep track of former versions of policies and General Orders while

clearly labeling currently operative policies and General Orders. All EHPD policies and General

Orders shall be made to conform to this template.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 2/19/13 deadline

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

EHPD delivered the template by the deadline to the JCE; The template is posted on the EHPD Website. A second and revised common template was implemented in early 2014 that is more ‘user-friendly’ for all policies. Questions/Next Steps None

21. Within 365 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall make all new and revised EHPD policies

freely available for public review online, unless there is a reasonable basis for maintaining a

specific policy or procedure confidential or unless an exemption from disclosure is allowed under

State or Federal Freedom of Information law or any other applicable law. All new and revised

policies shall be displayed on the EHPD website which shall also be available through a link on

the Town website.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The online requirement was completed by the 12/21/13 deadline.

Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE also recommended that the community have easy access to review the policies in a neutral location in early 2014, such as at the Hagaman Public Library per Settlement Agreement Paragraph 184. The EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual is available online at on the EHPD website, Town Hall, Police HQ and at the Hagaman Public Library. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to monitor and ensure that an updated and current Policies and Procedures Manual is available in hard copy at the Hagaman Public Library.

23

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 25 of 120

22. EHPD shall review and revise its Code of Conduct within 180 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter, to:

a) describe with specificity permitted and prohibited officer conduct;

b) be consistent with the requirements of professional police practice and this

Agreement; and

c) have an absolute requirement of officer honesty and make termination the default penalty for

dishonesty.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day deadline of June 19, 2013 and will be reviewed annually. The original Code of Conduct policy was rescinded and replaced by a rewritten and updated version.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The JCE and USDOJ received and reviewed and the East Haven Board of Commissioners approved the revised EHPD Code of Conduct - Policy 201.2

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps None

23. EHPD shall submit proposed revisions to its Code of Conduct to the JCE and DOJ for review

at least 60 days before the implementation of any revision. The dispute resolution process and

associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 shall apply to DOJ and the JCE's review

of any new or revised Code of Conduct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The original Code of Conduct has been revised and approved by the JCE and USDOJ. It was included in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

Recommendations Training and subsequent implementation on the new Code of Conduct occurred in January and February 2014.

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 201.1 completed. JCE approval memo dated August 23, 2013. Final redlined version reviewed and approved by USDOJ and JCE on December 5, 2013, as noted in emails and at bi-weekly team meeting on December 6, 2013. Roster of attendees who attended training.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps None

B. Training on Revised Policies, Procedures and Practices

24. EHPD shall ensure each officer and employee attends 2 – 4 hour training on the content of this

Agreement and the responsibilities of each officer and employee pursuant to it.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

24

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 26 of 120

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Within 60 days of the Effective Date; February 19, 2013.
None
EHPD provided documentation that this training was provided to all sworn and civilian department members by the 60-day mark. Training Roster Questions/Next Steps None

25. Within 30 days after issuing a policy or procedure pursuant to this Agreement, EHPD shall

ensure that all relevant EHPD personnel have received, read, and understand their responsibilities

pursuant to the policy or procedure, including the requirement that each officer or employee report

violations of policy; that supervisors of all ranks shall be held accountable for identifying and

responding to policy or procedure violations by personnel under their command; and that

personnel will be held accountable for policy and procedure violations. EHPD shall document

that each relevant EHPD officer or other employee has received, read, and sufficiently understands

the policy. Training beyond roll-call or similar training will be necessary for many new policies to

ensure officers understand and can perform their duties pursuant to the policy.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is currently ongoing with the completion and issuance of the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual December 21, 2013.

Recommendations The EHPD provided the JCE and USDOJ with a list of attendees, their associated job titles and the trainings they attended relevant to the revised policies and procedures.

Evidentiary Basis The JCE and USDOJ reviewed training materials and the training list with associated attendees. (Rosters)

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review training rosters for information noted above.

26. EHPD shall ensure delivery of the one-time and recurrent in-service training requirements set

out throughout this Agreement. As set out herein, EHPD shall provide a minimum of 32 hours of

in-service training each year to each officer, in addition to any specialized training for officers in

certain units, supervisors, etc., and in addition to the one-time training required by this Agreement.

Training in related areas may be delivered together. (For example, aspects of training in effective

community engagement and bias-free policing may be incorporated into stop, search, and arrest

training). The in-service training shall not include any firearms training required by the state. The

frequency and subject areas for initial one-time and recurrent in-service training are set out in the

sections below; however, it is anticipated that the frequency and subject areas for in-service

training in the future will be determined by the training plan this Settlement Agreement requires

EHPD to develop.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD is up-to-date and has completed all of the training required by the Settlement Agreement. They have developed a 2014-2016 training plan that all Parties have reviewed.

25

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 27 of 120

Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE will continue to track all training and review curricula and rosters. An update to the EHPD Training Goals and Objectives report should be completed for 2016-2018 in 2015. EHPD Training Goals and Objectives report dated September 17, 2013.
Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits.

27. EHPD shall provide mandatory supervisory, leadership, and command accountability training, tailored to each level of supervision and command, of 24 – 40 hours. All EHPD supervisors shall receive supervisory training prior to assuming supervisory responsibilities or serving as an acting supervisor, and shall receive no fewer than 40 hours of supervisory in-service training annually thereafter.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

All EHPD supervisors received the required number of hours of training. Specialized training classes were approved for individual officers after the JCE reviewed the curriculum. For example, the EHPD Lt. in charge of the overseeing the Settlement Agreement received specialized training at the Kennedy School of Government Senior Executives in State and Local Government three-week training. For future training, the EHPD should continue to send the JCE and USDOJ all supervisory, leadership and command accountability training curricula and related materials. Supervisory training curricula were reviewed by the JCE. Rosters Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits. JCE team members will forward EHPD information about new supervisory training classes that are being piloted in other jurisdictions.

28. The supervisory training program shall include instruction in the following topics:

a) techniques for effectively guiding and directing officers and promoting effective and ethical

police

practices;

b) de-escalating conflict;

c) evaluation of written reports;

d) reviewing and investigating officer uses of force;

e) responding to and investigating allegations of officer misconduct;

f) risk assessment and risk management;

g) evaluating officer performance;

h) appropriate disciplinary sanctions and non-disciplinary corrective action; and

i) using the Risk Management System to facilitate close and effective supervision.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

26

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 28 of 120

Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

These required topic areas were included in the training materials reviewed and approved by the JCE and USDOJ. None
Supervisory training curricula 2013 (from Institute of Police Technology and Mgt.) Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to review training materials to ensure documentation is consistent across training.

29. EHPD shall submit training curricula and lesson plans, revised pursuant to this Agreement, to the JCE and DOJ for review and comment at least 45 days prior to the scheduled date of training delivery. The JCE shall provide the Parties with written comments regarding the training. The

JCE and DOJ shall review all EHPD training curricula and lesson plans promulgated pursuant to

this Agreement to determine whether they are consistent with and incorporate the requirements of

this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices. The dispute resolution process and

associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 of this Agreement shall apply to DOJ and

the JCE’s review of training curricula and lesson plans.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was modified and approved by the court from 90 days. Since there is so much training associated with the first 365 days of the Settlement Agreement, all agreed 45 days was a more realistic time frame.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Training curricula and/or relevant training materials for the first 365 days were reviewed and approved by the JCE and USDOJ.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Step JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits.

30. Unless otherwise noted, the training required pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered

within 365 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter. Within 180 days of the Effective

Date, EHPD shall set out a schedule for delivering all training required by this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Required training, with the exception of the policies and procedures manual training, was delivered on time within the 365 days of the Settlement Agreement Effective Date. A training plan/schedule was also delivered by the 180-day mark. None.

Evidentiary Basis EHPD provided documentation that all training was delivered within the 365day mark and provided a training schedule at the 180-day mark.

27

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 29 of 120

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps Review annual training plans including new and refresher courses

31. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement documented and

approved testing policies and procedures regarding training to ensure that all testing is valid,

reliable, fair, and legally defensible. Both knowledge-based and performance-based tests shall be

designed, developed, administered, and scored according to established professional standards of

practice. Testing policies and procedures shall include detailed test security measures. All tests

shall be job-related, testing knowledge and skills required for successful job performance.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 270 day mark, however, additional training on this new policy issued November 2013 occurred in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 106.1 Training curricula and tests. Training Rosters. Questions/Next Steps The JCE, USDOJ and EHPD discussed how to measure compliance for tests that are continuing to be designed, developed, administered and scored professionally. All supported EHPD’s approach to identify and incorporate best practices for adult learning and retention into EHPD future teaching and testing. The JCE plans to conduct a site visit during a training session and observe the instruction and discuss the training with the attendees.

V. BIAS-FREE POLICING

32. EHPD shall deliver police services that are equitable, respectful, and free of unlawful bias, in a

manner that promotes broad community engagement and confidence in the Department. In

conducting its activities, EHPD shall ensure that members of the public receive equal protection of

the law, without bias based on demographic category, and in accordance with the rights, privileges,

or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. To achieve

these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. (Overview Paragraph)

Compliance

Partial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the Bias-Free Policing Section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the subparagraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

28

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 30 of 120

A. Bias- Free Policing

33. EHPD shall provide all officers with 4 hours of comprehensive and interdisciplinary training on bias-free policing within 180 days of the Effective Date, and 2 – 4 hours annually thereafter, based on developments in Connecticut or federal law and EHPD policy. Such training shall emphasize that discriminatory policing, in the form of either selective enforcement or nonenforcement of the law, including the selecting or rejecting of particular policing tactics or strategies, is prohibited by policy and will subject officers to discipline. This training shall address:
a) methods and strategies for more effective policing that relies upon non-discriminatory

factors;

b) police and community perspectives related to discriminatory policing;

c) constitutional and other legal requirements related to equal protection and unlawful

discrimination, including the requirements of this Agreement;

d) the protection of civil rights as a central part of the police mission and as essential to

effective

policing;

e) the existence and impact of arbitrary classifications, stereotyping, and implicit bias;

f) instruction in the data collection protocols required by this Agreement;

g) identification of key decision points where prohibited discrimination can take effect at both

the

incident and strategic-planning levels; and

h) methods, strategies, and techniques to reduce misunderstanding, conflict, and complaints due

to

perceived bias or discrimination, including problem-oriented policing strategies.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This training was provided by the Spector Training Network and taught by Eliot Spector, a highly respected attorney and lecturer. The training included bias-free policing practices and stop, search and arrest procedures. The lesson plans, which reflect the Settlement Agreement’s requirements, were approved by the JCE. An officer and a Lt. missed the training and were rescheduled (and since taken). The Lt., however, was unable to attend the make-up training as well. The Lt. has since documented evidence that he has received this training from other sources (Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University).

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Training test results for attendees on file at the EHPD; Discussion with EHPD Compliance Coordinator; Kennedy School of Government classroom materials Questions/Next Steps None

29

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 31 of 120

B. Ensuring Bias-Free Policing

34. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of demographic category in EHPD police practices. This policy shall have the following elements:
a) EHPD’s policy on bias-free policing shall prohibit officers from using demographic category

(to any

extent or degree) in conducting stops or detentions, or activities following stops or

detentions, except when engaging in appropriate suspect-specific activity to identify a

particular person or persons.

b) EHPD shall prohibit officer use of proxies for demographic category, including language

ability, geographic location, or manner of dress.

c) When officers are seeking one or more specific persons who have been identified or

described by

their demographic category, or any proxy thereto, officers may rely on these descriptions only

when combined with other appropriate identifying factors, and may not give exclusive

attention or undue weight to demographic category.

d) Data collection, as set forth in Paragraphs 64(c) and 65 of this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is the bias-free policing policy # 203.1 Bias-Free policing training occurred in 2013 as noted in paragraph 33 prior to the policy being completely approved and implemented.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 203.1 in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Additional review training on this policy was included in the policies and procedures manual training in January and February 2014.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE has developed a checklist of items to review via quarterly on-site

meetings as well as via ongoing telephonic and email communication. These

items include, but are not limited to: EIS, Technology Review, Supervisor

Reports, Random Audit or Review of Tasers, Citizen Complaints, Use of

Force Reports, Arrest Reports, Stop Data from State, Body Cameras,

Audit/Review, Search Warrant Applications, Community and Language Line

Data and Detainee Reports. Information and data for “Ensuring Bias-Free

Policing” will be gathered and analyzed from the checklist materials.

35. EHPD shall conduct quarterly analysis, as well as analysis on a cumulative basis, consistent with the methodology employed by the JCE, of its traffic enforcement activities to ensure officer, squad, and Department compliance with the bias-free policy.

Compliance Rating Discussion

Substantial Compliance This requirement was first completed at the 180-mark. Some quarterly reports

30

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 32 of 120

Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

were delayed due to a since-fixed software problem with a new CAD-based program that automatically tracks and analyzes these data. Quarterly reports need to be received by the JCE and USDOJ within ten (10) days of the end of the quarter. Additional analysis on stop data will need to be reviewed in- depth and a random review of stop incidents involving Hispanic drivers needs to be conducted to assess the appropriateness of the enforcement action. Work with EHPD to develop an easier way to compile user-friendly stop data. First report submitted at the 180-mark. Second report submitted on January 13, 2014. Third report submitted April 7, 2014. Fourth report submitted July 1, 2014. Stop data reviewed in June 2014. Questions/Next Steps Need to continue getting more detail about data set to ensure that traffic enforcement sanctions are appropriate.

36. EHPD shall develop a formalized procedure for officers to notify arrested foreign nationals of their right to contact their consulate, or to contact the appropriate consular official directly.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Training on this new policy was completed in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 304.1 Roster. Questions/Next Steps Continue to ask if any foreign nationals have been arrested since previous site visit.

37. EHPD shall refer any complaint plausibly implicating the bias-free policy to the IAO and to

the JCE. EHPD shall treat any violation of the bias-free policy as a serious violation. Officers

who engage in discriminatory policing will be subjected to discipline, and, where appropriate,

possible criminal prosecution.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD experienced one significant setback resulting from an incident that occurred in New Haven on January 17, 2013, less than one month after the execution of the Settlement Agreement. The facts of the case were very troubling, as they related directly to conduct referenced in this paragraph. The JCE is satisfied that the case was thoroughly investigated and handled properly by the Chief and the Town of East Haven. There have been no additional reports to the IAO and JCE since that case

Recommendations Continue to keep the JCE and USDOJ apprised of any complaints or violations in a timely manner.

Evidentiary Basis Chief’s immediate notification to JCE and DOJ. Regular and ongoing case briefings.

31

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 33 of 120

SITE VISIT

Comprehensive internal affairs investigation and report. Continue to review IAO files.

38. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall incorporate concrete requirements

regarding bias-free policing and equal protection into its hiring, promotion, and performance

assessment processes, including giving significant weight to an individual’s documented history of

bias-free policing, as well as using interviews and other methods to assess the individual’s ability

and willingness to effectively practice bias-free policing. EHPD’s hiring plan shall also include

steps to encourage qualified minority and other candidates who have a demonstrated ability to

serve diverse communities to apply for positions in EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Additional review after the 18-month mark is needed to sufficiently capture historical information. The JCE will continue to look at hiring decisions throughout the Settlement Agreement implementation period. The JCE will continue to review who is getting rejected and why. Reviewed civil service testing process and outcomes. New recruits speaking different languages were recently hired. Questions/Next Steps Continue to monitor

C. Language Assistance

39. EHPD shall ensure effective communication with and provide timely and meaningful access to police services to all members of the community, regardless of their national origin or limited ability to speak, read, write, or understand English. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:

a) develop and implement a comprehensive language assistance plan and policy that complies,

at a minimum, with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et

seq.) and other applicable law, and comports with professional policing practices;

b) ensure that all EHPD personnel take reasonable steps to provide timely, meaningful

language assistance services to LEP individuals they encounter and whenever an LEP individual

requests language assistance services;

c) identify and assess demographic data, specifically the number of LEP individuals within

its jurisdiction and the number of LEP victims and witnesses who seek EHPD services;

d) use collected demographic and service data to develop and meet specific hiring goals for

bilingual staff;

e) regularly assess the proficiency and qualifications of bilingual staff to become a EHPD

Authorized Interpreter (“EHPDAI”);

f) ensure that 911 call-takers identify an EHPDAI to respond to an incident involving an LEP

individual. If no EHPDAI is available, the personnel shall contact a telephonic interpretation

service provider. The call-taker shall note in information to the radio dispatch that the 911 caller is

an LEP individual and

indicate the language;

g) develop protocols for interpretation for interrogations and interviews of LEP individuals,

32

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 34 of 120

including requiring and ensuring the use of a qualified interpreter for the taking of any formal

statement that could adversely affect a suspect or witness’ legal rights;

h) develop and implement a process for taking, responding to and tracking civilian complaints

and resolutions of complaints filed by LEP individuals;

i) implement a process for recruitment of qualified bilingual personnel to meet

demonstrated service needs. As part of this process, EHPD shall establish significant and

sustained relationships with local and state-wide institutions and community organizations that can

serve as the source of qualified bilingual applicants and facilitate outreach to such advocates; and

j) implement effective incentives for bilingual employees to become EHPDAIs, such as pay

differentials and consideration in performance evaluations, assignments, and promotions.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark and EHPD remains in compliance through the 18-month mark. The plan is described in detail in Policy and Procedure 301.1, which is a thorough and complete document mandating: 1) the appointment of the Language Assistance Coordinator, 2) procedures for notifying the public about the EHPD’s language services, 3) hiring goals for bilingual staff at the EHPD, and 4) the qualifications for members of the Department authorized to act as EHPD interpreters (EHPDAI). It also establishes protocols for hiring contract interpreters to provide interpretation and translation service as necessary, currently through Language Line Solutions, but also from other vendors should Language Line Solutions be no longer available. The policy prescribes one hour of training for all EHPD personnel in how to assist LEP individuals in conducting their business with the Department. Procedures for conducting interrogations and interviews of LEP individuals, as well as taking complaints against the Department from, and reporting dispositions of complaint investigations to, LEP individuals are also established by the policy. A Language Assistance Coordinator, Lieutenant David Emerman, has been appointed. Lt. Emerman is a fluent Spanish speaker, who also serves as the Community Liaison Officer, required by Agreement Paragraph 181.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

JCE will continue to monitor bilingual staff hiring and processes and procedures for assisting LEP individual conducting business with the EHPD. Language Assistance Plan. Hiring Language Assistance Coordinator. Policy 301.1 Interviews with Lt. Emerman. Lt. Emerman 18-month Report (278 language line minutes tracked/used since August 2013). CAD/RMS Calls. Language Line data (39 calls for service from January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2014). Questions/Next Steps Continue meeting/communicating with EHPD Language Access. Coordinator/Community Liaison Officer Lt. Emerman regarding his ongoing interactions in the community.

33

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 35 of 120

40. EHPD shall translate the language assistance plan and policy into Spanish and other languages

as appropriate, and post the English and translated versions in a public area of the police

department building, as well as online, and in any other locations throughout the Town where

individuals go to seek police assistance. EHPD shall distribute the language assistance plan and

policy to a variety of community organizations serving LEP communities encountered by EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations Provide the JCE with a list of community organizations who have received

the plan.

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan.

Policy 301.1

Language Assistance Plan and policy has been translated into Spanish and is

available at the Hagaman Library, Town Hall and at EHPD.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

Continue to ensure this and other needed police materials are available in at

least Spanish.

41. 44 41. EHPD shall distribute its LEP plan and policy to all staff and police personnel, and, within

180 days of the Effective Date provide a minimum of one hour of training to all personnel on

providing language assistance services to LEP individuals. This training shall include:

a) EHPD’s LEP plan and policies, and the requirements of Title VI and this Agreement;

b) how to access EHPD-authorized, telephonic and in-person interpreters;

c) how to work with interpreters in the field;

d) cultural diversity and language barrier policing; and

e) basic command Spanish for officers assigned to patrol areas with significant LEP

populations.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan and Training Report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

None

42. Within 60 days of Effective Date, the Town shall designate a language access coordinator who

shall coordinate and ensure EHPD’s compliance with its language assistance plan.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 60-day mark.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Lt. Emerman assigned

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

Continue to discuss outreach efforts with Lt. Emerman and ensure a

designated language access coordinator is in place if staffing

changes/promotions occur.

34

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 36 of 120

43. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a process of

consultation with representatives of the LEP community to develop and at least annually review:

implementation of the language assistance plan, including areas of possible collaboration to ensure

its effectiveness; identification of additional languages that would be appropriate for translation of

materials; accuracy and quality of EHPD language assistance services; and concerns, ideas, and

strategies for ensuring language access.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

According to EHPD, this requirement was completed by the 60-day mark.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan (LAP).

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

LAP will be reviewed, enhanced and revised by Lt. Emerman in next six

months.

VI. STOPS, SEARCHES, AND ARRESTS

44. EHPD shall ensure that all EHPD investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are conducted in

accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or

laws of the United States. EHPD shall ensure that investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are

part of an effective overall crime prevention strategy; are consistent with community priorities for

enforcement; and are carried out even-handedly. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall

implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Partial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the

stops, searches, and arrest section. The Town of East Haven will reach

compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all

the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

A. Investigatory Stops and Detentions

45. EHPD officers shall conduct investigatory stops or detentions only where the officer has

reasonable suspicion that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in the commission of a

crime.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, searches and arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE started

randomly sampling supervisor reports and incidents and arrest reports during

35

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 37 of 120

Recommendation s Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

site visits in April and June 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. Add a coversheet for every arrest to show that Supervisors are reviewing arrests. Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. A random sampling of supervisor reports and incidents that would require supervisory reports were conducted during each site visit and no problems were identified. Questions/Next Steps Continue to sample officer and supervisor reports.

46. EHPD officers shall not use “canned” or conclusory language in any reports documenting

investigatory stops, detentions and searches. Articulation of reasonable suspicion and probable

cause shall be specific and clear.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE

started randomly sampling supervisor reports and incidents and arrest reports

during site visits in April and June 2014. The EHPD performed according to

policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations Add a coversheet for every arrest to show that Supervisors are reviewing

arrests.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

Continue to sample officers’ reports.

Sample citizen complaints.

47. EHPD officers shall not use or rely on information known to be materially false or incorrect in

effectuating an investigatory stop or detention.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE

started randomly sampling supervisor reports and incidents and arrest reports

during site visits in April and June 2014. The EHPD performed according to

policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

Continue randomly sampling supervisor/incident and arrest reports.

36

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 38 of 120

48. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category as a factor, to any extent or degree, in

establishing reasonable suspicion or probable cause, except as part of an actual and credible

description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE

started randomly sampling supervisor reports and incidents and arrest reports

during site visits in April and June 2014. The EHPD performed according to

policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

Continue randomly sampling supervisor/incident and arrest reports.

B. Searches

49. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category in exercising discretion to conduct a

warrantless search or to seek a search warrant, except as part of an actual and credible description

of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE

began randomly sampling arrest reports and stop data as well as reviewing all

search warrant applications after training was completed in February 2014.

The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

Random review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants on April and

June 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Continue review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants.

50. Where an officer seeks consent for a search, the officer shall affirmatively inform the subject

of his or her right to refuse and to revoke consent at any time, articulate and document the

independent legal justification for the search, and document the subject’s consent on a written

form that explains these rights.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE

began randomly sampling arrest reports and stop data as well as reviewing all

search warrant applications after training was completed in February 2014.

37

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 39 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. None Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants on April and June 2014 site visits. Questions/Next Steps: Continue review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants.

51. EHPD shall ensure that the consent to search form includes separate signature lines for

civilians to affirm that they understand they have a right to refuse, and for officers to certify that

they have read and explained the right to refuse to the civilian

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE

began randomly sampling arrest reports and stop data as well as reviewing all

search warrant applications after training was completed in February 2014.

The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants on April and June 2014

site visits. The JCE has reviewed the search consent form and it conforms to

requirements of Settlement Agreement

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Continue to review reports, forms and documentation related to searches.

52. An affidavit or sworn declaration supporting an application for a search warrant shall provide

an accurate, complete, and clear description of the offense, the place or thing to be searched, scope

of the search, and time and method of the search.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE

reviewed all search warrant applications and affidavits after training was

completed in February 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all

cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrant applications and

affidavits on April and June 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Continue to review all search warrant affidavits/applications.

38

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 40 of 120

53. A supervisor shall review each request for a search or arrest warrant, including each affidavit

or declaration before it is filed by an officer in support of a warrant application, for

appropriateness, legality, and conformance with EHPD policy and this Agreement. The supervisor

shall assess the information contained in the warrant application and supporting documents for

authenticity, including an examination for “canned” or conclusory language, inconsistent

information, and lack of articulation of a legal basis for the warrant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE

reviewed supervisory reports and all search warrant applications after training

was completed in February 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy

in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrant applications and

affidavits on April and June 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Continue to review supervisor reports and search warrant applications.

54. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those

warrant applications that are legally unsupported, are in violation of EHPD policy or this

Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy,

tactics, or training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or

deficiencies, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer,

and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. The quality and accuracy

of search warrants and supportive affidavits or declarations shall be taken into account in officer

performance evaluations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE

began randomly sampling supervisory reports, arrest reports and stop data as

well as reviewing all search warrant applications after training was completed

in February 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases

reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants on April and June 2014

site visits. Fifteen (15) were applied for and granted. The supervisors and JCE

found no unsupported warrant applications

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Continue review supervisory reports and search warrant applications

39

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 41 of 120

55. A supervisor shall review the operational plan for the execution of a search warrant and,

absent exceptional circumstances, shall be present for execution of the search warrant. A

supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her

presence. Once executed, a supervisor shall review the execution of the search warrant.

Supervisors shall memorialize their reviews in writing within 24 hours of the execution of a search

warrant. The quality of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s

performance evaluations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE began randomly sampling arrest reports and stop data as well as reviewing all search warrant applications after training was completed in February 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants on April and June 2014 site visits. Fifteen (15) were applied for and granted. A supervisor was present at each search and reviews were documented properly

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review supervisory reports and search warrant applications.

56. EHPD shall maintain centrally a log listing each search warrant, the case file where a copy of

such warrant is maintained, the officer who applied for, and each supervisor who reviewed the

application for a search warrant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE reviewed all search warrant applications (15) after training was completed in February 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. Due to the low number, in lieu of a log, the EHPD kept a copy of each one in a separate folder readily accessible for review. Should the volume increase, the EHPD told the JCE, they will implement a log.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 409.1, 420.1, 427.1 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants on April and June 2014 site visits. The JCE reviewed all 15 search warrant folders.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all search warrants.

40

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 42 of 120

C. Arrests

57. EHPD officers shall only arrest an individual where the officer has probable cause. In

effectuating an arrest, EHPD officers shall not rely on information known to be materially false or

incorrect. Officers may not consider demographic category in effecting an arrest, except as part of

an actual and credible description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April and June 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest reports.

58. An officer shall immediately notify a supervisor when effectuating: a felony arrest; an arrest

where the officer used force; an arrest for obstructing or resisting an officer; any arrest for the

violation of interfering with an officer; any arrest for violation of either breach of the peace in the

second degree or disorderly conduct in which the violative conduct is (a) a reaction to police

presence or officer conduct, or (b) targeted towards a police officer; or a custodial arrest for a

vehicle infraction, and the supervisor shall, absent exceptional circumstances, immediately

respond to the scene. A supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances

preventing his or her presence.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports, supervisor reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. All use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April and June 2014 site visits revealed proper notification of supervisors.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports to look for notifications of supervisors for such arrests

41

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 43 of 120

59. The responding supervisor shall approve or disapprove the officer’s arrest recommendation,

based on the existence of justifiable probable cause and EHPD policy. The supervisor shall take

appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in the officer’s arrest recommendation,

including releasing the subject, recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved

officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports and supervisory reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April and June 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE did not find any violations or deficiencies but will continue to monitor closely. JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

60. At the time of presentment at EHPD headquarters, a watch commander or supervisor shall

visually inspect each detainee or arrestee for injury, interview the detainee or arrestee for

complaints of pain, and ensure that the detainee or arrestee receives medical attention from an

appropriate medical provider, as necessary. The watch commander or supervisor shall document

the results of the visual inspection in writing.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest and supervisory reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April and June 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE did not find any violations or deficiencies but will continue to monitor closely. JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest, supervisory and visual inspection reports.

42

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 44 of 120

61. EHPD officers shall complete all arrest reports before the end of shift. EHPD field

supervisors shall review each arrest report of officers under their command and shall memorialize

their review in writing within 12 hours of the arrest, absent exceptional circumstances.

Supervisors shall review reports and forms for “canned” or conclusory language, inconsistent

information, lack of articulation of the legal basis for the action, or other indicia that the

information in the reports or forms is not authentic or correct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on April and June 2014 site visits. None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April and June 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

62. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those

arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement,

or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or

training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in

making arrests, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved

officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each

subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken,

to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each

violation or deficiency is noted in the officer’s performance evaluations. The quality of these

supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s own performance evaluations.

EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to

conduct reviews of adequate and consistent quality.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on April and June 2014 site visits. There were no arrests unsupported by probable cause.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

43

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 45 of 120

63. A command-level official shall review, in writing, all supervisory reviews related to arrests

that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that

indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The

commander’s review shall be completed within seven days of receiving the document reporting the

event. The commander shall evaluate the corrective action and recommendations in the

supervisor’s written report and ensure that all appropriate corrective action is taken, including

referring the incident to the IAO for investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to arrests were issued December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April and June 2014 site visits. There were no arrests unsupported by probable cause.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 412.1 and 413.1 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on April and June 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

D. Stop and Search Data Collection and Review

64. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy on stops, searches and seizures. This policy shall have the following elements:
a) A requirement that prior to making traffic stops, officers notify dispatch about known information, including the number of occupants of the vehicle, the perceived race or ethnicity of the occupants, and a description of the basis for the stop;
b) A detailed description of the justification necessary for officers to make stops and arrests; c) A requirement that all stops, searches, and seizures be documented in an Incident Report that
records: i. the officer’s name and badge number; ii. date, time, and location of the stop; iii. duration of the stop; iv. the apparent race, color or ethnicity of the individual, based on the police officer’s reasonable observation and perception; v. the suspected violation that led to the stop; vi. whether any contraband or evidence was seized from any individual, and nature of the contraband or evidence; vii. the post-stop action taken with regard to the violation (including a warning, a citation, an arrest, or a use of force); and

44

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 46 of 120

viii. whether any search was conducted, the kind of search conducted, the basis for the

search,

whether the search was consensual or non-consensual, and the outcome of the search.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 409.1 and 420.1 were informed by and completed after training by

1) the Spector Training Network as required in Paragraph 78 of the Settlement

Agreement, including instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law,

as well as First Amendment and related law.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 409.1 Motor Vehicle Stops and Policy 420.1 Search and Seizure and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the new EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

65. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a system to collect data on all

investigatory stops and searches, whether or not they result in an arrest or issuance of a citation.

This system shall allow for analysis and searches and also shall be integrated into the EIS.

EHPD’s stop and search data collection system shall be subject to the review of the Joint

Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall require officers to document all required information

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE reviewed stop and search data collected/analyzed in a new computer system fully implemented within the 270 days, but had some data categorization glitches that were not corrected until just after the 365-day mark. Getting an accurate view of these data is difficult as Hispanic can be either black or white, which meant EHPD had to revert to other data to reconcile this information and develop accurate statistics.

Recommendations

The JCE will need to carefully review this paragraph’s requirements and conduct random review of cases involving Hispanic drivers to assess the appropriateness of the enforcement action in addition to reviewing the data. The aggregate data does not always provide enough detailed data and information.

Evidentiary Basis The on-site database and EHPD reports were reviewed. Random incidents involving Hispanic drivers were reviewed.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to drill down into the data and incident reports.

66. Officers shall submit documentation of investigatory stops and detentions, and any searches resulting from or proximate to the stop or detention, including a complete and accurate inventory of all property or evidence seized, to their supervisors by the end of the shift in which the police action occurred. Absent exceptional circumstances, within 12 hours of receiving a report on an investigatory stop and detention or search, a supervisor shall review the report and shall document: (a) those investigatory stops and detentions that appear unsupported by reasonable suspicion, (b)
45

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 47 of 120

those searches that appear to be without legal justification; (c) stops or searches in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or (d) stops or searches that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches any were issued December 11, 2013 and training completed in February 2014.

Recommendations Supervisory reports should be reviewed.

Evidentiary Basis Supervisory Reports. Individual interviews with officers and supervisors.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to monitor supervisory reports

67. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address all violations or deficiencies in investigatory stops or detention or executing a search, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken, if any, to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each violation or deficiency is noted in the officer’s performance evaluations. The quality and completeness of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s own performance evaluations. EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to conduct complete, thorough, and accurate reviews of officers’ investigatory detentions and searches.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches any were issued December 11, 2013 and training completed in February 2014. Supervisory reports should be reviewed.

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 215.1 Supervisory Reports. Interviews with officers and supervisors and reviews of EIS. No violations or deficiencies were found

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to monitor supervisory reports

68. EHPD shall develop a protocol for comprehensive analysis, on at least a quarterly basis, of the

stop and search data collected. This protocol shall be subject to the review of the Joint

Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall identify and incorporate appropriate benchmarks for

comparison.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

A report covering these data for December 2012 through June 2013 was completed. A new computer program to collect and analyze these data was

46

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 48 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

added. The software that had caused data categorization problem was corrected in April 2014. Continue to review data and conduct individual interviews as needed.
Quarterly stop and search data report. DIS. Questions/Next Steps: Continue monitoring quarterly reports.

69. On at least a semi-annual basis, EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall issue a

report summarizing the stop and search data collected, the analysis of that data, and the steps taken

to correct problems and build on successes. The report shall be publicly available.

Compliance

Partial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Quarterly stat sheets and semi-annual reports were agreed upon by the Parties.

Recommendations Continue to carefully review and analyze report data.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Reports delivered and reviewed. (quarterly and semi-annual) Conversations with EHPD Compliance Coordinator. Discussions on conference calls with Parties. Questions/Next Steps: Go over quarterly data in detail with Compliance Coordinator; Request additional data/materials as needed in addition.

Although the data is released in a table form that is made public every quarter, the JCE will continue to closely monitor the stop and search data/report and work with EHPD to make sure the report adequately summarizes and analyzes the data.

The EHPD has also been doing semi-annuals of the full report and it is available on their website.

70. EHPD shall ensure that all databases containing individual specific data comply fully with

federal and state privacy standards governing personally identifying information. EHPD shall

develop a process to restrict database access to authorized, identified users who are accessing the

information for a specific and identified purpose.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE confirmed that there are current privacy processes in place and sufficient database access.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.1 JCE visit and review. Questions/Next Steps: None

47

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 49 of 120

E. First Amendment Right to Observe and Record Officer Conduct

71. EHPD shall ensure that onlookers or bystanders may witness, observe, record, and/or comment

on officer conduct, including stops, detentions, searches, arrests, or uses of force in accordance

with their rights, immunities, and privileges secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the

United States. Officers shall respect the right of civilians to observe, record, and/or verbally

comment on or complain about the performance of police duties occurring in public, and EHPD

shall ensure that officers understand that exercising this right serves important public purposes.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 204.1 was issued in November and December 2013. All Department

members were trained on this policy by March 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1 EIS

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will work with Parties to develop metrics.

72. Individuals observing stops, detentions, arrests and other incidents shall be permitted to remain in the proximity of the incident unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to move an individual, such as: an individual’s presence would jeopardize the safety of the officer, the suspect, or others in the vicinity; the individual violates the law; or the individual incites others to violate the law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

All Department members were trained on all policies in February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1 Training Roster. On-site observation.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

73. Individuals shall be permitted to record police officer enforcement activities by camera, video recorder, cell phone recorder, or other means, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to deny permission.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This policy was issued in November 2013 and will be fully implemented after training occurs in early 2014.

Recommendations The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field.
Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1

48

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 50 of 120

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Follow up discussion with USDOJ

74. Officers shall not threaten, intimidate, or otherwise discourage an individual from remaining in the proximity of or recording police officer enforcement activities.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1

On-site observation.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

JCE to continue reviewing police reports, complaints by citizens

75. Officers shall not detain, prolong the detention of, or arrest an individual for remaining in the proximity of, recording or verbally commenting on officer conduct directed at the individual or a third party, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis for the detention.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.1 On-site observation.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

76. Officers shall report to their supervisors whenever they believe they have been recorded by a

member of the public.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Supervisors know they need to report this, but the JCE is not aware of any occurrences.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Policy 204.1 Incident and Supervisory Report. Questions/Next Steps: JCE continue to monitor reports

77. Officers shall not seize or otherwise coerce production of recorded sounds or images, without obtaining a warrant, or order an individual to destroy such recordings. Where an officer has a reasonable belief that a bystander or witness has captured a recording of critical evidence related to

49

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 51 of 120

a felony, the officer may secure such evidence for no more than six hours while a legal subpoena, search warrant, or other valid order is obtained.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Modified from three (3) hours from the original Settlement Agreement under July 17, 2013 Order Modification, because three hours would not be long enough time to draft search warrant affidavit, review by a supervisor and prosecutor, and submit to judge. None Policy 204.1 Incident and Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Monitor reports to ensure it is being done

F. Stop, Search and Arrest Training

78. EHPD shall provide all officers with comprehensive training on stops, searches and arrests, including the requirements of this Agreement, of no fewer than 8 hours within 180 days of the Effective Date and between 4 – 6 hours on an at least an annual basis thereafter. Such training shall be taught by a competent legal instructor with significant experience litigating, or teaching at an accredited law school, Fourth Amendment issues, and shall:
a) address Fourth Amendment and related law; EHPD policies, and requirements in this Agreement regarding searches and seizures;
b) address First Amendment and related law in the context of the rights of individuals to verbally dispute, observe, and record officer conduct;
c) address the difference between various police contacts by the scope and level of police intrusion; between probable cause, reasonable suspicion and mere speculation; and voluntary consent from mere acquiescence to police authority;
d) provide guidance on the facts and circumstances that should be considered in initiating, conducting, terminating, and expanding an investigatory stop or detention;
e) provide guidance on proper and improper use of pretextual stops. f) provide guidance on the level of permissible intrusion when conducting searches, such as “pat-downs” or “frisks”; g) provide guidance on the legal requirements for conducting searches, with and without a warrant; h) provide guidance on the nature and scope of searches based on the level of permissible intrusion on an individual’s privacy interests, including searches conducted pursuant to probation or parole release provisions; i) specify the procedures for executing searches, including handling, recording, and taking custody of seized property or evidence; j) provide guidance on effecting an arrest with and without an arrest warrant; and k) provide guidance regarding the nature and scope of searches incident to an arrest.

50

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 52 of 120

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Training was provided by June 19, 2013, the 180-day mark. The Spector Training Network has provided eight (8) hours of stop, search, and arrest training as required in this Settlement Agreement paragraph, including instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law, as well as First Amendment and related law. This training was provided prior to the completion and approval of the policy manual. Additional training on revised policies was included in the January and February 2014 training. The JCE should be notified of any additional review or new training in this area if policies are revised again. Training curricula reviewed by JCE and USDOJ. Training Roster. Questions/Next Steps: None

VII. USE OF FORCE

79. EHPD shall develop and implement force policies, training, and review mechanisms that

ensure that force by EHPD officers is used in accordance with the rights, privileges, and

immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that any

unreasonable uses of force are identified and responded to appropriately. EHPD shall ensure that

officers use non-force techniques to effect compliance with police orders whenever feasible; use

physical force only when objectively reasonable; use physical force in a manner that avoids

unnecessary injury to officers and civilians; and de-escalate the physical use of force at the earliest

possible moment. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements set out

below

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the use of force section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

51

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 53 of 120

A. Use of Force Principles

80. EHPD uses of force, regardless of the type of force or weapon used, shall abide by the following requirements:

a) officers shall use advisements, warnings, and verbal persuasion, when possible, before

resorting to physical force;

b) physical force shall be de-escalated immediately as resistance decreases;

c) supervisors shall determine whether the action or inaction of officers using physical force, or

of other EHPD officers on scene, resulted in the need to use physical force;

d) officers will use disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a subject,

summoning reinforcements, and/or calling in specialized units, when possible, in order to reduce

the need for physical force and increase officer and civilian safety;

e) officers shall allow individuals time to submit to arrest before physical force is used

wherever possible;

f) officers shall not use neck holds or a strike to the head with a hard object, except where

lethal force is authorized;

g) using physical force against persons in handcuffs is prohibited except in emergencies in

which a reasonable officer would believe that bodily harm to another person or persons is

imminent;

h) unholstering and pointing a firearm at an individual constitutes a use of force and shall be

limited accordingly; and

i) immediately following a use of physical force officers and, upon arrival, a supervisor, shall

inspect and observe subjects for injury or complaints of pain and obtain immediately any

necessary medical care. This may require an officer to provide emergency medical care until

professional medical care providers are on-scene.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

JCE reviewed all use of force reports and found 46 incidents with the vast

majority involving non-compliant handcuffing. There were no serious

injuries. There were two (2) Taser deployments and officers/supervisors

followed policy for each.

Recommendations Continue to review all Use of Force Reports

Evidentiary Basis Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1

Reviewed all use of force reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Review all use of force reports on all site visits.

B. General Use of Force Policy

81. EHPD shall develop and implement an overarching agency-wide use of force policy that complies with applicable law and comports with professional police practices. The comprehensive use of force policy shall include all force techniques, technologies, and weapons, both lethal and less-lethal, that are available to EHPD officers. The comprehensive use of force policy shall clearly define and describe each force option and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The general use of force policy will incorporate the use of force principles
52

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 54 of 120

articulated above and shall specify that the unreasonable use of force will subject officers to discipline, possible criminal prosecution, and/or civil liability.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
New Policy Manual training took place in January and February 2014 and covered use of force policies and related issues. None Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1 Training Roster. Questions/Next Steps: None

82. In addition to a primary agency-wide use of force policy, EHPD shall develop and implement

policies and protocols for each authorized weapon, including each of the types of force addressed

below. No officer shall carry any weapon or use force that is not authorized by the Department.

EHPD use of force policies shall include training and certification requirements that each officer

must meet before being permitted to carry and use the authorized weapon.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training took place in January and February 2014, and

covered use of force policies and related issues.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1 Training Roster.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE continue to monitor and on field observation of weapons carried by officers

C. Use of Firearms

83. Officers shall not possess or use unauthorized firearms or ammunition, or obtain service ammunition from any source, except through official EHPD channels. All officers’ firearms shall be filled with the capacity number of rounds while on duty.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
Although use of force training was completed in 2013, the new policies and revisions required additional training in January and February 2014. None Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1 Training Roster. Supervisor Interviews. Supervisor Reports.

53

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 55 of 120

SITE VISIT

On-site observation of inspection. Questions/Next Steps: Check supervisor reports for evidence of random inspections.

84. Officers shall not fire at or from a moving vehicle, unless use of lethal force is justified by

something other than the threat from the moving vehicle; shall not intentionally place themselves

in the path of or reach inside a moving vehicle; and where possible shall attempt to move out of

the path of a moving vehicle before discharging their weapon.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1 Training Roster. Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: JCE continue to monitor reports

85. Officers shall successfully qualify with each firearm they are authorized to use or carry on-duty

pursuant to Connecticut requirements. Officers who fail to qualify shall immediately relinquish

those firearms on which they failed to qualify. Those officers who still fail to qualify after

remedial training within a reasonable time shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and

including termination of employment.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1 Training Roster. Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: There are no officers who failed to qualify. The JCE will continue to monitor.

86. Critical firearm discharges by officers on- or off-duty shall be reported and investigated. Data

and analysis related to critical firearm discharges shall be tracked in EIS and EHPD's Use of Force

Annual Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 404.1, 405.1 406.1 407.1, 408.1 and 302.1 Training Roster. Use of Force Reports.

54

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 56 of 120

SITE VISIT

EIS. There have not been any critical discharges. Questions/Next Steps: JCE to monitor supervisory reports

D. Electronic Control Weapons

87. EHPD shall limit the use of ECWs to only those situations in which such force is necessary to protect the officer, the subject, or another party from immediate physical harm.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were two (2) Taser deployments from April 1 to June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both. Review all Taser incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and 401.2 Use of Force Reports. Taser Incidents.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Review all Taser incidents.

88. Unless it would present a danger to the officer or others, officers shall issue a verbal warning to

the subject that the ECW will be used prior to use. Where feasible, the officer will defer ECW

application a reasonable time to allow the subject to comply with the warning.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were two (2) Taser deployments from April 1 to June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both. Review all Taser incidents.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 406.1 and 401.2 Use of Force Reports. Taser Incidents. Questions/Next Steps: Review all Taser incidents.

89. ECWs will not be used where such deployment may cause serious injury or death from

situational hazards, including falling, drowning, losing control of a moving vehicle, or becoming

ignited from the presence of a potentially explosive or flammable material or substance, except

where lethal force would be permitted.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were two (2) Taser deployments from April 1 to June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both.

55

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 57 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Review all Taser incidents.
Policy 406.1 Use of Force Reports. Taser Incidents. Questions/Next Steps: Review all Taser incidents.

90. After one standard ECW cycle (5 seconds), the officer shall reevaluate the situation to determine if subsequent cycles are necessary. Officers shall be trained in the risks of prolonged or repeated ECW exposure, including that exposure to the ECW for longer than 15 seconds (whether due to multiple applications or continuous cycling) may increase the risk of death or serious injury. Officers shall clearly articulate and justify each and every cycle used against a subject in a written Use of Force Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were two (2) Taser deployments from April 1 to June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both.

Recommendations Review all Taser incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and 401.2 User of Force Reports. Taser Incidents.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review all Taser incidents.

91. ECWs shall not be used in drive stun mode as a pain compliance technique. ECWs shall be

used in drive stun mode only to supplement the probe mode to complete the incapacitation circuit,

or as a countermeasure to gain separation between officers and the subject so that officers can

consider another force option.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were two Taser deployments from April 1 to June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both. Neither incident involved drive stun. Review all Taser incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and 401.2

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review all Taser incidents.

92. ECWs may not be used against pregnant women, elderly persons, children, visibly frail persons or persons with a slight build and persons in medical or mental crisis, except where lethal force would be permitted, or the officer has reasonable cause to believe there is an imminent risk of serious bodily self-harm and lesser force options are not feasible. Officers shall be trained in the increased risks ECWs may present to the above listed vulnerable populations.

56

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 58 of 120

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were two (2) Taser deployments from April 1 to June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both. Review all Taser incidents. Policy 406.1 and 401.2 User of Force Reports. Taser Incidents Questions/Next Steps: Review all Taser incidents.

93. ECWs may not be applied to a subject’s head, neck, and genitalia, absent exigent

circumstances. ECWs shall not be used on handcuffed persons, except in emergencies in which a

reasonable officer would believe that serious bodily harm to another person or persons is

imminent.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were two (2) Taser deployments from April 1 to June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both. Review all Taser incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 406.1 and 401.2 User of Force Reports. Taser Incidents.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review all Taser incidents.

94. Officers shall receive annual ECW certifications, which should consist of physical

competency; weapon retention; EHPD policy, including any policy changes; technology changes;

and scenario-based training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were two (2) Taser deployments from April 1 to June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both.

Recommendations Review all Taser incidents

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 406.1 and 401.2 User of Force Reports. Taser Incidents. Certification confirmed

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review all Taser incidents and continue to ensure all officers are certified.

57

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 59 of 120

95. Officers shall be trained in and follow protocols developed by EHPD in conjunction with medical professionals, on their responsibilities following ECW use, including:
(a) the removal of ECW probes, including requiring medical or specially-trained EHPD personnel to remove probes that are embedded in a subject’s skin, except for probes that are embedded in a subject’s head, throat, groin, or other sensitive area, which should be removed by medical personnel only; (b) transporting to a hospital for evaluation all subjects who: have been exposed to prolonged application (more than 15 seconds); are a member of one of the vulnerable populations listed above; had an ECW used against them in circumstances presenting a heightened risk of harm; or were kept in prone restraint after ECW use; and (c) monitoring all subjects who have received ECW application while in police custody.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were two (2) Taser deployments from April 1- June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both. The EHPD should train officers on the protocol for working with fire department paramedics. Policy 406.1 and 401.2 User of Force Reports. Taser Incidents. Questions/Next Steps: Review all Taser incidents. Continue dialogue with Fire Department.

96. Officers shall report all ECW discharges, except for training discharges, to their supervisor and

the communications command center as soon as possible.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were two (2) Taser deployments from April 1 to June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both.

Recommendations Review all Taser Incidents.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 406.1 and 401.2 User of Force Reports. Taser Incidents. Supervisor Reports and Interviews. Questions/Next Steps: Review all Taser incidents.

58

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 60 of 120

97. EHPD shall develop and implement integrity safeguards on the use of ECWs to ensure

compliance with EHPD policy, including conducting random and directed audits of ECW

deployment data. The audits should compare the downloaded data to the officer’s report on use of

force. Discrepancies within the audit should be addressed and appropriately investigated.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were two (2) Taser deployments from April 1- June 30, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for both. Review random audits

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 406.1 and 401.2 Taser Incident Reports. EHPD Technology Review. Supervisory Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review all Taser incidents and random and directed audits.

98. EHPD shall include the number of ECWs in operation and the number of ECW uses as

elements of the EIS. Analysis of this data shall include a determination of whether ECWs result in

an increase in the use of force and whether officer and subject injuries are affected by the rate of

ECW use. ECW data and analysis shall be included in EHPD's Use of Force Annual Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

ECW data and analysis included in EHPD's UOF Annual Report. The first annual report was completed in July 1, 2014 after all new policy training as completed and data collection began.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 406.1 and 401.2 EHPD UOF Annual Report. All Taser Incident Reports. Supervisor Interviews. EIS.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all reports/EIS.

E. Use of Force Reporting Policy and Use of Force Report

99. EHPD shall develop and implement a single, uniform, reporting system pursuant to a Use of Force Reporting policy and using a single, uniform, Use of Force Report. All officers using or observing force above un-resisted handcuffing shall, absent exigent circumstances report in writing, before the end of shift, the use of force in a Use of Force Report. The Use of Force Report shall include: (a) a detailed account of the incident from the officer’s perspective; (b) the reason for the initial police presence; (c) a specific description of the acts that led to the use of force; (d) the level of resistance encountered; and (e) a description of every type of force used. The use of

59

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 61 of 120

force reporting policy shall explicitly prohibit the use of “canned” or conclusory language in all reports documenting use of force.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. None Use of Force Annual Report. All Use of Force Incident Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

100. Officers who use or observe force and fail to report it, shall be held strictly accountable, and face discipline up to and including termination, regardless of whether the force was reasonable.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were no occurrences of failure to report use of force.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Use of Force Incident Reports. Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

101. Each officer in a position to see or hear a use of force shall complete a Use of Force Report, before the end of the shift, documenting the officer’s own actions and observations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Use of Force Incident Reports. Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

102. Officers' Use of Force Reports (whether primary or supplemental) shall completely and accurately describe the use of force. Officers shall be held strictly accountable for material omissions or inaccuracies in the Use of Force Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014.

60

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 62 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Use of Force Incident Reports. Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

103. Officers who use or observe force shall notify their supervisors immediately following any

use of force or upon receipt of an allegation of unreasonable or unreported use of force by any

officer.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.1 Use of Force Incident Reports. Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

104. Use of Force Reports shall be maintained centrally by the IAO for tracking and analysis purposes, as required by this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

IAO Naccarato report and interviews. JCE verified that Use of Force Reports were maintained centrally Questions/Next Steps: Meet with IAO Naccarato every site visit to review/discuss all use of force incidents.

105. At least annually, EHPD shall analyze the year’s force data, including force-related outcome data, to determine significant trends; identify and correct deficiencies revealed by this analysis; and document its findings in a public report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force Incident Reports since policy in effect.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force reports in depth every site visit. Review website and press release schedule for end of year after one (1) complete year of data is obtained.

61

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 63 of 120

F. Force Reviews by Supervisors

106. Absent exceptional circumstances, the direct supervisor of any officer using force, upon

notification of a use of force or allegation of excessive force, shall respond to the scene of the use

of force. If a supervisor is unable to respond to the scene, the supervisor shall document in the

case file the exigent circumstances preventing his or her presence. The direct supervisor of any

officer using force shall review all uses of force except those incidents involving a serious use of

force, a use of force that appears potentially unjustified or criminal, a use of force by EHPD

personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or a use of force reassigned to the IAO by the Chief of

Police or designee or the IAO. No supervisor who was involved in the incident, including by

participating in or ordering the force being investigated, shall be responsible for the investigation

of the incident.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.1

Supervisor Reports.

Review of all Use of Force Incidents.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

107. The reviewing supervisor shall:

a) respond to the scene, examine the subject of the force for injury, interview the subject for complaints of pain, and ensure that the subject receives medical attention from an appropriate medical provider;
b) notify the IAO immediately of the use of force and obtain a use of force tracking number; c) identify and collect all relevant evidence and shall evaluate that evidence to determine whether the use of force: (i) was consistent with EHPD policy and/or (ii) raises any policy, training, tactical or equipment concerns; d) ensure collection of all evidence to establish material facts related to the use of force, including audio and video recordings, and photographs and other documentation of injuries or the absence of injuries; e) ensure the canvass for and interview of civilian witnesses. In addition, civilian witnesses should be encouraged to provide and sign a written report in their own words; f) ensure that all officer witnesses provide a statement regarding the incident. Officers involved in a use of force incident shall be separated until they are interviewed. Group interviews shall be prohibited. Supervisors shall ensure that all use of force reports identify all officers who were involved in the incident or were on the scene when it occurred. Supervisors shall not ask officers or other witnesses leading questions that improperly suggest justifications for the officers’ conduct, when such questions are contrary to appropriate law enforcement techniques. Reviewing supervisors shall record all interviews with subjects and civilian witnesses and all follow-up interviews with officers; g) review all Use of Force Reports and ensure that all reports include the information required by this Agreement and EHPD policy; and

62

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 64 of 120

h) consider all relevant evidence, including circumstantial, direct, and physical evidence, and

make credibility determinations, if feasible. Supervisors will make all reasonable efforts to resolve

material inconsistencies between the officer, subject, and witness statements, as well as

inconsistencies between the level of force claimed by the officer and the subject’s injuries. EHPD

will train all of its supervisors on the factors to consider when evaluating credibility. Where a

reasonable and trained supervisor would determine that there may have been misconduct, the

supervisor shall immediately notify the IAO to respond to the scene.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.1

Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

108. Each supervisor shall provide a written report to the shift commander by the end of the shift

documenting the supervisor’s preliminary determination of the appropriateness of the use of force,

including whether the force was reasonable and within policy; whether the injuries appear

proportionate to the use of force described; and summaries of subject, witness, and officer

statements.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

End of shift interpreted as end of tour of duty. Supervisors shall provide

written report to shift commander before they go home.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force reports.

109. Each supervisor shall complete and document a use of force supervisory review using a Supervisor’s Force Review Report, within 72 hours of learning of the use of force. This Report shall include:
a) the supervisor’s narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the evidence that either justifies or fails to justify the officer’s conduct based on the supervisor’s independent review of the facts and circumstances of the incident;
b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers, and addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses, the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a statement;

63

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 65 of 120
c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force; d) the reviewing supervisor’s evaluation of the basis for the use of force, including a determination of whether the officer’s actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent with state and federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have been avoided through the use of de-escalation techniques or lesser force options; and e) documentation of any non-disciplinary corrective action taken.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
None None Policy 407.1 Use of Force Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents, including supervisory reports

110. Upon completion of the Supervisor’s Force Review Report, the investigating supervisor shall

forward the report to the patrol commander, who shall review the report to ensure that it is

complete and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The patrol

commander shall order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant

evidence that may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the

findings.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There has been no need for additional investigation.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

111. Where the findings of the Supervisory Force Review Report are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the patrol commander shall modify the findings after consultation with the reviewing supervisor, and document the reasons for this modification, including the specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification. The patrol commander shall counsel the reviewing supervisor regarding the modification and of any investigative deficiencies that led to it, and order corrective action where appropriate. The patrol commander shall be held accountable for the accuracy and completeness of Use of Force Supervisory Review Reports completed by
64

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 66 of 120

supervisors under the command of the patrol commander.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
There have been no occurrences. None Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

112. Where a reviewing supervisor repeatedly conducts deficient investigations, the supervisor

shall receive the appropriate corrective action, including training, demotion, and/or removal from a

supervisory position.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

113. Whenever a reviewing supervisor or patrol commander finds evidence of apparent criminal

conduct by an officer, he or she shall suspend the investigation immediately and notify the Chief

of Police, the IAO, the State Attorney’s Office, and the State Police. The IAO shall immediately

notify the FBI and USAO, where appropriate.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

114. When the patrol commander finds that the supervisor force review is complete and the findings are supported by the evidence, the force review file shall be forwarded to the Chief of Police and the IAO. The Chief of Police and the IAO shall review the force review to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by the evidence. At the discretion of the Chief of Police, his designee, or the IAO, a use of force review may be assigned or re-assigned to another supervisor, whether within or outside of the shift in which the incident occurred, or may be returned to the patrol commander for further review or analysis. This assignment or re-assignment

65

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 67 of 120

shall be explained in

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
There have been no occurrences. None Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

115. Where, after a force review, a use of force is found to be out of policy, the Chief of Police

shall direct and ensure appropriate discipline, including forwarding the outcome of the force

review to the Board of Police Commissioners for disciplinary action. Where the use of force

indicates policy, training, tactical, or equipment concerns, the Chief of Police shall ensure also that

necessary training is delivered and that policy, tactical or equipment concerns are resolved.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations Review training needs related to any use of force case may be required.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents and any new training associated with cases.

G. Force Investigations by Internal Affairs

116. EHPD shall establish a single, uniform reporting and investigation/review system for all serious uses of force, including critical firearm discharges.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

117. EHPD shall ensure that all serious uses of force are investigated fully and fairly by individuals with appropriate expertise, independence and investigative skills to ensure that uses of force that are contrary to law or policy are identified and appropriately resolved; that policy, training, equipment, or tactical deficiencies related to the use of force are identified and corrected;
66

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 68 of 120

and that investigations of sufficient quality to ensure that officers are held accountable as necessary. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:

a) Provide for an IAO to conduct administrative investigations of serious uses of force, uses of force by
EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or uses of force reassigned to the IAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the IAO.

b) Within 90 days from the Effective Date, EHPD shall recruit, assign, and train a sufficient number of IAOs to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement. Prior to performing IAO duties, IAOs shall receive a minimum of 24 hours of force investigation training; call out and investigative protocols; and proper roles of onscene counterparts such as crime scene technicians, State Attorney’s Office, State Police EHPD detectives, and Joint Compliance Expert; and investigative equipment and techniques. IAOs shall also receive annual in-service training on proper force investigations.
c) EHPD shall create a force investigation procedural manual to ensure consistency with this Agreement. The procedural manual shall include:

i. definitions of all relevant terms; ii. clear statements of the mission and authority of the IAO regarding force investigations; iii. procedures on report writing; iv. procedures for collecting and processing evidence; v. procedures to ensure appropriate separation of criminal and administrative
investigations in the event of compelled subject officer statements; vi. procedures for consulting with the State Attorney’s Office and the State Police, including
ensuring that administrative investigations are not unnecessarily delayed while a criminal investigation is pending; vii. scene management procedures; and viii. management procedures.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
None None Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

118. Where appropriate to ensure the fact and appearance of impartiality, investigations of serious uses of force or force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer shall be referred for investigation to an independent and highly competent entity outside EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

67

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 69 of 120

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

New FBI SAC Patricia Ferrick has worked with EHPD on reviewing Use of Force incidents. The JCE is satisfied with the quality and thoroughness of use of force investigations. None
Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Patti Ferrick, the Special Agent in Charge of the FBI for Connecticut, met with Chief Larrabee on March 5, 2014. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

119. In every incident involving a serious use of force, or any use of force indicating apparent

criminal conduct by an officer, the supervisor shall immediately notify the IAO and obtain a use of

force tracking number.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

120. The IAO shall respond to the scene of every incident involving a serious use of force, any use

of force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer, any use of force by an officer of a rank

higher than sergeant, or as ordered by the Chief of Police or designee.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Interview with IAO and review of IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

121. The IAO shall immediately notify and consult with the State Attorney’s Office and State

Police regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent criminal conduct by EHPD

personnel, or any use of force in which an officer discharged his firearm, or where an individual

has died while in or proximate to the custody of EHPD. The IAO shall immediately notify and

consult with the FBI and the USAO regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent

criminal conduct by EHPD personnel that violates federal law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

68

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 70 of 120

Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The EHPD has established a strong and productive relationship with the FBI.
None
Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Interviews with IAO Naccarato and review of IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force Incidents.

122. If the case may proceed criminally, or where EHPD requests a criminal prosecution, any

compelled interview of the subject officers shall be delayed, consistent with Paragraphs 148 and

150 of this Agreement. No other part of the investigation shall be held in abeyance unless

specifically authorized by the Chief of Police in consultation with the agency conducting the

criminal investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Unaware of any relevant incident to date.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.1

Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

123. The IAO shall complete its administrative use of force investigation within 60 days from the use of force. At the conclusion of each use of force investigation, the IAO shall prepare a report on the investigation. The report shall include:

a) a narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the evidence that

either justifies or fails to justify the officer’s conduct based on the IAO’s independent review of

the facts and circumstances of the incident;

b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers, and

addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses, the

report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but

circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone

number or address of those

witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report

should also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a

statement;

c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force;

d) the IAO’s evaluation of the basis for the use of force, including a determination of whether

the officer’s actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent with state and federal law;

whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of the incident

for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have been avoided

through the use of de-

escalation techniques or lesser force options;

e) if a weapon was used, documentation that the officer’s certification and training for the

weapon are current; and

69

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 71 of 120

f) documentation of any disciplinary and/or non-disciplinary corrective action recommended.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
There has not been an incident that this policy applies to since the JCE started. None Policy 407.1 Use of Force Reports. Interviews with IAO Naccarato and review of IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: None

H. Review by Chief of Police

124. The Chief of Police shall review all force reviews by supervisors and force investigations by the IAO. The Chief of Police shall:

a) review each force review and investigation within 30 days of receiving the force

review/investigation report to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by a

preponderance of the evidence;

b) order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant evidence that

may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the findings.

Where the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the Chief of Police or

his/her designee shall modify the findings and document the reasons for this modification,

including the specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification;

c) determine whether the force violated EHPD policy. If the force violated EHPD policy, the

Chief of Police of his/her designee shall take appropriate disciplinary action, including referring

the review or investigation report to the Board of Police Commissioners for appropriate

disciplinary action;

d) determine whether the incident raises policy, training, equipment, or tactical concerns, and

refer such incidents to the appropriate commander or supervisor within EHPD to ensure they are

resolved;

e) direct shift supervisors to take and document non-disciplinary corrective action to enable or

encourage an officer to improve his or her performance; and

f) document his or her findings within 45 days of receiving the force review or investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.1

Use of Force Reports.

Interviews with Chief Larrabee.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Ongoing review continued.

70

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 72 of 120

J. Use of Force Training

125. EHPD shall provide all EHPD officers with 4 – 8 hours of use of force training within 365 days of the Effective Date, and 4 – 8 hours of use of force training on at least an annual basis thereafter, including information on developments in applicable law and EHPD policy. EHPD shall coordinate and review all use of force policy and training to ensure quality, consistency, and compliance with the Constitution, Connecticut law, this Agreement and EHPD policy. EHPD’s use of force training shall include the following topics:

a) EHPD’s use of force model, as described in this Agreement;

b) proper use of force decision-making;

c) use of force reporting requirements;

d) the Fourth Amendment and related law;

e) role-playing scenarios and interactive exercises that illustrate proper use of force decision-

making, including training officers on the importance and impact of ethical decision making and

peer intervention;

f) the proper deployment and use of all intermediate weapons or technologies, including

canines and ECWs;

g) de-escalation techniques that encourage officers to make arrests without using force, and

instruction that disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a subject, summoning

reinforcements, calling in specialized units, or delaying arrest may be the appropriate response to a

situation, even when the use of force would be legally justified;

h) threat assessment;

i) basic crisis intervention and interacting with people with mental illnesses, including

instruction by mental health practitioners and an emphasis on de-escalation strategies;

j) factors to consider in initiating or continuing a pursuit;

k) appropriate training on conflict management; and

l) supervisors of all ranks, as part of their initial and annual in-service supervisory training,

shall receive additional training in conducting use of force reviews and investigations; strategies

for effectively directing officers to minimize uses of force and to intervene effectively to prevent

or stop unreasonable force; and supporting officers who report unreasonable or unreported force,

or who are retaliated against for using only reasonable force or attempting to prevent unreasonable

force.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations Ongoing review.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Use of Force Reports. Training Rosters and curricula reviewed. Questions/Next Steps: JCE to monitor yearly in-service training completed

126. Included in the use of force training set out above. EHPD shall require firearms training for all officers within 365 days of the Effective Date and at least twice yearly thereafter. EHPD firearms training shall:

71

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 73 of 120

a) require officers to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for

regulation and other service firearms on a semi-annual basis;

b) require cadets, officers in probationary periods, and officers who return from unarmed status

to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and other service

firearms before such personnel are permitted to carry and use firearms;

c) incorporate professional night training, stress training (e.g., training in using a firearm after

undergoing physical exertion) and proper use of force decision-making training, including

continuous threat assessment techniques, in the annual in-service training program; and

d) ensure that firearm instructors critically observe students and provide corrective

instruction regarding deficient firearm techniques and failure to utilize safe gun handling

procedures at all times.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations Ongoing review

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force Reports.

Training Rosters and curricula reviewed.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

JCE to monitor yearly in-service training

VIII. CIVILIAN COMPLAINTS, INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS, AND DISCIPLINE

127. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all allegations of officer misconduct are received and

are fully and fairly investigated; that all investigative findings are supported by a preponderance of

the evidence and documented in writing; and that all officers who commit misconduct are held

accountable pursuant to a disciplinary system that is fair and consistent. To achieve these

outcomes, EHPD and the Town shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Use of Force Reports. IAO Reports. Supervisor Reports. Citizen Complaints. Interviews with Chief Larrabee and IAO Naccarato. Policies 201, 208, 407. Questions/Next Steps: None

72

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 74 of 120

A. Reporting Misconduct

128. EHPD shall require that all officers and employees report apparent misconduct by another EHPD officer or employee to a supervisor or directly to the IAO for review and investigation. Where apparent misconduct is reported to a supervisor, the supervisor shall immediately document and report this information to the IAO. Failure to report or document apparent misconduct or criminal behavior shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination of employment. The default discipline for a failure to report criminal behavior shall be termination.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Use of Force Reports. IAO Reports. Supervisor Reports. Citizen Complaints. Interviews with Chief Larrabee and IAO Naccarato. Policies 201, 208, 407

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE to monitor reports

B. Complaint Information

129. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, the Town and EHPD shall develop and implement a

program to ensure broad knowledge throughout the East Haven community about how to make

misconduct complaints, and the availability of effective mechanisms for making misconduct

complaints. The requirements below shall be incorporated into this program.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The Civilian Complaint System and the Early Identification System (EIS) has been fully developed and implemented, and is publicizing the complaint process in the East Haven community, on the EHPD website and via a link from the Town website, at Town Hall, at EHPD headquarters and at the Hagaman Memorial Library. Officers are required to carry civilian complaint forms in EHPD vehicles.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Complaint System on Website and EIS reviewed JCE has developed a checklist of data and reports that are reviewed at each site visit

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will review all complaints and review EIS on every site visit.

130. The Town and EHPD shall make complaint forms and informational materials, including brochures and posters, available at appropriate government properties, including EHPD headquarters, EHPD and Town websites, Town Hall, and the public library. Individuals shall be
73

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 75 of 120

able to submit misconduct complaints through the EHPD and City websites and these websites shall include complaint forms and information regarding how to file misconduct complaints.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

During the first 365 days, additional edits were proposed by the JCE and USDOJ to the complaint process and implemented by EHPD. The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available in hard copy and on the website. The JCE noted a complaint referred by the US Attorney’s Office by a woman who required assistance accessing the online form and was frustrated from the inability to submit her civilian complaint via the internet. The JCE informed the Chief of the complaint. He immediately and appropriately addressed the situation to the eventual satisfaction of the complainant.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to check to ensure information and forms are easily accessible to the public in a neutral location.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Complaint system on website. The civilian complaint form is also available at the EHPD, at the library, and at East Haven Town Hall. JCE will continue to insure that forms are available and the process is fair and open. Questions/Next Steps: None

131. At the locations listed above, EHPD shall post and maintain a permanent placard describing

the external complaint process that includes relevant contact information, such as telephone

numbers, email addresses, and Internet sites. EHPD will require all officers to carry complaint

forms, containing basic complaint information, in their department vehicles at all times. Officers

shall also provide complaint forms and the officer’s name and badge number upon request. If an

individual objects to an officer’s conduct, that officer will inform the individual of his or her right

to make a complaint and shall provide the complaint form, informational brochure, and the

officer’s name and badge number. If the individual indicates that he or she would like to make a

complaint, the officer shall immediately inform his or her supervisor.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available at locations and via officers.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to check compliance regarding these materials with specific information at specific locations.

Evidentiary Basis Visual inspection in the EHPD lobby. Ridealongs and interviews with officers and sergeants.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

132. Complaint forms and related informational materials shall be made available and posted in English and Spanish.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

74

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 76 of 120

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available and posted in English and Spanish. The JCE will continue to check compliance in East Haven.
Visual inspection of materials and brochures.
Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor updates/changes to written materials.

C. Complaint Intake, Classification, and Tracking

133. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall revise policy and train all officers and supervisors to ensure that all officers properly handle complaint intake, including how to properly provide complaint materials and information; and the consequences for failing to take complaints; and strategies for turning complaints into positive police-civilian interactions.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
There was one (1) legitimate civilian complaint about the process during the 18 months of the Settlement Agreement. The JCE is satisfied that the Chief addressed the complaint properly. The EHPD must underscore the importance of this paragraph and management should continually closely monitor the complaint process. Policy 208.1 and training. Information from Chief. Review of all citizen complaints. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site.

134. The refusal to accept a misconduct complaint, discouraging the filing of a misconduct

complaint, or providing false or misleading information about filing a misconduct complaint, shall

be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There was one (1) legitimate civilian complaint about the process during the 18 months of the Settlement Agreement. The JCE is satisfied that the Chief addressed the complaint properly.

Recommendations The EHPD must underscore the importance of this paragraph and management should continually closely monitor the complaints process.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1 and training. Information from Chief. Review of all citizen complaints.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site.

75

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 77 of 120

135. EHPD shall accept all misconduct complaints, including anonymous and third-party

complaints, for review and investigation. Complaints may be made in writing or verbally, in

person or by mail, telephone (or TDD), facsimile, or electronic mail. Any LEP individual who

wishes to file a complaint about an EHPD officer or employee shall be provided with a complaint

form in Spanish or, for less common languages in East Haven, EHPD will make arrangements to

ensure that the LEP person is able to make a complaint. Such complaints will be investigated in

accordance with this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 and training. Interview and information from Lt. Emerman, Language Access Coordinator and Community Liaison Officer including 18-month report. Review of all citizen complaints. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site.

136. All officers and employees who receive a misconduct complaint in the field shall immediately

inform a supervisor of the misconduct complaint so that the supervisor can ensure proper intake of

the complaint. All misconduct complaints received outside of EHPD headquarters shall be

forwarded to the IAO before the end of the shift in which it was received.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph. Policy manual training re this paragraph has been completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1 and training.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

137. EHPD shall ensure that allegations of officer misconduct made during criminal prosecutions or civil lawsuits are identified and investigated as misconduct complaints.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing compliance check. There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations Track all lawsuits against EHPD personnel; Continue to monitor EIS

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 Information from IAO Naccarato. EIS review. Questions/Next Steps: Meet with IAO Naccarato; Review EIS.

76

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 78 of 120

138. Within three business days of the receipt of a misconduct complaint, the IAO shall determine whether the complaint will be assigned to the subject officer(s)’ supervisor(s) or retained by the IAO for an administrative investigation. The IAO shall also determine whether the misconduct complaint warrants a referral to the State Attorney’s Office and/or USAO for a criminal investigation. EHPD shall develop and implement a complaint classification protocol that is allegation-based rather than anticipated outcome-based to guide the IAO in determining where a complaint should be assigned. This complaint classification protocol shall ensure that the IAO investigates allegations including:

a) serious misconduct, including but not limited to: criminal misconduct; unreasonable use of force;
b) discriminatory policing; false arrest or planting evidence; untruthfulness/false statements; unlawful search; retaliation; sexual misconduct; domestic violence; and theft;
c) misconduct implicating the conduct of the supervisory or command leadership of the subject
d) officer; and c) any other violations as determined by the Chief of Police.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Ongoing tracking of all IAO reports. Continue to monitor EIS Policy 208.1 Information from IAO Naccarato. IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: Meet with IAO Naccarato; Review IAO reports.

139. The Chief of Police shall not be authorized to personally conduct an investigation of officer

misconduct or violation of policy, nor prevent the conduct of such an investigation. A misconduct

complaint investigation may not be conducted by any officer who used force during the incident;

whose conduct led to the injury of a person; who authorized the conduct that led to the reported

incident or complaint; or who was on the scene of the incident leading to the allegation of

misconduct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track review all IAO reports.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 All IAO reports reviewed. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all IAO reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

77

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 79 of 120

140. EHPD shall track, as a separate category of misconduct complaints, allegations of

discriminatory policing, along with characteristics of the complainants. EHPD shall ensure that

complaints of discriminatory policing are captured and tracked appropriately, even if the

complainant does not specifically label the misconduct as such.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Working with EHPD, the JCE will continue to track compliance on this

paragraph. There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1 EIS Report and on-site system review.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all IAO reports and meet with IAO Naccarato. JCE review of all complaints on every quarterly site visit.

141. Within 180 days of the Effective date, the IAO shall develop and implement a centralized

numbering and tracking system for all misconduct complaints. Upon the receipt of a complaint,

the IAO shall promptly assign a unique numerical identifier to the complaint, which shall be

provided to the complainant at the time the complaint is made. Where a misconduct complaint is

received in the field, a supervisor shall obtain the unique numerical identifier and provide this

identifier to the complainant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) has developed a centralized numbering and tracking system that will allow the prompt assignment of a unique numerical identifier to each civilian complaint and insure that complainants are informed of this number at the time the complaint is made. The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to monitor compliance to ensure that the unique numerical identifier is used for all complaints.

Evidentiary Basis EHPD compliance report; Policy 208.1 Review of all IAO complaints and numbering system. Meetings with IAO Naccarato.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to meet with IAO Naccarato and review all complaints and

numbering system.

142. EHPD’s centralized numbering and tracking system shall maintain accurate and reliable data regarding the number, nature, and status of all misconduct complaints, from initial intake to final disposition, including investigation timeliness and notification to the complainant of the interim status and final disposition of the investigation. This system shall be used to determine the status of complaints and to confirm that a complaint was received, as well as for periodic assessment of compliance with EHPD policies and procedures and this Agreement, including requirements on the timeliness of administrative investigations.
78

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 80 of 120

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Ongoing review of IAO reports will continue. The JCE will continue to monitor compliance to ensure that the unique numerical identifier is used for all complaints. EHPD compliance report; Policy 208.1 Review of all IAO complaints. Review of IAO numbering system. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to meet with IAO Naccarato and review all complaints and numbering system.

143. Where a supervisor receives a misconduct complaint in the field alleging that misconduct has

just occurred, the supervisor shall gather all relevant information and evidence and provide this

information and evidence to the IAO. This information includes the names and contact

information for all complainants and witnesses, the names of all EHPD officers and employees on

the scene at the time of the alleged misconduct, and any available physical evidence such as

voluntarily provided video or audio recordings, or documentation of the existence of such

recordings where the witness chooses not to provide the recording. The supervisor shall take

photographs of apparent injuries or the absence thereof.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO reports and supervisor reports.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1

IAO Files, IAO Reports and Supervisor Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Continue carefully tracking and reviewing IAO reports and meet with IAO

Naccarato.

D. Investigation of Complaints

144. Investigations of officer misconduct shall be as thorough as necessary to reach reliable and

complete findings. The misconduct complaint investigator shall interview each complainant in

person, absent exceptional circumstances, and this interview shall be recorded in its entirety,

absent specific, documented objection by the complainant. All officers in a position to hear or see

an incident, or any significant event before or after an incident, shall provide a written statement

regarding their observations, even to state that they did not see or hear anything.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO incident reports.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1 IAO Files and Reports.

79

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 81 of 120

SITE VISIT

Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Questions/Next Steps: Continue carefully tracking and reviewing IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

145. Where the alleged misconduct is particularly serious or information from an officer or other

witness may be necessary to resolve an allegation, the investigator shall conduct an in-person

interview of the officer or other witness. Each officer, witness, and complainant shall be

interviewed separately. An EHPDAI not involved in the underlying complaint will be used when

taking statements or conducting interviews of any LEP complainant or witness.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports. There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO incident reports.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Questions/Next Steps: Continue carefully tracking and reviewing IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

146. All officer and civilian witness statements should be documented in their entirety, including

any statement that the witness saw or heard nothing. All interviews should be recorded. All

recordings shall be stored and maintained in a secure location within IAO.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO incident reports.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Recordings. Questions/Next Steps: Continue carefully tracking and reviewing IAO incident reports and recordings and meet with IAO Naccarato.

147. EHPD shall require officers to cooperate with administrative investigations, including

appearing for an interview when requested by an EHPD investigator and providing all requested

documents and evidence. Supervisors shall be notified when an officer under their supervision is

summoned as part of an administrative investigation and shall facilitate the officer’s appearance,

absent extraordinary and documented circumstances.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports.

80

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 82 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to track all IAO incident reports.
Policy 208.1 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Questions/Next Steps: Continue carefully tracking and reviewing IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

148. The subject officer shall not be compelled to provide a statement to administrative

investigators where there is a potential criminal investigation or prosecution of the officer, until

consultation with the criminal investigative agency (e.g. State Attorney’s Office or USAO and

approval by the Chief of Police. EHPD, the Town, and the State Attorney’s Office shall develop

and implement protocols to ensure that the criminal and administrative investigations are kept

appropriately separate after a subject officer has provided a compelled statement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is law.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 Reviewed all IAO reports/cases. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review files and cases to ensure law is being closely followed.

149. Nothing in this Agreement or EHPD policy shall hamper an officer’s obligation to provide a

public safety statement regarding a work related incident or activity. EHPD shall make clear that

all officer statements in incident reports, arrest reports, use of force reports and similar documents,

and statements made in interviews such as those conducted in conjunction with EHPD’s routine

use of force review and investigation process, are part of each officer’s routine professional duties

and are not compelled statements. Where an officer believes that providing a verbal or written

statement will be self-incriminating the officer shall affirmatively state this and shall not be

compelled to provide a statement without prior consultation with the criminal investigative agency

(e.g. State Attorney’s Office or USAO), and approval by the Chief of Police.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance; If issue arises, JCE will investigate further.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 All IAO reports/cases. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will closely monitor.

150. If at any time during complaint intake or investigation the investigator determines that there may have been criminal conduct on the part of any officer or employee, the investigator shall

81

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 83 of 120

immediately notify the Chief of Police and the Joint Compliance Expert, and shall consult with the

State Attorney’s Office, USAO and the local office of the FBI regarding the initiation of a criminal

investigation, as appropriate. Where an allegation is investigated criminally, the IAO shall

continue with the administrative investigation of the allegation, except that it may delay or decline

to conduct an interview of the subject officer(s) or other witnesses until completion of the criminal

investigation unless, after consultation with the investigating agency and the Chief of Police, such

interviews are deemed appropriate

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Example of compliance following January 2013 New Haven incident; Policy 208.1 IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review IAO files.

151. In each investigation, EHPD shall consider all relevant evidence including circumstantial,

direct and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations based upon that evidence. There

will be no automatic preference for an officer’s statement over a non-officer’s statement, nor will

EHPD disregard a witness’ statement merely because the witness has some connection to the

complainant or because of any criminal history. During its investigation, EHPD may take into

account the criminal history of a complainant that involves a crime of dishonesty. EHPD may also

take into account the record of any involved officers who have been determined to have been

deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other

investigation. EHPD shall make efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between witness

statements.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Need to ensure this continues even after new IAO Officer; JCE recommends a succession plan to ensure these paragraph requirements continue even after Settlement Agreement monitoring is completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 All IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review IAO case files and meet with IAO.

152. The misconduct investigator shall explicitly identify and recommend one of the following dispositions for each allegation of misconduct in an administrative investigation:
a) “Unfounded,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the
b) alleged misconduct did not occur or did not involve the subject officer; b) “Sustained,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alleged
82

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 84 of 120

misconduct did occur;

c) “Not Sustained,” where the investigation is unable to determine, by a preponderance of the

d) evidence, whether the alleged misconduct occurred; or

e) “Exonerated,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that

the

alleged conduct did occur but did not violate EHPD policies, procedures, or training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 IAO files. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing careful review of all IAO cases/files.

153. In addition to determining whether the officer committed the alleged misconduct,

administrative investigations shall assess and document whether: (a) the police action was in

compliance with training and legal standards; (b) the use of different tactics should or could have

been employed to achieve a potentially better outcome; (c) the incident indicates a need for

additional training, counseling or other non-disciplinary corrective measures; and (d) the incident

suggests that EHPD should revise its policies, strategies, tactics, or training. This information

shall be shared with the relevant commander(s) who shall document the commander’s

disagreement or agreement with these findings; refer any recommendations to the appropriate

individual to implement the recommended change; document the implementation of these

recommendations; and return the documentation to the IAO.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 IAO files and documented implementation of recommendations by IAO. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing careful review of all IAO cases/files.

154. EHPD shall respond to each complaint within 48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays,

and shall resolve each stage of a complaint investigation in a reasonable time frame. EHPD shall

complete all investigations of civilian complaints within 60 days of receiving the complaint. Upon

a showing of good cause, officers may receive no more than two extensions of up to 30 days each.

Requests for extensions must be in writing and approved by the Chief.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Continual review of all complaints. One hundred percent (100%) have been resolved within 60 days.

Recommendations Keep in close communication between quarterly site visits with IAO.

83

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 85 of 120

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.1 All Citizen Complaints. IAO Files. Questions/Next Steps: None

155. A misconduct investigation shall not be closed simply because the complaint is withdrawn or

the alleged victim is unwilling or unable to provide additional information beyond the initial

complaint, or because the complainant pled guilty or was found guilty of an offense.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing careful review of all complaints and IAO investigations.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1 IAO Files and Review of all Citizen Complaints. Meetings with IAO Naccarato.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue close communication with IAO on-site and off-site.

156. Each misconduct complainant will be kept informed periodically regarding the status of the investigation. The complainant will be notified of the outcome of the investigation, in writing, within ten business days of the completion of the investigation, including regarding whether any disciplinary or non-disciplinary action was taken.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing tracking. None reported since last report.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.1 and Review of all citizen complaints.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

E. Discipline

157. EHPD shall ensure that discipline for sustained allegations of misconduct is based on the

nature of the allegation and defined, consistent, mitigating and aggravating factors, rather than the

identity of the officer or his or her status within EHPD or the broader community. EHPD and the

Town shall develop and implement procedures to ensure that discipline is fair and consistent.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 209.1 is still being revised by Parties

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 209.1 Review of all cases and reports involving discipline for sustained allegations of misconduct. Meetings with Chief and IAO.

84

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 86 of 120

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

158. EHPD, in consultation with the Board of Police Commissioners and the Town, shall create a disciplinary matrix that:

a) establishes a presumptive range of discipline for each type of rule violation; b) increases the presumptive discipline based on both an officer’s prior violations of the same or other
rules; c) sets out defined mitigating or aggravating factors; d) requires that any departure from the presumptive range of discipline must be justified in writing; e) provides that EHPD shall not take only non-disciplinary corrective action in cases in which the
disciplinary matrix calls for the imposition of discipline; and f) provides that EHPD shall consider whether non-disciplinary corrective action also is
appropriate in a case where discipline has been imposed.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Policy 209.1 still being revised by Parties. None Policy 209.1 Questions/Next Steps: Review training roster after policy complete and approved.

159. EHPD, the Board of Police Commissioners, and the Town shall establish a unified system for

reviewing sustained findings and assessing the appropriate level of discipline pursuant to EHPD’s

disciplinary matrix to facilitate consistency in the imposition of discipline. All disciplinary

decisions shall be documented, including the rationale behind any decision to deviate from the

level of discipline set out in the disciplinary matrix.

Compliance

Partial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 209.1 still being revised by Parties.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 209.1

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Discuss on next site visit.

160. EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall develop and establish written policies

and procedures to ensure that the Town Attorney provides close guidance to EHPD and the Board

at the disciplinary stage to ensure that EHPD’s and the Board’s disciplinary decisions are as fair

and legally defensible as possible.

Compliance

Partial Compliance

85

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 87 of 120

Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 209.1 still being revised by Parties. None Policy 209.1 Questions/Next Steps: None

IX. SUPERVISION AND MANAGEMENT

161. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that EHPD supervisors provide the close and effective

supervision necessary for officers to improve and grow as police officers; to police actively and

effectively, and to identify, correct, and prevent misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD

shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the supervision and management section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Review of reports and meetings with supervisors during site visits.

A. Duties of Supervisors

162. EHPD supervisors shall provide, and shall be held accountable for providing, the close and

effective supervision necessary to direct and guide officers. Close and effective supervision

requires that supervisors: (a) respond to the scene of certain arrests; (b) review each arrest report;

(c) respond to the scene of uses of force; (d) investigate each use of force (except those

investigated by the IAO); (e) confirm the accuracy and completeness of officers’ written reports;

(f) respond to each complaint of misconduct; (f) ensure officers are working actively to engage the

community and increase public trust and safety; and (g) provide counseling, redirection, support

to officers as needed, and are held accountable for performing each of these duties.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Although the JCE has witnessed and learned about effective supervision inside the EHPD during the past 15 months and the Policies and Procedures Manual training was completed, this paragraph will continue to be carefully monitored. None

Evidentiary Basis On-site observations in the EHPD; Discussions about supervisory response to use of force and misconduct cases with Chief Larrabee. Review of Supervisory reports.

86

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 88 of 120

SITE VISIT

Review of IAO files. Questions/Next Steps: JCE to continue discussion with Chief Larrabee and on-site observations

163. On-duty field supervisors shall be available throughout their shift to respond to the field to

provide supervision to officers under their direct command and, as needed, to provide supervisory

assistance to other shifts.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors. On-site interviews with officers. Supervisory Reports. Arrest Reports (sampling). All Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: None

164. Shift commanders shall closely and effectively supervise the officers under their command.

All EHPD Commanders and supervisors shall ensure that all supervisors and officers under their

command comply with EHPD policy, state and federal law, and the requirements of this

Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors. On-site interviews with officers. Supervisory Reports. Arrest Reports (sampling). All Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: None

165. EHPD shall hold commanders and supervisors directly accountable for the quality and effectiveness of their supervision, including whether commanders and supervisors identify and effectively respond to misconduct, as part of their performance evaluations and through nondisciplinary corrective action, or through the initiation of formal investigation and the disciplinary process, as appropriate.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

87

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 89 of 120

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph
None
Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors (Lieutenants). On-site interviews with officers. Supervisory Reports. Arrest Reports (sampling). All Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: None

166. Within twelve months of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement an EHPDspecific system to accurately evaluate officer performance in areas related to integrity, community policing, and critical police functions on both an ongoing and annual basis that comports with professional police practices and the requirements of this Agreement. As part of this program, EHPD shall establish a formalized system documenting annual performance evaluations of each officer by the officer’s direct supervisor which shall include assessment of:

a) community engagement and communication with the public;

b) use of community-policing and problem-solving strategies;

c) civilian commendations and complaints;

d) disciplinary actions;

e) compliance with policies on usage of sick leave and other leave;

f) compliance with policies on secondary employment;

g) safety (e.g., POST officer safety standards and vehicle operations);

h) training;

i) report-writing; and

j) decision-making skills.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The East Haven Board of Police Commissioners and executive board of the collective bargaining group reviewed and approved Policy 215.1. The policy became effective on June 15, 2014 and calls for annual performance evaluations on an employee’s anniversary date. Due to the effective date, some performance evaluations for the next 12 months may encompass a full year. Employees have reviewed and signed off on Policy 215.1 via the online Power DMS system as well as received individual and roll call training. Supervisors have also received training on completing the evaluation forms.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 215.1 Power DMS System Roster.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review Power DMS on-line curricula.

88

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 90 of 120

167. Annual performance evaluations shall be based upon work performance completed during the

specific rating period. The officer’s current direct supervisor shall complete the performance

evaluation, but all supervisory personnel who supervised the officer during the rating period

should provide written input, which shall be considered by the officer’s current supervisor and

incorporated into the performance evaluation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Training completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 215.1

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review random evaluations.

B. Early Identification System

168. EHPD shall develop, implement and maintain an Early Identification System (“EIS”) to

support the effective supervision and management of EHPD officers and employees, including the

identification of and response to potentially problematic behaviors as early as possible. EHPD will

regularly use EIS data to promote ethical and professional police practices; to manage risk and

liability; and to evaluate the performance of EHPD employees across all ranks, units and shifts.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

At the 180-day mark, the EHPD had begun implementing protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS). At the 365day mark, the EHPD started using/implementing the EIS to automatically draw information from the Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS), the in-house computer reporting system. According to a report by EHPD, the EIS can capture the following fields and thresholds: • Any firearm discharge or use. • Taser deployment or use; two (2) within a 60-day period. • Baton or O/C use; two (2) within a 60-day period • Non-compliant handcuffing • Physical use of force: three (3) within a 30-day period • Pursuits; two (2) within a 30-day period • Officers arrests, including interfering with police, obstructing a police officer, resisting arrest, and assault on a police officer; two (2) within a 60day period • Traffic accidents involving EHPD equipment; three (3) within 12-month period • Civil lawsuits; two (2) within a 12-month period • Excessive absences; eight (8) unscheduled occurrences in any 12-month period

The EIS is fully operational at month 18 and is monitored by the IAO and biweekly by the officer’s supervisor. IAO and supervisors initiate and
89

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 91 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

implement any intervention deemed necessary for the officer and document same in writing on the Departmental Review reporting area of LEAS consistent with the EHPD Early Intervention System (EIS) – Policy 207.1. None
Policy 207.1; Supplemental Reports on EIS by EHPD IAO Naccarato; JCE on-site review of EIS. Questions/Next Steps: Continue on-site review of EIS and any updates/upgrades.

169. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a

protocol setting out which fields in EIS shall include historical data; deadlines for inputting data

related to current and new information; and the individuals responsible for capturing and inputting

data.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD implemented protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS) that captures both historical data and emerging information about all sworn employees, automatically drawing data from the EHPD’s Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS). The EIS provides a single repository of all relevant information about each sworn employee, both positive and negative. The system has been designed to identify patterns and will establish thresholds in such areas as civilian complaints, uses of force, firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive absences, and other factors to identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct and in need of supervisory intervention.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 207.1 Onsite observation of completed EIS. Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review EIS on-site.

170. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a protocol for using the EIS and information obtained from it. The protocol for using the EIS shall address data storage, data retrieval, reporting, data analysis, pattern identification, identifying officers for intervention, supervisory use, supervisory/departmental intervention, documentation and audit. Among protocol requirements EHPD shall include:
a) comparative data analysis, including peer group, shift and unit analysis, to identify patterns of activity by individual officers and groups of officers;
b) EHPD commander and supervisor review, on a regular basis, but not less than bi-weekly, of EIS reports regarding each officer under the commander or supervisor’s direct command and, at least quarterly, broader, pattern-based reports;
c) EHPD commanders and supervisors to initiate, implement, and assess the effectiveness of interventions for individual officers, supervisors, and shifts, based on assessment of the

90

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 92 of 120

information contained in the EIS;

d) require an array of intervention options to facilitate an effective response to identified

problems. Interventions may take the form of counseling or training, or of other supervised,

monitored, and documented action plans and strategies designed to modify activity. All

interventions will be documented in writing and entered into the automated system;

e) specify that the decision to order an intervention for an employee or group using EIS data

shall include peer group analysis, including consideration of the nature of the employee’s

assignment, and not solely on the number or percentages of incidents in any category of

information recorded in the EIS;

f) prompt review by EHPD commanders and supervisors of the EIS system records of all

officers upon transfer to their supervision or command;

g) evaluation of EHPD commanders and supervisors based on their appropriate use of the EIS

to enhance effective and ethical policing and reduce risk; and

h) mechanisms to ensure monitored and secure access to the EIS to ensure the integrity, proper

use, and appropriate confidentiality of the data.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD

implemented protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification

System (EIS) that captured both historical data and emerging information

about all sworn employees, automatically drawing data from the EHPD’s Law

Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS). The EIS provided a single

repository of all relevant information about each sworn employee, both

positive and negative. The system has been designed to identify patterns and

will establish thresholds in such areas as civilian complaints, uses of force,

firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive absences, and other factors to

identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct and in need of

supervisory intervention.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.1

Onsite observation of completed EIS.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

JCE will continue to review EIS on-site.

171. The EIS shall include all relevant information available to EHPD to assess the conduct of each officer, including:

a) all awards and commendations received by employees; b) investigations of the officer; c) complaints (including civil lawsuits) against the officer and their dispositions; d) data collected regarding the officer’s stops, search and seizures and uses of force;
 e) data about officer’s arrests, including arrests for interfering with a police officer, resisting
 arrest, assault on a police officer, and disorderly conduct; f) training history; g) supervisory reviews; h) all vehicle pursuits and traffic collisions involving EHPD equipment;

91

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 93 of 120

i) all loss or theft of EHPD property or equipment in the custody of the employee, including currency, firearms, force instruments, and identification cards; and
j) any disciplinary or other corrective action taken against the officer.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EIS includes all information required by this Settlement Agreement

paragraph. Additional training data is available on another computer.

Recommendations Discuss issues with IAO Naccarato

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE reviewed the EIS system on-site. IAO Naccarato’s 365-day supplemental report and Policy 207.1 IAO Naccarato’s 18-month supplemental report. On-site review of EIS and training information. Questions/Next Steps: None

172. The EIS shall include appropriate identifying information for each involved officer (i.e., name, badge number, shift and supervisor) and civilian.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.1, Deputy Chief Lennon’s 365-day and 18-month report and IAO

Naccarato’s 365-day and 18-month supplemental report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

173. EHPD shall maintain all personally identifiable information about an officer included in the EIS for at least five years following the officer’s separation from the agency. Information necessary for aggregate statistical analysis will be maintained indefinitely in the EIS. On an ongoing basis, EHPD will enter information into the EIS in a timely, accurate, and complete manner, and shall maintain the data in a secure and confidential manner. No individual within EHPD shall have access to individually identifiable information that is maintained only within EIS and is about an officer not within that individual’s direct command, except as necessary for investigative, technological, or auditing purposes.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.1, Deputy Chief Lennon’s 365-day and 18-month report and IAO Naccarato’s 365-day and 18-month supplemental report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

174. The EIS, including any computer programs and hardware, will be operational, fully implemented, and be used in accordance with policies and protocols that incorporate the
92

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 94 of 120

requirements of this Agreement within 365 days of the Effective Date. Prior to full

implementation of the new EIS, EHPD will continue to use existing resources to the fullest extent

possible, to identify patterns of conduct by employees or groups of officers.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 207.1, Deputy Chief Lennon’s 365-day and 18-month report and IAO Naccarato’s 365-day and 18-month supplemental report. JCE verified in person. Questions/Next Steps: None

C. Visual and Audio Documentation of Police Activities

175. EHPD shall maintain and operate video cameras and AVL in all police vehicles and shall

repair or replace all non-functioning video cameras or AVL units. EHPD shall ensure that that

recordings are captured, maintained, and reviewed as appropriate by supervisors, in addition to any

review for investigatory or audit purposes, to assess the quality and appropriateness of officer

interactions, uses of force, and other police activities.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations Since all technology is in-car and tied to computer, if not operating correctly, the car will not start. No need for extra two-week checks and reports.
Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.1

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ask about how often this happens.

176. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and procedures regarding AVL, in-car recorders, ECWs, and similar equipment that require:
a) activation of in-car cameras for all traffic stops and pursuits until the motor vehicle stop is completed and the stopped vehicle departs, or until the officer's participation in the motor vehicle stop ends;
b) activation of ECW cameras when the ECW is unholstered; c) activation of in-car cameras for incidents in which a prisoner being transported is violent or
resistant; d) supervisors to review AVL, in-car camera recordings, and ECW recordings of all officers
listed in any EHPD report regarding any incident involving injuries to a prisoner or an officer, uses of force, vehicle pursuits, or misconduct complaints; e) supervisors to review recordings regularly and to incorporate the knowledge gained from this

93

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 95 of 120

review into their ongoing evaluation and supervision of officers;

f) that EHPD retain and preserve all recordings for at least three years; however if a case is

reasonably anticipated to lead to litigation or remains under investigation or litigation longer

than three years, EHPD shall retain and preserve the recordings for at least three years after the

final disposition of the matter, including appeals; and

g) that an officer notify a supervisor immediately when an event was not recorded.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The policy was completed and went into effect in September 2013. Training

was completed in January and February 2014. The JCE will continue to track

compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.1

Training Roster.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

None

177. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a schedule for

testing AVL, in-car recorder, and ECW camera recording equipment to confirm that it is in proper

working order. Officers shall be responsible for ensuring that recording equipment assigned to

them or their car is functioning properly at the beginning and end of each shift and shall report

immediately any improperly functioning equipment.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this paragraph. If the in-car technology (computer) is not

functioning properly, the car will not start.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.1

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

178. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall provide each supervisor with handheld

recording devices and require that supervisors use these devices to record complainant and witness

statements taken as part of use of force or misconduct complaint investigations

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

In compliance with Paragraph 178 of the Settlement Agreement, EHPD supervisors have been equipped with iPhones capable of functioning as recording devices and suitable for recording the statements of witnesses and complainants in the field in use of force cases and other cases. The JCE will continue to monitor the use of the iPhones to record complainant and witness statements per Policy 401.1. Policy 401.1 Onsite observation

94

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 96 of 120

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Interview supervisors regarding functionality of iPhones.

X. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT

179. EHPD shall create robust community relationships and engage constructively with the community to ensure collaborative problem-solving, ethical and bias-free policing, and increase community confidence in the Department. EHPD shall establish community and problem-oriented policing principles in its policing operations. EHPD shall also engage the public in the reform process through the dissemination of public information on a regular basis. EHPD and the Town shall develop, implement, and maintain systems to ensure comprehensive, effective, and transparent oversight of EHPD that will be sustained after the completion of this Agreement. To

achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the community engagement and oversight section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

180. EHPD shall, in all of its policing operations, adopt the professional police practices of community oriented and problem-solving policing, including robust community partnerships, cooperative strategies, and promoting trust in the community.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD has made considerable progress in this area. This paragraph will continue to be monitored by the JCE. The Chief and his leadership team have been visible in the community. The importance of constant community engagement must be underscored.

Recommendations Chief continues to emphasize the importance of formal and informal community engagement throughout all ranks.

Evidentiary Basis

Group and individual meetings with residents, businesses and faith-based members of the community and EHPD. Community Liaison Officer Report. Onsite observation at community meetings. Meetings with community members.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE continue to attend community meetings and interview members of the residential, business and faith-based communities.

95

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 97 of 120

181. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall appoint and/or hire a Community Liaison

Officer who is a sworn officer fluent in English and Spanish. The Community Liaison Officer

shall also have formalized training in the nature and scope of federal and state civil rights law as

applied to law enforcement activity

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Lieutenant David Emerman has selected as both the language access coordinator and the community liaison officer. Lt. Emerman is bi-lingual and fluently speaks English and Spanish. Due to his educational background and life experiences, Lt. Emerman is very cultured in fostering good community relationships with various community groups, especially the local Latino community. None

Evidentiary Basis

THE EHPD 90-day Compliance Report; Meetings with Lt. Emerman; 365day report and 18-month report. Media – newspaper articles. CLO Report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ensure that a designated Community Liaison Officer is in place if staffing changes/promotions occur

182. EHPD shall make the contact information and duty hours of the Community Liaison Officer public on its website and on any EHPD document generally available to the public. The Community Liaison Officer shall be directly available for public contact during normal business hours. The Community Liaison Officer shall have the following duties:

a) The Community Liaison Officer shall arrange for a monthly meeting of East Haven residents designed to permit residents to voice their concerns and ask questions. The meeting shall be conducted as follows:

i. The meeting shall be attended by the Community Liaison Officer, at least one senior

EHPD command staff member, and by officers responsible for patrolling, or supervising patrol, in

both the north and south sections of the Town. All EHPD personnel present shall be identified, in

uniform, and available for responses to questions from residents of East Haven.

ii. Names shall not be required of persons attending the meeting, nor shall any investigative

law enforcement action be taken at or after this meeting that involves attendees in any way, absent

an emergency. EHPD may act based on information explicitly communicated at the meeting for

that

purpose.

iii. EHPD shall notify the public of this meeting and the requirements of this provision,

including anonymity, regarding this meeting in the local press two weeks in advance of the

meeting.

iv. The meeting location shall alternate between the north and south sections of the Town

so that the meeting is held in each section every other month.

b) The Community Liaison Officer shall review, on a monthly basis, all complaints submitted to EHPD by members of the community to assess community concerns. For those complaints that
96

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 98 of 120

do not rise to the level of requiring formal action under EHPD policy, code of conduct, and the

terms of this Agreement, the Community Liaison Officer shall notify the complainant of the

availability of the Community

Liaison Officer to answer the complainant’s questions and

respond to any further concerns.

c) The Community Liaison Officer shall meet monthly with the Chief of Police, the Mayor, and

the Board. During these meetings, the Community Liaison Officer shall communicate the

concerns that the Community Liaison Officer has received during the previous month, along with

any other relevant information pertaining to the relationship of EHPD with East Haven residents.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This paragraph was modified from the original Settlement Agreement to

clarify where meetings should be held in town to make the meetings more

convenient to residents throughout the town. Monthly meetings now take

place on alternating sides of town.

Recommendations Need to develop secession plan for Community Liaison Officer to continue

this work.

Discuss new ideas for attracting more community members; only

approximately 60 total have attended.

Evidentiary Basis 365-day Supplemental Report and JCE on-site meetings and interviews.

18-month Report.

On-site meetings with Lt. Emerman.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Work on strategy to attract more community members.

183. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a strategic recruitment plan that

includes clear goals, objectives, and action steps for attracting high-quality applicants for

employment across all levels of EHPD, sworn and civilian. EHPD’s strategic recruitment plan

shall establish and clearly identify the duties and goals of EHPD’s recruitment efforts. The

strategic recruitment plan shall include specific strategies for attracting a diverse pool of

applicants, including members of groups that have been historically underrepresented in EHPD

and applicants fluent in Spanish.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this paragraph, Chief Brent Larrabee, Attorney Larry

Sgrignari, and Lt. Lennon attended the February 20, 2013 meeting of the East

Haven Civil Service Commission. After consulting with the Commission

members along with Chief Examiner Andrea Liquori, the Commission

requested the submission of various recommended changes to their rules by

their next meeting in order to comply with the Settlement Agreement. These

changes support the Department’s goals of moving towards a highly

competent professional law enforcement agency. On March 11, 2013, the

Civil Service Commission implemented the rule changes for the recruitment

and hiring of both sworn and non-sworn EHPD employees. These changes

include a tiered point system to encourage the recruiting of a more

professional and well suited applicant. Although the hiring provisions

97

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 99 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

required to hire police officers is regulated by the Connecticut General Statutes § 7-294 and the regulations of the CT POST Council, the encouragement for recruitment of a diverse applicant pool is driven by exceptional recruiting. The tiered point system grants additional testing points to applicants that provide proof of higher education, veteran’s points for military service, or the ability to fluently speak languages other than English. In addition, the Civil Service Commission is in the process of adopting a recruitment plan. Pursuant to the plan, the EHPD will also actively advertise its upcoming recruiting using various media sources. All advertisements will be in both English and Spanish. Some of the locations for advertisement will be: • All local newspapers (both English and Spanish) • Postings on EHPD and Town website • Multiple and frequent announcements on the EHPD’s Facebook© and Twitter© pages • Online media advertisements on local news sources such as the East Haven Patch The JCE will continue to monitor EHPD recruitment efforts per this paragraph. The EHPD 90-day Compliance Report and phone conferences with Chief Larrabee. Questions/Next Steps: Review recruitment plan strategies with EHPD leaders.

184. All EHPD audits and reports related to the implementation of this Agreement shall be made

publicly available via website and at the Police Department, Town Hall, and other public locations,

in English and in Spanish, to the fullest extent permissible under law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Although the major compliance reports marking 60, 90, 280, 270 and 365 day

after the Settlement Agreement Effective Date are posted on the websites, the

JCE will continue to review additional materials related to EHPD policies and

procedures and may make additional recommendations for adding materials.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to work with Deputy Chief Lennon to identify

additional materials for posting on the public website at the Police

Department, Town Hall and Hagaman Public Library. Discussion of a blog,

other social media outlets, using interns and other new processes to reach

public should continue to be discussed and pursued.

Evidentiary Basis EHPD Website and JCE on-site observations.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to verify and ensure updated materials are in place.

185. EHPD shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to facilitate and ensure transparency and wide public access to information related to EHPD decision making and activities, as permitted by law.

98

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 100 of 120

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
The JCE is continuing to work with USDOJ and EHPD to track compliance on this paragraph since all training on the new Policy Manual was completed in February 2014. None n/a Questions/Next Steps: Discuss any new ideas regarding transparency and information sharing with EHPD.

XI. AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT

A. Role of the Joint Compliance Expert

186. The Parties shall select a Joint Compliance Expert (“JCE”) to assist the Parties in determining

whether the terms of this Agreement have been fully and timely implemented, including reviewing

and making recommendations on new or revised policies, training curricula, standard operating

procedures, plans, protocols, and other operational documents related to this Agreement. The Joint

Compliance Expert shall also assess and report whether the requirements of this Agreement have

been implemented, and whether this implementation is resulting in constitutional policing,

increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Kathleen O’Toole was just sworn in as Police Chief in Seattle, Washington on June 23, 2014. The US Department of Justice approved the appointment of Rafael Ruiz as the new Joint Compliance Expert in East Haven, Connecticut on August 4, 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis JCE written reports, regular USDOJ and EHPD phone conference updates and interviews with members of the East Haven community and EHPD.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

187. The Joint Compliance Expert shall only have the duties, responsibilities and authority

conferred by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not, and is not intended to,

replace or assume the role and duties of the Mayor, Board, Chief of Police, or EHPD.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The JCE clearly understands her role. She has worked to earn trust and promote a collaborative approach among the Parties. She recognizes the importance of holding the EHPD accountable for meeting its obligations

99

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 101 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

under the Settlement Agreement, but has attempted to do so in a supportive, reassuring manner. None
JCE written reports, bi-weekly USDOJ and EHPD phone conference updates and regular informal phone conversations. Collaborative meetings and interviews with the Mayor, his staff, the Police Chief, members of the EHPD and the community. Questions/Next Steps: None

188. In order to assess and report on the Town’s implementation of this Agreement and whether

implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the

professional treatment of individuals by EHPD, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct the

compliance reviews and audits, outcome assessments, and incident reviews specified below, and

such additional audits, reviews, and assessments as the Joint Compliance Expert or the Parties

deem appropriate.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Overview Paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

B. Compliance Reviews and Audits

189. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct compliance reviews or audits as necessary to determine whether the Town has implemented and continues to comply with the material requirements of this Agreement. Compliance with a material requirement of this Agreement requires that the Town has: (a) incorporated the requirement into policy; (b) trained all relevant personnel as necessary to fulfill their responsibilities pursuant to the requirement; and (c) that the requirement is being carried out in actual practice. Compliance reviews and audits shall contain both qualitative and quantitative elements as necessary for reliability and comprehensiveness.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Completed on-site meeting with Parties to agree upon metrics for measuring

future compliance.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

April 30 meeting at EHPD. JCE Checklist. Questions/Next Steps: None

100

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 102 of 120
C. Outcome Assessments
190. In addition to compliance reviews and audits, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct qualitative and quantitative outcome assessments to measure whether the Town’s implementation of this Agreement has promoted effective and constitutional policing. These outcome assessments shall include collection and analysis, both quantitative and qualitative, of the following outcome data:
a) Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement measurements, including: i. A reliable, comprehensive, and representative annual survey of members of the East
Haven community regarding their experiences with and perceptions of EHPD and of public safety. This comprehensive community survey shall include measures to ensure input from individuals of each significantly represented demographic category;
ii. Number and variety of community partnerships, with particular consideration of partnerships with youth, and qualitative assessment of the depth and effectiveness of those partnerships.
b) Stop, Search and Arrest measurements, including: i. The number and rate of arrests for which there is articulated reasonable suspicion for the
stop and probable cause for the arrest, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category;
ii. The number and rate of arrests which are prosecuted, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category; and
iii. The number and rate of searches which result in a finding of contraband, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category.
c) Use of Force measurements including: i. Rate of force used per arrest by EHPD overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e.
street address); type of arrest; and demographic category; ii. Rate of force complaints that are sustained and rate that are not sustained, overall and by
force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); source of complaint (internal or external); type of arrest; and demographic category;
iii. Uses of Force that were found to violate policy overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic category;
iv. Number and rate of Use of Force administrative investigations/reviews in which each finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence; and
v. Number of officers who frequently or repeatedly use force, or have more than one instance of force found to violate policy.
d) Recruitment and Training measurements, including: i. Number of highly-qualified recruit candidates that have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse
communities; ii.Number of candidates with Spanish language fluency; iii. Officer and agency reports of adequacy of training in type and frequency; and iv. Role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by performance trends.
101

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 103 of 120

e) Supervision measurements, including: i. Initial identification of officer violations and performance problems by supervisors, and
effective response by supervisors to identified problems.

f) Accountability measurements, including:

i. The number of misconduct complaints, with a qualitative assessment of whether any

increase or decrease appears related to access to the complaint process;

ii. Rate of sustained, not sustained, exonerated and unfounded misconduct complaints;

iii. Number and rate of misconduct complaints in which the finding for each allegation is

supported by a preponderance of the evidence;

iv. Number of officers who are subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, or have repeated

instances of sustained misconduct complaints.

v. Number and nature of civil suits against EHPD officers for on or off duty police conduct,

regardless of whether the Town or EHPD is a defendant in the litigation, and settlement or penalty

amounts;

vi. Arrests/Summons of officers for on or off duty conduct; and

vii. Criminal prosecutions of officers for on or off duty conduct.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Completed on-site meeting with Parties to agree upon metrics for measuring

future compliance.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis April 30, 2014 meeting at EHPD.

EHPD Reports.

JCE 365-day, 18-month Report include qualitative and quantitative measures

of all above.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

None

191. In conducting these outcome assessments the Joint Compliance Expert may use any relevant data collected and maintained by EHPD, provided that it has determined that this data is reasonably reliable and complete. To conduct the annual community survey, the Joint Compliance Expert shall retain an individual or entity which shall:

a) develop a baseline of measures on public satisfaction with policing, attitudes among police personnel, and the quality of police-citizen encounters;
b) conduct baseline surveys of Town residents, police personnel, and detained arrestees, and follow-up surveys on at least an annual basis;
c) ensure that the resident surveys are designed to capture each demographic category; and d) conduct the survey in English and Spanish.

Compliance

Partial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Researcher Dr. John DeCarlo, formerly of New Haven University and now of John Jay College, was retained to develop, analyze and report back to the JCE, USDOJ and EHPD on a community survey, EHPD survey and detainee

102

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 104 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

survey. Dr. DeCarlo completed setting up the surveys, but not enough department members or community members took the survey. Similarly, collecting accurate information from detainees about their treatment while being detained became challenging. The original author of the Harvard University Kennedy School of Government community survey instrument that Dr. DeCarlo used to develop the EHPD survey, identified a recent graduate who agreed to complete all three surveys during June and July 2014. Unfortunately, she was offered and took a full time job and was not able to start the project. Another survey firm was asked to submit a proposal, but their schedule precludes them from starting the work until October 2014. The Parties have agreed to hold a separate meeting to discuss other options. Revamp the process for collecting the survey data, i.e., focus groups and/or individual interviews in the community should be discussed. EHPD Community Survey, EHPD Survey and the draft Detainee Survey instruments. Questions/Next Steps: Discuss new baseline data collection tools with Parties on a specially scheduled conference call.

D. Outcome Assessment Plan and Review Methodology

192. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:

a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be assessed for compliance,

indicating which requirements will be assessed together;

b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome

measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment occurring

within 18 months of the Effective Date; and

c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement of this

Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each

requirement at least annually thereafter.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The JCE Plan was submitted to USDOJ and EHPD in July 2013.

Recommendations The JCE will revise the plan schedule as needed.

Evidentiary Basis The JCE Plan.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

None

193. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:

a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be assessed for compliance, 103

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 105 of 120

indicating which requirements will be assessed together;

b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome

measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment occurring

within 18 months of the Effective Date; and

c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement of this

Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each

requirement at least annually thereafter.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The JCE Plan was submitted to USDOJ and EHPD in July 2013.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE Plan. April 30, 2014 meeting in East Haven with all Parties. June 2014 meeting in East Haven with Parties to discuss revamped reporting to coincide with end of the quarter. Questions/Next Steps: None

194. At least 90 days prior to the initiation of any outcome measure assessment or compliance

review or audit, the JCE shall submit a proposed methodology for the assessment, review or audit,

to the Parties. The Parties shall submit any comments or concerns regarding the proposed

methodology to the Joint Compliance Expert within 45 days of the proposed date of the

assessment, review or audit. The Joint Compliance Expert shall modify the methodology as

necessary to address any concerns or shall inform the Parties in writing of the reasons it is not

modifying its methodology as proposed.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The proposed methodology was presented in the JCE Plan in July 2013 and approved by the Parties.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

The JCE will work collaboratively with USDOJ and EHPD to track compliance for the Settlement Agreement requirements after policy manual training and policy implementation is fully completed. JCE Plan.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

E. Review of Use of Force and Misconduct Investigations

195. EHPD shall provide each completed investigation of a serious use of force or use of force that is the subject of a misconduct investigation, and each misconduct complaint report, to the Joint Compliance Expert. The Joint Compliance Expert shall review each use of force investigation or review and each misconduct investigation and recommend for further investigation any use of force or misconduct complaint investigations the Joint Compliance Expert determines to be incomplete or for which the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

104

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 106 of 120

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
This has been done. None. Chief has provided regular briefings on case to date.

F. Joint Compliance Expert Recommendations and Technical Assistance

196. The Joint Compliance Expert may make recommendations to the Parties regarding measures

necessary to ensure timely, full and effective implementation of this Agreement and its underlying

objectives. Such recommendations may include a recommendation to change, modify, or amend a

provision of the Agreement, a recommendation for additional training in any area related to this

Agreement, or a recommendation to seek technical assistance. In addition to such

recommendations, the Joint Compliance Expert may also, at the request of DOJ or the Town and

based on the Joint Compliance Expert’s reviews, provide technical assistance consistent with the

Joint Compliance Expert’s responsibilities under this Agreement.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE in collaboration with USDOJ and EHPD have developed some modifications to the Settlement Agreement which were approved by the Court in December 2013. The JCE team has also provided and will continue to provide EHPD with technical assistance related to securing additional grant funding to support some of the Settlement Agreement requirements. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Modified Settlement Agreement and OJP Diagnostic Center materials. Diagnostic Center team Meeting with EHPD in June 2014. Questions/Next Steps: Discuss next steps with Sgt. Rybaruk.

G. Comprehensive Re-Assessment

197. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct a comprehensive assessment two years after the

Effective Date to determine whether and to what extent the outcomes intended by this Agreement

have been achieved, and any modifications to the Agreement that are necessary for continued

achievement in light of changed circumstances or unanticipated impact (or lack of impact) of the

requirement. This assessment shall address also areas of greatest achievement and the

requirements that appear to have contributed to this success, as well as areas of greatest concern,

including strategies for accelerating full and effective compliance. Based upon this comprehensive

assessment, the Joint Compliance Expert shall recommend modifications to the Agreement

necessary to achieve and sustain intended outcomes. Where the Parties agree with the Joint

Compliance Expert’s recommendations, the Parties shall stipulate to modify the Agreement

accordingly. This provision in no way diminishes the Parties’ ability to stipulate to modifications

to this Agreement as set out below.

Compliance

n/a

105

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 107 of 120

Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Will occur at the two-year mark. None n/a Questions/Next Steps: None

H. Joint Compliance Expert Reports

198. The Joint Compliance Expert shall file with the Court semi-annual written, public reports covering the reporting period that shall include:

a) a description of the work conducted by the Joint Compliance Expert during the reporting

period;

b) a listing of each Agreement requirement indicating which requirements have been: (i)

incorporated into implemented policy; (ii) the subject of sufficient training for all relevant EHPD

officers and employees; (iii) reviewed or audited by the Joint Compliance Expert to determine

whether they have been fully

implemented in actual practice, including the date of the

review or audit; and (iv) found by the Joint Compliance Expert to have been fully implemented in

practice;

c) the methodology and specific findings for each audit or review conducted, redacted as

necessary for privacy concerns. An unredacted version shall be filed under seal with the Court and

provided to the Parties. The underlying data for each audit or review shall not be publicly

available but shall be retained by the Joint Compliance Expert and provided to either or both

Parties upon request;

d) for any requirements that were reviewed or audited and found not to have been fully

implemented in practice, the Joint Compliance Expert’s recommendations regarding necessary

steps to achieve compliance;

e) the methodology and specific findings for each outcome assessment conducted;

f) qualitative assessment of EHPD’s progress in achieving the desired outcomes for each area

covered by the Agreement--noting issues of concern or particular achievement; and

g) a projection of the work to be completed during the upcoming reporting period and any

anticipated challenges or concerns related to implementation of the Agreement.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The JCE submitted a timely 180-day and 365-day report which was

subsequently filed by the Parties. The JCE now respectfully submits this 18-

month report to be reviewed by the Parties and then filed by them with the

Court.

Recommendations The Parties review the report and subsequently file it with the Court. Evidentiary Basis JCE 2nd Semi-annual Report.

JCE 365-day and 18-month Report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

None

106

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 108 of 120

199. The Joint Compliance Expert shall provide a copy of semi-annual reports to the Parties in

draft form at least ten business days prior to Court filing and public release of the reports to allow

the Parties to informally comment on the reports. The Joint Compliance Expert shall consider the

Parties’ responses and make appropriate changes, if any, before issuing the report.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The JCE has provided copies of semi-annual reports in the required

timeframe.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

The JCE provided the 180-day report draft on July 12, 2013 and the 365-day report draft on January 13, 2014; The final 180-day report was due on July 22, 2013 but completed on July 19, 2013 by the JCE. The report was filed by the Parties as the JCE has no authority to file reports with the Court. The 365-day was filed by the Parties on January 24, 2014. The 18-month report will be filed by the Parties on August 22, 2014.

200. The Joint Compliance Expert shall maintain regular contact with the Parties in order to ensure effective and timely communication regarding the status of the Town’s implementation of and compliance with this Agreement.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE continues to hold regular phone conference update meetings with USDOJ and EHPD Parties. In year one, these phone meetings occurred every two weeks. In year two, these phone meetings will take place every three weeks. Between these meetings, the JCE remains in contact with all Parties in person and via telephone and email. None

Evidentiary Basis Phone Meeting Agendas, Scheduled Visits and Meetings to East Haven.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

I. Public Statements, Testimony, Records, and Conflicts of Interest

201. Except as required or authorized by the terms of this Agreement or the Parties acting together: neither the Joint Compliance Expert, including, for the purposes of this paragraph, any agent, employee, or independent contractor thereof, shall make any public statements or issue findings with regard to any act or omission of the Town or its agents, representatives, or employees; or disclose non-public information provided to the Joint Compliance Expert pursuant to the Agreement. Any press statement made by the Joint Compliance Expert regarding its employment or assessment activities under this Agreement shall first be approved by the Parties.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The JCE maintains strong lines of communication with all Parties. JCE has

107

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 109 of 120

Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

not made any public statements whatsoever without expressed consent from
the Parties
Continuation of scheduled conference calls. Continuation of formal and informal calls with individual Parties. Regular meetings in East Haven in 2014, with primary focus on monitoring implementation of new policies and procedures. n/a
Questions/Next Steps: None

202. The Joint Compliance Expert may testify as to observations, findings, and recommendations

before the Court with jurisdiction over this matter, but the Joint Compliance Expert shall not

testify in any other litigation or proceeding with regard to any act or omission of the Town or any

of its agents, representatives, or employees related to this Agreement or regarding any matter or

subject that the Joint Compliance Expert may have received knowledge of as a result of his or her

performance under this Agreement. This paragraph does not apply to any proceeding before a

court related to performance of contracts or subcontracts for monitoring this Agreement.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

To date, the JCE has not been required to testify before the Court with jurisdiction over this matter. The JCE has not testified in any other litigation or proceeding regarding this Settlement Agreement.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to follow the requirements of this paragraph.

Evidentiary Basis n/a

203. Unless such conflict is waived by the Parties, the Joint Compliance Expert shall not accept

employment or provide consulting services that would present a conflict of interest with the Joint

Compliance Expert’s responsibilities under this Agreement, including being retained (on a paid or

unpaid basis) by any current or future litigant or claimant, or such litigant’s or claimant’s attorney,

in connection with a claim or suit against the Town or its departments, officers, agents or

employees.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The JCE has not undertaken any professional or personal activities that would

present a conflict of interest.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to follow the requirements of this paragraph.

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

204. The Joint Compliance Expert is not a state or local agency, or an agent thereof, and accordingly the records maintained by the Joint Compliance Expert shall not be deemed public records subject to public inspection.

108

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 110 of 120

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

n/a
Overview Paragraph (not a requirement) None n/a Questions/Next Steps: None

205. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not be liable for any claim, lawsuit, or demand arising out of the Joint Compliance Expert’s performance pursuant to this Agreement.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Overview Paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations NONE

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

J. EHPD Compliance Coordinator

206. Within 30 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall identify a compliance coordinator to serve as the single point of contact to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. The Compliance Coordinator shall coordinate the Town’s compliance and implementation activities; facilitate the provision of data, documents, materials, and access to the Town’s personnel to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, as needed; ensure that all data, documents and records are maintained as provided in this Agreement; and assist in assigning implementation and compliance related tasks to EHPD personnel, as directed by the Chief of Police or his/her designee.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Deputy Chief Lennon has been and continues to be an exceptionally hard working and effective compliance coordinator for the EHPD.

Recommendations Deputy Chief Lennon should be commended for his efforts.

Evidentiary Basis This compliance report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ensure a designated Compliance Coordinator is in place if staffing changes/promotions occur.

K. Implementation Assessment and Report

207. The Town shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to: (a) document implementation of and compliance with this Agreement, including data and records necessary for the Joint Compliance Expert to conduct reliable outcome assessments, compliance reviews, and

109

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 111 of 120

audits; and (b) perform ongoing quality assurance in each of the areas addressed by this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The Town has collected, maintained and continues to share needed records and data with the JCE and USDOJ.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Data provided to JCE and USDOJ.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

208. Beginning with the Joint Compliance Expert’s first semi-annual report, the Town shall

provide to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ a status report no later than 30 days before the

Joint Compliance Expert’s semi-annual report is due. The Town’s report shall delineate the steps

taken by the Town during the reporting period to implement this Agreement; the Town’s

assessment of the status of its progress; plans to correct any problems; and response to any

concerns raised in the Joint Compliance Expert’s previous semi-annual report.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The Town has provided the JCE with timely status reports at 60-, 90-, 180-,

365-day and 18-month marks.

Recommendations Additional materials to supplement the reports may be requested for each JCE semi-annual report.
Evidentiary Basis Summary reports on EHPD website.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

L. Access and Confidentiality

209. To facilitate its work, the Joint Compliance Expert may conduct on-site visits and assessments without prior notice to the Town. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all necessary individuals, facilities, and documents, which shall include access to Agreement related trainings, meetings, and reviews such as critical incident reviews; use of force reviews, and disciplinary hearings. EHPD shall notify the Joint Compliance Expert as soon as practicable, and in any case within twelve hours, of any critical firearms discharge, arrest of any officer, or any other potentially high-profile serious incident.

Compliance Rating Discussion

n/a
The JCE has conducted numerous on-site visits and assessments. As this has been an effective, collaborative process, to date the JCE has always given prior notice. The Chief has provided timely notification of all significant incidents.
110

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 112 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Continue strong lines of communication. Regularly scheduled and unscheduled conversations and scheduled visits. Questions/Next Steps: None

210. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have timely, full and direct access to all of the Town’s staff, employees, and facilities that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall cooperate with the Town to access people and facilities in a reasonable manner that, consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert's responsibilities, minimizes interference with daily operations.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The Town has ensured complete and open access to the JCE throughout the Settlement Agreement process. In addition to the Chief and police personnel, Mayor Maturo has been readily accessible and has met formally on four occasions with the JCE. Continue strong lines of communications and regular meetings.

Evidentiary Basis Meetings with Town officials, EHPD and community members.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

211. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have full and direct access to

all of the Town’s documents and data that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems

necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement,

except any documents or data protected by the attorney-client privilege. Should the Town decline

to provide the Joint Compliance Expert access to documents or data based on attorney-client

privilege, the Town shall inform the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ that it is withholding

documents or data on this basis and shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ with a log

describing the documents or data.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The Town has readily provided all documents requested by the JCE in this

highly collaborative process.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

212. To the extent necessary to ensure proper implementation of this Agreement, DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall have full and direct access to all of the Town’s staff, employees, facilities, documents and data. DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall cooperate with the Town to access involved personnel, facilities, and documents in a reasonable manner that, consistent with DOJ’s responsibilities to enforce this Agreement, minimizes
111

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 113 of 120

interference with daily operations. Should the Town decline to provide DOJ with access to

documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform DOJ that it is

withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide DOJ with a log describing the

documents or data.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

USDOJ has had full and direct access to the Town and needed documents

throughout this collaborative process.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Ride-alongs and meetings in East Haven; Documents shared with USDOJ and JCE.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

213. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall provide the Town with reasonable notice of a

request for copies of documents. Upon such request, the Town shall provide in a timely manner

copies (electronic, where readily available) of the requested documents to the Joint Compliance

Expert and DOJ.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The Town has provided the JCE and USDOJ copies as needed. Some of the training materials have been difficult and costly to copy and send. The Parties have worked together to find alternative and more cost-effective means to share materials for review.

Recommendations The JCE and USDOJ have requested both electronic and hard copies of the new EHPD Policy Manual; The JCE and USDOJ would also like to have copies of future training curricula.

Evidentiary Basis

The EHDP policies are currently available electronically on their website and available to all personnel. The hardcopy policy manual is in the process of being reprinted and the EHPD plans to send a hardcopy by August 29, 2014 to the Parties.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Confirm Parties have received updated hard copy.

214. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all records and information relating to

criminal investigations of EHPD officers as permissible by law. The Joint Compliance Expert

shall have access to all documents in criminal investigation files that have been closed by EHPD.

The Joint Compliance Expert shall also have reasonable access to all arrest reports, warrants, and

warrant applications whether or not contained in open criminal investigation files. Where

practicable, arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications shall be obtained from sources other

than open criminal investigation files.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

112

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 114 of 120

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
The JCE had access to and was properly informed of all status updates for the January 2013 incident. Questions/Next Steps: None

M.Selection and Compensation of the Joint Compliance Expert

215. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall maintain all non-public information provided by

the Town in a confidential manner. This Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any privilege

or right the Town may assert, including those recognized at common law or created by statute, rule

or regulation, against any other person or entity with respect to the disclosure of any document or

communication.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The JCE is complying with this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

216. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, the Town and DOJ shall together select an independent Joint Compliance Expert, acceptable to both, which shall assess and report on EHPD’s implementation of this Agreement. The selection of the Joint Compliance Expert shall be pursuant to a method jointly established by the Town and DOJ, and will not be governed by any formal or legal procurement requirements. The Joint Compliance Expert and his/her team shall be individuals of the highest ethics.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

This was completed with the hiring of Kathleen M. O’Toole on February 19,

2013.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis JCE contract.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

217. If the Parties are unable to agree on a Joint Compliance Expert or an alternative method of

selection within 60 days of the Effective Date, they reserve the right to seek the Court’s assistance

by asking the Court to select a Joint Compliance Expert. In that case, each Party shall submit the

names of three candidates, or three groups of candidates, along with resumes and cost proposals, to

the Court, and the Court shall select a Joint Compliance Expert from among the qualified

candidates/candidate groups.

Compliance

n/a

113

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 115 of 120

Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

n/a Settlement Agreement was reached n/a n/a Questions/Next Steps: None

218. The Joint Compliance Expert shall be appointed for a period of four years from the Effective

Date and shall have its appointment extended automatically should the Town not demonstrate full

and effective compliance at the end of this four-year period.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

219. The Town shall bear all reasonable fees and costs of the Joint Compliance Expert. In

selecting the Joint Compliance Expert, DOJ and the Town recognize the importance of ensuring

that the fees and costs borne by the Town are reasonable, and accordingly fees and costs shall be

one factor considered in selecting the Joint Compliance Expert. In the event that any dispute arises

regarding the reasonableness or payment of the Joint Compliance Expert’s fees and costs, the

Town, DOJ, and the Joint Compliance Expert shall attempt to resolve such dispute cooperatively

prior to seeking the assistance of the Court to resolve such dispute.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

220. The Town shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert with permanent office space and

reasonable office support such as office furniture, telephones, access to internet, secure document

storage, photocopying and scanners.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

To date, the JCE has not required permanent office space or other formal

support, but will ask the Town for this support in the future if needed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

114

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 116 of 120

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

221. Should any of the Parties to this Agreement determine that the Joint Compliance Expert’s

individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors have exceeded their authority

or failed to satisfactorily perform the duties required by this Agreement, the Party shall meet and

confer to resolve outstanding concerns. If the Parties are unable to agree on a solution, either Party

may petition the Court for such relief as the Court deems appropriate, including replacement of the

Joint Compliance Expert, and/or any individual members, agents, employees, or independent

contractors.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Has not occurred.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

N. Court Jurisdiction, Modification of the Agreement, and Enforcement

222. This Agreement shall become effective upon entry by the Court.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement).

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

223. The Parties agree jointly to file this Agreement with the United States District Court for the

District of Connecticut. The joint motion shall request that the Court enter the Agreement

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), conditionally dismiss the complaint in this

action, and retain jurisdiction to enforce the Agreement. Should the United States determine that

the Town has failed to comply with the Agreement, the case will be reinstated for the purposes of

enforcing the Agreement only. The Town may not challenge liability or the necessity for

Agreement terms.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement).

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

115

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 117 of 120

224. To ensure that the requirements of this Agreement are properly and timely implemented, the

Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for enforcement purposes until such time as the Town

has achieved full and effective compliance with this Agreement and maintained such compliance

for no less than two years. If the Town believes it has reached full compliance and moves the

Court to terminate this Agreement, the Town shall bear the burden of demonstrating full and

effective compliance with this Agreement.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement)

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

225. The United States acknowledges the good faith of the Town in trying to address the remedial

measures that are needed to promote police integrity and ensure constitutional policing in East

Haven. The United States, however, reserves its right to seek enforcement of the provisions of this

Agreement if it determines that the Town has failed to fully comply with any provision of this

Agreement. Prior to initiating any enforcement proceedings in Court for an alleged failure to

comply with any provision of this Agreement, the United States will notify the Town in writing of

the facts supporting its belief that the Town is not in compliance. The Town will investigate the

allegations and respond in writing within 30 days. If the dispute remains unresolved, the Parties

will conduct negotiations to resolve the issue(s). If the Parties are unable to resolve the issue(s)

satisfactorily within 30 days of the Town’s written response, the United States may move the

Court for any relief permitted by law or equity and demonstrate that the relief is necessary to

implement this Agreement.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

To date, this has not occurred.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

226. Failure by any Party to enforce this entire Agreement or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other provision herein shall not be construed as a waiver, including of its right to enforce other deadlines and provisions of this Agreement.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

To date, this has not occurred.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

116

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 118 of 120

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

227. Any modification of this Agreement shall be executed in writing by the Parties, shall be filed

with the Court, and shall not be effective until the Court enters the modified agreement and retains

jurisdiction to enforce it.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Two Modifications to the Settlement Agreement were made with the consent of all Parties and filed with the Court on July 17 and December 3, 2013.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The modified Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

228. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as an acknowledgement, an admission, or

evidence of liability of the Town under the Constitution of the United States, federal or state law,

and this Agreement may not be used as evidence of liability in this or any other civil or criminal

proceeding.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement).

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

229. The Parties agree to defend the provisions of this Agreement. The Parties shall notify each

other of any court or administrative challenge to this Agreement. In the event any provision of this

Agreement is challenged in any Connecticut court, removal to a federal court shall be sought by

the Parties.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

Overview paragraph (not a requirement).

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

230. The Town agrees to promptly notify DOJ if any term of this Agreement becomes subject to a collective bargaining dispute and to consult with DOJ in a timely manner regarding the position the Town takes in any collective bargaining dispute connected with this Agreement.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

To date, this has not occurred.

Recommendations None

117

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 119 of 120

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

231. The Town shall require compliance with this Agreement by its respective officers, employees, agencies, assigns, or successors.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The Town has supported this requirement.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to monitor this paragraph.

Evidentiary Basis EHPD Compliance Reports at 60-, 90-, 180-,365-days and 18-month marks.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

O. Termination of the Agreement

232. The Parties anticipate that the Town will have reached full and effective compliance with this

Agreement within four years of its Effective Date. The Parties may agree to jointly ask the Court

to terminate this Agreement prior to or after this date, provided that the Town has been in full and

effective compliance with this Agreement for two consecutive years. “Full and Effective

Compliance” shall be defined to require both sustained compliance with all material requirements

of this Agreement and sustained and continuing improvement in constitutional policing and public

trust, as demonstrated pursuant to the Agreement's outcome measures.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

n/a

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

233. If after four years from the Effective Date the Parties disagree whether the Town has been in full and effective compliance for two years, either Party may seek to terminate this Agreement. In the case of termination sought by the Town, prior to filing a motion to terminate, the Town agrees to notify DOJ in writing when the Town has determined that it is in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and that such compliance has been maintained for no less than two years. Thereafter, the Parties shall promptly confer as to the status of compliance. If, after a reasonable period of consultation and the completion of any audit or evaluation that DOJ and/or the Joint Compliance Expert may wish to undertake, including on-site observations, document review, or interviews with the Town’s personnel, the Parties cannot resolve any compliance issues, the Town may file a motion to terminate this Agreement. If the Town moves for termination of this Agreement, DOJ will have 60 days after the receipt of the Town’s motion to object to the motion. If DOJ does not object, the Court may grant the Town’s motion. If DOJ does make an objection,

118

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 31-1 Filed 08/29/14 Page 120 of 120

the Court shall hold a hearing on the motion and the burden shall be on the Town to demonstrate

that they are in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and have maintained such

compliance for at least two consecutive years.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

n/a

Recommendations n/a

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

119

 
 Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37 Filed 09/25/15 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
TOWN OF EAST HAVEN AND THE EAST HAVEN BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL NO. 3:12-CV-1652 (AWT)

)

)

)

)

)

) September 25, 2015

NOTICE OF FILING OF JOINT COMPLIANCE EXPERT’S 30 MONTH
 COMPLIANCE REPORT

In accordance with Paragraph 198 of the Modified Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing (“Agreement”) entered by the Court on December 19, 2014, the parties, on behalf of the Joint Compliance Expert Rafael Ruiz, hereby file the 30- Month Compliance Report prepared by the Joint Compliance Expert. For future reference, this 30 Month Report is entitled “Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing 30 Month Compliance Report” and is dated September 24, 2015.

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37 Filed 09/25/15 Page 2 of 4

Respectfully submitted this 25 day of September, 2015.

DEIRDRE M. DALY United States Attorney District of Connecticut
s/John Hughes JOHN B. HUGHES, Civil Chief Assistant United States Attorney District of Connecticut Federal Bar No. ct05289
MICHELLE McCONAGHY Assistant United States Attorney Federal Bar No. ct27157 District of Connecticut U.S. Attorney’s Office 157 Church Street 23rd Floor CT Financial Center
New Haven, CT 06510 Tel: (203) 821-3700 Fax: (203) 773-5373 Michelle.McConaghy@usdoj.gov

VANITA GUPTA Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
MARK KAPPELHOFF Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
Jonathan M. Smith Chief
EMILY GUNSTON special Counsel
AARON FLEISHER Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Tel: (202) 514-6255 Fax: (202) 514-4884 Aaron.Fleisher@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for the United States

2


Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37 Filed 09/25/15 Page 3 of 4
/s/ Lawrence C. Sgrignari LAWRENCE C. SGRIGNARI Federal Bar No. ct09010 SHEILA HALL Federal Bar No. ct22566 Gesmonde, Pietrosimone and Sgrignari, LLC 3127 Whitney Avenue Hamden, CT 06518 Tel: (203) 407-4200 Fax: (203) 407-4210 lsgrignari@gpsp.com Attorneys for Defendants
3


Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37 Filed 09/25/15 Page 4 of 4
CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that on July 19, 2013, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s CM/ECF System. A copy of the foregoing was mailed to: Katherine O’Toole O'Toole Associates 1 Wintergreen Lane Sandwich, MA 02563
s/John Hughes JOHN B. HUGHES CHIEF, CIVIL DIVISION
4


Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 1 of 130
United States of America v. Town of East Haven and East Haven	  Board of Police Commissioners
Agreement	  for Effective and Constitutional Policing 30 Month Compliance Report
Prepared by: Rafael Ruiz,	  Joint Compliance Expert Joan Brody, JCE Team Coordinator September 24, 2015

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 2 of 130
TABLE	  OF	  CONTENTS
Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 2
 Section I. JCE Summary ................................................................................................................ 3
 Section II. Compliance Chart....................................................................................................... 21

1

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 3 of 130
INTRODUCTION
Rafael Ruiz of O’Toole Associates, LLC, the Joint Compliance Expert (JCE) overseeing the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing or Settlement Agreement (SA) between the Town of East Haven and East Haven Police Department (EHPD) and the U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ), submits this report of the JCE’s findings with respect to the first 30 months of the Settlement Agreement ending on June 30, 2015. As outlined in each of the JCE’s six-month reports, the JCE understands its task to be three-fold:
1) The JCE must ensure that the EHPD is meeting all material requirements and all deadlines specified in the various paragraphs of the Settlement Agreement;
2) The JCE must, over time, make a more generalized assessment of whether or not the process outlined in the Settlement Agreement is achieving the desired outcomes, namely “constitutional policing, increased community trust, and professional treatment of individuals by the EHPD officers;” and
3) The JCE must review and evaluate all serious and significant incidents involving the EHPD. These include any serious uses of force, any complaints alleging significant misconduct, or any other event that rises to the level of being newsworthy or notorious.
As agreed in discussions with the Parties, to accomplish these tasks, the JCE will provide both qualitative and quantitative measurements of outcomes 30 months after the Settlement Agreement effective date of December 21, 2012. This report has two sections. Section I presents a narrative overview of compliance milestones achieved or in the process of being completed by the EHPD during the last 30 months. In Section II, the JCE tracks the current compliance level, discusses the progress to-date, makes recommendations for enhancements and describes the basis upon which this assessment is made for each of the 224 paragraphs (numbered 10-233) in the Settlement Agreement for the reporting period January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015.
2

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 4 of 130
SECTION I. JCE SUMMARY
JCE NOTE: THE TERMS HISPANIC AND LATINO/A, AS USED IN THIS REPORT, ARE USED INTERCHANGIBLY.
For the last six months, the East Haven Police Department (EHPD) has continued to make progress towards full compliance with the Settlement Agreement (SA). The JCE and the Parties, the U.S Department of Justice (USDOJ) and the Town of East Haven, continue to stay in constant contact as per the Settlement Agreement. The high level of collaboration among the Parties continues to be very positive and, as a result, EHPD has received accolades from the local community and from around the nation for its quick turn-around of the Department.
The EHPD has received invitations from other cities and towns to make presentations on its accomplishments. For example, they received an invitation from the U.S. Attorney from Massachusetts to be a featured speaker at a conference hosted by the College of Holy Cross on May 27, 2015 in Worcester, MA. The EHPD has also received positive reviews from media outlets, such as the New Haven Register newspaper of Connecticut. In addition, community members and clergy members have also made positive comments to the paper and in community forums about the progress made by the EHPD in working with the community. The newly appointed US Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, praised the Department when she met with community leaders and police personnel during a site visit to the East Haven Police Department in July 2015. The EHPD has also increased its commitment to community policing by assigning more officers to bicycle patrol, conducting a successful citizens police academy and by opening two mini-substations.
Nevertheless, the EHPD still has additional work to do in furtherance of the Settlement Agreement. For example, the JCE has found that some EHPD Supervisory Review of Use of Force reports are lacking in a number of areas, which may point to the need for additional training in the process of Supervisory Review report writing. It appeared to the JCE that the supervisors had the sufficient information needed to complete these reviews properly, but failed
3

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 5 of 130
to document all thoroughly. The JCE notified the EHPD about these issues.
During this reporting period, the JCE continued to meet with community members and business owners in East Haven and has visited several stores owned by Latino East Haven residents. The feedback has been very positive. More detail is provided below under the section “Community Engagement.”
The JCE has also reviewed and approved, along with the Parties, seven new policies and five modifications of existing policies. The Parties also agreed to recommend to the Court the following two modifications to the Settlement Agreement:
o Use of Force Reviews by Supervisors: All Parties agreed that due to the size of the EHPD, it is acceptable, going forward, to have the same supervisor, who might have witnessed an incident, also conduct the use of force review, but only in minor cases, and only in the rare circumstance when there is no other supervisor available. In all major cases, an independent supervisor will do the review (this is normal EHPD practice). However, the JCE will keep monitoring all use of force reviews and will bring it to the attention of EHPD when and if necessary.
o All Parties also agreed that the unholstering of a weapon (firearm or Taser) while not pointing it at a human being, does not constitute a Use of Force, thus it does not require a use of force review process. Further, the unholstering of the weapon will be documented on a regular police incident report by EHPD. The EHPD will train/advise supervisors on this issue. The JCE will monitor this change going forward.
During the last six months, the JCE reviewed a random sample of arrest reports, supervisory reports, all search warrants, and search warrant applications and affidavits. The JCE also received and reviewed an analysis of motor vehicle (M/V) stops data, and the Early Intervention System (EIS)/Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) database and found them to be in order. Proper procedures were followed in every case. In addition, the JCE thoroughly reviewed all use of force reports and found them to have complied with established practices and EHPD’s policies.
4

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 6 of 130
More details on these issues are provided below under the Settlement Agreement seven focus areas, which are: I.) General Policies and Training; II.) Bias-Free Policing; III.) Stops, Searches, and Seizures; IV.) Use of Force; V. Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations, and Discipline; VI.) Supervision and Management; and VII.) Community Engagement and Oversight.
I.) General Policies and Training
General Policies and Training Policies and Procedures Manual: In the 30 months since the East Haven Settlement Agreement was enacted, the EHPD has developed and implemented 94 approved policies and procedures.
Within the last six months, the following five policies were completely rewritten and/or reviewed and revised based on input from EHPD officers, the JCE, the USDOJ and the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners:
209.2 – Discipline Guidelines Matrix 406.3 – Use of Less Lethal Force 415.3 – Domestic Violence 416.3 – Domestic Violence Involving Police Personnel 424.3 – Misdemeanor Summons Arrests
Seven new policies were issued during the reporting period: 309.1 – Employee and Equipment Inspections 310.1 – Travel Expenses of Department Employees 311.1 – Military Leave 441.1 – Domestic Violence Lethality Assessment Program 442.1 – Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) 704.1 – Canine Unit Drug Lab Management
5

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 7 of 130
802.1 – Sensitive Media and Disposal/Sanitation
One policy classification or policy number change was also made:
312.1 – Retired Officers Firearms Requirement
The EHPD has completed training for all 94 policies and procedures. The JCE anticipates that additional revisions and new policies and training will be completed in the coming year. The entire EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual is available on-line as well as at the Hagaman Public Library, East Haven Town Hall and in the Police Department. The JCE had an opportunity to visit these sites and found the Manual at these locations. The JCE will continue to monitor that all copies are current.
Policy Training: The EHPD conducted numerous trainings between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2015 and provided the JCE with a roster of attendees that completed these trainings. The EHPD again split employees into three different training squads, with approximately twenty people in each, to allow them to better balance staffing levels and to reasonably control overtime costs. After reviewing the training schedule for 2015, the JCE coordinated a site visit on June 3, 2015 to audit on-going In-Service Training. The courses audited were: Bias-free Policing; Stop, Search, and Arrest; and Use of Force.
• In the morning class, the instructor used videos of recent incidents on use of force (video of a pregnant woman being arrested) as a sample for class discussion. The class was very involved, asking appropriate questions on the issue of use of force. The instructor talked about the potential legal remedies for the unlawful use of force. In the afternoon, the instructor continued briefly with the subject of use of force. He then turned to the subject of search and seizures and used sample cases and had the class discuss and make decisions based on situations he described to the class.
• There were lively discussions among the class and with the instructor. The instructor refreshed the class on the subject of Profiling, but did not elaborate, as he said there were no new issues since he last taught the class at EHPD. The JCE noted that the class was
6

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 8 of 130
composed of 17 mostly early career (aged mid-20’s and early 30’s) officers. Three students were female, and one of the female students was African American. There were two African American males and one Latino male. A total of four minorities were present. Here, again, the JCE noted the commitment of EHPD to a diverse police force. Just less than two years ago, the JCE remembers entering the EHPD headquarters and did not see a minority officer in the station. This time, the JCE not only saw minority officers participating in the In-service class, but also noticed an African-American Lieutenant at the front desk who was the shift commander on this particular day. Here, once again, one can see evidence of EHPD’s commitment to diversity in its police department.
II.) Bias-Free Policing
The EHPD reports that, “The percentage of Hispanic drivers stopped by EHPD officers for the six-month period from January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015 was 15.52 percent. Just over 75 percent (75.13 percent) of total motor vehicle stops were non-Hispanic white drivers or white drivers of an unknown ethnicity. The remaining stops conducted were of black (7.21 percent), Asian (0.82 percent), Indian (0.34 percent), Middle Eastern (1.09 percent) or unknown race (0.0 percent) operators.”
The JCE noted that the Hispanic population in East Haven in 2010, as reported by the US Census, was only 10.3 percent as compared to 15.52 percent of Hispanic drivers stopped during this period. The JCE researched this discrepancy to determine whether EHPD officers were being biased against Hispanic drivers. The JCE determined that, in general, EHPD officers’ actions do not indicate bias based on estimated population numbers in East Haven today. Please see result of this research in the next section (Stops, Searches and Seizures).
EHPD further reports that: Certain violations require the investigating officer to take enforcement action to remove the vehicle and/or operator from the roadway, such as operating under suspension, operating without a license, operating under the influence, misuse or possession of stolen marker plate, operating without insurance, and/or active arrest warrants for the operator.
7

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 9 of 130
In total, 190 stops during this six-month time period had one of these situations in which the officer did not have discretion and was required to take some type of enforcement action. Of these 190 stops, 56 operators or 29.47 percent were Hispanic. 114 operators or 60 percent were white non-Hispanic. 18 operators or 9.47 percent were black.
The above numbers indicate that a high percentage of Hispanic drivers were targets of enforcement action, but one must keep in mind that officers had no discretion in these instances. As far as sanctions imposed, EHPD has informed the JCE that its officers almost never attend court hearings in these cases and, therefore, do not have any input on sanctions. Nevertheless, the JCE will continue to monitor this category in future reports to look for any signs of potential bias.
EHPD also reports that: Of the stops in which officers have the ability to exercise discretion, 979 stops were of white non-Hispanic operators and resulted in 324 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 33.09 percent of stops in this category. In the same situation, 170 stops of Hispanic operators resulted in 63 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 37.05 percent of stops in this category. 87 stops of black operators resulted in 24 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 27.58 percent. 14 stops of Middle Eastern operators resulted in 4 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 28.57 percent.
The above numbers indicate that there was an approximately 4 percentage point difference between the formal action taken against Hispanic drivers versus white drivers. Given this difference, the EHPD went further and looked to determine whether there was any one officer who targeted Hispanic drivers at a higher rate than others. EHPD determined that, indeed, there was one single officer with a higher rate of stops of Hispanic drivers and notified the JCE that it has conducted an analysis of stops by this officer. The analysis revealed that this officer had a total of 88 stops. Out of those motor vehicle stops, 23 operators were identified as being of Hispanic ethnicity, which indicates a 26 percent stop rate for operators identified as Hispanics, considerably higher than the 15.52 percent overall stop rate for all EHPD officers. This officer
8

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 10 of 130
took enforcement action in 9 of those 23 stops, for a 39 percent rate. EHPD reported that this officer is a rookie with less than two years on the job. After a thorough investigation, which included viewing the officer’s motor vehicle stops on cruiser and body mounted video cameras, EHPD reported that it does not appear that this officer was purposely targeting Hispanics. Nevertheless, this officer was counseled by his commander, and his immediate supervisor was made aware and instructed to monitor the officer. The JCE will continue to monitor this category in future reports to detect potential pattern of discriminatory policing.
During the reporting period, the EHPD reported that 49 vehicles were searched during stops, but that 34 of those searches were for inventory purpose, as required by EHPD policy (Policies and Procedures # 702), thus officers had no discretion. The remaining 14 searches, EHPD reported, resulted in 9 out of 1,094 (0.82 percent) stops of vehicles searched in which the operator was identified as white non-Hispanic, 3 out of 226 (1.32 percent) stops of vehicles in which the operator was identified as Hispanic, and 2 out of 105 (1.90 percent) stops of vehicles in which the operator was identified as black. EHPD said that contraband was located in 6 of these searches broken down as follows: 3 operators were white non-Hispanic, 2 were white Hispanics and 1 was Black non-Hispanic. Although the rates for vehicle searches of black and Hispanic drivers are higher than the rate for white drivers, the JCE determined that these numbers are too small, and not significant enough to rise to a level that indicates bias by EHPD officers. But, again, the JCE will continue to monitor these numbers.
III.) Stops, Searches, and Seizures; Stops The EHPD reported that:
A review of the stop data collected and analyzed indicates that traffic stops from this reporting period are generally consistent with the racial and ethnic make-up of the driving population in East Haven, CT based on several sources including the USDOJ Civil Rights Division Findings Letter dated December 19, 2011.
The finding letter states that the percentage of Hispanic or Latino drivers in East Haven was 8.3
9

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 11 of 130
percent. Data from the 2010 U.S. Census shows East Haven’s Hispanic population to be estimated at 10.3 percent. However, on May 12, 2015, U.S. News & World Report published its Annual Report on the Best Ranked High Schools in America for 2015. This report details statistics about the student body population at the East Haven High School. Minority enrollment in the East Haven High School is 24 percent of the total student body, of which Hispanic students represent 17 percent of the total student body. While the U.S. Census bureau reflects a Hispanic population of 10.3 percent, these data are from 2010 while the U.S. News & World Report data are from 2015 and based directly on student body demographics, which may be a more accurate representation of the Hispanic population in East Haven.
While there is a significant six percent difference in the Hispanic population cited by EHPD above (high school population versus general population), there is a high probability that the general Latino (or Hispanic) population in East Haven today is closer to the 17 percent (2013 high school Hispanic student population) than to 10.3 percent (2010 US Census of Hispanic population in East Haven). The JCE researched and compared the 2010 general Hispanic population versus the 2010 high school Hispanic student population of East Haven and the surrounding towns of Branford and North Haven. The comparison shows that there is a high correlation between the high school Hispanic student population and the general population of Hispanics in these towns. Therefore, the current high school population demographics may be a better way of estimating the Latino population living in East Haven today, compared to federal census numbers collected over five years ago.
For example, according to the US Census, the East Haven Hispanic population in 2010 was 10.3 percent, and the high school Hispanic student population was 10.1 percent. In Branford, the general Hispanic population in 2010 was 6 percent (344 out of 5819), and the high school Hispanic students were 3.7 percent of the total of 1,109; in North Haven, a town of similar size as East Haven, the Hispanic population in 2010 was about 4 percent (929 out of 24,093), versus a high school Hispanic student population of 6 percent (71 out of 1181). As we can see, in these towns, there are some differences in the percentage of Hispanic high school students and the general Hispanic population as reported by the census, but in all cases, the difference is no more than 2.5 percentage points.
10

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 12 of 130
Additionally, a comparison of US Census population data for the year 2000 (the most recent US Census data available before or after 2010) for these towns shows a similar pattern. In East Haven, in 2000, the Hispanic population was 1,228 (4.4 percent) of a total of 28,189, and the high school Hispanic students were 62 out of 1060 students, or 6 percent; in Branford, the Hispanic population was 218 (3.8 percent) out of a total of 5,735, versus a Hispanic high school student population of 20 (2 percent) out of a total of 1032; in North Haven, the Hispanic population in 2000 was 1.9 percent, or 433 out of 23035, versus a high school population of 1.3 percent (13 out of 977). Here again, we can see a close correlation between the Hispanic general population and the high school Hispanic student population of these towns. Based on the data above, it is feasible to assume, since the East Haven High school Hispanic student population in 2013 has been pegged at 17 percent, that East Haven’s general Hispanic population has grown to somewhere between 14 percent and 17 percent since 2010. Therefore, the report from EHPD that 15.52 percent of all motor vehicle stops were operators of Hispanic ethnicity would generally fall in line with the town’s Hispanic population today. The JCE must take the above numbers into consideration, given the fact that the most recent US Census is five years old, and there is no other way to confirm the exact, nor even an estimate of, the Hispanic population in East Haven.
[Data for high school populations obtained from the website www.schooldigger.com, which uses as a source the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics and US Census data]
Search Warrants and Affidavits The EHPD submitted to the JCE copies of 12 search warrants and affidavits issued and served by EHPD officers this reporting period. Five of those warrants were seeking a blood test for prosecution of Operating Under the Influence (OUI) cases. Three warrants were issued for the same incident seeking evidence in a murder case. Two warrants were issued for the same incident in a robbery case. One warrant was issued seeking DNA evidence in a burglary case; and one warrant was issued to secure a firearm belonging to a person in protective custody. The JCE reviewed all 12 warrants and affidavits and determined that there was no apparent bias in seeking and serving these search warrants. Although five of the twelve warrants were issued against two African-American subjects (one male, and one female), the warrants sought evidence
11

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 13 of 130
in a murder case and in a separate felony robbery case. Also, two of the 12 warrants were issued against two Hispanic males, one in a case of burglary, and one in a case of OUI. Although four of the nine subjects of these search warrants were minority subjects, the seriousness of the three cases mentioned above (murder, robbery and burglary) demanded no less from the EHPD. The JCE believes that all warrants and affidavits obtained in the above cases met standard police practice and seemed to meet constitutional requirements in such serious cases. The remaining five warrants were issued against white subjects for OUI (4) and to secure a firearm (1).
IV.) Use of Force
The EHPD reports that:
During the period from January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015, there have been 34 incidents where use of force was involved. Of those 34 incidents, there were 59 total uses of force, which are: • 19 Physical (hands on) • 7 Non- Compliant Handcuffing • 15 Firearm (no discharge) • 9 Taser (no discharge) • 9 Pursuits
The EHPD reports that there were “19 arrests in those 34 incidents and 4 emergency committals. From January1, 2015 to June 30, 2015, there were a total of 441 arrests and 169 emergency committals.”
The JCE reviewed all reports of Use of Force by EHPD this period and has found that, in general, EHPD officers have been reporting their Use of Force in a consistent manner, and that the supervisors have been reading and reviewing these reports. However, the JCE has also noted that, in some cases, supervisors have been vague in their reporting of the facts and lacking specificity in some cases when reviewing Use of Force reports. For example in some cases supervisors would report that they interviewed an officer or a witness, but failed to report the result of that interview. In other cases, the supervisors reported that someone acted violently
12

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 14 of 130
toward an officer, but did not describe the violent act/s that led to that conclusion. The JCE has notified EHPD of these shortcomings. The JCE believes this can be corrected through a brief refresher/reminder training course or bulletin issued to supervisors.
V.) Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations, and Discipline
From January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015 the EHPD has received four Civilian Complaints, as follows:
• On February1, 2015, a Sergeant responded to a scene and received a complaint that an officer was rude and the complainant felt disrespected by him. The complainant did not want to formally file a complaint but just wanted the officer spoken to. The sergeant did speak to the officer and felt that he needed to improve on his de-escalation skills. In the end, the officer did not pass his field training and is no longer with the Department.
• On March 4, 2015, a Civilian Complaint form was given out to a female who was complaining that an officer made inappropriate comments to her. The complaint was never filed but the incident was investigated and the officer was counseled by his supervisor.  
• On May 8, 2015, a Lieutenant received a phone call from a store manager who stated that while he was out of the store, the police responded on a complaint of counterfeit money and the officer who responded was “intimidating and awful.” The Lieutenant viewed the body camera footage and found that the officer was respectful and pleasant; he later went to that location to show the manager the body camera footage. The manager apologized for portraying the officer as someone he is not, and gave EHPD kudos for being able to provide such relevant and reliable proof. The officer was exonerated.  
• On May 27, 2015, a Civilian Complaint was made by an individual who was sentenced to prison time. The complaint was filed against an officer and a sergeant, stating that the officer unfairly arrested him on false charges and was having an affair with his exgirlfriend. This complaint was also made to the States Attorney’s Office and found
13

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 15 of 130
untrue by that office.
The JCE has reviewed all of the above complaints and noticed they were all allegations of minor violations and determined that they were satisfactorily investigated and that appropriate action was taken when warranted. The one complaint that alleges a serious violation is where the complainant said that he was falsely arrested by an officer, and that this officer is also having an alleged affair with his girlfriend. The EHPD Internal Affairs Officer conducted an investigation and reported that the complainant was unable to provide witnesses or other corroborating evidence. EHPD further found that this complainant was indeed arrested by the officer three times, but that the arrests were the result of two 911 calls to EHPD and one self-initiated incident and all were based on probable cause. Both officers were exonerated by EHPD.
The JCE is encouraged by the actions of EHPD and its commitment to providing fair service to its residents and visitors. The JCE cites the case above, May 27, 2015, and the case from March 4, 2015, where, although no complaint was filed by the complainant, the EHPD went ahead and conducted an investigation into the allegations and determined that the officer needed to be counseled. It shows good faith and is a step in the right direction for EHPD.
VI.) Supervision and Management
According to the EHPD, the Early Intervention System (EIS) captures the following fields and thresholds:
• Any firearm discharge or use • Taser deployment or use; two (2) within a 60-day period • Baton or O/C use; two (2) within a 60-day period • Non-compliant handcuffing; three (3) within a 30-day period • Physical use of force; three (3) within a 30-day period • Pursuits; two (2) within a 30-day period • Officers arrests, including interfering with police, obstructing a police officer, resisting
arrest, and assault on a police officer; two (2) within a 60-day period
14

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 16 of 130
• Traffic accidents involving EHPD equipment; three (3) within 12-month period • Civil lawsuits; two (2) within a 12-month period • Excessive absences; Eight (8) unscheduled occurrences in any 12-month period
The EIS is monitored by the IAO daily while on duty.
The EHPD further reported to the JCE that from January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015, the EIS has not been triggered and, therefore, no review of any employee has been necessary.
Body Worn Cameras It is EHPD policy that all officers wear body cameras during their tours of duty. Supervisors review and remind officers to ensure that their cameras are functioning properly. Supervisors also review all vehicle-mounted cameras and report their condition and request repairs when necessary. Officers are trained to activate their assigned body worn camera immediately prior to any encounter with a person when there is a potential for arrest, including pedestrian and traffic stops, any investigative call for service, any call in which they are needed to resolve or prevent a dispute, or any proactive self-initiated call for service in which law enforcement action can reasonably be anticipated.
The JCE has seen how valuable these cameras have been to EHPD management in supervising and monitoring their personnel and equipment. For example, in his review of use of force reports for this period, the JCE read vehicle pursuit reports where the supervisors checked the vehicle-mounted cameras to compare officers’ reports with what was captured in the videos and found that the officers’ reports were accurate. In a number of cases, supervisors noted that there were some technical issues with the cameras and reported them to management for corrective action.
Also, the JCE reported in his 24-month report to the court that he viewed body-cam videos of an officer shooting a dangerous animal, and, in another situation, a group of officers using proper tactics to take down a subject armed with a machete. By having these body-cam and in-vehicle
15

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 17 of 130
camera videos available for inspection, supervisors are better able to supervise and monitor performance by the personnel assigned to their command. In addition, these videos can also serve the EHPD as training tools in the future.
The JCE randomly reviewed arrest reports on three separate site visits during 2015 and found that they appeared to be in proper order. Additionally, the JCE conducted a random review of EHPD’s Detainee Questionnaires and found them to be, generally, in compliance, paying particular attention to the following questions:
• Were you taken into custody by force? • Have you been treated properly while in the custody of the East Haven Police Department?
In the vast majority of instances checked by the JCE, the detainees answered in the negative for the first question; also, the vast majority answered positive for the second question. Supervisors, for the most part, further interviewed those detainees who answered yes to those questions and made notes of their concerns. Most of the concerns that the supervisors reported were minor and were appropriately handled by EHPD.
However, the JCE noted that in some questionnaires, the detainees concerns were not always documented. For example, the instructions on the EHPD Detainee Questionnaire requires that a “Yes” answer to any question be further explained in a space provided for that purpose. In a small number of questionnaires with “Yes” answers, the Supervisor failed to provide an explanation. This was especially obvious when supervisors asked the subjects (Question #2) “Do you take any prescribed medications?” In many cases the answer was “Yes,” but the supervisor failed to make note of the medication being taken, whether the subject had the medication with him/her, or whether EHPD would make arrangements to get the medication if necessary. The JCE notified EHPD and recommended that EHPD provide re-training to its personnel to correct this important issue.
16

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 18 of 130
VII.) Community Engagement and Oversight.
The Following is a statement from EHPD concerning community meetings:
In continuing compliance with items 179, 180, and 182 (pages 42 and 43 of the Settlement Agreement), with the modification of the SA in December 2014, I [Lt. Emerman] will be having quarterly community meetings. The meetings will continue to be advertised in various print and online media outlets. Previous meetings have attracted residents with a great variety of questions, suggestions, and interest in learning how officers carry out their duties and how it will affect members of the community. The meetings will continue to rotate between the north and south side of town in compliance with the modified SA.
The JCE has found that EHPD has continued to make strides in the East Haven Hispanic community. Hispanics in East Haven have expressed their sentiments to the press during interviews conducted the past six months. For example, the New Haven Register newspaper, in an article published in February 2015, titled “Latinos in East Haven Applaud Police Efforts to Heal Community” by Esteban L. Hernandez, reported the following interviews with Hispanics in East Haven:
"’Things have changed,” said Chacon, speaking in Spanish. "They have returned to normal." The change Chacon is referring to is the relationship between Latinos in East Haven and members of the town's police force.
Annely Ardon, who's been working six years at Alex Grocery, agrees Latinos and police officers have turned a corner after a very difficult period. Speaking in Spanish, Ardon says at least three East Haven police officers speak Spanish fluently and more importantly, the Spanish-speaking officers have told them they're there to help. “The police are good people now. They're excellent.” Ardon said.
Vicky Friere, a co-worker of Ardon's, shared her sentiment. She said officers stop by
17

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 19 of 130
weekly to check in and greet them.
In another article reporting on the visit in July 2015 to East Haven by the newly appointed US Attorney Loretta Lynch, reporter Hernandez wrote, “While the forum in East Haven was closed to the press, Lynch addressed the media briefly before the forum and afterward during a press conference inside the school’s media center. Lynch said Latino community members who participated in the forum spoke positively of changes they see between officers and the community. “They particularly spoke of respectful interactions,” Lynch said. “If the people who really felt victimized don’t see a difference, then we would not view it as a success.” In another interview about her East Haven visit, US Attorney Lynch added that, “…there has been an enormous, positive, transformative progress here in East Haven.”
The EHPD has also held several community meetings throughout the last six months of 2015. Lt. Emerman reported that he has met with representatives of the Latino community on the following dates:
• Lt. Emerman met with the owners of a Hispanic convenience store on January13, 2015, January 30, 2015, April 9, 2015, May 5, 2015 and June 25, 2015; He met with the owners of a Hispanic Restaurant on February 25, 2015 and with the Associate Editor of La Voz Hispana de CT newspaper on April 13, 2015.
• Lt. Emerman also spoke with a Hispanic leader/activist on January 2, 2015, January 7, 2015, January 10, 2015, February 2, 2015, February 4, 2015, March 12, 2015, May 28, 2015, and met with the activist again on July 3, 2105 as well.
Lt. Emerman reported that the last monthly community meeting was held January 28, 2015 at the Foxon Volunteer Firehouse, located at 1420 North High Street. Approximately ten people attended. No names were taken as the attendees can remain anonymous per paragraph 182 of the Settlement Agreement. The topics that were covered included: traffic enforcement, officer training, and upcoming projects of the police department.
Also, a quarterly meeting was held on April 19, 2015 at Twin Pines Diner, 34 Main Street. This
18

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 20 of 130
was combined with an annual business owners meeting and had approximately 20 attendees.
Additionally, EHPD held a Citizens Police Academy for 10 weeks. Fifteen participants graduated on April 13, 2015. The JCE attended the inaugural class of this program and introduced himself to the group. The JCE is familiar with Citizens Police Academy programs, and has found that they are very popular and usually well attended by community residents. These programs tend to bring the police and the community closer together.
Lt. Emerman reported that he has not heard of any complaints from the representatives of the community. Contacts with the police have been positive and appropriate when enforcement action was taken. Additionally, Lt. Emerman has heard comments that many Latinos who had moved out of East Haven in previous years have begun to return to East Haven in recent times, further indicating a positive relationship with the Department.
In addition, the JCE has met with several Hispanic community leaders and business owners during the first six months of 2015. They have all made positive statements about their relationship with EHPD and its officers. For example:
• The JCE met with the owner’s son and a clerk at a Latino owned store located on Main Street in East Haven. Both said things were going very well with the EHPD, and they have had no issues, nor have they heard of any problems with EHPD officers. They were happy to report that officers stop by the store regularly to talk with them and inquire how everything is going.
• At an East Haven Latino grocery store, the owner told the JCE that she has had no complaints against EHPD, that the police have been responsive to her, and that she has heard of no complaints, or any other issues with the police from customers or other storeowners.
• The JCE spoke to a white male who was the owner and behind the counter at the Polo Palo Gelato (Italian Ice Cream) store on Main St. He told the JCE that he and his
19

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 21 of 130
girlfriend (co-owner), who is Latina, have a good relationship with the EHPD and is not aware of any issues. Community members that the JCE has met with highlight, and continue to praise, the excellent work and relationship building of EHPD Lieutenant David Emerman, the Department’s Liaison to the community. Lt. Emerman reported to the JCE that the Department has assigned a Spanishspeaking officer to begin training as a back-up to Lt. Emerman and future successor as the EHPD Liaison to the community. The EHPD has opened two police substations to better serve the community. The JCE visited both EHPD’s substations on June 16, 2015. The newest substation on Messina Drive was opened in March 2015. The town’s beach substation has been operating for many years. During the JCE’s visit to the EHPD substation located at the town’s public beach, no officer was present as it is not staffed 24/7. The JCE did, however, speak to the Beach Supervisor, who stated that he is encouraged to see the EHPD come back to the beach, and is happy to have the substation there. Although the substation is not fully staffed 24/7, the Supervisor said police presence is much needed at the beach, especially on weekends and at night. The JCE then visited the EHPD substation located at 65 Messina Drive. There was no officer present and the office was closed, however, the JCE spoke to a resident of the senior complex, who said that an EHPD officer comes in and out of the office throughout the day every day. She said the residents are happy to have the police presence in the building, which makes them feel safer.
20

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 22 of 130
Section	  II.	  Compliance Progress Chart	  for Modified Settlement	  Agreement	   Paragraphs	  10 through	  233, approved on December 19, 2014 CIVIL NO. 3:12-­‐CV-­‐1652	  (AWT)
KEY:
Partial Compliance – The Town of East Haven has taken verified and meaningful steps to implement the requirement, including incorporating the requirement in policy, commencing sufficient training to relevant staff on the requirement, and/or carrying out the requirement in actual practice.
Substantial Compliance – The Town of East Haven has implemented the requirement in policy, training, and actual practice to a level and degree that satisfies the material elements and objectives of the requirement, based on the JCE’s qualitative and quantitative assessments.
Full Compliance – The Town of East Haven has achieved substantial compliance with the requirement and sustained such compliance for two years. (Please note one exception. There are a few paragraphs where a one-time requirement has been met and no longer requires active monitoring. These paragraphs are now marked as having achieved full compliance.)
Non-Compliance – The Town of East Haven has made little or no progress to implement the requirement or has otherwise failed to take meaningful and verifiable steps to achieve compliance.
Deferred - Requirements were not reviewed, audited, or assessed during the relevant rating period.
The Joint Compliance Expert (JCE) is using the compliance ratings defined above. The JCE is relying on the following four criteria to assess East Haven’s progress on implementing each paragraph of the Settlement Agreement. These criteria are based on requirements included in paragraph 198 of the Settlement Agreement.
1. Policy: Is there a policy in place relevant to the paragraph requirement? 2. Training: Have all required East Haven Police Department staff been trained on this
paragraph? 3. Practice: Is the East Haven Police Department performing the requirement of the

paragraph?
 4. Verification: Have the requirements of the paragraph been audited, reviewed and verified
by the JCE?
21

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 23 of 130

When all four criteria are met, the paragraph will be rated as “substantial compliance.” After substantial compliance has been sustained for a two-year period, the JCE will mark the paragraph in “full compliance.”

IV. POLICIES AND TRAINING GENERALLY

10. EHPD’s policies and procedures shall reflect and express the Department’s core values and priorities, and provide clear direction to ensure that officers lawfully, effectively, and ethically carry out their law enforcement responsibilities. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all EHPD officers are trained to understand and be able to fulfill their duties and responsibilities pursuant to EHPD policies and procedures. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that supervisors have the knowledge, skills, and ability to provide close and effective supervision to each officer under the supervisor’s direct command; provide officers with the direction and guidance necessary to improve and develop as police officers; and to identify, correct, and prevent officer misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. (Overview paragraph for policy manual development)

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the policies and training section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the subparagraphs that it introduces. None

Evidentiary Basis

From January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, seven new policies were developed. 309.1 – Employee and Equipment Inspections 310.1 – Travel Expenses of Department Employees 311.1 – Military Leave 441.1 – Domestic Violence Lethality Assessment Program 442.1 – Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) 704.1 – Canine Unit Drug Lab Management 802.1 – Sensitive Media and Disposal/Sanitation

Five policies were revised. 209.2 – Discipline Guidelines Matrix 406.3 – Use of Less Lethal Force 415.3 – Domestic Violence 416.3 – Domestic Violence Involving Police Personnel 424.3 – Misdemeanor Summons Arrests The classification for one policy (formerly policy 216.1) was changed to 312.1 - Retired Officers Firearms Requirement.

22

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 24 of 130

A. Policy Development, Review and Implementation

11. EHPD shall develop and implement comprehensive and agency-wide policies and procedures

that ensure consistency with, and full implementation of, this Agreement, and incorporate each

requirement herein. Unless otherwise noted, all policies, procedures, and manuals shall be

developed within 270 days of the Effective Date.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Agency-wide policies and procedures have been developed and officer training completed for 94 policies.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis 94 policies were reviewed and approved by JCE

All training on the 94 policies has been completed for all EHPD members. JCE confirmed updated EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual is available and accessible to all.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to check that current revised editions of the hard copy policy manual are accessible to all and are on-line. It is anticipated that the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual will continue to be regularly updated as new issues, technologies, training etc. are introduced in policing and in the community.

12. EHPD policies and procedures shall define terms clearly, comply with applicable law and the requirements of this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE and USDOJ reviewed and approved 94 policies and procedures.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis All new and revised EHPD policies and procedures were reviewed and approved by the JCE, USDOJ and the Board of Police Commissioners.

SITE VISIT

The JCE will continue to review future revisions to EHPD policies and procedures.

13. EHPD shall review each policy or procedure related to this Agreement 180 days after it is implemented, and annually thereafter, to ensure that the policy or procedure provides effective direction to EHPD personnel and remains consistent with the Agreement, professional police practices, and current law, including incorporating mechanisms to promote and measure accountability and community engagement. EHPD also shall review policies and procedures as necessary upon notice of a policy deficiency during audits or reviews. Within 60 days of that review, EHPD shall revise the policy or procedure and consult with the JCE and USDOJ. USDOJ and the JCE shall provide the same review and approval of revised policies and procedures as with the initial policies and procedures to ensure consistency with this Agreement.

23

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 25 of 130

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
The JCE and Parties have worked with EHPD on revising existing policies within the deadlines required under this paragraph. None On an ongoing basis, the EHPD along with the JCE and USDOJ have reviewed and revised policies and procedures and EHPD has developed seven new ones.

Five revised policies were issued and became effective during the January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015 reporting period:

209.2 – Discipline Guidelines Matrix 406.3 – Use of Less Lethal Force 415.3 – Domestic Violence 416.3 – Domestic Violence Involving Police Personnel 424.3 – Misdemeanor Summons Arrests

From January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, seven new policies were developed:

309.1 – Employee and Equipment Inspections 310.1 – Travel Expenses of Department Employees 311.1 – Military Leave 441.1 – Domestic Violence Lethality Assessment Program 442.1 – Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) 704.1 – Canine Unit Drug Lab Management 802.1 – Sensitive Media and Disposal/Sanitation

SITE VISIT

The classification for one policy (formerly policy 216.1) was changed to 312.1 - Retired Officers Firearms Requirement. All new training required for revised policies was reviewed by the JCE and completed for the January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2014 reporting period. The JCE will continue to discuss policies with EHPD during site visits and track EHPD’s revision processes.

14. EHPD’s Department-wide policies and procedures shall be collected in a Department-level policy and procedure manual, and unit-wide policies and procedures (or standard operating procedures) shall be collected in unit-level policy and procedure manuals. EHPD shall develop and implement policy and procedure manuals that include the following EHPD functions:
a) Field operations, including patrol, supervision task forces, and special operations; b) Internal investigations, including case and records management, administrative investigations, confidential investigations, parallel criminal and administrative investigations, audits, and officer drug testing;
24

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 26 of 130

c) Use of force reporting, reviews, and investigations, including both Supervisor and IAO force investigations and reviews; and in-custody death reviews;
d) Criminal investigations; and e) Field and in-service training.

These manuals shall incorporate and otherwise be consistent with the requirements of this

Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

These policies and procedures are included in the manual.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The completed policies and procedures manual.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps - None

15. EHPD shall expressly prohibit all forms of retaliation, whether subtle or direct, including

discouragement, intimidation, coercion, or adverse action, against any person, civilian or officer,

who reports misconduct, makes a misconduct complaint, or cooperates with an investigation of

misconduct. The default penalty for retaliation shall be termination.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Settlement Agreement paragraph will continue to be tracked by the JCE.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 201.3 and 208.2 JCE community and police officer interviews (anonymous and nonanonymous) JCE review of all citizen complaints and use of force reports during site visits JCE attendance at community meetings and interactions with community during site-visits and via email and telephonic communication

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps Continue to review all complaints and misconduct allegations.

16. EHPD shall develop a policy governing its obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83

(1963), and its progeny. As part of this policy, EHPD shall track and maintain records of all

officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding,

Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make these records available to

prosecutors.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this

Settlement Agreement paragraph will continue to be tracked by the JCE.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 201.3 and 214.2

25

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 27 of 130

SITE VISIT

Question/Next Steps Review all relevant cases; None so far.

17. EHPD shall submit all new and revised policies, procedures, or manuals related to this Agreement to the JCE and USDOJ for review and comment prior to publication and implementation within 270 days of the Effective Date. If the JCE or USDOJ object that the proposed new or revised policy, procedure, or manual does not incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, or is inconsistent with this Agreement or the law, it shall note this objection in writing to all Parties within 15 business days of the receipt of the policy from EHPD. If neither the JCE nor USDOJ object to the new or revised policy, procedure, or manual, EHPD agrees to implement it within 30 days of it being provided to USDOJ and the JCE.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
This requirement continues to be monitored by the JCE. None EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual on the EHPD website. Questions/Next Steps None

18. EHPD shall have 15 days to resolve any objections to the new or revised policies, procedures, and manuals implementing the specified provisions. If, after this 15-day period has run, USDOJ maintains its objection, then the JCE shall have an additional 15 days to resolve the objection. If either party disagrees with the JCE’s resolution of the objection, either Party may ask the Court to resolve the matter. The JCE shall determine whether in some instances an additional amount of time is necessary to ensure full and proper review of policies. Factors to consider in making this determination include: 1) complexity of the policy; 2) extent of disagreement regarding policy; 3) number of policies provided simultaneously; and 4) extraordinary circumstances delaying review by USDOJ or the JCE. In determining whether these factors warrant additional time for review, the JCE shall fully consider the importance of prompt implementation of policies, and shall allow additional time for policy review only where it is clear that additional time is necessary to ensure full and proper review. Any extension to the above timelines by the JCE shall also toll EHPD’s deadline for policy completion.

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion

The 15-day requirement was never invoked.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps None

19. EHPD shall apply policies uniformly and hold officers accountable for complying with EHPD policy and procedure.

26

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 28 of 130

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Settlement Agreement paragraph will continue to be tracked by the JCE. None During quarterly JCE site visits, the JCE reviewed all internal affairs cases and supervisory review reports and found that policies were applied uniformly and officers held accountable when called for. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to monitor on future quarterly site visits and via email/telephonic communication.

20. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall formalize a common template to use for all

EHPD policies and General Orders. The template shall include a method for updates and revisions

that permits all Parties to keep track of former versions of policies and General Orders while

clearly labeling currently operative policies and General Orders. All EHPD policies and General

Orders shall be made to conform to this template.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 2/19/13 deadline

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

EHPD delivered the template by the deadline to the JCE; The template is posted on the EHPD Website. A second and revised common template was implemented in early 2014 that is more ‘user-friendly’ for all policies and continues to be used. The newer template continues to be used and works well with current, revised and new policies. Questions/Next Steps None

21. Within 365 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall make all new and revised EHPD policies

freely available for public review online, unless there is a reasonable basis for maintaining a

specific policy or procedure confidential or unless an exemption from disclosure is allowed under

State or Federal Freedom of Information law or any other applicable law. All new and revised

policies shall be displayed on the EHPD website which shall also be available through a link on

the Town website.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The online requirement was completed by the 12/21/13 deadline.

Recommendations The JCE recommended that the community have easy access to review the policies in a neutral location in early 2014, such as at the Hagaman Public Library per Settlement Agreement Paragraph 184.

Evidentiary Basis The JCE confirmed that the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual is available online on the EHPD website, at Town Hall, Police HQ and at the

27

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 29 of 130

SITE VISIT

Hagaman Public Library. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to confirm/monitor and ensure that an updated and current Policies and Procedures Manual is available in hard copy at the Hagaman Public Library.

22. EHPD shall review and revise its Code of Conduct within 180 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter, to:

a) describe with specificity permitted and prohibited officer conduct;

b) be consistent with the requirements of professional police practice and this

Agreement; and

c) have an absolute requirement of officer honesty and make termination the default

penalty for dishonesty.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day deadline of June 19, 2013 and continues to be reviewed annually. The original Code of Conduct policy was rescinded and replaced by a rewritten and updated version.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE and USDOJ received and reviewed and the East Haven Board of Commissioners approved the most recent revised EHPD Code of Conduct Policy 201.3 Questions/Next Steps None

23. EHPD shall submit proposed revisions to its Code of Conduct to the JCE and DOJ for review

at least 60 days before the implementation of any revision. The dispute resolution process and

associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 shall apply to DOJ and the JCE's review

of any new or revised Code of Conduct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The original Code of Conduct has been revised twice and approved twice by the JCE and USDOJ. It was included in the newest version of the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

Recommendations The JCE confirmed that training and subsequent implementation on the new Code of Conduct occurred in 2014. The JCE will continue to monitor.
Evidentiary Basis Policy 201.3 completed and enacted on September 1, 2014.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps None

28

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 30 of 130

B. Training on Revised Policies, Procedures and Practices

24. EHPD shall ensure each officer and employee attends 2 – 4 hour training on the content of this

Agreement and the responsibilities of each officer and employee pursuant to it.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Within 60 days of the Effective Date; February 19, 2013.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

EHPD provided documentation that this training was provided to all sworn and civilian department members by the 60-day mark. Training Roster Questions/Next Steps None

25. Within 30 days after issuing a policy or procedure pursuant to this Agreement, EHPD shall

ensure that all relevant EHPD personnel have received, read, and understand their responsibilities

pursuant to the policy or procedure, including the requirement that each officer or employee report

violations of policy; that supervisors of all ranks shall be held accountable for identifying and

responding to policy or procedure violations by personnel under their command; and that

personnel will be held accountable for policy and procedure violations. EHPD shall document

that each relevant EHPD officer or other employee has received, read, and sufficiently understands

the policy. Training beyond roll-call or similar training will be necessary for many new policies to

ensure officers understand and can perform their duties pursuant to the policy.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

All training on new and revised policies and procedures has been completed in 2014. In addition for 2015, EHPD informed the JCE that all sworn members have received or are in the process of receiving a minimum of 32 hours of annual in-service training that includes courses in bias-free policing, search and seizure, civil liability, and use of force by December 31, 2015. They said that most courses are also conducted to have the dual role of meeting the certification requirements of all police officers, as established by the Connecticut Police Officers Standards and Training Council (CTPOST).

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The EHPD provided the JCE and USDOJ with a list of attendees, their associated job titles and the trainings they attended relevant to the new and revised policies and procedures. The JCE and USDOJ reviewed training materials and the training list with associated attendees. EHPD provided the JCE with the 2015 training rosters and schedules. Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review training rosters and training curriculum for information noted above.

29

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 31 of 130

26. EHPD shall ensure delivery of the one-time and recurrent in-service training requirements set

out throughout this Agreement. As set out herein, EHPD shall provide a minimum of 32 hours of

in-service training each year to each officer, in addition to any specialized training for officers in

certain units, supervisors, etc., and in addition to the one-time training required by this Agreement.

Training in related areas may be delivered together. (For example, aspects of training in effective

community engagement and bias-free policing may be incorporated into stop, search, and arrest

training). The in-service training shall not include any firearms training required by the state. The

frequency and subject areas for initial one-time and recurrent in-service training are set out in the

sections below; however, it is anticipated that the frequency and subject areas for in-service

training in the future will be determined by the training plan this Settlement Agreement requires

EHPD to develop.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD is up-to-date and has completed all of the training required by the Settlement Agreement. They have developed a 2014-2016 training plan that all Parties have reviewed.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to track all training and review curricula and rosters.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

An update to the EHPD 2014 Training Division Annual Report was completed for 2014 and presented to the JCE in January 2015. Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits and discuss future training goals with Deputy Chief Lennon and Training Supervisor Lt Tracy.

27. EHPD shall provide mandatory supervisory, leadership, and command accountability training, tailored to each level of supervision and command, of 24 – 40 hours. All EHPD supervisors shall receive supervisory training prior to assuming supervisory responsibilities or serving as an acting supervisor, and shall receive no fewer than 40 hours of supervisory in-service training annually thereafter.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

It is anticipated that all EHPD supervisors will receive and complete the required number of annual hours of training within the next six months. For future training, the EHPD should continue to send the JCE and USDOJ all supervisory, leadership and command accountability training curricula and related materials. All supervisory training curricula were reviewed by the JCE. Rosters Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits. JCE team members will continue to forward EHPD information about new supervisory training classes that are being piloted in other jurisdictions.

30

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 32 of 130

28. The supervisory training program shall include instruction in the following topics:

a) techniques for effectively guiding and directing officers and promoting effective and

ethical police practices;

b) de-escalating conflict;

c) evaluation of written reports;

d) reviewing and investigating officer uses of force;

e) responding to and investigating allegations of officer misconduct;

f) risk assessment and risk management;

g) evaluating officer performance;

h) appropriate disciplinary sanctions and non-disciplinary corrective action; and

i) using the Risk Management System to facilitate close and effective supervision.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

These required topic areas were included in the training materials reviewed and approved by the JCE and USDOJ.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Supervisory training curricula 2013 (from Institute of Police Technology and Mgt.) 2014 EHPD Training Division Annual Report. 2015 Training Schedule and Roster. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to review training materials to ensure documentation is consistent across training.

29. EHPD shall submit training curricula and lesson plans, revised pursuant to this Agreement, to the JCE and DOJ for review and comment at least 45 days prior to the scheduled date of training delivery. The JCE shall provide the Parties with written comments regarding the training. The JCE and DOJ shall review all EHPD training curricula and lesson plans promulgated pursuant to this Agreement to determine whether they are consistent with and incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices. The dispute resolution process and associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 of this Agreement shall apply to DOJ and the JCE’s review of training curricula and lesson plans.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

This review and comment requirement was modified from 90 days to 45 days and approved by the court. EHPD has been providing the JCE and the DOJ with timely curricula and lesson plans for their review and approval None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

All training curricula and/or relevant training materials have been reviewed within the proper time frame throughout this reporting period Questions/Next Step JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits.

31

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 33 of 130

30. Unless otherwise noted, the training required pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered

within 365 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter. Within 180 days of the Effective

Date, EHPD shall set out a schedule for delivering all training required by this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Required training was delivered on time within the 365 days of the Settlement Agreement Effective Date. A training plan/schedule was also delivered by the 180-day mark. A 2014 Training Division Annual Report was also prepared/delivered in January 2015.

Recommendations None.

Evidentiary Basis EHPD provided documentation that all training was delivered within the 365-

day mark and continues to provide future training schedules to the JCE.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to review annual training plans including new and refresher courses

31. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement documented and

approved testing policies and procedures regarding training to ensure that all testing is valid,

reliable, fair, and legally defensible. Both knowledge-based and performance-based tests shall be

designed, developed, administered, and scored according to established professional standards of

practice. Testing policies and procedures shall include detailed test security measures. All tests

shall be job-related, testing knowledge and skills required for successful job performance.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 270-day mark; The JCE conducted one-on-one interviews with attendees. Additional training on new and/or revised policies issued throughout the first six months of 2015 has occurred. The JCE attended training sessions in June 2015 to ensure courses are being taught incorporating best practices for adult learning and retention..

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 106.2 Training curricula and tests. Training rosters. Training schedule for 2015. Training sessions.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to attend training sessions on future site-visits to ensure courses are being taught incorporating best practices for adult learning and retention. The JCE will also continue to conduct one-on-one interviews with attendees.

32

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 34 of 130

V. BIAS-FREE POLICING

32. EHPD shall deliver police services that are equitable, respectful, and free of unlawful bias, in a

manner that promotes broad community engagement and confidence in the Department. In

conducting its activities, EHPD shall ensure that members of the public receive equal protection of

the law, without bias based on demographic category, and in accordance with the rights, privileges,

or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. To achieve

these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. (Overview Paragraph)

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the Bias-Free Policing Section.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

A. Bias- Free Policing

33. EHPD shall provide all officers with 4 hours of comprehensive and interdisciplinary training on bias-free policing within 180 days of the Effective Date, and 2 – 4 hours annually thereafter, based on developments in Connecticut or federal law and EHPD policy. Such training shall emphasize that discriminatory policing, in the form of either selective enforcement or nonenforcement of the law, including the selecting or rejecting of particular policing tactics or strategies, is prohibited by policy and will subject officers to discipline. This training shall address:
a) methods and strategies for more effective policing that relies upon non-
discriminatory factors; b) police and community perspectives related to discriminatory policing; c) constitutional and other legal requirements related to equal protection and unlawful
discrimination, including the requirements of this Agreement; d) the protection of civil rights as a central part of the police mission and as essential
to effective policing; e) the existence and impact of arbitrary classifications, stereotyping, and implicit bias;

f) instruction in the data collection protocols required by this Agreement;

g) identification of key decision points where prohibited discrimination can take effect

at both the incident and strategic-planning levels; and

h) methods, strategies, and techniques to reduce misunderstanding, conflict, and

complaints due to perceived bias or discrimination, including problem-oriented policing strategies.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The training included bias-free policing practices and stop, search and arrest procedures. The lesson plans, which reflect the Settlement Agreement’s requirements, were approved by the JCE.

33

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 35 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Training test results for attendees on file at the EHPD; Discussion with EHPD Compliance Coordinator. The JCE audited in-service training at EHPD Headquarters during the month of June 2015. Questions/Next Steps None

B. Ensuring Bias-Free Policing

34. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of demographic category in EHPD police practices. This policy shall have the following elements:
a) EHPD’s policy on bias-free policing shall prohibit officers from using demographic

category (to any

extent or degree) in conducting stops or detentions, or activities following stops or

detentions, except when engaging in appropriate suspect-specific activity to identify a

particular person or persons.

b) EHPD shall prohibit officer use of proxies for demographic category, including

language ability, geographic location, or manner of dress.

c) When officers are seeking one or more specific persons who have been identified or

described by their demographic category, or any proxy thereto, officers may rely on these

descriptions only when combined with other appropriate identifying factors, and may not give

exclusive attention or undue weight to demographic category.

d) Data collection, as set forth in Paragraphs 64(c) and 65 of this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

This is the bias-free policing policy # 203.2, which has had one revision. Bias-Free policing training occurred in 2013 and 2014 as noted in paragraph 33 prior to the policy being completely approved and implemented. Also, inservice training on Bias-Free policing has been conducted at EHPD Headquarter during 2015 and the JCE audited some of these classes in June 2015. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 203.2 in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Additional review of training on this policy was included in the policies and procedures manual training in 2014. Questions/Next Steps The JCE continues to use a checklist of items to review at quarterly on-site meetings as well as through ongoing telephonic and email communication. These items include, but are not limited to: EIS, Technology Review, Supervisor Reports, Random Audit or Review of ECW’s (Tasers), Citizen Complaints, Use of Force Reports, Arrest Reports, Stop Data from State,

34

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 36 of 130

Body Cameras, Audit/Review, Search Warrant Applications, Community and Language Line Data and Detainee Reports. Information and data for “Ensuring Bias-Free Policing” will be gathered and analyzed from the checklist materials. The JCE will ensure that the bias-free policy #203.2 is kept up to date by EHPD.

35. EHPD shall conduct quarterly analysis, as well as analysis on a cumulative basis, consistent with the methodology employed by the JCE, of its traffic enforcement activities to ensure officer, squad, and Department compliance with the bias-free policy.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
This requirement was first completed at the 180-mark. Some quarterly reports were delayed due to a since-fixed software problem with a new CAD-based program that automatically tracks and analyzes these data. JCE will continue to work with EHPD to obtain quarterly reports in a timely manner. EHPD obtained additional software to help with demographic and geographic analysis. However, due to the small size of the town, the demographics data was not significant, and only geographic data was obtained. Analysis of geographic stop data conducted by EHPD this reporting period shows that the vast majority of stops occurred within the major roads in East Haven, regardless of who was stopped or the reason. First report submitted at the 180-mark. Second report submitted on January 13, 2014. Third report submitted April 7, 2014. Stop data reviewed in June 2014 Fourth report submitted July 1, 2014. The fifth report was submitted by EHPD on January 23, 2015. The sixth report was submitted on July 8, 2015. A review of the stop data collected and analyzed indicates that traffic stops from this reporting period are generally consistent with the racial and ethnic make-up of the population in East Haven. The JCE conducted an analysis of the stop data for Hispanics and concluded that stops by EHPD do not show bias towards Hispanics. Please see further details of this analysis in the section for Stops, Searches, and Seizures above. Questions/Next Steps Need to continue getting more detail about data set to ensure that traffic enforcement sanctions are appropriate.

36. EHPD shall develop a formalized procedure for officers to notify arrested foreign nationals of their right to contact their consulate, or to contact the appropriate consular official directly.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Training on this new policy was completed in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 304.2

Roster.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

35

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 37 of 130

The JCE continues to ask if any foreign nationals have been arrested since previous site visit. No instances have occurred during the first 30 months of the Settlement Agreement.

37. EHPD shall refer any complaint plausibly implicating the bias-free policy to the IAO and to the JCE. EHPD shall treat any violation of the bias-free policy as a serious violation. Officers who engage in discriminatory policing will be subjected to discipline, and, where appropriate, possible criminal prosecution.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were no complaints plausibly implicating the bias-free policy during the first six months of 2015.

Recommendations Continue to keep the JCE and USDOJ apprised of any complaints or violations in a timely manner.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Chief’s immediate notification to JCE and DOJ. Regular and ongoing case briefings. Comprehensive internal affairs investigation and report. The JCE will continue to review IAO files.

38. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall incorporate concrete requirements regarding bias-free policing and equal protection into its hiring, promotion, and performance assessment processes, including giving significant weight to an individual’s documented history of bias-free policing, as well as using interviews and other methods to assess the individual’s ability and willingness to effectively practice bias-free policing. EHPD’s hiring plan shall also include steps to encourage qualified minority and other candidates who have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities to apply for positions in EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to work with EHPD to review current hiring, promotion and performance processes.

Evidentiary Basis Reviewed civil service testing process and outcomes. One of the new recruits speaks Spanish.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps Continue to monitor

36

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 38 of 130

C. Language Assistance

39. EHPD shall ensure effective communication with and provide timely and meaningful access to police services to all members of the community, regardless of their national origin or limited ability to speak, read, write, or understand English. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:

a) develop and implement a comprehensive language assistance plan and policy that

complies, at a minimum, with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, (42 U.S.C. §

2000d et seq.) and other applicable law, and comports with professional policing practices;

b) ensure that all EHPD personnel take reasonable steps to provide timely, meaningful

language assistance services to LEP individuals they encounter and whenever an LEP individual

requests language assistance services;

c) identify and assess demographic data, specifically the number of LEP individuals

within its jurisdiction and the number of LEP victims and witnesses who seek EHPD

services;

d) use collected demographic and service data to develop and meet specific hiring

goals for bilingual staff;

e) regularly assess the proficiency and qualifications of bilingual staff to become a

EHPD Authorized Interpreter (“EHPDAI”);

f) ensure that 911 call-takers identify an EHPDAI to respond to an incident involving

an LEP individual. If no EHPDAI is available, the personnel shall contact a telephonic

interpretation service provider. The call-taker shall note in information to the radio dispatch that

the 911 caller is an LEP individual and indicate the language;

g) develop protocols for interpretation for interrogations and interviews of LEP

individuals, including requiring and ensuring the use of a qualified interpreter for the taking of any

formal statement that could adversely affect a suspect or witness’ legal rights;

h) develop and implement a process for taking, responding to and tracking civilian

complaints and resolutions of complaints filed by LEP individuals;

i) implement a process for recruitment of qualified bilingual personnel to meet

demonstrated service needs. As part of this process, EHPD shall establish

significant and sustained relationships with local and state-wide institutions and

community organizations that can serve as the source of qualified bilingual applicants and

facilitate outreach to such advocates; and

j) implement effective incentives for bilingual employees to become EHPDAIs, such

as pay differentials and consideration in performance evaluations, assignments, and promotions.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark and EHPD remains in compliance through the 30-month mark. The plan is described in detail in Policy and Procedure 301.2 which is a thorough and complete document mandating: 1) the appointment of the Language Assistance Coordinator, 2) procedures for notifying the public about the EHPD’s language services, 3) hiring goals for bilingual staff at the EHPD, and 4) the qualifications for members of the Department authorized to act as EHPD interpreters (EHPDAI). It also establishes protocols for hiring contract interpreters to

37

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 39 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

provide interpretation and translation service as necessary, currently through Language Line Solutions, but also from other vendors should Language Line Solutions be no longer available. The policy prescribes one hour of training for all EHPD personnel in how to assist LEP individuals in conducting their business with the Department. Procedures for conducting interrogations and interviews of LEP individuals, as well as taking complaints against the Department from, and reporting dispositions of complaint investigations to, LEP individuals are also established by the policy. Language Assistance Coordinator, Lt. David Emerman, is a fluent Spanish speaker, who also serves as the Community Liaison Officer, required by Agreement Paragraph 181. JCE will continue to monitor bilingual staff hiring and processes and procedures for assisting LEP individual conducting business with the EHPD. Language Assistance Plan. Hiring Language Assistance Coordinator. Policy 301.2 Interviews with Lt. Emerman. Lt. Emerman 30-month Report: For first six months of 2015 The Language Line received 9 calls of which 5 requested assistance for Spanish, 3 (Same caller/incident) were for Turkish interpretation services and 1 was for Nepali. CAD/RMS Calls EHPD received 21 requests for language assistance from January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, of which 18 calls were for Spanish. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue meeting/communicating with EHPD Language Access Coordinator/Community Liaison Officer Lt. Emerman regarding his ongoing interactions in the community. Another Spanish-speaking EHPD officer has been assigned to Lt. Emerman for training as Liaison to the community.

40. EHPD shall translate the language assistance plan and policy into Spanish and other languages

as appropriate, and post the English and translated versions in a public area of the police

department building, as well as online, and in any other locations throughout the Town where

individuals go to seek police assistance. EHPD shall distribute the language assistance plan and

policy to a variety of community organizations serving LEP communities encountered by EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations Continue to provide the JCE with a list of community organizations who have

received the plan.

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan.

Policy 301.2

Language Assistance Plan and policy has been translated into Spanish and is

available at the Hagaman Library, Town Hall and at EHPD.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

Continue to ensure this and other needed police materials are available, at a

minimum in Spanish, as Spanish is the primary second language utilized by

citizens of East Haven.

38

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 40 of 130

41. 44 41. EHPD shall distribute its LEP plan and policy to all staff and police personnel, and, within

180 days of the Effective Date provide a minimum of one hour of training to all personnel on

providing language assistance services to LEP individuals. This training shall include:

a) EHPD’s LEP plan and policies, and the requirements of Title VI and this

Agreement;

b) how to access EHPD-authorized, telephonic and in-person interpreters;

c) how to work with interpreters in the field;

d) cultural diversity and language barrier policing; and

e) basic command Spanish for officers assigned to patrol areas with significant LEP

populations.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan and Training Report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

None

42. Within 60 days of Effective Date, the Town shall designate a language access coordinator who

shall coordinate and ensure EHPD’s compliance with its language assistance plan.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 60-day mark.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Lt. Emerman assigned

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE continues to discuss outreach efforts with Lt. Emerman and ensure a

designated language access coordinator succession is in place if staffing

changes/promotions occur. Lt. Emerman reported to the JCE that another

Spanish-speaking EHPD officer has been assigned to Lt. Emerman for

training as Liaison to the community and as a future successor.

43. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a process of

consultation with representatives of the LEP community to develop and at least annually review:

implementation of the language assistance plan, including areas of possible collaboration to ensure

its effectiveness; identification of additional languages that would be appropriate for translation of

materials; accuracy and quality of EHPD language assistance services; and concerns, ideas, and

strategies for ensuring language access.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

According to EHPD, this requirement was completed by the 60-day mark.

Recommendations The JCE recommends that the EHPD report on their annual review of the

Language Access Plan. A Spanish-speaking EHPD officer has been assigned

to Lt. Emerman for training as successor for the community Liaison.

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan (LAP), which is in place.

39

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 41 of 130

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to work with Lt. Emerman on reviewing the Language Assistance Plan and ensure the succession plan is still in place.

VI. STOPS, SEARCHES, AND ARRESTS


44. EHPD shall ensure that all EHPD investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are conducted in

accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or

laws of the United States. EHPD shall ensure that investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are

part of an effective overall crime prevention strategy; are consistent with community priorities for

enforcement; and are carried out even-handedly. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall

implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the

stops, searches, and arrest section. The Town of East Haven will reach

compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all

the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

A. Investigatory Stops and Detentions

45. EHPD officers shall conduct investigatory stops or detentions only where the officer has

reasonable suspicion that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in the commission of a

crime.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, searches and arrests on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised and re-approved in 2014. Additional revisions were

made in 2015. The JCE started randomly sampling supervisor reports and

incidents and arrest reports during site visits in January, April, and June

2015. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. JCE

conducted a random sampling of supervisor and incident reports online using

an EHPD computer during site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE will continue to sample officer and supervisor reports

46. EHPD officers shall not use “canned” or conclusory language in any reports documenting investigatory stops, detentions and searches. Articulation of reasonable suspicion and probable cause shall be specific and clear.

40

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 42 of 130

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013 and the policies and procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. Additional revisions were made in 2015. The JCE continued randomly sampling supervisor reports and incidents and arrest reports during site visits in January, April, and June 2015. There were no cases of “canned” or conclusory language readily detectable and seemed to have been completed according to policy in all cases reviewed. EHPD Supervisors continue to review all arrests, searches, detentions, and stops Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to sample officers’ reports and sample citizen complaints.

47. EHPD officers shall not use or rely on information known to be materially false or incorrect in

effectuating an investigatory stop or detention.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013 and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. Additional revisions were made

in 2015. The JCE randomly sampled supervisor reports and incidents and

arrest reports during site visits in January, April and June 2015. The EHPD

performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE will continue randomly sampling supervisor/incident and arrest

reports.

48. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category as a factor, to any extent or degree, in

establishing reasonable suspicion or probable cause, except as part of an actual and credible

description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. Additional revisions were made

in 2015. The JCE randomly sampled supervisor reports and incidents and

arrest reports during site visits in January, April and June 2015. The EHPD

performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

41

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 43 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue randomly sampling supervisor/incident and arrest reports.

B. Searches

49. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category in exercising discretion to conduct a

warrantless search or to seek a search warrant, except as part of an actual and credible description

of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled

supervisor reports, search warrant applications, incident and arrest reports and

reviewed all search warrants during site visits in January, April and June

2015. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed and no

cases appeared to have used demographic category in conducting warrantless

searches or in seeking search warrants.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

Random review of arrest reports and stop data and review of all search

warrants on January, April and June 2015 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review arrest reports, stop data and search warrants.

50. Where an officer seeks consent for a search, the officer shall affirmatively inform the subject

of his or her right to refuse and to revoke consent at any time, articulate and document the

independent legal justification for the search, and document the subject’s consent on a written

form that explains these rights.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled

supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports and reviewing all search

warrants during site visits in 2015. The EHPD performed according to policy

in all cases reviewed.

On December 19, 2014, a modification request was made to and approved by the court to remove the requirement that such consent be in writing if it is otherwise captured on the body cameras. The Parties submitted that the video
42

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 44 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

is better evidence of the consent, and the written requirement superfluous. None Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants on January, April and June 2015 site visits. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants. The JCE will seek to review any videotaped consent to search during future site visits.

51. EHPD shall ensure that the consent to search form includes separate signature lines for

civilians to affirm that they understand they have a right to refuse, and for officers to certify that

they have read and explained the right to refuse to the civilian

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports, and reviewing all

search warrants during site visits in January, April and June 2015. The EHPD

performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports and stop data and review of all search warrants on

January, April and June site visits. The JCE has reviewed the search consent

form and it conforms to requirements of Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review reports, forms and documentation related to

searches.

52. An affidavit or sworn declaration supporting an application for a search warrant shall provide

an accurate, complete, and clear description of the offense, the place or thing to be searched, scope

of the search, and time and method of the search.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled

supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports and reviewed all search

warrants during site visits in January, April and June 2015. The EHPD

performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

43

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 45 of 130

SITE VISIT

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports and stop data and all search warrant applications and affidavits on January, April and June 2015 site visits. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all search warrant affidavits/applications.

53. A supervisor shall review each request for a search or arrest warrant, including each affidavit

or declaration before it is filed by an officer in support of a warrant application, for

appropriateness, legality, and conformance with EHPD policy and this Agreement. The supervisor

shall assess the information contained in the warrant application and supporting documents for

authenticity, including an examination for “canned” or conclusory language, inconsistent

information, and lack of articulation of a legal basis for the warrant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled

supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports and reviewed all search

warrants during site visits in January, April and June 2015.The EHPD

performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports, stop data and all search warrant applications and

affidavits on January, April and June 2015 site visits. JCE also reviewed all

search warrants and affidavits issued during the period of January 1, 2015

through June 30, 2015, and the JCE believes that all warrants and affidavits

obtained and served met standard police practice, no canned or conclusory

language was detected, and seemed to meet constitutional requirements. All

affidavits and search warrants were signed off by a supervisor.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review supervisor reports and all search warrant

applications.

54. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those

warrant applications that are legally unsupported, are in violation of EHPD policy or this

Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy,

tactics, or training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or

deficiencies, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer,

and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. The quality and accuracy

of search warrants and supportive affidavits or declarations shall be taken into account in officer

performance evaluations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

44

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 46 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports, and reviewed all search warrants and affidavits during site visits in January, April and June 2015. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. There were no unsupported warrant applications reported to the JCE None Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of all arrest reports and stop data and review of all search warrants during January, April and June site visits. 12 were applied for and granted during the first six months of 2015. The supervisors and JCE found no unsupported warrant applications, or in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue review supervisory reports and search warrant applications

55. A supervisor shall review the operational plan for the execution of a search warrant and,

absent exceptional circumstances, shall be present for execution of the search warrant. A

supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her

presence. Once executed, a supervisor shall review the execution of the search warrant.

Supervisors shall memorialize their reviews in writing within 24 hours of the execution of a search

warrant. The quality of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s

performance evaluations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled supervisor reports, incident and arrest reports, and reviewed all search warrants and affidavits during site visits in January, April and June 2015. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

On December 19, 2014, the Parties requested and the Court approved a modification to this paragraph to modify the operational plan requirements for executing search warrants to eliminate the requirement when the warrant is for medical records (i.e. Emergency Room records for DUI) or telephone/internet records. These situations do not require intrusion into someone's premises, etc. and again may not have been intended when the Settlement Agreement was negotiated. None
Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data on January, April and June 2015 site visits. 12 warrants were applied for and granted during the first six months of 2015.

45

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 47 of 130

SITE VISIT

All twelve were reviewed by the JCE. A supervisor was present at each search and reviews were documented properly. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review supervisory reports and search warrants and search warrant applications.

56. EHPD shall maintain centrally a log listing each search warrant, the case file where a copy of

such warrant is maintained, the officer who applied for, and each supervisor who reviewed the

application for a search warrant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled supervisor reports, incident and arrest reports, and reviewed all search warrants during site visits in January, April and June 2015. The JCE reviewed all 12 search warrants and applications issued this period. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. Due to the low number, in lieu of a log, the EHPD kept a copy of each one in a separate folder readily accessible for review. Should the volume increase, the EHPD told the JCE, they will implement a log.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data on January, April and June 2015 site visits. The JCE then reviewed all 12 search warrant folders and found them order.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all search warrants and affidavits.

C. Arrests

57. EHPD officers shall only arrest an individual where the officer has probable cause. In

effectuating an arrest, EHPD officers shall not rely on information known to be materially false or

incorrect. Officers may not consider demographic category in effecting an arrest, except as part of

an actual and credible description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014 and for the remainder of the year. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest

46

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 48 of 130

SITE VISIT

procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on January, April and, June 2015 site visits revealed no instances where officers relied on materially false or incorrect information. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest reports.

58. An officer shall immediately notify a supervisor when effectuating: a felony arrest; an arrest

where the officer used force; an arrest for obstructing or resisting an officer; any arrest for the

violation of interfering with an officer; any arrest for violation of either breach of the peace in the

second degree or disorderly conduct in which the violative conduct is (a) a reaction to police

presence or officer conduct, or (b) targeted towards a police officer; or a custodial arrest for a

vehicle infraction, and the supervisor shall, absent exceptional circumstances, immediately

respond to the scene. A supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances

preventing his or her presence.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports, supervisor reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014 and for the remainder of the year. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. All use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on January, April and June 2015 site visits revealed proper notification of supervisors who also responded to the scene.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports to look for notifications of supervisors for such arrests

59. The responding supervisor shall approve or disapprove the officer’s arrest recommendation,

based on the existence of justifiable probable cause and EHPD policy. The supervisor shall take

appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in the officer’s arrest recommendation,

including releasing the subject, recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved

officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports and supervisory reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014 and for the remainder of the year. The EHPD

47

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 49 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. None
Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on January, April and June 2015 site visits. No deficiencies or violations were detected. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE did not find any violations or deficiencies, but will continue to monitor closely. The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

60. At the time of presentment at EHPD headquarters, a watch commander or supervisor shall

visually inspect each detainee or arrestee for injury, interview the detainee or arrestee for

complaints of pain, and ensure that the detainee or arrestee receives medical attention from an

appropriate medical provider, as necessary. The watch commander or supervisor shall document

the results of the visual inspection in writing.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest and supervisory reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014 and for the remainder of 2014 and 2015. The JCE randomly inspected detainee questionnaires and found that supervisors and commanders reviewed them per EHPD policy. The EHPD performed according to policy in the vast majority of cases reviewed. There were some that had “yes” answers to questions that required further follow-up per EHPD policy. All were concerning minor issues, however, the JCE notified EHPD to correct situation.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on January, April and June 2015 site visits. The JCE randomly inspected detainee questionnaires and found that supervisors and commanders reviewed them per EHPD policy. The EHPD performed according to policy in the vast majority of cases reviewed. There were some that had “yes” answers to questions that required further follow-up per EHPD policy. All were concerning minor issues, however, the JCE notified EHPD to correct situation. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE found some minor deficiencies and will continue to monitor closely. JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest, supervisory and visual inspection reports (Detainee reports).

48

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 50 of 130

61. EHPD officers shall complete all arrest reports before the end of shift. EHPD field

supervisors shall review each arrest report of officers under their command and shall memorialize

their review in writing within 12 hours of the arrest, absent exceptional circumstances.

Supervisors shall review reports and forms for “canned” or conclusory language, inconsistent

information, lack of articulation of the legal basis for the action, or other indicia that the

information in the reports or forms is not authentic or correct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on January, April and June 2015 site visits.

On December 19, 2014, a modification to this paragraph was approved by the Court to modify the requirement to complete all arrest reports before the end of the shift to “custodial arrests.” Since a non-custodial motor vehicle summons is considered an arrest, completing the reports before the end of the shift is creating a significant burden which the Parties believe was not intended. The Parties would continue the requirement for all custodial arrests, but requested additional time for the motor vehicle summons.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of random sample of arrest reports on January, April and June 2015 site visits revealed they were completed and reviewed in a timely manner

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

62. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in making arrests, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken, to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each violation or deficiency is noted in the officer’s performance evaluations. The quality of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s own performance evaluations. EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to conduct reviews of adequate and consistent quality.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on January, April and June 2015 site visits. There were no arrests unsupported by probable cause, or in violation

49

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 51 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

of EHPD policy or this Agreement. None
Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. The JCE randomly reviewed arrest reports and found that there were no arrests unsupported by probable cause, or in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

63. A command-level official shall review, in writing, all supervisory reviews related to arrests

that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that

indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The

commander’s review shall be completed within seven days of receiving the document reporting the

event. The commander shall evaluate the corrective action and recommendations in the

supervisor’s written report and ensure that all appropriate corrective action is taken, including

referring the incident to the IAO for investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on January, April and June 2015 site visits. There were no arrests unsupported by probable cause. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. All use of force reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on January, April and June 2015 site visits by the JCE found there were no arrests unsupported by probable cause, or in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

D. Stop and Search Data Collection and Review

64. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy on stops, searches and seizures. This policy shall have the following elements:
a) A requirement that prior to making traffic stops, officers notify dispatch about known information, including the number of occupants of the vehicle, the perceived race or ethnicity of the occupants, and a description of the basis for the stop;
b) A detailed description of the justification necessary for officers to make stops and arrests;

50

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 52 of 130

c) A requirement that all stops, searches, and seizures be documented in an Incident

Report that

records:

i. the officer’s name and badge number;

ii. date, time, and location of the stop;

iii. duration of the stop;

iv. the apparent race, color or ethnicity of the individual, based on the police

officer’s reasonable

observation and perception;

v. the suspected violation that led to the stop;

vi. whether any contraband or evidence was seized from any individual, and

nature of the

contraband or evidence;

vii. the post-stop action taken with regard to the violation (including a warning,

a citation, an arrest,

or a use of force); and

viii. whether any search was conducted, the kind of search conducted, the basis

for the search,

whether the search was consensual or non-consensual, and the outcome of the search.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Spector Training Network trained the EHPD on Policies 409.3 and 420.2 as required in Paragraph 78 of the Settlement Agreement, which included instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law, as well as First Amendment and related law.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3 Motor Vehicle Stops and Policy 420.2 Search and Seizure and other relevant policies in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual were reviewed and approved by the JCE and DOJ.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

65. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a system to collect data on all investigatory stops and searches, whether or not they result in an arrest or issuance of a citation. This system shall allow for analysis and searches and also shall be integrated into the EIS. EHPD’s stop and search data collection system shall be subject to the review of the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall require officers to document all required information

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE reviewed stop and search data collected/analyzed in the EHPD computer system within the 270 day mark and through the 30-month reporting period. The State of Connecticut categorization glitches were corrected just after the 365-day mark. However, obtaining more detail on Hispanic drivers has proved challenging. EHPD has provided additional helpful information to track geographic data, but not demographic data due to

51

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 53 of 130

Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

the small size of the town. Analysis of stops data revealed one EHPD officer who may have stopped Hispanics at a disproportionate rate. EHPD’s investigation of this officer, which included reviewing videotaped stops, revealed no bias by this rookie officer in conducting the stops. The JCE and the EHPD will continue to collaborate and monitor. The JCE will continue to work with the Parties on carefully reviewing this paragraph’s requirements and perhaps developing new methodologies to collect additional detailed data for this broad categorization of Hispanic drivers. The EHPD has obtained new software for colleting additional geographic and demographic information about investigatory stops and searches. However, there is no significant demographic data available due to the small size of the town. The on-site database and EHPD reports were reviewed. Random incidents involving Hispanic drivers were reviewed Questions/Next Steps: Continue to drill down into the stop data and incident reports.

66. Officers shall submit documentation of investigatory stops and detentions, and any searches resulting from or proximate to the stop or detention, including a complete and accurate inventory of all property or evidence seized, to their supervisors by the end of the shift in which the police action occurred. Absent exceptional circumstances, within 12 hours of receiving a report on an investigatory stop and detention or search, a supervisor shall review the report and shall document: (a) those investigatory stops and detentions that appear unsupported by reasonable suspicion, (b) those searches that appear to be without legal justification; (c) stops or searches in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or (d) stops or searches that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and property inventory procedures, and training on these policies and procedures was completed in February 2014. Implementation continued throughout 2014 and 2015. Supervisory reports should continue to be reviewed.

Evidentiary Basis

Supervisory Reports. There were no policy violations or unsupported stops, or stops without legal justification revealed. Individual interviews with officers and supervisors. As per EHPD all reports were submitted within a proper time frame.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor supervisory reports.

52

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 54 of 130

67. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address all violations or deficiencies in

investigatory stops or detention or executing a search, including recommending non-disciplinary

corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or

criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or

deficiency and the corrective action taken, if any, to identify officers needing repeated corrective

action. The supervisor shall ensure that each violation or deficiency is noted in the officer’s

performance evaluations. The quality and completeness of these supervisory reviews shall be

taken into account in the supervisor’s own performance evaluations. EHPD shall take appropriate

corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to conduct complete, thorough, and

accurate reviews of officers’ investigatory detentions and searches.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013 and training on these policies and procedures was completed in February 2014. Implementation continued throughout 2014 and 2015.

Recommendations Supervisory reports should continue to be reviewed.

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 215.1 Supervisory Reports. Interviews with officers and supervisors and reviews of EIS. No violations or deficiencies were found.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor supervisory reports.

68. EHPD shall develop a protocol for comprehensive analysis, on at least a quarterly basis, of the

stop and search data collected. This protocol shall be subject to the review of the Joint

Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall identify and incorporate appropriate benchmarks for

comparison.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

A report covering these data was completed for all quarters.

Recommendations Continue to review data and conduct individual interviews as needed.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Quarterly stop and search data report. Additional information provided by EHPD through email to JCE. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE is continuing to monitor quarterly reports. Continue conversation with EHPD.

69. On at least a semi-annual basis, EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall issue a

report summarizing the stop and search data collected, the analysis of that data, and the steps taken

to correct problems and build on successes. The report shall be publicly available.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Quarterly stat sheets and semi-annual reports were agreed upon by the Parties.

53

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 55 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to carefully review and analyze report data.
Reports delivered and reviewed. (quarterly and semi-annual) Conversations with EHPD Compliance Coordinator. Discussions on conference calls with Parties. Analysis of data conducted by JCE- see JCE’s Summary section in this report Questions/Next Steps: Go over quarterly data in detail with Compliance Coordinator; Request additional data/materials as needed.

Although the data is released in a table form that is made public every quarter, the JCE is continuing to closely monitor the stop and search data/report and work with EHPD to make sure the report adequately summarizes and analyzes the data. EHPD working to breakdown data further for more accurate analysis.

The EHPD has also been doing semi-annuals of the full report and it is available on their website. EHPD has submitted to the JCE a more detailed breakdown of this data. JCE has analyzed this data and has not detected any major issues. See analysis in Stops, Search, and Seizures section of this report. JCE will continue to request and monitor this data going forward.

70. EHPD shall ensure that all databases containing individual specific data comply fully with

federal and state privacy standards governing personally identifying information. EHPD shall

develop a process to restrict database access to authorized, identified users who are accessing the

information for a specific and identified purpose.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE confirmed that there are current privacy processes in place and

sufficient database access.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 JCE visit and review. Questions/Next Steps: None

E. First Amendment Right to Observe and Record Officer Conduct
71. EHPD shall ensure that onlookers or bystanders may witness, observe, record, and/or comment on officer conduct, including stops, detentions, searches, arrests, or uses of force in accordance with their rights, immunities, and privileges secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. Officers shall respect the right of civilians to observe, record, and/or verbally comment on or complain about the performance of police duties occurring in public, and EHPD shall ensure that officers understand that exercising this right serves important public purposes.
54

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 56 of 130

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Policy 204.2 was issued in November and December 2013. All Department members were trained on this policy by March 2014 and it was implemented throughout 2014 and 2015. None Policy 204.2 EIS Questions/Next Steps: None

72. Individuals observing stops, detentions, arrests and other incidents shall be permitted to remain in the proximity of the incident unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to move an individual, such as: an individual’s presence would jeopardize the safety of the officer, the suspect, or others in the vicinity; the individual violates the law; or the individual incites others to violate the law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

All Department members were trained on all policies in February 2014 and

new officers also received training in 2015.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.2 Training schedule and Roster provided to the JCE. On-site observation.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

73. Individuals shall be permitted to record police officer enforcement activities by camera, video recorder, cell phone recorder, or other means, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to deny permission.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This policy was issued in November 2013 and was fully implemented after training occurred in early 2014. Training continues as new officers join the Dept.

Recommendations The JCE has to rely on complaints received by the IA Officer and supervisors.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.2

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Protocols have been followed as far as the JCE has learned. There have been no complaints from the community or anyone else. The only case reported was that of an EHPD officer who self-reported to his supervisor that he was being recorded, but no other issues found.

55

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 57 of 130

74. Officers shall not threaten, intimidate, or otherwise discourage an individual from remaining in the proximity of or recording police officer enforcement activities.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no reports of officers intimidating or discouraging citizens

from recording them.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 On-site observation. There have been no complaints from the community or anyone else. The only case reported was that of an EHPD officer who selfreported to his supervisor that he was being recorded, but no other issues found. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to review police reports, complaints by citizens. There have been no complaints from the community or anyone else as reported to the JCE. The only case reported was that of an EHPD officer who selfreported to his supervisor that he was being recorded, but no other issues found.

75. Officers shall not detain, prolong the detention of, or arrest an individual for remaining in the proximity of, recording or verbally commenting on officer conduct directed at the individual or a third party, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis for the detention.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 On-site observation. Questions/Next Steps: None

76. Officers shall report to their supervisors whenever they believe they have been recorded by a

member of the public.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Supervisors know they need to monitor and report on this. One case was properly reported and documented in 2014. No cases have come up this reporting period. As of October 1, 2015, it will be illegal in CT for the police to interfere with any person recording or photographing them https://www.cga.ct.gov/2015/act/pa/pdf/2015PA-00004-R00HB-07103SS1PA.pdf

Recommendations None

56

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 58 of 130

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 Incident and Supervisory Report. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor reports and verify compliance of this paragraph with EHPD command staff.

77. Officers shall not seize or otherwise coerce production of recorded sounds or images, without

obtaining a warrant, or order an individual to destroy such recordings. Where an officer has a

reasonable belief that a bystander or witness has captured a recording of critical evidence related to

a felony, the officer may secure such evidence for no more than six hours while a legal subpoena,

search warrant, or other valid order is obtained.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Modified from three hours from the original Settlement Agreement under July 17, 2013 Order Modification, because three hours would not be long enough time to draft search warrant affidavit, review by a supervisor and prosecutor, and submit to judge.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.2 Incident and Supervisory Reports reviewed and no violations of this paragraph were detected.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to monitor reports to ensure it is being done.

F. Stop, Search and Arrest Training

78. EHPD shall provide all officers with comprehensive training on stops, searches and arrests, including the requirements of this Agreement, of no fewer than 8 hours within 180 days of the Effective Date and between 4 – 6 hours on an at least an annual basis thereafter. Such training shall be taught by a competent legal instructor with significant experience litigating, or teaching at an accredited law school, Fourth Amendment issues, and shall:
a) address Fourth Amendment and related law; EHPD policies, and requirements in this Agreement regarding searches and seizures;
b) address First Amendment and related law in the context of the rights of individuals to verbally dispute, observe, and record officer conduct;
c) address the difference between various police contacts by the scope and level of police intrusion; between probable cause, reasonable suspicion and mere speculation; and voluntary consent from mere acquiescence to police authority;
d) provide guidance on the facts and circumstances that should be considered in initiating, conducting, terminating, and expanding an investigatory stop or detention;
e) provide guidance on proper and improper use of pretextual stops. f) provide guidance on the level of permissible intrusion when conducting searches, such as “pat-downs” or “frisks”; g) provide guidance on the legal requirements for conducting searches, with and
57

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 59 of 130

without a warrant; h) provide guidance on the nature and scope of searches based on the level of
permissible intrusion on an individual’s privacy interests, including searches conducted pursuant to probation or parole release provisions;
i) specify the procedures for executing searches, including handling, recording, and taking custody of seized property or evidence;
j) provide guidance on effecting an arrest with and without an arrest warrant; and k) provide guidance regarding the nature and scope of searches incident to an arrest.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Training was provided by June 19, 2013, the 180-day mark. Spector Training Network has provided eight hours of stop, search, and arrest training as required in this Settlement Agreement paragraph, including instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law, as well as First Amendment and related law. This training was provided prior to the completion and approval of the policy manual. Additional training on revised policies was included in the Jan. and Feb. 2014 training. The EHPD has scheduled training that will meet the 4-6 hour requirement in 2015. The JCE should be notified of any additional review or new training in this area if policies are revised again. The JCE will work with EHPD to confirm and coordinate site visits to coincide with as many trainings as possible. Training curricula reviewed by JCE and USDOJ. Training rosters. 2014 Training Calendar. 2015 Training Calendar and roster reviewed by the JCE. Training in April and Training in June 2015, which the JCE attended Questions/Next Steps: The JCE, going forward, will schedule site visits to coincide with future training topic and attend.

VII. USE OF FORCE


79. EHPD shall develop and implement force policies, training, and review mechanisms that

ensure that force by EHPD officers is used in accordance with the rights, privileges, and

immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that any

unreasonable uses of force are identified and responded to appropriately. EHPD shall ensure that

officers use non-force techniques to effect compliance with police orders whenever feasible; use

physical force only when objectively reasonable; use physical force in a manner that avoids

unnecessary injury to officers and civilians; and de-escalate the physical use of force at the earliest

possible moment. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements set out

below

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

58

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 60 of 130

Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the use of force section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces. None
n/a

A. Use of Force Principles

80. EHPD uses of force, regardless of the type of force or weapon used, shall abide by the following requirements:

a) officers shall use advisements, warnings, and verbal persuasion, when possible,

before resorting to physical force;

b) physical force shall be de-escalated immediately as resistance decreases;

c) supervisors shall determine whether the action or inaction of officers using physical

force, or of other EHPD officers on scene, resulted in the need to use physical force;

d) officers will use disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a

subject, summoning reinforcements, and/or calling in specialized units, when possible, in order to

reduce the need for physical force and increase officer and civilian safety;

e) officers shall allow individuals time to submit to arrest before physical force is used

wherever possible;

f) officers shall not use neck holds or a strike to the head with a hard object, except

where lethal force is authorized;

g) using physical force against persons in handcuffs is prohibited except in

emergencies in which a reasonable officer would believe that bodily harm to another person or

persons is imminent;

h) unholstering and pointing a firearm at an individual constitutes a use of force and

shall be limited accordingly; and

i) immediately following a use of physical force officers and, upon arrival, a

supervisor, shall inspect and observe subjects for injury or complaints of pain and obtain

immediately any necessary medical care. This may require an officer to provide emergency

medical care until professional medical care providers are on-scene.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD has implemented a Use of Force Policy which became effective

March 1, 2014.

Data was collected from the Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS, the EHPD in-house computer system) and used to track and monitor the Use of Force data.

During the period from January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015, there were 34 incidents where use of force was involved.

59

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 61 of 130

Of those 34 incidents, there were 59 total uses of force, which were:
• 19 Physical (hands on) • 7 Non- Compliant Handcuffing • 15 Firearm (no discharge) • 9 Taser (no discharge) • 9 Pursuits

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

There were 19 arrests in those 34 incidents and 4 emergency committals. From January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015, there were a total of 441 arrests and 169 emergency committals. Continue to review all Use of Force Reports Policies 404.2, 405.2 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 JCE reviewed all use of force reports and found no incidents of neck holds or any other action by officers that would be considered in violation of this Paragraph. All uses of force reviewed revealed that officers attempted to deescalate the situations before using force. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports on all site visits.

B. General Use of Force Policy

81. EHPD shall develop and implement an overarching agency-wide use of force policy that

complies with applicable law and comports with professional police practices. The comprehensive

use of force policy shall include all force techniques, technologies, and weapons, both lethal and

less-lethal, that are available to EHPD officers. The comprehensive use of force policy shall

clearly define and describe each force option and the circumstances under which use of such force

is appropriate. The general use of force policy will incorporate the use of force principles

articulated above and shall specify that the unreasonable use of force will subject officers to

discipline, possible criminal prosecution, and/or civil liability.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training took place in January and February 2014 and covered use of force policies and related issues. Re-training was given during the last period in April and June 2015.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 404.2, 405.2 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 reviewed and approved by the Parties. Training Roster. Questions/Next Steps: None

60

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 62 of 130

82. In addition to a primary agency-wide use of force policy, EHPD shall develop and implement

policies and protocols for each authorized weapon, including each of the types of force addressed

below. No officer shall carry any weapon or use force that is not authorized by the Department.

EHPD use of force policies shall include training and certification requirements that each officer

must meet before being permitted to carry and use the authorized weapon.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training took place in January and February 2014, and covered use of force policies and related issues. New training was given.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 404.2, 405.2 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 reviewed and approved by the Parties. Training Roster.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor and conduct on field observation of weapons carried by officers.

C. Use of Firearms

83. Officers shall not possess or use unauthorized firearms or ammunition, or obtain service ammunition from any source, except through official EHPD channels. All officers’ firearms shall be filled with the capacity number of rounds while on duty.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Although use of force training was completed in 2013, the new policies and revisions required additional training in January and February 2014. New training was provided. Inspections are conducted during roll call. None Policies 404.2, 405.2, 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Training Roster. Supervisor Interviews. Supervisor Reports. On-site observation of inspection. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review supervisor reports for evidence of random inspections.

84. Officers shall not fire at or from a moving vehicle, unless use of lethal force is justified by

something other than the threat from the moving vehicle; shall not intentionally place themselves

in the path of or reach inside a moving vehicle; and where possible shall attempt to move out of

the path of a moving vehicle before discharging their weapon.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

61

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 63 of 130

Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. All use of force reports were reviewed by the JCE and no incidents of firing at or from a moving vehicle were found. None
Policies 404.2, 405.2, 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Roster on Use of Force training. Use of Force Reports were reviewed by the JCE and no incidents of firing at or from a moving motor vehicle were found during this period. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to monitor reports.

85. Officers shall successfully qualify with each firearm they are authorized to use or carry on-duty pursuant to Connecticut requirements. Officers who fail to qualify shall immediately relinquish those firearms on which they failed to qualify. Those officers who still fail to qualify after remedial training within a reasonable time shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 404.2, 405.2, 406.3, 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Training Roster. Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Through June 30, 2015, there were no officers who failed to qualify. The JCE will continue to monitor.

86. Critical firearm discharges by officers on- or off-duty shall be reported and investigated. Data and analysis related to critical firearm discharges shall be tracked in EIS and EHPD's Use of Force Annual Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 404.2, 405.2, 406.3, 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Training Roster. Use of Force Reports. EIS. There were no critical firearm discharge incidents from Jan 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to monitor supervisory reports.

62

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 64 of 130

D. Electronic Control Weapons

87. EHPD shall limit the use of ECWs to only those situations in which such force is necessary to

protect the officer, the subject, or another party from immediate physical harm.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all.

Recommendations Continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.3 and 401.3 Use of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

88. Unless it would present a danger to the officer or others, officers shall issue a verbal warning to the subject that the ECW will be used prior to use. Where feasible, the officer will defer ECW application a reasonable time to allow the subject to comply with the warning.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all and issued verbal warnings.

Recommendations Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.3 and 401.3 Use of Force Reports reviewed by JCE and revealed no Taser discharges this reporting period.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incident reports to ensure officers are warning subjects and will review body camera video footage of all ECW (Taser) discharges.

89. ECWs will not be used where such deployment may cause serious injury or death from situational hazards, including falling, drowning, losing control of a moving vehicle, or becoming ignited from the presence of a potentially explosive or flammable material or substance, except where lethal force would be permitted.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

63

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 65 of 130

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 406.3 Use of Force Reports. All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by JCE and no discharges were noted nor violations of this paragraph were noted. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

90. After one standard ECW cycle (5 seconds), the officer shall reevaluate the situation to

determine if subsequent cycles are necessary. Officers shall be trained in the risks of prolonged or

repeated ECW exposure, including that exposure to the ECW for longer than 15 seconds (whether

due to multiple applications or continuous cycling) may increase the risk of death or serious injury.

Officers shall clearly articulate and justify each and every cycle used against a subject in a written

Use of Force Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all.

Recommendations Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 406.3 and 401.3 User of Force Reports. All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by JCE and no violations of this paragraph were noted.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

91. ECWs shall not be used in drive stun mode as a pain compliance technique. ECWs shall be used in drive stun mode only to supplement the probe mode to complete the incapacitation circuit, or as a countermeasure to gain separation between officers and the subject so that officers can consider another force option.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. All use of force reports were reviewed by JCE. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 406.3 and 401.3 and in-service training. All use of force reports reviewed by JCE. No evidence that ECW’s were used in drive stun mode. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents and training.

64

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 66 of 130

92. ECWs may not be used against pregnant women, elderly persons, children, visibly frail

persons or persons with a slight build and persons in medical or mental crisis, except where lethal

force would be permitted, or the officer has reasonable cause to believe there is an imminent risk

of serious bodily self-harm and lesser force options are not feasible. Officers shall be trained in

the increased risks ECWs may present to the above listed vulnerable populations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 406.3 and 401.3 User of Force Reports. All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by JCE and no violations of this paragraph were noted. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

93. ECWs may not be applied to a subject’s head, neck, and genitalia, absent exigent circumstances. ECWs shall not be used on handcuffed persons, except in emergencies in which a reasonable officer would believe that serious bodily harm to another person or persons is imminent.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 406.3 and 401.3 User of Force Reports. All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by the JCE and no violations of this paragraph were noted.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

94. Officers shall receive annual ECW certifications, which should consist of physical competency; weapon retention; EHPD policy, including any policy changes; technology changes; and scenario-based training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

EHPD confirmed that all officers have been certified as of 2014. Next certification scheduled for Fall 2015.

Recommendations Review all ECW Taser) incidents

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.3 and 401.3

65

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 67 of 130

SITE VISIT

User of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents. Certification confirmed in December 2014: EHPD provided JCE with class roster and attendance sheet. Next certification scheduled for Fall of 2015. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents and continue to ensure all officers are certified.

95. Officers shall be trained in and follow protocols developed by EHPD in conjunction with medical professionals, on their responsibilities following ECW use, including:
(a) the removal of ECW probes, including requiring medical or specially-trained EHPD personnel to remove probes that are embedded in a subject’s skin, except for probes that are embedded in a subject’s head, throat, groin, or other sensitive area, which should be removed by medical personnel only; (b) transporting to a hospital for evaluation all subjects who: have been exposed to prolonged application (more than 15 seconds); are a member of one of the vulnerable populations listed above; had an ECW used against them in circumstances presenting a heightened risk of harm; or were kept in prone restraint after ECW use; and (c) monitoring all subjects who have received ECW application while in police custody.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. All officers received training in the proper use of ECW’s and follow-up treatment as of December 2014. Next certification and training scheduled for Fall of 2015. The JCE will continue to track and confirm that all EHPD officers are trained on the protocol for working with fire department paramedics. Policies 406.3 and 401.3 Use of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents. JCE reviewed all use of force reports and determined they were all in compliance. ECW’s were deployed but not discharged. All officers received training as of December 2014. Next certification and training scheduled for Fall 2015. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents. Although no incidents required Fire Department assistance during the reporting period, The EHPD continues its partnership with Fire Department.

96. Officers shall report all ECW discharges, except for training discharges, to their supervisor and

the communications command center as soon as possible.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

66

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 68 of 130

Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. Review all ECW (Taser) Incidents.
Policies 406.3 and 401.3 Use of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents. Supervisor Reports and Interviews checked by JCE. Supervisors periodically inspect ECW’s for unreported discharges. All discharges are registered by the device. No unreported discharges were found during inspection. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

97. EHPD shall develop and implement integrity safeguards on the use of ECWs to ensure

compliance with EHPD policy, including conducting random and directed audits of ECW

deployment data. The audits should compare the downloaded data to the officer’s report on use of

force. Discrepancies within the audit should be addressed and appropriately investigated.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. There were no discrepancies noted. Review random audits

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 406.3 and 401.3 ECW (Taser) Incident Reports. EHPD Technology Review. All Supervisory Reports were checked by the JCE. Supervisors reported no discrepancies between reports by officers and downloaded data from ECW’s. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents and random and directed audits submitted by Supervisors.

98. EHPD shall include the number of ECWs in operation and the number of ECW uses as

elements of the EIS. Analysis of this data shall include a determination of whether ECWs result in

an increase in the use of force and whether officer and subject injuries are affected by the rate of

ECW use. ECW data and analysis shall be included in EHPD's Use of Force Annual Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015, there were 9 Taser deployments with no discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.3 and 401.3

67

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 69 of 130

SITE VISIT

EHPD UOF Annual Report. All ECW (Taser) Incident Reports. Supervisor Interviews. Data included in EIS database and EHPD periodic reports to the JCE regarding EIS. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all reports/EIS.

E. Use of Force Reporting Policy and Use of Force Report

99. EHPD shall develop and implement a single, uniform, reporting system pursuant to a Use of

Force Reporting policy and using a single, uniform, Use of Force Report. All officers using or

observing force above un-resisted handcuffing shall, absent exigent circumstances report in

writing, before the end of shift, the use of force in a Use of Force Report. The Use of Force

Report shall include: (a) a detailed account of the incident from the officer’s perspective; (b) the

reason for the initial police presence; (c) a specific description of the acts that led to the use of

force; (d) the level of resistance encountered; and (e) a description of every type of force used.

The use of force reporting policy shall explicitly prohibit the use of “canned” or conclusory

language in all reports documenting use of force.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. Use of Force form is online where officers access it to complete.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Use of Force Annual Report. All Use of Force Incident Reports were reviewed by the JCE and most were found to be in order, while some used conclusory language, which were brought to the attention of EHPD by the JCE and training recommended.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

100. Officers who use or observe force and fail to report it, shall be held strictly accountable, and face discipline up to and including termination, regardless of whether the force was reasonable.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. EHPD reported that one officer was disciplined for not reporting a use of force (Drawing the firearm, but not using it). None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

All Use of Force Incident Reports were reviewed by the JCE, as well as Supervisory Reports. EHPD reported that one officer was disciplined for not reporting a use of force (Drawing the firearm, but not using it). Questions/Next Steps:

68

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 70 of 130

Review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

101. Each officer in a position to see or hear a use of force shall complete a Use of Force Report, before the end of the shift, documenting the officer’s own actions and observations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE has seen compliance of officers completing use of force reports on a timely basis. Since all parties agreed that the unholstering of a weapon (firearm or Taser) while not pointing it at a human being, does not constitute a Use of Force, thus not requiring a use of force review process, and the unholstering of the weapon will be documented on a regular police incident report by EHPD, the issue of officers writing unnecessary Use of Force Reports has been resolved. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

All Use of Force Incident Reports were reviewed by the JCE, as well as Supervisory Reports. EHPD reported that one officer was disciplined for not reporting a use of force (Drawing the firearm, but not using it). Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

102. Officers' Use of Force Reports (whether primary or supplemental) shall completely and

accurately describe the use of force. Officers shall be held strictly accountable for material

omissions or inaccuracies in the Use of Force Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE has seen compliance of officers completing use of force reports on a timely basis. Since all parties agreed that the unholstering of a weapon (firearm or Taser) while not pointing it at a human being, does not constitute a Use of Force, thus not requiring a use of force review process, and the unholstering of the weapon will be documented on a regular police incident report by EHPD, the issue of officers writing unnecessary Use of Force Reports has been resolved.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis All Use of Force Incident Reports and Supervisory Reports reviewed by the JCE and determined to be in compliance.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

103. Officers who use or observe force shall notify their supervisors immediately following any

use of force or upon receipt of an allegation of unreasonable or unreported use of force by any

officer.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

69

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 71 of 130

Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Notifications are normally made through the dispatcher and noted by officers on their reports. Dispatcher then notifies the patrol supervisor to respond. EHPD reported that supervisors were notified in all instances of use of force by its officers. None
Policy 407.2 Use of Force Incident Reports reviewed as well as Supervisory Reports. EHPD reported that one officer was disciplined for not reporting a use of force (Drawing the firearm, but not using it). Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

104. Use of Force Reports shall be maintained centrally by the IAO for tracking and analysis purposes, as required by this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. IAO

maintains a central electronic file for Use of Force reports.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

IAO Naccarato report and interviews JCE verified that Use of Force Reports were maintained centrally. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to meet with IAO Naccarato every site visit to review/discuss all use of force incidents.

105. At least annually, EHPD shall analyze the year’s force data, including force-related outcome

data, to determine significant trends; identify and correct deficiencies revealed by this analysis;

and document its findings in a public report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014 and public report issued in January 2015 covering calendar year 2014. The JCE recommends that EHPD issue a training bulletin to remind supervisors of the requirements under EHPD’s own policies and Paragraphs 105 through 109 (Supervisory Reviews) of the Settlement Agreement. The JCE found some deficiencies in supervisory review reports and notified EHPD.

Evidentiary Basis

Use of Force Incident Reports since policy in effect. The first EHPD 2014 Use of Force Annual Report dated January 20, 2015. No significant trends or deficiencies in the force data were detected during this period.

70

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 72 of 130

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

F. Force Reviews by Supervisors

106. Absent exceptional circumstances, the direct supervisor of any officer using force, upon

notification of a use of force or allegation of excessive force, shall respond to the scene of the use

of force. If a supervisor is unable to respond to the scene, the supervisor shall document in the

case file the exigent circumstances preventing his or her presence. The direct supervisor of any

officer using force shall review all uses of force except those incidents involving a serious use of

force, a use of force that appears potentially unjustified or criminal, a use of force by EHPD

personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or a use of force reassigned to the IAO by the Chief of

Police or designee or the IAO. No supervisor who was involved in the incident, including by

participating in or ordering the force being investigated, shall be responsible for the investigation

of the incident.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Review of all Use of Force reports by JCE revealed that a supervisor was notified and responded as required.

Recommendations

The JCE found some deficiencies, such as lack of specificity and the use of conclusory language, in supervisory review reports and notified EHPD. The JCE recommends that EHPD issue a training bulletin to remind supervisors of the requirements under EHPD’s own policies and Paragraphs 105 through 109 (Supervisory Reviews) of the Settlement Agreement.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Review of Supervisor Reports. Review of all Use of Force Incidents. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

107. The reviewing supervisor shall: a) respond to the scene, examine the subject of the force for injury, interview the
subject for complaints of pain, and ensure that the subject receives medical attention from an appropriate medical provider;
b) notify the IAO immediately of the use of force and obtain a use of force tracking number; c) identify and collect all relevant evidence and shall evaluate that evidence to determine whether the use of force: (i) was consistent with EHPD policy and/or (ii) raises any policy, training, tactical or equipment concerns; d) ensure collection of all evidence to establish material facts related to the use of force, including audio and video recordings, and photographs and other documentation of injuries or the absence of injuries; e) ensure the canvass for and interview of civilian witnesses. In addition, civilian witnesses should be encouraged to provide and sign a written report in their own words;
71

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 73 of 130

f) ensure that all officer witnesses provide a statement regarding the incident. Officers involved in a use of force incident shall be separated until they are interviewed. Group interviews shall be prohibited. Supervisors shall ensure that all use of force reports identify all officers who were involved in the incident or were on the scene when it occurred. Supervisors shall not ask officers or other witnesses leading questions that improperly suggest justifications for the officers’ conduct, when such questions are contrary to appropriate law enforcement techniques. Reviewing supervisors shall record all interviews with subjects and civilian witnesses and all follow-up interviews with officers;
g) review all Use of Force Reports and ensure that all reports include the information required by this Agreement and EHPD policy; and

h) consider all relevant evidence, including circumstantial, direct, and physical

evidence, and make credibility determinations, if feasible. Supervisors will make all reasonable

efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between the officer, subject, and witness statements, as

well as inconsistencies between the level of force claimed by the officer and the subject’s injuries.

EHPD will train all of its supervisors on the factors to consider when evaluating credibility.

Where a reasonable and trained supervisor would determine that there may have been misconduct,

the supervisor shall immediately notify the IAO to respond to the scene.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

A review of all Use of Force reports revealed that proper investigative

procedures were followed by supervisors and IAO. No misconduct was

reported to the JCE, only one officer failed to report drawing his firearm and

has been disciplined by EHPD.

Recommendations The JCE found some deficiencies in supervisory review report writing and

notified EHPD. The JCE recommends that EHPD issue a training bulletin to

remind supervisors of the requirements under EHPD’s own policies and

Paragraphs 105 through 109 (Supervisory Reviews) of the Settlement

Agreement.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2

Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

108. Each supervisor shall provide a written report to the shift commander by the end of the shift documenting the supervisor’s preliminary determination of the appropriateness of the use of force, including whether the force was reasonable and within policy; whether the injuries appear proportionate to the use of force described; and summaries of subject, witness, and officer statements.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

End of shift interpreted as end of tour of duty. Supervisors shall provide written report to shift commander before they go home. The JCE found some deficiencies in supervisory review report writing and notified EHPD. The JCE recommends that EHPD issue a training bulletin to

72

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 74 of 130

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

remind supervisors of the requirements under EHPD’s own policies and Paragraphs 105 through 109 (Supervisory Reviews) of the Settlement Agreement. Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports reviewed by JCE showed that shift commanders were properly notified. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force reports.

109. Each supervisor shall complete and document a use of force supervisory review using a Supervisor’s Force Review Report, within 72 hours of learning of the use of force. This Report shall include:

a) the supervisor’s narrative description of the incident, including a precise description

of the evidence that either justifies or fails to justify the officer’s conduct based on the supervisor’s

independent review of the facts and circumstances of the incident;

b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers,

and addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses,

the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but

circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone

number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should

also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a statement;

c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force;

d) the reviewing supervisor’s evaluation of the basis for the use of force, including a

determination of whether the officer’s actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent

with state and federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an

assessment of the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force

may have been avoided through the use of de-escalation techniques or lesser force options; and

e) documentation of any non-disciplinary corrective action taken.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Proper reporting procedures were followed by supervisors in cases of Use of Force. Only one use of force review report was not submitted in a timely manner. Although this report was for a minor incident, the JCE made EHPD aware of this oversight.

Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Due to some minor deficiencies in report writing, the JCE recommended that EHPD issue a training bulletin to remind supervisors of the requirements under EHPD’s own policies and Paragraphs 105 through 109 (Supervisory Reviews) of the Settlement Agreement. Policy 407.2 Use of Force Supervisory Reports reviewed. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents, including supervisory reports

73

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 75 of 130

110. Upon completion of the Supervisor’s Force Review Report, the investigating supervisor shall

forward the report to the patrol commander, who shall review the report to ensure that it is

complete and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The patrol

commander shall order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant

evidence that may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the

findings.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Patrol Commanders reviewed all use of force reports. There has been no need for additional investigation.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

111. Where the findings of the Supervisory Force Review Report are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the patrol commander shall modify the findings after consultation with the reviewing supervisor, and document the reasons for this modification, including the specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification. The patrol commander shall counsel the reviewing supervisor regarding the modification and of any investigative deficiencies that led to it, and order corrective action where appropriate. The patrol commander shall be held accountable for the accuracy and completeness of Use of Force Supervisory Review Reports completed by supervisors under the command of the patrol commander.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports and supervisors review reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents and supervisory reviews.

112. Where a reviewing supervisor repeatedly conducts deficient investigations, the supervisor shall receive the appropriate corrective action, including training, demotion, and/or removal from a supervisory position.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences of repeated deficiencies by any one specific

supervisor to the knowledge of the JCE.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports.

74

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 76 of 130

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

113. Whenever a reviewing supervisor or patrol commander finds evidence of apparent criminal

conduct by an officer, he or she shall suspend the investigation immediately and notify the Chief

of Police, the IAO, the State Attorney’s Office, and the State Police. The IAO shall immediately

notify the FBI and USAO, where appropriate.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

114. When the patrol commander finds that the supervisor force review is complete and the

findings are supported by the evidence, the force review file shall be forwarded to the Chief of

Police and the IAO. The Chief of Police and the IAO shall review the force review to ensure that

it is complete and that the findings are supported by the evidence. At the discretion of the Chief of

Police, his designee, or the IAO, a use of force review may be assigned or re-assigned to another

supervisor, whether within or outside of the shift in which the incident occurred, or may be

returned to the patrol commander for further review or analysis. This assignment or re-assignment

shall be explained in writing.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports reviewed revealed that all were properly forwarded to the Chief and the IAO. No review reports needed to be re-assigned.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

115. Where, after a force review, a use of force is found to be out of policy, the Chief of Police shall direct and ensure appropriate discipline, including forwarding the outcome of the force review to the Board of Police Commissioners for disciplinary action. Where the use of force indicates policy, training, tactical, or equipment concerns, the Chief of Police shall ensure also that necessary training is delivered and that policy, tactical or equipment concerns are resolved.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences reported to the JCE.

Recommendations Review training needs related to any use of force report writing may be

75

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 77 of 130

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

required. Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports reviewed by JCE revealed the need for further training of report writing by supervisors. EHPD notified. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents and any new training associated with cases.

G. Force Investigations by Internal Affairs

116. EHPD shall establish a single, uniform reporting and investigation/review system for all serious uses of force, including critical firearm discharges.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

System already established

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports and supervisory review reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

117. EHPD shall ensure that all serious uses of force are investigated fully and fairly by individuals with appropriate expertise, independence and investigative skills to ensure that uses of force that are contrary to law or policy are identified and appropriately resolved; that policy, training, equipment, or tactical deficiencies related to the use of force are identified and corrected; and that investigations of sufficient quality to ensure that officers are held accountable as necessary. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:
a) Provide for an IAO to conduct administrative investigations of serious uses of force, uses of force by
EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or uses of force reassigned to the IAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the IAO.
b) Within 90 days from the Effective Date, EHPD shall recruit, assign, and train a sufficient number of IAOs to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement. Prior to performing IAO duties, IAOs shall receive a minimum of 24 hours of force investigation training; call out and investigative protocols; and proper roles of onscene counterparts such as crime scene technicians, State Attorney’s Office, State Police EHPD detectives, and Joint Compliance Expert; and investigative equipment and techniques. IAOs shall also receive annual in-service training on proper force investigations.
c) EHPD shall create a force investigation procedural manual to ensure consistency with this Agreement. The procedural manual shall include:

76

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 78 of 130

i. definitions of all relevant terms; ii. clear statements of the mission and authority of the IAO regarding force investigations; iii. procedures on report writing; iv. procedures for collecting and processing evidence; v. procedures to ensure appropriate separation of criminal and administrative
investigations in the event of compelled subject officer statements; vi. procedures for consulting with the State Attorney’s Office and the State Police, including ensuring that administrative investigations are not unnecessarily delayed while a criminal investigation is pending; vii. scene management procedures; and viii. management procedures.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
None None Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports reviewed. All supervisors are trained to investigate IA cases by EHPD. IAO investigates all serious uses of force. In cases of highranking officers being investigated, Police Chief Larrabee has a system in place to assign a trained officer of higher rank to investigate. There were no serious uses of force this reporting period. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

118. Where appropriate to ensure the fact and appearance of impartiality, investigations of serious

uses of force or force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer shall be referred for investigation to an independent and highly competent entity outside EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

There have been no referrals to the FBI for the reporting period.
None
Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. EHPD has built a relationship with the FBI and the State’s Attorney Office Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

77

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 79 of 130

119. In every incident involving a serious use of force, or any use of force indicating apparent

criminal conduct by an officer, the supervisor shall immediately notify the IAO and obtain a use of

force tracking number.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences during this reporting period.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

120. The IAO shall respond to the scene of every incident involving a serious use of force, any use

of force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer, any use of force by an officer of a rank

higher than sergeant, or as ordered by the Chief of Police or designee.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were no cases of serious use of force reported this period.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Interview with IAO and review of IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

121. The IAO shall immediately notify and consult with the State Attorney’s Office and State

Police regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent criminal conduct by EHPD

personnel, or any use of force in which an officer discharged his firearm, or where an individual

has died while in or proximate to the custody of EHPD. The IAO shall immediately notify and

consult with the FBI and the USAO regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent

criminal conduct by EHPD personnel that violates federal law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD has established a strong and productive relationship with the FBI. There have been no cases requiring notification to the State Attorney’s Office or FBI. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Interviews with IAO Naccarato and review of IAO reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force Incidents.

78

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 80 of 130

122. If the case may proceed criminally, or where EHPD requests a criminal prosecution, any compelled interview of the subject officers shall be delayed, consistent with Paragraphs 148 and 150 of this Agreement. No other part of the investigation shall be held in abeyance unless specifically authorized by the Chief of Police in consultation with the agency conducting the criminal investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Unaware of any relevant incident to date.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor Use of Force, Supervisory and IAO reports

123. The IAO shall complete its administrative use of force investigation within 60 days from the use of force. At the conclusion of each use of force investigation, the IAO shall prepare a report on the investigation. The report shall include:

a) a narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the

evidence that either justifies or fails to justify the officer’s conduct based on the IAO’s

independent review of the facts and circumstances of the incident;

b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers,

and addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses,

the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but

circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone

number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should

also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a

statement;

c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force;

d) the IAO’s evaluation of the basis for the use of force, including a determination of

whether the officer’s actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent with state and

federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of

the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have

been avoided through the use of de-escalation techniques or lesser force options;

e) if a weapon was used, documentation that the officer’s certification and training for

the weapon are current; and

f) documentation of any disciplinary and/or non-disciplinary corrective action

recommended.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

IAO has complied with this paragraph in the past. However there have been no cases investigated by the IAO this period.

Recommendations IAO to contact JCE if a case comes up.

79

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 81 of 130

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Interviews with IAO Naccarato and review of IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor Use of Force, Supervisory and IAO reports

H. Review by Chief of Police

124. The Chief of Police shall review all force reviews by supervisors and force investigations by the IAO. The Chief of Police shall:

a) review each force review and investigation within 30 days of receiving the force

review/investigation report to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are

supported by a preponderance of the evidence;

b) order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant

evidence that may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the

findings. Where the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the Chief of

Police or his/her designee shall modify the findings and document the reasons for this

modification, including the specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification;

c) determine whether the force violated EHPD policy. If the force violated EHPD

policy, the Chief of Police of his/her designee shall take appropriate disciplinary action, including

referring the review or investigation report to the Board of Police Commissioners for appropriate

disciplinary action;

d) determine whether the incident raises policy, training, equipment, or tactical

concerns, and refer such incidents to the appropriate commander or supervisor within EHPD to

ensure they are resolved;

e) direct shift supervisors to take and document non-disciplinary corrective action to

enable or encourage an officer to improve his or her performance; and

f) document his or her findings within 45 days of receiving the force review or

investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Chief Larrabee reviewed Use of Force reports and reported no issues with

same.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2

Use of Force Reports.

Continued interviews with Chief Larrabee and IAO.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review continued.

J. Use of Force Training 125. EHPD shall provide all EHPD officers with 4 – 8 hours of use of force training within 365 days of the Effective Date, and 4 – 8 hours of use of force training on at least an annual basis
80

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 82 of 130

thereafter, including information on developments in applicable law and EHPD policy. EHPD shall coordinate and review all use of force policy and training to ensure quality, consistency, and compliance with the Constitution, Connecticut law, this Agreement and EHPD policy. EHPD’s use of force training shall include the following topics:

a) EHPD’s use of force model, as described in this Agreement;

b) proper use of force decision-making;

c) use of force reporting requirements;

d) the Fourth Amendment and related law;

e) role-playing scenarios and interactive exercises that illustrate proper use of force

decision-making, including training officers on the importance and impact of ethical decision

making and peer intervention;

f) the proper deployment and use of all intermediate weapons or technologies,

including canines and ECWs;

g) de-escalation techniques that encourage officers to make arrests without using

force, and instruction that disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a

subject, summoning reinforcements, calling in specialized units, or delaying arrest may be the

appropriate response to a situation, even when the use of force would be legally justified;

h) threat assessment;

i) basic crisis intervention and interacting with people with mental illnesses, including

instruction by mental health practitioners and an emphasis on de-escalation strategies;

j) factors to consider in initiating or continuing a pursuit;

k) appropriate training on conflict management; and

l) supervisors of all ranks, as part of their initial and annual in-service supervisory

training, shall receive additional training in conducting use of force reviews and investigations;

strategies for effectively directing officers to minimize uses of force and to intervene effectively to

prevent or stop unreasonable force; and supporting officers who report unreasonable or unreported

force, or who are retaliated against for using only reasonable force or attempting to prevent

unreasonable force.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Class Roster and schedules of training on ECW (Tasers), firearms, and other weapons have been provided to the JCE for the current year, 2015. Most officers have attended training on use of force as of June 30, 2015.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Ongoing review. The JCE recommends that EHPD issue a training bulletin to remind supervisors of the requirements regarding report writing under EHPD’s own policies and Paragraphs 105 through 109 (Supervisory Reviews) of the Settlement Agreement. Use of Force Reports. Training Rosters and curricula reviewed. Class rosters and schedules of training on ECW (Tasers), firearms, and other weapons have been provided to the JCE for the current year, 2015. Most officers have attended training on use of force as of June 30, 2015. The JCE audited a class on use of force in June 2015. Questions/Next Steps: JCE to monitor yearly in-service training completed and attend training throughout 2015. JCE audited a class on use of force in June, 2015 taught by

81

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 83 of 130

Mr. Eliot Spector.

126. Included in the use of force training set out above. EHPD shall require firearms training for all officers within 365 days of the Effective Date and at least twice yearly thereafter. EHPD firearms training shall:

a) require officers to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for

regulation and other service firearms on a semi-annual basis;

b) require cadets, officers in probationary periods, and officers who return from

unarmed status to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and

other service firearms before such personnel are permitted to carry and use firearms;

c) incorporate professional night training, stress training (e.g., training in using a

firearm after undergoing physical exertion) and proper use of force decision-making training,

including continuous threat assessment techniques, in the annual in-service training program; and

d) ensure that firearm instructors critically observe students and provide corrective

instruction regarding deficient firearm techniques and failure to utilize safe gun

handling procedures at all times.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Class roster and schedules of firearm training for 2014 and 2015 have been

provided to the JCE by EHPD.

Recommendations Ongoing review. JCE to monitor in-service firearms training.

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force Reports.

Training Rosters, attendance sheets, and curricula reviewed by JCE. As per

EHPD, all officers have attended firearms training and retraining during in-

service training.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

JCE to monitor yearly in-service training.

VIII. CIVILIAN COMPLAINTS, INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS, AND DISCIPLINE


127. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all allegations of officer misconduct are received and

are fully and fairly investigated; that all investigative findings are supported by a preponderance of

the evidence and documented in writing; and that all officers who commit misconduct are held

accountable pursuant to a disciplinary system that is fair and consistent. To achieve these

outcomes, EHPD and the Town shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the use of force section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the subparagraphs that it introduces. Continue to monitor.

Evidentiary Basis IA Office files and reports.

82

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 84 of 130

Discussion

Fair disciplinary system is in place (Disciplinary Matrix).

A. Reporting Misconduct

128. EHPD shall require that all officers and employees report apparent misconduct by another

EHPD officer or employee to a supervisor or directly to the IAO for review and investigation.

Where apparent misconduct is reported to a supervisor, the supervisor shall immediately document

and report this information to the IAO. Failure to report or document apparent misconduct or

criminal behavior shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination of employment.

The default discipline for a failure to report criminal behavior shall be termination.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE is not aware of any reports of apparent misconduct by officers or employees of the EHPD reported by other officers or employees of the EHPD.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Continue talk with IAO Naccarato and Chief Larrabee. Use of Force Reports. IAO Reports. Supervisory Review Reports. Citizen Complaints. Interviews with Chief Larrabee and IAO Naccarato. Policies 201.3, 208.2, 407.2

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE to monitor reports.

B. Complaint Information

129. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, the Town and EHPD shall develop and implement a

program to ensure broad knowledge throughout the East Haven community about how to make

misconduct complaints, and the availability of effective mechanisms for making misconduct

complaints. The requirements below shall be incorporated into this program.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The Civilian Complaint System and the Early Identification System (EIS) has been fully developed and implemented, and is publicizing the complaint process in the East Haven community, on the EHPD website and via a link from the Town website, at Town Hall, at EHPD headquarters and at the Hagaman Memorial Library. Officers are required to carry civilian complaint forms in EHPD vehicles.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Complaint System on Website and EIS reviewed. Forms and information available at Town Hall, at EHPD headquarters and at the Hagaman Memorial Library. JCE has developed a checklist of data and reports that are reviewed at each

83

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 85 of 130

SITE VISIT

site visit. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all complaints and review EIS on every site visit.

130. The Town and EHPD shall make complaint forms and informational materials, including

brochures and posters, available at appropriate government properties, including EHPD

headquarters, EHPD and Town websites, Town Hall, and the public library. Individuals shall be

able to submit misconduct complaints through the EHPD and City websites and these websites

shall include complaint forms and information regarding how to file misconduct complaints.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

JCE has checked Department’s website, Library, Town Hall and found the forms and Policy Manual readily available. JCE also noticed informational material translated in Spanish at EHPD front desk.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The JCE will continue to check to ensure information and forms are easily accessible to the public in a neutral location. Complaint system on website. The civilian complaint form is also available at the EHPD, at the library, and at East Haven Town Hall. JCE will continue to insure that forms are available and the process is fair and open. Questions/Next Steps: Monitor and make sure forms continue to be readily available to the public.

131. At the locations listed above, EHPD shall post and maintain a permanent placard describing

the external complaint process that includes relevant contact information, such as telephone

numbers, email addresses, and Internet sites. EHPD will require all officers to carry complaint

forms, containing basic complaint information, in their department vehicles at all times. Officers

shall also provide complaint forms and the officer’s name and badge number upon request. If an

individual objects to an officer’s conduct, that officer will inform the individual of his or her right

to make a complaint and shall provide the complaint form, informational brochure, and the

officer’s name and badge number. If the individual indicates that he or she would like to make a

complaint, the officer shall immediately inform his or her supervisor.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available at locations and via officers. The JCE will continue to check compliance regarding these materials with specific information at specific locations.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Visual inspection in the EHPD lobby. Ride-alongs and interviews with officers and sergeants. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor

132. Complaint forms and related informational materials shall be made available and posted in English and Spanish.

84

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 86 of 130

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available and posted in English and Spanish. The JCE will continue to check compliance in East Haven. Visual inspection of materials and brochures by JCE confirmed that these forms are available in Spanish and English. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor updates/changes to written materials.

C. Complaint Intake, Classification, and Tracking

133. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall revise policy and train all officers and supervisors to ensure that all officers properly handle complaint intake, including how to properly provide complaint materials and information; and the consequences for failing to take complaints; and strategies for turning complaints into positive police-civilian interactions.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
There were four civilian complaints made during the January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015 reporting period. In-service training has been provided to all officers on the process of complaint intake. The EHPD must underscore the importance of this paragraph and management should continually closely monitor the complaint process. Policy 208.2 and training. Information from Chief, and Deputy Chief Review of all citizen complaints. All officers carry complaint forms and are instructed to hand to civilians wishing to file a complaint. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site and inspect police cars and other town sites for compliance.

134. The refusal to accept a misconduct complaint, discouraging the filing of a misconduct complaint, or providing false or misleading information about filing a misconduct complaint, shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were four civilian complaints made during the January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015 reporting period. No evidence found of officers discouraging the filing of complaints or denying forms to the public.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

The EHPD must underscore the importance of this paragraph and management should continually closely monitor the complaints process. Policy 208.2 and training. Review of all citizen complaints. Information from Chief Larrabee and IAO Naccarato that there have been no such cases this

85

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 87 of 130

SITE VISIT

period. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site.

135. EHPD shall accept all misconduct complaints, including anonymous and third-party

complaints, for review and investigation. Complaints may be made in writing or verbally, in

person or by mail, telephone (or TDD), facsimile, or electronic mail. Any LEP individual who

wishes to file a complaint about an EHPD officer or employee shall be provided with a complaint

form in Spanish or, for less common languages in East Haven, EHPD will make arrangements to

ensure that the LEP person is able to make a complaint. Such complaints will be investigated in

accordance with this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph. The JCE is not aware of any anonymous, third party, or LEP complaints.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 208.2 and training. Interview and information from Lt. Emerman, Language Access Coordinator and Community Liaison Officer including 30-month report. Review of all citizen complaints.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site.

136. All officers and employees who receive a misconduct complaint in the field shall immediately

inform a supervisor of the misconduct complaint so that the supervisor can ensure proper intake of

the complaint. All misconduct complaints received outside of EHPD headquarters shall be

forwarded to the IAO before the end of the shift in which it was received.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

IA Officer and EHPD reported to the JCE that all complaints recorded by EHPD were properly routed and procedures were followed. The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph. Policy manual training re this paragraph has been completed. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 and training, IAO files and reports

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

137. EHPD shall ensure that allegations of officer misconduct made during criminal prosecutions or civil lawsuits are identified and investigated as misconduct complaints.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing compliance check. There have been no occurrences.

86

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 88 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Track all lawsuits against EHPD personnel; Continue to monitor EIS
Policy 208.2 Information from IAO Naccarato. EIS review. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to meet with IAO Naccarato and review EIS.

138. Within three business days of the receipt of a misconduct complaint, the IAO shall determine whether the complaint will be assigned to the subject officer(s)’ supervisor(s) or retained by the IAO for an administrative investigation. The IAO shall also determine whether the misconduct complaint warrants a referral to the State Attorney’s Office and/or USAO for a criminal investigation. EHPD shall develop and implement a complaint classification protocol that is allegation-based rather than anticipated outcome-based to guide the IAO in determining where a complaint should be assigned. This complaint classification protocol shall ensure that the IAO investigates allegations including:
a) serious misconduct, including but not limited to: criminal misconduct; unreasonable use of force;
b) discriminatory policing; false arrest or planting evidence; untruthfulness/false statements; unlawful search; retaliation; sexual misconduct; domestic violence; and theft;
c) misconduct implicating the conduct of the supervisory or command leadership of the subject officer; and
d) any other violations as determined by the Chief of Police.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
The JCE will continue ongoing tracking of all IAO reports and engage in regular communication with EHPD command staff. The IA Officer retained and investigated one complaint alleging false arrest from January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2015. The officers were exonerated. Three other complaints alleging minor violations were investigated by officers’ immediate supervisors. Continue to monitor EIS Policy 208.2 Information from IAO Naccarato. IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to meet with IAO Naccarato and review EIS and complaint processes/procedures.

139. The Chief of Police shall not be authorized to personally conduct an investigation of officer misconduct or violation of policy, nor prevent the conduct of such an investigation. A misconduct
87

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 89 of 130

complaint investigation may not be conducted by any officer who used force during the incident;

whose conduct led to the injury of a person; who authorized the conduct that led to the reported

incident or complaint; or who was on the scene of the incident leading to the allegation of

misconduct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

No such cases have occurred this period. The JCE will continue to track and review all IAO reports.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 All IAO reports reviewed.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all IAO reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

140. EHPD shall track, as a separate category of misconduct complaints, allegations of discriminatory policing, along with characteristics of the complainants. EHPD shall ensure that complaints of discriminatory policing are captured and tracked appropriately, even if the complainant does not specifically label the misconduct as such.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Working with EHPD, the JCE will continue to track compliance on this

paragraph. There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 EIS Report and on-site system review.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all IAO reports and meet with IAO Naccarato. The JCE review of all complaints on every quarterly site visit.

141. Within 180 days of the Effective date, the IAO shall develop and implement a centralized numbering and tracking system for all misconduct complaints. Upon the receipt of a complaint, the IAO shall promptly assign a unique numerical identifier to the complaint, which shall be provided to the complainant at the time the complaint is made. Where a misconduct complaint is received in the field, a supervisor shall obtain the unique numerical identifier and provide this identifier to the complainant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) has developed a centralized numbering and tracking system that will allow the prompt assignment of a unique numerical identifier to each civilian complaint and insure that complainants are informed of this number at the time the complaint is made. The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to monitor compliance to ensure that the unique

88

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 90 of 130

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

numerical identifier is used for all complaints. EHPD compliance report; Policy 208.2 Review of all IAO complaints and numbering system. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to meet with IAO Naccarato and review all complaints and numbering system.

142. EHPD’s centralized numbering and tracking system shall maintain accurate and reliable data

regarding the number, nature, and status of all misconduct complaints, from initial intake to final

disposition, including investigation timeliness and notification to the complainant of the interim

status and final disposition of the investigation. This system shall be used to determine the status

of complaints and to confirm that a complaint was received, as well as for periodic assessment of

compliance with EHPD policies and procedures and this Agreement, including requirements on

the timeliness of administrative investigations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of IAO reports will continue.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to monitor compliance to ensure that the unique numerical identifier is used for all complaints.

Evidentiary Basis

EHPD compliance report; Policy 208.2 Review of all IAO complaints. Review of IAO numbering system. Meetings with IAO Naccarato.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to meet with IAO Naccarato and review all complaints and numbering system.

143. Where a supervisor receives a misconduct complaint in the field alleging that misconduct has just occurred, the supervisor shall gather all relevant information and evidence and provide this information and evidence to the IAO. This information includes the names and contact information for all complainants and witnesses, the names of all EHPD officers and employees on the scene at the time of the alleged misconduct, and any available physical evidence such as voluntarily provided video or audio recordings, or documentation of the existence of such recordings where the witness chooses not to provide the recording. The supervisor shall take photographs of apparent injuries or the absence thereof.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO reports and supervisor reports.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 IAO Files, IAO Reports and Supervisor Reports. The Chief informed the JCE that all EHPD supervisors are trained to investigate IA complaints.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

89

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 91 of 130

The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

D. Investigation of Complaints

144. Investigations of officer misconduct shall be as thorough as necessary to reach reliable and

complete findings. The misconduct complaint investigator shall interview each complainant in

person, absent exceptional circumstances, and this interview shall be recorded in its entirety,

absent specific, documented objection by the complainant. All officers in a position to hear or see

an incident, or any significant event before or after an incident, shall provide a written statement

regarding their observations, even to state that they did not see or hear anything.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

All four complaints filed this period were properly investigated, including interviews with witnesses, where applicable, and officers.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to track all IAO incident reports.
Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. The Chief informed the JCE that all EHPD supervisors are trained to investigate IA complaints Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

145. Where the alleged misconduct is particularly serious or information from an officer or other witness may be necessary to resolve an allegation, the investigator shall conduct an in-person interview of the officer or other witness. Each officer, witness, and complainant shall be interviewed separately. An EHPDAI not involved in the underlying complaint will be used when taking statements or conducting interviews of any LEP complainant or witness.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports. There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO incident reports.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. The Chief informed the JCE that all EHPD supervisors are trained to investigate IA complaints. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

146. All officer and civilian witness statements should be documented in their entirety, including any statement that the witness saw or heard nothing. All interviews should be recorded. All
90

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 92 of 130

recordings shall be stored and maintained in a secure location within IAO.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Review of all IA reports revealed they were properly documented, recorded when allowed and stored . Continue to track all IAO incident reports. Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. The Chief informed the JCE that all EHPD supervisors are trained to investigate IA complaints Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO incident reports and recordings and meet with IAO Naccarato.

147. EHPD shall require officers to cooperate with administrative investigations, including

appearing for an interview when requested by an EHPD investigator and providing all requested

documents and evidence. Supervisors shall be notified when an officer under their supervision is

summoned as part of an administrative investigation and shall facilitate the officer’s appearance,

absent extraordinary and documented circumstances.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO incident reports.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato who indicated that there have been no such cases this period. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

148. The subject officer shall not be compelled to provide a statement to administrative

investigators where there is a potential criminal investigation or prosecution of the officer, until

consultation with the criminal investigative agency (e.g. State Attorney’s Office or USAO and

approval by the Chief of Police. EHPD, the Town, and the State Attorney’s Office shall develop

and implement protocols to ensure that the criminal and administrative investigations are kept

appropriately separate after a subject officer has provided a compelled statement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is law and all supervisors are aware of it.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2

91

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 93 of 130

SITE VISIT

Reviewed all IAO reports/cases. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to review files and cases to ensure law is being closely followed.

149. Nothing in this Agreement or EHPD policy shall hamper an officer’s obligation to provide a

public safety statement regarding a work related incident or activity. EHPD shall make clear that

all officer statements in incident reports, arrest reports, use of force reports and similar documents,

and statements made in interviews such as those conducted in conjunction with EHPD’s routine

use of force review and investigation process, are part of each officer’s routine professional duties

and are not compelled statements. Where an officer believes that providing a verbal or written

statement will be self-incriminating the officer shall affirmatively state this and shall not be

compelled to provide a statement without prior consultation with the criminal investigative agency

(e.g. State Attorney’s Office or USAO), and approval by the Chief of Police.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance; If issue arises, JCE will investigate further.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 All IAO reports/cases. The Chief informed the JCE that all EHPD supervisors are trained to investigate IA complaints Questions/Next Steps: JCE will closely monitor.

150. If at any time during complaint intake or investigation the investigator determines that there

may have been criminal conduct on the part of any officer or employee, the investigator shall

immediately notify the Chief of Police and the Joint Compliance Expert, and shall consult with the

State Attorney’s Office, USAO and the local office of the FBI regarding the initiation of a criminal

investigation, as appropriate. Where an allegation is investigated criminally, the IAO shall

continue with the administrative investigation of the allegation, except that it may delay or decline

to conduct an interview of the subject officer(s) or other witnesses until completion of the criminal

investigation unless, after consultation with the investigating agency and the Chief of Police, such

interviews are deemed appropriate

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The IAO reported no incidents of suspected criminal conduct by officers to the JCE. The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Example of compliance following January 2013 New Haven incident; Policy 208.2 IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review IAO files.

92

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 94 of 130

151. In each investigation, EHPD shall consider all relevant evidence including circumstantial,

direct and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations based upon that evidence. There

will be no automatic preference for an officer’s statement over a non-officer’s statement, nor will

EHPD disregard a witness’ statement merely because the witness has some connection to the

complainant or because of any criminal history. During its investigation, EHPD may take into

account the criminal history of a complainant that involves a crime of dishonesty. EHPD may also

take into account the record of any involved officers who have been determined to have been

deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other

investigation. EHPD shall make efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between witness

statements.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

EHPD trains all its supervisors in the investigation of IA complaints and the Chief can assign anyone of them to investigate cases as needed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 All IAO reports were reviewed by the JCE and all appeared to be in compliance. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review IAO case files and meet with IAO.

152. The misconduct investigator shall explicitly identify and recommend one of the following dispositions for each allegation of misconduct in an administrative investigation:

a) “Unfounded,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that

the alleged misconduct did not occur or did not involve the subject officer;

b) “Sustained,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that

the alleged misconduct did occur;

c) “Not Sustained,” where the investigation is unable to determine, by a preponderance of the

evidence, whether the alleged misconduct occurred; or

d) “Exonerated,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that

the alleged conduct did occur but did not violate EHPD policies, procedures, or training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were four complaints filed. All were properly investigated and

discipline imposed, where applicable, using the categories described in this paragraph.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Policy 208.2 IAO reports submitted to JCE. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to conduct an ongoing careful review of all IAO cases/files.

93

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 95 of 130

153. In addition to determining whether the officer committed the alleged misconduct,

administrative investigations shall assess and document whether: (a) the police action was in

compliance with training and legal standards; (b) the use of different tactics should or could have

been employed to achieve a potentially better outcome; (c) the incident indicates a need for

additional training, counseling or other non-disciplinary corrective measures; and (d) the incident

suggests that EHPD should revise its policies, strategies, tactics, or training. This information

shall be shared with the relevant commander(s) who shall document the commander’s

disagreement or agreement with these findings; refer any recommendations to the appropriate

individual to implement the recommended change; document the implementation of these

recommendations; and return the documentation to the IAO.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

All four complaints filed this period complied with the requirements of this section. Two officers were counseled (Later one of these officers was terminated because he did not satisfactorily complete field training)

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 IAO files and documented implementation of recommendations by IAO. JCE reviewed all four complaints filed this period and found them to be in compliance Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to conduct an ongoing careful review of all IAO cases/files.

154. EHPD shall respond to each complaint within 48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays, and shall resolve each stage of a complaint investigation in a reasonable time frame. EHPD shall complete all investigations of civilian complaints within 60 days of receiving the complaint. Upon a showing of good cause, officers may receive no more than two extensions of up to 30 days each. Requests for extensions must be in writing and approved by the Chief.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Continual review of all complaints. One hundred percent (100%) have been

resolved within 60 days.

Recommendations Keep in close communication between quarterly site visits with IAO.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 All Citizen Complaints. IAO Files indicate all complaints were addressed in a timely manner according to the Agreement. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor

155. A misconduct investigation shall not be closed simply because the complaint is withdrawn or

the alleged victim is unwilling or unable to provide additional information beyond the initial

complaint, or because the complainant pled guilty or was found guilty of an offense.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

94

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 96 of 130

Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Ongoing careful review of all complaints and IAO investigations.
None
Policy 208.2. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. IAO Files and Review of all Citizen Complaints. IAO is complying with this requirement. For example, a complaint was made to EHPD but the complainant did not fill out a complaint form. The complaint was investigated nevertheless, and the officer received counseling from his immediate supervisor. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to be in close communication with IAO on-site and offsite.

156. Each misconduct complainant will be kept informed periodically regarding the status of the investigation. The complainant will be notified of the outcome of the investigation, in writing, within ten business days of the completion of the investigation, including regarding whether any disciplinary or non-disciplinary action was taken.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing tracking.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 and Review of all citizen complaints revealed compliance with this Paragraph. Questions/Next Steps: None

E. Discipline

157. EHPD shall ensure that discipline for sustained allegations of misconduct is based on the

nature of the allegation and defined, consistent, mitigating and aggravating factors, rather than the

identity of the officer or his or her status within EHPD or the broader community. EHPD and the

Town shall develop and implement procedures to ensure that discipline is fair and consistent.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Policy 209.1 Disciplinary Matrix was approved by the Parties as of December 31, 2014. Policy 209.2 – Disciplinary Matrix (revision) became effective July 1, 2015 and included some minor changes which were reviewed and approved by Parties in May 2015. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 209.1/209.2 Review of all cases and reports involving discipline for sustained allegations

95

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 97 of 130

SITE VISIT

of misconduct revealed EHPD followed proper procedures pertaining to the Disciplinary Matrix. Meetings with Chief and IAO. Questions/Next Steps: None

158. EHPD, in consultation with the Board of Police Commissioners and the Town, shall create a disciplinary matrix that:

a) establishes a presumptive range of discipline for each type of rule violation; b) increases the presumptive discipline based on both an officer’s prior violations of the same or other rules; c) sets out defined mitigating or aggravating factors; d) requires that any departure from the presumptive range of discipline must be justified in writing; e) provides that EHPD shall not take only non-disciplinary corrective action in cases in which the disciplinary matrix calls for the imposition of discipline; and e) provides that EHPD shall consider whether non-disciplinary corrective action also is appropriate in a case where discipline has been imposed.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Policy 209.1 Disciplinary Matrix was been approved by the Parties as of December 31, 2014. Policy 209.2 – Disciplinary Matrix (revision) became effective July 1, 2015 and included some minor changes which were reviewed and approved by Parties in May 2015. None Policy 209.1/209.2 Questions/Next Steps: Review training roster after policy complete and approved.

159. EHPD, the Board of Police Commissioners, and the Town shall establish a unified system for

reviewing sustained findings and assessing the appropriate level of discipline pursuant to EHPD’s

disciplinary matrix to facilitate consistency in the imposition of discipline. All disciplinary

decisions shall be documented, including the rationale behind any decision to deviate from the

level of discipline set out in the disciplinary matrix.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 209.1 Disciplinary Matrix was been approved by the Parties as of

December 31, 2014.

Policy 209.2 – Disciplinary Matrix (revision) became effective July 1, 2015

and included some minor changes which were reviewed and approved by

96

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 98 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Parties in May 2015. None
Policy 209.1/209.2 specifically states circumstances under which the Board or the Chief are authorized to discipline subjects, i.e.: The Board may suspend for periods exceeding ten days and demote and terminate; the Chief may suspend subjects only up to ten (10) days. Questions/Next Steps: JCE to continue monitoring disciplinary issues.

160. EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall develop and establish written policies

and procedures to ensure that the Town Attorney provides close guidance to EHPD and the Board

at the disciplinary stage to ensure that EHPD’s and the Board’s disciplinary decisions are as fair

and legally defensible as possible.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Policy 209.1 Disciplinary Matrix was been approved by the Parties as of December 31, 2014. Policy 209.2 – Disciplinary Matrix (revision) became effective July 1, 2015 and included some minor changes which were reviewed and approved by Parties in May 2015. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 209.1 Disciplinary Matrix takes into consideration the employees’ Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA); This policy was reviewed and approved by Town Hall Counsel. JCE to continue monitoring.

IX. SUPERVISION AND MANAGEMENT


161. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that EHPD supervisors provide the close and effective

supervision necessary for officers to improve and grow as police officers; to police actively and

effectively, and to identify, correct, and prevent misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD

shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the supervision and management section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Review of reports and meetings with supervisors during site visits.

97

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 99 of 130

A. Duties of Supervisors

162. EHPD supervisors shall provide, and shall be held accountable for providing, the close and

effective supervision necessary to direct and guide officers. Close and effective supervision

requires that supervisors: (a) respond to the scene of certain arrests; (b) review each arrest report;

(c) respond to the scene of uses of force; (d) investigate each use of force (except those

investigated by the IAO); (e) confirm the accuracy and completeness of officers’ written reports;

(f) respond to each complaint of misconduct; (f) ensure officers are working actively to engage the

community and increase public trust and safety; and (g) provide counseling, redirection, support

to officers as needed, and are held accountable for performing each of these duties.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Although the JCE has witnessed and learned about effective supervision inside the EHPD during the past 30 months and the Policies and Procedures Manual training was completed, this paragraph will continue to be carefully monitored.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

On-site observations in the EHPD; Discussions about supervisory response to use of force and misconduct cases with Chief Larrabee. Review of Supervisory reports show supervisors respond to use of force cases and serious arrest incidents, as required by the Agreement. Review of IAO files.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue discussions with Chief Larrabee and on-site observations.

163. On-duty field supervisors shall be available throughout their shift to respond to the field to provide supervision to officers under their direct command and, as needed, to provide supervisory assistance to other shifts.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors. On-site interviews with officers. Supervisory Reports show supervisors respond to use of force cases and serious arrest incidents, as required by the Agreement. Arrest Reports (sampling). All Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

98

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 100 of 130

164. Shift commanders shall closely and effectively supervise the officers under their command.

All EHPD Commanders and supervisors shall ensure that all supervisors and officers under their

command comply with EHPD policy, state and federal law, and the requirements of this

Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

No violations have been detected or reported to the JCE. The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors. On-site interviews with officers. Supervisory Reports. Arrest Reports (sampling). Detainee reports. All Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor

165. EHPD shall hold commanders and supervisors directly accountable for the quality and

effectiveness of their supervision, including whether commanders and supervisors identify and

effectively respond to misconduct, as part of their performance evaluations and through non-

disciplinary corrective action, or through the initiation of formal investigation and the disciplinary

process, as appropriate.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The one year mark for all EHPD members to undergo performance evaluation

based on their anniversary date is June 15, 2015.

Recommendations After June 15, 2015, performance evaluation reviews will be addressed on every JCE site-visit and discussed in the JCE Three-year report.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 215.1

On-site interviews with supervisors (Lieutenants). On-site interviews with officers.

Supervisory Reports. Arrest Reports (sampling).

All Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will review performance evaluations for next reporting period ending December 31, 2015.

166. Within twelve months of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement an EHPDspecific system to accurately evaluate officer performance in areas related to integrity, community policing, and critical police functions on both an ongoing and annual basis that comports with professional police practices and the requirements of this Agreement. As part of this program, EHPD shall establish a formalized system documenting annual performance evaluations of each officer by the officer’s direct supervisor which shall include assessment of:
a) community engagement and communication with the public;
 b) use of community-policing and problem-solving strategies;

99

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 101 of 130

c) d) e) f) g) h) i) j) Compliance

civilian commendations and complaints; disciplinary actions; compliance with policies on usage of sick leave and other leave; compliance with policies on secondary employment; safety (e.g., POST officer safety standards and vehicle operations); training; report-writing; and decision-making skills.
Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The East Haven Board of Police Commissioners adopted a policy, which became effective on June 15, 2014, that calls for annual performance evaluations on an employee’s anniversary date. After June 15, 2015, performance evaluation reviews will be addressed on every JCE site-visit and discussed in the JCE Three-year report. Employees have reviewed and signed off on Policy 215.1 via the online Power DMS system as well as received individual and roll call training. Supervisors have also received training on completing the evaluation forms.

Recommendations

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 215.1 Power DMS System Roster. For the last six months, EHPD reported that there were no major deficiencies noted in the evaluations conducted thus far. There were just basic improvement and career development for many of the young officers having only a few years’ experience. Each individual employee evaluation is reviewed and placed in the employee’s own personnel file. After June 15, 2015, performance evaluation reviews will be addressed on every JCE site-visit and discussed in the JCE Three-year report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will review random evaluations on future site visits and report on progress during the 36 month reporting period.

167. Annual performance evaluations shall be based upon work performance completed during the specific rating period. The officer’s current direct supervisor shall complete the performance evaluation, but all supervisory personnel who supervised the officer during the rating period should provide written input, which shall be considered by the officer’s current supervisor and incorporated into the performance evaluation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Performance evaluations based upon Policies and Procedures are conducted

yearly on the employee’s anniversary date.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 215.1. The EHPD reported that there were no major deficiencies noted. They also noted that some reports included “just basic improvement and career development for many of the young officers having only a few years’ experience.” Each individual employee evaluation is reviewed and

100

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 102 of 130

SITE VISIT

placed in the employee’s own personnel file. Questions/Next Steps:
 The JCE will continue to review random evaluations.


B. Early Identification System

168. EHPD shall develop, implement and maintain an Early Identification System (“EIS”) to

support the effective supervision and management of EHPD officers and employees, including the

identification of and response to potentially problematic behaviors as early as possible. EHPD will

regularly use EIS data to promote ethical and professional police practices; to manage risk and

liability; and to evaluate the performance of EHPD employees across all ranks, units and shifts.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

At the 180-day mark, the EHPD had begun implementing protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS). At the 365day mark, the EHPD started using/implementing the EIS to automatically draw information from the Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS), the in-house computer reporting system. At the 18-month mark and through the 30-month mark, the EIS is fully operational and continues to track:

• Any firearm discharge or use. • ECW (Taser) deployment or use; two (2) within a 60-day period. • Baton or O/C use; two (2) within a 60-day period • Non-compliant handcuffing • Physical use of force: three (3) within a 30-day period • Pursuits; two (2) within a 30-day period • Officers arrests, including interfering with police, obstructing a police officer, resisting arrest, and assault on a police officer; two (2) within a 60day period • Traffic accidents involving EHPD equipment; three (3) within 12-month period • Civil lawsuits; two (2) within a 12-month period • Excessive absences; eight (8) unscheduled occurrences in any 12-month period

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The EIS is monitored by the IAO and bi-weekly by the officer’s supervisor. IAO and supervisors initiate and implement any intervention deemed necessary for the officer and document same in writing on the Departmental Review reporting area of LEAS consistent with the EHPD Early Intervention System (EIS) – Policy 207.2 None
Policy 207.2; Supplemental Reports on EIS by EHPD IAO Naccarato; JCE on-site review of EIS. EIS was not triggered during this period. Questions/Next Steps:

101

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 103 of 130

The JCE continues on-site review of EIS and any updates/upgrades.

169. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a

protocol setting out which fields in EIS shall include historical data; deadlines for inputting data

related to current and new information; and the individuals responsible for capturing and inputting

data.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD implemented protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS) that captures both historical data and emerging information about all sworn employees, automatically drawing data from the EHPD’s Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS). The EIS provides a single repository of all relevant information about each sworn employee, both positive and negative. The system has been designed to identify patterns and will establish thresholds in such areas as civilian complaints, uses of force, firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive absences, and other factors to identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct and in need of supervisory intervention.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.2 Onsite observation of completed EIS.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE continues to review EIS on-site.

170. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a protocol for using the EIS and information obtained from it. The protocol for using the EIS shall address data storage, data retrieval, reporting, data analysis, pattern identification, identifying officers for intervention, supervisory use, supervisory/departmental intervention, documentation and audit. Among protocol requirements EHPD shall include:
a) comparative data analysis, including peer group, shift and unit analysis, to identify patterns of activity by individual officers and groups of officers;
b) EHPD commander and supervisor review, on a regular basis, but not less than biweekly, of EIS reports regarding each officer under the commander or supervisor’s direct command and, at least quarterly, broader, pattern-based reports;
c) EHPD commanders and supervisors to initiate, implement, and assess the effectiveness of interventions for individual officers, supervisors, and shifts, based on assessment of the information contained in the EIS; d) require an array of intervention options to facilitate an effective response to identified problems. Interventions may take the form of counseling or training, or of other supervised, monitored, and documented action plans and strategies designed to modify activity. All interventions will be documented in writing and entered into the automated system; e) specify that the decision to order an intervention for an employee or group using EIS data shall include peer group analysis, including consideration of the nature of the employee’s

102

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 104 of 130

assignment, and not solely on the number or percentages of incidents in any category of

information recorded in the EIS;

f) prompt review by EHPD commanders and supervisors of the EIS system records of

all officers upon transfer to their supervision or command;

g) evaluation of EHPD commanders and supervisors based on their appropriate use of

the EIS to enhance effective and ethical policing and reduce risk; and

h) mechanisms to ensure monitored and secure access to the EIS to ensure the

integrity, proper use, and appropriate confidentiality of the data.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD

implemented protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification

System (EIS) that captured both historical data and emerging information

about all sworn employees, automatically drawing data from the EHPD’s Law

Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS). The EIS provided a single

repository of all relevant information about each sworn employee, both

positive and negative. The system has been designed to identify patterns and

will establish thresholds in such areas as civilian complaints, uses of force,

firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive absences, and other factors to

identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct and in need of

supervisory intervention.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.2

Onsite observation of completed EIS.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE continues to review EIS on-site.

171. The EIS shall include all relevant information available to EHPD to assess the conduct of each officer, including:

a) all awards and commendations received by employees;

b) investigations of the officer;

c) complaints (including civil lawsuits) against the officer and their dispositions;

d) data collected regarding the officer’s stops, search and seizures and uses of force;

e) data about officer’s arrests, including arrests for interfering with a police officer,

resisting arrest, assault on a police officer, and disorderly conduct;

f) training history;

g) supervisory reviews;

h) all vehicle pursuits and traffic collisions involving EHPD equipment;

i) all loss or theft of EHPD property or equipment in the custody of the employee,

including currency, firearms, force instruments, and identification cards; and

j) any disciplinary or other corrective action taken against the officer.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EIS includes all information required by this Settlement Agreement

103

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 105 of 130

paragraph. Additional training data is available on another computer. Recommendations Discuss issues with IAO Naccarato

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE reviewed the EIS system on-site. IAO Naccarato’s 365-day supplemental report and Policy 207.2 IAO Naccarato’s 18-month supplemental report. IAO Naccarato’s 24-month supplemental report. IAO Naccarato’s 30-month supplemental report. IAO Naccarato’s 2014 Public Accountability Annual Report. On-site review of EIS and training information. Questions/Next Steps: None

172. The EIS shall include appropriate identifying information for each involved officer (i.e., name, badge number, shift and supervisor) and civilian.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The EIS Database includes all the identifying information required under this paragraph. Questions/Next Steps: None

173. EHPD shall maintain all personally identifiable information about an officer included in the

EIS for at least five years following the officer’s separation from the agency. Information

necessary for aggregate statistical analysis will be maintained indefinitely in the EIS. On an

ongoing basis, EHPD will enter information into the EIS in a timely, accurate, and complete

manner, and shall maintain the data in a secure and confidential manner. No individual within

EHPD shall have access to individually identifiable information that is maintained only within EIS

and is about an officer not within that individual’s direct command, except as necessary for

investigative, technological, or auditing purposes.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis The EIS Database includes all the identifying information required under this

paragraph.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Monitor EIS/IAO reports.

174. The EIS, including any computer programs and hardware, will be operational, fully implemented, and be used in accordance with policies and protocols that incorporate the requirements of this Agreement within 365 days of the Effective Date. Prior to full implementation of the new EIS, EHPD will continue to use existing resources to the fullest extent

104

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 106 of 130

possible, to identify patterns of conduct by employees or groups of officers.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Full Compliance
None The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates. EIS Database includes all requirements under this paragraph. Policy 207.2, Deputy Chief Lennon’s 365-day and 18-month report and IAO Naccarato’s 365-day,18-month supplemental report and IAO Naccarato’s 2014 Public Accountability Annual Report. JCE verified in person. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to monitor

C. Visual and Audio Documentation of Police Activities

175. EHPD shall maintain and operate video cameras and AVL in all police vehicles and shall repair or replace all non-functioning video cameras or AVL units. EHPD shall ensure that that recordings are captured, maintained, and reviewed as appropriate by supervisors, in addition to any review for investigatory or audit purposes, to assess the quality and appropriateness of officer interactions, uses of force, and other police activities.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations

Since all technology is in-car and tied to computer, if the technology is not operating correctly, the car will not start. Supervisors inspect AVL’s periodically to ensure device is functioning correctly; they also review all videos to ensure they are being utilized as per Department rules.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.3 and Supervisory reports

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor

176. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and procedures regarding AVL, in-car recorders, ECWs, and similar equipment that require:
a) activation of in-car cameras for all traffic stops and pursuits until the motor vehicle stop is completed and the stopped vehicle departs, or until the officer's participation in the motor vehicle stop ends; b) activation of ECW cameras when the ECW is unholstered; c) activation of in-car cameras for incidents in which a prisoner being transported is
violent or resistant;
d) supervisors to review AVL, in-car camera recordings, and ECW recordings of all officers listed in any EHPD report regarding any incident involving injuries to a prisoner or an officer, uses of

105

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 107 of 130

force, vehicle pursuits, or misconduct complaints;

e) supervisors to review recordings regularly and to incorporate the knowledge

gained from this review into their ongoing evaluation and supervision of officers;

f) that EHPD retain and preserve all recordings for at least three years; however if a case is

reasonably anticipated to lead to litigation or remains under investigation or litigation longer

than three years, EHPD shall retain and preserve the recordings for at least three years after the

final disposition of the matter, including appeals; and

g) that an officer notify a supervisor immediately when an event was not recorded.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The policy was completed and went into effect in September 2013. Training

was completed in January and February 2014 and the policy was fully

implemented throughout 2014. The JCE will continue to track compliance on

this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.3

Training roster. On-going training.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

None

177. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a schedule for testing AVL, in-car recorder, and ECW camera recording equipment to confirm that it is in proper working order. Officers shall be responsible for ensuring that recording equipment assigned to them or their car is functioning properly at the beginning and end of each shift and shall report immediately any improperly functioning equipment.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this paragraph, if the in-car technology (computer) is not

functioning properly, the car will not start.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.3. JCE has read reports during this period from supervisors reporting defective AVL. ECW and in-car recording equipment.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

178. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall provide each supervisor with handheld

recording devices and require that supervisors use these devices to record complainant and witness

statements taken as part of use of force or misconduct complaint investigations

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with Paragraph 178 of the Settlement Agreement, EHPD supervisors have been equipped with iPhones capable of functioning as recording devices and suitable for recording the statements of witnesses and complainants in the field in use of force cases and other cases. In addition, supervisors have been using Department-issued body cams to record

106

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 108 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

interviews and complaints The JCE will continue to monitor the use of the iPhones to record complainant and witness statements per Policy 401.3. Policy 401.3 On-site observation. All supervisors received training as IA investigators, as per the Chief. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to interview supervisors regarding functionality of iPhones.

X. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT


179. EHPD shall create robust community relationships and engage constructively with the

community to ensure collaborative problem-solving, ethical and bias-free policing, and increase

community confidence in the Department. EHPD shall establish community and problem-oriented

policing principles in its policing operations. EHPD shall also engage the public in the reform

process through the dissemination of public information on a regular basis. EHPD and the Town

shall develop, implement, and maintain systems to ensure comprehensive, effective, and

transparent oversight of EHPD that will be sustained after the completion of this Agreement. To

achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the community engagement and oversight section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

180. EHPD shall, in all of its policing operations, adopt the professional police practices of

community oriented and problem-solving policing, including robust community partnerships,

cooperative strategies, and promoting trust in the community.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD has made considerable progress in this area. This paragraph will continue to be monitored by the JCE. The Chief and his leadership team have been visible in the community. The importance of constant community engagement must be underscored. Chief continues to emphasize the importance of formal and informal community engagement throughout all ranks.

Evidentiary Basis Group and individual meetings with residents, businesses and faith-based members of the community and EHPD. Community Liaison Officer Report.

107

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 109 of 130

SITE VISIT

Onsite observation at community meetings. Meetings with community members. Chief has assigned sector PO’s to high school as Liaison and they’re staying in touch w/school Principal; officers on walking beat are assigned to new substations. Citizen’s police academy: 20 started class and 15 graduated. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to attend community meetings and interview members of the residential, business and faith-based communities.

181. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall appoint and/or hire a Community Liaison

Officer who is a sworn officer fluent in English and Spanish. The Community Liaison Officer

shall also have formalized training in the nature and scope of federal and state civil rights law as

applied to law enforcement activity

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Lieutenant David Emerman has been selected as both the language access coordinator and the community liaison officer. Lt. Emerman is bi-lingual and fluently speaks English and Spanish. Due to his educational background and life experiences, Lt. Emerman is very cultured in fostering good community relationships with various community groups, especially the local Latino community. The JCE has discussed the need to have a succession plan in place for this vital role and the EHPD has responded by assigning a Spanishspeaking officer to LT. Emerman for training as community Liaison.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

THE EHPD 90-day Compliance Report; Meetings with Lt. Emerman; 365day report, 18-month report, 24-month report and 30-month report. Media – newspaper articles. Community Liaison Officer Report. EHPD has responded by assigning a Spanish-speaking officer to LT. Emerman for training as community Liaison.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ensure that a designated Community Liaison Officer is in place if staffing changes/promotions occur.

182. EHPD shall make the contact information and duty hours of the Community Liaison Officer public on its website and on any EHPD document generally available to the public. The Community Liaison Officer shall be directly available for public contact during normal business hours. The Community Liaison Officer shall have the following duties:

a) The Community Liaison Officer shall arrange for quarterly meetings of East Haven residents designed to permit residents to voice their concerns and ask questions. The meetings shall be conducted as follows:

i.

The meeting shall be attended by the Community Liaison Officer, at least one

senior EHPD command staff member, and by officers responsible for patrolling, or supervising

108

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 110 of 130

patrol, in both the north and south sections of the Town. All EHPD personnel present shall be identified, in uniform, and available for responses to questions from residents of East Haven.
ii. Names shall not be required of persons attending the meeting, nor shall any investigative law enforcement action be taken at or after this meeting that involves attendees in any way, absent an emergency. EHPD may act based on information explicitly communicated at the meeting for that purpose.
iii. EHPD shall notify the public of this meeting and the requirements of this provision, including anonymity, regarding this meeting in the local press two weeks in advance of the meeting.
iv. The meeting location shall alternate between the north and south sections of the Town so that the meeting is held in each section quarterly.

b) The Community Liaison Officer shall review, on a monthly basis, all complaints submitted to EHPD by members of the community to assess community concerns. For those complaints that do not rise to the level of requiring formal action under EHPD policy, code of conduct, and the terms of this Agreement, the Community Liaison Officer shall notify the complainant of the availability of the Community Liaison Officer to answer the complainant’s questions and respond to any further concerns.

c) The Community Liaison Officer shall meet monthly with the Chief of Police, the

Mayor, and the Board. During these meetings, the Community Liaison Officer shall communicate

the concerns that the Community Liaison Officer has received during the previous month, along

with any other relevant information pertaining to the relationship of EHPD with East Haven

residents.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This paragraph was modified from the original Settlement Agreement to

clarify where meetings should be held in town to make the meetings more

convenient to residents throughout the town. Meetings now take place on

alternating sides of town (north and south).

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

A second modification was made to and approved by the Court on December 19, 2014 to the requirement of monthly community meetings to quarterly meetings due to low attendance. The Community Liaison Officer is well known by the community in East Haven and he arranges and attends all meetings and reports concerns to the Chief. Develop succession plan for Community Liaison Officer to continue this work. Develop additional strategies for attracting community members to quarterly meetings. 365-day Supplemental Report and JCE on-site meetings and interviews. 18-month Report. 24-month Report. 30-month Report. On-site meetings with Lt. Emerman. Community meetings coordinated by the Community Liaison Officer and

109

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 111 of 130

SITE VISIT

held on January 28, 2015 and April 19, 2015. Ten week Citizen Police Academy completed April 13, 2015 (15 graduates) Community meeting scheduled for 2015 Second Police Academy is scheduled for fall 2015 Community Liaison Officer meets regularly with the Police Commission and the Police Chief Questions/Next Steps: Discuss succession plan and strategy to attract more community members with Lt. Emerman.

183. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a strategic recruitment plan that

includes clear goals, objectives, and action steps for attracting high-quality applicants for

employment across all levels of EHPD, sworn and civilian. EHPD’s strategic recruitment plan

shall establish and clearly identify the duties and goals of EHPD’s recruitment efforts. The

strategic recruitment plan shall include specific strategies for attracting a diverse pool of

applicants, including members of groups that have been historically underrepresented in EHPD

and applicants fluent in Spanish.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this paragraph, Chief Brent Larrabee, Attorney Larry

Sgrignari, and Lt. Lennon attended the February 20, 2013 meeting of the East

Haven Civil Service Commission. After consulting with the Commission

members along with Chief Examiner Andrea Liquori, the Commission

requested the submission of various recommended changes to their rules by

their next meeting in order to comply with the Settlement Agreement. These

changes support the Department’s goals of moving towards a highly

competent professional law enforcement agency. On March 11, 2013, the

Civil Service Commission implemented the rule changes for the recruitment

and hiring of both sworn and non-sworn EHPD employees. These changes

include a tiered point system to encourage the recruiting of a more

professional and well suited applicant. Although the hiring provisions utilized

to hire police officers is regulated by the Connecticut General Statutes § 7-

294 and the regulations of the CT POST Council, the encouragement for

recruitment of a diverse applicant pool is driven by exceptional recruiting.

The tiered point system grants additional testing points to applicants that

provide proof of higher education, veteran’s points for military service, or the

ability to fluently speak languages other than English. In addition, the Civil

Service Commission has adopted a recruitment plan. Pursuant to the plan, the

EHPD actively advertises upcoming recruiting using various media sources.

All advertisements are in both English and Spanish. Some of the locations for

advertisement are:

• All local newspapers (both English and Spanish)

• Postings on EHPD and Town website

• Multiple and frequent announcements on the EHPD’s Facebook© and

Twitter© pages

• Online media advertisements on local news sources such as the East Haven

110

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 112 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Patch A much more diverse police department as compared to a few years ago. The JCE will continue to monitor EHPD recruitment efforts per this paragraph. The EHPD 90-day Compliance Report and phone conferences with Chief Larrabee.

The selection process used is the standard Civil Service testing process that is not regulated or established by the Police Department. This process applies from the hiring of new officers up to the rank of Captain. The process includes a standardized written test, standardized independent (outside personnel from other agencies as the evaluators) oral board assessment, Chief’s interview, and an interview by the Board of Police Commissioners.

SITE VISIT

The following personnel changes were made during the reporting period: - 2 new Officers hired – (Lateral Transfers) - In addition the State Civil service gave an exam for detective earlier this year. Three people passed and all three were promoted. Their promotions will take effect September 7, 2015. - Also, there presently are 3-5 vacancies and EHPD plans to fill them in the next 30-60 days. As a result EHPD today has a much more diverse police department. See JCE’s summary above for more information on diversity.
Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review and discuss recruitment plan strategies with EHPD leader and the 3-5 vacancies EHPD is planning to fill in the next 30-60 days.

184. All EHPD audits and reports related to the implementation of this Agreement shall be made

publicly available via website and at the Police Department, Town Hall, and other public locations,

in English and in Spanish, to the fullest extent permissible under law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Although the major compliance reports marking 60, 90, 280, 270 and 365

days, and 18, 24 and 30 months after the Settlement Agreement Effective

Date are posted on the websites, the JCE will continue to review additional

materials related to EHPD policies and procedures and may make additional

recommendations for adding materials.

Recommendations

The JCE will continue to work with Deputy Chief Lennon to identify additional materials for posting on the public website at the Police Department, Town Hall and Hagaman Public Library. Discussions of a blog, other social media outlets, using interns and other new processes to reach public should be continued.

Evidentiary Basis EHPD Website and JCE on-site observations.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to verify and ensure updated materials are in place.

111

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 113 of 130

185. EHPD shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to facilitate and ensure

transparency and wide public access to information related to EHPD decision making and

activities, as permitted by law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE is continuing to work with USDOJ and EHPD to track compliance on this paragraph since all training on the new Policy Manual was completed in February 2014 and continued to be implemented throughout 2015. Annual Use of Force reports, Stops, Search and Seizures reports --all available to the public.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Annual Use of Force reports, Stops, Search and Seizures reports, Policy Manual --all were published and accessible to the public.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Discuss any new ideas regarding transparency and information sharing with EHPD.

XI. AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT
A. Role of the Joint Compliance Expert
186. The Parties shall select a Joint Compliance Expert (“JCE”) to assist the Parties in determining whether the terms of this Agreement have been fully and timely implemented, including reviewing and making recommendations on new or revised policies, training curricula, standard operating procedures, plans, protocols, and other operational documents related to this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall also assess and report whether the requirements of this Agreement have been implemented, and whether this implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD.
187. The Joint Compliance Expert shall only have the duties, responsibilities and authority conferred by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not, and is not intended to, replace or assume the role and duties of the Mayor, Board, Chief of Police, or EHPD.
188. In order to assess and report on the Town’s implementation of this Agreement and whether implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct the compliance reviews and audits, outcome assessments, and incident reviews specified below, and such additional audits, reviews, and assessments as the Joint Compliance Expert or the Parties deem appropriate.

112

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 114 of 130
B. Compliance Reviews and Audits
189. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct compliance reviews or audits as necessary to determine whether the Town has implemented and continues to comply with the material requirements of this Agreement. Compliance with a material requirement of this Agreement requires that the Town has: (a) incorporated the requirement into policy; (b) trained all relevant personnel as necessary to fulfill their responsibilities pursuant to the requirement; and (c) that the requirement is being carried out in actual practice. Compliance reviews and audits shall contain both qualitative and quantitative elements as necessary for reliability and comprehensiveness.
C. Outcome Assessments
190. In addition to compliance reviews and audits, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct qualitative and quantitative outcome assessments to measure whether the Town’s implementation of this Agreement has promoted effective and constitutional policing. These outcome assessments shall include collection and analysis, both quantitative and qualitative, of the following outcome data
a) Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement measurements, including: i. A reliable, comprehensive, and representative annual survey of members
of the East Haven community regarding their experiences with and perceptions of EHPD and of public safety. This comprehensive community survey shall include measures to ensure input from individuals of each significantly represented demographic category;
ii. Number and variety of community partnerships, with particular consideration of partnerships with youth, and qualitative assessment of the depth and effectiveness of those partnerships.
b) Stop, Search and Arrest measurements, including: i. The number and rate of arrests for which there is articulated reasonable
suspicion for the stop and probable cause for the arrest, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category;
ii. The number and rate of arrests which are prosecuted, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category; and
iii. The number and rate of searches which result in a finding of contraband, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category.
c) Use of Force measurements including: i. Rate of force used per arrest by EHPD overall and by force type;
geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic category; ii. Rate of force complaints that are sustained and rate that are not sustained,
overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); source of complaint (internal or external); type of arrest; and demographic category;
iii. Uses of Force that were found to violate policy overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic category;
iv. Number and rate of Use of Force administrative investigations/reviews in which each finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence; and
113

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 115 of 130

v. Number of officers who frequently or repeatedly use force, or have more than one instance of force found to violate policy.

d) Recruitment and Training measurements, including: i.Number of highly-qualified recruit candidates that have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities; ii. Number of candidates with Spanish language fluency; iii. Officer and agency reports of adequacy of training in type and frequency; and
iv. Role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by performance trends.

e) Supervision measurements, including: i. Initial identification of officer violations and performance problems by
supervisors, and effective response by supervisors to identified problems.

f) Accountability measurements, including:

i. The number of misconduct complaints, with a qualitative assessment of

whether any increase or decrease appears related to access to the complaint process;

ii. Rate of sustained, not sustained, exonerated and unfounded misconduct

complaints;

iii. Number and rate of misconduct complaints in which the finding for each

allegation is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;

iv. Number of officers who are subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, or

have repeated instances of sustained misconduct complaints.

v. Number and nature of civil suits against EHPD officers for on or off duty

police conduct, regardless of whether the Town or EHPD is a defendant in the litigation, and

settlement or penalty amounts;

vi. Arrests/Summons of officers for on or off duty conduct; and

vii. Criminal prosecutions of officers for on or off duty conduct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement measurements, including:

(JCE notes in italics and parentheses below)

i. Survey: A community survey was prepared and

executed online, but there were not enough participants to achieve a

statistically significant sample. The JCE, working in collaboration with the

Parties, is in the process of engaging another survey firm to conduct a new

survey in the Fall 2015.

ii. Number and variety of community partnerships, with

particular consideration of partnerships with youth, and qualitative assessment

of the depth and effectiveness of those partnerships.

(Community groups/partnerships that the EHPD has been a part of have included: The Juvenile Review Board (JRB) which includes members from Police Department, Juvenile Probation, East Haven Public Schools, East Haven Youth Services, and the Juvenile Prosecutor’s Office.

114

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 116 of 130
Citizen’s Police Academy group started in January 2015- First class graduated in April 2015. Liquor Commission Meeting with Liquor Vendors (Liquor Stores).
There have been several published accounts from community members, clergy, and even the US Attorney General speaking positively about the good relationship that exist today between the EHPD and the community. The JCE and the Parties are working to have a community survey conducted to gauge community sentiments towards EHPD in a more formal way)
b) Stop, Search and Arrest measurements, including: i. The number and rate of arrests for which there is
articulated reasonable suspicion for the stop and probable cause for the arrest, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category;
(The EHPD reported the following to the JCE: Certain violations require the investigating officer to take enforcement action to remove the vehicle and/or operator from the roadway, such as operating under suspension, operating without a license, operating under the influence, misuse or possession of stolen marker plate, operating without insurance, and/or active arrest warrants for the operator. In total, 190 stops, during this six-month time period through June 2015, had one of these situations in which the officer did not have discretion and was required to take some type of enforcement action. Of these 190 stops, 56 operators or 29.47 percent were Hispanic. 114 operators or 60 percent were white non-Hispanic. 18 operators or 9.47 percent were black.
Of the stops in which officers had the ability to exercise discretion, 979 stops were of white non-Hispanic operators and resulted in 324 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 33.09 percent of stops in this category. In the same situation, 170 stops of Hispanic operators resulted in 63 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 37.05 percent of stops in this category. 87 stops of black operators resulted in 24 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 27.58 percent. 14 stops of Middle Eastern operators resulted in 4 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 28.57 percent.
(Please refer to section on Stops, Searches and Seizures, and Arrests above in JCE’s Summary for further analysis).
ii. The number and rate of arrests which are prosecuted, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category;
(Please refer to section on Stops, Searches and Seizures, and Arrests above in
115

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 117 of 130
JCE’s Summary for further analysis).
iii. The number and rate of searches which result in a finding of contraband, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category.
(The EHPD reported to the JCE the following: Out of the 1,456 vehicles stopped by EHPD, 49 were searched. A further analysis indicates that 35 of those searches were in fact motor vehicle inventories, which are governed by EHPD Policies and Procedures # 702. The remaining 14 searches resulted in 9 (0.82 percent) vehicles searched in which the operator was identified as white non-Hispanic, 3 (1.32 percent) vehicles in which the operator was identified as Hispanic, and 2 (1.90 percent) vehicles in which the operator was identified as black. Contraband was located during 6 of the searches: 3 were white non-Hispanic; 2 were Hispanic; and 1 was black non-Hispanic. For additional analysis, please refer to sections on Search, Seizures, and Arrests, and Bias-Free Policing in JCE’s Summary above.)
c) Use of Force measurements including: i. Rate of force used per arrest by EHPD overall and by
force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic category;
(From January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015, there were a total of 441 arrests and 169 emergency committals. During the period from January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015 there were 34 incidents where use of force was involved.
Of those 34 incidents, there were 59 total uses of force (this includes multiple reports for the same incident, ie: if two officers pulled their weapons out during the same incident, this would count as two separate uses of force). No serious injuries resulted from any of these incidents, which were broken down as follows:
• 19 Physical (hands on)
• 7 Non- Compliant Handcuffing
• 15 Firearm (no discharge)
• 9 Taser (no discharge)
• 9 Pursuits
There were 19 arrests in those 34 incidents and 4 emergency committals)
ii. Rate of force complaints that are sustained and rate that
116

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 118 of 130

are not sustained, overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); source of complaint (internal or external); type of arrest; and demographic category;
(The JCE reviewed all Use of Force reports and determined that all were justified during this time period. None were found to violate policy. No officers have been found to use force more frequently than others and no serious policy violations have taken place. There was one officer who failed to report a use of force (use of firearm-no discharge), and that officer was disciplined.) No Use of Force complaints were filed during this period.
iii. Uses of Force that were found to violate policy overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic category;
(All uses of force have been determined to be justified during this time period. Only one officer was found to have violated policy by not reporting a use of firearm (no discharge) and that officer was disciplined. No officers have been found to use force more frequently than others.)
iv. Number and rate of Use of Force administrative investigations/reviews in which each finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;
(The JCE reviewed all use of force reports and determined that all were justified during this time period. Only one officer was found to have violated policy by not reporting a use of firearm (no discharge) and that officer was disciplined. No officers have been found to use force more frequently than others)
and v. Number of officers who frequently or repeatedly use
force, or have more than one instance of force found to violate policy.
(All uses of force were determined to have been justified during this time period. No officers were found to have used force more frequently than others.)
d) Recruitment and Training measurements, including: i.Number of highly-qualified recruit candidates that have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities;

ii.

Number of candidates with Spanish language fluency;

• ( EHPD is presently working off a newly administered Police entrance

117

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 119 of 130
exam conducted by the State of Connecticut and it hopes to hire 3 to 5 new officers from this list in the fall 2015. The JCE will monitor this process).
iii. Officer and agency reports of adequacy of training in type and frequency;
(EHPD continues to utilize instructors and lesson plans pre-approved by the Department of Justice as required by the S.A. The JCE/DOJ have been provided with lesson plans and/or curricula consistent with the S.A. JCE audited in-service training during the month of June this year. Please see JCE’s Summary report above for further information.)
and iv. Role of lack of training reflected in problematic
incidents or by performance trends.
(As for the role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by performance trends, EHPD has reported to the JCE that one officer did not satisfactorily complete the required recruit field training program during this period and, as a result, was terminated from EHPD. No issues were reported to the JCE, which were believed to have been caused by or resulted from a lack of training.)
e) Supervision measurements, including: i. Initial identification of officer violations and
performance problems by supervisors, and effective response by supervisors to identified problems.
(The EHPD reported to the JCE that there were no major deficiencies noted during performance evaluations conducted this year. There were just basic improvement and career development for many of the young officers having only a few years’ experience. Each individual employee evaluation is
reviewed and placed in the employees own personnel file. There was one
minor issue that was dealt with by the line supervisors, when an officer failed to report a lost badge in a timely manner and was suspended for two days.)
f) Accountability measurements, including: i. The number of misconduct complaints, with a
qualitative assessment of whether any increase or decrease appears related to access to the complaint process;
(2014 was the first full year of data on IA complaints. The JCE will analyze 2014 data against a full year of data for 2015 for the next reporting period that ends December 31, 2015. However, so far through June 30, 2015, there have been only 4 complaints made against EHPD officers.)
118

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 120 of 130

ii. Rate of sustained, not sustained, exonerated and unfounded misconduct complaints;

(There have been only 4 complaints made against EHPD officers: One was never filed but nevertheless investigated by EHPD and officer was counseled; one officer was exonerated; one officer terminated for not satisfactorily completing field training; two officers in one case were investigated by the IAO and exonerated. Also the State’s Attorney cleared both- See JCE Summary report above for details.)

iii. Number and rate of misconduct complaints in which the finding for each allegation is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;

(There have been only 4 complaints made against EHPD officers: One was never filed but nevertheless investigated by EHPD and officer was counseled; one office was exonerated; one officer terminated for not satisfactorily completing field training; one is still under investigation by EHPD. Although the State’s Attorney cleared him- See JCE Summary report above for details.)

iv. Number of officers who are subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, or have repeated instances of sustained misconduct complaints.

(No officers were found to be subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, whether sustained or otherwise.)

v. Number and nature of civil suits against EHPD officers for on or off duty police conduct, regardless of whether the Town or EHPD is a defendant in the litigation, and settlement or penalty amounts;

(No civil suits have been filed against EHPD or its officers or the town for this reporting period.)

conduct;

vi. Arrests/Summons of officers for on or off duty

(No officers were arrested for any incident in EHPD this period.)

and conduct.

vii. Criminal prosecutions of officers for on or off duty

(There have been no criminal prosecutions of EHPD officers this reporting

119

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 121 of 130

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

period.)
Continue to work with the JCE on collecting and analyzing these data. Data provided in EHPD 30 month report. Additional data collected from phone conference and email communication. JCE research and analysis. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to work with EHPD on gathering this information and analyzing it to develop and report outcomes.

191. In conducting these outcome assessments the Joint Compliance Expert may use any relevant data collected and maintained by EHPD, provided that it has determined that this data is reasonably reliable and complete. To conduct the annual community survey, the Joint Compliance Expert shall retain an individual or entity which shall:

a) develop a baseline of measures on public satisfaction with policing, attitudes

among police personnel, and the quality of police-citizen encounters;

b) conduct baseline surveys of Town residents, police personnel, and detained

arrestees, and follow-up surveys on at least an annual basis;

c) ensure that the resident surveys are designed to capture each demographic category;

and

d) conduct the survey in English and Spanish.

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion

The JCE has solicited three nationally recognized survey firms to continue community, department and detainee survey work in East Haven. A fourth local firm identified by the Town of East Haven will also be asked to submit a proposal. A selection will be made by Fall 2015 and work will begin. All results will be presented and discussed in future JCE reports.

Recommendations

Continue to work with Lt. Emerman and survey firm on reaching a statistically significant and representative sample of East Haven’s community. It is anticipated that a second department survey will be given and a detainee survey and survey process will be developed in late 2015.

Evidentiary Basis Survey proposals have been received and are being evaluated by the Parties for a Fall 2015 start.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

D. Outcome Assessment Plan and Review Methodology

192. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:
a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be assessed for compliance, indicating which requirements will be assessed together;
b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome
120

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 122 of 130

measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment occurring within 18 months of the Effective Date; and
c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement of this Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each requirement at least annually thereafter.
193. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:
a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be assessed for compliance, indicating which requirements will be assessed together;
b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment
occurring within 18 months of the Effective Date; and c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement
of this Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each requirement at least annually thereafter.

194. At least 90 days prior to the initiation of any outcome measure assessment or compliance review or audit, the JCE shall submit a proposed methodology for the assessment, review or audit, to the Parties. The Parties shall submit any comments or concerns regarding the proposed methodology to the Joint Compliance Expert within 45 days of the proposed date of the assessment, review or audit. The Joint Compliance Expert shall modify the methodology as necessary to address any concerns or shall inform the Parties in writing of the reasons it is not modifying its methodology as proposed.

E. Review of Use of Force and Misconduct Investigations

195. EHPD shall provide each completed investigation of a serious use of force or use of force that

is the subject of a misconduct investigation, and each misconduct complaint report, to the Joint

Compliance Expert. The Joint Compliance Expert shall review each use of force investigation or

review and each misconduct investigation and recommend for further investigation any use of

force or misconduct complaint investigations the Joint Compliance Expert determines to be

incomplete or for which the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no serious uses of force that the JCE is aware of during this reporting period.

Recommendations None.

Evidentiary Basis Regular contact with Chief Larrabee and command staff.

121

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 123 of 130
F. Joint Compliance Expert Recommendations and Technical Assistance
196. The Joint Compliance Expert may make recommendations to the Parties regarding measures necessary to ensure timely, full and effective implementation of this Agreement and its underlying objectives. Such recommendations may include a recommendation to change, modify, or amend a provision of the Agreement, a recommendation for additional training in any area related to this Agreement, or a recommendation to seek technical assistance. In addition to such recommendations, the Joint Compliance Expert may also, at the request of DOJ or the Town and based on the Joint Compliance Expert’s reviews, provide technical assistance consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert’s responsibilities under this Agreement.
G. Comprehensive Re-Assessment
197. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct a comprehensive assessment two years after the Effective Date to determine whether and to what extent the outcomes intended by this Agreement have been achieved, and any modifications to the Agreement that are necessary for continued achievement in light of changed circumstances or unanticipated impact (or lack of impact) of the requirement. This assessment shall address also areas of greatest achievement and the requirements that appear to have contributed to this success, as well as areas of greatest concern, including strategies for accelerating full and effective compliance. Based upon this comprehensive assessment, the Joint Compliance Expert shall recommend modifications to the Agreement necessary to achieve and sustain intended outcomes. Where the Parties agree with the Joint Compliance Expert’s recommendations, the Parties shall stipulate to modify the Agreement accordingly. This provision in no way diminishes the Parties’ ability to stipulate to modifications to this Agreement as set out below.
H. Joint Compliance Expert Reports
198. The Joint Compliance Expert shall file with the Court semi-annual written, public reports covering the reporting period that shall include:
a) a description of the work conducted by the Joint Compliance Expert during the reporting period;
b) a listing of each Agreement requirement indicating which requirements have been: (i) incorporated into implemented policy; (ii) the subject of sufficient training for all relevant EHPD officers and employees; (iii) reviewed or audited by the Joint Compliance Expert to determine whether they have been fully implemented in actual practice, including the date of the review or audit; and (iv) found by the Joint Compliance Expert to have been fully implemented in practice;
c) the methodology and specific findings for each audit or review conducted, redacted as necessary for privacy concerns. An unredacted version shall be filed under seal with the Court and provided to the Parties. The underlying data for each audit or review shall not be publicly available but shall be retained by the Joint Compliance Expert and provided to either or both Parties upon request;
d) for any requirements that were reviewed or audited and found not to have been fully
122

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 124 of 130
implemented in practice, the Joint Compliance Expert’s recommendations regarding necessary steps to achieve compliance;
e) the methodology and specific findings for each outcome assessment conducted; f) qualitative assessment of EHPD’s progress in achieving the desired outcomes for each area covered by the Agreement--noting issues of concern or particular achievement; and g) a projection of the work to be completed during the upcoming reporting period and any anticipated challenges or concerns related to implementation of the Agreement.
199. The Joint Compliance Expert shall provide a copy of semi-annual reports to the Parties in draft form at least ten business days prior to Court filing and public release of the reports to allow the Parties to informally comment on the reports. The Joint Compliance Expert shall consider the Parties’ responses and make appropriate changes, if any, before issuing the report.
200. The Joint Compliance Expert shall maintain regular contact with the Parties in order to ensure effective and timely communication regarding the status of the Town’s implementation of and compliance with this Agreement.
I. Public Statements, Testimony, Records, and Conflicts of Interest
201. Except as required or authorized by the terms of this Agreement or the Parties acting together: neither the Joint Compliance Expert, including, for the purposes of this paragraph, any agent, employee, or independent contractor thereof, shall make any public statements or issue findings with regard to any act or omission of the Town or its agents, representatives, or employees; or disclose non-public information provided to the Joint Compliance Expert pursuant to the Agreement. Any press statement made by the Joint Compliance Expert regarding its employment or assessment activities under this Agreement shall first be approved by the Parties.
202. The Joint Compliance Expert may testify as to observations, findings, and recommendations before the Court with jurisdiction over this matter, but the Joint Compliance Expert shall not testify in any other litigation or proceeding with regard to any act or omission of the Town or any of its agents, representatives, or employees related to this Agreement or regarding any matter or subject that the Joint Compliance Expert may have received knowledge of as a result of his or her performance under this Agreement. This paragraph does not apply to any proceeding before a court related to performance of contracts or subcontracts for monitoring this Agreement.
203. Unless such conflict is waived by the Parties, the Joint Compliance Expert shall not accept employment or provide consulting services that would present a conflict of interest with the Joint Compliance Expert’s responsibilities under this Agreement, including being retained (on a paid or unpaid basis) by any current or future litigant or claimant, or such litigant’s or claimant’s attorney, in connection with a claim or suit against the Town or its departments, officers, agents or employees.
204. The Joint Compliance Expert is not a state or local agency, or an agent thereof, and accordingly the records maintained by the Joint Compliance Expert shall not be deemed public records subject to public inspection.
123

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 125 of 130

205. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not be liable for any claim, lawsuit, or demand arising out of the Joint Compliance Expert’s performance pursuant to this Agreement.

J. EHPD Compliance Coordinator

206. Within 30 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall identify a compliance coordinator to serve as the single point of contact to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. The Compliance Coordinator shall coordinate the Town’s compliance and implementation activities; facilitate the provision of data, documents, materials, and access to the Town’s personnel to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, as needed; ensure that all data, documents and records are maintained as provided in this Agreement; and assist in assigning implementation and compliance related tasks to EHPD personnel, as directed by the Chief of Police or his/her designee.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Deputy Chief Lennon and Lt. Emerman have been and continue to be exceptionally hard working and effective Compliance Coordinators for the EHPD. Deputy Chief Lennon and Lt. Emerman should be commended for their efforts. This compliance report. Lt. Emerman served as the Compliance Coordinator during Deputy Chief Lennon’s lengthy absence due to training earlier this year.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to ensure a designated Compliance Coordinator, such as Lt Emerman, is in place if staffing changes/promotions occur.

K. Implementation Assessment and Report

207. The Town shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to: (a) document implementation of and compliance with this Agreement, including data and records necessary for the Joint Compliance Expert to conduct reliable outcome assessments, compliance reviews, and audits; and (b) perform ongoing quality assurance in each of the areas addressed by this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The Town has collected, maintained and continues to share needed records

and data with the JCE and USDOJ.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Data provided to JCE and USDOJ.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

124

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 126 of 130
208. Beginning with the Joint Compliance Expert’s first semi-annual report, the Town shall provide to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ a status report no later than 30 days before the Joint Compliance Expert’s semi-annual report is due. The Town’s report shall delineate the steps taken by the Town during the reporting period to implement this Agreement; the Town’s assessment of the status of its progress; plans to correct any problems; and response to any concerns raised in the Joint Compliance Expert’s previous semi-annual report.
L. Access and Confidentiality
209. To facilitate its work, the Joint Compliance Expert may conduct on-site visits and assessments without prior notice to the Town. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all necessary individuals, facilities, and documents, which shall include access to Agreement related trainings, meetings, and reviews such as critical incident reviews; use of force reviews, and disciplinary hearings. EHPD shall notify the Joint Compliance Expert as soon as practicable, and in any case within twelve hours, of any critical firearms discharge, arrest of any officer, or any other potentially high-profile serious incident.
210. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have timely, full and direct access to all of the Town’s staff, employees, and facilities that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall cooperate with the Town to access people and facilities in a reasonable manner that, consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert's responsibilities, minimizes interference with daily operations.
211. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have full and direct access to all of the Town’s documents and data that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement, except any documents or data protected by the attorney-client privilege. Should the Town decline to provide the Joint Compliance Expert access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.
212. To the extent necessary to ensure proper implementation of this Agreement, DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall have full and direct access to all of the Town’s staff, employees, facilities, documents and data. DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall cooperate with the Town to access involved personnel, facilities, and documents in a reasonable manner that, consistent with DOJ’s responsibilities to enforce this Agreement, minimizes interference with daily operations. Should the Town decline to provide DOJ with access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.
125

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 127 of 130

213. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall provide the Town with reasonable notice of a request for copies of documents. Upon such request, the Town shall provide, in a timely manner, copies (electronic, where readily available) of the requested documents to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ.

214. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all records and information relating to

criminal investigations of EHPD officers as permissible by law. The Joint Compliance Expert

shall have access to all documents in criminal investigation files that have been closed by EHPD.

The Joint Compliance Expert shall also have reasonable access to all arrest reports, warrants, and

warrant applications whether or not contained in open criminal investigation files. Where

practicable, arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications shall be obtained from sources other

than open criminal investigation files.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis No new incidents this reporting period.

M. Selection and Compensation of the Joint Compliance Expert

215. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall maintain all non-public information provided by the Town in a confidential manner. This Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any privilege or right the Town may assert, including those recognized at common law or created by statute, rule or regulation, against any other person or entity with respect to the disclosure of any document or communication.

216. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, the Town and DOJ shall together select an independent Joint Compliance Expert, acceptable to both, which shall assess and report on EHPD’s implementation of this Agreement. The selection of the Joint Compliance Expert shall be pursuant to a method jointly established by the Town and DOJ, and will not be governed by any formal or legal procurement requirements. The Joint Compliance Expert and his/her team shall be individuals of the highest ethics.

217. If the Parties are unable to agree on a Joint Compliance Expert or an alternative method of selection within 60 days of the Effective Date, they reserve the right to seek the Court’s assistance by asking the Court to select a Joint Compliance Expert. In that case, each Party shall submit the names of three candidates, or three groups of candidates, along with resumes and cost proposals, to the Court, and the Court shall select a Joint Compliance Expert from among the qualified candidates/candidate groups.

218. The Joint Compliance Expert shall be appointed for a period of four years from the Effective Date and shall have its appointment extended automatically should the Town not demonstrate full and effective compliance at the end of this four-year period.

126

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 128 of 130
219. The Town shall bear all reasonable fees and costs of the Joint Compliance Expert. In selecting the Joint Compliance Expert, DOJ and the Town recognize the importance of ensuring that the fees and costs borne by the Town are reasonable, and accordingly fees and costs shall be one factor considered in selecting the Joint Compliance Expert. In the event that any dispute arises regarding the reasonableness or payment of the Joint Compliance Expert’s fees and costs, the Town, DOJ, and the Joint Compliance Expert shall attempt to resolve such dispute cooperatively prior to seeking the assistance of the Court to resolve such dispute.
220. The Town shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert with permanent office space and reasonable office support such as office furniture, telephones, access to internet, secure document storage, photocopying and scanners.
221. Should any of the Parties to this Agreement determine that the Joint Compliance Expert’s individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors have exceeded their authority or failed to satisfactorily perform the duties required by this Agreement, the Party shall meet and confer to resolve outstanding concerns. If the Parties are unable to agree on a solution, either Party may petition the Court for such relief as the Court deems appropriate, including replacement of the Joint Compliance Expert, and/or any individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors.
N. Court Jurisdiction, Modification of the Agreement, and Enforcement
222. This Agreement shall become effective upon entry by the Court.
223. The Parties agree jointly to file this Agreement with the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. The joint motion shall request that the Court enter the Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), conditionally dismiss the complaint in this action, and retain jurisdiction to enforce the Agreement. Should the United States determine that the Town has failed to comply with the Agreement, the case will be reinstated for the purposes of enforcing the Agreement only. The Town may not challenge liability or the necessity for Agreement terms.
224. To ensure that the requirements of this Agreement are properly and timely implemented, the Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for enforcement purposes until such time as the Town has achieved full and effective compliance with this Agreement and maintained such compliance for no less than two years. If the Town believes it has reached full compliance and moves the Court to terminate this Agreement, the Town shall bear the burden of demonstrating full and effective compliance with this Agreement.
225. The United States acknowledges the good faith of the Town in trying to address the remedial measures that are needed to promote police integrity and ensure constitutional policing in East Haven. The United States, however, reserves its right to seek enforcement of the provisions of this Agreement if it determines that the Town has failed to fully comply with any provision of this Agreement. Prior to initiating any enforcement proceedings in Court for an alleged failure to comply with any provision of this Agreement, the United States will notify the Town in writing of
127

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 129 of 130
the facts supporting its belief that the Town is not in compliance. The Town will investigate the allegations and respond in writing within 30 days. If the dispute remains unresolved, the Parties will conduct negotiations to resolve the issue(s). If the Parties are unable to resolve the issue(s) satisfactorily within 30 days of the Town’s written response, the United States may move the Court for any relief permitted by law or equity and demonstrate that the relief is necessary to implement this Agreement.
226. Failure by any Party to enforce this entire Agreement or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other provision herein shall not be construed as a waiver, including of its right to enforce other deadlines and provisions of this Agreement.
227. Any modification of this Agreement shall be executed in writing by the Parties, shall be filed with the Court, and shall not be effective until the Court enters the modified agreement and retains jurisdiction to enforce it.
228. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as an acknowledgement, an admission, or evidence of liability of the Town under the Constitution of the United States, federal or state law, and this Agreement may not be used as evidence of liability in this or any other civil or criminal proceeding.
229. The Parties agree to defend the provisions of this Agreement. The Parties shall notify each other of any court or administrative challenge to this Agreement. In the event any provision of this Agreement is challenged in any Connecticut court, removal to a federal court shall be sought by the Parties.
230. The Town agrees to promptly notify DOJ if any term of this Agreement becomes subject to a collective bargaining dispute and to consult with DOJ in a timely manner regarding the position the Town takes in any collective bargaining dispute connected with this Agreement.
231. The Town shall require compliance with this Agreement by its respective officers, employees, agencies, assigns, or successors.
O. Termination of the Agreement
232. The Parties anticipate that the Town will have reached full and effective compliance with this Agreement within four years of its Effective Date. The Parties may agree to jointly ask the Court to terminate this Agreement prior to or after this date, provided that the Town has been in full and effective compliance with this Agreement for two consecutive years. “Full and Effective Compliance” shall be defined to require both sustained compliance with all material requirements of this Agreement and sustained and continuing improvement in constitutional policing and public trust, as demonstrated pursuant to the Agreement's outcome measures.
128

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 37-1 Filed 09/25/15 Page 130 of 130
233. If after four years from the Effective Date the Parties disagree whether the Town has been in full and effective compliance for two years, either Party may seek to terminate this Agreement. In the case of termination sought by the Town, prior to filing a motion to terminate, the Town agrees to notify DOJ in writing when the Town has determined that it is in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and that such compliance has been maintained for no less than two years. Thereafter, the Parties shall promptly confer as to the status of compliance. If, after a reasonable period of consultation and the completion of any audit or evaluation that DOJ and/or the Joint Compliance Expert may wish to undertake, including on-site observations, document review, or interviews with the Town’s personnel, the Parties cannot resolve any compliance issues, the Town may file a motion to terminate this Agreement. If the Town moves for termination of this Agreement, DOJ will have 60 days after the receipt of the Town’s motion to object to the motion. If DOJ does not object, the Court may grant the Town’s motion. If DOJ does make an objection, the Court shall hold a hearing on the motion and the burden shall be on the Town to demonstrate that they are in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and have maintained such compliance for at least two consecutive years.
129

 
 Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44 Filed 09/26/16 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
TOWN OF EAST HAVEN AND THE EAST HAVEN BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

) )

CIVIL NO. 3:12-CV-1652 (AWT)

)

)

)

)

)

) )

September 26, 2016

NOTICE OF FILING OF 42-MONTH COMPLIANCE REPORT In accordance with Paragraph 198 of the Modified Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing (“Agreement”) entered by the Court on February 10, 2016, the parties, on behalf of the Joint Compliance Expert Rafael Ruiz, hereby file the 42-Month Compliance Report prepared by the Joint Compliance Expert. For future reference, this 42-Month Report is entitled “Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing 42 Month Compliance Report” and is dated September 25, 2016.

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44 Filed 09/26/16 Page 2 of 4

Respectfully submitted this 26th day of September, 2016.

DEIRDRE M. DALY United States Attorney District of Connecticut
/s/ Michelle L. McConaghy JOHN HUGHES, Civil Chief Assistant United States Attorney District of Connecticut Federal Bar No. ct05289
MICHELLE McCONAGHY Assistant United States Attorney Federal Bar No. ct27157 United States Attorney’s Office District of Connecticut 157 Church Street 25th Floor CT Financial Center New Haven, CT 06510 Tel: (203) 821-3700 Fax: (203) 773-5373 Michelle.McConaghy@usdoj.gov

VANITA GUPTA Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
STEVEN H. ROSENBAUM Chief
EMILY GUNSTON Special Counsel
STEPHEN RYALS Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Tel: (202) 514-6255 Fax: (202) 514-4884 stephen.ryals@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for the United States

2

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44 Filed 09/26/16 Page 3 of 4
/s/ Lawrence C. Sgrignari LAWRENCE C. SGRIGNARI Federal Bar No. ct09010 SHEILA HALL Federal Bar No. ct22566 Gesmonde, Pietrosimone and Sgrignari, LLC 3127 Whitney Avenue Hamden, CT 06518 Tel: (203) 407-4200 Fax: (203) 407-4210 lsgrignari@gpsp.com Attorney for Defendants
3

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44 Filed 09/26/16 Page 4 of 4
CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that on September 26, 2016, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s CM/ECF System. A copy of the foregoing was e-mailed to: Rafael Ruiz, JCE Joan Brody, JCE Team Coordinator
/s/ Michelle L. McConaghy Assistant United States Attorney
4

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 1 of 138
United States of America v. Town of East Haven and East Haven Board of Police Commissioners
Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing 42 Month Compliance Report
Prepared by: Rafael Ruiz, Joint Compliance Expert Joan Brody, JCE Team Coordinator September 25, 2016

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 2 of 138
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................2 Section I. JCE Summary .................................................................................................................3 Section II. Compliance Chart........................................................................................................23
1

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 3 of 138
INTRODUCTION
Rafael Ruiz of O’Toole   Associates,   LLC,   the   Joint   Compliance   Expert   (JCE)   overseeing   the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing or Settlement Agreement (SA) between the Town of East Haven and East Haven Police Department (EHPD) and the U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ),  submits  this  report  of  the  JCE’s  findings  with  respect  to  the  first  42 months of the Settlement Agreement ending on June 30, 2016. As outlined in each of the JCE’s six-month reports, the JCE understands its task to be three-fold:
1) The JCE must ensure that the EHPD is meeting all material requirements and all deadlines specified in the various paragraphs of the Settlement Agreement;
2) The JCE must, over time, make a more generalized assessment of whether or not the process outlined in the Settlement Agreement  is  achieving  the  desired  outcomes,  namely  “constitutional   policing, increased community trust, and professional treatment of individuals by the EHPD officers;;”  and  
3) The JCE must review and evaluate all serious and significant incidents involving the EHPD. These include any serious uses of force, any complaints alleging significant misconduct, or any other event that rises to the level of being newsworthy or notorious.
As agreed in discussions with the Parties, to accomplish these tasks, the JCE will provide both qualitative and quantitative measurements of outcomes 42 months after the Settlement Agreement effective date of December 21, 2012. This report has two sections. Section I presents a narrative overview of compliance milestones achieved or in the process of being completed by the EHPD during the last 42 months. In Section II, the JCE tracks the current compliance level, discusses the progress to-date, makes recommendations for enhancements and describes the basis upon which this assessment is made for each of the 224 paragraphs (numbered 10-233) in the Settlement Agreement for the reporting period January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016. However, in some instances, the data provided by the EHPD to the JCE covers time prior to the last six months and will be referenced and addressed as such in this report as the JCE continues to assess and monitor the ongoing progress EHPD is making on compliance to the Settlement Agreement.
2

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 4 of 138
SECTION I. JCE SUMMARY JCE NOTE: THE TERMS HISPANIC AND LATINO/A, AS THEY APPEAR IN THIS REPORT, ARE USED INTERCHANGIBLY.
Based  on  JCE’s  last three site visits, interviews with stakeholders and reviews of EHPD and media reports during the period of January 1st through June 30th, 2016, the JCE feels that the EHPD is continuing on a path to full compliance with the Settlement Agreement (SA). Collaboration among the Parties continues to be a big asset. Through the efforts of the Parties, the selected survey experts are in the process of conducting the required surveys (community, detainee, and EHPD officers), as has been outlined in signed contracts. Also, as required by the Settlement Agreement, the EHPD continues to notify the JCE of significant events and/or critical incidents. For example, three EHPD officers were recognized by the organization Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) for their work to prevent drunk driving in East Haven. Another example is when the JCE was notified that Chief Brent Larrabee had announced his retirement effective in June 2016. Deputy Chief Edward Lennon had been chosen to replace him, and Officer James Naccarato was chosen to replace Lennon as the new Deputy Chief.
During the three site visits the JCE conducted during the six-month reporting period, the JCE personally interviewed a number of community leaders representing the residential, business and faith based communities in East Haven. One business owner noted that he started his business in East Haven approximately four years ago and had heard about the police department and trouble with the Latino community in the past. He told the JCE that he has not heard of or seen any problems since he has been here. The businessman noted that he had personally witnessed an EHPD officer arrest a Latino man for operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, and aid the police were polite and professional. Other residents, including Latino community members, also told the JCE that they had positive experiences with the EHPD during the past four to five years.
The  JCE  also  spoke  to  members  of  East  Haven’s  faith  based  community  about  the  relationship between the police and the community. No one was aware of any current concerns.
3

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 5 of 138
For this same period, the JCE reviewed a random sample of arrest reports, all search warrants, search  warrant  applications  and  affidavits.  The  JCE  also  reviewed  EHPD’s  analysis  of  motor vehicle (M/V) stops data and the Early Intervention System (EIS)/Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) database. In addition, the JCE thoroughly reviewed all use of force reports and pertaining supervisory  reviews  for  compliance  with  established  practice  and  EHPD’s  policies. During the first six months of 2016, the JCE also reviewed and approved, along with the Parties, seven revised existing policies and all training curricula.
More details on the areas discussed above are provided below under the Settlement Agreement seven focus areas, which are: I.) General Policies and Training; II.) Bias-Free Policing; III.) Stops, Searches, and Seizures; IV.) Use of Force; V.) Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations, and Discipline; VI.) Supervision and Management; and VII.) Community Engagement and Oversight.
I.) General Policies and Training
General Policies and Training Policies and Procedures Manual: At the 42-month mark, there are 96 policies and procedures that EHPD has developed and are currently implementing.
New policies were reviewed and revised based on input from EHPD officers, the JCE, the USDOJ and the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners. Specifically, from January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, EHPD revised the following seven policies. All were approved by the Board of Police Commissioners and are currently in effect.
105.5- Uniforms and Appearance 201.4 - Code of Conduct 210.4 - Recognition 211.3 - Off Duty Authority 301.3 - Language Assistance Policy 401.4 - AVL and Officer Video Camera Use 415.4 - Domestic Violence
4

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 6 of 138
Please note that Policy 203.3 - EHPD Bias-Free policy, was re-issued and approved on July 26, 2016, to take effect on August 15, 2016
Also note, in Paragraph 73 of  the  Settlement  Agreement,  it  states  that  “Individuals shall be permitted to record police officer enforcement activities by camera, video recorder, cell phone recorder, or other means, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to deny permission.”   EHPD reported to the JCE that no cases of individuals videotaping police activity had been brought to its attention during this period.
In Paragraphs 190-191 of the Settlement Agreement, it states that “In addition to compliance reviews and audits, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct qualitative and quantitative outcome assessments to  measure  whether  the  Town’s  implementation  of  this  Agreement  has   promoted effective and constitutional policing. These outcome assessments shall include collection and analysis of data, both quantitative and qualitative.” The Parties agreed to modify the language of the Settlement Agreement to reflect that the current survey work is not a baseline survey and that the need to conduct additional surveys will be decided after the first survey is completed. The Parties filed a request for modification with the Court on February 5, 2016, and the Court approved it on February 10, 2016.
All surveys are underway as of the date of this report. Below is an update on the survey process:
 Detainee Survey: Survey experts hired by the JCE are presently working on this survey, conducting a combination of in-person interviews and handing surveys in a selfaddressed stamped envelope to detainees as they leave the police station, with instructions to detainees to mail them back to the researchers.
 Department Survey: This survey is scheduled to be conducted in November 2016, and will include officers and civilians of the EHPD.
 The Community Survey: The survey team has reported that they have received about 500 completed responses and are presently conducting the analysis of those responses. They
5

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 7 of 138
expect to have a draft report ready by the end of August or the first week in September 2016.
 Community Focus Group: The Focus Group is an add-on to the Community Survey and is currently being implemented.
Policy Training: The EHPD has completed all required training for all 96 policies and procedures. The entire EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual is available on-line as well as at the Hagaman Public Library, East Haven Town Hall and in the Police Department. The JCE had an opportunity to visit these sites and found the Manual containing the most up to date policies at these locations during his last three site visits in January, May, July 2016.
The following trainings were conducted between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2016: 1. Bias-free Policing 2. Stop, Search, and Arrest 3. Use of Force 4. Ethics 5. Over 32 hours of In-service Training [EHPD reported all officers received this in-class mandatory training] 6. Supervisors received as least 40 hours of Management-specific Instruction 7. Firearms Training
The JCE and the Parties reviewed and approved curriculums for the following trainings during the first six months of 2016:
EHPD - CT POST 403- The New Face of Law Enforcement EHPD CT POST 512 - Sexual Assault Investigations (Dalling) (2016) EHPD Sexual Assault Class Description Feb-2016 EHPD Sexual Assault Lesson Plan Jan 2016 EHPD Course on Blood-borne Pathogens (Vieweg) EHPD CT POST 412 - When Pink and Blue Are Not Enough (McHaelen) EHPD CT POST 413 - Fair and Impartial Policing (Laughlin) (Grant)
6

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 8 of 138
HPD CT POST 607 - Domestic Violence Lesson Plan (Murgo) (Lennon) EHPD CT POST 616 - Motor Vehicle Stop Techniques (Shea)
The EHPD also documented that individual officers or groups of officers received the following training throughout the first half of calendar year 2016:
1. Police Leadership Institute at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, Connecticut 2. Senior Management Institute for Police (SMIP), Session 59 at Boston University in
Boston, Massachusetts 3. High Visibility Enforcement (Operating Under the Influence) 4. Instructor Development Training 5. Driving While Intoxicated Instructor Class 6. Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Training 7. Overcoming Size Differences for Female Enforcers 8. South Central Regional SWAT Training 9. Fundamentals of Crisis Negotiation 10. South Central Connecticut Traffic Unit Accident Investigation 11. At Scene Traffic Crash/Homicide Investigation 12. Advanced Traffic Crash Investigation 13. Accident Reconstruction Investigation 14. Advanced Financial Investigation 15. Interview & Interrogation 16. Overview of Treatment for PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) 17. Problem Oriented Policing 18. Crime Scene Processing Classes 19. National Child Passenger Safety Certification 20. Identity Theft Investigation 21. Domestic Violence 22. Homicide Investigation 23. Taser Recertification/Certification 24. Defensive Tactics
7

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 9 of 138
The EHPD conducted all required trainings between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2016 and provided the JCE with a roster of attendees who completed these trainings. The EHPD again split employees into three different training squads, with approximately twenty people in each, to allow them to better balance staffing levels and to reasonably control overtime costs. As reported on the JCE’s 36-month Report to the Court, the JCE coordinated a site visit on January 13, 2016 and audited on-going In-Service Training. The courses audited were: criminal law, and criminal liability regarding use of force. The instructor was Elliot B. Spector. Twelve officers were in attendance: 1 female minority, 11 males (2 male minorities). Some of the training focused on:
o Passage of a new law on use of force; o How an operational plan organizer could be held liable when officers under his or her
command use excessive force; and o How a flash bang grenade could be viewed by a jury as a use of force.
II.) Bias-Free Policing
Between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2016, EHPD conducted 1,743 traffic stops.
The EHPD reports: …of  these  1,743  traffic  stops,  1,203  stops  (69.02  percent)  resulted  in  either  a  verbal  or  a   written warning. There were 37 custodial arrests (2.12 percent) that resulted from these stops. 127 stops (7.29 percent) resulted in misdemeanor summons arrests. 343 stops (19.68 percent) resulted in infraction tickets issued. 33 stops (1.89 percent) resulted in no enforcement action taken. The majority of stops, 1,349 (77.40 percent), were attributable to motor vehicle violations and 304 stops (17.44 percent) were attributable to equipment violations.
The racial, ethnic, and gender characteristics of the drivers stopped are further outlined on the MV Traffic Stops report chart on the next page.
EHPD and the JCE have reviewed the stop data for this reporting period and agree the numbers are generally consistent with the racial and ethnic make-up of drivers in East Haven, CT as
8

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 10 of 138 presented in the 2010 U.S. Census, which shows  East  Haven’s  Hispanic  population  to  be estimated at 10.3 percent. In the April 19th, 2016, U.S. News & World Report published its Annual Report on the Best Ranked High Schools in America for 2016. This report details statistics about the student body population at the East Haven High School. Minority enrollment in the East Haven High School is 24 percent of the total student body, of which Hispanic students represent 18 percent of the total student body or a 1 percent increase over the previous year. While the U.S. Census bureau reflects a Hispanic population of 10.3 percent, that data is from 2010 while the U.S. News & World Report data from 2016 is based directly on student body demographics and may be a more accurate representation of the Hispanic population in East Haven.
9

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 11 of 138

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 12 of 138
The EHPD notes in their 42-month compliance report to the JCE that:
The percentage of Hispanic drivers stopped by EHPD officers for the six-month period from January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016 was 16.70 percent. 71.77 percent of total motor vehicle stops were non-Hispanic white drivers or white drivers of an unknown ethnicity. The remaining stops conducted were of black (9.81 percent), Asian (1.15 percent), Indian (0.46 percent), Middle Eastern (.75 percent) or unknown race (0.0 percent) operators.
Certain violations require the investigating officer to take enforcement action to remove the vehicle and/or operator from the roadway, such as operating under suspension, operating without a license, operating under the influence, misuse or possession of a stolen marker plate, operating without insurance, and/or active arrest warrants for the operator. In total, 203 stops during this six-month time period had one of these situations in which the officer did not have discretion and was required to take some type of enforcement action. Of these 203 stops, 75 operators or 37.69 percent were Hispanic. 91 operators or 45.73 percent were white non-Hispanic. 36 operators or 18.09 percent were black.
Of the stops in which officers have the ability to exercise discretion, 1,251 stops were of white non-Hispanic operators and resulted in 233 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 18.63 percent of stops in this category. In the same situation, 291 stops of Hispanic operators resulted in 48 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 16.49 percent of stops in this category. 171 stops of black operators resulted in 21 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 12.28 percent. 13 stops of Middle Eastern operators resulted in 0 instances in which officers took formal enforcement action or 0.00 percent.
Out of the 1,743 vehicles stopped, 83 were searched. A further analysis indicates that 46 of those searches have to be recorded as searches due to Connecticut state reporting guidelines, however, they were in fact motor vehicle inventories. All motor vehicle inventories are addressed by EHPD Policies and Procedures # 702. The remaining 37 searches resulted in 28 (2.24 percent) vehicles searched in which the operator was

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 13 of 138
identified as white non-Hispanic, 6 (2.06 percent) vehicles in which the operator was identified as Hispanic, and 3 (1.75 percent) vehicles in which the operator was identified as black. Contraband was located during 22 of the searches.
JCE’s  analysis  of  EHPD  Traffic  stops this period:
Comparison of motor vehicle stops from January 1st through June 30th 2015, versus January 1st through June 30th 2016: EHPD reported a total of 1,456 traffic stops during January 1st through June 30th 2015 and 1,743 traffic stops for the January/June 2016 period. In an analysis of these traffic stops, the JCE has found that EHPD officers have again been generally consistent when examining stops of white drivers versus Hispanic or black drivers. For example, an examination of traffic stops by race and/or ethnicity, shows that whites were stopped 75.13% of the times (1094 of 1456) in the January/June 2015 period and 71.77% (1251 of 1743) during the same period in 2016; Hispanics were stopped 15.5% of the times (226 of 1456) in 2015 and 16.70% of the times (291 of 1743) in 2016; and blacks were stopped 7.21% of the times (105 of 1456) in 2015, and 9.81% (171 of 1743) in 2016. Additionally, there is no apparent racial bias when officers took discretionary action against drivers during this time period.
Discretionary traffic enforcement action taken by EHPD officers, January 1st through June 30th 2015, versus January/June, 2016: White non-Hispanics were cited 324 times out of 1094 stops (29.6%) during January/June 2015 and 233 times out of 1251 stops (18.63%) in January/June 2016; Hispanic drivers were cited 63 times out of 226 stops (27.88%), and 48 times out of 291 stops (16.49%), while black drivers were cited 24 times out of 105 stops (23%), and 21 times out of 171 stops (12.28%), for those same periods. Motor vehicle search data from EHPD also shows consistent enforcement, regardless of the race or ethnicity of the driver.
The JCE had noted in his 36-Month Report filed earlier this year that there was a need for closer attention when looking at EHPD officers search of White Non-Hispanic drivers versus Hispanic and Black drivers. Although, the disparity of searches reported then was determined to be justified due to other circumstances (strong odor of marijuana in most cases), it is evident from the reported data in this period that EHPD officials have taken corrective steps in this direction, with positive results. In his 36-Month Report, the JCE reported that during all of 2015, EHPD
11

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 14 of 138
had searched Hispanic drivers at double the rate, and Black drivers at one and one half the rate of White Non-Hispanic drivers. For this period, search rates are consistent regardless of race or ethnicity, with Whites Non-Hispanics having been searched at a slightly higher rate. Please see the  following  JCE’s  analysis.
Motor Vehicle Searches, January 1st through June 30th, 2015 versus January 1st through June 30th 2016: There were 14 non-inventory and consent searches conducted by EHPD officers during the January/June 2015 period, and 37 searches during the same period in 2016. White non-Hispanic drivers were stopped 1,094 times and searched 9 times (0.82%) in the January/June 2015 period, and stopped 1,251 times and searched 28 times (2.24%) in the January/June 2016 period; Hispanic drivers were stopped 226 times and searched 3 times (1.32%) in 2015, while in the same period in 2016 Hispanic drivers were stopped 291 times and searched 6 times (2.06%). Black drivers were stopped 105 times during January/June 2015, and were searched 2 times (1.90%), while in 2016 they were stopped 171 times and searched only 3 times (1.75%).
Also, the EHPD reported that its officers found contraband in 22 motor vehicle searches. The racial breakdown is as follows: 17 were Non-Hispanic White, 3 were Black, and 2 were Hispanic. In 17 cases the substance found was marijuana, in 3 cases marijuana and other narcotics, and in 1 case was just narcotics; in the other case, the contraband found was a weapon. Again, no signs of disparity are noted here.
However, the EHPD reported to the JCE that their analysis of stop data this period revealed that three of its officers appeared to have stopped Hispanic drivers at a higher rate than other officers. The EHPD is presently conducting an inquiry of these stops and will report the results to the JCE upon its conclusion.
Other than the officers reported above, the reported data shows that there is no discernible bias shown by the remaining EHPD officers when they conduct traffic stops. The reported percentage of stops of Hispanic drivers falls within the range of the estimated Hispanic population in East Haven as determined by the JCE analysis based on the high school Hispanic student population reported by the US News and World Report in 2015 (See the traffic stops section in the JCE 36-
12

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 15 of 138
Month Report to the Court filed in July 2016 for an analysis). Additionally, the JCE also reviewed the US News and World Report mentioned above by the EHPD, which reported an increase in the Hispanic high school student population in East Haven.
III.) Stops, Searches, and Seizures;
Stops As noted in the previous section of this report, stop data for the first six months of 2016 do not reveal disproportionate traffic stops or enforcement action taken against Hispanic drivers, with the noted exceptions that are under investigation.
Reports of Investigatory Stops or Detention by EHPD Officers The JCE reviewed a random sample of investigatory stop reports on-screen at EHPD during the January, May and July 2016 site visits. There were no improprieties noted at this time.
Search Warrants and Affidavits The EHPD submitted to the JCE copies of seven search warrants and affidavits issued and served by EHPD officers this reporting period. The JCE reviewed all seven warrants and affidavits and determined that there was no apparent bias in seeking and serving these search warrants. The warrants included three (3) search warrants for Saliva DNA swabs in Larceny and Burglary cases; one (1) search warrant for an Attempted Strangulation and Possession of Firearms; two (2) search warrants for bank records in a Home Invasion case and a Larceny case; and one (1) for an Arson case. The JCE believes that all warrants and affidavits obtained in the above cases met standard police practice and seemed to meet constitutional requirements.
IV.) Use of Force
The EHPD reports that: During the period from January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016, there were 20 incidents where use of force was involved. During those 20 incidents, there were 43 separate uses of force which consisted of: 13

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 16 of 138
13 Physical Uses of Force (hands on) 10 Firearm Deployments (no discharge) 17 Non- Compliant Handcuffing  1 Taser Deployments (no discharge) 2 Taser Discharge EHPD  further  added  that:  “There  were  15 arrests made and 7 psychiatric committals in those 20 incidents. From January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016, there were a total of 463 arrests.” There was use of force in 3.43% of all arrests. For the same time period, there were 120 emergency medical committals [for a use of force rate of 5.83%, or 7 uses of force in 120 committals].
JCE analysis of EHPD January/June 2016 rate of Use of Force versus rate of Use of Force for January/June period of 2015:
(JCE Note: To arrive at the rate of use of force, the JCE uses the total number of separate uses of force, divided by the number of total arrests plus committals.) For the first six months in 2015, there were 59 total separate uses of force, and 610 arrests and committals, for a use of force rate of 9.67%. In the first six months of 2016, there were 583 arrests/committals (463 arrests + 120 committals), and 43 total separate uses of force, for a rate of 7.38%, for a decrease of more than 2%.
The JCE reviewed all EHPD Use of Force reports for the January/June 2016 reporting period. EHPD officers continue to report their use of force in a consistent manner, and supervisors continue to read and thoroughly examine those reports. The review by the JCE showed that officers were justified in using force in all instances. The vast majority of use of force were minor incidents, such as hands on and non-compliant handcuffing; others were pointing the firearms at individuals who were armed or suspected to be armed; and the Taser (or ECW) was discharged twice, but during the same incident by two different officers when the first discharge missed the suspect. The JCE viewed a body-worn camera video of this incident provided by EHPD. The ECW had to be used in drive stun mode. The JCE determined that it was justified due to the circumstances: during a violent struggle with an arrestee after the ECW was
14

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 17 of 138
discharged and missed, and the suspect continued to fight the officers. This suspect was restrained after a long physical struggle with officers.
V.) Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations, and Discipline
(JCE Note: “Unfounded” means the alleged action/violation DID NOT occur, based on the investigation conducted. “Exonerated” means the action alleged DID occur, however, it was not a violation of Department Policy- or Rules and Procedures.)
The East Haven Police Department (EHPD) uses a Departmental Review Reporting System that sequentially generates identifying case numbers that convert to Internal Affairs numbers when needed. The numbering system resets annually on January 1. This same recording system is used by the Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) as well as supervisors receiving misconduct complaints. The system is secure with limited access and cannot be viewed or altered by officers not authorized for use. Upon receipt of a complaint, the complaining citizen receives a Department Review case number. From January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016 the EHPD has received eleven (11) Civilian Complaints:  In seven complaints, the officers were exonerated.  Three were closed because the complaint was not followed through, the forms were given out and
not returned.  One case was unfounded.
In addition, the EHPD reported that there were six Internal Affairs Investigations completed by the IAO between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2016. The results of these investigations were as follows:
•  Three investigations were for Rules and Regulations violations. All of those investigations were sustained with discipline.
•  Two investigations were Supervisor Complaints. One was exonerated; One closed, the complainant did not follow through.
•  One civilian complaint was investigated as noted in the previous paragraph. It [the officer] was exonerated.  
The JCE reviewed all 11 civilian complaints filed with the EHPD and determined that they were
15

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 18 of 138
appropriately investigated by supervisors. The exception was that in two cases, the investigating supervisors failed to include some information in their reports, although the information was included  in  the  officers’  reports. These cases were of a minor nature, however, the JCE notified the EHPD about these shortcomings for corrective action.
The JCE also reviewed all six Internal Affairs cases investigated by the IAO. These complaints were internally generated due to rule violations and/or generated by complaints from supervisors or officers. The JCE is encouraged to learn of these internal investigations and their disposition, because these tend to assure officers and supervisors that they have organizational support when dealing with internal conflicts or allegations of rule violations.
There appears to be no significant trend in the number of complaints filed by civilians against EHPD officers. From January 1st through June 30th 2015, EHPD received four civilian complaints against its officers, versus 11 for the same period in 2016. However, out of the 11 complaints in 2016, seven were found to not have violated any rules or laws (exonerated) while three were closed due to lack of follow-up by complainants. The JCE reviewed all 11 complaints and found that they were properly investigated and alleged minor infractions.
When looking at the total number for January-June 2016, 17 complaints (11 civilian complaints and six IAO Investigations) were received and investigated by EHPD. Eight complaints were exonerated, three sustained, one unfounded, and four were closed/not followed through. The JCE believes that the increase in complaint forms handed out in 2016 is due to the easy availability of the forms and convenient methods for filing (all officers carry the forms; forms are available at the public library and town hall; and online filing is available on the police web site). In addition, the JCE believes that a better measure will be the comparison of final numbers for 2015 v. 2016. Historically, data shows that a large percentage of civilian complaints are the result of traffic stops. Today’s  EHPD  is  a  young  department,  and  young  officers  tend  to  be  more  active  in  conducting   traffic stops. So, a year to year comparison would yield more reliable data.
16

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 19 of 138
VI.) Supervision and Management
The EHPD reports that the Early Intervention System (EIS) captures the following fields and thresholds:
• Any firearm discharge or use • Taser deployment or use; two (2) within a 60-day period • Baton or O/C use; two (2) within a 60-day period • Non-compliant handcuffing; three (3) within a 30-day period • Physical use of force; three (3) within a 30-day period • Pursuits: two (2) within a 30-day period • Officers arrests, including interfering with police, obstructing a police officer, resisting
arrest, and assault on a police officer: two (2) within a 60-day period • Traffic accidents involving EHPD equipment: three (3) within 12-month period • Civil lawsuits: two (2) within a 12-month period • Excessive absences: Eight (8) unscheduled occurrences in any 12-month period
The EIS is monitored by the IAO daily. The EHPD reported to the JCE that from January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016, From January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016, the EIS was triggered twice. The first time for interfering with police officer arrests and the second time for motor vehicle pursuits. Both were reviewed by EHPD and found that no intervention was needed.
The pursuits were stopped by supervisors because they were for minor violations and there were no injuries. The JCE reviewed all motor vehicle pursuit report investigations filed by supervisors (under the Settlement Agreement, pursuits are considered to be use of force). In all cases of minor motor vehicle violations or minor crimes committed, the supervisors immediately monitored the situation through radio communication, and were quick to terminate the pursuit when appropriate. The JCE believes that having two minor motor vehicle pursuits within a 30day period, although it triggers the EIS system, does not raise a concern, unless it happens repeatedly with the same officer.
The JCE also reviewed the interfering with an officer during arrest reports. This occurred while an officer was lawfully arresting an individual, a relative of the arrestee interfered with the officer. The JCE determined that the actions taken by the officer during this incident were
17

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 20 of 138
appropriate. Body Worn Cameras It is EHPD policy that all officers wear body cameras during their tours of duty. Supervisors continue to review and to remind officers to ensure that their cameras are functioning properly. Supervisors also review all vehicle-mounted cameras and report their condition and request repairs when necessary. Supervisors audit all body worn cameras monthly.
EHPD Officers are trained to activate their assigned body worn camera immediately prior to any encounter with a person when there is a potential for arrest, including pedestrian and traffic stops, any investigative call for service, any call in which they are needed to resolve or prevent a dispute, or any proactive self-initiated call for service in which law enforcement action can reasonably be anticipated. EHPD reported to the JCE that most officers turn their cameras on at the beginning of every incident, although they are not required to do so. During this period the EHPD notified the JCE that one officer failed to turn his camera on during a qualified incident in which the officer had to quickly pull his firearm out to cover another officer. The officer stated that he had  his  partner’s  safety  in  mind  as  a  priority,  which  is  reasonable  given  the  circumstances   (the  JCE  reviewed  the  officer’s  and  supervisor’s  reports).  Although  the  officer’s  actions  were   deemed reasonable, the supervisor counseled the officer on the rule.
EHPD is in the process of upgrading its body-cams to new HD body-worn cameras and also hopes to install HD in-vehicle cameras in fall 2016. The JCE and USDOJ were shown a model of the new HD camera during the site visit in May 2016.
There were eight videotaped consents to search by officers reported to the JCE by EHPD. The JCE reviewed a sample number and found that officers followed proper procedure.
The JCE randomly reviewed arrest reports on the three separate site visits that covered the reporting period of January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016. The JCE found that arrest reports appeared to be in proper order.
18

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 21 of 138
Additionally, the JCE conducted random reviews of  EHPD’s  Detainee  Questionnaires during his three site visits and found them to be, generally, in compliance, paying particular attention to the following questions:
• Were you taken into custody by force? • Have you been treated properly while in the custody of the East Haven Police Department?
During his review of detainee reports, the JCE found that a few detainees (out of over 400 arrests) claimed of not having been treated properly or that they were taken by force. In all cases reviewed, these detainees were either intoxicated or resisted arrest and had to be forcefully handcuffed.
The JCE is in the process of administering a detainee survey via a third party survey group (para. 190). It is anticipated that initial results will be reported in the next JCE report.
VII.) Community Engagement and Oversight.
As the EHPD Community Liaison, Lt. David Emerman, has continued discussions with members of the Hispanic community and business owners, meeting with various individuals on a regular basis throughout the year, receiving positive feedback.
During the reporting period of January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, the EHPD conducted two quarterly community meetings where approximately 15 community members attended. Those meetings were held on January 6 and April 26, 2016.
In formal and informal interactions with East Haven community members during this period, the JCE continued to find that EHPD is making strides in the East Haven Hispanic community, and continued to hear  praise  for  Lt  Emerman’s  outreach  effort, and praise for EHPD overall. During the  JCE’s  most  recent site-visits in May 2016 and in July 2016, the JCE spoke with a number of Latino and other minority business owners as well as other community members and leaders. In addition, the JCE participated in several ride-alongs with EHPD officers. During all these meetings and conversations, the JCE did not receive any negative comments about EHPD or its
19

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 22 of 138
officers. Instead, the JCE found that today, there are even more positive interactions between EHPD members and the community as illustrated by the examples below. JCE Interactions with East Haven Community
During  the  JCE’s  May  3,  2016  site  visit  to  EHPD,  at about 12:50 PM, the JCE had lunch at a Latino deli on Main Street and met with the owner. The owner said things are still going very well and that officers are still coming into her shop for lunch and conversation.
Between 2 PM and 4 PM on May 3, 2016, the JCE participated in a ride along with an EHPD officer and a sergeant. These officers said they were happy with the Police Department and the bosses. They said just about all officers have a good relationship with each other and get along well. They have seen the changes the last five years. While riding with an officer, the JCE stopped at a Latino grocery store and spoke to the female clerk. She said everything was going fine and she knows of no problems with the police.
At about 4:10 PM on May 3, 2016, the JCE met with civilian employee union President Mr. Steven Johnson. Mr. Johnson said that when civilian dispatchers were first introduced, there was some resentment from the officers during the first month or so. After the first month everything has been going well and that officers and civilians get along and have not had any issues. Mr. Johnson said he has no complaints at all.
JCE’s  July  7,  2016  site  visit  to  EHPD:
Business/Community contacts from 2:30 PM to 4 PM (USDOJ representative was with JCE). The JCE spoke to the owner of a Latino restaurant on Hemingway St. He said  he’s  only  been  in   East Haven about four to five years and was not around during the troubles of the Latino community with EHPD. However, he heard about it from others in the community and his customers.  He’s  had  no  problems  with  the  EHPD  since  he’s  been there, nor has he heard of any. He has seen the EHPD arrest a Latino man outside his business for OUI (Operating Under the Influence), but “the police were polite and only doing their job,”  he  said. The EHPD has been to
20

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 23 of 138
his business only to check up on him and make sure everything is alright. When he calls 911 for assistance, they respond and treat him with respect, he noted.
On this day, the JCE also spoke to the attendant at M and R Variedades Latinas Store. This person also  said  she’s  been  in  East  Haven  about  five years and did not witness the issues between the Latino community and the EHPD. But she knows what happened a few years ago from neighbors and friends. However, she has had no problems with EHPD, nor has she heard of any from customers or neighbors.
The JCE also spoke to young woman who is a member of a family owned business located on Main St. This business has been open in East Haven for many years. She said she was aware of what happened between EHPD and the Latino community and the church Priest. However, she and  her  family  have  had  no  problems  with  EHPD.  She’s  heard  that  the  police have changed for the better.
The JCE also spoke to another young man from a Main St. Latino business. He said everything has been going very well and that there are no issues with EHPD. As a matter of fact, the family feels so comfortable in East Haven that they are expanding their businesses there, he noted. He added that two of his former classmates are now members of the East Haven police force.
On this day, the JCE also met with Father Manship and had a conversation about the police and the community. Father Manship has a large following of East Haven Latino residents at his church in New Haven, and he is constantly in contact with them. He said that Latino members of his parish have not expressed any concerns with the police in East Haven the last few years.
Community Engagement The EHPD continues to enhance community engagement in a number of ways in 2016:
Cadet Program: 3 high school students graduated in June 2016 from the Police Cadet Program. The students said that, thanks to this program, in college they will major in criminal justice. EHPD is in talks with the school Principal to continue this program.
21

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 24 of 138
Citizen’s Police Academy: EHPD reported to the JCE that they graduated 14 residents from the Citizens Police Academy in June 2016. The Department plans to continue to offer this program to the community.
In June 2016, EHPD Police Chief Brent Larrabee retired, and on June 23, 2016, East Haven Mayor Joseph Maturo swore-in the new Police Chief, Edward Lennon, and Deputy Chief, James Naccarato. Retired/former Chief Larrabee had put together an Advisory Group to help him address community issues, with half of the participants coming from Latino and other minority communities. New Chief Lennon has continued to communicate with the high school Principal to get some students involved in his Chief’s Advisory Group.
In their on-going efforts to improve community relations, the Police Chief has made it a priority that all officers, especially Spanish-speaking officers, do “stop and talk” in the community during their shifts. During the JCE ‘s ride-along with several officers in the past year, they have stated to the JCE that they have been directed to do so, and to visit the schools and talk to the students.
Also, the EHPD continues to operate two sub-stations, one in a HUD (Housing and Urban Development) housing development, and one at the Town’s beach. The housing development substation operates year round, but is not formally staffed. However, police officers visit on a daily basis to use the space to interact with community members and to write reports. The beach sub-station is only open during summer months. The JCE again visited with the beach supervisor this past July 2016. He said that EHPD officers on bikes continue to come around, stop at the substation, and check-in on him and the beach, periodically.
22

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 25 of 138
Section II. Compliance Progress Chart for Modified Settlement Agreement Paragraphs 10 through 233, approved on December 19, 2014 CIVIL NO. 3:12-CV-1652 (AWT)
KEY: Partial Compliance – The Town of East Haven has taken verified and meaningful steps to implement the requirement, including incorporating the requirement in policy, commencing sufficient training to relevant staff on the requirement, and/or carrying out the requirement in actual practice.
Substantial Compliance – The Town of East Haven has implemented the requirement in policy, training, and actual practice to a level and degree that satisfies the material elements and objectives  of  the  requirement,  based  on  the  JCE’s  qualitative and quantitative assessments.
Full Compliance – The Town of East Haven has achieved substantial compliance with the requirement and sustained such compliance for two years. (Please note one exception. There are a few paragraphs where a one-time requirement has been met and no longer requires active monitoring. These paragraphs are now marked as having achieved full compliance.)
Non-Compliance – The Town of East Haven has made little or no progress to implement the requirement or has otherwise failed to take meaningful and verifiable steps to achieve compliance.
Deferred - Requirements were not reviewed, audited, or assessed during the relevant rating pd.
The Joint Compliance Expert (JCE) is using the compliance ratings defined above. The JCE is relying  on  the  following  four  criteria  to  assess  East  Haven’s  progress  on  implementing  each   paragraph of the Settlement Agreement. These criteria are based on requirements included in paragraph 198 of the Settlement Agreement.
1. Policy: Is there a policy in place relevant to the paragraph requirement? 2. Training: Have all required East Haven Police Department staff been trained on this
paragraph? 3. Practice: Is the East Haven Police Department performing the requirement of the
paragraph? 4. Verification: Have the requirements of the paragraph been audited, reviewed and verified
by the JCE?
When  all  four  criteria  are  met,  the  paragraph  will  be  rated  as  “substantial  compliance.”    After   substantial compliance has been sustained for a two-year period, the JCE will mark the paragraph  in  “full  compliance.”    
23

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 26 of 138

IV. POLICIES AND TRAINING GENERALLY

10. EHPD’s  policies  and  procedures  shall  reflect  and  express  the  Department’s  core  values and

priorities, and provide clear direction to ensure that officers lawfully, effectively, and ethically

carry out their law enforcement responsibilities. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all EHPD

officers are trained to understand and be able to fulfill their duties and responsibilities pursuant to

EHPD policies and procedures. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that supervisors have the

knowledge, skills, and ability to provide close and effective supervision to each officer under the

supervisor’s  direct command; provide officers with the direction and guidance necessary to

improve and develop as police officers; and to identify, correct, and prevent officer misconduct.

To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. (Overview paragraph

for policy manual development)

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the policies and training section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the subparagraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

From January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, EHPD revised 7 policies:

Revised policies: 105.5- Uniforms and Appearance 201.4 - Code of Conduct 210.4 - Recognition 211.3 - Off Duty Authority 301.3 - Language Assistance Policy 401.4 - AVL and Officer Video Camera Use 415.4 - Domestic Violence

A. Policy Development, Review and Implementation

11. EHPD shall develop and implement comprehensive and agency-wide policies and procedures

that ensure consistency with, and full implementation of, this Agreement, and incorporate each

requirement herein. Unless otherwise noted, all policies, procedures, and manuals shall be

developed within 270 days of the Effective Date.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Agency-wide policies and procedures have been developed and officer training completed for 95 policies.

Recommendations None

24

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 27 of 138

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

96 policies were reviewed and approved by JCE
The JCE has confirmed that all training on the 96 policies has been completed for all EHPD members. JCE confirmed during site visits in January, May and July 2016 that an updated EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual is available and accessible to all at Police Headquarters, City Hall and Hagaman Library.
Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to check that current revised editions of the hard copy policy manual are accessible to all and are on-line. It is anticipated that the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual will continue to be regularly updated as new issues, technologies, training etc. are introduced in policing and in the community.

12. EHPD policies and procedures shall define terms clearly, comply with applicable law and the

requirements of this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE and USDOJ reviewed and approved all 96 policies and procedures.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

All new and revised EHPD policies and procedures were reviewed and approved by the JCE, USDOJ and the Board of Police Commissioners. The JCE will continue to review future revisions to EHPD policies and procedures.

13. EHPD shall review each policy or procedure related to this Agreement 180 days after it is

implemented, and annually thereafter, to ensure that the policy or procedure provides effective

direction to EHPD personnel and remains consistent with the Agreement, professional police

practices, and current law, including incorporating mechanisms to promote and measure

accountability and community engagement. EHPD also shall review policies and procedures as

necessary upon notice of a policy deficiency during audits or reviews. Within 60 days of that

review, EHPD shall revise the policy or procedure and consult with the JCE and USDOJ. USDOJ

and the JCE shall provide the same review and approval of revised policies and procedures as with

the initial policies and procedures to ensure consistency with this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE and Parties have worked with EHPD on revising existing policies within the deadlines required under this paragraph.

Recommendations None

25

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 28 of 138

Evidentiary Basis On an ongoing basis, the EHPD along with the JCE and USDOJ have reviewed and revised policies and procedures that pertain to this Settlement Agreement.
From January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, EHPD revised 7 policies:

SITE VISIT

Revised policies: 105.5- Uniforms and Appearance 201.4 - Code of Conduct 210.4 - Recognition 211.3 - Off Duty Authority 301.3 - Language Assistance Policy 401.4 - AVL and Officer Video Camera Use 415.4 - Domestic Violence All training required for revised policies during the first six months of 2016 was reviewed by the JCE and completed during the reporting period. The JCE will continue to discuss policies with EHPD during site visits and track EHPD’s  revision  processes and training on new and revised policies.

14. EHPD’s  Department-wide policies and procedures shall be collected in a Department-level policy and procedure manual, and unit-wide policies and procedures (or standard operating procedures) shall be collected in unit-level policy and procedure manuals. EHPD shall develop and implement policy and procedure manuals that include the following EHPD functions:

a) Field operations, including patrol, supervision task forces, and special operations; b) Internal investigations, including case and records management, administrative investigations, confidential investigations, parallel criminal and administrative investigations, audits, and officer drug testing; c) Use of force reporting, reviews, and investigations, including both Supervisor and
IAO force investigations and reviews; and in-custody death reviews; d) Criminal investigations; and e) Field and in-service training.

These manuals shall incorporate and otherwise be consistent with the requirements of this Agreement.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

These policies and procedures are included in the manual.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The completed policies and procedures manual.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps - None

15. EHPD shall expressly prohibit all forms of retaliation, whether subtle or direct, including discouragement, intimidation, coercion, or adverse action, against any person, civilian or officer,

26

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 29 of 138

who reports misconduct, makes a misconduct complaint, or cooperates with an investigation of

misconduct. The default penalty for retaliation shall be termination.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Settlement Agreement paragraph will continue to be tracked by the JCE.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 201.3 (since revised to 201.4) and 208.2 JCE community and police officer interviews (anonymous and nonanonymous) JCE review of all citizen complaints and use of force reports during site visits JCE attendance at community meetings and interactions with community during site-visits and via email and telephonic communication

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps Continue to review all complaints and misconduct allegations.

16. EHPD shall develop a policy governing its obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and its progeny. As part of this policy, EHPD shall track and maintain records of all officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make these records available to prosecutors.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this

Settlement Agreement paragraph will continue to be tracked by the JCE.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 201.4 and 214.2

SITE VISIT

Question/Next Steps Review all relevant cases; None so far.

17. EHPD shall submit all new and revised policies, procedures, or manuals related to this Agreement to the JCE and USDOJ for review and comment prior to publication and implementation within 270 days of the Effective Date. If the JCE or USDOJ object that the proposed new or revised policy, procedure, or manual does not incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, or is inconsistent with this Agreement or the law, it shall note this objection in writing to all Parties within 15 business days of the receipt of the policy from EHPD. If neither the JCE nor USDOJ object to the new or revised policy, procedure, or manual, EHPD agrees to implement it within 30 days of it being provided to USDOJ and the JCE.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations

Substantial Compliance
This requirement continues to be monitored by the JCE. None

27

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 30 of 138

Evidentiary Basis EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual on the EHPD website.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps None

18. EHPD shall have 15 days to resolve any objections to the new or revised policies, procedures, and manuals implementing the specified provisions. If, after this 15-day period has run, USDOJ maintains its objection, then the JCE shall have an additional 15 days to resolve the objection. If either party disagrees with the JCE’s  resolution  of  the  objection,  either  Party  may  ask  the  Court  to   resolve the matter. The JCE shall determine whether in some instances an additional amount of time is necessary to ensure full and proper review of policies. Factors to consider in making this determination include: 1) complexity of the policy; 2) extent of disagreement regarding policy; 3) number of policies provided simultaneously; and 4) extraordinary circumstances delaying review by USDOJ or the JCE. In determining whether these factors warrant additional time for review, the JCE shall fully consider the importance of prompt implementation of policies, and shall allow additional time for policy review only where it is clear that additional time is necessary to ensure full and proper review. Any extension to the above timelines by the JCE shall  also  toll  EHPD’s   deadline for policy completion.

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion

The 15-day requirement was never invoked.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps None

19. EHPD shall apply policies uniformly and hold officers accountable for complying with EHPD

policy and procedure.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Settlement Agreement paragraph will continue to be tracked by the JCE.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis During quarterly JCE site visits, the JCE reviewed all internal affairs cases and supervisory review reports and found that policies were applied uniformly and officers held accountable when called for.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to monitor on future quarterly site visits and via email/telephonic communication.

20. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall formalize a common template to use for all EHPD policies and General Orders. The template shall include a method for updates and revisions that permits all Parties to keep track of former versions of policies and General Orders while clearly labeling currently operative policies and General Orders. All EHPD policies and General Orders shall be made to conform to this template.
28

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 31 of 138

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Full Compliance
This requirement was completed by the 2/19/13 deadline None EHPD delivered the template by the deadline to the JCE; The template is posted on the EHPD Website. A second and revised common template was implemented in early 2014 that is  more  ‘user-friendly’  for  all  policies and continues to be used. The newer template continues to be used and works well with current, revised and new policies. Questions/Next Steps None

21. Within 365 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall make all new and revised EHPD policies

freely available for public review online, unless there is a reasonable basis for maintaining a

specific policy or procedure confidential or unless an exemption from disclosure is allowed under

State or Federal Freedom of Information law or any other applicable law. All new and revised

policies shall be displayed on the EHPD website which shall also be available through a link on

the Town website.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The online requirement was completed by the 12/21/13 deadline.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE recommended that the community have easy access to review the policies in a neutral location in early 2014, such as at the Hagaman Public Library per Settlement Agreement Paragraph 184. The JCE confirmed that the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual is available online as well as in a paper format at the EHPD website, at Town Hall, Police HQ and at the Hagaman Public Library. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to confirm/monitor and ensure that an updated and current Policies and Procedures Manual is available in hard copy at the Hagaman Public Library.

22. EHPD shall review and revise its Code of Conduct within 180 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter, to:

a) describe with specificity permitted and prohibited officer conduct; b) be consistent with the requirements of professional police practice and this
Agreement; and c) have an absolute requirement of officer honesty and make termination the default penalty for dishonesty.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

29

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 32 of 138

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

This requirement was completed by the 180-day deadline of June 19, 2013 and continues to be reviewed annually. The original Code of Conduct policy was rescinded and replaced by a rewritten and updated version. None
The JCE and USDOJ received and reviewed and the East Haven Board of Commissioners approved the most recent revised EHPD Code of Conduct Policy 201.3 (since revised to 201.4). Questions/Next Steps None

23. EHPD shall submit proposed revisions to its Code of Conduct to the JCE and DOJ for review

at least 60 days before the implementation of any revision. The dispute resolution process and

associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 shall apply to DOJ and the JCE's review

of any new or revised Code of Conduct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The original Code of Conduct has been revised twice and approved twice by the JCE and USDOJ. It was included in the newest version of the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

Recommendations The JCE confirmed that training and subsequent implementation on the new Code of Conduct occurred in 2014. The JCE will continue to monitor.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 201.3 (since revised to 201.4) completed and enacted on September 1, 2014.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps None

B. Training on Revised Policies, Procedures and Practices

24. EHPD shall ensure each officer and employee attends 2 – 4 hour training on the content of this

Agreement and the responsibilities of each officer and employee pursuant to it.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Within 60 days of the Effective Date; February 19, 2013.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

EHPD provided documentation that this training was provided to all sworn and civilian department members by the 60-day mark. Training Roster Questions/Next Steps None

30

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 33 of 138

25. Within 30 days after issuing a policy or procedure pursuant to this Agreement, EHPD shall

ensure that all relevant EHPD personnel have received, read, and understand their responsibilities

pursuant to the policy or procedure, including the requirement that each officer or employee report

violations of policy; that supervisors of all ranks shall be held accountable for identifying and

responding to policy or procedure violations by personnel under their command; and that

personnel will be held accountable for policy and procedure violations. EHPD shall document

that each relevant EHPD officer or other employee has received, read, and sufficiently understands

the policy. Training beyond roll-call or similar training will be necessary for many new policies to

ensure officers understand and can perform their duties pursuant to the policy.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

All training on new and revised policies and procedures has been completed. In addition, in 201, EHPD informed the JCE that all sworn members are receiving a minimum of 32 hours of annual in-service training that includes courses in bias-free policing, search and seizure, civil liability, and use of force. EHPD noted that most courses are also conducted to have the dual role of meeting the certification requirements of all police officers, as established by the Connecticut Police Officers Standards and Training Council (CTPOST).

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The EHPD provided the JCE and USDOJ with a list of attendees, their associated job titles and the trainings they attended relevant to the new and revised policies and procedures. The JCE and USDOJ reviewed training materials and the training list with associated attendees. EHPD provided the JCE with the first six months of 2016 training rosters and schedules. The JCE audited in-service training of Use of Force, Bias-Free Policing, Criminal Law and Liability classes at EHPD during his January 2016 site visit. Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review training rosters and training curriculum for the information noted above and will continue to audit in-service training.

26. EHPD shall ensure delivery of the one-time and recurrent in-service training requirements set out throughout this Agreement. As set out herein, EHPD shall provide a minimum of 32 hours of in-service training each year to each officer, in addition to any specialized training for officers in certain units, supervisors, etc., and in addition to the one-time training required by this Agreement. Training in related areas may be delivered together. (For example, aspects of training in effective community engagement and bias-free policing may be incorporated into stop, search, and arrest training). The in-service training shall not include any firearms training required by the state. The frequency and subject areas for initial one-time and recurrent in-service training are set out in the sections below; however, it is anticipated that the frequency and subject areas for in-service training in the future will be determined by the training plan this Settlement Agreement requires EHPD to develop.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

31

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 34 of 138

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD is up-to-date and has completed all of the training required by the Settlement Agreement. They have developed a 2014-2016 training plan that all Parties have reviewed. The JCE will continue to track all training and review curricula and rosters.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

An updated Training Division Annual Report was completed and presented to the JCE in January 2016. Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits and discuss future training goals with Police Chief Ed Lennon, SA Compliance Officer, Lt. David Emerman, and Training Supervisor, Lt. Patrick Tracy.

27. EHPD shall provide mandatory supervisory, leadership, and command accountability training,

tailored to each level of supervision and command, of 24 – 40 hours. All EHPD supervisors shall

receive supervisory training prior to assuming supervisory responsibilities or serving as an acting

supervisor, and shall receive no fewer than 40 hours of supervisory in-service training annually

thereafter.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

All EHPD supervisors received and completed the required training for the first six months of 2016.

Recommendations For future training, the EHPD should continue to send the JCE and USDOJ all supervisory, leadership and command accountability training curricula and related materials.

Evidentiary Basis All supervisory training curricula were reviewed by the JCE. Rosters

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits. JCE team members will continue to forward EHPD information about new supervisory training classes that are being piloted in other jurisdictions.

28. The supervisory training program shall include instruction in the following topics: a) techniques for effectively guiding and directing officers and promoting effective and ethical police practices; b) de-escalating conflict; c) evaluation of written reports; d) reviewing and investigating officer uses of force; e) responding to and investigating allegations of officer misconduct; f) risk assessment and risk management; g) evaluating officer performance; h) appropriate disciplinary sanctions and non-disciplinary corrective action; and i) using the Risk Management System to facilitate close and effective supervision.

32

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 35 of 138

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
These required topic areas were included in the training materials reviewed and approved by the JCE and USDOJ. None Supervisory training roster and in-service class attendance sheet, 2015 EHPD Training Division Annual Report delivered in January 2016. A 2016 Training Schedule and Roster was received by the JCE. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to review training materials to ensure documentation is consistent across training.

29. EHPD shall submit training curricula and lesson plans, revised pursuant to this Agreement, to

the JCE and DOJ for review and comment at least 45 days prior to the scheduled date of training

delivery. The JCE shall provide the Parties with written comments regarding the training. The

JCE and DOJ shall review all EHPD training curricula and lesson plans promulgated pursuant to

this Agreement to determine whether they are consistent with and incorporate the requirements of

this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices. The dispute resolution process and

associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 of this Agreement shall apply to DOJ and

the JCE’s  review  of  training  curricula  and  lesson  plans.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This review and comment requirement was modified from 90 days to 45 days and approved by the court. EHPD has been providing the JCE and the DOJ with timely curricula and lesson plans for their review and approval.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis All training curricula and/or relevant training materials have been reviewed within the proper time frame throughout this reporting period.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Step JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits.

30. Unless otherwise noted, the training required pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered

within 365 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter. Within 180 days of the Effective

Date, EHPD shall set out a schedule for delivering all training required by this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Required training was delivered on time within the 365 days of the Settlement Agreement Effective Date. A training plan/schedule was also delivered by the 180-day mark. A 2014 Training Division Annual Report was also prepared/delivered in January 2015. A 2015 Training Division Annual Report was also prepared/delivered in January 2016.

Recommendations None.

33

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 36 of 138

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

EHPD provided documentation that all training was delivered within the 365day mark and continues to provide future training schedules to the JCE. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to review annual training plans including new and refresher courses

31. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement documented and

approved testing policies and procedures regarding training to ensure that all testing is valid,

reliable, fair, and legally defensible. Both knowledge-based and performance-based tests shall be

designed, developed, administered, and scored according to established professional standards of

practice. Testing policies and procedures shall include detailed test security measures. All tests

shall be job-related, testing knowledge and skills required for successful job performance.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 270-day mark; The JCE conducted oneon-one interviews with attendees. Additional training on new and/or revised policies issued throughout the first six months of 2016 has occurred. The JCE attended training sessions in June 2015 and in January 2016 to ensure courses are being taught incorporating best practices for adult learning and retention.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 106.2 Training curricula and tests. Training rosters. Training schedule for 2016. In-Service Training sessions audited by the JCE in June 2015 and January 2016.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to attend training sessions on future site-visits to ensure courses are being taught incorporating best practices for adult learning and retention. The JCE will also continue to conduct one-on-one interviews with attendees.

V. BIAS-FREE POLICING

32. EHPD shall deliver police services that are equitable, respectful, and free of unlawful bias, in a manner that promotes broad community engagement and confidence in the Department. In conducting its activities, EHPD shall ensure that members of the public receive equal protection of the law, without bias based on demographic category, and in accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. (Overview Paragraph)

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

34

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 37 of 138

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the BiasFree Policing Section. None
n/a

A. Bias- Free Policing

33. EHPD shall provide all officers with 4 hours of comprehensive and interdisciplinary training on bias-free policing within 180 days of the Effective Date, and 2 – 4 hours annually thereafter, based on developments in Connecticut or federal law and EHPD policy. Such training shall emphasize that discriminatory policing, in the form of either selective enforcement or nonenforcement of the law, including the selecting or rejecting of particular policing tactics or strategies, is prohibited by policy and will subject officers to discipline. This training shall address:
a) methods and strategies for more effective policing that relies upon nondiscriminatory factors;
b) police and community perspectives related to discriminatory policing; c) constitutional and other legal requirements related to equal protection and unlawful discrimination, including the requirements of this Agreement; d) the protection of civil rights as a central part of the police mission and as essential to effective policing; e) the existence and impact of arbitrary classifications, stereotyping, and implicit bias;

f) instruction in the data collection protocols required by this Agreement;

g) identification of key decision points where prohibited discrimination can take effect

at both the incident and strategic-planning levels; and

h) methods, strategies, and techniques to reduce misunderstanding, conflict, and

complaints due to perceived bias or discrimination, including problem-oriented policing strategies.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The training included bias-free policing practices and stop, search and arrest procedures. The lesson plans, which reflect the Settlement Agreement’s   requirements, were approved by the JCE and USDOJ during the year 2015. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Training test results for attendees on file at the EHPD; Discussion with EHPD Compliance Coordinator. The JCE audited in-service training at EHPD Headquarters during the month of June 2015 and January 2016. Questions/Next Steps None

35

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 38 of 138

B. Ensuring Bias-Free Policing

34. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of demographic category in EHPD police practices. This policy shall have the following elements:
a) EHPD’s  policy  on  bias-free policing shall prohibit officers from using demographic

category (to any

extent or degree) in conducting stops or detentions, or activities following stops or

detentions, except when engaging in appropriate suspect-specific activity to identify a

particular person or persons.

b) EHPD shall prohibit officer use of proxies for demographic category, including

language ability, geographic location, or manner of dress.

c) When officers are seeking one or more specific persons who have been identified or

described by their demographic category, or any proxy thereto, officers may rely on these

descriptions only when combined with other appropriate identifying factors, and may not give

exclusive attention or undue weight to demographic category.

d) Data collection, as set forth in Paragraphs 64(c) and 65 of this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is the bias-free policing policy 203.3, which has had two revisions. Bias-Free policing training occurred in 2013, 2014 and 2015 as noted in paragraph 33 prior to the policy being completely approved and implemented. Also, in-service training on Bias-Free policing has been conducted at EHPD Headquarter during 2015 and the JCE audited some of these classes in June 2015 and January 2016. A new revision has been approved and will be in effect August 15, 2016.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 203.3 in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Additional review of training on this policy was included in the policies and procedures manual training in 2014, 2015 and 2016.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE continues to use a checklist of items to review at quarterly on-site meetings as well as through ongoing telephonic and email communication. These items include, but are not limited to: Early Intervention System (EIS), Technology Review, Supervisor Reports, Random Audit or Review of ECW’s   (Tasers), Citizen Complaints, Use of Force Reports, Arrest Reports, Stop Data from State, Body Cameras, Audit/Review, Search Warrant Applications, Community and Language Line Data and Detainee Reports. Information and data for  “Ensuring  Bias-Free  Policing”  will  be gathered and analyzed from the checklist materials. The JCE will ensure that the bias-free policy 203.3 is kept up to date by EHPD. Please note that a new July 2016 revised and Parties-approved version will take effect in August 2016.

36

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 39 of 138

35. EHPD shall conduct quarterly analysis, as well as analysis on a cumulative basis, consistent with the methodology employed by the JCE, of its traffic enforcement activities to ensure officer, squad, and Department compliance with the bias-free policy.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
This requirement was first completed at the 180-mark. Some quarterly reports were delayed due to a since-fixed software problem with a new CAD-based program that automatically tracks and analyzes these data. Since then data is being consistently submitted to the JCE on a quarterly basis JCE will continue to work with EHPD to obtain quarterly reports in a timely manner. EHPD obtained additional software to help with demographic and geographic analysis. However, due to the small size of the town, the geographic data was not significant, and only demographic data was obtained. The Parties have since agreed, and the Court has approved, to modify the Agreement so that geographic data is no longer required. Analysis of geographic stop data conducted by EHPD this reporting period shows that the vast majority of stops occurred within the major roads in East Haven, regardless of who was stopped or the reason. The JCE conducted an analysis of the traffic data submitted by EHPD --please see JCE summary section on Stops, Search and Seizure and Arrests. First report submitted at the 180-mark. Second report submitted on January 13, 2014. Third report submitted April 7, 2014. Stop data reviewed in June 2014 Fourth report submitted July 1, 2014. The fifth report was submitted by EHPD on January 23, 2015. The sixth report was submitted on July 8, 2015. The seventh report was submitted on July 22, 2016. A review of the stop data collected and analyzed indicates that traffic stops from this reporting period are generally consistent with the racial and ethnic make-up of the population in East Haven. The JCE conducted an analysis of the stop data for Hispanics and concluded that stops by EHPD do not show bias towards Hispanics. Please see further details of this analysis in the section for Stops, Searches, and Seizures and Arrests above. Questions/Next Steps Continue getting more detail about data set to ensure that traffic enforcement sanctions are appropriate.

36. EHPD shall develop a formalized procedure for officers to notify arrested foreign nationals of

their right to contact their consulate, or to contact the appropriate consular official directly.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Training on this new policy was completed in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 304.2 Roster.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

37

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 40 of 138

The JCE continues to ask if any foreign nationals have been arrested since previous site visit. Notifications are regularly made in accordance with the Settlement Agreement.

37. EHPD shall refer any complaint plausibly implicating the bias-free policy to the IAO and to the JCE. EHPD shall treat any violation of the bias-free policy as a serious violation. Officers who engage in discriminatory policing will be subjected to discipline, and, where appropriate, possible criminal prosecution.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were no complaints plausibly implicating the bias-free policy during the first six months of 2016.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to keep the JCE and USDOJ apprised of any complaints or violations in a timely manner. Chief’s  immediate  notification  to  JCE  and  DOJ. Regular and ongoing case briefings. Comprehensive internal affairs investigation and quarterly reports to the JCE. The JCE will continue to review IAO files.

38. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall incorporate concrete requirements regarding bias-free policing and equal protection into its hiring, promotion, and performance assessment  processes,  including  giving  significant  weight  to  an  individual’s  documented  history  of   bias-free policing, as well as using interviews and other methods to assess  the  individual’s  ability   and willingness to effectively practice bias-free  policing.    EHPD’s  hiring  plan  shall  also  include   steps to encourage qualified minority and other candidates who have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities to apply for positions in EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to work with EHPD to review current hiring, promotion and performance processes.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Town of East Haven establishes a list of candidates and allows extra points for candidates who speak other languages. EHPD last seven hires in 2015: 6 white males, 1 Asian; New hires in 2014 included 1 Hispanic and 1female. EHPD promotion: 3 detectives were promoted in 2015 1 White male, 2 African-American females Please note that 10 out of  EHPD’s 51 officers are minority, or 19.6% (and includes 5 females, or 9.8%). For 2016, EHPD is close to fully staffed. A new test will be held in the fall of 2016; the present list expires in September, 2016. EHPD has 2 Middle Eastern/Arab officers on roster Questions/Next Steps Continue to monitor

38

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 41 of 138

C. Language Assistance

39. EHPD shall ensure effective communication with and provide timely and meaningful access to police services to all members of the community, regardless of their national origin or limited ability to speak, read, write, or understand English. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:

a) develop and implement a comprehensive language assistance plan and policy that

complies, at a minimum, with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, (42 U.S.C. §

2000d et seq.) and other applicable law, and comports with professional policing practices;

b) ensure that all EHPD personnel take reasonable steps to provide timely, meaningful

language assistance services to LEP individuals they encounter and whenever an LEP individual

requests language assistance services;

c) identify and assess demographic data, specifically the number of LEP individuals

within its jurisdiction and the number of LEP victims and witnesses who seek EHPD

services;

d) use collected demographic and service data to develop and meet specific hiring

goals for bilingual staff;

e) regularly assess the proficiency and qualifications of bilingual staff to become a

EHPD  Authorized  Interpreter  (“EHPDAI”);;

f) ensure that 911 call-takers identify an EHPDAI to respond to an incident involving

an LEP individual. If no EHPDAI is available, the personnel shall contact a telephonic

interpretation service provider. The call-taker shall note in information to the radio dispatch that

the 911 caller is an LEP individual and indicate the language;

g) develop protocols for interpretation for interrogations and interviews of LEP

individuals, including requiring and ensuring the use of a qualified interpreter for the taking of any

formal statement that could adversely affect a suspect or witness’  legal  rights;;

h) develop and implement a process for taking, responding to and tracking civilian

complaints and resolutions of complaints filed by LEP individuals;

i) implement a process for recruitment of qualified bilingual personnel to meet

demonstrated service needs. As part of this process, EHPD shall establish

significant and sustained relationships with local and state-wide institutions and

community organizations that can serve as the source of qualified bilingual applicants and

facilitate outreach to such advocates; and

j) implement effective incentives for bilingual employees to become EHPDAIs, such

as pay differentials and consideration in performance evaluations, assignments, and promotions.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark and EHPD remains in compliance through the 36-month mark. The plan is described in detail in Policy and Procedure 301.3 which is a thorough and complete document mandating: 1) the appointment of the Language Assistance Coordinator, 2) procedures  for  notifying  the  public  about  the  EHPD’s  language  services,  3)   hiring goals for bilingual staff at the EHPD, and 4) the qualifications for members of the Department authorized to act as EHPD interpreters (EHPDAI). It also establishes protocols for hiring contract interpreters to

39

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 42 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

provide interpretation and translation service as necessary, currently through Language Line Solutions, but also from other vendors should Language Line Solutions be no longer available. The policy prescribes one hour of training for all EHPD personnel in how to assist LEP individuals in conducting their business with the Department. Procedures for conducting interrogations and interviews of LEP individuals, as well as taking complaints against the Department from, and reporting dispositions of complaint investigations to, LEP individuals are also established by the policy. Language Assistance Coordinator, Lt. David Emerman, is a fluent Spanish speaker, who also serves as the Community Liaison Officer, required by Agreement Paragraph 181. JCE will continue to monitor bilingual staff hiring and processes and procedures for assisting LEP individual conducting business with the EHPD. Language Assistance Plan. Hiring Language Assistance Coordinator. Policy 301.3 - Language Assistance Policy has been reviewed. The EHPD is in the process of modifying this policy to change in the requirement under Section VII. B. which requires annual testing for proficiency. The language testing companies utilized by the EHPD to assess language proficiency recommend testing every two years. This change will be reflected in an upcoming change to this policy by EHPD. Interviews with Lt. Emerman. EHPD Officers speak Arabic, Cantonese, French, Greek, Italian and Spanish From Lt. Emerman 42-month Report:
Data collected from LEAS (CAD/RMS) January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, showed 32 calls for service requiring language assistance, of which 31 were recorded with the target language of Spanish. The data collected continues to support the initial assessment that Spanish is the primary language of the LEP community and that Spanish speakers are the most likely residents requiring language assistance when having contact with police personnel. While incidents of requests for assistance in other languages have occurred, from the period of January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016 they have accounted for only 3% percent of calls that required language assistance.

Data collected from utilizing the Language Line service was 1 call in total for the period of January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, of which the single call was for Spanish interpretation or 100 percent.

Approximately 97 percent of calls requiring language assistance have been recorded with Spanish as the target language, consistent with our initial analysis of our resident population. Community meetings have been held quarterly allowing members of the public to ask questions directly to the Community Liaison and other members of the Department.

40

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 43 of 138

SITE VISIT

The Community Liaison has continued discussions with members of the Hispanic community on a regular basis, receiving positive feedback. The Community Liaison has advised the Chief, the Board of Police Commissioners and the Mayor of community issues that have been raised.
Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue meeting/communicating with EHPD Language Access Coordinator/Community Liaison Officer Lt. Emerman regarding his ongoing interactions in the community. All EHPD officers, including those who are fluent in Spanish, have been assisting Lt. Emerman in the on-going efforts to improve community relations.

40. EHPD shall translate the language assistance plan and policy into Spanish and other languages

as appropriate, and post the English and translated versions in a public area of the police

department building, as well as online, and in any other locations throughout the Town where

individuals go to seek police assistance. EHPD shall distribute the language assistance plan and

policy to a variety of community organizations serving LEP communities encountered by EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations Continue to provide the JCE with a list of community organizations who have

received the plan.

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan.

Policy 301.3

Language Assistance Plan and policy has been translated into Spanish and is

available at the Hagaman Library, Town Hall and at EHPD.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

Continue to ensure this and other needed police materials are available, at a

minimum in Spanish, as Spanish is the primary second language utilized by

citizens of East Haven.

41. 44 41. EHPD shall distribute its LEP plan and policy to all staff and police personnel, and, within

180 days of the Effective Date provide a minimum of one hour of training to all personnel on

providing language assistance services to LEP individuals. This training shall include:

a) EHPD’s  LEP  plan  and  policies,  and  the  requirements of Title VI and this

Agreement;

b) how to access EHPD-authorized, telephonic and in-person interpreters;

c) how to work with interpreters in the field;

d) cultural diversity and language barrier policing; and

e) basic command Spanish for officers assigned to patrol areas with significant LEP

populations.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations None

41

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 44 of 138

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan and Training Report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

None

42. Within 60 days of Effective Date, the Town shall designate a language access coordinator who

shall  coordinate  and  ensure  EHPD’s  compliance  with  its  language  assistance  plan.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 60-day mark.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Lt. Emerman assigned

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE continues to discuss outreach efforts with Lt. Emerman and ensure a

designated language access coordinator succession is in place if staffing

changes/promotions occur. EHPD has several officers who are fluent in

Spanish and they have been assisting Lt. Emerman in the on-going efforts to

improve community relations.

43. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a process of

consultation with representatives of the LEP community to develop and at least annually review:

implementation of the language assistance plan, including areas of possible collaboration to ensure

its effectiveness; identification of additional languages that would be appropriate for translation of

materials; accuracy and quality of EHPD language assistance services; and concerns, ideas, and

strategies for ensuring language access.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

According to EHPD, this requirement was completed by the 60-day mark.

Recommendations The JCE recommends that the EHPD continue to report on their annual

review of the Language Access Plan. EHPD has several officers who are

fluent in Spanish and they have been assisting Lt. Emerman in the on-going

efforts to improve community relations.

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan (LAP), which is in place. Lt. Emerman has stated

to the JCE that he consults with the community regarding the Language

Assistant Plan and other issues.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE will continue to work with Lt. Emerman on reviewing the Language

Assistance Plan and ensure the succession plan is still in place.

VI. STOPS, SEARCHES, AND ARRESTS
44. EHPD shall ensure that all EHPD investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are conducted in accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. EHPD shall ensure that investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are part of an effective overall crime prevention strategy; are consistent with community priorities for

42

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 45 of 138

enforcement; and are carried out even-handedly. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the stops, searches, and arrest section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces. None n/a

A. Investigatory Stops and Detentions

45. EHPD officers shall conduct investigatory stops or detentions only where the officer has

reasonable suspicion that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in the commission of a

crime.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, searches and arrests on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised and re-approved in 2014. Additional revisions were

made throughout 2015. The JCE continued to randomly sample supervisor

reports and incidents and arrest reports during all three site visits during the

first six months of 2016. The EHPD performed according to policy in all

cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. The JCE

conducted a random sampling of supervisor and incident reports online using

an EHPD computer during site visits during the first six months of 2016.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE will continue to sample officer and supervisor reports

46. EHPD  officers  shall  not  use  “canned”  or  conclusory  language  in  any  reports  documenting  

investigatory stops, detentions and searches. Articulation of reasonable suspicion and probable

cause shall be specific and clear.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013 and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. Additional revisions were made

throughout 2015. The JCE continued randomly sampling supervisor reports

and incidents and arrest reports during site visits in January, May and July,

2016. There  were  no  cases  of  “canned”  or  conclusory  language  readily  

43

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 46 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

detectable and seemed to have been completed according to policy in all cases reviewed. EHPD Supervisors continue to review all arrests, searches, detentions, and stops Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to sample officers’ reports and sample citizen complaints.

47. EHPD officers shall not use or rely on information known to be materially false or incorrect in

effectuating an investigatory stop or detention.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013 and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. Additional revisions were made

in 2015. The JCE randomly sampled supervisor reports and incidents and

arrest reports during site visits in January, May and July 2016. The EHPD

performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE will continue randomly sampling supervisor/incident and arrest

reports.

48. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category as a factor, to any extent or degree, in

establishing reasonable suspicion or probable cause, except as part of an actual and credible

description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. Additional revisions were made

in 2015. The JCE randomly sampled supervisor reports and incidents and

arrest reports during site visits in in January, May and July 2016. The EHPD

performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE will continue randomly sampling supervisor/incident and arrest

reports.

44

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 47 of 138

B. Searches

49. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category in exercising discretion to conduct a

warrantless search or to seek a search warrant, except as part of an actual and credible description

of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled

supervisor reports, search warrant applications, incident and arrest reports and

reviewed all search warrants during site visits in January, May and July 2016.

The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed and no cases

appeared to have used demographic category in conducting warrantless

searches or in seeking search warrants.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

Random review of arrest reports and stop data and review of all search

warrants on January, May and July 2016 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review arrest reports, stop data and search warrants.

50. Where an officer seeks consent for a search, the officer shall affirmatively inform the subject

of his or her right to refuse and to revoke consent at any time, articulate and document the

independent legal justification for the search, and document the subject’s  consent  on  a  written  

form that explains these rights.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled

supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports and reviewed all search

warrants during all site visits in January, May and July 2016. The EHPD

performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

On December 19, 2014, a modification request was made to and approved by the court to remove the requirement that such consent be in writing if it is otherwise captured on the body cameras. The Parties submitted that the video is better evidence of the consent, and the written requirement superfluous. None Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants 0n January, May and July 2016 site visits. Questions/Next Steps:

45

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 48 of 138

The JCE will continue to review arrest reports, stop data and search warrants. The JCE will seek to review any videotaped consent to search during future site visits. During the January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, there were 8 known consents to search motor vehicles videotaped by officers. The JCE is presently reviewing videos.

51. EHPD shall ensure that the consent to search form includes separate signature lines for

civilians to affirm that they understand they have a right to refuse, and for officers to certify that

they have read and explained the right to refuse to the civilian

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports, and reviewing all

search warrants during site visits in January, May and July 2016. The EHPD

performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. Also, on December 19,

2014, a modification request was made to and approved by the court to

remove the requirement that such consent be in writing if it is otherwise

captured on the officer’s  body  camera.  The Parties submitted that the video is

better evidence of the consent, and the written requirement superfluous.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports and stop data and review of all search warrants on

January, May and July 2016 site visits. The JCE has reviewed all 8 videos of

consent searches by EHPD officers.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review videos, reports, forms and documentation

related to searches.

52. An affidavit or sworn declaration supporting an application for a search warrant shall provide

an accurate, complete, and clear description of the offense, the place or thing to be searched, scope

of the search, and time and method of the search.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled

supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports and reviewed all search

warrants and applications during site visits in January, May and July 2016.

The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

46

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 49 of 138

SITE VISIT

review of arrest reports and stop data and all search warrant applications and affidavits on January, May and July 2016 site visits. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all search warrant affidavits/applications.

53. A supervisor shall review each request for a search or arrest warrant, including each affidavit

or declaration before it is filed by an officer in support of a warrant application, for

appropriateness, legality, and conformance with EHPD policy and this Agreement. The supervisor

shall assess the information contained in the warrant application and supporting documents for

authenticity,  including  an  examination  for  “canned”  or  conclusory  language,  inconsistent  

information, and lack of articulation of a legal basis for the warrant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled

supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports and reviewed all search

warrants and applications during site visits in January, May and July 2016.

The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports, stop data and all search warrant applications and

affidavits on January, May and July 2016 site visits. JCE also reviewed all

search warrants and affidavits issued during the period of January 2016

through June 30, 2016, and the JCE believes that all warrants and affidavits

obtained and served met standard police practice, no canned or conclusory

language was detected, and seemed to meet constitutional requirements. All

affidavits and search warrants were signed off by a supervisor.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review supervisor reports and all search warrant

applications.

54. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those

warrant applications that are legally unsupported, are in violation of EHPD policy or this

Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy,

tactics, or training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or

deficiencies, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer,

and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. The quality and accuracy

of search warrants and supportive affidavits or declarations shall be taken into account in officer

performance evaluations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled

47

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 50 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports, and reviewed all search warrants and affidavits during site visits in January, May and July 2016. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. There were no unsupported warrant applications reported to the JCE None Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of all arrest reports and stop data and review of all search warrants during January, May and July 2016 site visits. Seven search warrants were applied for and granted during the first six months of 2016. The supervisors and JCE found no unsupported warrant applications, or warrant applications in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue review supervisory reports and search warrant applications

55. A supervisor shall review the operational plan for the execution of a search warrant and,

absent exceptional circumstances, shall be present for execution of the search warrant. A

supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her

presence. Once executed, a supervisor shall review the execution of the search warrant.

Supervisors shall memorialize their reviews in writing within 24 hours of the execution of a search

warrant. The quality of these supervisory  reviews  shall  be  taken  into  account  in  the  supervisor’s  

performance evaluations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled supervisor reports, incident and arrest reports, and reviewed all search warrants and affidavits during site visits in January, May and July 2016. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

On December 19, 2014, the Parties requested and the Court approved a modification to this paragraph to modify the operational plan requirements for executing search warrants to eliminate the requirement when the warrant is for medical records (i.e. Emergency Room records for DUI) or telephone/internet records. These situations do not require intrusion into someone's premises, etc. and again may not have been intended when the Settlement Agreement was negotiated. None
Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data on January, May and July 2016 site visits. Seven warrants were applied for and granted during the last six months of

48

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 51 of 138

SITE VISIT

2016. All seven were reviewed by the JCE. A supervisor was present at each search and reviews were documented properly. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review supervisory reports and search warrants and search warrant applications.

56. EHPD shall maintain centrally a log listing each search warrant, the case file where a copy of

such warrant is maintained, the officer who applied for, and each supervisor who reviewed the

application for a search warrant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE randomly sampled supervisor reports, incident and arrest reports, and reviewed all search warrants during site visits on January, May and July 2016. The JCE reviewed all seven search warrants and applications issued this period. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. Due to the low number, in lieu of a log, the EHPD kept a copy of each one in a separate folder readily accessible for review. Should the volume increase, the EHPD told the JCE, they will implement a log.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 409.3, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data on January, May and July 2016 site visits. The JCE then reviewed all seven search warrant folders and found them in order.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all search warrants and affidavits.

C. Arrests

57. EHPD officers shall only arrest an individual where the officer has probable cause. In

effectuating an arrest, EHPD officers shall not rely on information known to be materially false or

incorrect. Officers may not consider demographic category in effecting an arrest, except as part of

an actual and credible description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014 and for the remainder of 2014, all of 2015 and the first six months of 2016. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

49

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 52 of 138

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on January, May and July 2016 site visits revealed no instances where officers relied on materially false or incorrect information. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest reports.

58. An officer shall immediately notify a supervisor when effectuating: a felony arrest; an arrest

where the officer used force; an arrest for obstructing or resisting an officer; any arrest for the

violation of interfering with an officer; any arrest for violation of either breach of the peace in the

second degree or disorderly conduct in which the violative conduct is (a) a reaction to police

presence or officer conduct, or (b) targeted towards a police officer; or a custodial arrest for a

vehicle infraction, and the supervisor shall, absent exceptional circumstances, immediately

respond to the scene. A supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances

preventing his or her presence.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports, supervisor reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in December 2015. Supervisors were notified by officers and responded to arrest scenes when required. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. All use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on January, May and July 2016 site visits revealed proper notification of supervisors who also responded to the scene.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports to look for notifications of supervisors for such arrests

59. The responding supervisor  shall  approve  or  disapprove  the  officer’s  arrest  recommendation,  

based on the existence of justifiable probable cause and EHPD policy. The supervisor shall take

appropriate  action  to  address  violations  or  deficiencies  in  the  officer’s  arrest  recommendation,

including releasing the subject, recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved

officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports and

50

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 53 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

supervisory reports and reviewed all use of force reports during the first six months of 2016. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. None
Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on January, May and July 2016 site visits. No deficiencies or violations were detected. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE did not find any violations or deficiencies, but will continue to monitor closely. The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

60. At the time of presentment at EHPD headquarters, a watch commander or supervisor shall

visually inspect each detainee or arrestee for injury, interview the detainee or arrestee for

complaints of pain, and ensure that the detainee or arrestee receives medical attention from an

appropriate medical provider, as necessary. The watch commander or supervisor shall document

the results of the visual inspection in writing.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest and supervisory reports and reviewed all use of force reports. The JCE randomly inspected detainee questionnaires and found that supervisors and commanders reviewed them per EHPD policy. The EHPD performed according to policy in the vast majority of cases reviewed. In the 30-month report, the JCE had notified the EHPD about some detainee reviews that required further follow-up by EHPD. EHPD retrained its supervisors on the stated issues and, as a result, the detainee reports for the 36-month report showed a great improvement. The JCE’s  review  of  detainee  reports  for  the  first  six  months  of  2016  shows  that   this trend continues and that supervisors are being thorough in their inspections of detainees.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on January, May and July 2016 site visits. The JCE randomly inspected detainee questionnaires and found that supervisors and commanders reviewed them per EHPD policy. The EHPD performed according to policy in the vast majority of cases reviewed. In the 30-month report, the JCE had notified the EHPD about some detainee reviews that required further follow-up by EHPD. EHPD retrained its supervisors on the stated issues and, as a result, the detainee reports for the 36-month report showed a great improvement. The JCE’s  review  of  detainee  reports  for  the  first  six  months  of  2016 shows that

51

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 54 of 138

SITE VISIT

this trend continues and that supervisors are being thorough in their inspections of detainees. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE found some minor deficiencies in his reviews for the JCE 30-month report. These deficiencies have been corrected by EHPD. However, the JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest, supervisory and visual inspection reports (Detainee reports) going forward.

61. EHPD officers shall complete all arrest reports before the end of shift. EHPD field

supervisors shall review each arrest report of officers under their command and shall memorialize

their review in writing within 12 hours of the arrest, absent exceptional circumstances.

Supervisors  shall  review  reports  and  forms  for  “canned”  or  conclusory  language,  inconsistent  

information, lack of articulation of the legal basis for the action, or other indicia that the

information in the reports or forms is not authentic or correct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on January, May and July 2016 site visits.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

On December 19, 2014, a modification to this paragraph was approved by the Court to modify the requirement to complete all arrest reports before the end of the shift to “custodial arrests.” Since a non-custodial motor vehicle summons is considered an arrest, completing the reports before the end of the shift is creating a significant burden which the Parties believe was not intended. The Parties would continue the requirement for all custodial arrests, but requested additional time for the motor vehicle summons. None
Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of random sample of arrest reports on January, May and July 2016 site visits revealed they were completed and reviewed in a timely manner. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

52

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 55 of 138

62. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those

arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement,

or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or

training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in

making arrests, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved

officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each

subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken,

to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each

violation  or  deficiency  is  noted  in  the  officer’s  performance  evaluations.    The  quality  of  these  

supervisory  reviews  shall  be  taken  into  account  in  the  supervisor’s  own  performance  evaluations.    

EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to

conduct reviews of adequate and consistent quality.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on January, May and July 2016 site visits. There were no arrests unsupported by probable cause, or in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. The JCE randomly reviewed arrest reports on screen at EHPD Headquarter and found that there were no arrests unsupported by probable cause, or in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

63. A command-level official shall review, in writing, all supervisory reviews related to arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The commander’s  review  shall  be  completed  within  seven  days  of  receiving  the  document  reporting  the   event. The commander shall evaluate the corrective action and recommendations in the supervisor’s  written  report  and  ensure that all appropriate corrective action is taken, including referring the incident to the IAO for investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. Review by JCE of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on January, May and July 2016 site visits. There were no arrests unsupported by probable cause. None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. All use of force

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 56 of 138

SITE VISIT

reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on January, May and July 2016 site visits by the JCE found there were no arrests unsupported by probable cause, or in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

D. Stop and Search Data Collection and Review

64. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy on stops, searches and seizures. This policy shall have the following elements:

a) A requirement that prior to making traffic stops, officers notify dispatch about

known information, including the number of occupants of the vehicle, the perceived race or

ethnicity of the occupants, and a description of the basis for the stop;

b) A detailed description of the justification necessary for officers to make stops and

arrests;

c) A requirement that all stops, searches, and seizures be documented in an Incident

Report that records:

i. the  officer’s  name  and  badge  number;;

ii. date, time, and location of the stop;

iii. duration of the stop;

iv. the apparent race, color or ethnicity of the individual, based on the police

officer’s  reasonable  observation  and  perception;;

v. the suspected violation that led to the stop;

vi. whether any contraband or evidence was seized from any individual, and

nature of the contraband or evidence;

vii. the post-stop action taken with regard to the violation (including a warning,

a citation, an arrest, or a use of force); and

viii. whether any search was conducted, the kind of search conducted, the basis

for the search, whether the search was consensual or non-consensual, and the outcome of the

search.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Spector Training Network trained the EHPD on Policies 409.3 and 420.2 as required in Paragraph 78 of the Settlement Agreement, which included instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law, as well as First Amendment and related law.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.3 Motor Vehicle Stops and Policy 420.2 Search and Seizure and other relevant policies in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual were reviewed and approved by the JCE and DOJ.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

54

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 57 of 138

65. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a system to collect data on all

investigatory stops and searches, whether or not they result in an arrest or issuance of a citation.

This system shall allow for analysis and searches and also shall be integrated into the EIS. EHPD’s  stop  and  search  data  collection system shall be subject to the review of the Joint

Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall require officers to document all required information

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE reviewed stop and search data collected/analyzed in the EHPD computer system within the 270-day mark and through the 36-month reporting period. The State of Connecticut categorization glitches were corrected just after the 365-day mark. However, obtaining more detail on Hispanic drivers has proved challenging. EHPD has provided additional helpful information to track demographic data (Geographic data requirement has been eliminated by agreement of the Parties and approval of the Court from SA). Analysis of stops data revealed three EHPD officers who may have stopped Hispanics at a disproportionate rate during the first six months of 2016. EHPD is conducting a review of these officers’  actions,  which  include reviewing videotaped stops, and police reports. EHPD will report to the JCE at the conclusion of this investigation.

Recommendations

The JCE will continue to work with the Parties and carefully review this paragraph’s  requirements  and  perhaps  develop new methodologies to analyze detailed data for this broad categorization of Hispanic drivers. The EHPD has obtained new software for collecting additional geographic and demographic information about investigatory stops and searches. However, there is no significant geographic data available due to the small size of the town. The JCE believes that the demographic data collected thus far has been effectively used, as far as is possible, in detecting bias, if any, by EHPD officers.

Evidentiary Basis The on-site database and EHPD reports, as well as the State of Connecticut Racial Profiling Traffic Stop Report for East Haven, were reviewed. Random

incidents involving Hispanic drivers were also reviewed.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Continue to drill down into the stop data and incident reports.

66. Officers shall submit documentation of investigatory stops and detentions, and any searches

resulting from or proximate to the stop or detention, including a complete and accurate inventory

of all property or evidence seized, to their supervisors by the end of the shift in which the police

action occurred. Absent exceptional circumstances, within 12 hours of receiving a report on an

investigatory stop and detention or search, a supervisor shall review the report and shall document:

(a) those investigatory stops and detentions that appear unsupported by reasonable suspicion, (b)

those searches that appear to be without legal justification; (c) stops or searches in violation of

EHPD policy or this Agreement, or (d) stops or searches that indicate a need for corrective action

or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

55

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 58 of 138

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and property inventory procedures, and training on these policies and procedures was completed in February 2014. Implementation continued throughout 2014, 2015 and into 2016. Supervisory reports should continue to be reviewed.
Supervisory Reports. There were no policy violations or unsupported stops, or stops without legal justification revealed. Individual interviews with officers and supervisors. As per EHPD all reports were submitted within a proper time frame. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor supervisory reports.

67. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address all violations or deficiencies in

investigatory stops or detention or executing a search, including recommending non-disciplinary

corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or

criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or

deficiency and the corrective action taken, if any, to identify officers needing repeated corrective action.    The  supervisor  shall  ensure  that  each  violation  or  deficiency  is  noted  in  the  officer’s  

performance evaluations. The quality and completeness of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account  in  the  supervisor’s  own  performance  evaluations.    EHPD  shall  take  appropriate  

corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to conduct complete, thorough, and accurate  reviews  of  officers’  investigatory  detentions  and  searches.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013 and training on these policies and procedures was completed in February 2014. Implementation continued throughout 2014, 2015 and into 2016. An Early Intervention System (EIS) is in place to detect repeated violations or other pertinent issues re stops and searches, and was not triggered this reporting period

Recommendations Supervisory reports should continue to be reviewed.

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 215.1 Supervisory Reports. Interviews with officers and supervisors and reviews of EIS. No violations or deficiencies were found this reporting period.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor supervisory reports and EIS.

68. EHPD shall develop a protocol for comprehensive analysis, on at least a quarterly basis, of the stop and search data collected. This protocol shall be subject to the review of the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall identify and incorporate appropriate benchmarks for comparison.

56

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 59 of 138

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
A report covering these data was completed for all quarters. Continue to review data and conduct individual interviews as needed. Quarterly stop and search data reports submitted throughout 2015 and into 2016. Additional information provided by EHPD through email to JCE. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE is continuing to monitor quarterly reports. Continue conversation with EHPD.

69. On at least a semi-annual basis, EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall issue a

report summarizing the stop and search data collected, the analysis of that data, and the steps taken

to correct problems and build on successes. The report shall be publicly available.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Quarterly stat sheets and semi-annual reports were agreed upon by the Parties.

Recommendations Continue to carefully review and analyze report data.

Evidentiary Basis

Reports delivered and reviewed throughout 2015 and into 2016. (quarterly and semi-annual) Conversations with EHPD Compliance Coordinator. Discussions on conference calls with Parties. Analysis of data conducted by JCE -see  JCE’s  Summary  section  in  this  report

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Go over quarterly data in detail with Compliance Coordinator; Request additional data/materials as needed.

Although the data is released in a table form that is made public every quarter, the JCE is continuing to closely monitor the stop and search data/report and work with EHPD to make sure the report adequately summarizes and analyzes the data.

The EHPD has also been doing semi-annuals of the full report and it is available on their website. EHPD has submitted to the JCE a more detailed breakdown of these data. JCE has analyzed data and has not detected any major issues. See JCE analysis in Stops, Search, and Seizures section of this report. JCE will continue to request and monitor this data going forward.

70. EHPD shall ensure that all databases containing individual specific data comply fully with

federal and state privacy standards governing personally identifying information. EHPD shall

develop a process to restrict database access to authorized, identified users who are accessing the

information for a specific and identified purpose.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

57

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 60 of 138

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The JCE confirmed that there are current privacy processes in place and sufficient database access. None
Policy 204.2 JCE visit and review. Questions/Next Steps: None

E. First Amendment Right to Observe and Record Officer Conduct

71. EHPD shall ensure that onlookers or bystanders may witness, observe, record, and/or comment

on officer conduct, including stops, detentions, searches, arrests, or uses of force in accordance

with their rights, immunities, and privileges secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the

United States. Officers shall respect the right of civilians to observe, record, and/or verbally

comment on or complain about the performance of police duties occurring in public, and EHPD

shall ensure that officers understand that exercising this right serves important public purposes.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 204.2 was issued in November and December 2013. All Department members were trained on this policy by March 2014 and it was implemented throughout 2014, 2015 and into 2016.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.2 EIS

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

72. Individuals observing stops, detentions, arrests and other incidents shall be permitted to remain in the proximity of the incident unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to move  an  individual,  such  as:    an  individual’s  presence  would  jeopardize  the  safety  of  the  officer,   the suspect, or others in the vicinity; the individual violates the law; or the individual incites others to violate the law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

All Department members were trained on all policies in February 2014 and new officers also received training in 2015. During the first six months in 2016, officers have received in-service training which included this subject. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 Training schedule and Roster provided to the JCE. On-site observation. All IA complaints during the first six months of 2016 were reviewed by the JCE and no violations were found. Questions/Next Steps: None

58

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 61 of 138

73. Individuals shall be permitted to record police officer enforcement activities by camera, video recorder, cell phone recorder, or other means, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to deny permission.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This policy was issued in November 2013 and was fully implemented after training occurred in early 2014. Training continues as new officers join the Dept.

Recommendations The JCE has to rely on complaints received by the IA Officer and supervisors.

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 204.2 Protocols have been followed as far as the JCE has learned. There have been no complaints from the community or anyone else. There were no cases, according to EHPD, during the first six months of 2016 reported to the JCE.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor community and police reports and IA complaints.

74. Officers shall not threaten, intimidate, or otherwise discourage an individual from remaining in the proximity of or recording police officer enforcement activities.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no reports of officers intimidating or discouraging citizens

from recording them while performing their duties.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 204.2 On-site observation. There have been no complaints from the community or anyone else. Protocols have been followed as far as the JCE has learned. There have been no complaints from the community or anyone else during the first six months of 2016.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to review police reports, complaints by citizens. There have been no complaints from the community or anyone else as reported to the JCE.

75. Officers shall not detain, prolong the detention of, or arrest an individual for remaining in the proximity of, recording or verbally commenting on officer conduct directed at the individual or a third party, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis for the detention.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.2

59

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 62 of 138

SITE VISIT

On-site observation. Protocols have been followed as far as the JCE has learned. There have been no complaints from the community or anyone else during the first six months of 2016. Questions/Next Steps: None

76. Officers shall report to their supervisors whenever they believe they have been recorded by a

member of the public.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Supervisors know they need to monitor and report on this. One case was properly reported and documented in 2014. No cases were reported to the JCE this period. As of October 1, 2015, it is illegal in CT for the police to interfere with any person recording or photographing them https://www.cga.ct.gov/2015/act/pa/pdf/2015PA-00004-R00HB-07103SS1PA.pdf

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.2 Incident and Supervisory Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor reports and verify compliance of this paragraph with EHPD command staff.

77. Officers shall not seize or otherwise coerce production of recorded sounds or images, without obtaining a warrant, or order an individual to destroy such recordings. Where an officer has a reasonable belief that a bystander or witness has captured a recording of critical evidence related to a felony, the officer may secure such evidence for no more than six hours while a legal subpoena, search warrant, or other valid order is obtained.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Modified from three hours from the original Settlement Agreement under July 17, 2013 Order Modification, because three hours would not be long enough time to draft search warrant affidavit, review by a supervisor and prosecutor, and submit to judge. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 Incident and Supervisory Reports reviewed and no violations of this paragraph were detected. Review of all search warrants submitted this period by the JCE revealed no cases that apply to this paragraph. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to monitor reports and search warrants to ensure it is being done.

60

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 63 of 138

F. Stop, Search and Arrest Training
78. EHPD shall provide all officers with comprehensive training on stops, searches and arrests, including the requirements of this Agreement, of no fewer than 8 hours within 180 days of the Effective Date and between 4 – 6 hours on an at least an annual basis thereafter. Such training shall be taught by a competent legal instructor with significant experience litigating, or teaching at an accredited law school, Fourth Amendment issues, and shall:
a) address Fourth Amendment and related law; EHPD policies, and requirements in this Agreement regarding searches and seizures;
b) address First Amendment and related law in the context of the rights of individuals to verbally dispute, observe, and record officer conduct;
c) address the difference between various police contacts by the scope and level of police intrusion; between probable cause, reasonable suspicion and mere speculation; and voluntary consent from mere acquiescence to police authority;
d) provide guidance on the facts and circumstances that should be considered in initiating, conducting, terminating, and expanding an investigatory stop or detention;
e) provide guidance on proper and improper use of pretextual stops. f) provide guidance on the level of permissible intrusion when conducting searches, such  as  “pat-downs”  or  “frisks”;; g) provide guidance on the legal requirements for conducting searches, with and without a warrant; h) provide guidance on the nature and scope of searches based on the level of permissible  intrusion  on  an  individual’s  privacy  interests, including searches conducted pursuant to probation or parole release provisions; i) specify the procedures for executing searches, including handling, recording, and taking custody of seized property or evidence; j) provide guidance on effecting an arrest with and without an arrest warrant; and k) provide guidance regarding the nature and scope of searches incident to an arrest.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
Training was provided by June 19, 2013, the 180-day mark. Spector Training Network has provided eight hours of stop, search, and arrest training as required in this Settlement Agreement paragraph, including instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law, as well as First Amendment and related law. This training was provided prior to the completion and approval of the policy manual. Additional training on revised policies was included in the Jan. and Feb. 2014 training and June and December 2015. Classes by Spector Training Network were held during the first six months of 2016 (January, March, April, and June). The JCE should be notified of any additional review or new training in this area if policies are revised again. The JCE will work with EHPD to confirm and coordinate site visits to coincide with as many trainings as possible. Training curricula reviewed by JCE and USDOJ.

61

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 64 of 138

SITE VISIT

Training rosters. 2014 Training Calendar. 2015 Training Calendar and roster reviewed by the JCE. 2016 EHPD provided Training Calendar and roster to and reviewed by the JCE. Training in April and training in June 2015, which the JCE attended. JCE also attended training in January, 2016 Questions/Next Steps: The JCE, going forward and when possible, will schedule site visits to coincide with future training topic and attend.

VII. USE OF FORCE

79. EHPD shall develop and implement force policies, training, and review mechanisms that

ensure that force by EHPD officers is used in accordance with the rights, privileges, and

immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that any

unreasonable uses of force are identified and responded to appropriately. EHPD shall ensure that

officers use non-force techniques to effect compliance with police orders whenever feasible; use

physical force only when objectively reasonable; use physical force in a manner that avoids

unnecessary injury to officers and civilians; and de-escalate the physical use of force at the earliest

possible moment. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements set out

below

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the use of force section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

A. Use of Force Principles

80. EHPD uses of force, regardless of the type of force or weapon used, shall abide by the following requirements:
a) officers shall use advisements, warnings, and verbal persuasion, when possible, before resorting to physical force; b) physical force shall be de-escalated immediately as resistance decreases; c) supervisors shall determine whether the action or inaction of officers using physical force, or of other EHPD officers on scene, resulted in the need to use physical force; d) officers will use disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a subject, summoning reinforcements, and/or calling in specialized units, when possible, in order to reduce the need for physical force and increase officer and civilian safety;
62

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 65 of 138

e) officers shall allow individuals time to submit to arrest before physical force is used

wherever possible;

f) officers shall not use neck holds or a strike to the head with a hard object, except

where lethal force is authorized;

g) using physical force against persons in handcuffs is prohibited except in

emergencies in which a reasonable officer would believe that bodily harm to another person or

persons is imminent;

h) un-holstering and pointing a firearm at an individual constitutes a use of force and

shall be limited accordingly; and

i) immediately following a use of physical force officers and, upon arrival, a

supervisor, shall inspect and observe subjects for injury or complaints of pain and obtain

immediately any necessary medical care. This may require an officer to provide emergency

medical care until professional medical care providers are on-scene.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

During the period from January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016, there were 20

incidents where use of force was involved. During those 20 incidents, there

were 43 separate uses of force which consisted of:

13 Physical Uses of Force (hands on) 10 Firearm Deployments (no discharge) 17 Non- Compliant Handcuffing  1 Taser Deployments (no discharge) 2 Taser Discharge

There were 15 arrests made and 7 psychiatric committals in those 20 incidents. From January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016, there were a total of 463 arrests.

Data was collected from the Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS, the EHPD in-house computer system) and used to track and monitor the Use of Force data.

Please see JCE Summary section IV. Use of Force, for further analysis by the JCE.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to review all Use of Force Reports Policies 404.2, 405.3 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.3 JCE reviewed all use of force reports and found no incidents of neck holds or any other action by officers that would be considered in violation of this Paragraph. All uses of force reviewed revealed that officers attempted to deescalate the situations before using force. The JCE viewed a few body-cam videos of use of force and saw that officer, in all instances, attempted to deescalate the situation by warning individuals to either calm down or stop resisting when appropriate. Questions/Next Steps:

63

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 66 of 138

The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports on all site visits. B. General Use of Force Policy

81. EHPD shall develop and implement an overarching agency-wide use of force policy that complies with applicable law and comports with professional police practices. The comprehensive use of force policy shall include all force techniques, technologies, and weapons, both lethal and less-lethal, that are available to EHPD officers. The comprehensive use of force policy shall clearly define and describe each force option and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The general use of force policy will incorporate the use of force principles articulated above and shall specify that the unreasonable use of force will subject officers to discipline, possible criminal prosecution, and/or civil liability.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training took place in January and February 2014 and covered use of force policies and related issues. Re-training was given during the last period in June and December 2015. Policies dealing with use of force issues were created and approved. Use of force training was conducted, according to EHPD, on January 4, 6, and 13, 2016 None

Evidentiary Basis ITE VISIT

Policies 404.2, 405.3 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.3 all deal with use of force issues and were reviewed and approved by the Parties. 2016 Training class Roster and Calendar. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor in-service class and use of force reports.

82. In addition to a primary agency-wide use of force policy, EHPD shall develop and implement

policies and protocols for each authorized weapon, including each of the types of force addressed

below. No officer shall carry any weapon or use force that is not authorized by the Department.

EHPD use of force policies shall include training and certification requirements that each officer

must meet before being permitted to carry and use the authorized weapon.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training took place in January and February 2014, and covered use of force policies and related issues. New in-service training continues throughout the year.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 404.2, 405.3 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.3 all deal with use of force issues and weapons, and were reviewed and approved by the Parties. Training class Roster. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor and conduct on field observation of weapons carried by officers.

64

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 67 of 138

C. Use of Firearms

83. Officers shall not possess or use unauthorized firearms or ammunition, or obtain service ammunition  from  any  source,  except  through  official  EHPD  channels.    All  officers’  firearms  shall   be filled with the capacity number of rounds while on duty.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Although use of force training was completed in 2013, the new policies and revisions required additional training in January and February 2014. New training was provided throughout the year in 2015. The JCE was provided with a training calendar and roster with signatures of officers who attended. Additionally, inspections are conducted during roll call. None Policies 404.2, 405.3 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.3 Training Roster with signatures. Supervisor Interviews. Supervisor Reports. On-site observation of inspection. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review supervisor reports for evidence of random inspections.

84. Officers shall not fire at or from a moving vehicle, unless use of lethal force is justified by something other than the threat from the moving vehicle; shall not intentionally place themselves in the path of or reach inside a moving vehicle; and where possible shall attempt to move out of the path of a moving vehicle before discharging their weapon.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. All use of force reports were reviewed by the JCE and no incidents of firing at or from a moving vehicle were found. None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 404.2, 405.3 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.3 Roster on Use of Force training. Use of Force Reports were reviewed by the JCE and no incidents of firing at or from a moving motor vehicle were found during this period.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE continues to monitor reports.

85. Officers shall successfully qualify with each firearm they are authorized to use or carry on-duty

pursuant to Connecticut requirements. Officers who fail to qualify shall immediately relinquish

those firearms on which they failed to qualify. Those officers who still fail to qualify after

remedial training within a reasonable time shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and

including termination of employment.

65

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 68 of 138

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. Firearm qualification training occurs on yearly basis. JCE and USDOJ have reviewed and approved firearm training lesson plans during 2015 and the first six months of 2016. None Policies 404.2, 405.3 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.3 Training Roster. Use of Force Reports. Firearm qualification training occurs on yearly basis. JCE and USDOJ have reviewed and approved firearm training lesson plans during 2015 Questions/Next Steps: Through June 2016, there were no officers who failed to qualify. The JCE will continue to monitor.

86. Critical firearm discharges by officers on- or off-duty shall be reported and investigated. Data

and analysis related to critical firearm discharges shall be tracked in EIS and EHPD's Use of Force

Annual Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. Firearm discharges are reported to the JCE by EHPD Command staff.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 404.2, 405.3 406.3 407.2, 408.2 and 302.3 Training Roster. Use of Force Reports. EIS. There were no critical firearm discharge incidents during January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to monitor supervisory reports.

D. Electronic Control Weapons

87. EHPD shall limit the use of ECWs to only those situations in which such force is necessary to

protect the officer, the subject, or another party from immediate physical harm.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, there were three Taser deployments with two discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. The JCE viewed the video of the two Taser discharges by two different officers, which occurred during the same incident. Officers can be heard warning suspect, who was very violent toward officers, to stop resisting

66

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 69 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

and allow to be handcuffed. The first discharge by an officer missed the suspect, which necessitated a second discharge by the second officer. Continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.
Policies 406.3 and 401.4 Use of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents. There were two discharges and they were properly investigated by the IAO. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

88. Unless it would present a danger to the officer or others, officers shall issue a verbal warning to

the subject that the ECW will be used prior to use. Where feasible, the officer will defer ECW

application a reasonable time to allow the subject to comply with the warning.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, through June 30, 2016, there were three Taser deployments with two discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all and issued verbal warnings.

Recommendations Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.3 and 401.4

SITE VISIT

Use of Force Reports reviewed by JCE revealed three Taser deployments with two discharges during this reporting period. The JCE viewed the video of the two Taser discharges by two different officers, which occurred during the same incident. Officers can be heard warning suspect, who was very violent toward officers, to stop resisting and allow to be handcuffed. The first discharge by an officer missed the suspect, which necessitated a second discharge by the second officer. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incident reports to ensure officers are warning subjects and will review body camera video footage of all ECW (Taser) discharges.

89. ECWs will not be used where such deployment may cause serious injury or death from

situational hazards, including falling, drowning, losing control of a moving vehicle, or becoming

ignited from the presence of a potentially explosive or flammable material or substance, except

where lethal force would be permitted.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, there were three Taser deployments with two discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. The JCE viewed the video of the two Taser discharges by two different officers, which occurred during the same incident. Officers can be heard warning suspect, who was very violent toward officers, to stop resisting

67

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 70 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

and allow to be handcuffed. The first discharge by an officer missed the suspect, which necessitated a second discharge by the second officer. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.
Policy 406.3 Use of Force Reports. All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by JCE. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

90. After one standard ECW cycle (5 seconds), the officer shall reevaluate the situation to

determine if subsequent cycles are necessary. Officers shall be trained in the risks of prolonged or

repeated ECW exposure, including that exposure to the ECW for longer than 15 seconds (whether

due to multiple applications or continuous cycling) may increase the risk of death or serious injury.

Officers shall clearly articulate and justify each and every cycle used against a subject in a written

Use of Force Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, there were three Taser deployments with two discharges. No cases applied to this particular paragraph.

Recommendations Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 406.3 and 401.4 User of Force Reports reviewed by the JCE. All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by JCE and no violations of this paragraph were noted.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

91. ECWs shall not be used in drive stun mode as a pain compliance technique. ECWs shall be used in drive stun mode only to supplement the probe mode to complete the incapacitation circuit, or as a countermeasure to gain separation between officers and the subject so that officers can consider another force option.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

For the period, January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, there were three Taser deployments with two discharges. There was one case where the ECW was used in drive stun mode. A video of the incident was reviewed by the JCE and determined that it was justified due to the circumstances: during a violent struggle with an arrestee after the ECW was discharged and missed, officers were forced to use it in drive stun. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all others. All use of force reports were reviewed by JCE. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.3 and 401.4 and in-service training. All use of force reports reviewed by JCE. There was one case where the ECW was used in drive stun

68

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 71 of 138

SITE VISIT

mode. A video of the incident was reviewed by the JCE and determined that it was justified due to the circumstances: during a violent struggle with an arrestee after ECW was discharged and missed. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents and training.

92. ECWs may not be used against pregnant women, elderly persons, children, visibly frail

persons or persons with a slight build and persons in medical or mental crisis, except where lethal

force would be permitted, or the officer has reasonable cause to believe there is an imminent risk

of serious bodily self-harm and lesser force options are not feasible. Officers shall be trained in

the increased risks ECWs may present to the above listed vulnerable populations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

For the period, January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, there were three Taser deployments with two discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. The JCE viewed the video of the two Taser discharges by two different officers, which occurred during the same incident. Officers can be heard warning suspect, who was very violent toward officers, to stop resisting and allow to be handcuffed. The first discharge by an officer missed the suspect, which necessitated a second discharge by the second officer. No ECW was discharged at any pregnant woman, elderly person, children, frail person, slight build person, or persons in mental crisis. ECW Recertification is scheduled for December of 2016. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 406.3 and 401.4 User of Force Reports. All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by JCE and no violations of this paragraph were noted. 2016 Training Calendar submitted to the JCE. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

93. ECWs  may  not  be  applied  to  a  subject’s  head,  neck,  and  genitalia,  absent  exigent   circumstances. ECWs shall not be used on handcuffed persons, except in emergencies in which a reasonable officer would believe that serious bodily harm to another person or persons is imminent.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

For the period, January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, there were three Taser deployments with two discharges. Review of the body-cam videos showed that Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.3 and 401.4 User of Force Reports.

69

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 72 of 138

All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by the JCE and no violations of

this paragraph were noted. There was one case where the ECW was used in

drive stun mode. A video of the incident was reviewed by the JCE and

determined that it was justified due to the circumstances: during a violent

struggle with an arrestee after ECW was discharged and missed.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

94. Officers shall receive annual ECW certifications, which should consist of physical

competency; weapon retention; EHPD policy, including any policy changes; technology changes;

and scenario-based training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

EHPD confirmed that all officers remain certified as of June 30, 2016.

Recommendations Review all ECW Taser) incidents

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 406.3 and 401.4 User of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents. Next certification scheduled for December of 2016 Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents and continue to ensure all officers are certified.

95. Officers shall be trained in and follow protocols developed by EHPD in conjunction with medical professionals, on their responsibilities following ECW use, including:
(a) the removal of ECW probes, including requiring medical or specially-trained EHPD personnel to remove probes that are embedded in a subject’s  skin,  except  for  probes  that   are  embedded  in  a  subject’s  head,  throat,  groin,  or  other  sensitive  area,  which  should  be   removed by medical personnel only; (b) transporting to a hospital for evaluation all subjects who: have been exposed to prolonged application (more than 15 seconds); are a member of one of the vulnerable populations listed above; had an ECW used against them in circumstances presenting a heightened risk of harm; or were kept in prone restraint after ECW use; and (c) monitoring all subjects who have received ECW application while in police custody.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations

Substantial Compliance
For the period January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, there were three Taser deployments with two discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. All officers received training in the proper use of  ECW’s  and  followup re-training and re-certification as of December 2015. ECW Recertification is scheduled for December of 2016. The JCE will continue to track and confirm that all EHPD officers are trained on the protocol for working with fire department paramedics.

70

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 73 of 138

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 406.3 and 401.4 Use of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents. JCE reviewed all use of force reports and determined they were all in compliance. ECW’s  were  deployed  and  one  was discharged with no contact or effect. All officers received training as of December 2015. Next certification and training scheduled for fall and early winter 2016 Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents. Although no incidents required Fire Department assistance during the reporting period, The EHPD continues its partnership with Fire Department.

96. Officers shall report all ECW discharges, except for training discharges, to their supervisor and

the communications command center as soon as possible.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016, there were 3 Taser deployments with two discharges. Officers notified supervisors following the discharges.

Recommendations Review all ECW (Taser) Incidents.

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 406.3 and 401.4 Use of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents. Supervisor Reports and Interviews checked by JCE. Supervisors periodically inspect  ECW’s  for  unreported  discharges.   All discharges are registered by the device. No unreported discharges were found during inspection.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

97. EHPD shall develop and implement integrity safeguards on the use of ECWs to ensure

compliance with EHPD policy, including conducting random and directed audits of ECW deployment data. The audits should compare the downloaded data  to  the  officer’s  report  on  use  of  

force. Discrepancies within the audit should be addressed and appropriately investigated.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, there were three Taser deployments with two discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all, but one -see explanation above in Paragraph 89. There were no discrepancies noted by supervisors during audit.

Recommendations Review random audits

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 406.3 and 401.4 ECW (Taser) Incident Reports. EHPD Technology Review. All Supervisory Reports were checked by the JCE. Supervisors reported no discrepancies  between  reports  by  officers  and  downloaded  data  from  ECW’s.

71

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 74 of 138

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents and random and directed audits submitted by Supervisors.

98. EHPD shall include the number of ECWs in operation and the number of ECW uses as

elements of the EIS. Analysis of this data shall include a determination of whether ECWs result in

an increase in the use of force and whether officer and subject injuries are affected by the rate of

ECW use. ECW data and analysis shall be included in EHPD's Use of Force Annual Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

For the period, January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, there were three Taser deployments with two discharges. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. EIS tracks use of ECW to detect misuse or abuse. No cases have activated EIS this period.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 406.3 and 401.4 EHPD UOF Annual Report. All ECW (Taser) Incident Reports. Supervisor Interviews. Data included in EIS database and EHPD periodic reports to the JCE regarding EIS. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all reports/EIS.

E. Use of Force Reporting Policy and Use of Force Report

99. EHPD shall develop and implement a single, uniform, reporting system pursuant to a Use of Force Reporting policy and using a single, uniform, Use of Force Report. All officers using or observing force above un-resisted handcuffing shall, absent exigent circumstances report in writing, before the end of shift, the use of force in a Use of Force Report. The Use of Force Report shall include: (a)  a  detailed  account  of  the  incident  from  the  officer’s  perspective;;  (b)  the  reason   for the initial police presence; (c) a specific description of the acts that led to the use of force; (d) the level of resistance encountered; and (e) a description of every type of force used. The use of force  reporting  policy  shall  explicitly  prohibit  the  use  of  “canned”  or  conclusory language in all reports documenting use of force.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. Use of

Force form is online where officers access it to complete.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Use of Force Annual Report. All Use of Force Incident Reports were reviewed by the JCE and most were found to be in order, while some used conclusory language, which were brought to the attention of EHPD by the JCE and training recommended.

72

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 75 of 138

SITE VISIT

Supervisors were trained as of this report and use of force reviews have improved greatly. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

100. Officers who use or observe force and fail to report it, shall be held strictly accountable, and face discipline up to and including termination, regardless of whether the force was reasonable.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. EHPD reported that one officer was disciplined for not reporting a use of force in 2015 (Drawing the firearm, but not using it). For this reporting period there are no reports of officers failing report a use of force, according to EHPD.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

All Use of Force Incident Reports were reviewed by the JCE, as well as Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

101. Each officer in a position to see or hear a use of force shall complete a Use of Force Report, before  the  end  of  the  shift,  documenting  the  officer’s  own  actions  and  observations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE has seen compliance of officers completing use of force reports on a timely basis. Since all parties agreed that the un-holstering of a firearm while not pointing it at a human being, does not constitute a Use of Force, thus not requiring a use of force review process, and the un-holstering of the firearm will be documented on a regular police incident report by EHPD, the issue of officers writing unnecessary Use of Force Reports has been resolved. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

All Use of Force Incident Reports were reviewed by the JCE, as well as Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

102. Officers’ Use of Force Reports (whether primary or supplemental) shall completely and

accurately describe the use of force. Officers shall be held strictly accountable for material

omissions or inaccuracies in the Use of Force Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

73

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 76 of 138

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE has seen compliance of officers completing use of force reports on a timely basis and reports are complete and thorough. Since all parties agreed that the un-holstering of a firearm while not pointing it at a human being, does not constitute a Use of Force, thus not requiring a use of force review process, and the un-holstering of the firearm will be documented on a regular police incident report by EHPD, the issue of officers writing unnecessary Use of Force Reports has been resolved. None
All Use of Force Incident Reports and Supervisory Reports reviewed by the JCE and determined to be in compliance. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

103. Officers who use or observe force shall notify their supervisors immediately following any

use of force or upon receipt of an allegation of unreasonable or unreported use of force by any

officer.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Notifications are normally made through the dispatcher and noted by officers on their reports. Dispatcher then notifies the patrol supervisor to respond. EHPD reported that supervisors were notified in all instances of use of force by its officers.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Incident Reports reviewed as well as Supervisory Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

104. Use of Force Reports shall be maintained centrally by the IAO for tracking and analysis purposes, as required by this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014.

IAO maintains a central electronic file for Use of Force reports.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis IAO Robert S. Brockett Jr. report and interviews. JCE verified that Use of

Force Reports were maintained centrally.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to meet with new IAO Robert Brockett Jr. every site visit to review/discuss all use of force incidents. Former IAO Naccarato was promoted to Deputy Chief.

74

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 77 of 138

105. At  least  annually,  EHPD  shall  analyze  the  year’s  force  data,  including  force-related outcome

data, to determine significant trends; identify and correct deficiencies revealed by this analysis;

and document its findings in a public report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014 and public report issued in January 2015 covering calendar year 2014 and in January 2016 covering calendar year 2015.

Recommendations The JCE recommended in his 30-month report that EHPD issue a training bulletin  to  remind  supervisors  of  the  requirements  under  EHPD’s  own  

policies and Paragraphs 105 through 109 (Supervisory Reviews) of the Settlement Agreement. The JCE found some deficiencies in supervisory review reports and notified EHPD. EHPD retrained its supervisors on this issue and review reports have improved greatly since then. The  JCE’s  review   of supervisory reports for the first six months of 2016 revealed a continued improvement in report investigations.

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force Incident Reports since policy in effect. The first EHPD 2014 Use of Force Annual Report dated January 20, 2015.

Also an Annual Use of Force report for 2015 was issued in January 2016. No

significant trends or deficiencies in the force data were detected in these

reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site

visit.

F. Force Reviews by Supervisors

106. Absent exceptional circumstances, the direct supervisor of any officer using force, upon

notification of a use of force or allegation of excessive force, shall respond to the scene of the use

of force. If a supervisor is unable to respond to the scene, the supervisor shall document in the

case file the exigent circumstances preventing his or her presence. The direct supervisor of any

officer using force shall review all uses of force except those incidents involving a serious use of

force, a use of force that appears potentially unjustified or criminal, a use of force by EHPD

personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or a use of force reassigned to the IAO by the Chief of

Police or designee or the IAO. No supervisor who was involved in the incident, including by

participating in or ordering the force being investigated, shall be responsible for the investigation

of the incident.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Review of all Use of Force reports by JCE revealed that only in one case a supervisor was notified and could not respond as required. This supervisor stated that he was the only supervisor on duty at the time, and the incident was a minor one. He was able to respond at a later time and conduct interviews. All Parties agreed to modify, and the Court approved, that

75

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 78 of 138

Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

supervisors who witnessed or participated in minor uses of force could also investigate same if there was no other supervisor available. The JCE found some deficiencies, such as lack of specificity and the use of conclusory language, in supervisory review reports and notified EHPD. The JCE recommended that EHPD issue a training bulletin to remind supervisors  of  the  requirements  under  EHPD’s  own  policies  and Paragraphs 105 through 109 (Supervisory Reviews) of the Settlement Agreement. EHPD retrained its supervisors on this issue and review reports have improved greatly since then. A review of supervisory reports this period revealed a continued improvement in force investigations. Policy 407.2 Review of Supervisor Reports. Review of all Use of Force Incidents. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

107. The reviewing supervisor shall: a) respond to the scene, examine the subject of the force for injury, interview the
subject for complaints of pain, and ensure that the subject receives medical attention from an appropriate medical provider;
b) notify the IAO immediately of the use of force and obtain a use of force tracking number; c) identify and collect all relevant evidence and shall evaluate that evidence to determine whether the use of force: (i) was consistent with EHPD policy and/or (ii) raises any policy, training, tactical or equipment concerns; d) ensure collection of all evidence to establish material facts related to the use of force, including audio and video recordings, and photographs and other documentation of injuries or the absence of injuries; e) ensure the canvass for and interview of civilian witnesses. In addition, civilian witnesses should be encouraged to provide and sign a written report in their own words; f) ensure that all officer witnesses provide a statement regarding the incident. Officers involved in a use of force incident shall be separated until they are interviewed. Group interviews shall be prohibited. Supervisors shall ensure that all use of force reports identify all officers who were involved in the incident or were on the scene when it occurred. Supervisors shall not ask officers or other witnesses leading questions that improperly suggest justifications for the officers’  conduct,  when  such  questions  are  contrary to appropriate law enforcement techniques. Reviewing supervisors shall record all interviews with subjects and civilian witnesses and all follow-up interviews with officers; g) review all Use of Force Reports and ensure that all reports include the information required by this Agreement and EHPD policy; and
h) consider all relevant evidence, including circumstantial, direct, and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations, if feasible. Supervisors will make all reasonable efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between the officer, subject, and witness statements, as well as inconsistencies between the level of force  claimed  by  the  officer  and  the  subject’s  injuries.
76

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 79 of 138

EHPD will train all of its supervisors on the factors to consider when evaluating credibility.

Where a reasonable and trained supervisor would determine that there may have been misconduct,

the supervisor shall immediately notify the IAO to respond to the scene.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

A review of all Use of Force reports revealed that proper investigative

procedures were followed by supervisors and IAO.

Recommendations In the 30-Month report the JCE reported some deficiencies in supervisory

review report writing and notified EHPD. The JCE recommended that EHPD

issue a training bulletin to remind supervisors of the requirements under

EHPD’s  own  policies  and  Paragraphs  105  through  109  (Supervisory  Reviews)  

of the Settlement Agreement. EHPD retrained its supervisors on this issue

and force review reports have improved greatly since then. A review of

supervisory reports this period revealed a continued improvement in force

investigations

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2

All Use of Force Reports reviewed by JCE this period.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

108. Each supervisor shall provide a written report to the shift commander by the end of the shift

documenting  the  supervisor’s  preliminary  determination  of  the  appropriateness  of  the  use  of  force,  

including whether the force was reasonable and within policy; whether the injuries appear

proportionate to the use of force described; and summaries of subject, witness, and officer

statements.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

End of shift interpreted as end of tour of duty. Supervisors shall provide written report to shift commander before they go home. In  the  JCE’s  30-month report, the JCE found some deficiencies in supervisory review report writing and notified EHPD. he JCE recommended that EHPD provide further training to remind supervisors of the requirements under EHPD’s  own  policies  and  Paragraphs  105  through  109  (Supervisory  Reviews)   of the Settlement Agreement. The EHPD addressed this issue during the latter part of 2015 and, as a result, the JCE noticed a significant improvement in how supervisors investigated and reviewed use of force reports submitted for the last six months of 2015. A review of supervisory reports this period revealed a continued improvement in force investigations. All review reports inspected by the JCE were submitted in a timely manner. Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports reviewed by JCE showed that shift commanders were properly notified. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force reports.

77

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 80 of 138

109. Each supervisor shall complete and document a use of force supervisory review using a Supervisor’s  Force  Review  Report,  within  72  hours  of  learning  of  the  use  of  force.    This  Report   shall include:

a) the  supervisor’s  narrative  description  of  the  incident, including a precise description

of the evidence that either justifies or fails  to  justify  the  officer’s  conduct  based  on  the  supervisor’s  

independent review of the facts and circumstances of the incident;

b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers,

and addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses,

the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but

circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone

number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should

also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a statement;

c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force;

d) the  reviewing  supervisor’s  evaluation  of  the  basis for the use of force, including a

determination  of  whether  the  officer’s actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent

with state and federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an

assessment of the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force

may have been avoided through the use of de-escalation techniques or lesser force options; and

e) documentation of any non-disciplinary corrective action taken.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Proper reporting procedures were followed by supervisors in cases of Use of Force during this reporting period, January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to monitor supervisory reports to ensure reports are properly prepared and submitted in a timely manner.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 All Use of Force Supervisory Reports reviewed this reporting period. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents, including supervisory reports

110. Upon  completion  of  the  Supervisor’s  Force  Review  Report,  the  investigating  supervisor  shall  

forward the report to the patrol commander, who shall review the report to ensure that it is

complete and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The patrol

commander shall order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant

evidence that may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the

findings.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Patrol Commanders reviewed all use of force reports. There has been no need for additional investigation.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2

Use of Force Reports reviewed by the JCE.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

78

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 81 of 138

Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

111. Where the findings of the Supervisory Force Review Report are not supported by a

preponderance of the evidence, the patrol commander shall modify the findings after consultation

with the reviewing supervisor, and document the reasons for this modification, including the

specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification. The patrol commander shall counsel the

reviewing supervisor regarding the modification and of any investigative deficiencies that led to it,

and order corrective action where appropriate. The patrol commander shall be held accountable

for the accuracy and completeness of Use of Force Supervisory Review Reports completed by

supervisors under the command of the patrol commander.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences of Supervisory Force Review Report not supported by a preponderance of the evidence reported to the JCE.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports and supervisors review reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents and supervisory reviews.

112. Where a reviewing supervisor repeatedly conducts deficient investigations, the supervisor shall receive the appropriate corrective action, including training, demotion, and/or removal from a supervisory position.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences of repeated deficiencies by any one specific

supervisor to the knowledge of the JCE.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

113. Whenever a reviewing supervisor or patrol commander finds evidence of apparent criminal conduct by an officer, he or she shall suspend the investigation immediately and notify the Chief of  Police,  the  IAO,  the  State  Attorney’s  Office,  and  the  State  Police.    The  IAO  shall  immediately   notify the FBI and USAO, where appropriate.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports.

79

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 82 of 138

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

114. When the patrol commander finds that the supervisor force review is complete and the

findings are supported by the evidence, the force review file shall be forwarded to the Chief of

Police and the IAO. The Chief of Police and the IAO shall review the force review to ensure that

it is complete and that the findings are supported by the evidence. At the discretion of the Chief of

Police, his designee, or the IAO, a use of force review may be assigned or re-assigned to another

supervisor, whether within or outside of the shift in which the incident occurred, or may be

returned to the patrol commander for further review or analysis. This assignment or re-assignment

shall be explained in writing.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports reviewed revealed that all were properly forwarded to the Chief and the IAO. No review reports needed to be re-assigned. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

115. Where, after a force review, a use of force is found to be out of policy, the Chief of Police

shall direct and ensure appropriate discipline, including forwarding the outcome of the force

review to the Board of Police Commissioners for disciplinary action. Where the use of force

indicates policy, training, tactical, or equipment concerns, the Chief of Police shall ensure also that

necessary training is delivered and that policy, tactical or equipment concerns are resolved.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

No use of force this period was found to be out of policy by EHPD, as reported to the JCE

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents and any new training associated with cases.

G. Force Investigations by Internal Affairs

116. EHPD shall establish a single, uniform reporting and investigation/review system for all serious uses of force, including critical firearm discharges.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

System already established.

80

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 83 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports and supervisory review reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

117. EHPD shall ensure that all serious uses of force are investigated fully and fairly by individuals with appropriate expertise, independence and investigative skills to ensure that uses of force that are contrary to law or policy are identified and appropriately resolved; that policy, training, equipment, or tactical deficiencies related to the use of force are identified and corrected; and that investigations of sufficient quality to ensure that officers are held accountable as necessary. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:
a) Provide for an IAO to conduct administrative investigations of serious uses of force, uses of force by
EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or uses of force reassigned to the IAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the IAO.
b) Within 90 days from the Effective Date, EHPD shall recruit, assign, and train a sufficient number of IAOs to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement. Prior to performing IAO duties, IAOs shall receive a minimum of 24 hours of force investigation training; call out and investigative protocols; and proper roles of onscene  counterparts  such  as  crime  scene  technicians,  State  Attorney’s  Office,  State   Police EHPD detectives, and Joint Compliance Expert; and investigative equipment and techniques. IAOs shall also receive annual in-service training on proper force investigations.
c) EHPD shall create a force investigation procedural manual to ensure consistency with this Agreement. The procedural manual shall include:
i. definitions of all relevant terms; ii. clear statements of the mission and authority of the IAO regarding force investigations; iii. procedures on report writing; iv. procedures for collecting and processing evidence; v. procedures to ensure appropriate separation of criminal and administrative
investigations in the event of compelled subject officer statements; vi. procedures for consulting with the State Attorney’s  Office  and  the  State   Police, including ensuring that administrative investigations are not unnecessarily delayed while a criminal investigation is pending; vii. scene management procedures; and viii. management procedures.

Compliance Rating Discussion

Substantial Compliance Use of Force Investigations Policy 407.2 has been established and updated.
81

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 84 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports reviewed. All supervisors are trained to investigate IA cases by EHPD. IAO investigates all serious uses of force. In cases of highranking officers being investigated, Police Chief Lennon has a system in place to assign a trained officer of higher rank to investigate. There were no serious uses of force this reporting period, other than an accidental firearm discharged by an off-duty officer with no injuries. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

118. Where appropriate to ensure the fact and appearance of impartiality, investigations of serious uses of force or force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer shall be referred for investigation to an independent and highly competent entity outside EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

There have been no referrals to the FBI for the reporting period.
None
Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. EHPD has built a relationship with the FBI and the State’s Attorney Office. There has been no need to refer any cases to outside entities this reporting period. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

119. In every incident involving a serious use of force, or any use of force indicating apparent

criminal conduct by an officer, the supervisor shall immediately notify the IAO and obtain a use of

force tracking number.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were no use of force incidents during this reporting period that did not follow proper protocols and procedures.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Supervisory Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

120. The IAO shall respond to the scene of every incident involving a serious use of force, any use of force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer, any use of force by an officer of a rank higher than sergeant, or as ordered by the Chief of Police or designee.

82

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 85 of 138

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
IAO responds to all serious uses of force when properly notified. None Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Interview with IAO and review of IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

121. The  IAO  shall  immediately  notify  and  consult  with  the  State  Attorney’s  Office  and  State  

Police regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent criminal conduct by EHPD

personnel, or any use of force in which an officer discharged his firearm, or where an individual

has died while in or proximate to the custody of EHPD. The IAO shall immediately notify and

consult with the FBI and the USAO regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent

criminal conduct by EHPD personnel that violates federal law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD has established a strong and productive relationship with the FBI. There  have  been  no  cases  requiring  notification  to  the  State  Attorney’s  Office   or FBI. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Interviews with former IAO Naccarato and new IAO Brokett Review of IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force Incidents.

122. If the case may proceed criminally, or where EHPD requests a criminal prosecution, any

compelled interview of the subject officers shall be delayed, consistent with Paragraphs 148 and

150 of this Agreement. No other part of the investigation shall be held in abeyance unless

specifically authorized by the Chief of Police in consultation with the agency conducting the

criminal investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Unaware of any relevant incident to date.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor Use of Force, Supervisory and IAO reports

83

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 86 of 138

123. The IAO shall complete its administrative use of force investigation within 60 days from the use of force. At the conclusion of each use of force investigation, the IAO shall prepare a report on the investigation. The report shall include:

a) a narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the

evidence  that  either  justifies  or  fails  to  justify  the  officer’s  conduct  based  on  the IAO’s    

independent review of the facts and circumstances of the incident;

b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers,

and addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses,

the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but

circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone

number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should

also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a

statement;

c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force;

d) the  IAO’s  evaluation  of  the  basis  for  the  use  of  force, including a determination of

whether  the  officer’s  actions  appear  to  be  within  EHPD policy and consistent with state and

federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of

the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have

been avoided through the use of de-escalation techniques or lesser force options;

e) if a weapon was used,  documentation  that  the  officer’s  certification and training for

the weapon are current; and

f) documentation of any disciplinary and/or non-disciplinary corrective action

recommended.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

IAO has complied with this paragraph in the past. There have been no cases investigated by the IAO this period that apply to this paragraph.

Recommendations IAO to contact JCE if a case comes up.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Interviews with former IAO Naccarato and review of IAO reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor Use of Force, Supervisory and IAO reports

H. Review by Chief of Police

124. The Chief of Police shall review all force reviews by supervisors and force investigations by the IAO. The Chief of Police shall:
a) review each force review and investigation within 30 days of receiving the force review/investigation report to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are
supported by a preponderance of the evidence; b) order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant
evidence that may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the
84

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 87 of 138

findings. Where the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the Chief of

Police or his/her designee shall modify the findings and document the reasons for this

modification, including the specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification;

c) determine whether the force violated EHPD policy. If the force violated EHPD

policy, the Chief of Police of his/her designee shall take appropriate disciplinary action, including

referring the review or investigation report to the Board of Police Commissioners for appropriate

disciplinary action;

d) determine whether the incident raises policy, training, equipment, or tactical

concerns, and refer such incidents to the appropriate commander or supervisor within EHPD to

ensure they are resolved;

e) direct shift supervisors to take and document non-disciplinary corrective action to

enable or encourage an officer to improve his or her performance; and

f) document his or her findings within 45 days of receiving the force review or

investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Retired/former Chief Larrabee reviewed Use of Force reports and reported no

issues with same.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2

Use of Force Reports reviewed by JCE revealed they were reviewed and

signed by the Chief.

Continued interviews with retired/former Chief Larrabee and new Chief

Lennon and IAO.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review continued.

J. Use of Force Training
125. EHPD shall provide all EHPD officers with 4 – 8 hours of use of force training within 365 days of the Effective Date, and 4 – 8 hours of use of force training on at least an annual basis thereafter, including information on developments in applicable law and EHPD policy. EHPD shall coordinate and review all use of force policy and training to ensure quality, consistency, and compliance  with  the  Constitution,  Connecticut  law,  this  Agreement  and  EHPD  policy.    EHPD’s   use of force training shall include the following topics:
a) EHPD’s  use  of  force  model,  as  described  in  this  Agreement;;   b) proper use of force decision-making; c) use of force reporting requirements; d) the Fourth Amendment and related law; e) role-playing scenarios and interactive exercises that illustrate proper use of force decision-making, including training officers on the importance and impact of ethical decision making and peer intervention; f) the proper deployment and use of all intermediate weapons or technologies, including canines and ECWs;

85

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 88 of 138

g) de-escalation techniques that encourage officers to make arrests without using

force, and instruction that disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a

subject, summoning reinforcements, calling in specialized units, or delaying arrest may be the

appropriate response to a situation, even when the use of force would be legally justified;

h) threat assessment;

i) basic crisis intervention and interacting with people with mental illnesses, including

instruction by mental health practitioners and an emphasis on de-escalation strategies;

j) factors to consider in initiating or continuing a pursuit;

k) appropriate training on conflict management; and

l) supervisors of all ranks, as part of their initial and annual in-service supervisory

training, shall receive additional training in conducting use of force reviews and investigations;

strategies for effectively directing officers to minimize uses of force and to intervene effectively to

prevent or stop unreasonable force; and supporting officers who report unreasonable or unreported

force, or who are retaliated against for using only reasonable force or attempting to prevent

unreasonable force.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

All current Class Roster and schedules of training on ECW (Tasers), firearms, and other weapons have been provided to the JCE. All officers have attended training on use of force as of December 31, 2015. Use of force training was also held on January 4, 6, and 13 of 2016.

Recommendations

Ongoing review. The JCE recommends that EHPD issue a training bulletin to remind supervisors of the requirements regarding report writing under EHPD’s  own  policies  and  Paragraphs  105  through  109  (Supervisory  Reviews)   of the Settlement Agreement.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

All current Use of Force Reports. Training Rosters and curricula reviewed. Class rosters and schedules of training on ECW (Tasers), firearms, and other weapons have been provided to the JCE. All officers have attended training on use of force as of December 31, 2015. The JCE audited a class on use of force in June 2015. Use of Force class was also held in December 2015, and in January 2016. Questions/Next Steps: JCE to monitor yearly in-service training completed and attend training throughout 2016. JCE audited a class on use of force in June, 2015 taught by Mr. Eliot Spector, and in January 2016.

126. Included in the use of force training set out above. EHPD shall require firearms training for all officers within 365 days of the Effective Date and at least twice yearly thereafter. EHPD firearms training shall:
a) require officers to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and other service firearms on a semi-annual basis;
b) require cadets, officers in probationary periods, and officers who return from unarmed status to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and other service firearms before such personnel are permitted to carry and use firearms;

86

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 89 of 138

c) incorporate professional night training, stress training (e.g., training in using a

firearm after undergoing physical exertion) and proper use of force decision-making training,

including continuous threat assessment techniques, in the annual in-service training program; and

d) ensure that firearm instructors critically observe students and provide corrective

instruction regarding deficient firearm techniques and failure to utilize safe gun

handling procedures at all times.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Class roster and schedules of firearm training for 2014, 2015 and 2016 have

been provided to the JCE by EHPD.

Recommendations Ongoing review. JCE to monitor in-service firearms training.

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force Reports.

Training Rosters, attendance sheets, and curricula reviewed by JCE. As per

EHPD, all officers have attended firearms training and retraining during in-

service training. The JCE audited a class on use of force in June 2015. Use

of Force class was also held in December 2015 and January 2016. Firearm

training was also held in May 2016, and is scheduled again for August 2016.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

JCE to monitor yearly in-service training.

VIII. CIVILIAN COMPLAINTS, INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS, AND DISCIPLINE

127. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all allegations of officer misconduct are received and

are fully and fairly investigated; that all investigative findings are supported by a preponderance of

the evidence and documented in writing; and that all officers who commit misconduct are held

accountable pursuant to a disciplinary system that is fair and consistent. To achieve these

outcomes, EHPD and the Town shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the use of force section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the subparagraphs that it introduces. Continue to monitor.

Evidentiary Basis IA Office files and reports.

Discussion

Fair disciplinary system is in place (Disciplinary Matrix).

A. Reporting Misconduct

128. EHPD shall require that all officers and employees report apparent misconduct by another EHPD officer or employee to a supervisor or directly to the IAO for review and investigation. Where apparent misconduct is reported to a supervisor, the supervisor shall immediately document and report this information to the IAO. Failure to report or document apparent misconduct or

87

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 90 of 138

criminal behavior shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination of employment. The default discipline for a failure to report criminal behavior shall be termination.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were six internal complaints by EHPD supervisors that were reported to the IAO for investigation. Three investigations were for Rules and Regulations violations. All of those investigations were sustained with discipline.

Two investigations were Supervisor Complaints. One was exonerated; One closed, the complainant did not follow through.

One civilian complaint was investigated and exonerated  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue talk with IAO Brockett and Chief Lennon Use of Force Reports. IAO Reports. Supervisory Review Reports. Citizen Complaints and IAO complaint reports reviewed Interviews with Chief Larrabee and former IAO Naccarato. Policies 201.4, 208.2, 407.2 Questions/Next Steps: JCE to monitor reports.

B. Complaint Information

129. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, the Town and EHPD shall develop and implement a

program to ensure broad knowledge throughout the East Haven community about how to make

misconduct complaints, and the availability of effective mechanisms for making misconduct

complaints. The requirements below shall be incorporated into this program.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The Civilian Complaint System and the Early Identification System (EIS) has been fully developed and implemented, and is publicizing the complaint process in the East Haven community, on the EHPD website and via a link from the Town website, at Town Hall, at EHPD headquarters and at the Hagaman Memorial Library. Officers are required to carry civilian complaint forms in EHPD vehicles.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Complaint System on Website and EIS reviewed. Forms and information available at Town Hall, at EHPD headquarters and at the Hagaman Memorial Library. JCE has developed a checklist of data and reports that are reviewed at each site visit.

88

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 91 of 138

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all complaints and review EIS on every site visit.

130. The Town and EHPD shall make complaint forms and informational materials, including

brochures and posters, available at appropriate government properties, including EHPD

headquarters, EHPD and Town websites, Town Hall, and the public library. Individuals shall be

able to submit misconduct complaints through the EHPD and City websites and these websites

shall include complaint forms and information regarding how to file misconduct complaints.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

JCE has checked Department’s  website,  Library,  Town  Hall  and  found  the  

forms and Policy Manual readily available. JCE also noticed informational

material translated in Spanish at EHPD front desk.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to check to ensure information and forms are easily

accessible to the public in a neutral location.

Evidentiary Basis Complaint system on website. The civilian complaint form is also available

at the EHPD, at the library, and at East Haven Town Hall. JCE also noticed

informational material translated in Spanish at EHPD front desk. JCE will

continue to insure that forms are available and the process is fair and open.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Monitor and make sure forms continue to be readily available to the public.

131. At the locations listed above, EHPD shall post and maintain a permanent placard describing

the external complaint process that includes relevant contact information, such as telephone

numbers, email addresses, and Internet sites. EHPD will require all officers to carry complaint

forms, containing basic complaint information, in their department vehicles at all times. Officers

shall  also  provide  complaint  forms  and  the  officer’s  name  and  badge  number  upon  request.    If  an  

individual objects to an officer’s  conduct,  that  officer  will  inform  the  individual  of  his  or  her  right  

to make a complaint and shall provide the complaint form, informational brochure, and the

officer’s  name  and  badge  number.    If  the  individual  indicates  that  he  or  she  would  like  to  make a

complaint, the officer shall immediately inform his or her supervisor.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available at locations and via officers.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The JCE will continue to check compliance regarding these materials with specific information at specific locations. Visual inspection in the EHPD lobby. Ride-alongs and interviews with officers and sergeants during site visits in January, May and July 2016. Policies 201.4 and 208.2 Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor.

89

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 92 of 138

132. Complaint forms and related informational materials shall be made available and posted in English and Spanish.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available and posted in English and Spanish.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to check compliance in East Haven.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Visual inspection during site visits of materials and brochures by JCE confirmed that these forms are available in Spanish and English. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor updates/changes to written materials.

C. Complaint Intake, Classification, and Tracking

133. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall revise policy and train all officers and supervisors to ensure that all officers properly handle complaint intake, including how to properly provide complaint materials and information; and the consequences for failing to take complaints; and strategies for turning complaints into positive police-civilian interactions.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Policy 208.2 instructs officers on the process of complaint intake. In-service training has been provided to all officers on the process of complaint intake. The EHPD must underscore the importance of this paragraph and management should continually closely monitor the complaint process. Policy 208.2 and training. Information from Chief, and Deputy Chief. Review of all citizen complaints. All officers carry complaint forms and are instructed to hand to civilians wishing to file a complaint. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site and inspect police cars and other town sites for compliance.

134. The refusal to accept a misconduct complaint, discouraging the filing of a misconduct

complaint, or providing false or misleading information about filing a misconduct complaint, shall

be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

No evidence found of officers discouraging the filing of complaints or denying forms to the public. Policy 208.2 instructs officers on the process and they have been trained.

Recommendations The EHPD must underscore the importance of this paragraph and management should continually closely monitor the complaints process.

90

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 93 of 138

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 and training. Review of all citizen complaints. Information from retired/former Chief Larrabee and former IAO Naccarato that there have been no such cases reported this period. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site.

135. EHPD shall accept all misconduct complaints, including anonymous and third-party

complaints, for review and investigation. Complaints may be made in writing or verbally, in

person or by mail, telephone (or TDD), facsimile, or electronic mail. Any LEP individual who

wishes to file a complaint about an EHPD officer or employee shall be provided with a complaint

form in Spanish or, for less common languages in East Haven, EHPD will make arrangements to

ensure that the LEP person is able to make a complaint. Such complaints will be investigated in

accordance with this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph. The JCE is not aware of any anonymous, third party, or LEP complaints that was not accepted or otherwise.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 208.2 and training. Interview and information from Lt. Emerman, Language Access Coordinator and Community Liaison Officer including 42-month report and conversations with former IAO James Naccarato and current IAO Brockett/ Review of all citizen complaints by JCE.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site.

136. All officers and employees who receive a misconduct complaint in the field shall immediately inform a supervisor of the misconduct complaint so that the supervisor can ensure proper intake of the complaint. All misconduct complaints received outside of EHPD headquarters shall be forwarded to the IAO before the end of the shift in which it was received.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

IA Officer and EHPD reported to the JCE that all complaints recorded by EHPD were properly routed and procedures were followed. The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph. Policy manual training (Policy 208.2) regarding this paragraph has been completed. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 and training, IAO files and reports

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

137. EHPD shall ensure that allegations of officer misconduct made during criminal prosecutions or civil lawsuits are identified and investigated as misconduct complaints.

91

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 94 of 138

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Ongoing compliance check. There have been no occurrences of this type reported to the JCE. Track all lawsuits against EHPD personnel; Continue to monitor EIS Policy 208.2 Information from former IAO Naccarato. EIS review. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to meet with IAO Brockett and review EIS.

138. Within three business days of the receipt of a misconduct complaint, the IAO shall determine whether  the  complaint  will  be  assigned  to  the  subject  officer(s)’  supervisor(s)  or  retained  by  the   IAO for an administrative investigation. The IAO shall also determine whether the misconduct complaint  warrants  a  referral  to  the  State  Attorney’s  Office  and/or  USAO for a criminal investigation. EHPD shall develop and implement a complaint classification protocol that is allegation-based rather than anticipated outcome-based to guide the IAO in determining where a complaint should be assigned. This complaint classification protocol shall ensure that the IAO investigates allegations including:
a) serious misconduct, including but not limited to: criminal misconduct; unreasonable use of force;
b) discriminatory policing; false arrest or planting evidence; untruthfulness/false statements; unlawful search; retaliation; sexual misconduct; domestic violence; and theft;
c) misconduct implicating the conduct of the supervisory or command leadership of the subject officer; and
d) any other violations as determined by the Chief of Police.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
The JCE will continue ongoing tracking of all IAO reports and engage in regular communication with EHPD command staff. The JCE is not aware of any complaint investigation not completed in a timely manner, nor any that needed  to  be  referred  to  State  Attorney’s  Office. Continue to monitor EIS Policy 208.2 Information from former IAO Naccarato. IAO reports. JCE’s  review  of  complaints Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to meet with IAO and review EIS and complaint processes/procedures.

92

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 95 of 138

139. The Chief of Police shall not be authorized to personally conduct an investigation of officer

misconduct or violation of policy, nor prevent the conduct of such an investigation. A misconduct

complaint investigation may not be conducted by any officer who used force during the incident;

whose conduct led to the injury of a person; who authorized the conduct that led to the reported

incident or complaint; or who was on the scene of the incident leading to the allegation of

misconduct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

No such cases have been reported to the JCE this period. The JCE will continue to track and review all IAO reports.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 All IAO reports reviewed and appeared to have complied with this paragraph.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all IAO reports and meet with IAO Brockett.

140. EHPD shall track, as a separate category of misconduct complaints, allegations of discriminatory policing, along with characteristics of the complainants. EHPD shall ensure that complaints of discriminatory policing are captured and tracked appropriately, even if the complainant does not specifically label the misconduct as such.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Working with EHPD, the JCE will continue to track compliance on this

paragraph. There have been no occurrences reported to the JCE this period.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 EIS Report and on-site system review. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all IAO reports and meet with IAO Brockett. The JCE review of all complaints on every quarterly site visit.

141. Within 180 days of the Effective date, the IAO shall develop and implement a centralized

numbering and tracking system for all misconduct complaints. Upon the receipt of a complaint,

the IAO shall promptly assign a unique numerical identifier to the complaint, which shall be

provided to the complainant at the time the complaint is made. Where a misconduct complaint is

received in the field, a supervisor shall obtain the unique numerical identifier and provide this

identifier to the complainant.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) has developed a centralized numbering and tracking system that will allow the prompt assignment of a unique numerical identifier to each civilian complaint and ensure that complainants are informed of this

93

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 96 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

number at the time the complaint is made. The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph. The JCE will continue to monitor compliance to ensure that the unique numerical identifier is used for all complaints. EHPD compliance report; Policy 208.2 Review of all IAO complaints and numbering system. Meetings with IAO Brockett. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to meet with former IAO Naccarato and review all complaints and numbering system.

142. EHPD’s  centralized  numbering  and  tracking  system  shall  maintain  accurate  and  reliable  data   regarding the number, nature, and status of all misconduct complaints, from initial intake to final disposition, including investigation timeliness and notification to the complainant of the interim status and final disposition of the investigation. This system shall be used to determine the status of complaints and to confirm that a complaint was received, as well as for periodic assessment of compliance with EHPD policies and procedures and this Agreement, including requirements on the timeliness of administrative investigations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Ongoing review of IAO reports will continue. IAO is able to provide useful data to JCE using the present system. The JCE will continue to monitor compliance to ensure that the unique numerical identifier is used for all complaints. EHPD quarterly compliance report to the JCE; Policy 208.2 Review of all IAO complaints. Review of IAO numbering system. Meetings with former IAO Naccarato. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to meet with IAO Brockett and review all complaints and numbering system.

143. Where a supervisor receives a misconduct complaint in the field alleging that misconduct has just occurred, the supervisor shall gather all relevant information and evidence and provide this information and evidence to the IAO. This information includes the names and contact information for all complainants and witnesses, the names of all EHPD officers and employees on the scene at the time of the alleged misconduct, and any available physical evidence such as voluntarily provided video or audio recordings, or documentation of the existence of such recordings where the witness chooses not to provide the recording. The supervisor shall take photographs of apparent injuries or the absence thereof.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports reveals that these procedures are being followed.

94

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 97 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to track all IAO reports and supervisor reports.
Policy 208.2 on the Complaint Process. IAO Files, IAO Reports and Supervisor Reports. The Chief informed the JCE that all EHPD supervisors are trained to investigate IAO complaints. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO reports and meet with IAO Brockett.

D. Investigation of Complaints

144. Investigations of officer misconduct shall be as thorough as necessary to reach reliable and

complete findings. The misconduct complaint investigator shall interview each complainant in

person, absent exceptional circumstances, and this interview shall be recorded in its entirety,

absent specific, documented objection by the complainant. All officers in a position to hear or see

an incident, or any significant event before or after an incident, shall provide a written statement

regarding their observations, even to state that they did not see or hear anything.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

All complaints, but two, filed this period were properly investigated, including interviews with witnesses, where applicable, and officers. The exception was that in two cases, the investigating supervisors failed to include some information in their reports, although the information was included in the  officers’  reports.  These  cases  were  of  a  minor  nature,  however,  the  JCE   notified the EHPD about these shortcomings for corrective action

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to track all IAO incident reports.
Policy 208.2 The JCE reviewed all IA Files and Reports for this period and found that they complied with this paragraph. Meetings with former IAO Naccarato. The Chief informed the JCE that all EHPD supervisors are trained to investigate IAO complaints Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO complaints and meet with IAO Brockett.

145. Where the alleged misconduct is particularly serious or information from an officer or other

witness may be necessary to resolve an allegation, the investigator shall conduct an in-person

interview of the officer or other witness. Each officer, witness, and complainant shall be

interviewed separately. An EHPDAI not involved in the underlying complaint will be used when

taking statements or conducting interviews of any LEP complainant or witness.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports. In-person interviews were conducted when indicated and when necessary.

95

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 98 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to track all IAO incident reports.
Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports reviewed and in-person interviews were conducted when necessary. Meetings with former IAO Naccarato. The Chief informed the JCE that all EHPD supervisors are trained to investigate IAO complaints. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Brockett.

146. All officer and civilian witness statements should be documented in their entirety, including

any statement that the witness saw or heard nothing. All interviews should be recorded. All

recordings shall be stored and maintained in a secure location within IAO.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Review of all IAO reports revealed they were properly documented, recorded

when allowed and stored.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO incident reports.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with former IAO Naccarato. The Chief informed the JCE that all EHPD supervisors are trained to investigate IA complaints and to comply with this paragraph Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO incident reports and recordings and meet with IAO Brockett.

147. EHPD shall require officers to cooperate with administrative investigations, including

appearing for an interview when requested by an EHPD investigator and providing all requested

documents and evidence. Supervisors shall be notified when an officer under their supervision is

summoned as part of an administrative investigation  and  shall  facilitate  the  officer’s  appearance,  

absent extraordinary and documented circumstances.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports. Policy  208.2  requires  officer’s  cooperation.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO incident reports.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with former IAO Naccarato who indicated that supervisors are routinely notified and that there have been no issues when an officer is summoned for an interview. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Brockett.

96

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 99 of 138

148. The subject officer shall not be compelled to provide a statement to administrative

investigators where there is a potential criminal investigation or prosecution of the officer, until

consultation with the criminal investigative agency (e.g. State Attorney’s  Office  or  USAO  and  

approval by the Chief of Police. EHPD,  the  Town,  and  the  State  Attorney’s  Office  shall  develop  

and implement protocols to ensure that the criminal and administrative investigations are kept

appropriately separate after a subject officer has provided a compelled statement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is law and all supervisors are aware of it.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 Reviewed all IAO reports/cases. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to review files and cases to ensure law is being closely followed.

149. Nothing  in  this  Agreement  or  EHPD  policy  shall  hamper  an  officer’s  obligation  to  provide  a  

public safety statement regarding a work related incident or activity. EHPD shall make clear that

all officer statements in incident reports, arrest reports, use of force reports and similar documents,

and  statements  made  in  interviews  such  as  those  conducted  in  conjunction  with  EHPD’s  routine  

use of force  review  and  investigation  process,  are  part  of  each  officer’s  routine  professional  duties  

and are not compelled statements. Where an officer believes that providing a verbal or written

statement will be self-incriminating the officer shall affirmatively state this and shall not be

compelled to provide a statement without prior consultation with the criminal investigative agency

(e.g.  State  Attorney’s  Office  or  USAO), and approval by the Chief of Police.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will track compliance; If issue arise, JCE will investigate further.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 All IAO reports/cases. The Chief informed the JCE that all EHPD supervisors are trained to investigate IA complaints and are aware of officers’ rights and obligations. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will closely monitor.

150. If at any time during complaint intake or investigation the investigator determines that there may have been criminal conduct on the part of any officer or employee, the investigator shall immediately notify the Chief of Police and the Joint Compliance Expert, and shall consult with the State Attorney’s  Office,  USAO and the local office of the FBI regarding the initiation of a criminal investigation, as appropriate. Where an allegation is investigated criminally, the IAO shall continue with the administrative investigation of the allegation, except that it may delay or decline

97

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 100 of 138

to conduct an interview of the subject officer(s) or other witnesses until completion of the criminal

investigation unless, after consultation with the investigating agency and the Chief of Police, such

interviews are deemed appropriate

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The IAO reported no incidents of suspected criminal conduct by officers to the JCE. The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 IAO reported to the JCE no cases of suspected criminal conduct this period.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review IAO files.

151. In each investigation, EHPD shall consider all relevant evidence including circumstantial, direct and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations based upon that evidence. There will  be  no  automatic  preference  for  an  officer’s  statement  over  a  non-officer’s  statement,  nor  will   EHPD  disregard  a  witness’  statement  merely  because  the  witness  has  some  connection  to  the   complainant or because of any criminal history. During its investigation, EHPD may take into account the criminal history of a complainant that involves a crime of dishonesty. EHPD may also take into account the record of any involved officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between witness statements.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

EHPD trains all its supervisors in the investigation of IAO complaints and the

Chief can assign anyone of them to investigate cases as needed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 All IAO reports were reviewed by the JCE and all appeared to be in compliance. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review IAO case files and meet with IAO.

152. The misconduct investigator shall explicitly identify and recommend one of the following dispositions for each allegation of misconduct in an administrative investigation:
a) “Unfounded,”  where  the  investigation  determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alleged misconduct did not occur or did not involve the subject officer;
b) “Sustained,”  where  the  investigation  determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alleged misconduct did occur;
c) “Not  Sustained,”  where  the  investigation  is unable to determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, whether the alleged misconduct occurred; or

98

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 101 of 138

d) “Exonerated,”  where  the  investigation  determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alleged conduct did occur but did not violate EHPD policies, procedures, or training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were 17 internal and external complaints filed during the first six months of 2016. All were properly investigated and categorized as described in this paragraph

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Policy 208.2 IAO reports submitted to JCE. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to conduct an ongoing careful review of all IAO cases/files.

153. In addition to determining whether the officer committed the alleged misconduct,

administrative investigations shall assess and document whether: (a) the police action was in

compliance with training and legal standards; (b) the use of different tactics should or could have

been employed to achieve a potentially better outcome; (c) the incident indicates a need for

additional training, counseling or other non-disciplinary corrective measures; and (d) the incident

suggests that EHPD should revise its policies, strategies, tactics, or training. This information

shall  be  shared  with  the  relevant  commander(s)  who  shall  document  the  commander’s  

disagreement or agreement with these findings; refer any recommendations to the appropriate

individual to implement the recommended change; document the implementation of these

recommendations; and return the documentation to the IAO.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

No incident this period indicated that EHPD policies, strategies or tactics should be revised.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 IAO files and documented implementation of recommendations by IAO. JCE reviewed all complaints filed this period and found them to be in compliance

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to conduct an ongoing careful review of all IAO cases/files.

154. EHPD shall respond to each complaint within 48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays,

and shall resolve each stage of a complaint investigation in a reasonable time frame. EHPD shall

complete all investigations of civilian complaints within 60 days of receiving the complaint. Upon

a showing of good cause, officers may receive no more than two extensions of up to 30 days each.

Requests for extensions must be in writing and approved by the Chief.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

99

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 102 of 138

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continual review of all complaints. One hundred percent (100%) have been resolved within 60 days. Keep in close communication between quarterly site visits with IAO.
Policy 208.2 All Citizen Complaints reviewed were resolved in accordance with this paragraph. IAO Files indicate all complaints were addressed in a timely manner and according to the Agreement. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor.

155. A misconduct investigation shall not be closed simply because the complaint is withdrawn or the alleged victim is unwilling or unable to provide additional information beyond the initial complaint, or because the complainant pled guilty or was found guilty of an offense.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Careful review of all complaints and IAO investigations revealed that all were

followed through and completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2. Meetings with former IAO Naccarato. IAO Files and Review of all Citizen Complaints. IAO is complying with this requirement. IAO and supervisors followed through on all investigations by contacting and interviewing complainants and witnesses. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to be in close communication with IAO on-site and offsite.

156. Each misconduct complainant will be kept informed periodically regarding the status of the

investigation. The complainant will be notified of the outcome of the investigation, in writing,

within ten business days of the completion of the investigation, including regarding whether any

disciplinary or non-disciplinary action was taken.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing tracking.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 and Review of all citizen complaints revealed compliance with this Paragraph. Questions/Next Steps: None

100

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 103 of 138

E. Discipline

157. EHPD shall ensure that discipline for sustained allegations of misconduct is based on the

nature of the allegation and defined, consistent, mitigating and aggravating factors, rather than the

identity of the officer or his or her status within EHPD or the broader community. EHPD and the

Town shall develop and implement procedures to ensure that discipline is fair and consistent.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 209.2 – Disciplinary Matrix became effective July 1, 2015 and included some minor changes which were reviewed and approved by Parties in May 2015. The Matrix provides for mitigating and aggravating factors and remains current.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 209.2 Review of all cases and reports involving discipline for sustained allegations of misconduct revealed EHPD followed proper procedures pertaining to the Disciplinary Matrix (Policy 209.2). Meetings with Chief and IAO.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

158. EHPD, in consultation with the Board of Police Commissioners and the Town, shall create a disciplinary matrix that:

a) establishes a presumptive range of discipline for each type of rule violation; b) increases the presumptive discipline based on both an officer’s  prior  violations  of   the same or other rules; c) sets out defined mitigating or aggravating factors; d) requires that any departure from the presumptive range of discipline must be justified in writing; e) provides that EHPD shall not take only non-disciplinary corrective action in cases in which the disciplinary matrix calls for the imposition of discipline; and e) provides that EHPD shall consider whether non-disciplinary corrective action also is appropriate in a case where discipline has been imposed.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Full Compliance
Policy 209.2 – Disciplinary Matrix (revision) became effective July 1, 2015 and included some minor changes which were reviewed and approved by Parties in May 2015. It also includes all the requirements listed in this paragraph. None Policy 209.2

101

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 104 of 138

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review training roster after policy complete and approved.

159. EHPD, the Board of Police Commissioners, and the Town shall establish a unified system for reviewing  sustained  findings  and  assessing  the  appropriate  level  of  discipline  pursuant  to  EHPD’s   disciplinary matrix to facilitate consistency in the imposition of discipline. All disciplinary decisions shall be documented, including the rationale behind any decision to deviate from the level of discipline set out in the disciplinary matrix.

Compliance Rating Discussion

Substantial Compliance
Policy 209.2 – Disciplinary Matrix (revision) became effective July 1, 2015 and included some minor changes which were reviewed and approved by Parties in May 2015. There were no known deviations during this reporting period.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 209.2 specifically states circumstances under which the Board or the Chief are authorized to discipline subjects, i.e.: The Board may suspend for periods exceeding ten days and demote and terminate; the Chief may suspend subjects only up to ten days.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE to continue monitoring disciplinary issues.

160. EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall develop and establish written policies and procedures to ensure that the Town Attorney provides close guidance to EHPD and the Board at  the  disciplinary  stage  to  ensure  that  EHPD’s  and  the  Board’s  disciplinary  decisions  are  as  fair  

and legally defensible as possible.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 209.2 – Disciplinary Matrix (revision) became effective July 1, 2015

and included some minor changes which were reviewed and approved by

Parties in May 2015. Town Hall Counsel is involved and advises Police

Dept.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 209.1 Disciplinary Matrix takes into consideration the employees’  

Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA); This policy was reviewed and

approved by Town Hall Counsel.

SITE VISIT

JCE to continue monitoring.

IX. SUPERVISION AND MANAGEMENT

161. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that EHPD supervisors provide the close and effective supervision necessary for officers to improve and grow as police officers; to police actively and effectively, and to identify, correct, and prevent misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.

102

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 105 of 138

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the supervision and management section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces. None Review of reports and meetings with supervisors during site visits.

A. Duties of Supervisors

162. EHPD supervisors shall provide, and shall be held accountable for providing, the close and

effective supervision necessary to direct and guide officers. Close and effective supervision

requires that supervisors: (a) respond to the scene of certain arrests; (b) review each arrest report;

(c) respond to the scene of uses of force; (d) investigate each use of force (except those investigated  by  the  IAO);;  (e)  confirm  the  accuracy  and  completeness  of  officers’  written  reports;;  

(f) respond to each complaint of misconduct; (f) ensure officers are working actively to engage the

community and increase public trust and safety; and (g) provide counseling, redirection, support

to officers as needed, and are held accountable for performing each of these duties.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE has witnessed and learned about effective supervision inside the EHPD during site visits over the past 42 months, and the Policies and Procedures Manual training was completed. The JCE will continue to carefully monitor this paragraph. Supervisors respond to scene to review arrests as necessary and to investigate use of force reports.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

On-site observations in the EHPD; Discussions about supervisory response to use of force and misconduct cases with retired/former Chief Larrabee, Chief Lennon and Deputy Chief Naccarato. Supervisors received supervisory administrative training in 2015. Supervisors received Command Training in May 2016 Review of Supervisory reports show supervisors respond to use of force cases and serious arrest incidents, as required by the Agreement. Review of IAO files.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue discussions with Chief Lennon, and Deputy Chief Naccarato, and on-site observations and review of training.

163. On-duty field supervisors shall be available throughout their shift to respond to the field to provide supervision to officers under their direct command and, as needed, to provide supervisory assistance to other shifts.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

103

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 106 of 138

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Supervisors are generally available and respond to the field when necessary. The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph. None
Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors. On-site interviews with officers. Supervisory Reports show supervisors respond to use of force cases and serious arrest incidents, as required by the Agreement. Arrest Reports (sampling). All Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor.

164. Shift commanders shall closely and effectively supervise the officers under their command.

All EHPD Commanders and supervisors shall ensure that all supervisors and officers under their

command comply with EHPD policy, state and federal law, and the requirements of this

Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

No violations have been detected or reported to the JCE. The JCE has noted that Commanders sign off on supervisory reports. The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors. On-site interviews with officers. Review of Supervisory Reports. Arrest Reports (sampling). Detainee reports. All Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor.

165. EHPD shall hold commanders and supervisors directly accountable for the quality and effectiveness of their supervision, including whether commanders and supervisors identify and effectively respond to misconduct, as part of their performance evaluations and through nondisciplinary corrective action, or through the initiation of formal investigation and the disciplinary process, as appropriate.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Supervisors have, when appropriate, identified misconduct by officers and referred same to IAO for investigation. For example, for this period supervisors filed at least three complaints against officers for misconduct, which were investigated by the IAO. In another case a supervisor counseled an officer who failed to turn on his body-cam during an incident. Continue to monitor supervisory reviews.

104

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 107 of 138

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors (Lieutenants). On-site interviews with officers. Supervisory Reports. Arrest Reports (sampling). All Use of Force Reports. IAO Complaints, and civilian complaints. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor supervisory reviews.

166. Within twelve months of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement an EHPD-

specific system to accurately evaluate officer performance in areas related to integrity, community

policing, and critical police functions on both an ongoing and annual basis that comports with

professional police practices and the requirements of this Agreement. As part of this program,

EHPD shall establish a formalized system documenting annual performance evaluations of each officer  by  the  officer’s  direct  supervisor  which  shall include assessment of:

a) community engagement and communication with the public;

b) use of community-policing and problem-solving strategies;

c) civilian commendations and complaints;

d) disciplinary actions;

e) compliance with policies on usage of sick leave and other leave;

f) compliance with policies on secondary employment;

g) safety (e.g., POST officer safety standards and vehicle operations);

h) training;

i) report-writing; and

j) decision-making skills.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The East Haven Board of Police Commissioners adopted a policy, which became effective on June 15, 2014, that calls for annual performance evaluations on an  employee’s  anniversary  date. Employees have reviewed and signed off on Policy 215.1 via the online Power DMS system as well as received individual and roll call training. Supervisors have also received training on completing the evaluation forms.

Recommendations

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 215.1 Power DMS System Roster. There were no major deficiencies noted in the evaluations conducted of officers this period. As in last report, there were basic improvements recommended for some young officers. Each individual employee evaluation is reviewed and placed in the employee’s own personnel file.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will review random evaluations on future site visits and report on progress.

105

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 108 of 138

167. Annual performance evaluations shall be based upon work performance completed during the

specific  rating  period.    The  officer’s  current  direct  supervisor  shall  complete  the  performance  

evaluation, but all supervisory personnel who supervised the officer during the rating period

should provide written input, which shall be considered  by  the  officer’s  current  supervisor  and  

incorporated into the performance evaluation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Performance evaluations based upon Policies and Procedures are conducted yearly  on  the  employee’s  anniversary  date.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 215.1. The EHPD reported that there were no major deficiencies noted this period. Each individual employee evaluation is reviewed and placed in the employee’s own personnel file.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review random evaluations.

B. Early Identification System

168. EHPD shall develop, implement and maintain an Early Identification System (“EIS”)  to  

support the effective supervision and management of EHPD officers and employees, including the

identification of and response to potentially problematic behaviors as early as possible. EHPD will

regularly use EIS data to promote ethical and professional police practices; to manage risk and

liability; and to evaluate the performance of EHPD employees across all ranks, units and shifts.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

At the 180-day mark, the EHPD had begun implementing protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS). At the 365day mark, the EHPD started using/implementing the EIS to automatically draw information from the Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS), the in-house computer reporting system. At the 18-month mark and through the 42-month mark, the EIS is fully operational and continues to track:

•  Any  firearm  discharge  or  use.   •  ECW (Taser) deployment or use; two (2) within a 60-day period. •  Baton  or  O/C  use;;  two (2) within a 60-day period •  Non-compliant handcuffing •  Physical  use  of  force:  three (3) within a 30-day period •  Pursuits;;  two (2) within a 30-day period •  Officers  arrests,  including  interfering  with  police,  obstructing  a  police   officer, resisting arrest, and assault on a police officer; two (2) within a 60day period •  Traffic  accidents  involving  EHPD  equipment;;  three (3) within 12-month period •  Civil  lawsuits;;  two (2) within a 12-month period

106

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 109 of 138

•  Excessive  absences;;  eight (8) unscheduled occurrences in any 12-month period

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The EIS is monitored by the IAO and bi-weekly  by  the  officer’s  supervisor. IAO and supervisors initiate and implement any intervention deemed necessary for the officer and document same in writing on the Departmental Review reporting area of LEAS consistent with the EHPD Early Intervention System (EIS) – Policy 207.2 None
Policy 207.2; Supplemental Reports on EIS by EHPD IAO Naccarato; JCE on-site review of EIS. EIS was triggered twice during the first six months of 2016 due to two vehicle pursuits within a 30-day period and an arrest for interfering with an officer while making an arrest. The officers were cleared because the pursuits were for minor m/v violations and were terminated quickly, and the interference was caused by an intoxicated person trying to rescue a relative. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues on-site review of EIS and any updates/upgrades.

169. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a

protocol setting out which fields in EIS shall include historical data; deadlines for inputting data

related to current and new information; and the individuals responsible for capturing and inputting

data.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD implemented protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS) that captures both historical data and emerging information about  all  sworn  employees,  automatically  drawing  data  from  the  EHPD’s  Law   Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS). The EIS provides a single repository of all relevant information about each sworn employee, both positive and negative. The system has been designed to identify patterns and will establish thresholds in such areas as civilian complaints, uses of force, firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive absences, and other factors to identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct and in need of supervisory intervention.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.2 Onsite observation of completed EIS. IAO quarterly reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE continues to review EIS on-site.

170. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a protocol for using the EIS and information obtained from it. The protocol for using the EIS shall address data storage, data retrieval, reporting, data analysis, pattern identification, identifying
107

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 110 of 138

officers for intervention, supervisory use, supervisory/departmental intervention, documentation and audit. Among protocol requirements EHPD shall include:

a) comparative data analysis, including peer group, shift and unit analysis, to identify

patterns of activity by individual officers and groups of officers;

b) EHPD commander and supervisor review, on a regular basis, but not less than bi-

weekly, of EIS reports regarding each officer under the commander or supervisor’s  direct  

command and, at least quarterly, broader, pattern-based reports;

c) EHPD commanders and supervisors to initiate, implement, and assess the

effectiveness of interventions for individual officers, supervisors, and shifts, based on

assessment of the information contained in the EIS;

d) require an array of intervention options to facilitate an effective response to

identified problems. Interventions may take the form of counseling or training, or of other

supervised, monitored, and documented action plans and strategies designed to modify activity.

All interventions will be documented in writing and entered into the automated system;

e) specify that the decision to order an intervention for an employee or group using

EIS data shall include peer group analysis, including consideration of the nature of  the  employee’s  

assignment, and not solely on the number or percentages of incidents in any category of

information recorded in the EIS;

f) prompt review by EHPD commanders and supervisors of the EIS system records of

all officers upon transfer to their supervision or command;

g) evaluation of EHPD commanders and supervisors based on their appropriate use of

the EIS to enhance effective and ethical policing and reduce risk; and

h) mechanisms to ensure monitored and secure access to the EIS to ensure the

integrity, proper use, and appropriate confidentiality of the data.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD

implemented protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification

System (EIS) that captured both historical data and emerging information

about  all  sworn  employees,  automatically  drawing  data  from  the  EHPD’s  Law  

Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS). The EIS provided a single

repository of all relevant information about each sworn employee, both

positive and negative. The system has been designed to identify patterns and

will establish thresholds in such areas as civilian complaints, uses of force,

firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive absences, and other factors to

identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct and in need of

supervisory intervention.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.2

Onsite observation of completed EIS.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE continues to review EIS on-site.

171. The EIS shall include all relevant information available to EHPD to assess the conduct of each officer, including:

108

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 111 of 138

a) all awards and commendations received by employees;

b) investigations of the officer;

c) complaints (including civil lawsuits) against the officer and their dispositions;

d) data  collected  regarding  the  officer’s  stops,  search  and  seizures  and  uses  of  force;;

e) data  about  officer’s  arrests,  including  arrests  for  interfering  with  a  police  officer,  

resisting arrest, assault on a police officer, and disorderly conduct;

f) training history;

g) supervisory reviews;

h) all vehicle pursuits and traffic collisions involving EHPD equipment;

i) all loss or theft of EHPD property or equipment in the custody of the employee,

including currency, firearms, force instruments, and identification cards; and

j) any disciplinary or other corrective action taken against the officer.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EIS includes all information required by this Settlement Agreement

paragraph. Additional training data is available on another computer.

Recommendations Discuss issues with IAO Brockett.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE reviewed the EIS system on-site. IAO Naccarato’s  365-day supplemental report and Policy 207.2 IAO Naccarato’s  18-month supplemental report. IAO Naccarato’s  24-month supplemental report. IAO  Naccarato’s 30-month supplemental report. IAO  Naccarato’s  36-month supplemental report. IAO  Naccarato’s  2014 Public Accountability Annual Report. IAO  Naccarato’s  2015  Public  Accountability  Annual  Report. Former IAO Naccarato and new IAO Brockett supplemental reports on EIS for the first six months of 2016 (42-month supplemental report). On-site review of EIS and training information. Questions/Next Steps: None

172. The EIS shall include appropriate identifying information for each involved officer (i.e., name, badge number, shift and supervisor) and civilian.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

EIS Database has been reviewed on-site by the JCE

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis The EIS Database includes all the identifying information required under this paragraph. On-site review of EIS system.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

109

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 112 of 138

173. EHPD shall maintain all personally identifiable information about an officer included in the

EIS  for  at  least  five  years  following  the  officer’s  separation  from  the  agency.    Information  

necessary for aggregate statistical analysis will be maintained indefinitely in the EIS. On an

ongoing basis, EHPD will enter information into the EIS in a timely, accurate, and complete

manner, and shall maintain the data in a secure and confidential manner. No individual within

EHPD shall have access to individually identifiable information that is maintained only within EIS

and is about an officer not within that  individual’s  direct  command,  except  as  necessary  for  

investigative, technological, or auditing purposes.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The EIS Database includes all the identifying information required under this paragraph. The data is kept in storage for the appropriate time period and is secure and kept confidential; only certain officers have access to it. Questions/Next Steps: Monitor EIS/IAO reports.

174. The EIS, including any computer programs and hardware, will be operational, fully implemented, and be used in accordance with policies and protocols that incorporate the requirements of this Agreement within 365 days of the Effective Date. Prior to full implementation of the new EIS, EHPD will continue to use existing resources to the fullest extent possible, to identify patterns of conduct by employees or groups of officers.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis

EIS Database includes all requirements under this paragraph. Policy 207.2, EIS continues to operate according Deputy Chief Naccarato’s 42-month report, and IAO Brockett’s  42  month  supplemental reports JCE verified in person.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to monitor.

C. Visual and Audio Documentation of Police Activities

175. EHPD shall maintain and operate video cameras and AVL in all police vehicles and shall

repair or replace all non-functioning video cameras or AVL units. EHPD shall ensure that that

recordings are captured, maintained, and reviewed as appropriate by supervisors, in addition to any

review for investigatory or audit purposes, to assess the quality and appropriateness of officer

interactions, uses of force, and other police activities.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph.

110

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 113 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Since all technology is in-car and tied to computer, if the technology is not operating correctly, the car will not start. Supervisors  inspect  AVL’s   periodically to ensure device is functioning correctly; they also review all videos to ensure they are being utilized as per Department rules. Policy 401.4 and Supervisory reports reviewed by JCE. Patrol cars with malfunctioning video cams are taken out of service per EHPD policy. Also, JCE was informed that AVL’s  as  well  as video storage capacity were updated during first few months of 2016. EHPD now has unlimited video storage capacity and new HD Body-cams are coming on line. Supervisors monitor videos uploaded by officers on a regular basis. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor.

176. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and procedures regarding AVL, in-car recorders, ECWs, and similar equipment that require:

a) activation of in-car cameras for all traffic stops and pursuits until the motor vehicle stop is

completed and the stopped vehicle departs, or until the officer's participation in the motor

vehicle stop ends;

b) activation of ECW cameras when the ECW is un-holstered;

c) activation of in-car cameras for incidents in which a prisoner being transported is

violent or resistant;

d) supervisors to review AVL, in-car camera recordings, and ECW recordings of all officers

listed in any EHPD report regarding any incident involving injuries to a prisoner or an

officer, uses of force, vehicle pursuits, or misconduct complaints;

e) supervisors to review recordings regularly and to incorporate the knowledge gained from

this review into their ongoing evaluation and supervision of officers;

f) that EHPD retain and preserve all recordings for at least three years; however if a case is

reasonably anticipated to lead to litigation or remains under investigation or litigation longer

than three years, EHPD shall retain and preserve the recordings for at least three years after the

final disposition of the matter, including appeals; and

g) that an officer notifies a supervisor immediately when an event was not recorded.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The policy was completed and went into effect in September 2013. Training

was completed in January and February 2014 and the policy was fully

implemented throughout 2014. Policy 401.4 was revised, reviewed and

approved by the Parties during 2015. The JCE will continue to track

compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 401.4 (revised 2015). Reviewed and approved by the JCE and the Parties. Training roster. On-going training. Also,  JCE  was  informed  that  AVL’s, ECW’s as well as video storage capacity have been updated during first few months of 2016.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

111

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 114 of 138

None

177. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a schedule for testing AVL, in-car recorder, and ECW camera recording equipment to confirm that it is in proper working order. Officers shall be responsible for ensuring that recording equipment assigned to them or their car is functioning properly at the beginning and end of each shift and shall report immediately any improperly functioning equipment.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

In compliance with this paragraph, if the in-car technology (computer) is not functioning properly, the car will not start. All  AVL’s,  in-car cameras, and ECW cameras are tested regularly. None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 401.4. JCE has read reports during this period from supervisors reporting defective AVL, ECW and in-car recording equipment. Also, JCE was  informed  that  ECW’s,  and  AVL’s,  as well as video storage capacity have been updated during first few months of 2016.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

178. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall provide each supervisor with handheld

recording devices and require that supervisors use these devices to record complainant and witness

statements taken as part of use of force or misconduct complaint investigations

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with Paragraph 178 of the Settlement Agreement, EHPD supervisors have been equipped with iPhones capable of functioning as recording devices and suitable for recording the statements of witnesses and complainants in the field in use of force cases and other cases. In addition, supervisors have been using Department-issued body cams to record interviews and complaints. Review by the JCE of supervisors’ reports this period revealed that they continue to use body-cams for recording interviews with victims/witnesses.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to monitor the use of the iPhones to record complainant and witness statements per Policy 401.4.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.4

On-site observation. All supervisors received training as IA investigators, as

per the Chief. Use of the body-cams and iPhones for interviews

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE continues to interview supervisors regarding functionality of iPhones

and body-cams.

112

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 115 of 138

X. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT

179. EHPD shall create robust community relationships and engage constructively with the

community to ensure collaborative problem-solving, ethical and bias-free policing, and increase

community confidence in the Department. EHPD shall establish community and problem-oriented

policing principles in its policing operations. EHPD shall also engage the public in the reform

process through the dissemination of public information on a regular basis. EHPD and the Town

shall develop, implement, and maintain systems to ensure comprehensive, effective, and

transparent oversight of EHPD that will be sustained after the completion of this Agreement. To

achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the community engagement and oversight section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

180. EHPD shall, in all of its policing operations, adopt the professional police practices of

community oriented and problem-solving policing, including robust community partnerships,

cooperative strategies, and promoting trust in the community.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD has made considerable progress in this area. This paragraph will continue to be monitored by the JCE. The Chief and his leadership team have been visible in the community. The importance of constant community engagement must be underscored. Retired/former Chief Larrabee/Chief Lennon has assigned officers to walking beats, has opened satellite mini police station, has created a cadet program and assigned officers to the high school to mentor and work with students.

Recommendations Chief continues to emphasize the importance of formal and informal community engagement throughout all ranks.

Evidentiary Basis

Group and individual meetings with residents, businesses and faith-based members of the community and EHPD. Community Liaison Officer Report. Onsite observation at community meetings. Meetings with community members. Chief has assigned  sector  PO’s  to  high  school  as  Liaison  and  they’re  staying   in touch w/school Principal and students; officers on walking beat and on bicycles are  assigned  to  new  substations,  and  to  perform  “walk  and  talk”   during their shifts. Citizen’s police academy: 14 graduated this June 2016.

113

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 116 of 138

SITE VISIT

Planned  Citizen’s  police  academy  for  high  school  students. A new Cadet program for high school students with 3 participants who graduated this year and are continuing on to college to major in Criminal Justice. Chief’s  Advisory Board. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to attend community meetings and interview members of the residential, business and faith-based communities.

181. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall appoint and/or hire a Community Liaison

Officer who is a sworn officer fluent in English and Spanish. The Community Liaison Officer

shall also have formalized training in the nature and scope of federal and state civil rights law as

applied to law enforcement activity

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Lieutenant David Emerman has been selected as both the language access coordinator and the community liaison officer. Lt. Emerman is bi-lingual and fluently speaks English and Spanish. Due to his educational background and life experiences, Lt. Emerman is very proficient in fostering good community relationships with various community groups, especially the local Latino community. The JCE has discussed the need to have a succession plan in place for this vital role. EHPD has stated that they have several officers who are fluent in Spanish and they have been assisting Lt. Emerman in the ongoing efforts to improve community relations. Any of these officers would be eligible for consideration as Liaison.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

THE EHPD 90-day Compliance Report; Meetings with Lt. Emerman; 365day report, 18-month report, 24-month report, 30-month report,36-month report and 42-month report; Media – newspaper articles commending Lt Emerman. Community Liaison Officer Report. EHPD has several officers who are fluent in Spanish and they have been assisting Lt. Emerman in the on-going efforts to improve community relations.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to ensure that a designated Community Liaison Officer is in place if staffing changes/promotions occur.

182. EHPD shall make the contact information and duty hours of the Community Liaison Officer public on its website and on any EHPD document generally available to the public. The Community Liaison Officer shall be directly available for public contact during normal business hours. The Community Liaison Officer shall have the following duties:
a) The Community Liaison Officer shall arrange for quarterly meetings of East Haven residents designed to permit residents to voice their concerns and ask questions. The meetings shall be conducted as follows:

114

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 117 of 138

i.

The meeting shall be attended by the Community Liaison Officer, at least one

senior EHPD command staff member, and by officers responsible for patrolling, or supervising

patrol, in both the north and south sections of the Town. All EHPD personnel present shall be

identified, in uniform, and available for responses to questions from residents of East Haven.

ii. Names shall not be required of persons attending the meeting, nor shall any

investigative law enforcement action be taken at or after this meeting that involves attendees in

any way, absent an emergency. EHPD may act based on information explicitly communicated at

the meeting for that purpose.

iii. EHPD shall notify the public of this meeting and the requirements of this

provision, including anonymity, regarding this meeting in the local press two weeks in advance of

the meeting.

iv. The meeting location shall alternate between the north and south sections of the Town

so that the meeting is held in each section quarterly.

b) The Community Liaison Officer shall review, on a monthly basis, all complaints submitted to EHPD by members of the community to assess community concerns. For those complaints that do not rise to the level of requiring formal action under EHPD policy, code of conduct, and the terms of this Agreement, the Community Liaison Officer shall notify the complainant  of  the  availability  of  the  Community  Liaison  Officer  to  answer  the  complainant’s   questions and respond to any further concerns.

c) The Community Liaison Officer shall meet monthly with the Chief of Police, the

Mayor, and the Board. During these meetings, the Community Liaison Officer shall communicate

the concerns that the Community Liaison Officer has received during the previous month, along

with any other relevant information pertaining to the relationship of EHPD with East Haven

residents.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This paragraph was modified from the original Settlement Agreement to

clarify where meetings should be held in town to make the meetings more

convenient to residents throughout the town. Meetings now take place on

alternating sides of town (north and south).

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

A second modification was made to and approved by the Court on December 19, 2014 to the requirement of monthly community meetings to quarterly meetings due to low attendance. The Community Liaison Officer is well known by the community in East Haven and he arranges and attends all meetings and reports concerns to the Chief. This Officer also meets frequently with the police Chief and the Board, as well information is passed to him through his Legal Advisor. Plan for Community Liaison Officer to continue this work. Develop additional strategies for attracting community members to quarterly meetings. 365-day Supplemental Report and JCE on-site meetings and interviews. 18-month Report. 24-month Report.

115

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 118 of 138

SITE VISIT

30-month Report. 36-month Report. 42-month Report. On-site meetings with Lt. Emerman. Community meetings coordinated by the Community Liaison Officer and held on January 6, and April 26, 2016. Ten-week Citizen Police Academy completed June 2016 (14 graduates) Community meeting held in 2016 Second Police Academy is scheduled with high school students Cadet Program with 3 high school students participating Community Liaison Officer meets regularly with the Police Commission and the Police Chief and the Mayor through his Legal Counsel. Questions/Next Steps: Discuss plan and strategy to attract more community members with Lt. Emerman. Monitor new Citizens Police Academy and Cadet Program.

183. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a strategic recruitment plan that

includes clear goals, objectives, and action steps for attracting high-quality applicants for

employment  across  all  levels  of  EHPD,  sworn  and  civilian.    EHPD’s  strategic  recruitment  plan  

shall  establish  and  clearly  identify  the  duties  and  goals  of  EHPD’s  recruitment  efforts.    The  

strategic recruitment plan shall include specific strategies for attracting a diverse pool of

applicants, including members of groups that have been historically underrepresented in EHPD

and applicants fluent in Spanish.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this paragraph, Chief Brent Larrabee, Attorney Larry

Sgrignari, and Lt. Lennon attended the February 20, 2013 meeting of the East

Haven Civil Service Commission. After consulting with the Commission

members along with Chief Examiner Andrea Liquori, the Commission

requested the submission of various recommended changes to their rules by

their next meeting in order to comply with the Settlement Agreement. These

changes support the Department’s  goals of moving towards a highly

competent professional law enforcement agency. On March 11, 2013, the

Civil Service Commission implemented the rule changes for the recruitment

and hiring of both sworn and non-sworn EHPD employees. These changes

include a tiered point system to encourage the recruiting of a more

professional and well suited applicant. Although the hiring provisions

utilized to hire police officers is regulated by the Connecticut General Statutes

§ 7-294 and the regulations of the CT POST Council, the encouragement for

recruitment of a diverse applicant pool is driven by exceptional recruiting.

The tiered point system grants additional testing points to applicants that

provide  proof  of  higher  education,  veteran’s  points  for  military  service,  or  the  

ability to fluently speak languages other than English. In addition, the Civil

Service Commission has adopted a recruitment plan. Pursuant to the plan, the

EHPD actively advertises upcoming recruiting using various media sources.

116

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 119 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

All advertisements are in both English and Spanish. Some of the locations for advertisement are: •  All  local  newspapers  (both  English  and  Spanish). •  Postings  on  EHPD  and  Town website. •  Multiple  and  frequent  announcements  on  the  EHPD’s  Facebook©  and   Twitter© pages. •  Online  media  advertisements  on  local news sources such as the East Haven Patch. A much more diverse police department as compared to a few years ago, with seven officers who are fluent in Spanish and several African-American officers. The JCE will continue to monitor EHPD recruitment efforts per this paragraph. The EHPD 90-day Compliance Report and phone conferences with Chief Larrabee.

Recruitment plan- State establishes list: from last 7 hires in 2015: six were white males, and one Asian. Out of total of 51 officers in the EHPD, 10 are minorities, including five women. EHPD also has two Middle Eastern/Arab officers on roster. The selection process used is the standard Civil Service testing process that is not regulated or established by the Police Department. This process applies to the hiring of new officers up to the rank of Captain. The process includes a standardized written test, standardized independent (outside personnel from other agencies as the evaluators) oral board assessment,  Chief’s  interview,   and an interview by the Board of Police Commissioners.

SITE VISIT

New task force officers assigned to Fed & FBI – One officer is assigned to the DEA and one is assigned to the FBI. This is evidence that the Dept. has vastly improved its relationship w/Federal authorities. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review and discuss recruitment plan strategies with EHPD leaders.

184. All EHPD audits and reports related to the implementation of this Agreement shall be made

publicly available via website and at the Police Department, Town Hall, and other public locations,

in English and in Spanish, to the fullest extent permissible under law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Although the major compliance reports marking 60, 90, 280, 270 and 365

days, and 18, 24, and 30, 36 and 42 months after the Settlement Agreement

Effective Date are posted on the websites, the JCE will continue to review

additional materials related to EHPD policies and procedures and may make

additional recommendations for adding materials.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to work with Deputy Chief Naccarato to identify

additional materials for posting on the public website at the Police

117

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 120 of 138

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Department, Town Hall and Hagaman Public Library. Discussions of a blog, other social media outlets, using interns and other new processes to reach public should be continued. EHPD Website and JCE on-site observations.
Questions/Next Steps: Continue to verify and ensure updated materials are in place.

185. EHPD shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to facilitate and ensure

transparency and wide public access to information related to EHPD decision making and

activities, as permitted by law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE is continuing to work with USDOJ and EHPD to track compliance on this paragraph since all training on the new Policy Manual was completed in February 2014 and continued to be implemented throughout 2015 and into 2016. Annual Use of Force reports, Stops, Search and Seizures and Annual Compliance reports are all available to the public through EHPD website and at police station. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Annual Use of Force reports, Stops, Search and Seizures reports, Policy Manual, and Compliance reports --all were published and accessible to the public. Questions/Next Steps: Discuss any new ideas regarding transparency and information sharing with EHPD.

XI. AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT
A. Role of the Joint Compliance Expert
186. The Parties shall  select  a  Joint  Compliance  Expert  (“JCE”)  to  assist  the  Parties in determining whether the terms of this Agreement have been fully and timely implemented, including reviewing and making recommendations on new or revised policies, training curricula, standard operating procedures, plans, protocols, and other operational documents related to this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall also assess and report whether the requirements of this Agreement have been implemented, and whether this implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD.
187. The Joint Compliance Expert shall only have the duties, responsibilities and authority conferred by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not, and is not intended to, replace or assume the role and duties of the Mayor, Board, Chief of Police, or EHPD.

118

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 121 of 138
188. In  order  to  assess  and  report  on  the  Town’s  implementation  of  this  Agreement  and  whether   implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct the compliance reviews and audits, outcome assessments, and incident reviews specified below, and such additional audits, reviews, and assessments as the Joint Compliance Expert or the Parties deem appropriate.
B. Compliance Reviews and Audits
189. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct compliance reviews or audits as necessary to determine whether the Town has implemented and continues to comply with the material requirements of this Agreement. Compliance with a material requirement of this Agreement requires that the Town has: (a) incorporated the requirement into policy; (b) trained all relevant personnel as necessary to fulfill their responsibilities pursuant to the requirement; and (c) that the requirement is being carried out in actual practice. Compliance reviews and audits shall contain both qualitative and quantitative elements as necessary for reliability and comprehensiveness.
C. Outcome Assessments
190. In addition to compliance reviews and audits, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct qualitative  and  quantitative  outcome  assessments  to  measure  whether  the  Town’s  implementation   of this Agreement has promoted effective and constitutional policing. These outcome assessments shall include collection and analysis, both quantitative and qualitative, of the following outcome data
a) Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement measurements, including: i. A reliable, comprehensive, and representative survey of members of the
East Haven community regarding their experiences with and perceptions of EHPD and of public safety. This comprehensive community survey shall include measures to ensure input from individuals of each significantly represented demographic category;
ii. Number and variety of community partnerships, with particular consideration of partnerships with youth, and qualitative assessment of the depth and effectiveness of those partnerships.
b) Stop, Search and Arrest measurements, including: i. The number and rate of arrests for which there is articulated reasonable
suspicion for the stop and probable cause for the arrest, overall and broken down by type of arrest; and demographic category;
ii. The number and rate of arrests which are prosecuted, overall and broken down; type of arrest; and demographic category; and
iii. The number and rate of searches which result in a finding of contraband, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category.
c) Use of Force measurements including: i. Rate of force used per arrest by EHPD overall and by force type; type of
arrest; and demographic category;
119

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 122 of 138

ii. Rate of force complaints that are sustained and rate that are not sustained, overall and by force type; source of complaint (internal or external); type of arrest; and demographic category;
iii. Uses of Force that were found to violate policy overall and by force type; type of arrest; and demographic category;
iv. Number and rate of Use of Force administrative investigations/reviews in which each finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence; and
v. Number of officers who frequently or repeatedly use force, or have more than one instance of force found to violate policy.

d) Recruitment and Training measurements, including: i.Number of highly-qualified recruit candidates that have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities; ii. Number of candidates with Spanish language fluency; iii. Officer and agency reports of adequacy of training in type and frequency; and
iv. Role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by performance trends.

e) Supervision measurements, including: i. Initial identification of officer violations and performance problems by
supervisors, and effective response by supervisors to identified problems.

f) Accountability measurements, including:

i. The number of misconduct complaints, with a qualitative assessment of

whether any increase or decrease appears related to access to the complaint process;

ii. Rate of sustained, not sustained, exonerated and unfounded misconduct

complaints;

iii. Number and rate of misconduct complaints in which the finding for each

allegation is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;

iv. Number of officers who are subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, or

have repeated instances of sustained misconduct complaints.

v. Number and nature of civil suits against EHPD officers for on or off duty

police conduct, regardless of whether the Town or EHPD is a defendant in the litigation, and

settlement or penalty amounts;

vi. Arrests/Summons of officers for on or off duty conduct; and

vii. Criminal prosecutions of officers for on or off duty conduct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement measurements, including:

(JCE notes in italics and parentheses below)

i. Survey:

(A community survey was prepared and executed online, but there were not

enough participants to achieve a statistically significant sample. The JCE,

working in collaboration with the Parties, has engaged another survey firm to

conduct a new survey that will include community, department and detainee

120

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 123 of 138
components. Survey results are to be submitted to JCE in September of 2016.)
ii. Number and variety of community partnerships, with particular consideration of partnerships with youth, and qualitative assessment of the depth and effectiveness of those partnerships.
(Community groups/partnerships that the EHPD has been a part of have include: The Juvenile Review Board (JRB) which includes members from Police Department, Juvenile Probation, East Haven Public Schools, East Haven Youth Services, and the  Juvenile  Prosecutor’s  Office.     Citizen’s  Police  Academy  group  started  in  January  2015- First class graduated in April 2015. Another class of 14 graduated in June of 2016 Liquor Commission Meeting with Liquor Vendors (Liquor Stores).
EHPD continues to build upon its relationship with high school students. A new Police Cadet program for high school students just graduated three participants this year. The EHPD new Police Chief is in talks with the Principal to continue to offer this program to high school students going forward. Another program the Chief is continuing to involve high school students  is  the  Chief’s  Advisory  Group.  In addition, the Chief has assigned officers to the school to work with the Principal and serve as mentors for students.
Also, several positive accounts were again published in the media this year. One story was published on the internet-based news site ZIP06.com concerning positive reviews by the three high school students who graduated from the Police Cadet Program. Another article was published on NEWS8 web site wtnh.com about three EHPD officers who received recognition from MADD for outstanding work preventing drunk driving)
b) Stop, Search and Arrest measurements, including: i. The number and rate of arrests for which there is
articulated reasonable suspicion for the stop and probable cause for the arrest, overall and broken down by; type of arrest; and demographic category;
(Please refer to section II Bias-free Policing, and section III on Stops, Searches and Seizures, and Arrests above in  JCE’s Summary for further analysis.)
ii. The number and rate of arrests which are prosecuted, overall and broken down by type of arrest and demographic category;
(Please refer to section II Bias-free Policing, and section III on Stops, Searches  and  Seizures,  and  Arrests  above  in  JCE’s  Summary  for  further analysis.)
121

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 124 of 138
iii. The number and rate of searches which result in a finding of contraband, overall and broken down by; type of arrest; and demographic category.
(EHPD, from January 1st to June 30th 2016, found Contrabands in 22 cases. The racial breakdown of contraband found is as follows: 17 were white, three were black, and two were Hispanic. The contraband found were a variety of narcotics, marijuana, and a weapon.
For additional analysis, please refer to section III on Search, Seizures, and Arrests, and section II Bias-Free  Policing  in  JCE’s  Summary  above.)
c) Use of Force measurements including: i. Rate of force used per arrest by EHPD overall and by
force type; type of arrest; and demographic category;
(The EHPD reports that: During the period from January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016, there were 20 incidents where use of force was involved. During those 20 incidents, there were 43 separate uses of force which consisted of: 13 Physical Uses of Force (hands on)
10 Firearm Deployments (no discharge)
17 Non- Compliant Handcuffing 
1 Taser Deployments (no discharge)
2 Taser Discharge
EHPD  further  added  that:  “There  were  15  arrests  made  and  seven psychiatric committals in those 20 incidents. From January 1, 2016 to June 30,  2016,  there  were  a  total  of  463  arrests.”    There  was  use  of  force  in  3.43%   of all arrests. For the same time period, there were 120 emergency medical committals [for a use of force rate of 5.83%, or seven uses of force in 120 committals].
JCE analysis of EHPD January/June 2016 rate of Use of Force versus rate of Use of Force for January/June period of 2015:
(JCE Note: To arrive at the rate of use of force, the JCE uses the total number of separate uses of force, divided by the number of total arrests plus committals.)
122

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 125 of 138
For the first six months in 2015, there were 59 total separate uses of force, and 610 arrests and committals, for a use of force rate of 9.67%. In the first six months of 2016, there were 583 arrests/committals (463 arrests + 120 committals), and 43 total separate uses of force, for a rate of 7.38%, or a decrease of more than 2%.
The JCE reviewed all EHPD Use of Force reports for the January/June 2016 reporting period. EHPD officers continue to report their use of force in a consistent manner, and supervisors continue to read and thoroughly examine those reports. The review by the JCE showed that officers were justified in using force in all instances. The vast majority of use of force were minor incidents, such as hands on and non-compliant handcuffing; others were pointing the firearms at individuals who were armed or suspected to be armed; and the Taser (or ECW) was discharged twice, but during the same incident by two different officers when the first discharge missed the suspect. The JCE viewed a body-worn camera video of this incident provided by EHPD. This suspect was restrained after a long physical struggle with officers.)
Please see section IV Use of Force above in the JCE summary section for a further analysis on use of force.)
ii. Rate of force complaints that are sustained and rate that are not sustained, overall and by force type; source of complaint (internal or external); type of arrest; and demographic category;
(The JCE reviewed all EHPD Use of Force reports for the January/June 2016 reporting period. EHPD officers continue to report their use of force in a consistent manner, and supervisors continue to read and thoroughly examine those reports. The review by the JCE showed that officers were justified in using force in all instances. The vast majority of use of force were minor incidents, such as hands on and non-compliant handcuffing; others were pointing the firearms at individuals who were armed or suspected to be armed; and the Taser (or ECW) was discharged twice, but during the same incident by two different officers when the first discharge missed the suspect. The JCE viewed a body-worn camera video of this incident provided by EHPD. This suspect was restrained after a long physical struggle with officers. No external complaints of use of force were reported this period. No officers have been found to use force more frequently than others.)
iii. Uses of Force that were found to violate policy overall and by force type; type of arrest; and demographic category;
(All uses of force have been determined to be justified during this time period. No officers have been found to use force more frequently than others.)
123

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 126 of 138

iv. Number and rate of Use of Force administrative investigations/reviews in which each finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;

(The JCE reviewed all use of force reports and supervisory reviews and determined that all were justified during this time period. Supervisors conducted a thorough investigation and their findings were based on the preponderance of the evidence. All EHPD supervisors have received training on Use of Force investigation and review and IA Complaint investigation.)

and v. Number of officers who frequently or repeatedly use
force, or have more than one instance of force found to violate policy.

(No officers were found to have used force more frequently than others, nor have any violated use of force policy in more than one instance for this period.)

d) Recruitment and Training measurements, including: i.Number of highly-qualified recruit candidates that have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities;

(There were no new hires in EHPD this period, as the Department is fully staffed. EHPD Diversity Report tallied that 12 out 53 EHPD officers are minorities and includes five women. There are two Middle Eastern/Arab Officers in the EHPD today and seven Spanish-speaking officers.)

ii.

Number of candidates with Spanish language fluency;

(One Spanish-speaking officer was hired by EHPD in 2015. Also, the EHPD Diversity Report tallied that 12 out 53 EHPD officers are Minorities and includes five women. In addition, there are two Middle Eastern/Arab Officers and seven officers who speak Spanish fluently in the EHPD today.)

iii. Officer and agency reports of adequacy of training in type and frequency;
(EHPD continues to utilize instructors and lesson plans pre-approved by the Department of Justice as required by the S.A. The JCE/USDOJ have been provided with lesson plans and/or curricula consistent with the S.A. The JCE audited in-service training during the month of June 2015 and in January 2016. Please  see  JCE’s  Summary  report  above  for  further  information.)
and

124

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 127 of 138
iv. Role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by performance trends.
(As for the role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by performance trends, no issues were reported to the JCE during this period.)
e) Supervision measurements, including: i. Initial identification of officer violations and
performance problems by supervisors, and effective response by supervisors to identified problems.
(The JCE reviewed all Internal Affairs cases investigated by the IAO. These complaints were internally generated due to rule violations and/or generated by complaints from supervisors or officers. The JCE is encouraged to learn of these internal investigations and their disposition, because these tend to assure officers and supervisors that they have organizational support when dealing with internal personnel issues.)
f) Accountability measurements, including: i. The number of misconduct complaints, with a
qualitative assessment of whether any increase or decrease appears related to access to the complaint process:
(There appears to be no significant trend in the number of complaints filed by civilians against EHPD officers. From January 1st through June 30th 2015, EHPD received four civilian complaints against its officers, versus 11 for the same period in 2016. However, out of the 11 complaints in 2016, seven were found to not have violated any rules or law (Exonerated), while three were closed due to lack of follow-up by complainants. The JCE reviewed all 11 complaints and found that they were for alleged minor infractions. A total of 17 complaints- 11 civilians and 6 IAO- were received and investigated by EHPD: eight were exonerated, three sustained, one unfounded, and four were closed/not followed through. The JCE believes that the increase in complaint forms handed out is due to the easy availability of the forms and convenient methods for filing (all officers carry the forms, forms available at the public library and town hall, and availability online on the police web site). In addition, the JCE believes that a better measure will be the comparison of final numbers for 2015 v. 2016. (Note: Forms not returned are cases where the complainant refuses to fill out the form while in police presence, but chooses to take the form with him/her and never submits a complaint.)
ii. Rate of sustained, not sustained, exonerated and unfounded misconduct complaints:
125

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 128 of 138

From January 1st through June 30th 2015, EHPD received four (4) civilian complaints against its officers, versus 11 for the same period in 2016. However, out of the eleven complaints in 2016, seven were found to not have violated any rules or law (Exonerated), while three were closed due to lack of follow-up by complainants. The JCE reviewed all 11 complaints and found that they were for alleged minor infractions. A total of 17 complaints- 11 civilians and 6 IAO- were received and investigated by EHPD: eight were exonerated, three sustained, one unfounded, and four were closed/not followed through. The JCE believes that the increase in complaint forms handed out is due to the easy availability of the forms and convenient methods for filing (all officers carry the forms, forms available at the public library and town hall, and availability online on the police web site). In addition, the JCE believes that a better measure will be the comparison of final numbers for 2015 v. 2016.

iii. Number and rate of misconduct complaints in which the finding for each allegation is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;

(The JCE has reviewed all complaints filed with the EHPD and has determined that all findings were supported by a preponderance of the evidence available.
iv. Number of officers who are subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, or have repeated instances of sustained misconduct complaints.

(No officers were found to be subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, whether sustained or otherwise.)

v. Number and nature of civil suits against EHPD officers for on or off duty police conduct, regardless of whether the Town or EHPD is a defendant in the litigation, and settlement or penalty amounts;

(No civil suits have been filed against EHPD or its officers or the town for this reporting period.)

conduct;

vi. Arrests/Summons of officers for on or off duty

(No officers were arrested for any incident in EHPD this period.)

and conduct.

vii. Criminal prosecutions of officers for on or off duty

126

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 129 of 138

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

(There have been no criminal prosecutions of EHPD officers this reporting
period.)
Continue to work with the JCE on collecting and analyzing these data. Data provided in EHPD 42-month report (This report). Data provided in EHPD Annual Report for 2015. Additional data collected from phone conference and email communication. JCE research and analysis. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to work with EHPD on gathering this information and analyzing it to develop and report outcomes.

191. In conducting these outcome assessments the Joint Compliance Expert may use any relevant data collected and maintained by EHPD, provided that it has determined that this data is reasonably reliable and complete. To conduct the annual community survey, the Joint Compliance Expert shall retain an individual or entity which shall:

a) develop a baseline of measures on public satisfaction with policing, attitudes among police personnel, and the quality of police-citizen encounters; b) conduct baseline surveys of Town residents, police personnel, and detained arrestees, and follow-up surveys on at least an annual basis; c) ensure that the resident surveys are designed to capture each demographic category; and d) conduct the survey in English and Spanish.

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

A new survey team was selected and will start working on a three pronged survey project involving the community, department and detainees in early 2016. All results will be presented and discussed in future JCE reports. It is anticipated that initial community survey results will be available in fall 2016 with department survey results and some detainee information by the end of 2016. Continue to work with the Survey Team on completing all three parts of the survey in 2016 in an expeditious fashion. Survey contract.

Phone conferences with parties and survey team.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The Parties agreed to modify the language of the Settlement Agreement to reflect that the current survey work is not a baseline survey and that the need to conduct additional surveys will be decided after the first survey is completed. The Parties filed a request for modification with the Court on February 5, 2016, and the Court approved it on February 10, 2016.

127

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 130 of 138
D. Outcome Assessment Plan and Review Methodology
192. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:
a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be assessed for compliance, indicating which requirements will be assessed together;
b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment
occurring within 18 months of the Effective Date; and c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement
of this Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each requirement at least annually thereafter.
193. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:
a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be assessed for compliance, indicating which requirements will be assessed together;
b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment
occurring within 18 months of the Effective Date; and c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement
of this Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each requirement at least annually thereafter.
194. At least 90 days prior to the initiation of any outcome measure assessment or compliance review or audit, the JCE shall submit a proposed methodology for the assessment, review or audit, to the Parties. The Parties shall submit any comments or concerns regarding the proposed methodology to the Joint Compliance Expert within 45 days of the proposed date of the assessment, review or audit. The Joint Compliance Expert shall modify the methodology as necessary to address any concerns or shall inform the Parties in writing of the reasons it is not modifying its methodology as proposed.
E. Review of Use of Force and Misconduct Investigations
195. EHPD shall provide each completed investigation of a serious use of force or use of force that is the subject of a misconduct investigation, and each misconduct complaint report, to the Joint Compliance Expert. The Joint Compliance Expert shall review each use of force investigation or review and each misconduct investigation and recommend for further investigation any use of force or misconduct complaint investigations the Joint Compliance Expert determines to be incomplete or for which the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
128

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 131 of 138

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
There have been no serious uses of force that the JCE is aware of during this reporting period. None. Regular contact with retired/former Chief Larrabee/and Chief Lennon and command staff.

F. Joint Compliance Expert Recommendations and Technical Assistance

196. The Joint Compliance Expert may make recommendations to the Parties regarding measures necessary to ensure timely, full and effective implementation of this Agreement and its underlying objectives. Such recommendations may include a recommendation to change, modify, or amend a provision of the Agreement, a recommendation for additional training in any area related to this Agreement, or a recommendation to seek technical assistance. In addition to such recommendations, the Joint Compliance Expert may also, at the request of DOJ or the Town and based on the Joint Compliance  Expert’s  reviews,  provide  technical  assistance  consistent  with  the   Joint  Compliance  Expert’s  responsibilities  under  this  Agreement.

G. Comprehensive Re-Assessment
197. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct a comprehensive assessment two years after the Effective Date to determine whether and to what extent the outcomes intended by this Agreement have been achieved, and any modifications to the Agreement that are necessary for continued achievement in light of changed circumstances or unanticipated impact (or lack of impact) of the requirement. This assessment shall address also areas of greatest achievement and the requirements that appear to have contributed to this success, as well as areas of greatest concern, including strategies for accelerating full and effective compliance. Based upon this comprehensive assessment, the Joint Compliance Expert shall recommend modifications to the Agreement necessary to achieve and sustain intended outcomes. Where the Parties agree with the Joint Compliance  Expert’s  recommendations,  the  Parties shall stipulate to modify the Agreement accordingly. This provision in no way diminishes the Parties’  ability  to  stipulate  to  modifications to this Agreement as set out below.
H. Joint Compliance Expert Reports
198. The Joint Compliance Expert shall file with the Court semi-annual written, public reports covering the reporting period that shall include:
a) a description of the work conducted by the Joint Compliance Expert during the reporting period;
b) a listing of each Agreement requirement indicating which requirements have been: (i) incorporated into implemented policy; (ii) the subject of sufficient training for all relevant
129

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 132 of 138
EHPD officers and employees; (iii) reviewed or audited by the Joint Compliance Expert to determine whether they have been fully implemented in actual practice, including the date of the review or audit; and (iv) found by the Joint Compliance Expert to have been fully implemented in practice;
c) the methodology and specific findings for each audit or review conducted, redacted as necessary for privacy concerns. An un-redacted version shall be filed under seal with the Court and provided to the Parties. The underlying data for each audit or review shall not be publicly available but shall be retained by the Joint Compliance Expert and provided to either or both Parties upon request;
d) for any requirements that were reviewed or audited and found not to have been fully implemented  in  practice,  the  Joint  Compliance  Expert’s  recommendations  regarding  necessary   steps to achieve compliance;
e) the methodology and specific findings for each outcome assessment conducted; f) qualitative assessment of EHPD’s  progress  in  achieving  the  desired  outcomes  for   each area covered by the Agreement--noting issues of concern or particular achievement; and g) a projection of the work to be completed during the upcoming reporting period and any anticipated challenges or concerns related to implementation of the Agreement.
199. The Joint Compliance Expert shall provide a copy of semi-annual reports to the Parties in draft form at least ten business days prior to Court filing and public release of the reports to allow the Parties to informally comment on the reports. The Joint Compliance Expert shall consider the Parties’  responses  and  make  appropriate  changes, if any, before issuing the report.
200. The Joint Compliance Expert shall maintain regular contact with the Parties in order to ensure effective  and  timely  communication  regarding  the  status  of  the  Town’s  implementation  of  and   compliance with this Agreement.
I. Public Statements, Testimony, Records, and Conflicts of Interest
201. Except as required or authorized by the terms of this Agreement or the Parties acting together: neither the Joint Compliance Expert, including, for the purposes of this paragraph, any agent, employee, or independent contractor thereof, shall make any public statements or issue findings with regard to any act or omission of the Town or its agents, representatives, or employees; or disclose non-public information provided to the Joint Compliance Expert pursuant to the Agreement. Any press statement made by the Joint Compliance Expert regarding its employment or assessment activities under this Agreement shall first be approved by the Parties.
202. The Joint Compliance Expert may testify as to observations, findings, and recommendations before the Court with jurisdiction over this matter, but the Joint Compliance Expert shall not testify in any other litigation or proceeding with regard to any act or omission of the Town or any of its agents, representatives, or employees related to this Agreement or regarding any matter or subject that the Joint Compliance Expert may have received knowledge of as a result of his or her performance under this Agreement. This paragraph does not apply to any proceeding before a court related to performance of contracts or subcontracts for monitoring this Agreement.
130

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 133 of 138

203. Unless such conflict is waived by the Parties, the Joint Compliance Expert shall not accept employment or provide consulting services that would present a conflict of interest with the Joint Compliance  Expert’s  responsibilities  under  this  Agreement,  including  being  retained  (on  a  paid or unpaid  basis)  by  any  current  or  future  litigant  or  claimant,  or  such  litigant’s  or  claimant’s  attorney,   in connection with a claim or suit against the Town or its departments, officers, agents or employees.
204. The Joint Compliance Expert is not a state or local agency, or an agent thereof, and accordingly the records maintained by the Joint Compliance Expert shall not be deemed public records subject to public inspection.
205. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not be liable for any claim, lawsuit, or demand arising out of  the  Joint  Compliance  Expert’s  performance  pursuant  to  this  Agreement.    

J. EHPD Compliance Coordinator

206. Within 30 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall identify a compliance coordinator to serve

as the single point of contact to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. The Compliance Coordinator  shall  coordinate  the  Town’s  compliance  and  implementation  activities;;  facilitate  the   provision of data, documents, materials, and access to  the  Town’s  personnel  to  the  Joint  

Compliance Expert and DOJ, as needed; ensure that all data, documents and records are

maintained as provided in this Agreement; and assist in assigning implementation and compliance

related tasks to EHPD personnel, as directed by the Chief of Police or his/her designee.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Former Deputy Chief Lennon has been and continues to be an exceptionally hard working and effective Compliance Coordinator for the EHPD. New Chief Lennon has designated Lt. David Emerman as the new Compliance Coordinator.

Recommendations Deputy Chief Lennon should be commended for his efforts and congratulated for becoming the new Police Chief after Chief Larrabee retired.

Evidentiary Basis This compliance report and the positive direction the EHPD is moving to comply with the Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Work with Compliance Coordinator, Lt. David Emerman.

K. Implementation Assessment and Report

207. The Town shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to: (a) document implementation of and compliance with this Agreement, including data and records necessary for the Joint Compliance Expert to conduct reliable outcome assessments, compliance reviews, and audits; and (b) perform ongoing quality assurance in each of the areas addressed by this Agreement.

131

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 134 of 138

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
The Town has collected, maintained and continues to share needed records and data with the JCE and USDOJ. None Data provided to JCE and USDOJ.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

208. Beginning  with  the  Joint  Compliance  Expert’s  first  semi-annual report, the Town shall provide to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ a status report no later than 30 days before the Joint  Compliance  Expert’s  semi-annual  report  is  due.    The  Town’s  report  shall  delineate  the  steps   taken by the Town during the reporting period to implement this Agreement; the Town’s   assessment of the status of its progress; plans to correct any problems; and response to any concerns  raised  in  the  Joint  Compliance  Expert’s  previous  semi-annual report.

L. Access and Confidentiality

209. To facilitate its work, the Joint Compliance Expert may conduct on-site visits and assessments without prior notice to the Town. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all necessary individuals, facilities, and documents, which shall include access to Agreement related trainings, meetings, and reviews such as critical incident reviews; use of force reviews, and disciplinary hearings. EHPD shall notify the Joint Compliance Expert as soon as practicable, and in any case within twelve hours, of any critical firearms discharge, arrest of any officer, or any other potentially high-profile serious incident.

210. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have timely, full and direct access  to  all  of  the  Town’s  staff,  employees,  and facilities that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall cooperate with the Town to access people and facilities in a reasonable manner that, consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert's responsibilities, minimizes interference with daily operations.
211. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have full and direct access to all  of  the  Town’s  documents  and  data  that  the  Joint  Compliance  Expert  reasonably  deems   necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement, except any documents or data protected by the attorney-client privilege. Should the Town decline to provide the Joint Compliance Expert access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.

132

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 135 of 138

212. To the extent necessary to ensure proper implementation of this Agreement, DOJ and its consultative  experts  and  agents  shall  have  full  and  direct  access  to  all  of  the  Town’s  staff,   employees, facilities, documents and data. DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall cooperate with the Town to access involved personnel, facilities, and documents in a reasonable manner  that,  consistent  with  DOJ’s  responsibilities  to  enforce  this  Agreement,  minimizes   interference with daily operations. Should the Town decline to provide DOJ with access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.
213. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall provide the Town with reasonable notice of a request for copies of documents. Upon such request, the Town shall provide, in a timely manner, copies (electronic, where readily available) of the requested documents to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ.

214. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all records and information relating to

criminal investigations of EHPD officers as permissible by law. The Joint Compliance Expert

shall have access to all documents in criminal investigation files that have been closed by EHPD.

The Joint Compliance Expert shall also have reasonable access to all arrest reports, warrants, and

warrant applications whether or not contained in open criminal investigation files. Where

practicable, arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications shall be obtained from sources other

than open criminal investigation files.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis No new incidents this reporting period.

M. Selection and Compensation of the Joint Compliance Expert

215. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall maintain all non-public information provided by the Town in a confidential manner. This Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any privilege or right the Town may assert, including those recognized at common law or created by statute, rule or regulation, against any other person or entity with respect to the disclosure of any document or communication.
216. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, the Town and DOJ shall together select an independent Joint  Compliance  Expert,  acceptable  to  both,  which  shall  assess  and  report  on  EHPD’s   implementation of this Agreement. The selection of the Joint Compliance Expert shall be pursuant to a method jointly established by the Town and DOJ, and will not be governed by any formal or legal procurement requirements. The Joint Compliance Expert and his/her team shall be individuals of the highest ethics.

133

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 136 of 138
217. If the Parties are unable to agree on a Joint Compliance Expert or an alternative method of selection  within  60  days  of  the  Effective  Date,  they  reserve  the  right  to  seek  the  Court’s  assistance   by asking the Court to select a Joint Compliance Expert. In that case, each Party shall submit the names of three candidates, or three groups of candidates, along with resumes and cost proposals, to the Court, and the Court shall select a Joint Compliance Expert from among the qualified candidates/candidate groups.
218. The Joint Compliance Expert shall be appointed for a period of four years from the Effective Date and shall have its appointment extended automatically should the Town not demonstrate full and effective compliance at the end of this four-year period.
219. The Town shall bear all reasonable fees and costs of the Joint Compliance Expert. In selecting the Joint Compliance Expert, DOJ and the Town recognize the importance of ensuring that the fees and costs borne by the Town are reasonable, and accordingly fees and costs shall be one factor considered in selecting the Joint Compliance Expert. In the event that any dispute arises regarding  the  reasonableness  or  payment  of  the  Joint  Compliance  Expert’s  fees  and  costs,  the   Town, DOJ, and the Joint Compliance Expert shall attempt to resolve such dispute cooperatively prior to seeking the assistance of the Court to resolve such dispute.
220. The Town shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert with permanent office space and reasonable office support such as office furniture, telephones, access to internet, secure document storage, photocopying and scanners.
221. Should any of the Parties to  this  Agreement  determine  that  the  Joint  Compliance  Expert’s   individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors have exceeded their authority or failed to satisfactorily perform the duties required by this Agreement, the Party shall meet and confer to resolve outstanding concerns. If the Parties are unable to agree on a solution, either Party may petition the Court for such relief as the Court deems appropriate, including replacement of the Joint Compliance Expert, and/or any individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors.
N. Court Jurisdiction, Modification of the Agreement, and Enforcement
222. This Agreement shall become effective upon entry by the Court.
223. The Parties agree jointly to file this Agreement with the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. The joint motion shall request that the Court enter the Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), conditionally dismiss the complaint in this action, and retain jurisdiction to enforce the Agreement. Should the United States determine that the Town has failed to comply with the Agreement, the case will be reinstated for the purposes of enforcing the Agreement only. The Town may not challenge liability or the necessity for Agreement terms.
134

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 137 of 138
224. To ensure that the requirements of this Agreement are properly and timely implemented, the Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for enforcement purposes until such time as the Town has achieved full and effective compliance with this Agreement and maintained such compliance for no less than two years. If the Town believes it has reached full compliance and moves the Court to terminate this Agreement, the Town shall bear the burden of demonstrating full and effective compliance with this Agreement.
225. The United States acknowledges the good faith of the Town in trying to address the remedial measures that are needed to promote police integrity and ensure constitutional policing in East Haven. The United States, however, reserves its right to seek enforcement of the provisions of this Agreement if it determines that the Town has failed to fully comply with any provision of this Agreement. Prior to initiating any enforcement proceedings in Court for an alleged failure to comply with any provision of this Agreement, the United States will notify the Town in writing of the facts supporting its belief that the Town is not in compliance. The Town will investigate the allegations and respond in writing within 30 days. If the dispute remains unresolved, the Parties will conduct negotiations to resolve the issue(s). If the Parties are unable to resolve the issue(s) satisfactorily  within  30  days  of  the  Town’s  written  response,  the  United  States  may  move  the   Court for any relief permitted by law or equity and demonstrate that the relief is necessary to implement this Agreement.
226. Failure by any Party to enforce this entire Agreement or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other provision herein shall not be construed as a waiver, including of its right to enforce other deadlines and provisions of this Agreement.
227. Any modification of this Agreement shall be executed in writing by the Parties, shall be filed with the Court, and shall not be effective until the Court enters the modified agreement and retains jurisdiction to enforce it.
228. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as an acknowledgement, an admission, or evidence of liability of the Town under the Constitution of the United States, federal or state law, and this Agreement may not be used as evidence of liability in this or any other civil or criminal proceeding.
229. The Parties agree to defend the provisions of this Agreement. The Parties shall notify each other of any court or administrative challenge to this Agreement. In the event any provision of this Agreement is challenged in any Connecticut court, removal to a federal court shall be sought by the Parties.
230. The Town agrees to promptly notify DOJ if any term of this Agreement becomes subject to a collective bargaining dispute and to consult with DOJ in a timely manner regarding the position the Town takes in any collective bargaining dispute connected with this Agreement.
231. The Town shall require compliance with this Agreement by its respective officers, employees, agencies, assigns, or successors.
135

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 44-1 Filed 09/26/16 Page 138 of 138
O. Termination of the Agreement 232. The Parties anticipate that the Town will have reached full and effective compliance with this Agreement within four years of its Effective Date. The Parties may agree to jointly ask the Court to terminate this Agreement prior to or after this date, provided that the Town has been in full and effective  compliance  with  this  Agreement  for  two  consecutive  years.    “Full  and  Effective   Compliance”  shall  be  defined  to  require  both  sustained  compliance  with  all  material  requirements   of this Agreement and sustained and continuing improvement in constitutional policing and public trust, as demonstrated pursuant to the Agreement's outcome measures. 233. If after four years from the Effective Date the Parties disagree whether the Town has been in full and effective compliance for two years, either Party may seek to terminate this Agreement. In the case of termination sought by the Town, prior to filing a motion to terminate, the Town agrees to notify DOJ in writing when the Town has determined that it is in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and that such compliance has been maintained for no less than two years. Thereafter, the Parties shall promptly confer as to the status of compliance. If, after a reasonable period of consultation and the completion of any audit or evaluation that DOJ and/or the Joint Compliance Expert may wish to undertake, including on-site observations, document review, or interviews  with  the  Town’s  personnel, the Parties cannot resolve any compliance issues, the Town may file a motion to terminate this Agreement. If the Town moves for termination of this Agreement,  DOJ  will  have  60  days  after  the  receipt  of  the  Town’s  motion  to  object  to  the  motion.     If DOJ does not object,  the  Court  may  grant  the  Town’s  motion.    If  DOJ  does  make  an  objection,   the Court shall hold a hearing on the motion and the burden shall be on the Town to demonstrate that they are in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and have maintained such compliance for at least two consecutive years.
136

 
 Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 1 of 151
	  
United	  States	  of	  America	  v.	  Town	  of	  East	  Haven	  	   and	  East	  Haven	  Board	  of	  Police	  Commissioners	   	  
	   Agreement	  for	  Effective	  and	  Constitutional	  Policing	  
Two-­‐Year	  Comprehensive	  Report	  and	  	  
24	  Month	  Compliance	  Report	  
	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	  
Prepared	  by:	   Rafael	  Ruiz,	  Joint	  Compliance	  Expert	  	   Joan	  Brody,	  JCE	  Team	  Coordinator	   March	  24,	  2015	  
	  
	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 2 of 151
	  
	   	  
TABLE	  OF	  CONTENTS	  	  
	  
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 2
Section I. JCE Summary.................................................................................................................3
Section II. Compliance Chart ....................................................................................................... 23
	   	  
	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	   	  
1	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 3 of 151
	  
	  
INTRODUCTION	  
Rafael Ruiz of O’Toole Associates, LLC, the Joint Compliance Expert (JCE) overseeing the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing or Settlement Agreement (SA) between the Town of East Haven and East Haven Police Department (EHPD) and the U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ), submits this report of the JCE’s findings with respect to the first 24 months or two years of the Settlement Agreement ending on December 31, 2014. As outlined in each of the JCE’s six-month reports, the JCE understands its task to be three-fold:
1) The JCE must ensure that the EHPD is meeting all material requirements and all deadlines specified in the various paragraphs of the Settlement Agreement.
2) The JCE must, over time, make a more generalized assessment of whether or not the process outlined in the Settlement Agreement is achieving the desired outcomes, namely “constitutional policing, increased community trust, and professional treatment of individuals by the EHPD officers;” and
3) The JCE must review and evaluate all serious and significant incidents involving the EHPD. These include any serious uses of force, any complaints alleging significant misconduct, or any other event that rises to the level of being newsworthy or notorious.
As agreed in discussions with the Parties, to accomplish these tasks, the JCE will provide both qualitative and quantitative measurements of outcomes 24 months after the Settlement Agreement effective date of December 21, 2012. This report has two sections. Section 1 presents a narrative overview of compliance milestones achieved or in the process of being completed by the EHPD during the last 24 months. In Section 2, the JCE tracks the current compliance level, discusses the progress to-date, makes recommendations for enhancements and describes the basis upon which this assessment is made for each of the 223 paragraphs (numbered 10-233) in the settlement Agreement through December 31, 2014.
2	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 4 of 151
	  
SECTION	  I.	  	  JCE	  SUMMARY	   	  
I started to work on this Settlement Agreement with O’Toole Associates as a member of its team back in early 2013. I remember walking into police headquarters then and feeling that EHPD was a cold place. With the exception of the Chief and his immediate staff, few officers made you feel welcome. During my most recent site visits, this time as the JCE, on September 30, 2014 and January 12, 2015, I noticed something different: officers seemed to be more upbeat, polite, and happy to see us (USDOJ, JCE, AUSAs, etc…). The change in attitude has been like night and day in a short two years. I now notice younger officers of different backgrounds, race, and ethnicity patrolling the streets and staffing the front desk at Police Headquarters.
On one of my recent visits, I had the opportunity to do a ride along with a rookie AfricanAmerican officer. I observed this officer interact with a Hispanic business owner in a way that created goodwill and trust in the police department. At another time, this officer was dispatched to assist a citizen, to pick up her belongings from a home she was vacating due to an on-going domestic situation, and the officer who came to assist him was a young Hispanic female officer. These officers have not been on the job long enough to compare to the EHPD of three/four years ago, however, they still showed a lot of enthusiasm and professionalism. I believe that the effort put forward by the EHPD in the last two years in recruiting police candidates of different backgrounds is noticeable and is paying off substantially in the way that the EHPD is viewed by the community.
During my site visits, I have attended several community and Police Commission meetings, and met with community activists, advocates, clergy, and business owners to gauge their opinions of the EHPD. They assessed the current state of affairs between the police and the community as positive. The only caveat mentioned was that they would like to see more officers walking the beat and interacting one-on-one with the community. As the JCE, I passed this information on to the EHPD and was told that a personnel shortage was holding them back from making these assignments on a regular basis. Hopefully this will be remedied with the addition of new recruits upon graduation from the Academy. I will continue, going forward, to monitor this situation.
3	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 5 of 151
	  
During the last six months, I randomly reviewed arrest reports, supervisor reports, search warrants, search warrant applications and affidavits, motor vehicle (M/V) stops data, and the Early Intervention System (EIS)/Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) database and found them to be in order. Proper constitutional procedures were followed in each case. In addition, I thoroughly reviewed use of force reports and found no issues of importance. More details on these issues are provided below under the Settlement Agreement seven focus areas.
In December 2014, I reviewed the final analysis of a survey that 63% of all EHPD police officers completed in 2013-2014. (Please see full survey results in Attachment A). Some survey questions, particularly those asking about officers’ demographic characteristics, had high rates of non-response. In addition to asking about officers’ demographic characteristics, the survey asked respondents for their views on the department’s work environment, colleagues, supervisors, disciplinary procedures, community and race relations, and overall evaluations of department efficacy. While more than half of officers expressed some dissatisfaction with the EHPD work environment, officers reported generally favorable views of their colleagues, supervisors, and EHPD disciplinary procedures. Officers had very positive views on community relations, including relations with ethnic and racial minority residents, and most felt these relations had improved in recent years. Despite the positive outlook on community relations, officers’ overall assessments of the EHPD were mixed. After further review, I plan to implement a new department survey in 2015 in order to compare and contrast previous results with more current data measuring attitudes among police personnel in the EHPD.
I have also reviewed and approved, along with the Parties, several new policies, modifications of existing policies, and agreed-upon modifications to the Settlement Agreement that were filed and approved by the Court. There were four modifications requested and approved by the Court that helped to reasonably ease the responsibilities of the EHPD in satisfying certain requirements in the Settlement Agreement. These included:
4	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 6 of 151
	  
Paragraph 182, where Parties agreed to change the requirement of holding monthly community meetings to holding quarterly community meetings due to low attendance at the monthly meetings.
Paragraph 50, where the Parties requested to remove the requirement that consent to search be in writing if it is otherwise captured on body cameras, as video is better evidence of the consent, and the written requirement superfluous.
Paragraph 55, where the Parties requested to modify the operational plan requirements for executing search warrants and to eliminate the requirement when the warrant is for medical records (i.e. ER records for DUI) or telephone/internet records. The Parties agreed that these situations do not require intrusion into someone's premises, etc. and again may not have been intended when the Settlement Agreement was negotiated.
Paragraph 61, where the Parties requested to modify the requirement to complete “all arrest reports” before the end of the shift to “custodial arrest reports.” Since a non-custodial motor vehicle summons is considered an arrest, completing the reports before the end of the shift is creating a significant burden, which the Parties believe was not intended. The EHPD would continue the requirement for all custodial arrests, but the Parties requested additional time for the motor vehicle summons.
	  
Police Chief Larrabee continues to contact me regarding significant incidents as per the Settlement Agreement. I was notified of an incident where an officer lawfully discharged his weapon at a dangerous animal; and also was notified of an incident wherein an officer was placed on paid leave while under investigation for a violation of Department Rules. That officer resigned from the police department before the Internal Affairs investigation was concluded. Connecticut State law prohibits the EHPD from placing this file in the officer Human Resources file because the investigation was not completed.
I have received total and enthusiastic cooperation from the Town of East Haven, including Mayor Joseph Maturo and his staff, Attorney Larry Sgrignari, as well as Police Chief Brent
5	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 7 of 151
	  
Larrabee, Deputy Chief Edward Lennon, Lt. David Emerman, and other members of the EHPD. The USDOJ Civil Rights Division and US Attorney’s Office staffs have been excellent in assisting and guiding me. The Parties remain in constant contact. It is my belief that with the continued quality of the collaboration and cooperation among the Parties, this Settlement Agreement will be completed to the satisfaction of all parties in a timely manner.
	  
The Settlement Agreement is divided into seven focus areas: I. General Policies and Training; II. Bias-Free Policing; III. Stops, Searches, and Seizures; IV. Use of Force; V. Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations, and Discipline; VI. Supervision and Management; and VII. Community Engagement and Oversight.
I. General Policies and Training Policies and Procedures Manual: In the two years since the East Haven Settlement Agreement was enacted, the EHPD has developed and implemented 87 approved policies and procedures. Within the last six months, the following policies were completely rewritten and/or reviewed and revised based on input from officers, the JCE, US Attorney’s Office, the USDOJ and the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners:
105.3 - Uniforms and Appearance – Revised 215.1 - Performance Evaluations - New 209.1 - Disciplinary Matrix - New 216.1 - Retired Officers Firearms Qualification Requirements - New 401.3 - AVL and Officer Video Camera Use - Revised 437.3 - K9 Unit- Revised
The EHPD has completed training for all 87 policies and procedures. The JCE anticipates that additional revisions and new policies and training will be completed in the coming year. The entire EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual is available on-line, as well as at the Hagaman Public Library, East Haven Town Hall and the Police Department. The JCE had an opportunity to visit these sites and found the Manual at these locations. The JCE will continue to monitor that all copies are current.
6	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 8 of 151
	  
Policy Training: The EHPD provided the JCE with a roster of attendees that completed the policy trainings in 2014. The JCE has reviewed all training curricula and plans to attend a sampling of classes during future site visits, including the April 7, 2015 site-visit if trainings are scheduled during this time. An additional site visit will be coordinated to coincide with on-going In-Service Training.
There are currently six recruits who graduated from the Training Academy in September 2014. They were trained on all policies and procedures in August 2014. Five of the six recruits have been assigned in the field as new patrol officers. The sixth is in the process of completing training requirements.
The EHPD conducted numerous trainings between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2014. As in the past, the EHPD split employees into three different training squads with approximately twenty people in each. The squads consisted of full-­‐time sworn and non-­‐sworn employees as well as part time employees. The EHPD noted that splitting the Department into three squads allowed them to better balance staffing levels and assist in controlling overtime costs. Trainings covered the following:
1. Bias-free Policing 2. Stop, Search, and Arrest 3. Use of Force 4. Ethics 5. In-service Training 6. Supervisory Management-specific Training 7. Firearms Training
In addition to the training that is required by the Settlement Agreement, individual officers or groups of officers received training in 2014 in other areas, including:
1. Deputy Chief Lennon attended the FBI National Academy, Session #258 from October 5, 2014 through December 19, 2014.
2. Instructor Development Training 3. South Central Regional SWAT Training
7	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 9 of 151
	  
4. South Central Connecticut Traffic Unit Accident Investigation 5. Nexgen Computer Familiarization 6. Management of the Small Law Enforcement Agency 7. Homicide Investigation 8. EAP Services 9. Proficiency In Laser and Radar Enforcement 10. DEA Basic Narcotics School 11. Field Training School 12. Managing Generational Differences 13. ECW (Taser) Recertification 14. Digital Photography
As outlined in the EHPD Training Plan, in 2015 the EHPD plans to provide officers with the following training:
1. Use of Force 2. Bias-free Policing 3. Stop, Search, and Arrest 4. Taser (ECW) 5. Advanced Management and Supervisory Training 6. Basic Crime Scene Processing 7. Crisis Intervention Team 8. L.E.A.D.S. Law Enforcement Active Diffusion Strategies 9. Problem Orientated Policing
Personnel that were/are on long-term leave or injury leave in 2014 completed required training when they returned to full duty. There are no EHPD members at this time that have not completed all required classes. The JCE received from EHPD the Roster and calendar of training for 2015 and will continue to discuss any additional training needs for 2015 with EHPD leaders
8	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 10 of 151
	  
II. Bias-Free Policing
As required in paragraph 42 of the Settlement Agreement, the JCE has observed Language Access Coordinator, Lt. David Emerman, who is fluent in Spanish, interact with members of the East Haven Latino community in different settings, and it is clear that he has established solid lines of communication. The JCE met with Lt. Emerman during the site visits and together they visited several Hispanic business people and activists. Lt. Emerman and the JCE also attended community meetings. During these meetings and visits, the JCE heard several people praise Lt. Emerman for his great efforts to help open lines of communications and improve the relationship between the police department and the community. The JCE also discussed ideas with Chief Larrabee for enhancing and expanding communication with the East Haven Latino community, such as assigning Spanish-speaking officers to Latino sectors of the town, and having officers get out of their cruisers during down time and walking the beat to get closer to the community. It is hoped that the JCE will hear that this is occurring and witness it on future site visits. The JCE also discussed EHPD’s succession plan for the Language Access Coordinator position. EHPD has this in mind and is working towards it.
The Department continues to use the EHPD Authorized Interpreters (EHPDAI) and the Language Line to enable access to police services for all members of the community regardless of their national origin or limited ability to speak, read, write, or understand English. The EHPD reports that data collected from the Law Enforcement Administration System or LEAS Computer Aided Dispatch/Records Management System (CAD/RMS), July 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 included 29 calls for service requiring language assistance, of which 26 were recorded with the target language of Spanish. From January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2014 there were 39 calls for service requiring language assistance, of which 37 were recorded with the target language of Spanish. In 2014, there were a total of 68 calls for service requiring language assistance as collected from CAD/RMS, with a total of 63 requesting assistance for Spanish.
Data collected from utilizing the Language Line service tallied 23 calls in total for 2014, of which 20 calls were for Spanish interpretation, or approximately 87 %. Approximately 9 % of calls requiring language assistance have been recorded with Spanish as the target language,
9	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 11 of 151
	  
consistent with EHPD’s initial analysis of their resident population. These data continue to support that Spanish is the primary language of the Limited English Proficiency or LEP community and that Spanish speakers are the most likely residents requiring language assistance when having contact with police personnel. While incidents of requests for assistance in other languages have occurred, during 2014, they have accounted for only seven percent of calls that required language assistance.
The Department has continued to develop relationships in the community. The Community Liaison, Lt. David Emerman, has continued discussions with members of the Hispanic community, meeting with various individuals on a regular basis, and receiving positive feedback. For example, during one of the JCE site visits, a long-time activist for the Latino community told the JCE, Lt. Emerman and a USDOJ representative that she was very pleased with the work the EHPD has been doing lately. She said that, today it is a pleasure to speak to officers of the EHPD, something that was not pleasant to do just a year ago. She said that other community members she knows no longer fear approaching an officer in East Haven.
In another example, the JCE met a Latino owner of a convenience store who recounted how her Latino customers in the past used to call her to find out whether EHPD was around. If the EHPD was around, the store owner said, the customers would wait until the officers left before they came to shop. Today, she said, her Latino customers no longer call, they just show up to shop. As a result, she has noticed business picking up the last year or so.
Throughout 2014, Lt. Emerman has also continued holding monthly community meetings. The meetings were promoted and advertised in various print and online media outlets, and attracted residents with a great variety of questions, suggestions, and interest in learning how officers carry out their duties and worked with the members of the community. The meetings rotated between the north and south side of town and, overall, attendees remained very positive. A number of attendees noted that they are pleased the Department is taking an interest in their concerns and provides a forum for them to ask questions and voice their concerns outside of the Police Commission meetings.
10	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 12 of 151
	  
Unfortunately, turnout at the community meetings has been fairly low. Following discussions among the Parties, all agreed that at this juncture, quarterly community meetings might more appropriately serve East Haven’s population. The Parties approved this recommendation, and a modification to the Settlement Agreement was entered and approved by the Court on December 19, 2014. In their effort to open more channels of communication with the community, the EHPD has started a Citizens Police Academy program, where community members learn about various subjects taught by police officers, government agencies and other civilians. Training includes: how police officers do their jobs, how the 911 system works, Domestic Violence and criminal law, and more.
Calls for service requiring language assistance (other than Spanish as the target language) have included Italian, Greek, Russian, Punjabi, Cambodian and Bengali. It should be noted that EHPD has continued its efforts of recruiting new police officers that speak other languages in addition to English. Additional points are granted on the application for those who score high on a language test provided by Language Testing International on the application for employment. Language Testing International is the exclusive licensee of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) and is renowned for its testing services. Language Testing International provides testing services for private businesses and federal government agencies. In addition to the existing Spanish-speaking officers, the Department has one officer fluent in Greek and others fluent in Arabic, French, Luganda and Italian. The new EHPD recruits who just graduated from the Academy in September 2014 also speak Arabic, Swahili, Luganda, Italian, Spanish and French.
III. Stops, Searches and Seizures
Continuing education and refresher training in bias-free policing was held in the fall of 2014. The EHPD released their most recent bi-annual report of data on stops and searches in January 2015 for the prior six-month period. See below for excerpts and summaries.
Review and analysis of the data in an EHPD stop, search and seizure report for the time period July 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014, found that the most recent traffic stop data in East
11	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 13 of 151
	  
Haven is consistent with other data from earlier in 2014, and in some cases, a downward trend is seen.
During the July 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 period, EHPD officers conducted 1,293 traffic stops. Of these 1,293 traffic stops, 732 stops (56.6%) resulted in either a verbal or a written warning. During all of 2014, there were 2021 traffic stops and 1,143 (56.6%) drivers received verbal or written warnings. In the last six months of 2014, there were 13 custodial arrests resulting from all stops (1%), while for all of 2014 there were 46 custodial arrests (2.2%). There were 129 stops (9.97%) which resulted in the issuance of misdemeanor summonses arrests for the period from July 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014, as compared with 187 (9.25%) misdemeanor summons issued for all of 2014. During the last six months of 2014, there were 386 stops (29.8%) which resulted in infraction tickets issued, compared to 620 (30.7%) in all of 2014. Also for the last six months of 2014, 33 stops (2.5%) resulted in no enforcement action taken, and for all of 2014 there were 53 stops (2.6%) that had the same result. Of the stops for the July 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014 period, 1,045 (80.8%) stops were attributable to motor vehicle violations, and 189 stops (14.6%) were attributable to equipment violations, while 37 (2.8%) of the total vehicles stopped in that period were searched. All of 2014 produced similar numbers: 1,661 (82%) stops were for vehicle violations; 272 (13.5%) stops were for equipment violations; and 65 (3.2%) vehicles were searched
In their report, the EHPD notes that their stop data for the last six months of 2014 indicates that traffic stops from this reporting period are consistent with the racial and ethnic make-up of the driving population in East Haven, CT, as reported in the USDOJ Civil Rights Division Findings Letter dated December 19, 2011. The finding letter states that the percentage of Hispanic drivers in East Haven was 8.3%. Additionally, data from the 2010 U.S. Census shows East Haven’s Hispanic population to be estimated at 10.3 %. The percentage of Hispanic drivers stopped by EHPD officers for the six-month period from July 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 was 12.1%. The EHPD also reported that 78.1 % of total motor vehicle stops were non-Hispanic white drivers or white drivers of unknown ethnicity. The remaining stops conducted of black, Asian, Indian, Middle Eastern or unknown race totaled 9.1%. Although these stop data statistics for the reporting period do not reveal disproportionate traffic stops of Hispanic drivers based on
12	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 14 of 151
	  
the USDOJ Findings Letter and the U.S. Census Bureau data for the Town of East Haven, the JCE has previously suggested to EHPD, and will revisit the idea during the April 2015 site visit, of researching newer East Haven population data as well as looking into population fluctuations and differences comparing day and night time East Haven population numbers. Also, EHPD, urged by the JCE, is in the process of updating its IT system to be able to capture better and more specific traffic stop data that can be used for more accurate analysis in compliance with Paragraph 190 of this Agreement. EHPD stated this data will be provided in time for the next six-month report due in June 2015.
The EHPD also analyzed stop data by individual officers and found that its enforcement is consistent with the driving population by race and ethnicity. The only exceptions were three officers who showed a slightly higher stop rate of Hispanic operators. However, upon further analysis of a sampling of reports, it does not appear that any stops were conducted based on suspected profiling of motor vehicle operators. Of the incidents reviewed, all stops were determined to be based on reasonable suspicion or probable cause of motor vehicle violations, equipment violations, or were conducted for investigative purposes. Additionally, it should be noted that the stops for motor vehicle violations or equipment violations are captured on video by patrol vehicle dash cameras, further supporting the officers’ actions. EHPD had a Captain speak with all three officers involved and made them aware of the percentage rate of operators they stopped with Hispanic ethnicities, the reason for the department reviewing their stops and
the outcome of the review. The officers’ direct supervisors were advised of the stop percentage,
the review and the results of that review. The JCE and EHPD will monitor going forward.
Although this information and the EHPD analysis are helpful, getting an overall accurate picture of this data remains difficult due to how the data is currently categorized. As the JCE noted in the 18-month report, the JCE will continue working with EHPD on identifying better ways to collect and analyze stop data. For example, in the future the JCE would like to revisit questions such as whether there were any white drivers stopped for no license and/or no insurance, and whether those drivers received formal sanctions. EHPD informed the JCE that in the State of Connecticut, officers usually do not attend court and that sanctions in these cases are sought solely by the State Attorney’s Office and officers have no say.
13	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 15 of 151
	  
While the JCE was pleased to see that the enforcement appears to be proportionate according to the data provided thus far, the JCE will continue to closely examine future data to ensure that the EHPD remains in compliance with the Agreement and that constitutional policing is the norm In East Haven. The JCE will discuss these data questions with EHPD leaders during the April 7, 2015 site-visit.
Search Warrants: The JCE reviewed all search warrants and affidavits and found them to be proper. There were 27 search warrants issued from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014. Most search warrants were issued seeking blood samples for Operating Under the Influence (OUI) arrests. Four search warrants sought illegal drug contraband and other items, and the subjects of the search did not raise any racial or ethnic concerns. The JCE did not find any search warrants that were denied for any reason. Rather than a random review going forward, the JCE will continue to review all search warrants.
IV. Use of Force
The EHPD Use of Force Policy became effective March 1, 2014. Data is collected from the Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS), the EHPD in-house computer system, and used to track and monitor the Use of Force data. During the period from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014 there were 58 incidents where the use of force was involved.
Of those 58 incidents there were 142 separate uses of force, which consisted of: • 49 Physical Uses of Force (hands on) • 41 Firearm Deployments (no discharge) • 32 Non- Compliant Handcuffing • 14 Taser (ECW) Deployments (no discharge) • 5 Taser (ECW) Discharges • 1 Firearm Discharge
There were 53 arrests, which resulted from those 58 incidents. From January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014 there were a total of 987 arrests. There was use of force in 5.9% of all arrests. In addition, there were 319 emergency psychiatric/medical committals for the same period. Force was used in 13 of those incidents, for a rate of 4.08%.
14	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 16 of 151
	  
The JCE reviewed all use of force reports and found that proper procedures were followed: supervisors and the IAO properly reviewed all reports. The vast majority of Use of Force reports were for forceful handcuffing and hands-on use of force. The JCE noticed that several of these reports pertained to the same incident, i.e. two or more officers involved in handcuffing one suspect, where each officer would fill out a Use of Force Report. This explains “142 uses of force” during 58 incidents as stated above. There were no issues found. The JCE also viewed the Body Cam video of an officer who fired his weapon against an attacking dog, striking same once. The dog survived its injuries. The video showed the officer was justified in firing his weapon.
The JCE reviewed all ECW (Taser) incidents and determined that the officers and supervisors followed policy for each. The JCE viewed a Body Cam video of an officer deploying his ECW (Taser) at an individual armed with a machete. It is the JCE’s opinion that had the officer not been equipped with the ECW (Taser), this surely would have turned out to be a Use of Deadly Force incident. The action of the officers in the video (one officer with ECW (Taser) warning suspect several times, while another officer had gun out and at the ready) probably saved the life of the suspect, and demonstrated unequivocally that the officers were well trained in the use of the ECW (Taser) and followed proper procedures..
V. Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations and Discipline
As required by the Settlement Agreement, the East Haven Police Department Internal Affairs Officer developed and implemented a centralized numbering and tracking system for all misconduct complaints. Upon receipt of a complaint, the IAO promptly assigns a unique numerical identifier to the complaint, which is then provided to the complainant at the time the complaint is made. When a misconduct complaint is received in the field, a supervisor obtains the unique numerical identifier and provides this identifier to the complainant. (Settlement Agreement paragraph 141).
15	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 17 of 151
	  
In compliance with paragraph 141, the EHPD uses a Departmental Review Reporting System that sequentially generates identifying case numbers that convert to Internal Affairs numbers when needed. The numbering system resets every January 1. The IAO, as well as supervisors receiving misconduct complaints use this same recording system. The system is secure with limited access and cannot be viewed or altered by officers not authorized for its use. Upon receipt of a complaint, the complaining citizen receives a Department Review case number.
For 2014, there were 14 civilian complaints filed. Of those 14 complaints, seven civilian complaint forms were given out and the complainant did not follow through with the complaint, six complaints were exonerated and one complaint was unfounded. There were no sustained civilian complaints in 2014.

Civilian	  Complaints	  
15	  

10	  

5	  

0	   Civilian	   Exonerated	   Unfounded	  
Complaints	  

Form	  Not	   Returned	  

Civilian	  Complaints	  

For 2014, there were two bias-based policing complaints made. In both cases, bias was mentioned as a reason for the police action, the officers notified their supervisors immediately of the claim, and investigations were opened. This is consistent with Department policies and procedures. The investigations revealed there was no bias found in either case. The JCE looked into these bias-based complaints and found that one had been initiated by an officer who overheard a person claiming he was stopped because he was Hispanic. The person had been the source of a 911 complaint from a restaurant. When officers approached the suspect, they determined that he was intoxicated and refused to leave the premises. The second case was also self-initiated by an officer who stopped a motorist for a traffic violation and overheard the driver
16	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 18 of 151
	  
say that he was stopped only because of his race. The officer reported this to his supervisor. The EHPD investigated the bias complaints and found both had no merit.
VI. Supervision and Management
Early Intervention System (EIS): The Early Intervention System (EIS) is a problem-oriented approach to officer performance. This enables management to recognize behavior patterns from among discrete incidents over a prescribed period of time. The EIS provides a way for the Department to provide non-disciplinary direction and training before an officer becomes a liability to citizens, the Department, and him/herself. Through EIS, the Department tailors assistance strategies, e.g. counseling and training - for the specific issue(s) affecting the officer.
According to the EHPD 2014 Public Accountability Annual Report:
• It is the policy of the Department to intervene as rapidly as is feasible to address problematic behavior to manage risk and liability.
• The Department regularly uses EIS data to promote ethical and professional police practices; to manage risk and liability; and to evaluate the performance of officers and employees across all ranks, units and shifts.
• The EIS is monitored daily by the Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) while on duty. • The Department considers an array of intervention options to facilitate an effective
response to identified problems. Interventions may take the form of counseling, training, or of other supervised, monitored, and documented action plans and strategies designed to modify activity.
The EIS also includes information about ECW (Taser) incidents and other use of force incidents. The EIS was triggered once during 2014 for a firearm discharge, where an officer was being attacked by a dog and had to discharge his firearm to stop the attack. IAO Naccarato was notified by telephone immediately and responded to the scene. Officer Naccarato completed the
17	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 19 of 151
	  
investigation in this case and found the discharge to have been justified and that proper procedure were followed.
Body Worn Cameras: In June 2014, EHPD officers were assigned body worn cameras. The JCE has confirmed that every full-time sworn member of the EHPD has been issued a body camera. Policies and Procedures 401 was modified to reflect the use of these cameras. The Department reports that body worn cameras are of value in the prosecution. The JCE randomly reviewed arrest reports on four separate site visits in 2014. The JCE also reviewed a large sampling of detainee questionnaires signed by those taken into custody. The JCE paid particular attention to the following questions:
1. Were you taken into custody by force? 2. Have you been treated properly while in the custody of the East Haven Police
Department?
In the vast majority of instances checked by the JCE, the detainees answered in the negative for the first question; and all answered positive for the second question.
Officers activate their assigned body worn camera immediately prior to any encounter with a person when there is a potential for arrest, including pedestrian and traffic stops, any investigative call for service, any call in which they are needed to resolve or prevent a dispute, or any proactive self-initiated call for service in which law enforcement action can reasonably be anticipated. For example, on the first night the body worn cameras were issued, three officers were in a confrontation with a subject armed with a machete, which was captured on video.
The Department has told the JCE that body worn cameras are a welcomed addition and that officers have been activating their body worn cameras above and beyond what they are required to per Department policies and procedures. For example, the JCE viewed a video where an officer activated his Body Cam late at night while attempting to approach a dog that appeared to be lost. It was a good decision by the officer, as the dog turned on him and attacked. The officer had to shoot the dog, which stopped the attack and the dog also survived. Although the officer
18	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 20 of 151
	  
was not obligated to turn the Body Cam on, he did so anyway. Follow-up investigation of this incident and available Body Cam video showed officer was justified in using deadly force against a dangerous animal.
The JCE reviewed all incident reports in cases where force was used and one case wherein the arrestee stated on the detainee questionnaire that he did not feel he was treated properly. The JCE determined that the police performed according to policy in all of the cases reviewed.
Supervisors have observed minor unintentional policy violations (including but not limited to): Motor Video Recorder (MVR) wireless microphones not activated on a motor vehicle stop; minor officer tactics due to being new inexperienced officers, failure to fully activate audible emergency signal device (when required by policy). Line supervisors dealt with these violations as non-disciplinary training issues. Other than the internal affairs investigations previously discussed, there have been no serious policy violations.
VII. Community Engagement and Oversight
Community Outreach: Lt. David Emerman continues to meet with members of the Latino community on a regular basis. He proactively reaches out to Latino community leaders on a monthly basis. He discusses issues with them that affect their community and gauges how they and other community groups from the residential, business and faith-based communities feel about their interactions and relationships with the EHPD. Lt. Emerman has received overwhelmingly positive responses from his community contacts with whom he has built trust.
The JCE has attended several meetings with the community and visited with community activists over the last six months. In all cases, the JCE has witnessed positive interaction between the community and Lt. Emerman. The JCE also spoke individually with several Latino community members to gauge their views of the EHPD today. The JCE heard people praise the EHPD’s progress in creating and maintaining a good relationship with the community.
19	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 21 of 151
	  
In one case the JCE spoke to a customer at a convenience store named My Country Store. This customer said he did not live in East Haven, but came from a nearby town to shop at this store. He stated to the JCE that he was aware of the past issues between the Latino community and the EHPD. He then added that he felt safe and comfortable coming to shop in East Haven and had no issues with the police. In another case, while riding along with an EHPD officer one afternoon, the JCE observed this officer stop at another convenience store owned by a Latino businessman. This store had been the victim of a robbery some days earlier and this officer was the responding officer. The officer came in to follow up on the case and informed the store clerk that the suspect had been identified and an arrest warrant was being sought. This type of interaction creates goodwill and trust in the police.
The JCE also met individually with Father James Manship, who has been an activist and defender of the East Haven Latino community. Much of the community attends Father Manship’s services in New Haven. Father Manship praised the work of Lt. Emerman and the progress made so far by the EHPD in creating a better relationship with the community. He gave the EHPD a B+ for their performance in this area. He stated that his congregation has not complained to him regarding the EHPD in a long time. However, Father Manship expressed concerns regarding whether the EHPD will sustain the progress made so far. He said he remains optimistic but cautious.
Lt. Emerman also reports that some Hispanic residents still remain somewhat fearful of the police. Lt. Emerman feels this sentiment is changing over time and that some of it may be attributed to cultural issues related to interacting with police in their native countries. The JCE tends to agree with Lt Emerman as he has seen this happen in other jurisdictions.
During 2014, Lt. Emerman met with La Voz Hispana de Connecticut, the only Spanish language newspaper widely distributed in this area. The editor interviewed Lt. Emerman about the Settlement Agreement, the various changes that are taking place in the Department, and several noteworthy policies of particular interest to the Hispanic community relating to paragraphs 179, 180, and 182 of the Settlement Agreement. The EHPD noted that the March 7, 2014 front page, full-page article was well received in the East Haven community.
20	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 22 of 151
	  
Other Community groups/partnerships that the EHPD has been a part of have included: The Juvenile Review Board (JRB) which includes members from Police Department, Juvenile Probation, East Haven Public Schools, East Haven Youth Services, the Juvenile Prosecutor’s Office, and Liquor Store Commission meetings. EHPD has also recently started a Citizens Police Academy Program, in which the JCE attended the first class held in January 2015.
Lt. Emerman has continued to hold monthly community meetings. But unfortunately, the attendance has been low. In late 2014, the Parties agreed to seek a modification to the Settlement Agreement to allow for quarterly meetings, which was approved on December 19, 2014. Lt. Emerman will continue to work with the Parties to develop new strategies for increasing attendance at quarterly meetings.
Staff from the USDOJ attended some of the meetings with the JCE on September 30, 2014. Also on this date, the JCE attended a meeting with the Police Commission and the community, where there were about 20 residents present. The JCE will continue to try and schedule site visits that coincide with the dates of community meetings.
Community Survey: During the past year, the JCE team has worked with EHPD and the other Parties to figure out alternatives for collecting and analyzing information from the community, as the original on-line survey instrument did not receive very many participants. The Parties agreed to try and engage community members through a series of focus groups. Unfortunately, the JCE has not been able to identify and hire a researcher to design and implement the focus group discussions. A number of researchers that the JCE contacted were interested in the project, but were too busy with other research projects and could not take on the additional work. At this time, a local researcher from Yale University is discussing overseeing and assigning a graduate student to work with the JCE on implementing focus groups in the spring 2015. Questions about community-police interaction, attitudes and treatment from when the Settlement Agreement was enacted through today will be asked so as to collect information and qualitative data about any changes during the past two years.
21	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 23 of 151
	  
Detainee Survey: Similarly, the JCE has been trying to engage a researcher or survey firm to develop an EHPD detainee survey. Unfortunately, the response has been minimal. The JCE anticipates receiving a sample detainee survey that another jurisdiction has successfully developed this spring. Once the instrument is reviewed and revised to fit East Haven, a process will be implemented for all EHDP detainees to receive a copy of the survey in a stamped, addressed envelope when they leave detention. It is hoped that the Yale researchers will help the JCE review and analyze the detainee survey results mid-2015.
EHPD Survey: At the end of 2014, a researcher from Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut completed an analysis of the data from the internal, online Department survey. Below is an excerpt from the Executive Summary of the analysis.
The East Haven Police Department Survey was distributed via the internet to all sworn officers in the fall of 2013. Of the department’s 60 sworn officers, 38 completed at least some of the survey, for a response rate of 63 %. Some survey questions, particularly those asking about officers’ demographic characteristics, had high rates of non-response, which I (the researcher) specify where relevant. In addition to asking about officers’ demographic characteristics, the survey asked respondents for their views on the department’s work environment, colleagues, supervisors, disciplinary procedures, community and race relations, and overall evaluations of department efficacy.
While more than half of officers expressed some dissatisfaction with the East Haven Police Department (EHPD) work environment, officers reported generally favorable views of their colleagues, supervisors, and departmental disciplinary procedures. Officers had very positive views on community relations, including relations with ethnic and racial minority residents, and most felt these relations had improved in recent years. Despite these positive assessments, however, overall evaluations of the EHPD were quite mixed. Seventy-two percent of officers described the department as doing an “excellent” or “good” job, yet fewer than half reported that they would be satisfied with police services if they lived in East Haven. Because the respondents to the survey were overwhelmingly white, male, patrol officers, it is challenging to identify significant patterns of variation across officers. The only consistent pattern to
22	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 24 of 151
	  
emerge is that older officers are more dissatisfied with the department and its relations with the broader community, though this finding is largely driven by negative responses by a small number of older officers. Please see Attachment A for the complete report.
It is anticipated that the JCE will conduct a follow-up survey within the EHPD at the end of 2015.	  
Section	  II.	  Compliance	  Progress	  Chart	  for	  Modified	  Settlement	  Agreement	   Paragraphs	  10	  through	  233,	  filed	  on	  December	  19,	  2014	   	  CIVIL	  NO.	  3:12-­‐CV-­‐1652	  (AWT)	  	  
	  
KEY:	  	  	  
Partial Compliance – The Town of East Haven has taken verified and meaningful steps to implement the requirement, including incorporating the requirement in policy, commencing sufficient training to relevant staff on the requirement, and/or carrying out the requirement in actual practice.
Substantial Compliance – The Town of East Haven has implemented the requirement in policy, training, and actual practice to a level and degree that satisfies the material elements and objectives of the requirement, based on the JCE’s qualitative and quantitative assessments.
Full Compliance – The Town of East Haven has achieved substantial compliance with the requirement and sustained such compliance for two years. (Please note one exception. There are a few paragraphs where a one-time requirement has been met and no longer requires active monitoring. These paragraphs are now marked as having achieved full compliance.)
Non-Compliance – The Town of East Haven has made little or no progress to implement the requirement or has otherwise failed to take meaningful and verifiable steps to achieve compliance.
Deferred - Requirements were not reviewed, audited, or assessed during the relevant rating period.
The Joint Compliance Expert (JCE) is using the compliance ratings defined above. The JCE is relying on the following four criteria to assess East Haven’s progress on implementing each paragraph of the Settlement Agreement. These criteria are based on requirements included in paragraph 198 of the Settlement Agreement.
1. Policy: Is there a policy in place relevant to the paragraph requirement?
23	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 25 of 151
	  

2. Training: Have all required East Haven Police Department staff been trained on this paragraph?
3. Practice: Is the East Haven Police Department performing the requirement of the paragraph?
4. Verification: Have the requirements of the paragraph been audited, reviewed and verified by the JCE?

When all four criteria are met, the paragraph will be rated as “substantial compliance.” After substantial compliance has been sustained for a two-year period, the JCE will mark the paragraph in “full compliance.”

IV. POLICIES AND TRAINING GENERALLY

10. EHPD’s policies and procedures shall reflect and express the Department’s core values and

priorities, and provide clear direction to ensure that officers lawfully, effectively, and ethically

carry out their law enforcement responsibilities. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all EHPD

officers are trained to understand and be able to fulfill their duties and responsibilities pursuant to

EHPD policies and procedures. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that supervisors have the

knowledge, skills, and ability to provide close and effective supervision to each officer under the

supervisor’s direct command; provide officers with the direction and guidance necessary to

improve and develop as police officers; and to identify, correct, and prevent officer misconduct.

To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. (Overview paragraph

for policy manual development)

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the policies and training section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the subparagraphs that it introduces. .

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis By the 365-day deadline, the EHPD, JCE and USDOJ reviewed and revised 84 policies. Three more policies were developed, approved and added in 2014 for a total of 87 policies.

A. Policy Development, Review and Implementation
11. EHPD shall develop and implement comprehensive and agency-wide policies and procedures that ensure consistency with, and full implementation of, this Agreement, and incorporate each requirement herein. Unless otherwise noted, all policies, procedures, and manuals shall be developed within 270 days of the Effective Date.
24	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 26 of 151
	  

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
Agency-wide policies and procedures have been developed and officer training completed for 87 policies. None 87 policies were reviewed and approved by JCE.

All training on the 87 policies has been completed for all EHPD members.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to check that current revised editions of the hard copy policy manual are accessible to all and are on-line. It is anticipated that the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual will continue to be regularly updated as new issues, technologies, training etc. are introduced in policing and in the community.

12. EHPD policies and procedures shall define terms clearly, comply with applicable law and the requirements of this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This paragraph is covered in the above status reports in paragraphs 10 and 11.

The JCE and USDOJ reviewed and approved 87 policies and procedures.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Following extensive edits, all EHPD policies and procedures were reviewed and approved by the JCE, USDOJ and the Board of Police Commissioners. The JCE will continue to review future revisions to EHPD policies and procedures.

13. EHPD shall review each policy or procedure related to this Agreement 180 days after it is

implemented, and annually thereafter, to ensure that the policy or procedure provides effective

direction to EHPD personnel and remains consistent with the Agreement, professional police

practices, and current law, including incorporating mechanisms to promote and measure

accountability and community engagement. EHPD also shall review policies and procedures as

necessary upon notice of a policy deficiency during audits or reviews. Within 60 days of that

review, EHPD shall revise the policy or procedure and consult with the JCE and USDOJ. USDOJ

and the JCE shall provide the same review and approval of revised policies and procedures as with

the initial policies and procedures to ensure consistency with this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE and Parties have worked with EHPD on revising existing policies

within the deadlines required under this paragraph.

Recommendations None

25	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 27 of 151
	  

Evidentiary Basis
On an ongoing basis, the EHPD has reviewed and revised policies and procedures and developed new ones throughout 2014.

3 revised policies were completed and reviewed in 2014:

105.3 Uniforms and Appearance

SITE VISIT

401.3 - AVL and Officer Video Camera Use - Revised 437.3 - K9 Unit- Revised
All new training required for revised policies was reviewed by the JCE and completed in 2014. The JCE will continue to discuss policies with EHPD during site visits and track EHPD’s revision processes.

14. EHPD’s Department-wide policies and procedures shall be collected in a Department-level policy and procedure manual, and unit-wide policies and procedures (or standard operating procedures) shall be collected in unit-level policy and procedure manuals. EHPD shall develop and implement policy and procedure manuals that include the following EHPD functions:

a) Field operations, including patrol, supervision task forces, and special operations; b) Internal investigations, including case and records management, administrative
investigations, confidential investigations, parallel criminal and administrative investigations, audits, and officer drug testing; c) Use of force reporting, reviews, and investigations, including both Supervisor and IAO force investigations and reviews; and in-custody death reviews; d) Criminal investigations; and e) Field and in-service training.

These manuals shall incorporate and otherwise be consistent with the requirements of this

Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

These policies and procedures are included in the manual.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The completed policies and procedures manual.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps - None

15. EHPD shall expressly prohibit all forms of retaliation, whether subtle or direct, including discouragement, intimidation, coercion, or adverse action, against any person, civilian or officer, who reports misconduct, makes a misconduct complaint, or cooperates with an investigation of misconduct. The default penalty for retaliation shall be termination.
26	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 28 of 151
	  

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Settlement Agreement paragraph will continue to be tracked by the JCE. None Policy 201.3 and 208.2 JCE community and police officer interviews (anonymous and nonanonymous) JCE review of all citizen complaints and use of force reports during site visits JCE attendance at community meetings and interactions with community during site-visits and via email and telephonic communication Questions/Next Steps Continue to review all complaints and misconduct allegations.

16. EHPD shall develop a policy governing its obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83

(1963), and its progeny. As part of this policy, EHPD shall track and maintain records of all

officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding,

Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make these records available to

prosecutors.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this Settlement Agreement paragraph will continue to be tracked by the JCE.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 201.3 and 214.2

SITE VISIT

Question/Next Steps Review all relevant cases; None so far.

17. EHPD shall submit all new and revised policies, procedures, or manuals related to this Agreement to the JCE and USDOJ for review and comment prior to publication and implementation within 270 days of the Effective Date. If the JCE or USDOJ object that the proposed new or revised policy, procedure, or manual does not incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, or is inconsistent with this Agreement or the law, it shall note this objection in writing to all Parties within 15 business days of the receipt of the policy from EHPD. If neither the JCE nor USDOJ object to the new or revised policy, procedure, or manual, EHPD agrees to implement it within 30 days of it being provided to USDOJ and the JCE.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
This requirement continues to be monitored by the JCE. None EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual on the EHPD website. Questions/Next Steps None

27	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 29 of 151
	  

18. EHPD shall have 15 days to resolve any objections to the new or revised policies, procedures,

and manuals implementing the specified provisions. If, after this 15-day period has run, USDOJ

maintains its objection, then the JCE shall have an additional 15 days to resolve the objection. If

either party disagrees with the JCE’s resolution of the objection, either Party may ask the Court to

resolve the matter. The JCE shall determine whether in some instances an additional amount of

time is necessary to ensure full and proper review of policies. Factors to consider in making this

determination include: 1) complexity of the policy; 2) extent of disagreement regarding policy; 3)

number of policies provided simultaneously; and 4) extraordinary circumstances delaying review

by USDOJ or the JCE. In determining whether these factors warrant additional time for review,

the JCE shall fully consider the importance of prompt implementation of policies, and shall allow

additional time for policy review only where it is clear that additional time is necessary to ensure

full and proper review. Any extension to the above timelines by the JCE shall also toll EHPD’s

deadline for policy completion.

Compliance

n/a

Rating

Discussion

The 15-day requirement was never invoked.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps None

19. EHPD shall apply policies uniformly and hold officers accountable for complying with EHPD

policy and procedure.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implementation of policies and procedures to address this

Settlement Agreement paragraph will continue to be tracked by the JCE.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

During quarterly JCE site visits, the JCE continues to review all internal affairs cases and related complaints; JCE also continues to review all use of force reports and a random sampling of all arrest reports. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to monitor on future quarterly site visits and via email/telephonic communication.

20. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall formalize a common template to use for all

EHPD policies and General Orders. The template shall include a method for updates and revisions

that permits all Parties to keep track of former versions of policies and General Orders while

clearly labeling currently operative policies and General Orders. All EHPD policies and General

Orders shall be made to conform to this template.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 2/19/13 deadline

28	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 30 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
EHPD delivered the template by the deadline to the JCE; The template is posted on the EHPD Website. A second and revised common template was implemented in early 2014 that is more ‘user-friendly’ for all policies and continues to be used. The newer template continues to be used and works well with current, revised and new policies. Questions/Next Steps None

21. Within 365 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall make all new and revised EHPD policies freely available for public review online, unless there is a reasonable basis for maintaining a specific policy or procedure confidential or unless an exemption from disclosure is allowed under State or Federal Freedom of Information law or any other applicable law. All new and revised policies shall be displayed on the EHPD website which shall also be available through a link on the Town website.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The online requirement was completed by the 12/21/13 deadline.

Recommendations The JCE recommended that the community have easy access to review the

policies in a neutral location in early 2014, such as at the Hagaman Public Library per Settlement Agreement Paragraph 184.

Evidentiary Basis The EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual is available online on the EHPD website, at Town Hall, Police HQ and at the Hagaman Public Library.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to confirm/monitor and ensure that an updated and current Policies and Procedures Manual is available in hard copy at the Hagaman Public Library.

	  

22. EHPD shall review and revise its Code of Conduct within 180 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter, to:

a) describe with specificity permitted and prohibited officer conduct;

b) be consistent with the requirements of professional police practice and this

Agreement; and

c) have an absolute requirement of officer honesty and make termination the default penalty for

dishonesty.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

This requirement was completed by the 180-day deadline of June 19, 2013 and continues to be reviewed annually. The original Code of Conduct policy was rescinded and replaced by a rewritten and updated version. None

Evidentiary Basis The JCE and USDOJ received and reviewed and the East Haven Board of Commissioners approved the most recent revised EHPD Code of Conduct -

29	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 31 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

Policy 201.3 Questions/Next Steps None

23. EHPD shall submit proposed revisions to its Code of Conduct to the JCE and DOJ for review

at least 60 days before the implementation of any revision. The dispute resolution process and associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 shall apply to DOJ and the JCE's review

of any new or revised Code of Conduct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The original Code of Conduct has been revised twice and approved twice by

the JCE and USDOJ. It was included in the newest version of the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

Recommendations The JCE confirmed that training and subsequent implementation on the new

Code of Conduct occurred in 2014. The JCE will continue to monitor.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 201.3 completed and enacted on September 1, 2014. .

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

None

B. Training on Revised Policies, Procedures and Practices

24. EHPD shall ensure each officer and employee attends 2 – 4 hour training on the content of this Agreement and the responsibilities of each officer and employee pursuant to it.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Within 60 days of the Effective Date; February 19, 2013.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis EHPD provided documentation that this training was provided to all sworn and civilian department members by the 60-day mark. Training Roster

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps None

25. Within 30 days after issuing a policy or procedure pursuant to this Agreement, EHPD shall ensure that all relevant EHPD personnel have received, read, and understand their responsibilities pursuant to the policy or procedure, including the requirement that each officer or employee report violations of policy; that supervisors of all ranks shall be held accountable for identifying and responding to policy or procedure violations by personnel under their command; and that personnel will be held accountable for policy and procedure violations. EHPD shall document that each relevant EHPD officer or other employee has received, read, and sufficiently understands the policy. Training beyond roll-call or similar training will be necessary for many new policies to ensure officers understand and can perform their duties pursuant to the policy.
30	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 32 of 151
	  

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
All training on new and revised policies and procedures has been completed in 2014. The EHPD provided the JCE and USDOJ with a list of attendees, their associated job titles and the trainings they attended relevant to the new and revised policies and procedures. The JCE and USDOJ reviewed training materials and the training list with associated attendees. (Rosters) Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review training rosters and training curriculum for information noted above.

26. EHPD shall ensure delivery of the one-time and recurrent in-service training requirements set out throughout this Agreement. As set out herein, EHPD shall provide a minimum of 32 hours of in-service training each year to each officer, in addition to any specialized training for officers in certain units, supervisors, etc., and in addition to the one-time training required by this Agreement. Training in related areas may be delivered together. (For example, aspects of training in effective community engagement and bias-free policing may be incorporated into stop, search, and arrest training). The in-service training shall not include any firearms training required by the state. The frequency and subject areas for initial one-time and recurrent in-service training are set out in the sections below; however, it is anticipated that the frequency and subject areas for in-service training in the future will be determined by the training plan this Settlement Agreement requires EHPD to develop.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD is up-to-date and has completed all of the training required by the Settlement Agreement. They have developed a 2014-2016 training plan that all Parties have reviewed. The JCE will continue to track all training and review curricula and rosters.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

An update to the EHPD 2014 Training Division Annual Report was completed for 2014 and presented to the JCE in January 2015. Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits and discuss future training goals with Chief Lennon and Training Supervisor Sgt. Tracy.

27. EHPD shall provide mandatory supervisory, leadership, and command accountability training,

tailored to each level of supervision and command, of 24 – 40 hours. All EHPD supervisors shall

receive supervisory training prior to assuming supervisory responsibilities or serving as an acting

supervisor, and shall receive no fewer than 40 hours of supervisory in-service training annually

thereafter.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

31	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 33 of 151
	  

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

All EHPD supervisors received the required number of hours of training. Specialized training classes were approved for individual officers after the JCE reviewed the curriculum. For example, the EHPD Lt. in charge of overseeing the Settlement Agreement received specialized training at the Kennedy School of Government Senior Executives in State and Local Government three-week training. For future training, the EHPD should continue to send the JCE and USDOJ all supervisory, leadership and command accountability training curricula and related materials. All supervisory training curricula were reviewed by the JCE. Rosters Questions/Next Steps JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits. JCE team members will continue to forward EHPD information about new supervisory training classes that are being piloted in other jurisdictions.

28. The supervisory training program shall include instruction in the following topics: a) techniques for effectively guiding and directing officers and promoting effective and ethical police practices; b) de-escalating conflict; c) evaluation of written reports; d) reviewing and investigating officer uses of force; e) responding to and investigating allegations of officer misconduct; f) risk assessment and risk management; g) evaluating officer performance; h) appropriate disciplinary sanctions and non-disciplinary corrective action; and i) using the Risk Management System to facilitate close and effective supervision.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

These required topic areas were included in the training materials reviewed

and approved by the JCE and USDOJ.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Supervisory training curricula 2013 (from Institute of Police Technology and Mgt.) 2014 EHPD Training Division Annual Report

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to review training materials to ensure documentation is consistent across training.

29. EHPD shall submit training curricula and lesson plans, revised pursuant to this Agreement, to the JCE and DOJ for review and comment at least 45 days prior to the scheduled date of training delivery. The JCE shall provide the Parties with written comments regarding the training. The JCE and DOJ shall review all EHPD training curricula and lesson plans promulgated pursuant to this Agreement to determine whether they are consistent with and incorporate the requirements of

32	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 34 of 151
	  

this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices. The dispute resolution process and associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 of this Agreement shall apply to DOJ and the JCE’s review of training curricula and lesson plans.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This review and comment requirement was modified from 90 days to 45 days and approved by the court. Since there is so much training associated with the first 365 days of the Settlement Agreement, all agreed 45 days was a more realistic time frame.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

All training curricula and/or relevant training materials have been reviewed within the proper time frame during the second year of the Settlement Agreement. Questions/Next Step JCE will continue to review EHPD training curricula and rosters on quarterly site visits.

30. Unless otherwise noted, the training required pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered

within 365 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter. Within 180 days of the Effective

Date, EHPD shall set out a schedule for delivering all training required by this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Required training, with the exception of the new policies and procedures manual training currently under consideration was delivered on time within the 365 days of the Settlement Agreement Effective Date. A training plan/schedule was also delivered by the 180-day mark. A 2014Training Division Annual Report was also prepared/delivered in January 2015. None.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

EHPD provided documentation that all training was delivered within the 365day mark and continues to provide future training schedules to the JCE. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to review annual training plans including new and refresher courses

31. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement documented and

approved testing policies and procedures regarding training to ensure that all testing is valid,

reliable, fair, and legally defensible. Both knowledge-based and performance-based tests shall be

designed, developed, administered, and scored according to established professional standards of

practice. Testing policies and procedures shall include detailed test security measures. All tests

shall be job-related, testing knowledge and skills required for successful job performance.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 270 day mark; Additional training on

33	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 35 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

new and/or revised policies issued throughout 2014 has occurred. None
Policy 106.2 Training curricula and tests. Training Rosters Training Schedule for 2014 Training sessions Questions/Next Steps The JCE will attend training sessions during future site visits in April/May 2015 to ensure courses are being taught incorporating best practices for adult learning and retention. The JCE plans to conduct one-on-one interviews with attendees.

V. BIAS-FREE POLICING

32. EHPD shall deliver police services that are equitable, respectful, and free of unlawful bias, in a manner that promotes broad community engagement and confidence in the Department. In conducting its activities, EHPD shall ensure that members of the public receive equal protection of the law, without bias based on demographic category, and in accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. (Overview Paragraph)

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the

Bias-Free Policing Section.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

A. Bias- Free Policing

33. EHPD shall provide all officers with 4 hours of comprehensive and interdisciplinary training on bias-free policing within 180 days of the Effective Date, and 2 – 4 hours annually thereafter, based on developments in Connecticut or federal law and EHPD policy. Such training shall emphasize that discriminatory policing, in the form of either selective enforcement or nonenforcement of the law, including the selecting or rejecting of particular policing tactics or strategies, is prohibited by policy and will subject officers to discipline. This training shall address:
a) methods and strategies for more effective policing that relies upon non-discriminatory
factors;
b) police and community perspectives related to discriminatory policing;
c) constitutional and other legal requirements related to equal protection and unlawful
discrimination, including the requirements of this Agreement;
d) the protection of civil rights as a central part of the police mission and as essential to

34	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 36 of 151
	  

effective policing;

e) the existence and impact of arbitrary classifications, stereotyping, and implicit bias;

f) instruction in the data collection protocols required by this Agreement;

g) identification of key decision points where prohibited discrimination can take effect at both

the incident and strategic-planning levels; and

h) methods, strategies, and techniques to reduce misunderstanding, conflict, and complaints due

to perceived bias or discrimination, including problem-oriented policing strategies.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

This training was provided by the Spector Training Network and taught by Eliot Spector, a highly respected attorney and lecturer. The training included bias-free policing practices and stop, search and arrest procedures. The lesson plans, which reflect the Settlement Agreement’s requirements, were approved by the JCE. An officer and a Lt. missed the training and were rescheduled (and since taken). The Lt., however, was unable to attend the make-up training as well. The Lt. has since documented evidence that he has received this training from other sources (Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University). Annual training requirements have also occurred and been confirmed. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Training test results for attendees on file at the EHPD; Discussion with EHPD Compliance Coordinator Questions/Next Steps None

B. Ensuring Bias-Free Policing
34. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of demographic category in EHPD police practices. This policy shall have the following elements:
a) EHPD’s policy on bias-free policing shall prohibit officers from using demographic category (to any
extent or degree) in conducting stops or detentions, or activities following stops or detentions, except when engaging in appropriate suspect-specific activity to identify a particular person or persons. b) EHPD shall prohibit officer use of proxies for demographic category, including language
ability, geographic location, or manner of dress. c) When officers are seeking one or more specific persons who have been identified or described by their demographic category, or any proxy thereto, officers may rely on these descriptions only when combined with other appropriate identifying factors, and may not give exclusive
35	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 37 of 151
	  

attention or undue weight to demographic category.

d) Data collection, as set forth in Paragraphs 64(c) and 65 of this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is the bias-free policing policy # 203.2, which has had one revision Bias-Free policing training occurred in 2013 and 2014 as noted in paragraph 33 prior to the policy being completely approved and implemented.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 203.2 in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Additional review of training on this policy was included in the policies and procedures manual training in 2014. Questions/Next Steps The JCE continues to use a checklist of items to review at quarterly on-site

meetings as well as through ongoing telephonic and email communication.

These items include, but are not limited to: EIS, Technology Review,

Supervisor Reports, Random Audit or Review of ECW’s (Tasers), Citizen

Complaints, Use of Force Reports, Arrest Reports, Stop Data from State,

Body Cameras, Audit/Review, Search Warrant Applications, Community and

Language Line Data and Detainee Reports. Information and data for

“Ensuring Bias-Free Policing” will be gathered and analyzed from the

checklist materials.

	  
35. EHPD shall conduct quarterly analysis, as well as analysis on a cumulative basis, consistent with the methodology employed by the JCE, of its traffic enforcement activities to ensure officer, squad, and Department compliance with the bias-free policy.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
This requirement was first completed at the 180-mark. Some quarterly reports were delayed due to a since-fixed software problem with a new CAD-based program that automatically tracks and analyzes these data. Quarterly reports need to be received by the JCE and USDOJ within ten (10) days of the end of the quarter. Additional analysis on stop data will need to be reviewed in- depth and a random review of stop incidents involving Hispanic drivers needs to be conducted to assess the appropriateness of the enforcement action. Work with EHPD to develop an easier way to compile user-friendly stop data by the 30-month report. For this purpose, EHPD is revamping its IT system. First report submitted at the 180-mark. Second report submitted on January 13, 2014. Third report submitted April 7, 2014. Stop data reviewed in June 2014 Fourth report submitted July 1, 2014. The fifth report was submitted by EHPD on January 23, 2015.

36	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 38 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps Need to continue getting more detail about data set to ensure that traffic enforcement sanctions are appropriate.

36. EHPD shall develop a formalized procedure for officers to notify arrested foreign nationals of

their right to contact their consulate, or to contact the appropriate consular official directly.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Training on this new policy was completed in January and February 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 304.2 Roster.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps The JCE continues to ask if any foreign nationals have been arrested since previous site visit. No instances have occurred during the first two years of the Settlement Agreement.

37. EHPD shall refer any complaint plausibly implicating the bias-free policy to the IAO and to the JCE. EHPD shall treat any violation of the bias-free policy as a serious violation. Officers who engage in discriminatory policing will be subjected to discipline, and, where appropriate, possible criminal prosecution.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were no complaints plausibly implicating the bias-free policy in 2014.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to keep the JCE and USDOJ apprised of any complaints or violations in a timely manner. Chief’s immediate notification to JCE and DOJ. Regular and ongoing case briefings. Comprehensive internal affairs investigation and report. The JCE will continue to review IAO files.

38. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall incorporate concrete requirements regarding bias-free policing and equal protection into its hiring, promotion, and performance assessment processes, including giving significant weight to an individual’s documented history of bias-free policing, as well as using interviews and other methods to assess the individual’s ability and willingness to effectively practice bias-free policing. EHPD’s hiring plan shall also include steps to encourage qualified minority and other candidates who have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities to apply for positions in EHPD.

37	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 39 of 151
	  

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark. The JCE will continue to work with EHPD to review current hiring, promotion and performance processes. Reviewed civil service testing process and outcomes. New recruits who speak different languages were recently hired, most of whom are proficient in Spanish. Questions/Next Steps Continue to monitor

C. Language Assistance

39. EHPD shall ensure effective communication with and provide timely and meaningful access to police services to all members of the community, regardless of their national origin or limited ability to speak, read, write, or understand English. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:

a) develop and implement a comprehensive language assistance plan and policy that complies,

at a minimum, with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et

seq.) and other applicable law, and comports with professional policing practices;

b) ensure that all EHPD personnel take reasonable steps to provide timely, meaningful

language assistance services to LEP individuals they encounter and whenever an LEP individual

requests language assistance services;

c) identify and assess demographic data, specifically the number of LEP individuals within

its jurisdiction and the number of LEP victims and witnesses who seek EHPD services;

d) use collected demographic and service data to develop and meet specific hiring goals for

bilingual staff;

e) regularly assess the proficiency and qualifications of bilingual staff to become a EHPD

Authorized Interpreter (“EHPDAI”);

f) ensure that 911 call-takers identify an EHPDAI to respond to an incident involving an LEP

individual. If no EHPDAI is available, the personnel shall contact a telephonic interpretation

service provider. The call-taker shall note in information to the radio dispatch that the 911 caller is

an LEP individual and

indicate the language;

g) develop protocols for interpretation for interrogations and interviews of LEP individuals,

including requiring and ensuring the use of a qualified interpreter for the taking of any formal

statement that could adversely affect a suspect or witness’ legal rights;

h) develop and implement a process for taking, responding to and tracking civilian complaints

and resolutions of complaints filed by LEP individuals;

i) implement a process for recruitment of qualified bilingual personnel to meet

demonstrated service needs. As part of this process, EHPD shall establish significant and

sustained relationships with local and state-wide institutions and community organizations that can

serve as the source of qualified bilingual applicants and facilitate outreach to such advocates; and

j) implement effective incentives for bilingual employees to become EHPDAIs, such as pay

38	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 40 of 151
	  
differentials and consideration in performance evaluations, assignments, and promotions.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark and EHPD remains in compliance through the 24-month mark. The plan is described in detail in Policy and Procedure 301.2 which is a thorough and complete document mandating: 1) the appointment of the Language Assistance Coordinator, 2) procedures for notifying the public about the EHPD’s language services, 3) hiring goals for bilingual staff at the EHPD, and 4) the qualifications for members of the Department authorized to act as EHPD interpreters (EHPDAI). It also establishes protocols for hiring contract interpreters to provide interpretation and translation service as necessary, currently through Language Line Solutions, but also from other vendors should Language Line Solutions be no longer available. The policy prescribes one hour of training for all EHPD personnel in how to assist LEP individuals in conducting their business with the Department. Procedures for conducting interrogations and interviews of LEP individuals, as well as taking complaints against the Department from, and reporting dispositions of complaint investigations to, LEP individuals are also established by the policy. Language Assistance Coordinator, Lt. David Emerman, is a fluent Spanish speaker, who also serves as the Community Liaison Officer, required by Agreement Paragraph 181. JCE will continue to monitor bilingual staff hiring and processes and procedures for assisting LEP individual conducting business with the EHPD. Language Assistance Plan. Hiring Language Assistance Coordinator. Policy 301.2 Interviews with Lt. Emerman. Lt. Emerman 24-month Report : For all of 2014, Language Line received 23 calls of which 20 requested assistance for Spanish CAD/RMS Calls EHPD received 68 requests for language assistance in 2014, of which 63 calls were for Spanish. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue meeting/communicating with EHPD Language Access Coordinator/Community Liaison Officer Lt. Emerman regarding his ongoing interactions in the community.

39	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 41 of 151
	  

40. EHPD shall translate the language assistance plan and policy into Spanish and other languages

as appropriate, and post the English and translated versions in a public area of the police

department building, as well as online, and in any other locations throughout the Town where

individuals go to seek police assistance. EHPD shall distribute the language assistance plan and

policy to a variety of community organizations serving LEP communities encountered by EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations Continue to provide the JCE with a list of community organizations who have

received the plan.

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan.

Policy 301.2

Language Assistance Plan and policy has been translated into Spanish and is

available at the Hagaman Library, Town Hall and at EHPD.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

Continue to ensure this and other needed police materials are available, at a

minimum in Spanish, as Spanish is the primary second language utilized by

citizens of East Haven.

41. 44 41. EHPD shall distribute its LEP plan and policy to all staff and police personnel, and, within

180 days of the Effective Date provide a minimum of one hour of training to all personnel on

providing language assistance services to LEP individuals. This training shall include:

a) EHPD’s LEP plan and policies, and the requirements of Title VI and this Agreement; b) how to access EHPD-authorized, telephonic and in-person interpreters;

c) how to work with interpreters in the field;

d) cultural diversity and language barrier policing; and

e) basic command Spanish for officers assigned to patrol areas with significant LEP

populations.

Compliance Rating

Full Compliance

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 180-day mark.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan and Training Report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

None

	  

42. Within 60 days of Effective Date, the Town shall designate a language access coordinator who shall coordinate and ensure EHPD’s compliance with its language assistance plan.

Compliance Rating

Substantial Compliance

Discussion

This requirement was completed by the 60-day mark.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Lt. Emerman assigned

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE continues to discuss outreach efforts with Lt. Emerman and ensure a

designated language access coordinator succession is in place if staffing

40	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 42 of 151
	  

changes/promotions occur.

	  

43. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a process of

consultation with representatives of the LEP community to develop and at least annually review:

implementation of the language assistance plan, including areas of possible collaboration to ensure

its effectiveness; identification of additional languages that would be appropriate for translation of

materials; accuracy and quality of EHPD language assistance services; and concerns, ideas, and

strategies for ensuring language access.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

According to EHPD, this requirement was completed by the 60-day mark.

Recommendations The JCE recommends that the EHPD report on their annual review of the

Language Access Plan and discuss succession plans for a Language Access Coordinator with the JCE by the 30th month report.

Evidentiary Basis Language Assistance Plan (LAP), which is in place.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE will continue to work with Lt. Emerman on reviewing the Language

Assistance Plan and discussing succession planning.

VI. STOPS, SEARCHES, AND ARRESTS

44. EHPD shall ensure that all EHPD investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are conducted in

accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or

laws of the United States. EHPD shall ensure that investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are

part of an effective overall crime prevention strategy; are consistent with community priorities for

enforcement; and are carried out even-handedly. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall

implement the requirements below.

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the

stops, searches, and arrest section. The Town of East Haven will reach

compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all

the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

A. Investigatory Stops and Detentions

45. EHPD officers shall conduct investigatory stops or detentions only where the officer has

reasonable suspicion that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in the commission of a

crime.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, searches and arrests on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

41	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 43 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

procedures were revised and re-approved in 2014. The JCE started randomly sampling supervisor reports and incidents and arrest reports during site visits in April, June and September 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. None Policies 409.2, 420.3, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. JCE conducted a random sampling of supervisor and incident reports online using an EHPD computer during site visits. One officer was disciplined for not turning on his body cam: another case, Motor Video Recorder (MVR) wireless microphone not activated on a motor vehicle stop, minor officer tactics due to being new inexperienced officers, failure to fully activate audible emergency signal device (when required by policy). Otherwise, no other problems were identified. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue to sample officer and supervisor reports

46. EHPD officers shall not use “canned” or conclusory language in any reports documenting

investigatory stops, detentions and searches. Articulation of reasonable suspicion and probable

cause shall be specific and clear.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013 and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports and incidents and arrest reports during site visits

in April, June, September 2014 and January 2015. There were no cases of

“canned” or conclusory language readily detectable and seemed to have been

completed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations EHPD Supervisors continue to review all arrests, searches, detentions, and

stops

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.2, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE will continue to sample officers’ reports and sample citizen

complaints.

47. EHPD officers shall not use or rely on information known to be materially false or incorrect in

effectuating an investigatory stop or detention.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013 and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports and incidents and arrest reports during site visits

in April, June and September 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy

42	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 44 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

in all cases reviewed. None Policies 409.2, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Questions/Next Steps The JCE will continue randomly sampling supervisor/incident and arrest reports.

48. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category as a factor, to any extent or degree, in

establishing reasonable suspicion or probable cause, except as part of an actual and credible

description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports and incidents and arrest reports during site visits

in April, June and September 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy

in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.2, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE will continue randomly sampling supervisor/incident and arrest

reports.

B. Searches

49. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category in exercising discretion to conduct a

warrantless search or to seek a search warrant, except as part of an actual and credible description

of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports and reviewing all

search warrants during site visits in April, June and September 2014. The

EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.2 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement.

Random review of arrest reports and stop data and review of all search

warrants on April, June and September 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review arrest reports, stop data and search warrants.

43	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 45 of 151
	  

50. Where an officer seeks consent for a search, the officer shall affirmatively inform the subject

of his or her right to refuse and to revoke consent at any time, articulate and document the

independent legal justification for the search, and document the subject’s consent on a written

form that explains these rights.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports and reviewing all

search warrants during site visits in April, June and September 2014. The

EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

On December 19, 2014, a modification request was made to and approved by the court to remove the requirement that such consent be in writing if it is otherwise captured on the body cameras. The Parties submitted that the video is better evidence of the consent, and the written requirement superfluous.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None Policies 409.2, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants on April, June and September 2014 site visits. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants.

51. EHPD shall ensure that the consent to search form includes separate signature lines for

civilians to affirm that they understand they have a right to refuse, and for officers to certify that

they have read and explained the right to refuse to the civilian

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports, and reviewing all

search warrants during site visits in April, June and September 2014. The

EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.2, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports and stop data and review of all search warrants on

April, June and September 2014 site visits. The JCE has reviewed the search

consent form and it conforms to requirements of Settlement Agreement

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

44	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 46 of 151
	  

The JCE will continue to review reports, forms and documentation related to searches.

52. An affidavit or sworn declaration supporting an application for a search warrant shall provide

an accurate, complete, and clear description of the offense, the place or thing to be searched, scope

of the search, and time and method of the search.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports and reviewed all

search warrants during site visits in April, June and September 2014. The

EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.2, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports and stop data and all search warrant applications and

affidavits on April, June and September 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review all search warrant affidavits/applications.

53. A supervisor shall review each request for a search or arrest warrant, including each affidavit

or declaration before it is filed by an officer in support of a warrant application, for

appropriateness, legality, and conformance with EHPD policy and this Agreement. The supervisor

shall assess the information contained in the warrant application and supporting documents for

authenticity, including an examination for “canned” or conclusory language, inconsistent

information, and lack of articulation of a legal basis for the warrant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports and reviewed all

search warrants during site visits in April, June and September 2014.The

EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.2, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of arrest reports, stop data and all search warrant applications and

affidavits on April, June and September 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue to review supervisor reports and search warrant

applications.

45	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 47 of 151
	  

54. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those

warrant applications that are legally unsupported, are in violation of EHPD policy or this

Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy,

tactics, or training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or

deficiencies, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer,

and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. The quality and accuracy

of search warrants and supportive affidavits or declarations shall be taken into account in officer

performance evaluations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to investigatory

stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and

procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly

sampling supervisor reports, incidents and arrest reports, and reviewed all

search warrants during site visits in April, June and September 2014. The

EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 409.2, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest

policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random

review of all arrest reports and stop data and review of all search warrants

during April, June and September 2014 site visits. Twenty-seven were applied

for and granted in 2014. The supervisors and JCE found no unsupported

warrant applications.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

The JCE will continue review supervisory reports and search warrant

applications

55. A supervisor shall review the operational plan for the execution of a search warrant and,

absent exceptional circumstances, shall be present for execution of the search warrant. A

supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her

presence. Once executed, a supervisor shall review the execution of the search warrant.

Supervisors shall memorialize their reviews in writing within 24 hours of the execution of a search

warrant. The quality of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s

performance evaluations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly sampling supervisor reports, incident and arrest reports, and reviewing all search warrants during site visits in April, June and September 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

On December 19, 2014, the Parties requested and the Court approved a modification to this paragraph to modify the operational plan requirements for executing search warrants to eliminate the requirement when the warrant is

46	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 48 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

for medical records (i.e. Emergency Room records for DUI) or telephone/internet records. These situations do not require intrusion into someone's premises, etc. and again may not have been intended when the Settlement Agreement was negotiated.	  	   None
Policies 409.2, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data and search warrants on April and June 2014 site visits. Twenty-Seven were applied for and granted in 2014. A supervisor was present at each search and reviews were documented properly. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review supervisory reports and search warrant applications.

56. EHPD shall maintain centrally a log listing each search warrant, the case file where a copy of

such warrant is maintained, the officer who applied for, and each supervisor who reviewed the

application for a search warrant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and the policies and procedures were revised/reapproved in 2014. The JCE started randomly sampling supervisor reports, incident and arrest reports, and reviewing all search warrants during site visits in April, June and September 2014. The JCE reviewed all search warrant applications (27) after training was completed in February 2014 and for the remainder of the year. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. Due to the low number, in lieu of a log, the EHPD kept a copy of each one in a separate folder readily accessible for review. Should the volume increase, the EHPD told the JCE, they will implement a log.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 409.2, 420.2, 427.2 as well as other relevant stop, search and arrest policies and procedures throughout the Settlement Agreement. Random review of arrest reports, stop data and all search warrants on April and June 2014 site visits. The JCE reviewed all 27 search warrant folders.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all search warrants.

C. Arrests

57. EHPD officers shall only arrest an individual where the officer has probable cause. In

effectuating an arrest, EHPD officers shall not rely on information known to be materially false or

incorrect. Officers may not consider demographic category in effecting an arrest, except as part of

an actual and credible description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

47	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 49 of 151
	  

Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014 and for the remainder of the year. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. None
Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April, June and September 2014 site visits. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest reports.

58. An officer shall immediately notify a supervisor when effectuating: a felony arrest; an arrest where the officer used force; an arrest for obstructing or resisting an officer; any arrest for the violation of interfering with an officer; any arrest for violation of either breach of the peace in the second degree or disorderly conduct in which the violative conduct is (a) a reaction to police presence or officer conduct, or (b) targeted towards a police officer; or a custodial arrest for a vehicle infraction, and the supervisor shall, absent exceptional circumstances, immediately respond to the scene. A supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her presence.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports, supervisor reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014 and for the remainder of the year. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. All use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April, June and September 2014 and January 2015 site visits revealed proper notification of supervisors who also responded to the scene.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports to look for notifications of supervisors for such arrests

	  

59. The responding supervisor shall approve or disapprove the officer’s arrest recommendation, based on the existence of justifiable probable cause and EHPD policy. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in the officer’s arrest recommendation, including releasing the subject, recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved

48	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 50 of 151
	  

officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest reports and supervisory reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014 and for the remainder of the year. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April, June and September 2014 site visits. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE did not find any violations or deficiencies, but will continue to monitor closely. The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

60. At the time of presentment at EHPD headquarters, a watch commander or supervisor shall visually inspect each detainee or arrestee for injury, interview the detainee or arrestee for complaints of pain, and ensure that the detainee or arrestee receives medical attention from an appropriate medical provider, as necessary. The watch commander or supervisor shall document the results of the visual inspection in writing.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. The JCE randomly sampled arrest and supervisory reports and reviewed all use of force reports after training was completed in February 2014 and for the remainder of 2014. The EHPD performed according to policy in all cases reviewed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April, June and September 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE did not find any violations or deficiencies but will continue to monitor closely. JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest, supervisory and visual inspection reports.

	  

49	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 51 of 151
	  

61. EHPD officers shall complete all arrest reports before the end of shift. EHPD field

supervisors shall review each arrest report of officers under their command and shall memorialize

their review in writing within 12 hours of the arrest, absent exceptional circumstances.

Supervisors shall review reports and forms for “canned” or conclusory language, inconsistent

information, lack of articulation of the legal basis for the action, or other indicia that the

information in the reports or forms is not authentic or correct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on April, June and September 2014 site visits.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

On December 19, 2014, a modification to this paragraph was approved by the Court to modify the requirement to complete all arrest reports before the end of the shift to “custodial arrests.” Since a non-custodial motor vehicle summons is considered an arrest, completing the reports before the end of the shift is creating a significant burden, which the Parties believe was not intended. The Parties would continue the requirement for all custodial arrests, but requested additional time for the motor vehicle summons. None
Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April, June and September 2014 site visits. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

62. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those

arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement,

or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or

training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in

making arrests, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved

officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each

subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken,

to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each

violation or deficiency is noted in the officer’s performance evaluations. The quality of these

supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s own performance evaluations.

EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to

conduct reviews of adequate and consistent quality.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of

50	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 52 of 151
	  

arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on April, June and September 2014 site visits. There were no arrests unsupported by probable cause.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample arrest and supervisory reports.

	  

63. A command-level official shall review, in writing, all supervisory reviews related to arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The commander’s review shall be completed within seven days of receiving the document reporting the event. The commander shall evaluate the corrective action and recommendations in the supervisor’s written report and ensure that all appropriate corrective action is taken, including referring the incident to the IAO for investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented of policies and procedures related to arrests on December 11, 2013. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest reports reviewed on April, June and September 2014 site visits. There were no arrests unsupported by probable cause.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 412.2 and 413.2 and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Review of all use of force reports and random sample of arrest and supervisory reports reviewed on April, June and September 2014 site visits.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all use of force reports and randomly sample

arrest and supervisory reports.

D. Stop and Search Data Collection and Review

64. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy on stops, searches and seizures. This policy shall have the following elements:
a) A requirement that prior to making traffic stops, officers notify dispatch about known information, including the number of occupants of the vehicle, the perceived race or ethnicity of the occupants, and a description of the basis for the stop;
b) A detailed description of the justification necessary for officers to make stops and arrests; c) A requirement that all stops, searches, and seizures be documented in an Incident Report that
records: i. the officer’s name and badge number; ii. date, time, and location of the stop; iii. duration of the stop;
51	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 53 of 151
	  

iv. the apparent race, color or ethnicity of the individual, based on the police officer’s

reasonable

observation and perception;

v. the suspected violation that led to the stop;

vi. whether any contraband or evidence was seized from any individual, and nature of the

contraband or evidence;

vii. the post-stop action taken with regard to the violation (including a warning, a citation,

an arrest,

or a use of force); and

viii. whether any search was conducted, the kind of search conducted, the basis for the

search,

whether the search was consensual or non-consensual, and the outcome of the search.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Spector Training Network trained the EHPD on Policies 409.2 and 420.2 as required in Paragraph 78 of the Settlement Agreement, which included instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law, as well as First Amendment and related law. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 409.2 Motor Vehicle Stops and Policy 420.2 Search and Seizure and other relevant policies addressing arrest procedures in the EHPD Policies and Procedures Manual. Questions/Next Steps: None

65. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a system to collect data on all

investigatory stops and searches, whether or not they result in an arrest or issuance of a citation.

This system shall allow for analysis and searches and also shall be integrated into the EIS.

EHPD’s stop and search data collection system shall be subject to the review of the Joint

Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall require officers to document all required information

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE reviewed stop and search data collected/analyzed in the EHPD computer system within the 270 day mark and through the two-year reporting period. The State of Connecticut categorization glitches were corrected just after the 365-day mark. However, obtaining more detail on Hispanic drivers has proved challenging. EHPD has provided additional helpful information. The JCE and the EHPD will continue to collaborate on this issue. The JCE will continue to work with the Parties on carefully reviewing this paragraph’s requirements and perhaps developing new methodologies to collect additional detailed data for this broad categorization of Hispanic drivers. Moreover, at future site visits, the JCE would like to conduct random review of cases involving Hispanic drivers to assess the appropriateness of the enforcement action in addition to reviewing the data. In other words, although the EHPD is collecting aggregate data, this information does not always

52	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 54 of 151
	  

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

provide enough detail. The JCE is working with EHPD to develop new methodologies for colleting additional information about investigatory stops and searches for the 30 Month Report. The on-site database and EHPD reports were reviewed. Random incidents involving Hispanic drivers were reviewed Questions/Next Steps: Continue to drill down into the data and incident reports.

66. Officers shall submit documentation of investigatory stops and detentions, and any searches resulting from or proximate to the stop or detention, including a complete and accurate inventory of all property or evidence seized, to their supervisors by the end of the shift in which the police action occurred. Absent exceptional circumstances, within 12 hours of receiving a report on an investigatory stop and detention or search, a supervisor shall review the report and shall document: (a) those investigatory stops and detentions that appear unsupported by reasonable suspicion, (b) those searches that appear to be without legal justification; (c) stops or searches in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or (d) stops or searches that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013, and training on these policies and procedures was completed in February 2014. Implementation continued throughout 2014.

Recommendations Supervisory reports should continue to be reviewed.

Evidentiary Basis Supervisory Reports. Individual interviews with officers and supervisors.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor supervisory reports.

	  

67. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address all violations or deficiencies in investigatory stops or detention or executing a search, including recommending non-disciplinary

corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken, if any, to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each violation or deficiency is noted in the officer’s performance evaluations. The quality and completeness of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor’s own performance evaluations. EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to conduct complete, thorough, and accurate reviews of officers’ investigatory detentions and searches.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD implemented policies and procedures related to investigatory stops, detentions and searches on December 11, 2013 and training on these policies and procedures was completed in February 2014. Implementation continued throughout 2014.

53	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 55 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Supervisory reports should continue to be reviewed.
Policy 215.1 Supervisory Reports. Interviews with officers and supervisors and reviews of EIS. No violations or deficiencies were found

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor supervisory reports.

68. EHPD shall develop a protocol for comprehensive analysis, on at least a quarterly basis, of the

stop and search data collected. This protocol shall be subject to the review of the Joint

Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall identify and incorporate appropriate benchmarks for

comparison.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

A report covering these data was completed for all quarters.

Recommendations Continue to review data and conduct individual interviews as needed.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Quarterly stop and search data report. Additional information provided by EHPD through email to JCE. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE is continuing to monitor quarterly reports. Continue conversation with EHPD

69. On at least a semi-annual basis, EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall issue a

report summarizing the stop and search data collected, the analysis of that data, and the steps taken

to correct problems and build on successes. The report shall be publicly available.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Quarterly stat sheets and semi-annual reports were agreed upon by the Parties.

Recommendations Continue to carefully review and analyze report data.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Reports delivered and reviewed. (quarterly and semi-annual) Conversations with EHPD Compliance Coordinator. Discussions on conference calls with Parties. Questions/Next Steps: Go over quarterly data in detail with Compliance Coordinator; Request additional data/materials as needed in addition.

Although the data is released in a table form that is made public every quarter, the JCE will continue to closely monitor the stop and search data/report and work with EHPD to make sure the report adequately summarizes and analyzes the data. EHPD working to breakdown data further for more accurate analysis.

The EHPD has also been doing semi-annuals of the full report and it is available on their website. EHPD has submitted to the JCE a more detailed

54	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 56 of 151
	  

breakdown of this data. JCE has analyzed this data and has not detected any major issues. JCE will continue to request and monitor this data going forward.

70. EHPD shall ensure that all databases containing individual specific data comply fully with

federal and state privacy standards governing personally identifying information. EHPD shall

develop a process to restrict database access to authorized, identified users who are accessing the

information for a specific and identified purpose.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE confirmed that there are current privacy processes in place and

sufficient database access.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 JCE visit and review. Questions/Next Steps: None

E. First Amendment Right to Observe and Record Officer Conduct

71. EHPD shall ensure that onlookers or bystanders may witness, observe, record, and/or comment

on officer conduct, including stops, detentions, searches, arrests, or uses of force in accordance

with their rights, immunities, and privileges secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the

United States. Officers shall respect the right of civilians to observe, record, and/or verbally

comment on or complain about the performance of police duties occurring in public, and EHPD

shall ensure that officers understand that exercising this right serves important public purposes.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Policy 204.2 was issued in November and December 2013. All Department members were trained on this policy by March 2014 and it was implemented throughout 2014. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 EIS Questions/Next Steps: None

72. Individuals observing stops, detentions, arrests and other incidents shall be permitted to remain

in the proximity of the incident unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to

move an individual, such as: an individual’s presence would jeopardize the safety of the officer,

the suspect, or others in the vicinity; the individual violates the law; or the individual incites others

to violate the law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

55	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 57 of 151
	  

Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

All Department members were trained on all policies in February 2014.
None
Policy 204.2 Training Roster. On-site observation. Questions/Next Steps: None

73. Individuals shall be permitted to record police officer enforcement activities by camera, video recorder, cell phone recorder, or other means, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to deny permission.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

This policy was issued in November 2013 and was fully implemented after training occurred in early 2014. The JCE will work with the USDOJ and EHPD to determine how to best measure compliance of this paragraph in the field. Policy 204.2

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Protocols have been followed as far as the JCE has learned. There have been no complaints from the community or anyone else.

74. Officers shall not threaten, intimidate, or otherwise discourage an individual from remaining in the proximity of or recording police officer enforcement activities.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no reports of officers intimidating or discouraging citizens

from recording them.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 On-site observation. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to review police reports, complaints by citizens.

75. Officers shall not detain, prolong the detention of, or arrest an individual for remaining in the proximity of, recording or verbally commenting on officer conduct directed at the individual or a third party, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis for the detention.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no reports of officers improperly detaining or prolonging the detention of individuals under any circumstances.

Recommendations None

56	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 58 of 151
	  

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 On-site observation. Questions/Next Steps: None

76. Officers shall report to their supervisors whenever they believe they have been recorded by a member of the public.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Supervisors know they need to report this. One case was properly reported and documented in 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 204.2 Incident and Supervisory Report. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor reports and verify compliance of this paragraph with EHPD command staff.

77. Officers shall not seize or otherwise coerce production of recorded sounds or images, without

obtaining a warrant, or order an individual to destroy such recordings. Where an officer has a

reasonable belief that a bystander or witness has captured a recording of critical evidence related to

a felony, the officer may secure such evidence for no more than six hours while a legal subpoena,

search warrant, or other valid order is obtained.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Modified from three hours from the original Settlement Agreement under July 17, 2013 Order Modification, because three hours would not be long enough time to draft search warrant affidavit, review by a supervisor and prosecutor, and submit to judge.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 204.2 Incident and Supervisory Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to monitor reports to ensure it is being done.

F. Stop, Search and Arrest Training
78. EHPD shall provide all officers with comprehensive training on stops, searches and arrests, including the requirements of this Agreement, of no fewer than 8 hours within 180 days of the Effective Date and between 4 – 6 hours on an at least an annual basis thereafter. Such training shall be taught by a competent legal instructor with significant experience litigating, or teaching at an accredited law school, Fourth Amendment issues, and shall:

57	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 59 of 151
	  
a) address Fourth Amendment and related law; EHPD policies, and requirements in this Agreement regarding searches and seizures;
b) address First Amendment and related law in the context of the rights of individuals to verbally dispute, observe, and record officer conduct;
c) address the difference between various police contacts by the scope and level of police intrusion; between probable cause, reasonable suspicion and mere speculation; and voluntary consent from mere acquiescence to police authority;
d) provide guidance on the facts and circumstances that should be considered in initiating, conducting, terminating, and expanding an investigatory stop or detention;
e) provide guidance on proper and improper use of pretextual stops. f) provide guidance on the level of permissible intrusion when conducting searches, such as “pat-downs” or “frisks”; g) provide guidance on the legal requirements for conducting searches, with and without a warrant; h) provide guidance on the nature and scope of searches based on the level of permissible intrusion on an individual’s privacy interests, including searches conducted pursuant to probation or parole release provisions; i) specify the procedures for executing searches, including handling, recording, and taking custody of seized property or evidence; j) provide guidance on effecting an arrest with and without an arrest warrant; and k) provide guidance regarding the nature and scope of searches incident to an arrest.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Training was provided by June 19, 2013, the 180-day mark. Spector Training Network has provided eight hours of stop, search, and arrest training as required in this Settlement Agreement paragraph, including instruction in the Fourth Amendment and related law, as well as First Amendment and related law. This training was provided prior to the completion and approval of the policy manual. Additional training on revised policies was included in the Jan. and Feb. 2014 training. Additional training also took place in Sept. 2015. EHPD has scheduled training meeting the 4-6 hour requirement in 2015. The JCE should be notified of any additional review or new training in this area if policies are revised again. The JCE will work with EHPD to confirm and coordinate site visits to coincide with as many trainings as possible. Training curricula reviewed by JCE and USDOJ. Training Roster. 2014 Training Calendar 2015 Training Calendar Training scheduled in April and June 2015 Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will try to schedule site visits to coincide with this training topic and attend.

58	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 60 of 151
	  

VII. USE OF FORCE

79. EHPD shall develop and implement force policies, training, and review mechanisms that ensure that force by EHPD officers is used in accordance with the rights, privileges, and immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that any unreasonable uses of force are identified and responded to appropriately. EHPD shall ensure that officers use non-force techniques to effect compliance with police orders whenever feasible; use physical force only when objectively reasonable; use physical force in a manner that avoids unnecessary injury to officers and civilians; and de-escalate the physical use of force at the earliest possible moment. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements set out below

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the use of force section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

A. Use of Force Principles

80. EHPD uses of force, regardless of the type of force or weapon used, shall abide by the following requirements:
a) officers shall use advisements, warnings, and verbal persuasion, when possible, before resorting to physical force;
b) physical force shall be de-escalated immediately as resistance decreases; c) supervisors shall determine whether the action or inaction of officers using physical force, or of other EHPD officers on scene, resulted in the need to use physical force; d) officers will use disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a subject, summoning reinforcements, and/or calling in specialized units, when possible, in order to reduce the need for physical force and increase officer and civilian safety; e) officers shall allow individuals time to submit to arrest before physical force is used wherever possible; f) officers shall not use neck holds or a strike to the head with a hard object, except where lethal force is authorized; g) using physical force against persons in handcuffs is prohibited except in emergencies in which a reasonable officer would believe that bodily harm to another person or persons is imminent; h) unholstering and pointing a firearm at an individual constitutes a use of force and shall be limited accordingly; and i) immediately following a use of physical force officers and, upon arrival, a supervisor, shall inspect and observe subjects for injury or complaints of pain and obtain immediately any necessary medical care. This may require an officer to provide emergency medical care until

59	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 61 of 151
	  

professional medical care providers are on-scene.

Compliance Rating

Substantial Compliance

Discussion

JCE reviewed all use of force reports during the period from January 1, 2014

to December 31, 2014. There were 58 incidents where the use of force was

involved. Of those 58 incidents there were 142 separate uses of force, which

consisted of:

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

• 49 Physical Uses of Force (hands on) • 41 Firearm Deployments (no discharge) • 32 Non- Compliant Handcuffing • 14 Taser (ECW) Deployments (no discharge) • 5 Taser (ECW) Discharges • 1 Firearm Discharge
Continue to review all Use of Force Reports Policies 404.2, 405.2 406.2 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Reviewed all use of force reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports on all site visits.

B. General Use of Force Policy

81. EHPD shall develop and implement an overarching agency-wide use of force policy that complies with applicable law and comports with professional police practices. The comprehensive use of force policy shall include all force techniques, technologies, and weapons, both lethal and less-lethal, that are available to EHPD officers. The comprehensive use of force policy shall clearly define and describe each force option and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The general use of force policy will incorporate the use of force principles articulated above and shall specify that the unreasonable use of force will subject officers to discipline, possible criminal prosecution, and/or civil liability.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training took place in January and February 2014 and

covered use of force policies and related issues.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 404.2, 405.2 406.2 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Training Roster.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

82. In addition to a primary agency-wide use of force policy, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and protocols for each authorized weapon, including each of the types of force addressed below. No officer shall carry any weapon or use force that is not authorized by the Department. EHPD use of force policies shall include training and certification requirements that each officer

60	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 62 of 151
	  
must meet before being permitted to carry and use the authorized weapon.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
New Policy Manual training took place in January and February 2014, and covered use of force policies and related issues. None Policies 404.2, 405.2 406.2 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Training Roster. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor and on field observation of weapons carried by officers.

C. Use of Firearms

83. Officers shall not possess or use unauthorized firearms or ammunition, or obtain service ammunition from any source, except through official EHPD channels. All officers’ firearms shall be filled with the capacity number of rounds while on duty.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Although use of force training was completed in 2013, the new policies and revisions required additional training in January and February 2014. EHPD has no reports of officers carrying unauthorized weapons and/or ammunition. None Policies 404.2, 405.2 406.2 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Training Roster. Supervisor Interviews. Supervisor Reports. On-site observation of inspection. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review supervisor reports for evidence of random inspections.

84. Officers shall not fire at or from a moving vehicle, unless use of lethal force is justified by

something other than the threat from the moving vehicle; shall not intentionally place themselves

in the path of or reach inside a moving vehicle; and where possible shall attempt to move out of

the path of a moving vehicle before discharging their weapon.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. All use of force reports were reviewed by the JCE and no incidents of firing at or from a moving vehicle were found.

61	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 63 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Policies 404.2, 405.2 406.2 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Roster on Use of Force training. Use of Force Reports were reviewed by the JCE and no incidents of firing at or from a moving motor vehicle were found. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to monitor reports.

85. Officers shall successfully qualify with each firearm they are authorized to use or carry on-duty

pursuant to Connecticut requirements. Officers who fail to qualify shall immediately relinquish

those firearms on which they failed to qualify. Those officers who still fail to qualify after

remedial training within a reasonable time shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and

including termination of employment.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. All officers have been trained and qualified in the use of Department-issued firearms per State of Connecticut requirements. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 404.2, 405.2 406.2 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Training Roster. Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Through December 2014, there were no officers who failed to qualify. The JCE will continue to monitor.

86. Critical firearm discharges by officers on- or off-duty shall be reported and investigated. Data

and analysis related to critical firearm discharges shall be tracked in EIS and EHPD's Use of Force

Annual Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There was only one firearm discharge (at an aggressive animal) in 2014 and it was properly reported and investigated by IAO.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 404.2, 405.2 406.2 407.2, 408.2 and 302.2 Training Roster. Use of Force Reports. EIS. There was one critical discharge on October 7, 2014 involving a vicious dog attack where the officer’s actions were justified for self-protection. Video of incident made public. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE was notified of the critical discharge and reviewed all evidence. The JCE continues to monitor supervisory reports

62	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 64 of 151
	  

D. Electronic Control Weapons

87. EHPD shall limit the use of ECWs to only those situations in which such force is necessary to protect the officer, the subject, or another party from immediate physical harm.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all.

Recommendations Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.2 and 401.3 Use of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

	  

88. Unless it would present a danger to the officer or others, officers shall issue a verbal warning to the subject that the ECW will be used prior to use. Where feasible, the officer will defer ECW application a reasonable time to allow the subject to comply with the warning.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all according to reports submitted to the JCE.

Recommendations Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.2 and 401.3

Use of Force Reports reviewed. ECW (Taser) Incidents. JCE viewed a video of a ECW (Taser) discharge at an armed suspect. EHPD complied with all requirements of SA.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incident reports to ensure officers are warning subjects and will review body camera video footage of all ECW (Taser) discharges

89. ECWs will not be used where such deployment may cause serious injury or death from

situational hazards, including falling, drowning, losing control of a moving vehicle, or becoming

ignited from the presence of a potentially explosive or flammable material or substance, except

where lethal force would be permitted.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were

63	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 65 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.
Policy 406.2 Use of Force Reports. All ECW (Taser) Incidents reviewed by JCE and no violations of this paragraph were noted. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

90. After one standard ECW cycle (5 seconds), the officer shall reevaluate the situation to determine if subsequent cycles are necessary. Officers shall be trained in the risks of prolonged or repeated ECW exposure, including that exposure to the ECW for longer than 15 seconds (whether due to multiple applications or continuous cycling) may increase the risk of death or serious injury. Officers shall clearly articulate and justify each and every cycle used against a subject in a written Use of Force Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were 19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 406.2 and 401.3 User of Force Reports. All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by JCE and no violations of this paragraph were noted. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

91. ECWs shall not be used in drive stun mode as a pain compliance technique. ECWs shall be

used in drive stun mode only to supplement the probe mode to complete the incapacitation circuit,

or as a countermeasure to gain separation between officers and the subject so that officers can

consider another force option.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were 19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. No incidents of drive stun were noted in reports.

Recommendations Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.2 and 401.3

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

64	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 66 of 151
	  

92. ECWs may not be used against pregnant women, elderly persons, children, visibly frail

persons or persons with a slight build and persons in medical or mental crisis, except where lethal

force would be permitted, or the officer has reasonable cause to believe there is an imminent risk

of serious bodily self-harm and lesser force options are not feasible. Officers shall be trained in

the increased risks ECWs may present to the above listed vulnerable populations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were 19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. There were no violations of policy noted by JCE. Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 406.2 and 401.3 User of Force Reports. All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by JCE and no violations of this paragraph were noted. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

93. ECWs may not be applied to a subject’s head, neck, and genitalia, absent exigent

circumstances. ECWs shall not be used on handcuffed persons, except in emergencies in which a

reasonable officer would believe that serious bodily harm to another person or persons is

imminent.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were 19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. No violations were noted. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all.

Recommendations Review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

Evidentiary Basis

Policies 406.2 and 401.3 User of Force Reports. All ECW (Taser) Incidents were reviewed by the JCE and no violations of this paragraph were noted.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

94. Officers shall receive annual ECW certifications, which should consist of physical

competency; weapon retention; EHPD policy, including any policy changes; technology changes;

and scenario-based training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were

19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014

65	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 67 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

through December 31, 2014. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. All officers passed their ECW certifications. Review all ECW Taser) incidents
Policies 406.2 and 401.3 User of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents. Certification confirmed: EHPD provided JCE with class roster and attendance sheet. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents and continue to ensure all officers are certified.

95. Officers shall be trained in and follow protocols developed by EHPD in conjunction with medical professionals, on their responsibilities following ECW use, including:
(a) the removal of ECW probes, including requiring medical or specially-trained EHPD personnel to remove probes that are embedded in a subject’s skin, except for probes that are embedded in a subject’s head, throat, groin, or other sensitive area, which should be removed by medical personnel only; (b) transporting to a hospital for evaluation all subjects who: have been exposed to prolonged application (more than 15 seconds); are a member of one of the vulnerable populations listed above; had an ECW used against them in circumstances presenting a heightened risk of harm; or were kept in prone restraint after ECW use; and (c) monitoring all subjects who have received ECW application while in police custody.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were 19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. All officers have received training on issues raised by Paragraph 95. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. The JCE will continue to track and confirm that all EHPD officers are trained on the protocol for working with fire department paramedics. Policies 406.2 and 401.3 User of Force Reports. ECW (Taser )Incidents. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents. The JCE will ensure the EHPD continues its dialogue with Fire Department.

96. Officers shall report all ECW discharges, except for training discharges, to their supervisor and

the communications command center as soon as possible.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

66	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 68 of 151
	  

Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were 19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. All discharges are registered by the device, which are periodically inspected by supervisors. Officers and supervisors followed policy for all. Review all ECW (Taser) Incidents.
Policies 406.2 and 401.3 Use of Force Reports. ECW (Taser) Incidents. Supervisor Reports and Interviews checked by JCE. Supervisors periodically inspect ECW’s for unreported discharges. All discharges are registered by the device. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents.

97. EHPD shall develop and implement integrity safeguards on the use of ECWs to ensure

compliance with EHPD policy, including conducting random and directed audits of ECW

deployment data. The audits should compare the downloaded data to the officer’s report on use of

force. Discrepancies within the audit should be addressed and appropriately investigated.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New Policy Manual training occurred in January-February 2014. There were 19 ECW (Taser) deployments (5 discharges) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. There were no discrepancies noted. Review random audits

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policies 406.2 and 401.3 ECW (Taser) Incident Reports. EHPD Technology Review. Supervisory Reports checked by JCE. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all ECW (Taser) incidents and random and directed audits submitted by Supervisors.

98. EHPD shall include the number of ECWs in operation and the number of ECW uses as

elements of the EIS. Analysis of this data shall include a determination of whether ECWs result in

an increase in the use of force and whether officer and subject injuries are affected by the rate of

ECW use. ECW data and analysis shall be included in EHPD's Use of Force Annual Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

ECW (Taser) data and analysis included in EHPD's UOF Annual Report. The first annual report was completed in July 1, 2014 after all new policy training as completed and data collection began.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policies 406.2 and 401.3

67	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 69 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

EHPD UOF Annual Report. All ECW (Taser) Incident Reports. Supervisor Interviews. EIS. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all reports/EIS.

E. Use of Force Reporting Policy and Use of Force Report

99. EHPD shall develop and implement a single, uniform, reporting system pursuant to a Use of

Force Reporting policy and using a single, uniform, Use of Force Report. All officers using or

observing force above un-resisted handcuffing shall, absent exigent circumstances report in

writing, before the end of shift, the use of force in a Use of Force Report. The Use of Force

Report shall include: (a) a detailed account of the incident from the officer’s perspective; (b) the

reason for the initial police presence; (c) a specific description of the acts that led to the use of

force; (d) the level of resistance encountered; and (e) a description of every type of force used.

The use of force reporting policy shall explicitly prohibit the use of “canned” or conclusory

language in all reports documenting use of force.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. Use of Force form is online where officers access it to complete.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force Annual Report. All Use of Force Incident Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

100. Officers who use or observe force and fail to report it, shall be held strictly accountable, and face discipline up to and including termination, regardless of whether the force was reasonable.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. There were no occurrences of failure to report use of force.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Use of Force Incident Reports. Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

101. Each officer in a position to see or hear a use of force shall complete a Use of Force Report, before the end of the shift, documenting the officer’s own actions and observations.
68	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 70 of 151
	  

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
The JCE has seen compliance of officers completing use of force reports on a timely basis. Officers in some cases have completed Use of Force reports where it was not required. None Use of Force Incident Reports. Supervisory Reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

102. Officers' Use of Force Reports (whether primary or supplemental) shall completely and

accurately describe the use of force. Officers shall be held strictly accountable for material

omissions or inaccuracies in the Use of Force Report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. Officers in some cases have completed Use of Force reports where it was not required.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force Incident Reports and Supervisory Reports reviewed by the JCE

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

103. Officers who use or observe force shall notify their supervisors immediately following any

use of force or upon receipt of an allegation of unreasonable or unreported use of force by any

officer.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE will continue to work with EHPD command staff on how to track and ensure that officers notify their supervisors following a use of force incident. Notifications are normally made through the dispatcher and noted by officers on their reports. None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Incident Reports. Supervisory Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE shall continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

104. Use of Force Reports shall be maintained centrally by the IAO for tracking and analysis purposes, as required by this Agreement.
69	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 71 of 151
	  

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014. IAO maintains a central electronic file for Use of Force reports. None IAO Naccarato report and interviews JCE verified that Use of Force Reports were maintained centrally Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to meet with IAO Naccarato every site visit to review/discuss all use of force incidents.

105. At least annually, EHPD shall analyze the year’s force data, including force-related outcome

data, to determine significant trends; identify and correct deficiencies revealed by this analysis;

and document its findings in a public report.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

New Policy Manual training occurred in January and February 2014 and public report issued in January 2015 covering calendar year 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force Incident Reports since policy in effect. The first EHPD 2014 Use of Force Annual Report dated January 20, 2015

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all use of force reports in depth every site visit.

F. Force Reviews by Supervisors

106. Absent exceptional circumstances, the direct supervisor of any officer using force, upon

notification of a use of force or allegation of excessive force, shall respond to the scene of the use

of force. If a supervisor is unable to respond to the scene, the supervisor shall document in the

case file the exigent circumstances preventing his or her presence. The direct supervisor of any

officer using force shall review all uses of force except those incidents involving a serious use of

force, a use of force that appears potentially unjustified or criminal, a use of force by EHPD

personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or a use of force reassigned to the IAO by the Chief of

Police or designee or the IAO. No supervisor who was involved in the incident, including by

participating in or ordering the force being investigated, shall be responsible for the investigation

of the incident.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Review of all Use of Force reports by JCE revealed that a supervisor was

notified and responded as required. The only serious Use of Force reported was the shooting of a dangerous animal. This incident was investigated by the

IA Officer who was notified, responded and investigated it.

Recommendations None

70	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 72 of 151
	  

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2

Review of Supervisor Reports.

Review of all Use of Force Incidents.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

	  

107. The reviewing supervisor shall:

a) respond to the scene, examine the subject of the force for injury, interview the subject for

complaints of pain, and ensure that the subject receives medical attention from an appropriate

medical provider;

b) notify the IAO immediately of the use of force and obtain a use of force tracking number;

c) identify and collect all relevant evidence and shall evaluate that evidence to determine

whether the use of force: (i) was consistent with EHPD policy and/or (ii) raises any policy,

training, tactical or equipment concerns; d) ensure collection of all evidence to establish material facts related to the use of force,

including audio and video recordings, and photographs and other documentation of injuries or the absence of injuries;

e) ensure the canvass for and interview of civilian witnesses. In addition, civilian witnesses should be encouraged to provide and sign a written report in their own words;

f) ensure that all officer witnesses provide a statement regarding the incident. Officers

involved in a use of force incident shall be separated until they are interviewed. Group interviews

shall be prohibited. Supervisors shall ensure that all use of force reports identify all officers who

were involved in the incident or were on the scene when it occurred. Supervisors shall not ask

officers or other witnesses leading questions that improperly suggest justifications for the officers’

conduct, when such questions are contrary to appropriate law enforcement techniques.

Reviewing supervisors shall record all interviews with subjects and civilian witnesses and all

follow-up interviews with officers;

g) review all Use of Force Reports and ensure that all reports include the information required

by this Agreement and EHPD policy; and

h) consider all relevant evidence, including circumstantial, direct, and physical evidence, and

make credibility determinations, if feasible. Supervisors will make all reasonable efforts to resolve

material inconsistencies between the officer, subject, and witness statements, as well as

inconsistencies between the level of force claimed by the officer and the subject’s injuries. EHPD

will train all of its supervisors on the factors to consider when evaluating credibility. Where a

reasonable and trained supervisor would determine that there may have been misconduct, the

supervisor shall immediately notify the IAO to respond to the scene.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

A review of all Use of Force reports revealed that proper investigative

procedures were followed by supervisors and IAO.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2

Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

71	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 73 of 151
	  

108. Each supervisor shall provide a written report to the shift commander by the end of the shift

documenting the supervisor’s preliminary determination of the appropriateness of the use of force,

including whether the force was reasonable and within policy; whether the injuries appear

proportionate to the use of force described; and summaries of subject, witness, and officer

statements.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

End of shift interpreted as end of tour of duty. Supervisors shall provide written report to shift commander before they go home. Use of Force reports have been submitted on a timely basis.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force reports.

109. Each supervisor shall complete and document a use of force supervisory review using a Supervisor’s Force Review Report, within 72 hours of learning of the use of force. This Report shall include:

a) the supervisor’s narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the

evidence that either justifies or fails to justify the officer’s conduct based on the supervisor’s

independent review of the facts and circumstances of the incident;

b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers, and

addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses, the

report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but

circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone

number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should

also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a statement;

c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force;

d) the reviewing supervisor’s evaluation of the basis for the use of force, including a

determination of whether the officer’s actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent

with state and federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an

assessment of the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force

may have been avoided through the use of de-escalation techniques or lesser force options; and

e) documentation of any non-disciplinary corrective action taken.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Proper reporting procedures were followed by supervisors in cases of Use of Force.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Supervisory Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

72	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 74 of 151
	  

Ongoing review of all use of force incidents, including supervisory reports

110. Upon completion of the Supervisor’s Force Review Report, the investigating supervisor shall forward the report to the patrol commander, who shall review the report to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The patrol commander shall order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant evidence that may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the findings.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There has been no need for additional investigation.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

111. Where the findings of the Supervisory Force Review Report are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the patrol commander shall modify the findings after consultation with the reviewing supervisor, and document the reasons for this modification, including the specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification. The patrol commander shall counsel the reviewing supervisor regarding the modification and of any investigative deficiencies that led to it, and order corrective action where appropriate. The patrol commander shall be held accountable for the accuracy and completeness of Use of Force Supervisory Review Reports completed by supervisors under the command of the patrol commander.

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

112. Where a reviewing supervisor repeatedly conducts deficient investigations, the supervisor shall receive the appropriate corrective action, including training, demotion, and/or removal from a supervisory position.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports.

73	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 75 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

113. Whenever a reviewing supervisor or patrol commander finds evidence of apparent criminal

conduct by an officer, he or she shall suspend the investigation immediately and notify the Chief

of Police, the IAO, the State Attorney’s Office, and the State Police. The IAO shall immediately

notify the FBI and USAO, where appropriate.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

114. When the patrol commander finds that the supervisor force review is complete and the findings are supported by the evidence, the force review file shall be forwarded to the Chief of Police and the IAO. The Chief of Police and the IAO shall review the force review to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by the evidence. At the discretion of the Chief of Police, his designee, or the IAO, a use of force review may be assigned or re-assigned to another supervisor, whether within or outside of the shift in which the incident occurred, or may be returned to the patrol commander for further review or analysis. This assignment or re-assignment shall be explained in

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

115. Where, after a force review, a use of force is found to be out of policy, the Chief of Police

shall direct and ensure appropriate discipline, including forwarding the outcome of the force

review to the Board of Police Commissioners for disciplinary action. Where the use of force

indicates policy, training, tactical, or equipment concerns, the Chief of Police shall ensure also that

necessary training is delivered and that policy, tactical or equipment concerns are resolved.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations Review training needs related to any use of force case may be required.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2

74	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 76 of 151
	  

Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Ongoing review of all use of force incidents and any new training associated

with cases.

G. Force Investigations by Internal Affairs

116. EHPD shall establish a single, uniform reporting and investigation/review system for all serious uses of force, including critical firearm discharges.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

System has been established and all personnel trained on it.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

117. EHPD shall ensure that all serious uses of force are investigated fully and fairly by individuals with appropriate expertise, independence and investigative skills to ensure that uses of force that are contrary to law or policy are identified and appropriately resolved; that policy, training, equipment, or tactical deficiencies related to the use of force are identified and corrected; and that investigations of sufficient quality to ensure that officers are held accountable as necessary. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:
a) Provide for an IAO to conduct administrative investigations of serious uses of force, uses of force by
EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or uses of force reassigned to the IAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the IAO.
b) Within 90 days from the Effective Date, EHPD shall recruit, assign, and train a sufficient number of IAOs to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement. Prior to performing IAO duties, IAOs shall receive a minimum of 24 hours of force investigation training; call out and investigative protocols; and proper roles of onscene counterparts such as crime scene technicians, State Attorney’s Office, State Police EHPD detectives, and Joint Compliance Expert; and investigative equipment and techniques. IAOs shall also receive annual in-service training on proper force investigations.
c) EHPD shall create a force investigation procedural manual to ensure consistency with this Agreement. The procedural manual shall include:
i. definitions of all relevant terms; ii. clear statements of the mission and authority of the IAO regarding force investigations; iii. procedures on report writing; iv. procedures for collecting and processing evidence; v. procedures to ensure appropriate separation of criminal and administrative
75	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 77 of 151
	  

investigations in the event of compelled subject officer statements; vi. procedures for consulting with the State Attorney’s Office and the State Police, including
ensuring that administrative investigations are not unnecessarily delayed while a criminal investigation is pending; vii. scene management procedures; and viii. management procedures.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
IAO and all supervisors have been trained in the investigation of Use of Force incidents. None Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

118. Where appropriate to ensure the fact and appearance of impartiality, investigations of serious

uses of force or force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer shall be referred for

investigation to an independent and highly competent entity outside EHPD.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

New FBI SAC Patricia Ferrick has worked with EHPD on reviewing Use of Force incidents. The JCE is satisfied with the quality and thoroughness of use of force investigations. There have been no referrals to the FBI as of the date of this report that the JCE is aware of. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Patti Ferrick, the Special Agent in Charge of the FBI for Connecticut, met with Chief Larrabee on March 5, 2014. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

119. In every incident involving a serious use of force, or any use of force indicating apparent

criminal conduct by an officer, the supervisor shall immediately notify the IAO and obtain a use of

force tracking number.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Supervisory Reports.

76	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 78 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

120. The IAO shall respond to the scene of every incident involving a serious use of force, any use of force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer, any use of force by an officer of a rank higher than sergeant, or as ordered by the Chief of Police or designee.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

There was only one occurrence in 2014 where an officer fired his weapon against a dangerous animal. IAO Naccarato responded and investigated the case. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Interview with IAO and review of IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: Ongoing review of all use of force incidents.

121. The IAO shall immediately notify and consult with the State Attorney’s Office and State

Police regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent criminal conduct by EHPD

personnel, or any use of force in which an officer discharged his firearm, or where an individual

has died while in or proximate to the custody of EHPD. The IAO shall immediately notify and

consult with the FBI and the USAO regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent

criminal conduct by EHPD personnel that violates federal law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The EHPD has established a strong and productive relationship with the FBI. There have been no cases requiring notification to the State Attorney’s Office or FBI.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Interviews with IAO Naccarato and review of IAO reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review all use of force Incidents.

122. If the case may proceed criminally, or where EHPD requests a criminal prosecution, any compelled interview of the subject officers shall be delayed, consistent with Paragraphs 148 and 150 of this Agreement. No other part of the investigation shall be held in abeyance unless specifically authorized by the Chief of Police in consultation with the agency conducting the criminal investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Unaware of any relevant incident to date.

77	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 79 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor Use of Force, Supervisory and IAO reports

123. The IAO shall complete its administrative use of force investigation within 60 days from the use of force. At the conclusion of each use of force investigation, the IAO shall prepare a report on the investigation. The report shall include:

a) a narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the evidence that either justifies or fails to justify the officer’s conduct based on the IAO’s independent review of the facts and circumstances of the incident;
b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers, and addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses, the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a statement;
c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force; d) the IAO’s evaluation of the basis for the use of force, including a determination of whether the officer’s actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent with state and federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have been avoided through the use of de-escalation techniques or lesser force options; e) if a weapon was used, documentation that the officer’s certification and training for the weapon are current; and f) documentation of any disciplinary and/or non-disciplinary corrective action recommended.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

There was an incident that this policy applies to, when an officer fired his weapon against a dangerous animal. IAO responded and investigated the incident in a timely manner. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 407.2 Use of Force Reports. Interviews with IAO Naccarato and review of IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to monitor Use of Force, Supervisory and IAO reports

H. Review by Chief of Police

124. The Chief of Police shall review all force reviews by supervisors and force investigations by the IAO. The Chief of Police shall:

78	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 80 of 151
	  

a) review each force review and investigation within 30 days of receiving the force

review/investigation report to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by a

preponderance of the evidence;

b) order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant evidence that

may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the findings.

Where the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the Chief of Police or

his/her designee shall modify the findings and document the reasons for this modification,

including the specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification;

c) determine whether the force violated EHPD policy. If the force violated EHPD policy, the

Chief of Police of his/her designee shall take appropriate disciplinary action, including referring

the review or investigation report to the Board of Police Commissioners for appropriate

disciplinary action;

d) determine whether the incident raises policy, training, equipment, or tactical concerns, and

refer such incidents to the appropriate commander or supervisor within EHPD to ensure they are

resolved;

e) direct shift supervisors to take and document non-disciplinary corrective action to enable or

encourage an officer to improve his or her performance; and

f) document his or her findings within 45 days of receiving the force review or investigation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Chief Larrabee reviewed Use of Force reports and reported no issues with

same, including where an officer fired his gun against an animal.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 407.2

Use of Force Reports.

Continued interviews with Chief Larrabee.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

Ongoing review continued.

J. Use of Force Training

125. EHPD shall provide all EHPD officers with 4 – 8 hours of use of force training within 365 days of the Effective Date, and 4 – 8 hours of use of force training on at least an annual basis thereafter, including information on developments in applicable law and EHPD policy. EHPD shall coordinate and review all use of force policy and training to ensure quality, consistency, and compliance with the Constitution, Connecticut law, this Agreement and EHPD policy. EHPD’s use of force training shall include the following topics:

a) EHPD’s use of force model, as described in this Agreement; b) proper use of force decision-making; c) use of force reporting requirements; d) the Fourth Amendment and related law; e) role-playing scenarios and interactive exercises that illustrate proper use of force decisionmaking, including training officers on the importance and impact of ethical decision making and peer intervention; f) the proper deployment and use of all intermediate weapons or technologies, including

79	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 81 of 151
	  

canines and ECWs;

g) de-escalation techniques that encourage officers to make arrests without using force, and

instruction that disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a subject, summoning

reinforcements, calling in specialized units, or delaying arrest may be the appropriate response to a

situation, even when the use of force would be legally justified;

h) threat assessment;

i) basic crisis intervention and interacting with people with mental illnesses, including

instruction by mental health practitioners and an emphasis on de-escalation strategies;

j) factors to consider in initiating or continuing a pursuit;

k) appropriate training on conflict management; and

l) supervisors of all ranks, as part of their initial and annual in-service supervisory training,

shall receive additional training in conducting use of force reviews and investigations; strategies

for effectively directing officers to minimize uses of force and to intervene effectively to prevent

or stop unreasonable force; and supporting officers who report unreasonable or unreported force,

or who are retaliated against for using only reasonable force or attempting to prevent unreasonable

force.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Class Roster and schedules of training on ECW (Tasers) and Use of Force

have been provided to the JCE

Recommendations Ongoing review.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Use of Force Reports. Training Rosters and curricula reviewed. Questions/Next Steps: JCE to monitor yearly in-service training completed and attend training throughout 2015.

126. Included in the use of force training set out above. EHPD shall require firearms training for all officers within 365 days of the Effective Date and at least twice yearly thereafter. EHPD firearms training shall:

a) require officers to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for

regulation and other service firearms on a semi-annual basis;

b) require cadets, officers in probationary periods, and officers who return from unarmed status

to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and other service

firearms before such personnel are permitted to carry and use firearms;

c) incorporate professional night training, stress training (e.g., training in using a firearm after

undergoing physical exertion) and proper use of force decision-making training, including

continuous threat assessment techniques, in the annual in-service training program; and

d) ensure that firearm instructors critically observe students and provide corrective

instruction regarding deficient firearm techniques and failure to utilize safe gun handling

procedures at all times.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Class roster and schedules of firearm training for 2014 and 2015 have been

80	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 82 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

provided to the JCE by EHPD Ongoing review Use of Force Reports. Training Rosters, attendance sheets, and curricula reviewed by JCE Questions/Next Steps: JCE to monitor yearly in-service training

VIII. CIVILIAN COMPLAINTS, INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS, AND DISCIPLINE

127. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all allegations of officer misconduct are received and

are fully and fairly investigated; that all investigative findings are supported by a preponderance of

the evidence and documented in writing; and that all officers who commit misconduct are held

accountable pursuant to a disciplinary system that is fair and consistent. To achieve these

outcomes, EHPD and the Town shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the use of force section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the subparagraphs that it introduces. Continue to monitor

Evidentiary Basis IA Office files and reports

Discussion

There was one allegation of officer misconduct reported to the JCE by EHPD. That case was regarding an officer who left his Department-issued weapon unattended while guarding a prisoner. That officer retired from EHPD before the investigation was concluded.

A. Reporting Misconduct

128. EHPD shall require that all officers and employees report apparent misconduct by another

EHPD officer or employee to a supervisor or directly to the IAO for review and investigation.

Where apparent misconduct is reported to a supervisor, the supervisor shall immediately document

and report this information to the IAO. Failure to report or document apparent misconduct or

criminal behavior shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination of employment.

The default discipline for a failure to report criminal behavior shall be termination.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE is not aware of any reports of apparent misconduct by officers or employees of the EHPD reported by other officers or employees of the EHPD

Recommendations Continue talk with IAO Naccarato and Chief Larrabee

Evidentiary Basis Use of Force Reports. IAO Reports. Supervisor Reports.

81	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 83 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

Citizen Complaints. Interviews with Chief Larrabee and IAO Naccarato. Policies 201.3, 208.2, 407.2 Questions/Next Steps: JCE to monitor reports.

B. Complaint Information

129. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, the Town and EHPD shall develop and implement a

program to ensure broad knowledge throughout the East Haven community about how to make

misconduct complaints, and the availability of effective mechanisms for making misconduct

complaints. The requirements below shall be incorporated into this program.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The Civilian Complaint System and the Early Identification System (EIS) has been fully developed and implemented, and is publicizing the complaint process in the East Haven community, on the EHPD website and via a link from the Town website, at Town Hall, at EHPD headquarters and at the Hagaman Memorial Library. Officers are required to carry civilian complaint forms in EHPD vehicles.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Complaint System on Website and EIS reviewed JCE has developed a checklist of data and reports that are reviewed at each site visit

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to review all complaints and review EIS on every site visit.

130. The Town and EHPD shall make complaint forms and informational materials, including brochures and posters, available at appropriate government properties, including EHPD headquarters, EHPD and Town websites, Town Hall, and the public library. Individuals shall be able to submit misconduct complaints through the EHPD and City websites and these websites shall include complaint forms and information regarding how to file misconduct complaints.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

JCE has checked Department’s website, Library, Town Hall and found the forms and Policy Manual readily available. JCE also noticed informational material translated in Spanish at EHPD front desk. The JCE will continue to check to ensure information and forms are easily accessible to the public in a neutral location.

Evidentiary Basis Complaint system on website. The civilian complaint form is also available at the EHPD, at the library, and at East Haven Town Hall. JCE will continue to insure that forms are available and the process is fair and open.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

82	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 84 of 151
	  

131. At the locations listed above, EHPD shall post and maintain a permanent placard describing the external complaint process that includes relevant contact information, such as telephone numbers, email addresses, and Internet sites. EHPD will require all officers to carry complaint forms, containing basic complaint information, in their department vehicles at all times. Officers shall also provide complaint forms and the officer’s name and badge number upon request. If an individual objects to an officer’s conduct, that officer will inform the individual of his or her right to make a complaint and shall provide the complaint form, informational brochure, and the officer’s name and badge number. If the individual indicates that he or she would like to make a complaint, the officer shall immediately inform his or her supervisor.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available at locations and via officers. The JCE will continue to check compliance regarding these materials with specific information at specific locations. Visual inspection in the EHPD lobby. Ride-alongs and interviews with officers and sergeants. Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor

132. Complaint forms and related informational materials shall be made available and posted in English and Spanish.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to monitor that complaint forms and related materials are available and posted in English and Spanish.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to check compliance in East Haven.

Evidentiary Basis Visual inspection of materials and brochures.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor updates/changes to written materials.

C. Complaint Intake, Classification, and Tracking

133. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall revise policy and train all officers and supervisors to ensure that all officers properly handle complaint intake, including how to properly provide complaint materials and information; and the consequences for failing to take complaints; and strategies for turning complaints into positive police-civilian interactions.

Compliance Rating Discussion

Substantial Compliance
There were 14 civilian complaints made in 2014. Of the fourteen civilian complaint forms handed out, seven civilian complaint forms were not returned, six complaints were exonerated, and one complaint was unfounded.

83	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 85 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

There were no sustained civilian complaints for the year. EHPD has instructed officers on its complaint intake procedures. All cruisers are equipped with the forms for officers to hand to citizens wishing to file a complaint. Officers must contact dispatch for a unique control number. The EHPD must underscore the importance of this paragraph and management should continually closely monitor the complaint process. Policy 208.2 and training. Information from Chief. Review of all citizen complaints. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site.

134. The refusal to accept a misconduct complaint, discouraging the filing of a misconduct

complaint, or providing false or misleading information about filing a misconduct complaint, shall

be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were 14 civilian complaints made in 2014. Of the fourteen civilian complaint forms handed out, seven civilian complaint forms were not returned, six complaints were exonerated, and one complaint was unfounded. There were no sustained civilian complaints for the year. No claims of refusal to accept or discouraging a complaint were found during JCE’s review and interview with IAO.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The EHPD must underscore the importance of this paragraph and management should continually closely monitor the complaints process. Policy 208.2 and training. Information from Chief Larrabee and IAO Naccarato Review of all citizen complaints. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site.

135. EHPD shall accept all misconduct complaints, including anonymous and third-party

complaints, for review and investigation. Complaints may be made in writing or verbally, in

person or by mail, telephone (or TDD), facsimile, or electronic mail. Any LEP individual who

wishes to file a complaint about an EHPD officer or employee shall be provided with a complaint

form in Spanish or, for less common languages in East Haven, EHPD will make arrangements to

ensure that the LEP person is able to make a complaint. Such complaints will be investigated in

accordance with this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph. The JCE is not aware of any anonymous, third party, or LEP complaints.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 and training. Interview and information from Lt. Emerman, Language Access Coordinator

84	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 86 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

and Community Liaison Officer including 24-month report. Review of all citizen complaints. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review all citizen complaints on-site and off-site.

136. All officers and employees who receive a misconduct complaint in the field shall immediately

inform a supervisor of the misconduct complaint so that the supervisor can ensure proper intake of

the complaint. All misconduct complaints received outside of EHPD headquarters shall be

forwarded to the IAO before the end of the shift in which it was received.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

IA Officer and EHPD reported to the JCE that all complaints recorded by EHPD were properly routed and procedures were followed. The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph. Policy manual training re this paragraph has been completed.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 and training, IAO files and reports

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

137. EHPD shall ensure that allegations of officer misconduct made during criminal prosecutions or civil lawsuits are identified and investigated as misconduct complaints.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing compliance check. There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations Track all lawsuits against EHPD personnel; Continue to monitor EIS

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 Information from IAO Naccarato. EIS review. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to meet with IAO Naccarato and review EIS.

	  

85	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 87 of 151
	  

138. Within three business days of the receipt of a misconduct complaint, the IAO shall determine whether the complaint will be assigned to the subject officer(s)’ supervisor(s) or retained by the IAO for an administrative investigation. The IAO shall also determine whether the misconduct complaint warrants a referral to the State Attorney’s Office and/or USAO for a criminal investigation. EHPD shall develop and implement a complaint classification protocol that is allegation-based rather than anticipated outcome-based to guide the IAO in determining where a complaint should be assigned. This complaint classification protocol shall ensure that the IAO investigates allegations including:

a) serious misconduct, including but not limited to: criminal misconduct; unreasonable use of force;
b) discriminatory policing; false arrest or planting evidence; untruthfulness/false statements; unlawful search; retaliation; sexual misconduct; domestic violence; and theft;
c) misconduct implicating the conduct of the supervisory or command leadership of the subject
d) officer; and e) any other violations as determined by the Chief of Police.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
The JCE will continue ongoing tracking of all IAO reports and engage in regular communication with EHPD command staff. The IA Officer retained and investigated two complaints during all of 2014. The rest were investigated by officers’ immediate supervisors. Continue to monitor EIS Policy 208.2 Information from IAO Naccarato. IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to meet with IAO Naccarato and review EIS and complaint processes/procedures.

139. The Chief of Police shall not be authorized to personally conduct an investigation of officer

misconduct or violation of policy, nor prevent the conduct of such an investigation. A misconduct

complaint investigation may not be conducted by any officer who used force during the incident;

whose conduct led to the injury of a person; who authorized the conduct that led to the reported

incident or complaint; or who was on the scene of the incident leading to the allegation of

misconduct.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to track review all IAO reports.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 All IAO reports reviewed.

86	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 88 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all IAO reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

140. EHPD shall track, as a separate category of misconduct complaints, allegations of

discriminatory policing, along with characteristics of the complainants. EHPD shall ensure that

complaints of discriminatory policing are captured and tracked appropriately, even if the

complainant does not specifically label the misconduct as such.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Working with EHPD, the JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph. There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2

EIS Report and on-site system review.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review all IAO reports and meet with IAO Naccarato. The JCE review of all complaints on every quarterly site visit.

141. Within 180 days of the Effective date, the IAO shall develop and implement a centralized

numbering and tracking system for all misconduct complaints. Upon the receipt of a complaint,

the IAO shall promptly assign a unique numerical identifier to the complaint, which shall be

provided to the complainant at the time the complaint is made. Where a misconduct complaint is

received in the field, a supervisor shall obtain the unique numerical identifier and provide this

identifier to the complainant.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) has developed a centralized numbering and tracking system that will allow the prompt assignment of a unique numerical identifier to each civilian complaint and insure that complainants are informed of this number at the time the complaint is made. The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The JCE will continue to monitor compliance to ensure that the unique numerical identifier is used for all complaints. EHPD compliance report; Policy 208.2 Review of all IAO complaints and numbering system. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to meet with IAO Naccarato and review all complaints and numbering system.

142. EHPD’s centralized numbering and tracking system shall maintain accurate and reliable data regarding the number, nature, and status of all misconduct complaints, from initial intake to final disposition, including investigation timeliness and notification to the complainant of the interim status and final disposition of the investigation. This system shall be used to determine the status
87	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 89 of 151
	  

of complaints and to confirm that a complaint was received, as well as for periodic assessment of compliance with EHPD policies and procedures and this Agreement, including requirements on the timeliness of administrative investigations.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of IAO reports will continue.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The JCE will continue to monitor compliance to ensure that the unique numerical identifier is used for all complaints. EHPD compliance report; Policy 208.2 Review of all IAO complaints. Review of IAO numbering system. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to meet with IAO Naccarato and review all complaints and numbering system.

143. Where a supervisor receives a misconduct complaint in the field alleging that misconduct has

just occurred, the supervisor shall gather all relevant information and evidence and provide this

information and evidence to the IAO. This information includes the names and contact

information for all complainants and witnesses, the names of all EHPD officers and employees on

the scene at the time of the alleged misconduct, and any available physical evidence such as

voluntarily provided video or audio recordings, or documentation of the existence of such

recordings where the witness chooses not to provide the recording. The supervisor shall take

photographs of apparent injuries or the absence thereof.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO reports and supervisor reports.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 IAO Files, IAO Reports and Supervisor Reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

D. Investigation of Complaints

144. Investigations of officer misconduct shall be as thorough as necessary to reach reliable and complete findings. The misconduct complaint investigator shall interview each complainant in

person, absent exceptional circumstances, and this interview shall be recorded in its entirety, absent specific, documented objection by the complainant. All officers in a position to hear or see

an incident, or any significant event before or after an incident, shall provide a written statement regarding their observations, even to state that they did not see or hear anything.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

88	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 90 of 151
	  

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports. In 11 cases complainants were not interviewed personally because the complainant cancelled the interview several times and then would not return IAO’s calls. The initial conversation was conducted via telephone. In all other cases, complainants were interviewed in person.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to track all IAO incident reports.
Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

145. Where the alleged misconduct is particularly serious or information from an officer or other witness may be necessary to resolve an allegation, the investigator shall conduct an in-person interview of the officer or other witness. Each officer, witness, and complainant shall be interviewed separately. An EHPDAI not involved in the underlying complaint will be used when taking statements or conducting interviews of any LEP complainant or witness.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports. There have been no occurrences.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO incident reports.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

146. All officer and civilian witness statements should be documented in their entirety, including

any statement that the witness saw or heard nothing. All interviews should be recorded. All

recordings shall be stored and maintained in a secure location within IAO.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO incident reports.

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Recordings.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully track and review IAO incident reports and recordings and meet with IAO Naccarato.

89	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 91 of 151
	  

147. EHPD shall require officers to cooperate with administrative investigations, including appearing for an interview when requested by an EHPD investigator and providing all requested documents and evidence. Supervisors shall be notified when an officer under their supervision is summoned as part of an administrative investigation and shall facilitate the officer’s appearance, absent extraordinary and documented circumstances.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing review of all IAO reports.

Recommendations Continue to track all IAO incident reports.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Reports. Meetings with IAO Naccarato.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to carefully tracking and reviewing IAO incident reports and meet with IAO Naccarato.

148. The subject officer shall not be compelled to provide a statement to administrative

investigators where there is a potential criminal investigation or prosecution of the officer, until

consultation with the criminal investigative agency (e.g. State Attorney’s Office or USAO and

approval by the Chief of Police. EHPD, the Town, and the State Attorney’s Office shall develop

and implement protocols to ensure that the criminal and administrative investigations are kept

appropriately separate after a subject officer has provided a compelled statement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This is law.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 Reviewed all IAO reports/cases. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continue to review files and cases to ensure law is being closely followed.

149. Nothing in this Agreement or EHPD policy shall hamper an officer’s obligation to provide a

public safety statement regarding a work related incident or activity. EHPD shall make clear that

all officer statements in incident reports, arrest reports, use of force reports and similar documents,

and statements made in interviews such as those conducted in conjunction with EHPD’s routine

use of force review and investigation process, are part of each officer’s routine professional duties

and are not compelled statements. Where an officer believes that providing a verbal or written

statement will be self-incriminating the officer shall affirmatively state this and shall not be

compelled to provide a statement without prior consultation with the criminal investigative agency

(e.g. State Attorney’s Office or USAO), and approval by the Chief of Police.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

90	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 92 of 151
	  

Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The JCE will track compliance; If issue arises, JCE will investigate further.
None
Policy 208.2 All IAO reports/cases. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will closely monitor.

150. If at any time during complaint intake or investigation the investigator determines that there

may have been criminal conduct on the part of any officer or employee, the investigator shall

immediately notify the Chief of Police and the Joint Compliance Expert, and shall consult with the

State Attorney’s Office, USAO and the local office of the FBI regarding the initiation of a criminal

investigation, as appropriate. Where an allegation is investigated criminally, the IAO shall

continue with the administrative investigation of the allegation, except that it may delay or decline

to conduct an interview of the subject officer(s) or other witnesses until completion of the criminal

investigation unless, after consultation with the investigating agency and the Chief of Police, such

interviews are deemed appropriate

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The IAO reported no incidents of suspected criminal conduct by officers to the JCE. The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Example of compliance following January 2013 New Haven incident; Policy 208.2 IAO reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review IAO files.

151. In each investigation, EHPD shall consider all relevant evidence including circumstantial,

direct and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations based upon that evidence. There will be no automatic preference for an officer’s statement over a non-officer’s statement, nor will

EHPD disregard a witness’ statement merely because the witness has some connection to the complainant or because of any criminal history. During its investigation, EHPD may take into

account the criminal history of a complainant that involves a crime of dishonesty. EHPD may also

take into account the record of any involved officers who have been determined to have been

deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other

investigation. EHPD shall make efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between witness

statements.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Need to ensure this continues even after new IAO Officer; JCE recommends a

succession plan to ensure the requirements of this Paragraph continue even after Settlement Agreement monitoring is completed. EHPD trains all its

supervisors in the investigation of IA complaints and the Chief can assign

91	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 93 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

anyone of those to investigate cases as needed. None
Policy 208.2 All IAO reports. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review IAO case files and meet with IAO.

152. The misconduct investigator shall explicitly identify and recommend one of the following dispositions for each allegation of misconduct in an administrative investigation:

a) “Unfounded,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the
b) alleged misconduct did not occur or did not involve the subject officer; b) “Sustained,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alleged misconduct did occur;
c) “Not Sustained,” where the investigation is unable to determine, by a preponderance of the d) evidence, whether the alleged misconduct occurred; or e) “Exonerated,” where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that
the alleged conduct did occur but did not violate EHPD policies, procedures, or training.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There were 14 complaints filed. Of those, seven (7) civilian complaint forms were given out and the complainant did not follow through with the complaint; six (6) complaints were exonerated and one (1) complaint was unfounded. There were no sustained civilian complaints for the year. The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

None
Policy 208.2 IAO files. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to conduct an ongoing careful review of all IAO cases/files.

153. In addition to determining whether the officer committed the alleged misconduct, administrative investigations shall assess and document whether: (a) the police action was in compliance with training and legal standards; (b) the use of different tactics should or could have been employed to achieve a potentially better outcome; (c) the incident indicates a need for additional training, counseling or other non-disciplinary corrective measures; and (d) the incident suggests that EHPD should revise its policies, strategies, tactics, or training. This information shall be shared with the relevant commander(s) who shall document the commander’s disagreement or agreement with these findings; refer any recommendations to the appropriate individual to implement the recommended change; document the implementation of these recommendations; and return the documentation to the IAO.

92	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 94 of 151
	  

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
The JCE will track compliance on this paragraph. None Policy 208.2 IAO files and documented implementation of recommendations by IAO. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to conduct an ongoing careful review of all IAO cases/files.

154. EHPD shall respond to each complaint within 48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays,

and shall resolve each stage of a complaint investigation in a reasonable time frame. EHPD shall

complete all investigations of civilian complaints within 60 days of receiving the complaint. Upon

a showing of good cause, officers may receive no more than two extensions of up to 30 days each.

Requests for extensions must be in writing and approved by the Chief.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Continual review of all complaints. One hundred percent (100%) have been

resolved within 60 days.

Recommendations Keep in close communication between quarterly site visits with IAO.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 All Citizen Complaints. IAO Files. Questions/Next Steps: None

155. A misconduct investigation shall not be closed simply because the complaint is withdrawn or

the alleged victim is unwilling or unable to provide additional information beyond the initial

complaint, or because the complainant pled guilty or was found guilty of an offense.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Ongoing careful review of all complaints and IAO investigations.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 208.2 IAO Files and Review of all Citizen Complaints. Meetings with IAO Naccarato. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to be in close communication with IAO on-site and offsite.

156. Each misconduct complainant will be kept informed periodically regarding the status of the investigation. The complainant will be notified of the outcome of the investigation, in writing, within ten business days of the completion of the investigation, including regarding whether any disciplinary or non-disciplinary action was taken.

93	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 95 of 151
	  

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Substantial Compliance
Ongoing tracking. None reported since last report. None Policy 208.2 and Review of all citizen complaints. Questions/Next Steps: None

E. Discipline

157. EHPD shall ensure that discipline for sustained allegations of misconduct is based on the

nature of the allegation and defined, consistent, mitigating and aggravating factors, rather than the

identity of the officer or his or her status within EHPD or the broader community. EHPD and the

Town shall develop and implement procedures to ensure that discipline is fair and consistent.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 209.1 – Disciplinary Matrix became effective December 31, 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 209.1 Review of all cases and reports involving discipline for sustained allegations of misconduct. Meetings with Chief and IAO. Questions/Next Steps: None

158. EHPD, in consultation with the Board of Police Commissioners and the Town, shall create a disciplinary matrix that:

a) establishes a presumptive range of discipline for each type of rule violation; b) increases the presumptive discipline based on both an officer’s prior violations of the same or other rules; c) sets out defined mitigating or aggravating factors; d) requires that any departure from the presumptive range of discipline must be justified in writing; e) provides that EHPD shall not take only non-disciplinary corrective action in cases in which the disciplinary matrix calls for the imposition of discipline; and f) provides that EHPD shall consider whether non-disciplinary corrective action also is
appropriate in a case where discipline has been imposed.

Compliance Rating Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

Substantial Compliance
Policy 209.1 – Disciplinary Matrix became effective December 31, 2014. None Policy 209.1

94	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 96 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Review training roster after policy complete and approved.

159. EHPD, the Board of Police Commissioners, and the Town shall establish a unified system for

reviewing sustained findings and assessing the appropriate level of discipline pursuant to EHPD’s

disciplinary matrix to facilitate consistency in the imposition of discipline. All disciplinary

decisions shall be documented, including the rationale behind any decision to deviate from the

level of discipline set out in the disciplinary matrix.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 209.1 – Disciplinary Matrix became effective December 31, 2014.

During the January 2015 site visit, the JCE did not review any disciplinary

decisions as there were no disciplinary decisions made or sustained

complaints against any EHPD officers during all of 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 209.1 specifically states circumstances under which the Board or the Chief are authorized to discipline subjects, i.e.: The Board may suspend for periods exceeding ten days and demote and terminate; the Chief may suspend subjects only up to ten (10) days.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: JCE to continue monitoring disciplinary issues.

160. EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall develop and establish written policies

and procedures to ensure that the Town Attorney provides close guidance to EHPD and the Board

at the disciplinary stage to ensure that EHPD’s and the Board’s disciplinary decisions are as fair

and legally defensible as possible.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Policy 209.1 Disciplinary Matrix has been approved by the Parties as of December 31, 2014.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 209.1 Disciplinary Matrix takes into consideration the employees’ Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA); This policy was reviewed and approved by Town Hall Counsel. The JCE will meet with Town Counsel in April 2015 to discuss this paragraph.

IX. SUPERVISION AND MANAGEMENT
161. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that EHPD supervisors provide the close and effective supervision necessary for officers to improve and grow as police officers; to police actively and effectively, and to identify, correct, and prevent misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD
95	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 97 of 151
	  

shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

N/A
This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the supervision and management section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces. None Review of reports and meetings with supervisors during site visits.

A. Duties of Supervisors

162. EHPD supervisors shall provide, and shall be held accountable for providing, the close and

effective supervision necessary to direct and guide officers. Close and effective supervision

requires that supervisors: (a) respond to the scene of certain arrests; (b) review each arrest report;

(c) respond to the scene of uses of force; (d) investigate each use of force (except those

investigated by the IAO); (e) confirm the accuracy and completeness of officers’ written reports;

(f) respond to each complaint of misconduct; (f) ensure officers are working actively to engage the

community and increase public trust and safety; and (g) provide counseling, redirection, support

to officers as needed, and are held accountable for performing each of these duties.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Although the JCE has witnessed and learned about effective supervision

inside the EHPD during the past 24 months and the Policies and Procedures Manual training was completed, this paragraph will continue to be carefully

monitored.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis On-site observations in the EHPD; Discussions about supervisory response to

use of force and misconduct cases with Chief Larrabee. Review of Supervisory reports.

Review of IAO files.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue discussions with Chief Larrabee and on-site

observations

163. On-duty field supervisors shall be available throughout their shift to respond to the field to

provide supervision to officers under their direct command and, as needed, to provide supervisory

assistance to other shifts.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

96	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 98 of 151
	  

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors. On-site interviews with officers. Supervisory Reports. Arrest Reports (sampling). All Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: None

164. Shift commanders shall closely and effectively supervise the officers under their command.

All EHPD Commanders and supervisors shall ensure that all supervisors and officers under their

command comply with EHPD policy, state and federal law, and the requirements of this

Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The JCE will continue to carefully track compliance on this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors. On-site interviews with officers. Supervisory Reports. Arrest Reports (sampling). All Use of Force Reports. Questions/Next Steps: None

165. EHPD shall hold commanders and supervisors directly accountable for the quality and

effectiveness of their supervision, including whether commanders and supervisors identify and

effectively respond to misconduct, as part of their performance evaluations and through non-

disciplinary corrective action, or through the initiation of formal investigation and the disciplinary

process, as appropriate.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The one year mark for all EHPD members to undergo performance evaluation based on their anniversary date is June 15, 2015. After June 15, 2015, performance evaluation reviews will be addressed on every JCE site-visit.

Evidentiary Basis

Policy 215.1 On-site interviews with supervisors (Lieutenants). On-site interviews with officers. Supervisory Reports. Arrest Reports (sampling). All Use of Force Reports.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will review performance evaluations for next reporting period in June 2015.

97	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 99 of 151
	  

166. Within twelve months of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement an EHPD-

specific system to accurately evaluate officer performance in areas related to integrity, community

policing, and critical police functions on both an ongoing and annual basis that comports with

professional police practices and the requirements of this Agreement. As part of this program,

EHPD shall establish a formalized system documenting annual performance evaluations of each

officer by the officer’s direct supervisor which shall include assessment of:

a) community engagement and communication with the public;

b) use of community-policing and problem-solving strategies;

c) civilian commendations and complaints;

d) disciplinary actions;

e) compliance with policies on usage of sick leave and other leave;

f) compliance with policies on secondary employment;

g) safety (e.g., POST officer safety standards and vehicle operations);

h) training;

i) report-writing; and

j) decision-making skills.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The East Haven Board of Police Commissioners adopted a policy, which became effective on June 15, 2014, that calls for annual performance evaluations on an employee’s anniversary date. Due to the effective date, some performance evaluations will take place through June 15, 2015, which encompasses a full year. Employees have reviewed and signed off on Policy 215.1 via the online Power DMS system as well as received individual and roll call training. Supervisors have also received training on completing the evaluation forms.

Recommendations Revisit in its entirety after one year mark, June 15, 2015.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 215.1 Power DMS System Roster.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will review random evaluations on future site visits and report on progress during the 30 month reporting period.

167. Annual performance evaluations shall be based upon work performance completed during the

specific rating period. The officer’s current direct supervisor shall complete the performance

evaluation, but all supervisory personnel who supervised the officer during the rating period

should provide written input, which shall be considered by the officer’s current supervisor and

incorporated into the performance evaluation.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Training on policy 215.1 was completed in June 2014. Performance evaluations will take place through June 15, 2015, which encompasses a full year. Complete evaluations should be available then for the next reporting period.

98	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 100 of 151
	  

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

None Policy 215.1 Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to review random evaluations.

B. Early Identification System

168. EHPD shall develop, implement and maintain an Early Identification System (“EIS”) to

support the effective supervision and management of EHPD officers and employees, including the

identification of and response to potentially problematic behaviors as early as possible. EHPD will

regularly use EIS data to promote ethical and professional police practices; to manage risk and

liability; and to evaluate the performance of EHPD employees across all ranks, units and shifts.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

At the 180-day mark, the EHPD had begun implementing protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS). At the 365day mark, the EHPD started using/implementing the EIS to automatically draw information from the Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS), the in-house computer reporting system. At the 18-month mark and through the 24-month mark, the EIS is fully operational and continues to track:

• Any firearm discharge or use. • ECW (Taser) deployment or use; two (2) within a 60-day period. • Baton or O/C use; two (2) within a 60-day period • Non-compliant handcuffing • Physical use of force: three (3) within a 30-day period • Pursuits; two (2) within a 30-day period • Officers arrests, including interfering with police, obstructing a police officer, resisting arrest, and assault on a police officer; two (2) within a 60day period • Traffic accidents involving EHPD equipment; three (3) within 12-month period • Civil lawsuits; two (2) within a 12-month period • Excessive absences; eight (8) unscheduled occurrences in any 12-month period

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

The EIS is monitored by the IAO and bi-weekly by the officer’s supervisor. IAO and supervisors initiate and implement any intervention deemed necessary for the officer and document same in writing on the Departmental Review reporting area of LEAS consistent with the EHPD Early Intervention System (EIS) – Policy 207.2 None
Policy 207.2; Supplemental Reports on EIS by EHPD IAO Naccarato; JCE on-site review of EIS. EIS was triggered in October 2014 for a firearm discharged by an officer as

99	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 101 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

he was being attacked by a vicious dog. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues on-site review of EIS and any updates/upgrades.

169. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a

protocol setting out which fields in EIS shall include historical data; deadlines for inputting data

related to current and new information; and the individuals responsible for capturing and inputting

data.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD implemented protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification System (EIS) that captures both historical data and emerging information about all sworn employees, automatically drawing data from the EHPD’s Law Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS). The EIS provides a single repository of all relevant information about each sworn employee, both positive and negative. The system has been designed to identify patterns and will establish thresholds in such areas as civilian complaints, uses of force, firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive absences, and other factors to identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct and in need of supervisory intervention.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 207.2 Onsite observation of completed EIS. Questions/Next Steps The JCE continues to review EIS on-site.

170. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a protocol for using the EIS and information obtained from it. The protocol for using the EIS shall address data storage, data retrieval, reporting, data analysis, pattern identification, identifying officers for intervention, supervisory use, supervisory/departmental intervention, documentation and audit. Among protocol requirements EHPD shall include:
a) comparative data analysis, including peer group, shift and unit analysis, to identify patterns of activity by individual officers and groups of officers;
b) EHPD commander and supervisor review, on a regular basis, but not less than bi-weekly, of EIS reports regarding each officer under the commander or supervisor’s direct command and, at least quarterly, broader, pattern-based reports;
c) EHPD commanders and supervisors to initiate, implement, and assess the effectiveness of interventions for individual officers, supervisors, and shifts, based on assessment of the information contained in the EIS;
d) require an array of intervention options to facilitate an effective response to identified problems. Interventions may take the form of counseling or training, or of other supervised, monitored, and documented action plans and strategies designed to modify activity. All interventions will be documented in writing and entered into the automated system;

100	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 102 of 151
	  

e) specify that the decision to order an intervention for an employee or group using EIS data

shall include peer group analysis, including consideration of the nature of the employee’s

assignment, and not solely on the number or percentages of incidents in any category of

information recorded in the EIS;

f) prompt review by EHPD commanders and supervisors of the EIS system records of all

officers upon transfer to their supervision or command;

g) evaluation of EHPD commanders and supervisors based on their appropriate use of the EIS

to enhance effective and ethical policing and reduce risk; and

h) mechanisms to ensure monitored and secure access to the EIS to ensure the integrity, proper

use, and appropriate confidentiality of the data.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this Settlement Agreement paragraph, the EHPD

implemented protocols for designing the data fields for an Early Identification

System (EIS) that captured both historical data and emerging information

about all sworn employees, automatically drawing data from the EHPD’s Law

Enforcement Administrative System (LEAS). The EIS provided a single

repository of all relevant information about each sworn employee, both

positive and negative. The system has been designed to identify patterns and

will establish thresholds in such areas as civilian complaints, uses of force,

firearms discharges, vehicle pursuits, excessive absences, and other factors to

identify officers who may be at risk for misconduct and in need of

supervisory intervention.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.2

Onsite observation of completed EIS.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps

The JCE continues to review EIS on-site.

171. The EIS shall include all relevant information available to EHPD to assess the conduct of each officer, including:

a) all awards and commendations received by employees; b) investigations of the officer;

c) complaints (including civil lawsuits) against the officer and their dispositions; d) data collected regarding the officer’s stops, search and seizures and uses of force; e) data about officer’s arrests, including arrests for interfering with a police officer, resisting arrest, assault on a police officer, and disorderly conduct; f) training history; g) supervisory reviews; h) all vehicle pursuits and traffic collisions involving EHPD equipment; i) all loss or theft of EHPD property or equipment in the custody of the employee, including currency, firearms, force instruments, and identification cards; and j) any disciplinary or other corrective action taken against the officer.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

101	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 103 of 151
	  

Discussion

The EIS includes all information required by this Settlement Agreement

paragraph. Additional training data is available on another computer.

Recommendations Discuss issues with IAO Naccarato

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE reviewed the EIS system on-site. IAO Naccarato’s 365-day supplemental report and Policy 207.2 IAO Naccarato’s 18-month supplemental report. IAO Naccarato’s 2014 Public Accountability Annual Report On-site review of EIS and training information. Questions/Next Steps: None

172. The EIS shall include appropriate identifying information for each involved officer (i.e., name, badge number, shift and supervisor) and civilian.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.2, Deputy Chief Lennon’s 365-day and 18-month report and IAO Naccarato’s 365-day, 18-month supplemental report and IAO Naccarato’s 2014 Public Accountability Annual Report

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

	  

173. EHPD shall maintain all personally identifiable information about an officer included in the EIS for at least five years following the officer’s separation from the agency. Information necessary for aggregate statistical analysis will be maintained indefinitely in the EIS. On an ongoing basis, EHPD will enter information into the EIS in a timely, accurate, and complete manner, and shall maintain the data in a secure and confidential manner. No individual within EHPD shall have access to individually identifiable information that is maintained only within EIS and is about an officer not within that individual’s direct command, except as necessary for investigative, technological, or auditing purposes.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

A centralized IA/EIS system has been created along with appropriate rules to

control access.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 207.2, Deputy Chief Lennon’s 365-day and 18-month report and IAO Naccarato’s 365-day,18-month supplemental report and IAO Naccarato’s 2014 Public Accountability Annual Report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Monitor EIS/IAO reports.

102	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 104 of 151
	  

174. The EIS, including any computer programs and hardware, will be operational, fully implemented, and be used in accordance with policies and protocols that incorporate the requirements of this Agreement within 365 days of the Effective Date. Prior to full implementation of the new EIS, EHPD will continue to use existing resources to the fullest extent possible, to identify patterns of conduct by employees or groups of officers.

Compliance

Full Compliance

Rating

Discussion

A full and complete EIS system is in place

Recommendations The JCE will continue to review EIS for updates.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

Policy 207.2, Deputy Chief Lennon’s 365-day and 18-month report and IAO Naccarato’s 365-day,18-month supplemental report and IAO Naccarato’s 2014 Public Accountability Annual Report. JCE verified in person. Questions/Next Steps: JCE will continue to monitor

C. Visual and Audio Documentation of Police Activities

175. EHPD shall maintain and operate video cameras and AVL in all police vehicles and shall repair or replace all non-functioning video cameras or AVL units. EHPD shall ensure that that recordings are captured, maintained, and reviewed as appropriate by supervisors, in addition to any review for investigatory or audit purposes, to assess the quality and appropriateness of officer interactions, uses of force, and other police activities.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Since all technology is in-car and tied to computer, if the technology is not operating correctly, the car will not start. Supervisors inspect AVL’s periodically to ensure device is functioning correctly; they also review all videos to ensure they are being utilized as per Department rules. The JCE will continue to track compliance on this paragraph.

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.3

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to monitor

176. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and procedures regarding AVL, in-car recorders, ECWs, and similar equipment that require:
a) activation of in-car cameras for all traffic stops and pursuits until the motor vehicle stop is completed and the stopped vehicle departs, or until the officer's participation in the motor vehicle stop ends;
b) activation of ECW cameras when the ECW is unholstered; c) activation of in-car cameras for incidents in which a prisoner being transported is violent or
resistant; d) supervisors to review AVL, in-car camera recordings, and ECW recordings of all officers
listed in any EHPD report regarding any incident involving injuries to a prisoner or an officer, uses of
103	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 105 of 151
	  

force, vehicle pursuits, or misconduct complaints;

e) supervisors to review recordings regularly and to incorporate the knowledge gained from

this review into their ongoing evaluation and supervision of officers;

f) that EHPD retain and preserve all recordings for at least three years; however if a case is

reasonably anticipated to lead to litigation or remains under investigation or litigation longer

than three years, EHPD shall retain and preserve the recordings for at least three years after the

final disposition of the matter, including appeals; and

g) that an officer notify a supervisor immediately when an event was not recorded.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The policy was completed and went into effect in September 2013. Training

was completed in January and February 2014 and the policy was fully

implemented throughout 2014. The JCE will continue to track compliance on

this paragraph.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.3

Training Roster.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps:

None

177. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a schedule for

testing AVL, in-car recorder, and ECW camera recording equipment to confirm that it is in proper

working order. Officers shall be responsible for ensuring that recording equipment assigned to

them or their car is functioning properly at the beginning and end of each shift and shall report

immediately any improperly functioning equipment.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with this paragraph. If the in-car technology (computer) is not functioning properly, the car will not start and the vehicle would be taken out of service.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Policy 401.3

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

178. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall provide each supervisor with handheld

recording devices and require that supervisors use these devices to record complainant and witness

statements taken as part of use of force or misconduct complaint investigations

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

In compliance with Paragraph 178 of the Settlement Agreement, EHPD supervisors have been equipped with iPhones capable of functioning as recording devices and suitable for recording the statements of witnesses and complainants in the field in use of force cases and other cases.

Recommendations The JCE will continue to monitor the use of the iPhones to record

104	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 106 of 151
	  

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

complainant and witness statements per Policy 401.3 Policy 401.3 On-site observation Questions/Next Steps: The JCE continues to interview supervisors regarding functionality of iPhones.

X. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT

179. EHPD shall create robust community relationships and engage constructively with the community to ensure collaborative problem-solving, ethical and bias-free policing, and increase community confidence in the Department. EHPD shall establish community and problem-oriented policing principles in its policing operations. EHPD shall also engage the public in the reform process through the dissemination of public information on a regular basis. EHPD and the Town shall develop, implement, and maintain systems to ensure comprehensive, effective, and transparent oversight of EHPD that will be sustained after the completion of this Agreement. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.

Compliance

N/A

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

This is an introductory paragraph outlining the goals and objectives of the community engagement and oversight section. The Town of East Haven will reach compliance in this introductory paragraph after compliance is achieved for all the sub-paragraphs that it introduces. None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

180. EHPD shall, in all of its policing operations, adopt the professional police practices of community oriented and problem-solving policing, including robust community partnerships, cooperative strategies, and promoting trust in the community.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

The EHPD has made considerable progress in this area. This paragraph will continue to be monitored by the JCE. The Chief and his leadership team have been visible in the community. The importance of constant community engagement must be underscored. Chief continues to emphasize the importance of formal and informal community engagement throughout all ranks. Group and individual meetings with residents, businesses and faith-based members of the community and EHPD. Community Liaison Officer Report. Onsite observation at community meetings. Meetings with community members. Questions/Next Steps:

105	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 107 of 151
	  

The JCE continues to attend community meetings and interview members of the residential, business and faith-based communities.

181. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall appoint and/or hire a Community Liaison

Officer who is a sworn officer fluent in English and Spanish. The Community Liaison Officer

shall also have formalized training in the nature and scope of federal and state civil rights law as

applied to law enforcement activity

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

Lieutenant David Emerman has been selected as both the language access coordinator and the community liaison officer. Lt. Emerman is bi-lingual and fluently speaks English and Spanish. Due to his educational background and life experiences, Lt. Emerman is very cultured in fostering good community relationships with various community groups, especially the local Latino community. The JCE has discussed the need to have a succession plan in place for this vital role. None

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

THE EHPD 90-day Compliance Report; Meetings with Lt. Emerman; 365day report, 18-month report and 24-month report. Media – newspaper articles. Community Liaison Officer Report. Questions/Next Steps: Ensure that a designated Community Liaison Officer is in place if staffing changes/promotions occur.

182. EHPD shall make the contact information and duty hours of the Community Liaison Officer public on its website and on any EHPD document generally available to the public. The Community Liaison Officer shall be directly available for public contact during normal business hours. The Community Liaison Officer shall have the following duties:

a) The Community Liaison Officer shall arrange for quarterly meetings of East Haven residents designed to permit residents to voice their concerns and ask questions. The meetings shall be conducted as follows:

i. The meeting shall be attended by the Community Liaison Officer, at least one senior

EHPD command staff member, and by officers responsible for patrolling, or supervising patrol, in

both the north and south sections of the Town. All EHPD personnel present shall be identified, in

uniform, and available for responses to questions from residents of East Haven.

ii. Names shall not be required of persons attending the meeting, nor shall any investigative

law enforcement action be taken at or after this meeting that involves attendees in any way, absent

an emergency. EHPD may act based on information explicitly communicated at the meeting for

that

purpose.

iii. EHPD shall notify the public of this meeting and the requirements of this provision,

including anonymity, regarding this meeting in the local press two weeks in advance of the

meeting.

106	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 108 of 151
	  

iv. The meeting location shall alternate between the north and south sections of the Town so that the meeting is held in each section every other month (This needs to be modified to “quarter”)

b) The Community Liaison Officer shall review, on a monthly basis, all complaints submitted to EHPD by members of the community to assess community concerns. For those complaints that do not rise to the level of requiring formal action under EHPD policy, code of conduct, and the terms of this Agreement, the Community Liaison Officer shall notify the complainant of the availability of the Community Liaison Officer to answer the complainant’s questions and respond to any further concerns.

c) The Community Liaison Officer shall meet monthly with the Chief of Police, the Mayor, and

the Board. During these meetings, the Community Liaison Officer shall communicate the

concerns that the Community Liaison Officer has received during the previous month, along with

any other relevant information pertaining to the relationship of EHPD with East Haven residents.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

This paragraph was modified from the original Settlement Agreement to

clarify where meetings should be held in town to make the meetings more

convenient to residents throughout the town. Meetings now take place on

alternating sides of town (north and south)

Recommendations

A second modification was made to and approved by the Court on December 19, 2014 to the requirement of monthly community meetings to quarterly meetings due to low attendance. Develop succession plan for Community Liaison Officer to continue this work. Develop additional strategies for attracting community members to quarterly meetings.

Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

365-day Supplemental Report and JCE on-site meetings and interviews. 18-month Report. 24-month Report. On-site meetings with Lt. Emerman. Questions/Next Steps: Discuss succession plan and strategy to attract more community members with Lt. Emerman.

183. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a strategic recruitment plan that

includes clear goals, objectives, and action steps for attracting high-quality applicants for

employment across all levels of EHPD, sworn and civilian. EHPD’s strategic recruitment plan

shall establish and clearly identify the duties and goals of EHPD’s recruitment efforts. The

strategic recruitment plan shall include specific strategies for attracting a diverse pool of

applicants, including members of groups that have been historically underrepresented in EHPD

and applicants fluent in Spanish.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

107	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 109 of 151
	  

Rating Discussion
Recommendations Evidentiary Basis

In compliance with this paragraph, Chief Brent Larrabee, Attorney Larry Sgrignari, and Lt. Lennon attended the February 20, 2013 meeting of the East Haven Civil Service Commission. After consulting with the Commission members along with Chief Examiner Andrea Liquori, the Commission requested the submission of various recommended changes to their rules by their next meeting in order to comply with the Settlement Agreement. These changes support the Department’s goals of moving towards a highly competent professional law enforcement agency. On March 11, 2013, the Civil Service Commission implemented the rule changes for the recruitment and hiring of both sworn and non-sworn EHPD employees. These changes include a tiered point system to encourage the recruiting of a more professional and well suited applicant. Although the hiring provisions utilized to hire police officers is regulated by the Connecticut General Statutes § 7294 and the regulations of the CT POST Council, the encouragement for recruitment of a diverse applicant pool is driven by exceptional recruiting. The tiered point system grants additional testing points to applicants that provide proof of higher education, veteran’s points for military service, or the ability to fluently speak languages other than English. In addition, the Civil Service Commission has adopted a recruitment plan. Pursuant to the plan, the EHPD actively advertises upcoming recruiting using various media sources. All advertisements are in both English and Spanish. Some of the locations for advertisement are: • All local newspapers (both English and Spanish) • Postings on EHPD and Town website • Multiple and frequent announcements on the EHPD’s Facebook© and Twitter© pages • Online media advertisements on local news sources such as the East Haven Patch The JCE will continue to monitor EHPD recruitment efforts per this paragraph and work with the Parties to develop methods to track this paragraph. The EHPD 90-day Compliance Report and phone conferences with Chief Larrabee. The selection process used is the standard Civil Service testing process that is not regulated or established by the Police Department. This process applies from the hiring of new officers up to the rank of Captain. The process includes a standardized written test, standardized independent (outside personnel from other agencies as the evaluators) oral board assessment, Chief’s interview, and an interview by the Board of Police Commissioners. The following personnel changes were made in 2014: - Deputy Chief of Police – (1) Lieutenant was Promoted to Deputy Chief (Civil Service exempt) - Lieutenant – (2) Sergeants were promoted to Lieutenant - Sergeant – (3) Officers were promoted to Sergeant - Detective – (2) Officers were promoted to Detective - Officer – (9) New Officers Were Hired

108	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 110 of 151
	  

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to review and discuss recruitment plan strategies with EHPD leaders.

184. All EHPD audits and reports related to the implementation of this Agreement shall be made

publicly available via website and at the Police Department, Town Hall, and other public locations,

in English and in Spanish, to the fullest extent permissible under law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Although the major compliance reports marking 60, 90, 280, 270 and 365 days, and 18 and 24 months after the Settlement Agreement Effective Date are posted on the websites, the JCE will continue to review additional materials related to EHPD policies and procedures and may make additional recommendations for adding materials.

Recommendations

The JCE will continue to work with Deputy Chief Lennon to identify additional materials for posting on the public website at the Police Department, Town Hall and Hagaman Public Library. Discussions of a blog, other social media outlets, using interns and other new processes to reach public should be continued.

Evidentiary Basis EHPD Website and JCE on-site observations.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to verify and ensure updated materials are in place.

185. EHPD shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to facilitate and ensure transparency and wide public access to information related to EHPD decision making and activities, as permitted by law.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion Recommendations

The JCE is continuing to work with USDOJ and EHPD to track compliance on this paragraph since all training on the new Policy Manual was completed in February 2014 and continued to be implemented throughout 2014. None

Evidentiary Basis n/a

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Discuss any new ideas regarding transparency and information sharing with EHPD.

XI. AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT
A. Role of the Joint Compliance Expert
186. The Parties shall select a Joint Compliance Expert (“JCE”) to assist the Parties in determining whether the terms of this Agreement have been fully and timely implemented, including reviewing
109	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 111 of 151
	  
and making recommendations on new or revised policies, training curricula, standard operating procedures, plans, protocols, and other operational documents related to this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall also assess and report whether the requirements of this Agreement have been implemented, and whether this implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD.
187. The Joint Compliance Expert shall only have the duties, responsibilities and authority conferred by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not, and is not intended to, replace or assume the role and duties of the Mayor, Board, Chief of Police, or EHPD.
188. In order to assess and report on the Town’s implementation of this Agreement and whether implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct the compliance reviews and audits, outcome assessments, and incident reviews specified below, and such additional audits, reviews, and assessments as the Joint Compliance Expert or the Parties deem appropriate.
B. Compliance Reviews and Audits
189. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct compliance reviews or audits as necessary to determine whether the Town has implemented and continues to comply with the material requirements of this Agreement. Compliance with a material requirement of this Agreement requires that the Town has: (a) incorporated the requirement into policy; (b) trained all relevant personnel as necessary to fulfill their responsibilities pursuant to the requirement; and (c) that the requirement is being carried out in actual practice. Compliance reviews and audits shall contain both qualitative and quantitative elements as necessary for reliability and comprehensiveness.
C. Outcome Assessments
190. In addition to compliance reviews and audits, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct qualitative and quantitative outcome assessments to measure whether the Town’s implementation of this Agreement has promoted effective and constitutional policing. These outcome assessments shall include collection and analysis, both quantitative and qualitative, of the following outcome data
a) Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement measurements, including: i. A reliable, comprehensive, and representative annual survey of members of the East
Haven community regarding their experiences with and perceptions of EHPD and of public safety. This comprehensive community survey shall include measures to ensure input from individuals of each significantly represented demographic category;
ii. Number and variety of community partnerships, with particular consideration of partnerships with youth, and qualitative assessment of the depth and effectiveness of those partnerships.
110	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 112 of 151
	  
b) Stop, Search and Arrest measurements, including: i. The number and rate of arrests for which there is articulated reasonable suspicion for the
stop and probable cause for the arrest, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category;
ii. The number and rate of arrests which are prosecuted, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category; and
iii. The number and rate of searches which result in a finding of contraband, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category.
c) Use of Force measurements including: i. Rate of force used per arrest by EHPD overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e.
street address); type of arrest; and demographic category; ii. Rate of force complaints that are sustained and rate that are not sustained, overall and by
force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); source of complaint (internal or external); type of arrest; and demographic category;
iii. Uses of Force that were found to violate policy overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic category;
iv. Number and rate of Use of Force administrative investigations/reviews in which each finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence; and
v. Number of officers who frequently or repeatedly use force, or have more than one instance of force found to violate policy.
d) Recruitment and Training measurements, including: i. Number of highly-qualified recruit candidates that have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse
communities; ii.Number of candidates with Spanish language fluency; iii. Officer and agency reports of adequacy of training in type and frequency; and iv. Role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by performance trends.
e) Supervision measurements, including: i. Initial identification of officer violations and performance problems by supervisors, and
effective response by supervisors to identified problems.
f) Accountability measurements, including: i. The number of misconduct complaints, with a qualitative assessment of whether any
increase or decrease appears related to access to the complaint process; ii. Rate of sustained, not sustained, exonerated and unfounded misconduct complaints; iii. Number and rate of misconduct complaints in which the finding for each allegation is
supported by a preponderance of the evidence; iv. Number of officers who are subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, or have repeated
instances of sustained misconduct complaints. v. Number and nature of civil suits against EHPD officers for on or off duty police conduct,
regardless of whether the Town or EHPD is a defendant in the litigation, and settlement or penalty amounts;
vi. Arrests/Summons of officers for on or off duty conduct; and
111	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 113 of 151
	  

vii. Criminal prosecutions of officers for on or off duty conduct.

Compliance Rating Discussion

Substantial Compliance
Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement measurements, including: (JCE notes in italics and parentheses below)
i. Survey: A Community Survey was prepared and disseminated, but not enough people responded. The Parties are in the process of implementing focus groups to ask survey questions.
ii. Number and variety of community partnerships, with particular consideration of partnerships with youth, and qualitative assessment of the depth and effectiveness of those partnerships.
(Community groups/partnerships that the EHPD has been a part of have included: The Juvenile Review Board (JRB) which includes members from Police Department, Juvenile Probation, East Haven Public Schools, East Haven Youth Services, and the Juvenile Prosecutor’s Office. Citizen’s Police Academy group started in January 2015. Liquor Commission Meeting with Liquor Vendors (Liquor Stores). The EHPD is updating its IT system to be able to collect and provide more specific data to the JCE. The JCE will work with EHPD on finalizing this data collection and analysis for the 30 month report.)
b) Stop, Search and Arrest measurements, including: i. The number and rate of arrests for which there is articulated
reasonable suspicion for the stop and probable cause for the arrest, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category;
(The EHPD is updating its IT system to be able to collect and provide more specific data to the JCE. The JCE will work with EHPD on finalizing this data collection and analysis for the 30 month report.)
ii. The number and rate of arrests which are prosecuted, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category;
(The EHPD is updating its IT system to be able to collect and provide more specific data to the JCE. The JCE will work with EHPD on finalizing this data collection and analysis for the 30 month report.)
iii. The number and rate of searches which result in a finding of contraband, overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category.
(The EHPD is updating its IT system to be able to collect and provide more specific data to the JCE. The JCE will work with EHPD on finalizing this data collection and analysis for the 30 month report.)

112	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 114 of 151
	  
c) Use of Force measurements including: i. Rate of force used per arrest by EHPD overall and by force type;
geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic category;
(The EHPD is updating its IT system to be able to collect and provide more specific data to the JCE. The JCE will work with EHPD on finalizing this data collection and analysis for the 30 month report.)
ii. Rate of force complaints that are sustained and rate that are not sustained, overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); source of complaint (internal or external); type of arrest; and demographic category;
(All uses of force have been determined to be justified during this time period. None were found to violate policy. No officers have been found to use force more frequently than others and no policy violations have taken place. In addition, the EHPD is updating its IT system to be able to collect and provide more specific data to the JCE. The JCE will work with EHPD on finalizing this data collection and analysis for the 30 month report.)
iii. Uses of Force that were found to violate policy overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic category;
(All uses of force have been determined to be justified during this time period. None were found to violate policy. No officers have been found to use force more frequently than others and no policy violations have taken place. In addition, the EHPD is updating its IT system to be able to collect and provide more specific data to the JCE. The JCE will work with EHPD on finalizing this data collection and analysis for the 30 month report.)
iv. Number and rate of Use of Force administrative investigations/reviews in which each finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;
(All uses of force have been determined to be justified during this time period. None were found to violate policy. No officers have been found to use force more frequently than others and no policy violations have taken place. In addition, the EHPD is updating its IT system to be able to collect and provide more specific data to the JCE. The JCE will work with EHPD on finalizing this data collection and analysis for the 30 month report.)
and v. Number of officers who frequently or repeatedly use force, or have
more than one instance of force found to violate policy.
113	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 115 of 151
	  
(All uses of force have been determined to be justified during this time period. None were found to violate policy. No officers have been found to use force more frequently than others and no policy violations have taken place. In addition, the EHPD is updating its IT system to be able to collect and provide more specific data to the JCE. The JCE will work with EHPD on finalizing this data collection and analysis for the 30 month report.)
d) Recruitment and Training measurements, including: i. Number of highly-qualified recruit candidates that have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse
communities;
(From the last recruitment, 151 people applied. Of those, 76 passed the written test, oral board, and physical fitness exam. Of those 76 that passed, 14 requested the additional points for proficiency in a foreign language. Of the 14 who took the test for proficiency, 11 scored at the proficiency level established by the Civil Service Commission to receive the extra points. Regarding adequacy of training, EHPD has utilized instructors and lesson plans pre-approved by the Department of Justice as required by the S.A. The JCE/DOJ are provided with lesson plans and/or curricula consistent with the S.A)
ii.Number of candidates with Spanish language fluency;
(14 Candidates requested the additional points for proficiency in a foreign language. Of the 14 who took the test for proficiency, 11 scored at the proficiency level established by the Civil Service Commission to receive the extra points).
iii. Officer and agency reports of adequacy of training in type and frequency;
(EHPD has utilized instructors and lesson plans pre-approved by the Department of Justice as required by the S.A. The JCE/DOJ are provided with lesson plans and/or curricula consistent with the S.A)
and iv. Role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by
performance trends.
(As for the role of lack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by performance trends, EHPD has reported to the JCE that they have not observed any issues that are believed are caused by or resulted from a lack of training.)
114	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 116 of 151
	  
e) Supervision measurements, including: i. Initial identification of officer violations and performance problems
by supervisors, and effective response by supervisors to identified problems.
(Supervisors have observed certain situations such as minor unintentional policy violations (including but not limited to): Mobil Video Recorder (MVR) wireless microphone not activated on a motor vehicle stop; minor officer tactics due to being new inexperienced officers; failure to fully activate audible emergency signal device (when required by policy). These issues were dealt with by the line supervisors as non-disciplinary training issues)
f) Accountability measurements, including: i. The number of misconduct complaints, with a qualitative assessment
of whether any increase or decrease appears related to access to the complaint process;
(This is the first full year of data on IA complaints. Therefore, the JCE will analyze 2014 data against data for 2015 for the next reporting period in June 2015.)
ii. Rate of sustained, not sustained, exonerated and unfounded misconduct complaints;
(Only 7 Complaints were filed and investigated, 6 of which were exonerated and one was unfounded for all of 2014)
iii. Number and rate of misconduct complaints in which the finding for each allegation is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;
(Only 7 Complaints were filed and investigated, 6 of which were exonerated and one was unfounded)
iv. Number of officers who are subjects of repeated misconduct complaints, or have repeated instances of sustained misconduct complaints.
(No officers were found to be subjects of repeated misconduct, whether sustained or otherwise)
v. Number and nature of civil suits against EHPD officers for on or off duty police conduct, regardless of whether the Town or EHPD is a defendant in the litigation, and settlement or penalty amounts;
(No civil suits have been filed against EHPD or its officers or the town for this reporting period.)
vi. Arrests/Summons of officers for on or off duty conduct;
115	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 117 of 151
	  

(No officers were arrested for any incident in EHPD this period)
and vii. Criminal prosecutions of officers for on or off duty conduct.

(There have been no criminal prosecution of EHPD officers this reporting
period.
Supervisors have observed certain situations such as minor unintentional policy violations (including but not limited to): Mobil Video Recorder (MVR) wireless microphone not activated on a motor vehicle stop; minor officer tactics due to being new inexperienced officers; failure to fully activate audible emergency signal device (when required by policy). These issues were dealt with by the line supervisors as non-disciplinary training issues. Other than the internal affairs investigations previously discussed, there have been no serious violations of policies. . In addition, the EHPD is updating its IT system to be able to collect and provide more specific data to the JCE. The JCE will work with EHPD on finalizing this data collection and analysis for the 30 month report.)

Recommendations Evidentiary Basis
SITE VISIT

Continue to work with the JCE on collecting and analyzing these data. Data provided in EHPD 24 month report. Additional data collected from phone conference and email communication. Questions/Next Steps: The JCE will continue to work with EHPD on gathering this information and analyzing it to develop and report outcomes for 30 month report.

191. In conducting these outcome assessments the Joint Compliance Expert may use any relevant data collected and maintained by EHPD, provided that it has determined that this data is reasonably reliable and complete. DISCUSS To conduct the annual community survey, the Joint Compliance Expert shall retain an individual or entity which shall:

a) develop a baseline of measures on public satisfaction with policing, attitudes among police personnel, and the quality of police-citizen encounters;
b) conduct baseline surveys of Town residents, police personnel, and detained arrestees, and follow-up surveys on at least an annual basis;
c) ensure that the resident surveys are designed to capture each demographic category; and d) conduct the survey in English and Spanish.

Compliance

Partial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Researcher Dr. John DeCarlo, formerly of New Haven University and now of John Jay College, was retained to develop, analyze and report back to the JCE, USDOJ and EHPD on a community survey, EHPD survey and detainee survey. Dr. DeCarlo completed setting up the surveys, but not enough department members or community members took the survey. Similarly,

116	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 118 of 151
	  

collecting accurate information from detainees about their treatment while being detained became challenging.

The Parties held a separate meeting to discuss new options and agreed to hold community focus groups with focus group questions and facilitation led by a qualified researcher. Professors from Yale University located in New Haven, which is next to East Haven, have posted this work for graduate student interest and the JCE is waiting for a response. It is anticipated that this work will be completed in spring and summer 2015.

The EHPD Department survey was completed and has been analyzed by Dr. Williamson from Trinity College in Hartford, CT. The results are discussed in the opening paragraphs of this report. The full report is provided below as Attachment A.

Recommendations
Evidentiary Basis SITE VISIT

The JCE has developed a plan to disseminate and collect detainee surveys. The JCE anticipates receiving a sample of a similar survey that is in the process of being completed in another city that can be adapted for EHPD during the next few months. Work with Lt. Emerman and researchers to set up focus group sessions; The JCE will develop focus group questions from the original survey. EHPD Community Survey, EHPD Survey Questions/Next Steps: None

D. Outcome Assessment Plan and Review Methodology

192. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:
a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be assessed for compliance, indicating which requirements will be assessed together;
b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment occurring within 18 months of the Effective Date; and c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement of this Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each requirement at least annually thereafter.
193. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:
a) clearly delineate the requirements of the Agreement to be assessed for compliance, indicating which requirements will be assessed together;
117	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 119 of 151
	  

b) set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment occurring within 18 months of the Effective Date; and c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement of this Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each requirement at least annually thereafter.

194. At least 90 days prior to the initiation of any outcome measure assessment or compliance review or audit, the JCE shall submit a proposed methodology for the assessment, review or audit, to the Parties. The Parties shall submit any comments or concerns regarding the proposed methodology to the Joint Compliance Expert within 45 days of the proposed date of the assessment, review or audit. The Joint Compliance Expert shall modify the methodology as necessary to address any concerns or shall inform the Parties in writing of the reasons it is not modifying its methodology as proposed.
E. Review of Use of Force and Misconduct Investigations

195. EHPD shall provide each completed investigation of a serious use of force or use of force that

is the subject of a misconduct investigation, and each misconduct complaint report, to the Joint

Compliance Expert. The Joint Compliance Expert shall review each use of force investigation or

review and each misconduct investigation and recommend for further investigation any use of

force or misconduct complaint investigations the Joint Compliance Expert determines to be

incomplete or for which the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

There have been no serious uses of force that the JCE is aware of during this reporting period.

Recommendations None.

Evidentiary Basis Chief has provided regular briefings on case to date.

F. Joint Compliance Expert Recommendations and Technical Assistance

196. The Joint Compliance Expert may make recommendations to the Parties regarding measures necessary to ensure timely, full and effective implementation of this Agreement and its underlying objectives. Such recommendations may include a recommendation to change, modify, or amend a provision of the Agreement, a recommendation for additional training in any area related to this Agreement, or a recommendation to seek technical assistance. In addition to such recommendations, the Joint Compliance Expert may also, at the request of DOJ or the Town and based on the Joint Compliance Expert’s reviews, provide technical assistance consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert’s responsibilities under this Agreement.
G. Comprehensive Re-Assessment

118	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 120 of 151
	  

197. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct a comprehensive assessment two years after the Effective Date to determine whether and to what extent the outcomes intended by this Agreement have been achieved, and any modifications to the Agreement that are necessary for continued achievement in light of changed circumstances or unanticipated impact (or lack of impact) of the requirement. This assessment shall address also areas of greatest achievement and the requirements that appear to have contributed to this success, as well as areas of greatest concern, including strategies for accelerating full and effective compliance. Based upon this comprehensive assessment, the Joint Compliance Expert shall recommend modifications to the Agreement necessary to achieve and sustain intended outcomes. Where the Parties agree with the Joint Compliance Expert’s recommendations, the Parties shall stipulate to modify the Agreement accordingly. This provision in no way diminishes the Parties’ ability to stipulate to modifications to this Agreement as set out below.
H. Joint Compliance Expert Reports

198. The Joint Compliance Expert shall file with the Court semi-annual written, public reports covering the reporting period that shall include:

a) a description of the work conducted by the Joint Compliance Expert during the reporting

period;

b) a listing of each Agreement requirement indicating which requirements have been: (i)

incorporated into implemented policy; (ii) the subject of sufficient training for all relevant EHPD

officers and employees; (iii) reviewed or audited by the Joint Compliance Expert to determine

whether they have been fully

implemented in actual practice, including the date of the

review or audit; and (iv) found by the Joint Compliance Expert to have been fully implemented in

practice;

c) the methodology and specific findings for each audit or review conducted, redacted as

necessary for privacy concerns. An unredacted version shall be filed under seal with the Court and

provided to the Parties. The underlying data for each audit or review shall not be publicly

available but shall be retained by the Joint Compliance Expert and provided to either or both

Parties upon request;

d) for any requirements that were reviewed or audited and found not to have been fully

implemented in practice, the Joint Compliance Expert’s recommendations regarding necessary

steps to achieve compliance;

e) the methodology and specific findings for each outcome assessment conducted;

f) qualitative assessment of EHPD’s progress in achieving the desired outcomes for each area

covered by the Agreement--noting issues of concern or particular achievement; and

g) a projection of the work to be completed during the upcoming reporting period and any

anticipated challenges or concerns related to implementation of the Agreement.

199. The Joint Compliance Expert shall provide a copy of semi-annual reports to the Parties in

draft form at least ten business days prior to Court filing and public release of the reports to allow

the Parties to informally comment on the reports. The Joint Compliance Expert shall consider the

Parties’ responses and make appropriate changes, if any, before issuing the report.

119	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 121 of 151
	  
200. The Joint Compliance Expert shall maintain regular contact with the Parties in order to ensure effective and timely communication regarding the status of the Town’s implementation of and compliance with this Agreement.
I. Public Statements, Testimony, Records, and Conflicts of Interest
201. Except as required or authorized by the terms of this Agreement or the Parties acting together: neither the Joint Compliance Expert, including, for the purposes of this paragraph, any agent, employee, or independent contractor thereof, shall make any public statements or issue findings with regard to any act or omission of the Town or its agents, representatives, or employees; or disclose non-public information provided to the Joint Compliance Expert pursuant to the Agreement. Any press statement made by the Joint Compliance Expert regarding its employment or assessment activities under this Agreement shall first be approved by the Parties.
202. The Joint Compliance Expert may testify as to observations, findings, and recommendations before the Court with jurisdiction over this matter, but the Joint Compliance Expert shall not testify in any other litigation or proceeding with regard to any act or omission of the Town or any of its agents, representatives, or employees related to this Agreement or regarding any matter or subject that the Joint Compliance Expert may have received knowledge of as a result of his or her performance under this Agreement. This paragraph does not apply to any proceeding before a court related to performance of contracts or subcontracts for monitoring this Agreement.
	  
203. Unless such conflict is waived by the Parties, the Joint Compliance Expert shall not accept employment or provide consulting services that would present a conflict of interest with the Joint Compliance Expert’s responsibilities under this Agreement, including being retained (on a paid or unpaid basis) by any current or future litigant or claimant, or such litigant’s or claimant’s attorney, in connection with a claim or suit against the Town or its departments, officers, agents or employees.
204. The Joint Compliance Expert is not a state or local agency, or an agent thereof, and accordingly the records maintained by the Joint Compliance Expert shall not be deemed public records subject to public inspection.
205. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not be liable for any claim, lawsuit, or demand arising out of the Joint Compliance Expert’s performance pursuant to this Agreement.
J. EHPD Compliance Coordinator
206. Within 30 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall identify a compliance coordinator to serve as the single point of contact to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. The Compliance Coordinator shall coordinate the Town’s compliance and implementation activities; facilitate the
120	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 122 of 151
	  

provision of data, documents, materials, and access to the Town’s personnel to the Joint

Compliance Expert and DOJ, as needed; ensure that all data, documents and records are

maintained as provided in this Agreement; and assist in assigning implementation and compliance

related tasks to EHPD personnel, as directed by the Chief of Police or his/her designee.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

Deputy Chief Lennon and Lt. Emerman have been and continue to be exceptionally hard working and effective Compliance Coordinators for the EHPD. Lt. Emerman was Acting Compliance Coordinator from October 5, 2014 to December 19, 2014 when Deputy Chief Lennon attended the FBI National Academy.

Recommendations Deputy Chief Lennon and Lt. Emerman should be commended for their efforts.
Evidentiary Basis This compliance report.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: Continue to ensure a designated Compliance Coordinator is in place if staffing changes/promotions occur.

K. Implementation Assessment and Report

207. The Town shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to: (a) document implementation of and compliance with this Agreement, including data and records necessary for the Joint Compliance Expert to conduct reliable outcome assessments, compliance reviews, and audits; and (b) perform ongoing quality assurance in each of the areas addressed by this Agreement.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

The Town has collected, maintained and continues to share needed records

and data with the JCE and USDOJ.

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis Data provided to JCE and USDOJ.

SITE VISIT

Questions/Next Steps: None

208. Beginning with the Joint Compliance Expert’s first semi-annual report, the Town shall provide to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ a status report no later than 30 days before the Joint Compliance Expert’s semi-annual report is due. The Town’s report shall delineate the steps taken by the Town during the reporting period to implement this Agreement; the Town’s assessment of the status of its progress; plans to correct any problems; and response to any concerns raised in the Joint Compliance Expert’s previous semi-annual report.

L. Access and Confidentiality

121	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 123 of 151
	  
209. To facilitate its work, the Joint Compliance Expert may conduct on-site visits and assessments without prior notice to the Town. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all necessary individuals, facilities, and documents, which shall include access to Agreement related trainings, meetings, and reviews such as critical incident reviews; use of force reviews, and disciplinary hearings. EHPD shall notify the Joint Compliance Expert as soon as practicable, and in any case within twelve hours, of any critical firearms discharge, arrest of any officer, or any other potentially high-profile serious incident.
210. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have timely, full and direct access to all of the Town’s staff, employees, and facilities that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall cooperate with the Town to access people and facilities in a reasonable manner that, consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert's responsibilities, minimizes interference with daily operations.
211. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have full and direct access to all of the Town’s documents and data that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement, except any documents or data protected by the attorney-client privilege. Should the Town decline to provide the Joint Compliance Expert access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.
212. To the extent necessary to ensure proper implementation of this Agreement, DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall have full and direct access to all of the Town’s staff, employees, facilities, documents and data. DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall cooperate with the Town to access involved personnel, facilities, and documents in a reasonable manner that, consistent with DOJ’s responsibilities to enforce this Agreement, minimizes interference with daily operations. Should the Town decline to provide DOJ with access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.
213. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall provide the Town with reasonable notice of a request for copies of documents. Upon such request, the Town shall provide, in a timely manner, copies (electronic, where readily available) of the requested documents to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ.
214. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all records and information relating to criminal investigations of EHPD officers as permissible by law. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all documents in criminal investigation files that have been closed by EHPD. The Joint Compliance Expert shall also have reasonable access to all arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications whether or not contained in open criminal investigation files. Where
122	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 124 of 151
	  

practicable, arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications shall be obtained from sources other than open criminal investigation files.

Compliance

Substantial Compliance

Rating

Discussion

None

Recommendations None

Evidentiary Basis The JCE had access to and was properly informed of all status updates for the January 2013 incident.

M.Selection and Compensation of the Joint Compliance Expert

215. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall maintain all non-public information provided by the Town in a confidential manner. This Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any privilege or right the Town may assert, including those recognized at common law or created by statute, rule or regulation, against any other person or entity with respect to the disclosure of any document or communication.

216. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, the Town and DOJ shall together select an independent Joint Compliance Expert, acceptable to both, which shall assess and report on EHPD’s implementation of this Agreement. The selection of the Joint Compliance Expert shall be pursuant to a method jointly established by the Town and DOJ, and will not be governed by any formal or legal procurement requirements. The Joint Compliance Expert and his/her team shall be individuals of the highest ethics.

217. If the Parties are unable to agree on a Joint Compliance Expert or an alternative method of selection within 60 days of the Effective Date, they reserve the right to seek the Court’s assistance by asking the Court to select a Joint Compliance Expert. In that case, each Party shall submit the names of three candidates, or three groups of candidates, along with resumes and cost proposals, to the Court, and the Court shall select a Joint Compliance Expert from among the qualified candidates/candidate groups.
	  
218. The Joint Compliance Expert shall be appointed for a period of four years from the Effective Date and shall have its appointment extended automatically should the Town not demonstrate full and effective compliance at the end of this four-year period.

219. The Town shall bear all reasonable fees and costs of the Joint Compliance Expert. In selecting the Joint Compliance Expert, DOJ and the Town recognize the importance of ensuring that the fees and costs borne by the Town are reasonable, and accordingly fees and costs shall be one factor considered in selecting the Joint Compliance Expert. In the event that any dispute arises regarding the reasonableness or payment of the Joint Compliance Expert’s fees and costs, the Town, DOJ, and the Joint Compliance Expert shall attempt to resolve such dispute cooperatively prior to seeking the assistance of the Court to resolve such dispute.
	  

123	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 125 of 151
	  
220. The Town shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert with permanent office space and reasonable office support such as office furniture, telephones, access to internet, secure document storage, photocopying and scanners.
221. Should any of the Parties to this Agreement determine that the Joint Compliance Expert’s individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors have exceeded their authority or failed to satisfactorily perform the duties required by this Agreement, the Party shall meet and confer to resolve outstanding concerns. If the Parties are unable to agree on a solution, either Party may petition the Court for such relief as the Court deems appropriate, including replacement of the Joint Compliance Expert, and/or any individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors.
N. Court Jurisdiction, Modification of the Agreement, and Enforcement
222. This Agreement shall become effective upon entry by the Court.
	  
223. The Parties agree jointly to file this Agreement with the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. The joint motion shall request that the Court enter the Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), conditionally dismiss the complaint in this action, and retain jurisdiction to enforce the Agreement. Should the United States determine that the Town has failed to comply with the Agreement, the case will be reinstated for the purposes of enforcing the Agreement only. The Town may not challenge liability or the necessity for Agreement terms.
224. To ensure that the requirements of this Agreement are properly and timely implemented, the Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for enforcement purposes until such time as the Town has achieved full and effective compliance with this Agreement and maintained such compliance for no less than two years. If the Town believes it has reached full compliance and moves the Court to terminate this Agreement, the Town shall bear the burden of demonstrating full and effective compliance with this Agreement.
225. The United States acknowledges the good faith of the Town in trying to address the remedial measures that are needed to promote police integrity and ensure constitutional policing in East Haven. The United States, however, reserves its right to seek enforcement of the provisions of this Agreement if it determines that the Town has failed to fully comply with any provision of this Agreement. Prior to initiating any enforcement proceedings in Court for an alleged failure to comply with any provision of this Agreement, the United States will notify the Town in writing of the facts supporting its belief that the Town is not in compliance. The Town will investigate the allegations and respond in writing within 30 days. If the dispute remains unresolved, the Parties will conduct negotiations to resolve the issue(s). If the Parties are unable to resolve the issue(s) satisfactorily within 30 days of the Town’s written response, the United States may move the Court for any relief permitted by law or equity and demonstrate that the relief is necessary to implement this Agreement.
124	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 126 of 151
	  
226. Failure by any Party to enforce this entire Agreement or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other provision herein shall not be construed as a waiver, including of its right to enforce other deadlines and provisions of this Agreement.
227. Any modification of this Agreement shall be executed in writing by the Parties, shall be filed with the Court, and shall not be effective until the Court enters the modified agreement and retains jurisdiction to enforce it.
228. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as an acknowledgement, an admission, or evidence of liability of the Town under the Constitution of the United States, federal or state law, and this Agreement may not be used as evidence of liability in this or any other civil or criminal proceeding.
229. The Parties agree to defend the provisions of this Agreement. The Parties shall notify each other of any court or administrative challenge to this Agreement. In the event any provision of this Agreement is challenged in any Connecticut court, removal to a federal court shall be sought by the Parties.
230. The Town agrees to promptly notify DOJ if any term of this Agreement becomes subject to a collective bargaining dispute and to consult with DOJ in a timely manner regarding the position the Town takes in any collective bargaining dispute connected with this Agreement.
231. The Town shall require compliance with this Agreement by its respective officers, employees, agencies, assigns, or successors.
O. Termination of the Agreement
232. The Parties anticipate that the Town will have reached full and effective compliance with this Agreement within four years of its Effective Date. The Parties may agree to jointly ask the Court to terminate this Agreement prior to or after this date, provided that the Town has been in full and effective compliance with this Agreement for two consecutive years. “Full and Effective Compliance” shall be defined to require both sustained compliance with all material requirements of this Agreement and sustained and continuing improvement in constitutional policing and public trust, as demonstrated pursuant to the Agreement's outcome measures.
	  
233. If after four years from the Effective Date the Parties disagree whether the Town has been in full and effective compliance for two years, either Party may seek to terminate this Agreement. In the case of termination sought by the Town, prior to filing a motion to terminate, the Town agrees to notify DOJ in writing when the Town has determined that it is in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and that such compliance has been maintained for no less than two years. Thereafter, the Parties shall promptly confer as to the status of compliance. If, after a reasonable period of consultation and the completion of any audit or evaluation that DOJ and/or the Joint Compliance Expert may wish to undertake, including on-site observations, document review, or interviews with the Town’s personnel, the Parties cannot resolve any compliance issues, the Town
125	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 127 of 151
	  
may file a motion to terminate this Agreement. If the Town moves for termination of this Agreement, DOJ will have 60 days after the receipt of the Town’s motion to object to the motion. If DOJ does not object, the Court may grant the Town’s motion. If DOJ does make an objection, the Court shall hold a hearing on the motion and the burden shall be on the Town to demonstrate that they are in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and have maintained such compliance for at least two consecutive years.
126	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 128 of 151
	  
ATTACHMENT A
EAST HAVEN, CONNECTICUT POLICE DEPARTMENT SURVEY REPORT 	   	  	  
December	  30,	  2014	  	   	  	  
Abigail	  Fisher	  Williamson,	  Ph.D.	  	   	   	  
Executive	  Summary	  	  
	  	   The	  East	  Haven	  Police	  Department	  Survey	  was	  distributed	  via	  the	  internet	  to	  all	  sworn	  officers	  in	   the	  Fall	  of	  2013.1	  Of	  the	  department’s	  60	  sworn	  officers,	  38	  completed	  at	  least	  some	  of	  the	   survey,	  for	  a	  response	  rate	  of	  63	  percent.	  	  Some	  survey	  questions,	  particularly	  those	  asking	  about	   officers’	  demographic	  characteristics,	  had	  high	  rates	  of	  non-­‐response,	  which	  I	  specify	  where	   relevant.	  In	  addition	  to	  asking	  about	  officers’	  demographic	  characteristics,	  the	  survey	  asked	   respondents	  for	  their	  views	  on	  the	  department’s	  work	  environment,	  colleagues,	  supervisors,	   disciplinary	  procedures,	  community	  and	  race	  relations,	  and	  overall	  evaluations	  of	  department	   efficacy.	  	   	  	   While	  more	  than	  half	  of	  officers	  expressed	  some	  dissatisfaction	  with	  the	  East	  Haven	  Police	   Department	  (EHPD)	  work	  environment,	  officers	  reported	  generally	  favorable	  views	  of	  their	   colleagues,	  supervisors,	  and	  departmental	  disciplinary	  procedures.	  Officers	  had	  very	  positive	   views	  on	  community	  relations,	  including	  relations	  with	  ethnic	  and	  racial	  minority	  residents,	  and	   most	  felt	  these	  relations	  had	  improved	  in	  recent	  years.	  Despite	  these	  positive	  assessments,	   however,	  overall	  evaluations	  of	  the	  EHPD	  were	  quite	  mixed.	  Seventy-­‐two	  percent	  of	  officers	   described	  the	  department	  as	  doing	  an	  “excellent”	  or	  “good”	  job;	  yet	  fewer	  than	  half	  reported	  that	   they	  would	  be	  satisfied	  with	  police	  services	  if	  they	  lived	  in	  East	  Haven.	  Because	  the	  respondents	   to	  the	  survey	  were	  overwhelmingly	  white,	  male,	  patrol	  officers,	  it	  is	  challenging	  to	  identify	   significant	  patterns	  of	  variation	  across	  officers.	  	  The	  only	  consistent	  pattern	  to	  emerge	  is	  that	   older	  officers	  are	  more	  dissatisfied	  with	  the	  department	  and	  its	  relations	  with	  the	  broader	   community,	  though	  this	  finding	  is	  largely	  driven	  by	  negative	  responses	  by	  a	  small	  number	  of	  older	   officers.	  In	  the	  pages	  that	  follow,	  I	  discuss	  each	  of	  these	  topics	  in	  greater	  detail.	  	  For	  additional	   information,	  I	  refer	  the	  reader	  to	  full	  frequency	  tables	  included	  in	  the	  Appendix	  (labeled	  Table	  A1-­‐ A56).	  	   	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	 	    1 The survey remained accessible to officers through the Fall of 2014, though the EHPD reports that most officers completed the survey prior to January 15, 2014.	  
127	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 129 of 151
	  
	  	  

Respondent	  Characteristics	  	  
	  	   The	  modal	  respondent	  to	  the	  survey	  is	  a	  non-­‐Hispanic,	  white,	  male	  patrol	  officer	  in	  his	  thirties,	   who	  has	  worked	  for	  the	  department	  for	  less	  than	  a	  decade	  and	  who	  lives	  outside	  of	  East	  Haven.	   More	  precisely,	  of	  the	  27	  officers	  that	  reported	  their	  ethnicity,	  only	  two	  (7	  percent)	  were	   Hispanic.	  Likewise,	  of	  the	  27	  officers	  that	  reported	  their	  race,	  only	  three	  (11	  percent)	  were	   nonwhite	  (Table	  A1).	  Since	  race	  and	  ethnicity	  overlap,	  in	  total	  four	  officers	  reported	  an	  identity	   other	  than	  non-­‐Hispanic	  white.	  Of	  the	  34	  officers	  who	  reported	  their	  gender,	  only	  three	  (9	   percent)	  were	  women.	  Finally,	  of	  the	  28	  officers	  who	  reported	  their	  age,	  17	  officers	  (61	  percent)	   were	  under	  40,	  as	  displayed	  in	  Figure	  1	  (Table	  A2).	  	  	  

Figure	  1.	  Officers	  by	  Age	  Range	  	  
	  
35%	   	   Per cent30%	   	   o	  f 25%	   	   Offi cers2	  0%	   	  

15%	   	  

10%	   	  

5	%   	  

0	%   	  

20-­‐29	  

30-­‐39	  

40-­‐49	  

50-­‐59	  

60-­‐69	   	  	  

	  

	  	  

	  	  

In	  terms	  of	  their	  departmental	  role,	  of	  the	  29	  officers	  who	  reported	  their	  current	  position,	  22	  

officers	  (76	  percent)	  served	  in	  a	  patrol	  capacity	  (Table	  A3).	  Of	  the	  31	  officers	  who	  reported	  their	  

current	  rank,	  20	  (65	  percent)	  were	  patrol	  officers,	  while	  11	  reported	  other	  ranks	  (Table	  A4).	  Of	  

the	  25	  officers	  who	  reported	  when	  they	  were	  hired,	  40	  percent	  (or	  10	  officers)	  were	  hired	  since	  

2010.	  	  An	  additional	  nine	  officers	  (35	  percent)	  were	  hired	  between	  2000-­‐2009,	  and	  six	  officers	  (24	  

percent)	  were	  hired	  before	  the	  year	  2000	  (Table	  A5).	  	  Only	  nine	  of	  33	  officers	  (27	  percent)	  live	  in	  

East	  Haven,	  while	  the	  remaining	  24	  live	  outside	  the	  city.	  	  

	  	  

As	  Table	  1(below)	  depicts,	  the	  greatest	  number	  of	  officers	  reported	  joining	  the	  EHPD	  out	  of	  a	  

commitment	  to	  promoting	  community	  safety	  (23	  officers,	  61%)	  and	  helping	  people	  (21	  officers,	  

55%),	  while	  an	  additional	  13	  officers	  (34%)	  reported	  an	  interest	  in	  fighting	  crime.	  A	  number	  of	  

128	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 130 of 151
	  
officers	  also	  mentioned	  instrumental	  reasons	  for	  joining	  the	  EHPD,	  including	  job	  security	  (14	   officers,	  37%),	  career	  opportunities	  (13	  officers,	  34%),	  and	  good	  pay	  (10	  officers,	  26%).	  	   	  	  

Table	  1.	  Reasons	  for	  Joining	  the	  EHPD	  	  

	  	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	  	   Percent	  	  

To	  promote	  community	  safety	  	  

23	  	  

61%	  	  

To	  help	  people	  	  

21	  	  

55%	  	  

For	  job	  security	  	  

14	  	  

37%	  	  

To	  fight	  crime	  	  

13	  	  

34%	  	  

For	  career	  opportunities	  	  

13	  	  

34%	  	  

For	  good	  pay	  	  

10	  	  

26%	  	  

Because	  job	  is	  exciting	  	  

7	  	  

18%	  	  

For	  family	  tradition	  	  

7	  	  

18%	  	  

Other	  	  

4	  	  

11%	  	  

Total	  Respondents	  	  

38	  	  

	  	  	  

Note: Respondents could choose multiple answers to this question. 	  

	  	  

Most	  officers	  were	  not	  concerned	  that	  they	  or	  their	  family	  members	  would	  be	  victims	  of	  gang	  

violence	  in	  their	  neighborhoods,	  with	  28	  officers	  (88	  percent)	  reporting	  they	  were	  “not	  very”	  or	  

“not	  at	  all”	  concerned	  (Table	  A6).	  	  On	  the	  other	  hand,	  15	  officers	  (47	  percent)	  reported	  feeling	  

“very”	  or	  “somewhat”	  concerned	  that	  they	  or	  their	  family	  members	  would	  be	  a	  victim	  of	  some	  

crime	  (Table	  A7).	  In	  a	  two	  sided	  t-­‐test,	  the	  nine	  officers	  that	  live	  in	  East	  Haven	  were	  more	  likely	  to	  

report	  concern	  about	  family	  members	  being	  victims	  of	  crime	  than	  officers	  who	  live	  elsewhere	  by	  

a	  marginally	  statistically	  significant	  margin	  (p =	  .09).	  	  

	  	   	  	  

Perceptions	  of	  Work	  Environment	  	  
	  	   The	  survey	  asked	  officers	  several	  question	  about	  their	  work	  environment	  and	  relations	  with	   colleagues.	  In	  total,	  more	  than	  half	  of	  officers	  expressed	  some	  dissatisfaction	  with	  the	  EHPD	  work	   environment	  and	  nearly	  half	  would	  choose	  to	  leave	  if	  given	  the	  opportunity.	  In	  response	  to	  the	   overarching	  question	  of	  whether	  the	  EHPD	  “provides	  an	  outstanding	  work	  environment,”	  24	   officers	  (59	  percent)	  disagreed	  or	  strongly	  disagreed	  with	  this	  statement,	  while	  15	  officers	  (41	   percent)	  agreed	  or	  strongly	  agreed	  (Table	  A8).	  Dissatisfaction	  with	  the	  EHPD’s	  work	  environment	   is	  not	  statistically	  associated	  with	  gender,	  ethnicity,	  patrol	  officer	  rank,	  or	  when	  the	  officer	  was	   hired.	  	  On	  average,	  however,	  older	  officers	  express	  greater	  dissatisfaction,	  as	  displayed	  in	  Table	  2,	   though	  this	  result	  is	  driven	  by	  the	  negative	  assessments	  of	  a	  small	  number	  of	  older	  officers.	  	  In	  

129	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 131 of 151
	  
response	  to	  whether	  they	  would	  “leave	  this	  department”	  if	  the	  opportunity	  arose,	  14	  officers	  (45	   percent)	  agreed,	  while	  17	  officers	  (55	  percent)	  disagreed	  (Table	  A9).	  	  Wishing	  to	  leave	  the	   department	  was	  not	  statistically	  associated	  with	  officer	  characteristics.	  	   	  	  

Table	  2.	  Satisfaction	  with	  EHPD	  Work	  Environment	  by	  Age	  	  

	  

Age	  	  

Number	  Officers	  	  

Mean	  Response	  	  

20-­‐29	  	  

8	  	  

2.0	  	  

30-­‐39	  	  

9	  	  

2.9	  	  

40-­‐49	  	  

8	  	  

2.5	  	  

50-­‐69	  	  

3	  	  

3.3	  	  

Total	  	  

28	  	  

2.6	  	  

Note: Responses range from 1 “strongly agree” to 4 “strongly disagree.” 	  

	  	   	  	  

Perceptions	  of	  Colleagues	  	  	  
	  	   Officers	  expressed	  generally	  favorable	  views	  of	  their	  colleagues.	  Twenty-­‐six	  officers	  (70	  percent)	   agreed	  or	  strongly	  agreed	  that	  “all	  EHPD	  personnel	  treat	  me	  with	  respect”	  (Table	  A10).	  Moreover,	   officers	  expressed	  faith	  in	  their	  colleagues,	  with	  26	  officers	  (72	  percent)	  agreeing	  that	  the	  EHPD	   “hires	  qualified	  people”	  (Table	  A11).	  	  When	  asked	  whether	  the	  community	  liaison	  officer,	  senior	   patrol	  officers,	  and	  youth	  programs	  staff	  “do	  valuable	  work	  for	  the	  department,”	  more	  than	  60	   percent	  of	  respondents	  agreed	  in	  each	  case,	  as	  depicted	  in	  Table	  3.	  Likewise,	  nearly	  three-­‐ quarters	  of	  respondents	  agreed	  that	  youth	  programs	  staff	  contributed	  to	  reducing	  crime.	  On	  the	   other	  hand,	  a	  majority	  of	  officers	  did	  not	  feel	  that	  the	  community	  liaison	  officer	  and	  senior	  patrol	   officers	  contributed	  to	  reducing	  crime	  (complete	  data	  in	  Tables	  A12-­‐17).	  	  

Table	  3.	  Officers	  Agreeing	  that	  Specified	  Colleagues	  Do	  Valuable	  Work	  

and	  Reduce	  Crime	  	  

	  	  

	  

Valuable	  Work	  	  

Reduce	  Crime	  	  

	  	   	  	   Community	  Liaison	  Officer	  	   Senior	  Patrol	  Officers	  	  

Number	  	   27	  	   21	  	  

Percent	  	 N  umber	  	   Percent	  	  

77%	  	   62%	  	  

12	  	   40%	  	   15	  	   39%	  	  

Youth	  Programs	  	  

22	  	  

65%	  	  

25	  	   74%	  	  

130	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 132 of 151
	  
Note: Percentage figures vary since different numbers of officers responded to different questions. 	   	  	   	  	  

Perceptions	  of	  Supervisors	  	  
	  	   Officers	  generally	  expressed	  satisfaction	  with	  their	  supervisors.	  Nearly	  three-­‐quarters	  of	   respondents	  (26	  officers)	  agreed	  that	  the	  chief	  of	  police	  “is	  leading	  us	  in	  the	  right	  direction,”	  as	   displayed	  in	  Figure	  2	  (Table	  A18).	  	  Likewise,	  three-­‐quarters	  (27	  officers)	  agreed	  that	  command	   staff	  had	  “improved	  relations	  with	  the	  community,”	  while	  60	  percent	  of	  respondents	  (21	  officers)	   agreed	  that	  command	  staff	  were	  “good	  leaders”	  (Table	  A19,	  A20).	  Twenty-­‐seven	  officers	  (73	   percent)	  agreed	  that	  their	  “immediate	  supervisor”	  provided	  “regular	  feedback	  on	  the	  quality”	  of	   their	  work	  (Table	  A21).	  Twenty	  officers	  (59	  percent)	  felt	  that	  command	  staff	  was	  “open	  to	  new	   ideas	  and	  ways	  of	  working”	  (Table	  A22).	  On	  the	  other	  hand,	  twelve	  officers	  (45	  percent)	  agreed	   that	  frequent	  turnover	  among	  supervisors	  had	  negatively	  affected	  their	  work	  (Table	  A23).	  	   	  	  

Figure	  2.	  The	  Chief	  of	  Police	  is	  “Leading	  us	  in	  the	  Right	  Direction”	  	  

	  	  

Nu 18	  

16	  	  

mb 16	  

e	  r 14	  

of 12	   Offi10	  

10	  	  

cers	   8	  

7	  	  

6	  

4	  

2	  	  

2	  

0	   Strongly	  agree	  

Agree	  

	  	   	  	   	  	  

Disagree	  

Strongly	  
disagree	   	  	   	  

Views	  on	  Discipline	  	  
	  	   On	  any	  given	  question	  regarding	  disciplinary	  procedures,	  most	  officers	  supported	  the	   department’s	  policies,	  but	  roughly	  ten	  officers	  expressed	  some	  sort	  of	  dissatisfaction	  with	  
131	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 133 of 151
	  
disciplinary	  practices.	  	  Only	  25	  officers	  answered	  the	  question	  on	  the	  fairness	  of	  the	  performance	   evaluation	  system,	  but	  of	  those,	  60	  percent	  (15	  officers)	  agreed	  the	  system	  was	  fair	  (Table	  A24).	   Likewise,	  63	  percent	  (22	  officers)	  agreed	  that	  command	  staff’s	  administration	  of	  discipline	  was	   fair	  (Table	  A25).	  	  Seventy	  percent	  (26	  officers)	  agreed	  that	  they	  clearly	  understood	  “what	  type	  of	   behavior	  will	  result	  in	  discipline”	  (Table	  A26).	  	  On	  the	  other	  hand,	  just	  over	  half	  (18	  officers)	   expressed	  concern	  that	  they	  would	  be	  “punished	  for	  making	  an	  honest	  mistake”	  (Table	  A27).	  	   Perhaps	  as	  a	  result,	  as	  Table	  4	  depicts,	  45	  percent	  (15	  officers)	  expressed	  hesitancy	  about	  using	   their	  Tasers	  (ECW)	  and	  more	  than	  a	  third	  (12	  officers)	  expressed	  hesitancy	  about	  using	  lethal	   force	  (Tables	  A28,	  A29).	  That	  said,	  only	  five	  officers	  (15	  percent)	  suggested	  that	  their	  concerns	  led	   them	  to	  “avoid	  contact	  with	  suspects”	  (Table	  A30).	  	   	  	  

Table	  4.	  Proportion	  of	  Officers	  Agreeing	  to	  Hesitancy	  in	  Using	  Force	  	  

	  

	  

Number	  	  	   Percent	  	  

	  Hesitant	  to	  use	  Taser	  (ECW)	  

15	  	  

45%	  	  

Hesitant	  to	  use	  lethal	  force	  	  

12	  	  

34%	  	  

Avoid	  contact	  with	  suspects	  	  

5	  	  

15%	  	  

	  	   	  	  

Despite	  these	  concerns,	  71	  percent	  (24	  officers)	  agreed	  that	  “the	  investigation	  of	  civilian	  

complaints”	  was	  fair	  (Table	  A31).	  Indeed,	  while	  81	  percent	  (25	  officers)	  agreed	  that	  “most	  civilian	  

complaints	  against	  officers	  are	  frivolous,”	  only	  two	  officers	  (6	  percent)	  agreed	  that	  civilian	  

complaints	  had	  “negatively	  affected”	  their	  career	  (Table	  A32,	  A33).	  	  On	  the	  whole,	  24	  officers	  (71	  

percent)	  agreed	  that	  the	  civilian	  complaint	  system	  made	  the	  EHPD	  “more	  accountable	  to	  the	  

public”	  (Table	  A34).	  	  Similarly,	  22	  officers	  (69	  percent)	  agreed	  that	  the	  Early	  Warning	  System	  

helped	  the	  EHPD	  “identify	  risky	  behavior	  among	  officers”	  (Table	  A35).	  	  Finally,	  in	  terms	  of	  the	  

Internal	  Affairs	  Officer,	  24	  officers	  (67	  percent)	  felt	  that	  he	  gave	  the	  disciplinary	  system	  “greater	  

integrity,”	  while	  25	  officers	  (71	  percent)	  agreed	  that	  the	  IAO	  officer	  helped	  the	  EHPD	  to	  “prevent	  

police	  misconduct”	  (Table	  A36,	  A37).	  	  

	  	   	  	  

Community	  and	  Race	  Relations	  	  
	  	   A	  number	  of	  questions	  asked	  officers	  about	  community	  relations	  and	  whether	  they	  had	  improved	   in	  recent	  years.	  Officers	  were	  largely	  positive	  about	  police-­‐community	  relations	  and,	  in	  every	   case,	  at	  least	  half	  of	  officers	  thought	  that	  relations	  had	  improved	  in	  the	  last	  year	  to	  three	  years,	  as	   Table	  5	  displays.	  Eighty-­‐seven	  percent	  (26	  officers)	  agreed	  that	  East	  Haven	  residents	  respect	   “officers	  on	  my	  shift”	  (Table	  A38).	  	  Half	  (17	  officers)	  agreed	  that	  support	  for	  the	  department	  had	  
132	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 134 of 151
	  
increased	  in	  the	  past	  year	  (Table	  A39).	  Two-­‐thirds	  (23	  officers)	  felt	  that	  relations	  between	  the	   police	  and	  community	  were	  positive	  (Table	  A40).	  	  Just	  over	  half	  of	  officers	  felt	  these	  relations	  had	   improved	  as	  compared	  to	  three	  years	  ago	  (Table	  A41).	  	  Being	  a	  decade	  older,	  however,	  is	   associated	  with	  a	  greater	  likelihood	  of	  believing	  that	  police-­‐community	  relations	  becoming	  worse.	   Here,	  as	  throughout	  the	  survey,	  age	  is	  not	  serving	  as	  a	  proxy	  for	  when	  officers	  were	  hired;	  rather,	   age	  is	  associated	  with	  dissatisfaction	  while	  the	  timing	  of	  hiring	  is	  not.	  	   	  	   Eighty-­‐seven	  percent	  (27	  officers)	  felt	  that	  the	  EHPD	  “brings	  offenders	  to	  justice	  while	  respecting	   their	  rights	  and	  complying	  with	  the	  law”	  (Table	  A42).	  	  Eighty	  percent	  (24	  officers)	  felt	  the	  EHPD	   was	  more	  likely	  to	  promote	  justice	  while	  respecting	  rights	  as	  compared	  to	  three	  years	  ago	  (Table	   A43).	  Again,	  however,	  an	  increase	  of	  a	  decade	  in	  age	  range,	  is	  associated	  with	  a	  greater	  likelihood	   of	  disagreeing	  that	  the	  department	  has	  improved	  on	  this	  measure.	  Although	  only	  two	  nonwhite	   officers	  responded	  to	  this	  question,	  being	  nonwhite	  is	  statistically	  associated	  with	  a	  greater	   likelihood	  of	  disagreeing	  that	  the	  EHPD	  has	  improved	  on	  this	  measure	  (p	  =	  .07).	  Indeed,	  the	  two	   nonwhite	  officers	  averaged	  2.5	  on	  the	  1-­‐4	  scale,	  where	  four	  corresponds	  to	  strongly	  disagreeing,	   while	  white	  officers	  averaged	  1.5.	  	   	  	  

Table	  5.	  Perception	  on	  Community	  Relations	  and	  Improvements	  over	  

Time	  	  

	  

	  

Number 	   Percent 	  

Residents	  respect	  officers	  on	  my	  shift	  	  

26	  	  

87%	  	  

Residents	  support	  the	  department	  more	  than	  one	  year	  ago	  	   17	  	5   0%	  Police-­‐Community	  relations	  

positive	  today	  	   23	  	6   6%	  	  

Police-­‐Community	  relations	  better	  than	  three	  years	  ago	  	   16	  	5   2%	  EHPD	  brings	  offenders	  to	  justice	  while	  

protecting	  rights	  	   27	  	8   7%	  	  

EHPD	  more	  likely	  to	  bring	  offenders	  to	  justice	  while	  protecting	  rights	  than	  three	  years	  ago	  	   24	  	  

80%	  	  

Most/all	  police	  treat	  all	  members	  of	  community	  with	  respect	  	  

33	  	   100%	  	  

Police	  treat	  all	  members	  of	  community	  with	  more	  respect	  than	  three	  years	  ago	  	  

17	  	  

55%	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

With	  respect	  to	  the	  department’s	  relations	  with	  ethnic/racial	  minority	  communities,	  every	  officer	  

(33	  in	  total)	  felt	  that	  most	  or	  all	  EHPD	  officers	  treat	  “all	  members	  of	  the	  community	  with	  respect”	   (Table	  A44).	  On	  average,	  patrol	  officers	  felt	  that	  “all”	  officers	  treated	  members	  of	  the	  community	  

members	  with	  respect,	  while	  other	  ranks	  felt	  that	  on	  average	  “most”	  officers	  treated	  community	  

members	  with	  respect.	  	  Just	  over	  half	  (17	  officers)	  felt	  that	  EHPD	  officers	  treated	  all	  community	  

members	  with	  more	  respect	  than	  three	  years	  ago	  (Table	  A45).	  Indeed,	  29	  officers	  (94	  percent)	  

expressed	  that	  “officers	  on	  my	  shift”	  always	  “treat	  all	  racial	  and	  ethnic	  groups	  fairly,”	  with	  the	  

remaining	  two	  officers	  reporting	  that	  officers	  on	  their	  shift	  treated	  all	  groups	  fairly	  “most	  of	  the	  

time”	  (Table	  A46).	  In	  general,	  nearly	  all	  officers	  felt	  that	  “racial	  and	  ethnic	  groups	  in	  East	  Haven	  

133	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 135 of 151
	  
are	  getting	  along	  “very	  well”	  or	  “somewhat	  well.”	  	  That	  is,	  all	  but	  two	  of	  31	  officers	  (94	  percent)	   agreed	  felt	  that	  ethnic/racial	  relations	  in	  East	  Haven	  were	  proceeding	  well	  (Table	  A47).	  	   Moreover,	  21	  officers	  (64	  percent)	  agreed	  that	  the	  EHPD	  contributed	  to	  improving	  ethnic/racial	   relations	  in	  East	  Haven	  (Table	  A48).	  	   	  	   On	  the	  whole,	  officers	  were	  cognizant	  that	  their	  work	  affected	  community	  perceptions	  of	  the	   EHPD,	  with	  all	  but	  two	  officers	  (94	  percent)	  agreeing	  with	  this	  statement	  (Table	  A49).	  Few	  officers	   felt	  that	  “law	  enforcement	  strategies”	  on	  their	  shift	  negatively	  impacted	  community	  relations,	   with	  only	  3	  of	  31	  officers	  (10	  percent)	  agreeing	  with	  this	  statement	  (Table	  A50).	  	  Almost	  half	  of	   officers	  (14	  or	  47	  percent)	  agreed	  that	  East	  Haven	  residents	  care	  “more	  about	  safety	  than	  fairness	   in	  policing”	  (Table	  A51).	  	  Overall,	  however,	  nearly	  three-­‐quarters	  of	  officers	  (24	  or	  73	  percent)	  felt	   that	  East	  Haven	  residents	  trust	  the	  EHPD	  (Table	  A52).	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	  
Overall	  Assessment	  of	  EHPD	  Services	  	  
	  	   Despite	  the	  positive	  outlook	  on	  community	  relations,	  officers’	  overall	  assessments	  of	  the	  EHPD	   were	  quite	  mixed.	  	  Fewer	  than	  half	  (15	  officers,	  44	  percent)	  agreed	  that	  they	  “would	  be	  satisfied”	   with	  police	  services	  if	  they	  lived	  in	  East	  Haven	  (Table	  A53).	  	  Yet	  when	  asked	  whether	  the	  EHPD	   was	  “doing	  an	  excellent,	  good,	  poor,	  or	  very	  poor	  job,”	  26	  officers	  (72	  percent)	  rated	  the	   department’s	  work	  as	  excellent	  or	  good,	  as	  shown	  in	  Figure	  1	  (Table	  A54).	  On	  the	  other	  hand,	  as	   Figure	  2	  depicts,	  just	  over	  half	  of	  officers	  (19	  officers,	  51	  percent)	  rated	  the	  police	  services	  in	  East	   Haven	  as	  “excellent”	  or	  “good,”	  while	  18	  officers	  felt	  that	  EHPD	  services	  were	  “fair”	  or	  	   “poor”	  (Table	  A55).	  In	  terms	  of	  improvement,	  18	  officers	  (60	  percent)	  felt	  that	  the	  EHPD	  was	  a	   “better	  organization	  than	  it	  was	  three	  years	  ago”	  (Table	  A56).	  In	  terms	  of	  variation	  among	  officers	   on	  this	  question,	  living	  in	  East	  Haven	  is	  associated	  with	  disagreeing	  that	  the	  EHPD	  is	  a	  	   “better	  organization	  than	  it	  was	  three	  years	  ago”	  (p	  =	  .06).	  	  Likewise,	  age	  is	  again	  associated	  with	   disagreeing	  that	  the	  EHPD	  has	  improved.	  	  For	  every	  decade	  increase	  in	  age,	  officers	  moved	  a	  half	   point	  in	  the	  direction	  of	  disagreement	  (p	  =	  .01).	  	   	  	  
134	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 136 of 151
	  

Figure 1. The EHPD is Doing a … Job.	  	  

	  

	F   igure 2. The Services of the EHPD are …	  	  

20	   Nu

m

b	  	  e r	  

15	  

of	  

Off ice 10	  

rs	  

5	  

20	   Nu

m

b	  	  e r	  

15	  

of	  

Off ice 10	  

rs	  

5	  

0	  

0	  

Excellent	   Good	   Poor	   Very	  poor	  

Excellent	   Good	   Fair	   Poor	  

	  

	  	   	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

Conclusion	  	  
	  	   Analysis	  of	  the	  EHPD	  Survey	  reveals	  that	  officers	  have	  a	  positive	  outlook	  on	  their	  colleagues,	   supervisors,	  disciplinary	  procedures,	  and	  community	  and	  race	  relations.	  	  All	  the	  same,	  a	  majority	   reports	  dissatisfaction	  with	  the	  work	  environment	  and	  overall	  evaluations	  of	  department	  efficacy	   are	  mixed.	  	  While	  the	  EHPD	  sample	  is	  largely	  homogeneous,	  one	  pattern	  that	  emerged	  was	   greater	  levels	  of	  dissatisfaction	  among	  older	  officers.	  	  On	  the	  whole,	  however,	  EHPD	  officers	   report	  that	  community	  relations	  and	  relations	  with	  ethnic	  and	  racial	  minorities	  are	  strong	  and	   improving.	  	   	  	  
	  	   APPENDIX: FULL FREQUENCY TABLES 	   	  

Table A1. What racial group do you most identify with? 	  

	  	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

White	  	  

24	  	  

89%	  	  

Black	  of	  African	  American	  	  

1	  	  

4%	  	  

Some	  other	  group	  	  

2	  	  

7%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

27	  	  

100%	  	  

	  	  

135	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 137 of 151
	  

Table A2. Which of the following categories includes your age? 	   	  	  

	  	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

20-­‐29	  	  

8	  	  

29%	  	  

30-­‐39	  	  

9	  	  

32%	  	  

40-­‐49	  	  

8	  	  

29%	  	  

50-­‐59	  	  

2	  	  

7%	  	  

60-­‐69	  	  

1	  	  

4%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

28	  	  

100%	  	  

	  	   	  	   	  	   Table A3. In what role do you currently serve? 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	   	   Percent	  	  

	  Patrol	  	  

22	  	  

Detective	  	  

1	  	  

Command	  staff	  	  

2	  	  

Records	  	  

1	  	  

Supernumery	  status	  	  

3	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

29	  	  

	  Table A4. What is your present rank? 	  	  

76%	  	   3%	  	   7%	  	   3%	  	   10%	  	   100%	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

	  Patrol	  officer	  	  

20	  	  

65%	  	  

Detective	  	  

1	  	  

3%	  	  

Sergeant	  	  

4	  	  

13%	  	  

Lieutenant	  	  

1	  	  

3%	  	  

Other	  	  

5	  	  

16%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

31	  	  

100%	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	  	   	  	   Table A5. In what year were you hired at the East Haven Police Department? 	   	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  1989	  	   1997	  	   2001	  	   2006	  	   2007	  	  

4	  	  

16%	  	  

2	  	  

8%	  	  

2	  	  

8%	  	  

1	  	  

4%	  	  

6	  	  

24%	  	  

16%	  	   24%	  	   32%	  	   36%	  	   60%	  	  

136	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 138 of 151
	  

2010	  	   2012	  	   2013	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

1	  	  

4%	  	  

64%	  	  

4	  	  

16%	  	  

80%	  	  

5	  	  

20%	  	  

100%	  	  

25	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	   	  	  

	  	  

Table A6. How concerned are you that you or a family member will be a victim of gang violence in your neighborhood? 	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Very	  concerned	  	   Somewhat	  concerned	  	   Not	  very	  concerned	  	   Not	  at	  all	  concerned	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

6%	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

13%	  	  

14	  	  

44%	  	  

56%	  	  

14	  	  

44%	  	  

100%	  	  

32	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	   	  	  

	  	  

Table A7.How concerned are you that you or a family member will be a victim of any crime? 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Very	  concerned	  	   Somewhat	  concerned	  	   Not	  very	  concerned	  	   Not	  at	  all	  concerned	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

5	  	  

16%	  	  

16%	  	  

10	  	  

31%	  	  

47%	  	  

12	  	  

38%	  	  

84%	  	  

5	  	  

16%	  	  

100%	  	  

32	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	   	  	  

	  	   Table A8. The EHPD provides an outstanding work environment. 	  

	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	  	   Percent	  	   Cum.	  Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	  

4	  	  

11%	  	  

11%	  	  

Agree	  	  

11	  	  

30%	  	  

41%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

16	  	  

43%	  	  

84%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

6	  	  

16%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

37	  	  

100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   Table A9. I would leave this department if I had an opportunity. 	  
	  

137	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 139 of 151
	  

	  	  	   Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

Frequency	  	   4	  	   10	  	   14	  	   3	  	   31	  	  

Percent	  	   13%	  	   32%	  	   45%	  	   10%	  	   100%	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	   13%	  	   45%	  	   90%	  	   100%	  	  
	  

	  	   	  	  

	  	   Table A10. Virtually all EHPD personnel treat me with respect. 	   	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	   	  	  

7	  	  

19%	  	  

Agree	  	  

19	  	  

51%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

8	  	  

22%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

3	  	  

8%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

37	  	  

100%	  	  

	   Cum.	  Percent	  	   19%	  	   70%	  	   92%	  	   100%	  	  
	  

	  	   	  	   Table A11. The department today hires qualified people. 	   	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	  

5	  	  

14%	  	  

Agree	  	  

21	  	  

58%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

6	  	  

17%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

4	  	  

11%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

36	  	  

100%	  	  

	   Cum.	  Percent	  	   14%	  	   72%	  	   89%	  	   100%	  	  
	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A12. The Community Liaison Officer does valuable work for the Department. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

3	  	  

9%	  	  

24	  	  

69%	  	  

8	  	  

23%	  	  

0	  	  

0%	  	  

35	  	  

100%	  	  

9%	  	   77%	  	   100%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	  

	  Table A13. The work of the Community Liaison Officer helps reduce crime.	  	   	  	   	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

1	  	  

3%	  	  

3%	  	  

138	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 140 of 151
	  

Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

11	  	  

37%	  	  

15	  	  

50%	  	  

3	  	  

10%	  	  

30	  	  

100%	  	  

40%	  	   90%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	  
	   Table A14. Senior Patrol Officers do valuable work for the department. 	   	  

	   	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

Frequency	  	   4	  	   17	  	   9	  	   4	  	   34	  	  

Percent	  	   12%	  	   50%	  	   26%	  	   12%	  	   100%	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	   12%	  	   62%	  	   88%	  	   100%	  	  
	  

	  Table A15. The work of Senior Patrol Officers helps reduce 	  	   	  	   crime. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

	  	   Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

2	  	  

5%	  	  

13	  	  

34%	  	  

18	  	  

47%	  	  

5	  	  

13%	  	  

38	  	  

100%	  	  

5%	  	   39%	  	   87%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	  

	  Table A16. Youth programs improve relations between the EHPD and the community where I 	  	   	  

	  

	  	  

work. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

5	  	  

15%	  	  

17	  	  

50%	  	  

10	  	  

29%	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

34	  	  

100%	  	  

15%	  	   65%	  	   94%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  Table A17. Youth programs help reduce crime.

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

	  	   	  	  
	   Percent	  	   	  

	  	   Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	  

5	  	  

15%	  	  

20	  	  

59%	  	  

15%	  	   74%	  	  

139	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 141 of 151
	  

Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

9	  	  

26%	  	  

0	  	  

0%	  	  

34	  	  

100%	  	  

100%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	   Table A18. I am confident the chief of police is leading us in the right direction. 	   	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	  	   Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	  

10	  	  

29%	  	  

29%	  	  

Agree	  	  

16	  	  

46%	  	  

74%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

7	  	  

20%	  	  

94%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

35	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	   Table A19. My command staff has improved relations with the community in which I work. 	   	  	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

6%	  	  

Agree	  	  

25	  	  

69%	  	  

75%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

7	  	  

19%	  	  

94%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

36	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	  

	  Table A20. The command staff members are good leaders.	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	   	   Cum.	  Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	  

5	  	  

14%	  	  

14%	  	  

Agree	  	  

16	  	  

46%	  	  

60%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

7	  	  

20%	  	  

80%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

7	  	  

20%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

35	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	  

	  	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	  

Table A21. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on the quality of my work. 	   	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	  

5	  	  

14%	  	  

14%	  	  

Agree	  	  

22	  	  

59%	  	  

73%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

8	  	  

22%	  	  

95%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

2	  	  

5%	  	  

100%	  	  

140	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 142 of 151
	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

37	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	  

	  Table A22. My commanding staff is	   open to new ideas and ways of working.	  	   	  	   	   	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	  

8	  	  

24%	  	  

24%	  	  

Agree	  	  

12	  	  

35%	  	  

59%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

9	  	  

26%	  	  

85%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

5	  	  

15%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

34	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	  

	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	  

	  	   	  	   	  	  

	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   Table A23. The frequent turnover of my supervisors has a negative effect on my work. 	   	  	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	  

3	  	  

9%	  	  

9%	  	  

Agree	  	  

9	  	  

27%	  	  

36%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

19	  	  

58%	  	  

94%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

33	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	  

Table A24. The performance evaluation system is fair. 	  

	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	  	   Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

4	  	  

16%	  	  

11	  	  

44%	  	  

6	  	  

24%	  	  

4	  	  

16%	  	  

25	  	  

100%	  	  

	  	  
Cum.	  Percent 	  	  
16%	  	   60%	  	   84%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

141	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 143 of 151
	  

Table A25. The way command staff administers discipline today is fair. 	   	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	   Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	  

4	  	  

11%	  	  

11%	  	  

Agree	  	  

18	  	  

51%	  	  

63%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

8	  	  

23%	  	  

86%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

5	  	  

14%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

35	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	   	  	   Table A26. I understand clearly what type of behavior will result in discipline. 	   	  

Frequency	  	   Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

5	  	  

14%	  	  

14%	  	  

Agree	  	  

21	  	  

57%	  	  

70%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

9	  	  

24%	  	  

95%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

2	  	  

5%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

37	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	  

	  Table A27. I am afraid I will be 	  punished for making an honest mistake.	  	   	  	   	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	   Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

6	  	  

17%	  	  

12	  	  

34%	  	  

12	  	  

34%	  	  

5	  	  

14%	  	  

35	  	  

100%	  	  

17%	  	   51%	  	   86%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A28. I am hesitant to use my Taser (ECW) because of the possible impact on my career. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

7	  	  

Agree	  	  

8	  	  

Disagree	  	  

14	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

4	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

33	  	  

21%	  	   24%	  	   42%	  	   12%	  	   100%	  	  

21%	  	   45%	  	   88%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A29. I am hesitant to use lethal force because of the possible impact on my career. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

142	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 144 of 151
	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

6	  	  

Agree	  	  

6	  	  

Disagree	  	  

13	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

10	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

35	  	  

17%	  	   17%	  	   37%	  	   29%	  	   100%	  	  

17%	  	   34%	  	   71%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A30. I have avoided contact with criminal suspects because of the possible impact on my career. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

0	  	  

Agree	  	  

5	  	  

Disagree	  	  

18	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

10	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

33	  	  

0%	  	   15%	  	   55%	  	   30%	  	   100%	  	  

0%	  	   15%	  	   70%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	   Table A31. The investigation of civilian complaints today is fair. 	   	  

	  	  	  

Frequency	   Percent	  	   Cum.	  Percent	  	  

Strongly	  agree	  	  

3	  	  

9%	  	  

9%	  	  

Agree	  	  

21	  	  

62%	  	  

71%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

5	  	  

15%	  	  

85%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

5	  	  

15%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

34	  	  

100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A 32. Most civilian complaints against officers are frivolous. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	   Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

23	  	  

74%	  	  

5	  	  

16%	  	  

1	  	  

3%	  	  

31	  	  

100%	  	  

6%	  	   81%	  	   97%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

	  	  

	  	   	  	   	  	  

Table A33. My career has been negatively affected by civilian complaints. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

143	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 145 of 151
	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

1	  	  

Agree	  	  

1	  	  

Disagree	  	  

22	  	  

Strongly	   disagree	  

10	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

34	  	  

3%	  	   3%	  	   65%	  	   29%	  	   100%	  	  

3%	  	   6%	  	   71%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A34. The complaint system makes the Department more accountable to the public. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

2	  	  

Agree	  	  

23	  	  

Disagree	  	  

8	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

2	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

35	  	  

6%	  	   66%	  	   23%	  	   6%	  	   100%	  	  

6%	  	   71%	  	   94%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	  

	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   Table A35. The Early Warning System (EWS) helps the Department identify risky behavior. 	   	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

2	  	  

Agree	  	  

20	  	  

Disagree	  	  

7	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

3	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

32	  	  

6%	  	   63%	  	   22%	  	   9%	  	   100%	  	  

6%	  	   69%	  	   91%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A36. The Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) helps the Department prevent police misconduct. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

6	  	  

17%	  	  

19	  	  

54%	  	  

7	  	  

20%	  	  

3	  	  

9%	  	  

35	  	  

100%	  	  

17%	  	   71%	  	   91%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A37. The IAO gives the Department's disciplinary system greater integrity. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

7	  	  

19%	  	  

19%	  	  

144	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 146 of 151
	  

Agree	  	  

17	  	  

Disagree	  	  

7	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

5	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

36	  	  

47%	  	   19%	  	   14%	  	   100%	  	  

67%	  	   86%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	  

	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   Table A38. Officers on my shift are respected by residents in the community. 	  
	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

5	  	  

Agree	  	  

21	  	  

Disagree	  	  

4	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

0	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

30	  	  

17%	  	   70%	  	   13%	  	   0%	  	   100%	  	  

17%	  	   87%	  	   100%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	  

	  Table A39. The department receives more support from the community than a year ago.	  	   	  	   	  	   	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	   Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

15	  	  

44%	  	  

14	  	  

41%	  	  

3	  	  

9%	  	  

34	  	  

100%	  	  

6%	  	   50%	  	   91%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	  

	  	  	   	  	   	  	   	  	   Table A40. The relations between the police and the community where I work today are... 	   	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Very	  positive	  	  

5	  	  

Somewhat	  positive	  	  

18	  	  

Neither	  positive	  or	  negative	  	  

8	  	  

Somewhat	  negative	  	  

3	  	  

Very	  negative	  	  

1	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

35	  	  

14%	  	   51%	  	   23%	  	   9%	  	   3%	  	   100%	  	  

14%	  	   66%	  	   89%	  	   97%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	 	   	  Table A41. Compared to three years ago, the relations between the EHPD and the community where I	  	   	   	   	  	   	  work are... 	  

145	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 147 of 151
	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Much	  better	  	  

6	  	  

19%	  	  

	   19%	  	  

	  	  

Somewhat	  better	  	  

10	  	  

32%	  	  

	   52%	  	  

	  	  

About	  the	  same	  	  

11	  	  

35%	  	  

	   87%	  	  

	  	  

Somewhat	  worse	  	  

4	  	  

13%	  	  

	   100%	  	  

	  	  

Much	  worse	  	  

0	  	  

0%	  	  

	   100%	  	  

	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

31	  	  

100%	  	  

	  	  

	  	   	  	   	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	   Table A42. The police department today in East Haven brings offenders to justice while respecting their rights and complying with the law 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

13	  	  

42%	  	  

42%	  	  

14	  	  

45%	  	  

87%	  	  

4	  	  

13%	  	  

100%	  	  

0	  	  

0%	  	  

100%	  	  

31	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	  

	  Table A43. Compared with three years ago, the EHPD today is 	  	   more likely to bring offenders to	  	   	  	   justice while respecting their rights and complying with the law. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

10	  	  

33%	  	  

33%	  	  

14	  	  

47%	  	  

80%	  	  

5	  	  

17%	  	  

97%	  	  

1	  	  

3%	  	  

100%	  	  

30	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A44. How many officers do you work with that treat all members of the community with

respect? 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	   Percent	  	   Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  All	  officers	  treat	  the	  community	  with	  respect	  	   Most	  officers	  treat	  the	  community	  with	  respect	  	  

14	  	  

42%	  	  

19	  	  

58%	  	  

42%	  	   100%	  	  

146	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 148 of 151
	  

About	  the	  same	  treat	  the	  community	  with	  respect	  as	  do	  not	  	  

0	  	  

Most	  officers	  do	  not	  treat	  the	  community	  with	  respect	  	  

0	  	  

Almost	  none	  of	  the	  officers	  treat	  the	  community	  with	  respect	  	   0	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

33	  	  

0%	  	   0%	  	   0%	  	   100%	  	  

100%	  	   100%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	  

	  Table A45. Compared with three years ago, police officers in East Haven today treat 	  all members of the community with: 	  

	  

Frequency	  	   Percent	  	   Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Much	  more	  respect	  	   Somewhat	  more	  respect	  	   About	  the	  same	  amount	  of	  respect	  	   Somewhat	  less	  respect	  	   Much	  less	  respect	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

8	  	  

26%	  	  

26%	  	  

9	  	  

29%	  	  

55%	  	  

14	  	  

45%	  	  

100%	  	  

0	  	  

0%	  	  

100%	  	  

0	  	  

0%	  	  

100%	  	  

31	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	   	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

	  	  

Table A46. The officers on my shift treat all racial and ethnic groups fairly. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Always	  	  

29	  	  

Most	  of	  the	  time	  	  

2	  	  

Only	  some	  of	  the	  time	  	  

0	  	  

Almost	  never	  	  

0	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

31	  	  

94%	  	   6%	  	   0%	  	   0%	  	   100%	  	  

94%	  	   100%	  	   100%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A47. Overall, how would you say that racial and ethnic groups in East Haven are

getting along these days? 	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Very	  well	  	   Somewhat	  well	  	   Somewhat	  badly	  	   Very	  badly	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

8	  	  

26%	  	  

21	  	  

68%	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

0	  	  

0%	  	  

31	  	  

100%	  	  

26%	  	   94%	  	   100%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	  

147	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 149 of 151
	  

	  Table A48. The work of the EHPD improves relations between racial and ethnic groups in East	   	   	  	   	  	   Haven. 	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

19	  	  

58%	  	  

9	  	  

27%	  	  

3	  	  

9%	  	  

33	  	  

100%	  	  

6%	  	   64%	  	   91%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A49. The quality of my work influences the way the community perceives the EHPD 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

12	  	  

38%	  	  

38%	  	  

Agree	  	  

18	  	  

56%	  	  

94%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

100%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

0	  	  

0%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total Responding

32

100%

	  	  

	  Table A50. Law enforcement strategies on my shift negatively affect community relations.	  	   	  	   	   	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	   Agree	  	   Disagree	  	   Strongly	  disagree	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

1	  	  

3%	  	  

3%	  	  

2	  	  

6%	  	  

10%	  	  

22	  	  

71%	  	  

81%	  	  

6	  	  

19%	  	  

100%	  	  

31	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A51. Residents in the community I work in care more about safety than fairness in policing 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

1	  	  

Agree	  	  

13	  	  

Disagree	  	  

15	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

1	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

30	  	  

3%	  	   43%	  	   50%	  	   3%	  	   100%	  	  

3%	  	   47%	  	   97%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  Table A52. Residents in the community I work in	   trust the EHPD.	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

148	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 150 of 151
	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

3	  	  

Agree	  	  

21	  	  

Disagree	  	  

9	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

0	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

33	  	  

9%	  	   64%	  	   27%	  	   0%	  	   100%	  	  

9%	  	   73%	  	   100%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A53. If I lived in East Haven I would be satisfied with the police services. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

4	  	  

12%	  	  

12%	  	  

Agree	  	  

11	  	  

32%	  	  

44%	  	  

Disagree	  	  

13	  	  

38%	  	  

82%	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

6	  	  

18%	  	  

100%	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

34	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A54. In general, do you think the EHPD is doing an excellent, good, poor, or

very poor job? 	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Excellent	  	   Good	  	   Poor	  	   Very	  poor	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

5	  	  

14%	  	  

14%	  	  

21	  	  

58%	  	  

72%	  	  

7	  	  

19%	  	  

92%	  	  

3	  	  

8%	  	  

100%	  	  

36	  	  

100%	  	  

	  

	  	   	  	  

Table A55. Overall, the services of the police in East Haven are... 	  

	  

Frequency	  	   	   Percent	  	  

	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Excellent	  	  

5	  	   	  

14%	  	  

14%	  	  

Good	  	  

14	  	   	  

38%	  	  

51%	  	  

Fair	  	  

13	  	   	  

35%	  	  

86%	  	  

Poor	  	   Total	  Responding	  	  

5	  	   	   37	  	   	  

14%	  	   100%	  	   	  

100%	  	  

	  	   	  	   	  	  
	  	   	  	   	  	  

149	   	  

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 35-1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 151 of 151
	  

Table A56. The EHPD today is a better organization than it was three years ago. 	  

	  

	  

Frequency	  	  

Percent	  	  

Cum.	  Percent	  	  

	  Strongly	  agree	  	  

9	  	  

Agree	  	  

9	  	  

Disagree	  	  

8	  	  

Strongly	  disagree	  	  

4	  	  

Total	  Responding	  	  

30	  	  

30%	  	   30%	  	   27%	  	   13%	  	   100%	  	  

30%	  	   60%	  	   87%	  	   100%	  	   	  

	  	   	  	  

150	   	  

 
 Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 1 of 55
EXHIBIT A
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff;
v.
TOWN OF EAST HAVEN AND EAST HAVEN BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS,
Defendants.

No. 3:12-CV-1652 (AWT)
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

AGREEMENT FOR EFFECTIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL POLICING
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The United States of America, the Town of East Haven, the East Haven Police Department, and the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners (collectively, "the Parties") enter into this Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing ("Agreement") to ensure that the East Haven Police Department provides effective and lawful policing to all East Haven residents, in accordance with the United States Constitution, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-4a ("Title VI"), and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968,42 U.S.C. § 3789d ("Safe Streets Act"). In particular, the provisions of this Agreement are designed to ensure that East Haven residents are not subject to discriminatory policing, unjustified stops and arrests, or use of excessive force. Central to the Agreement is the establishment of numerous systems of institutional accountability, including a Joint Compliance Expert, which will provide the East I-Iaven Police Department with a lasting structure enabling policing that is consistent with the United States Constitution, federal law, and professional police practices. The Parties jointly request that this Agreement be entered as an order of the Court and that the Town of East Haven be permitted flexibility to implement the Agreement consistent with its terms.
2. Plaintiff in this action is the United States of America ("United States").
~-----~~ ~-~ ~-Defendant",-in-this-aGtiQn-ar€-the-'I'Qwn-gf'East-Maveni-th€-gast-Maven-I'glic€-Departmentt--­
("EHPD"); and the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners ("Board") (collectively, "Town").

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 2 of 55
II. BACKGROUND 4. On September 30,2009, the United States notified the Town and EHPD of the Civil
Rights Division, Special Litigation Section's investigation into allegations that EHPD officers engage in discriminatory policing, unconstitutional searches and seizures, and use of excessive force.
5. In conducting its investigation, the United States, with the assistance of police practice consultants, interviewed EHPD personnel, Town officials, and members of the community, conducted multiple on-site tours, and reviewed numerousEHPD documents and data sources.
6. On December 19, 20 II, the Civil Rights Division reported the findings of its investigation. Specifically, the Civil Rights Division found that EHPD engages in a pattern or practice of systematically discriminating against Latinos, in violation of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, 42 U.S.C. § 14141 ("§ 14141"), Title VI, and the Safe Streets Act. The Civil Rights Division also noted serious concerns that EHPD had failed to ensure that individuals in East Haven are free from unlawful searches and seizures and use of excessive force.
7. Following the release of the United States' investigative findings, the Mayor announced that the Town and EHPD were willing to rebuild EHPD through implementation of changes in policies and practices. The United States and the Town have accordingly determined that this Agreement, rather than costly and protracted litigation, is the most effective means to resolve its investigation.
8. In order to ensure that EHPD is providing law enforcement services consistent with the Constitution and federal law, this Agreement establishes seven focus areas detailing the requirements that the Town, EHPD, and the Board have agreed to undertake to ensure constitutional and effective policing. These focus areas are: (a) General Policies and Training; (b) Bias-Free Policing; (c) Stops, Searches, and Seizures; (d) Use of Force; (e) Civilian Complaints, Internal Investigations, and Discipline; (f) Supervision and Management; and (g) Community Engagement and Oversight. This Agreement also establishes a Joint Compliance Expert responsible for: (a) promoting constitutional and effective policing by EHPD; (b) evaluating EHPD's performance under this Agreement; and (c) reporting on EI-IPD' s compliance with this Agreement.
III. DEFINITIONS 9. The following terms and definitions shall apply to this Agreement:
a. "EHPD" or "the Department" shall refer to the East Haven Police Department and its agents, officers, supervisors, and employees (both sworn and unsworn).
b. "Chief of Police" shall refer to the East Haven Chief of Police, including all successors in office.
c. "Board" shall refer to the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners, including all successors in office.
2

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 3 of 55
d. "Town" shall refer to the Town of East Haven, including its agents, officers, and employees.
e. "Mayor" shall refer to the Mayor of East Haven,. including all successors in office.
f. "DOJ" shall refer to the United States Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division and its agents and employees.
g. "USAO" means the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Connecticut.
h. "Court" shall refer to the Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut presiding over this case.
i. "Active resistance" means a subject's physical actions to defeat an officer's attempt at control and to avoid being taken into custody. Verbal statements alone do not constitute active resistance.
j. "Apprehension" means the arrest, capture, or taking into custody ofa person.
k. "Arrest" means a seizure of greater scope or duration than an investigatory stop or detention. An arrest is lawful when supported by probable cause.
1. "AVL" means "Automatic Vehicle Location," a system that automatically tracks the geographic position of a vehicle and transmits that information to a receiver.
m. "Bilingual staff' means a staff person who has demonstrated and verified proficiency, pursuant to generally accepted objective criteria, in both spoken English and at least one other language as authorized by EHPD. Bilingual staff must voluntarily agree to be assessed and serve as a bilingual employee on behalf ofEHPD.
n. "Civilian Employee" means any non-sworn personnel employed by EHPD, on either a temporary or permanent basis, in either a paid or unpaid capacity.
o. "Complainant" means any person, including an EHPD officer or employee, who makes a complaint against EHPD or an officer or employee ofEHPD.
p. "Complaint" means any complaint made to EHPD by a member of the public, an EHPD officer, or a civilian employee, regarding EHPD services, policy or procedure, or any claim for damages or criminal complaint that alleges misconduct by an EHPD officer or civilian employee.
3

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 4 of 55

q. "Critical firearm discharge" means a discharge of a firearm by an EHPD officer, including accidental discharges, discharges at animals, and discharges at persons where no one is struck, with the exception of range and training discharges.

r.

"Defendant-directed compliance period" means the time period following the

Effective Date, lasting no more than 270 days, during which the Parties will

request a stay of proceedings. During the Defendant-directed compliance period,

the Defendants shall work to gain substantial compliance with the provisions of

this Agreement.

s. "Demographic Category" means race, color, ethnicity, or national origin.

t.

"Discipline" means a personnel action for violation of an established law,

regulation, rule, or EHPD policy, including, but not limited to, an admonishment,

written reprimand, suspension, demotion or dismissal.

u. "Discriminatory Policing" means selective enforcement or non-enforcement of the law, including the selecting or rejecting of particular policing tactics or strategies, based on membership in a demographic category specified in this Agreement. Discriminatory policing does not include using membership in a demographic category as part of a reliable suspect-specific description.

v. "ECW" means Electronic Control Weapon, a weapon designed primarily to discharge electrical charges into a subject that will cause involuntary muscle contractions and overrides the subject's voluntary motor responses.

w. "ECW application" means the contact and delivery of electrical impulse to a subject with an Electronic Control Weapon.

x. "Effective Date" means the day this Agreement is entered by the Court.

y. "EIS" means the Early Intervention System.

z. "Exigent circumstances" means emergencies in which a reasonable person would believe that imminent bodily harm to a person or persons or the destruction of evidence is likely.

aa. "Firearm" means a pistol, revolver, shotgun, carbine or machine gun, as well as any instrument capable of discharging a bullet or shot.

bb. "Implement" or "implementation" means the development or putting into place of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _<La:polic)' or procedure, including the appropriate training of all relevant personnel,_ __
and the consistent and verified performance of that policy or procedure in actual practice.

cc. "Including," "includes," and "include" mean "including, but not limited to."

4

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 5 of 55
dd. "lAO" stands for Internal Affairs Officer, the EHPD officer or officers charged with conducting internal and administrative investigations of EHPD officers, agents, and employees, including investigations of serious uses of force, uses of force by EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or uses of force reassigned to the lAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the lAO.
ee. "Interpretation" means the act of listening to a communication in one language (source language) and orally converting it into another language (target language), while retaining the same meaning.
ff. "Joint Compliance Expert" means a person or team of people with specialized expertise who shall be selected to independently assess and report on the Defendants' implementation of this Agreement.
gg. "Less-lethal force" means a force application not intended or expected to cause death or serious injury and which is commonly understood to have less potential for causing death or serious injury than conventional, more lethal police tactics. Nonetheless, use of less-lethal force can result in death or serious injury.
hh. "Less-lethal weapon" means any apprehension or restraint tool that, when used as designed and intended, is less likely to cause death or serious injury than a conventional lethal weapon (e.g., firearm). Nonetheless, use ofa less-lethal weapon may result in death or serious injury.
n. "Lethal force" means any use of force likely to cause death or serious physical injury, including, the use of a firearrn, neck hold, or strike to the head, neck or throat with a hard object, including a fist.
jj. "LEP" means Limited English Proficient, and refers to a person who does not speak English as his/her primary language and has a limited ability to read, write, speak, or understand English. LEP individuals may be competent in certain types of communication (e.g., spealdng or understanding), but still be LEP for other purposes (e.g., reading or writing).
kk. "Misconduct complaint" means any allegation of improper conduct by an officer or other EHPD employee, whether the complaint alleges corruption or other criminal misconduct; a violation oflaw; or a violation of EHPD policy or procedure. EHPD shall document and evaluate expressions of dissatisfaction regarding the service provided by EHPD officers or employees to determine whether these complaints include allegations of misconduct and are therefore
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _"m"i"'sc"o"'n"d"u"'c'-t""co",m,,,Rlaints, or are purely service comR",la",in"t""s,,-._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
5

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 6 of 55
11. "Neck hold" refers to one of the following types of holds: (1) bar-arm control hold: a hold that inhibits breathing by compression of the airway in the neck; and (2) carotid restraint hold: a hold that inhibits blood flow by compression of the blood vessels in the neck; (3) a lateral vascular neck constraint; or (4) a hold with a knee or other object to the back of a prone subject's neck. A neck hold shall be considered lethal force.
mm. "Non-disciplinary corrective action" refers to action other than discipline taken by an EHPD supervisor to enable or encourage an officer to improve his or her performance.
nn. "EHPD unit" means any designated organization of officers within EHPD, including patrol shifts and investigative components.
00. "EHPDAI" means EHPD Authorized Interpreter, a bilingual EHPD employee who has been authorized to interpret for others in certain situations, such as interviews, interrogations, or taking and responding to civilian complaints.
pp. "Passive Resistance" means non-compliance with officer commands that is non­ violent and is less aggressive than active resistance.
qq. "Personnel" means EHPD officers and employees.
rr. "Police officer" or "officer" mean any law enforcement agent employed by EHPD, including supervisors and cadets.
ss. "Policies and Procedures" means written regulations or directives, regardless of the name of the regulation or directive, describing the duties, functions, and obligations of EHPD officers andlor employees, and providing specific direction in how to fulfill those duties, functions, or obligations.
tt. "Pretext stop" refers to a stop made by an officer for an observed infraction, such as a traffic infraction, where the officer's object is to conduct a criminal investigation unrelated to the observed infraction.
uu. "Probable cause" means reasonably trustworthy facts and circumstances that, within the totality of the circumstances, lead an officer to reasonably believe that an individual has committed or is committing a crime.
vv. "Professional police practices" refers to police practices that are endorsed by credible, professional policing organizations and/or are generally accepted,
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _"'st""andard Qractices used b)' a wide varietx-of comQetent Qolice deQartments. For the purposes of this Agreement, whether a particular practice constitutes a "professional police practice" shall be determined by the Joint Compliance Expert in consultation with the Parties.
6

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 7 of 55
ww. "Reasonable Force" means that force which an ordinary, prudent and reasonable
officer placed in the same position with the same knowledge would find to be reasonable. In determining whether the force used by a police officer in effectuating an arrest was reasonable under the circumstances, factors to be considered are: (1) the known character of the arrestee; (2) the risks and dangers faced by the officers and third parties; (3) the nature of the offense involved; (4) the chance of the arrestee's escape if the particular means are not employed; (5) the existence of alternative methods of arrest; (6) the physical size, strength, and weaponry of the officers as compared to the arrestee; and (7) the exigency of the moment. Force that is not "reasonable" is "unreasonable."
xx. "Reasonable suspicion" means articulable facts that, within the totality of the circumstances, lead an officer to reasonably suspect that criminal activity has been or is about to be committed.
yy. "Seizure" or "detention" mean any restriction on the liberty interest of an individual. A seizure occurs when an officer's words or actions convey to a reasonable person that he or she is not free to leave.
zz. "Serious use of force" means: (1) all uses offorce by an EHPD officer that create a substantial risk of death, serious disfigurement, disability or impairment of the functioning of any body part or organ; (2) all critical firearm discharges by an EHPD officer; (3) all uses offorce by an EHPD officer resulting in a significant injury, including a broken bone or an injury requiring hospitalization; (4) all head, neck, and throat strikes; (5) all neck holds; (6) all uses of force by an EHPD officer resulting in a loss of consciousness; (7) all other uses offorce by an EHPD officer apparently resulting in death; (8) all canine apprehensions; (9) more than two applications of an ECW on an individual during a single interaction, regardless of the mode or duration ofthe application, and whether the applications are by the same or different officers, ot ECW application for longer than 15 seconds, whether continuous or consecutive; and (10) any strike, blow, kick, ECW application, or similar use of force against a handcuffed subject.
aaa. "Service firearm" means any firearm issued to sworn personnel by the Department.
bbb. "Shall" means that the provision imposes a mandatory duty.
ccc. "Supervisor" means a sworn EHPD employee at the rank of sergeant or above (or anyone acting in those capacities) and non-sworn employees ofEHPD with oversight responsibility for other personnel.
ddd. "Supervisory investigation" means an investigation conducted by a subject officer's supervisor or higher level official within the officer's chain-of­ command.
7

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 8 of 55
eee. "Supervisor's Investigation Report" means a written report documenting the supervisory investigation.
fff. "Training" shall comport with best practices and include adult-learning methods that incorporate role-playing scenarios and interactive exercises, as well as traditional lecture formats. Training shall also include testing andlor writings that indicate that the officer comprehends the material taught.
ggg. "Translation" means the replacement of written text from one language (source language) with an equivalent written text in another language (target language).
hhh. "Use of force" means any physical coercion used to effect, influence, or persuade an individual to comply with an order from an officer above escorting or unresisted handcuffing, including unholstering a firearm.
iii. "Use offorce indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer" means that force which a reasonable and trained supervisor would conclude could result in criminal charges due to the apparent circumstances of the use offorce, such as the level of the force used as compared to the resistance encountered or discrepancies in the use of force as described by the officer and the use of force as evidenced by any resulting injuries, witness statements, or other evidence. It includes all strikes, blows, kicks, ECW applications, or other similar uses offorce against a handcuffed subject, absent exigent circumstances.
jjj. "Use of Force Report" means a written report documenting all force above un­ resisted handcuffing.
kkk. "Vehicle stop" means any instance where an EHPD officer directs a civilian operating a motor vehicle of any type to stop and the driver is detained for any length of time. IV. POLICIES AND TRAINING GENERALLY
10. EHPD's policies and procedures shall reflect and express the Department's core values and priorities, and provide clear direction to ensure that officers lawfully, effectively, and ethically carry out their law enforcement responsibilities. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all EHPD officers are trained to understand and be able to fulfill their duties and responsibilities pursuant to EHPD policies and procedures. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that supervisors have the knowledge, skills, and ability to provide close and effective supervision to each officer under the supervisor's direct command; provide officers with the direction and guidance necessary to improve and develop as police officers; and to identify, correct, and prevent officer misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.
8

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 9 of 55
A. Policy Development, Review, and Implementation
11. EHPD shall develop and implement comprehensive and agency-wide policies and procedures that ensure consistency with, and full implementation of, this Agreement, and incorporate each requirement herein. Unless otherwise noted, all policies, procedures, and manuals shall be developed within 270 days of the Effective Date.
12. EHPD policies and procedures shall define terms clearly, comply with applicable law and the requirements ofthis Agreement, and comport with professional police practices.
13. EHPD shall review each policy or procedure related to this Agreement 180 days after it is implemented, and annually thereafter, to ensure that the policy or procedure provides effective direction to EHPD personnel and remains consistent with the Agreement, professional police practices, and current law, including incorporating mechanisms to promote and measure accountability and community engagement. EHPD also shall review policies and procedures as necessary upon notice of a policy deficiency during audits or reviews. Within 60 days of that review EHPD shall revise the policy or procedure and consult with the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert shall provide the same review and approval ofrevised policies and procedures as with the initial policies and procedures to ensure consistency with this Agreement.
14. EHPD's Department-wide policies and procedures shall be collected in a Department­ level policy and procedure manual, and unit-wide policies and procedures (or standard operating procedures) shall be collected in unit-level policy and procedure manuals. EHPD shall develop and implement policy and procedure manuals that include the following EHPD functions:
a) Field operations, including patrol, supervision task forces, and special operations; b) Internal investigations, including case and records management, administrative
investigations, confidential investigations, parallel criminal and administrative investigations, audits, and officer drug testing; c) Use of force reporting, reviews, and investigations, including both Supervisor and lAO force investigations and reviews; and in-custody death reviews; d) Criminal investigations; and e) Field and in-service training.
These manuals shall incorporate and otherwise be consistent with the requirements of this Agreement.
15. EHPD shall expressly prohibit all forms of retaliation, whether subtle or direct, including _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-'d"'i"'sc"'o'-'u"-'!ragement, intimidation, coercion, or adverse action, against anY-]2erson, civilian or
officer, who reports misconduct, makes a misconduct complaint, or cooperates with an investigation of misconduct. The default penalty for retaliation shall be termination.
9

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 10 of 55
16. EHPD shall develop a policy governing its obligations under Brady v. Maryland,
373 U.S. 83 (1963), and its progeny. As part of this policy, EHPD shall track and maintain records of all officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make these records available to prosecutors.
17. EHPD shall submit all new and revised policies, procedures, or manuals related to this Agreement to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ for review and comment prior to publication and implementation within 270 days of the Effective Date. If the Joint Compliance Expert or DOJ object that the proposed new or revised policy, procedure, or manual does not incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, or is inconsistent with this Agreement or the law, it shall note this objection in writing to all parties within 15 business days of the receipt of the policy from EHPD. If neither the Joint Compliance Expert nor DOJ object to the new or revised policy, procedure, or manual, EHPD agrees to implement it within 30 days of it being provided to DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert.
18. EHPD shall have 15 days to resolve any objections to the new or revised policies, procedures, and manuals implementing the specified provisions. If, after this IS-day period has run, DOJ maintains its objection, then the Joint Compliance Expert shall have an additional 15 days to resolve the objection. If either party disagrees with the Joint Compliance Expert's resolution ofthe objection, either Party may ask the Court to resolve the matter. The Joint Compliance Expert shall determine whether in some instances an additional amount oftime is necessary to ensure full and proper review of policies. Factors to consider in making this determination include: 1) complexity of the policy; 2) extent of disagreement regarding policy; 3) number of policies provided simultaneously; and 4) extraordinary circnmstances delaying review by DOJ or the Joint Compliance Expert. In determining whether these factors warrant additional time for review, the Joint Compliance Expert shall fully consider the importance of prompt implementation of policies, and shall allow additional time for policy review only where it is clear that additional time is necessary to ensure full and proper review. Any extension to the above timelines by the Joint Compliance Expert shall also toll EHPD's deadline for policy completion.
19. EHPD shall apply policies uniformly and hold officers accountable for complying with EHPD policy and procedure.
20. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall formalize a common template to use for all EHPD policies and General Orders. The template shall include a method for updates and revisions that permits all parties to keep track offormer versions of policies and General Orders While clearly labeling currently operative policies and General
_ _ _ _ _ _ _---'O~r'_'d"'e"_'rs"_.-"A-,I"I-"E~f",IP,-,D,,--.l2olicies and General Orders shall be made to conform to this template.
21. Within 365 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall make all new and revised EHPD policies freely available for public review on the Town website, unless there is a reasonable basis for maintaining a specific policy or procedure confidential or unless an
10

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 11 of 55
exemption from disclosure is allowed under State or Federal Freedom of Information law or any other applicable law.
22. EHPD shall review and revise its Code of Conduct within 180 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter, to:
a) describe with specificity permitted and prohibited officer conduct; b) be consistent with the requirements of professional police practice and this
Agreement; and c) have an absolute requirement of officer honesty and make termination the
default penalty for dishonesty.
23. EHPD shall submit proposed revisions to its Code of Conduct to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ for review and comment at least 60 days before the implementation of any revision to ensure consistency with this Agreement. The dispute resolution process and associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 of this Agreement shall apply to DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert's review of any new or revised Code of Conduct.
B. Training on Revised Policies, Procedures, and Practices
24. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall ensure that each officer and employee attends a 2-4 hour training on the content of this Agreement and the responsibilities of each officer and employee pursuant to it.
25. Within 30 days after issuing a policy or procedure pursuant to this Agreement, EHPD shall ensure that all relevant EHPD personnel have received, read, and understand their responsibilities pursuant to the policy or procedure, including the requirement that each officer or employee report violations of policy; that supervisors of all ranks shall be held accountable for identifying and responding to policy or procedure violations by personnel under their command; and that personnel will be held accountable for policy and procedure violations. EHPD shall document that each relevant EHPD officer or other employee has received, read, and sufficiently understands the policy. Training beyond roll-call or similar training will be necessary for many new policies to ensure officers understand and can perform their duties pursuant to the policy.
26. EHPD shall ensure delivery of the one-time and recurrent in-service training requirements set out throughout this Agreement. As set out herein, EHPD shall provide a minimum of 32 hours ofin-service training each year to each officer, in addition to any specialized training for officers in certain units, supervisors, etc., and in addition to the one-time training required by this Agreement. Training in related areas may be delivered together. (For example, aSlJects of training in effective community engagement and bias­ free policing may be incorporated into stop, search, and arrest training). The in-service training shall not include any firearms training required by the state. The frequency and subject areas for initial one-time and recurrent in-service training are set out in the sections below; however, it is anticipated that the frequency and subject areas for in-
11

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 12 of 55
service training in the future will be determined by the training plan this Agreement requires EHPD to develop.
27. EHPD shall provide mandatory supervisory, leadership, and command accountability training, tailored to each level of supervision and command, of24 - 40 hours. All EHPD supervisors shall receive supervisory training prior to assuming supervisory responsibilities or serving as an acting supervisor, and shall receive no fewer than 40 hours of supervisory in-service training annually thereafter.
28. The supervisory training program shall include instruction in the following topics:
a) techniques for effectively guiding and directing officers and promoting effective and ethical police practices;
b) de-escalating conflict; c) evaluation of written reports; d) reviewing and investigating officer uses of force; e) responding to and investigating allegations of officer misconduct; f) risk.assessment and risk management; g) evaluating officer performance; h) appropriate disciplinary sanctions and non-disciplinary corrective action; and i) using the Risk Management System to facilitate close and effective supervision.
29. EHPD shall submit training curricula and lesson plans, revised pursuant to this Agreement, to the Joint Compliance Expert and DO.r for review and comment at least 90 days prior to the scheduled date of training delivery. The Joint Compliance Expert shall provide the Parties with written comments regarding the training. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall review all EHPD training curricula and lesson plans promulgated pursuant to this Agreement to determine whether they are consistent with and incorporate the requirements of this Agreement, and comport with professional police practices. The dispute resolution process and associated time frames set forth in Paragraphs 17 and 18 of this Agreement shall apply to DOJ and the Joint Compliance Expert's review of training curricula and lesson plans.
30. Unless otherwise noted, the training required pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered within 365 days of the Effective Date, and annually thereafter. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall set out a schedule for delivering all training required by this Agreement.
31. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement documented and approved testing policies and procedures regarding training to ensure that that all testing is valid, reliable, fair, and legally defensible. Both knowledge-based and
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _}lerformance-based tests shall be designed, develo}led, administered, and scored according to established professional standards of practice. Testing policies and procedures shall include detailed test security measures. All tests shall be job-related, testing knowledge and skills required for successful job performance.
12

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 13 of 55
V. BIAS-FREE POLICING
32. EHPD shall deliver police services that are equitable, respectful, and free of unlawful bias, in a manner that promotes broad community engagement and confidence in the Department. In conducting its activities, EHPD shall ensure that members of the public receive equal protection of the law, without bias based on demographic category, and in accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.
A. Bias-Free Policing Training
33. EHPD shall provide all officers with 4 hours of comprehensive and interdisciplinary training on bias-free policing within 180 days of the Effective Date, and 2 - 4 hours annually thereafter, based on developments in Connecticut or federal law and EHPD policy. Such training shall emphasize that discriminatory policing, in the form of either selective enforcement or non-enforcement of the law, including the selecting or rejecting of particular policing tactics or strategies, is prohibited by policy and will subject officers to discipline. This training shall address:
a) methods and strategies for more effective policing that relies upon non­ discriminatory factors;
b) police and community perspectives related to discriminatory policing; c) constitutional and other legal requirements related to equal protection and
unlawful discrimination, including the requirements of this Agreement; d) the protection of civil rights as a central part of the police mission and as essential
to effective policing; e) the existence and impact of arbitrary classifications, stereotyping, and implicit
bias; f) instruction in the data collection protocols required by this Agreement; g) identification ofkey decision points where prohibited discrimination can take
effect at both the incident and strategic-planning levels; and h) methods, strategies, and techniques to reduce misunderstanding, conflict, and
complaints due to perceived bias or discrimination, including problem-oriented policing strategies.
B. Ensuring Bias-Free Policing
34. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of demographic category in EHPD police practices. This policy shall have the following elements:
a) EHPD's policy on bias-free policing shall prohibit officers from using demographic category (to any extent or degree) in conducting stops or detentions, or activities following stops or detentions, except when engaging in appropriate suspect-specific activity to identify a particular person or persons.
13

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 14 of 55
b) EHPD shall prohibit officer use of proxies for demographic category, including language ability, geographic location, or manner of dress. c) When officers are seeking one or more specific persons who have been identified or described by their demographic category, or any proxy thereto, officers may rely on these descriptions only when combined with other appropriate identifying factors, and may not give exclusive attention or nndue weight to demographic category. d) Data collection, as set forth in Paragraphs 64(c) and 65 of this Agreement.
35. EHPD shall conduct quarterly analysis, as well as analysis on a cumulative basis, consistent with the methodology employed by the Joint Compliance Expert, of its traffic enforcement activities to ensure officer, squad, and Department compliance with the bias­ free policy.
36. EHPD shall develop a formalized procedure for officers to notify arrested foreign nationals of their right to contact their consulate, or to contact the appropriate consular official directly.
37. EHPD shall refer any complaint plausibly implicating the bias-free policy to the lAO and to the Joint Compliance Expert. EHPD shall treat any violation of the bias-free policy as a serious violation. Officers who engage in discriminatory policing will besubj ected to discipline, and, where appropriate, possible criminal prosecution.
38. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall incorporate concrete requirements regarding bias-free policing and equal protection into its hiring, promotion, and performance assessment processes, including giving significant weight to an individual's documented history of bias-free policing, as well as using interviews and other methods to assess the individual's ability and willingness to effectively practice bias-free policing. EHPD's hiring plan shall also include steps to encourage qualified minority and other candidates who have a demonstrated ability to serve diverse communities to apply for positions in EHPD
C. Language Assistance
39. EHPD shall ensure effective communication with and provide timely and meaningful access to police services to all members of the community, regardless of their national origin or limited ability to speak, read, write, or understand English. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:
a) develop and implement a comprehensive language assistance plan and policy that complies, at a minimum, with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.) and other applicable law, and comports with professional policing practices;
b) ensure that all EHPD personnel take reasonable steps to provide timely, meaningful language assistance services to LEP individuals they encounter and whenever an LEP individual requests language assistance services;
14

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 15 of 55

c) identify and assess demographic data, specifically the number of LEP individuals

within its jurisdiction and the number of LEP victims and witnesses who seek

EHPD services;

d) use collected demographic and service data to develop and meet specific hiring

goals for bilingual staff;

e) regularly assess the proficiency and qualifications of bilingual staff to become a

EHPD Authorized Interpreter ("EHPDAI");

f) ensure that 911 call-takers identify an EHPDAI to respond to an incident

involving an LEP individual. If no EHPDAI is available, the personnel shall

contact a telephonic interpretation service provider. The call-taker shall note in

information to the radio dispatch that the 911 caller is an LEP individual and

indicate the language;

g) develop protocols for interpretation for interrogations and interviews of LEP

individuals, including requiring and ensuring the use of a qualified interpreter for

the taking of any formal statement that could adversely affect a suspect or

witness' legal rights;

h) develop and implement a process for taking, responding to and tracking civilian

complaints and resolutions of complaints filed by LEP individuals;

i)

implement a process for recruitment of qualified bilingual personnel to meet

demonstrated service needs. As part of this process, EHPD shall establish

significant and sustained relationships with local and state-wide institutions and

community organizations that can serve as the source of qualified bilingual

applicants and facilitate outreach to such advocates; and

j)

implement effective incentives for bilingual employees to become EHPDAls,

such as pay differentials and consideration in performance evaluations,

assignments, and promotions.

40. EHPD shall translate the language assistance plan and policy into Spanish and other languages as appropriate, and post the English and translated versions in a public area of the police department building, as well as online, and in any other locations throughout the Town where individuals go to seek police assistance. EHPD shall distribute the language assistance plan and policy to a variety of community organizations serving LEP communities encoll1tered by E1-IPD.

41. EHPD shall distribute its LEP plan and policy to all staff and police personnel, and, within 180 days of the Effective Date provide a minimum of one hour of training to all personnel on providing language assistance services to LEP individuals. This training shall include:

a) EHPD's LEP plan and policies, and the requirements of Title VI and this Agreement;
b) how to access EHPD-authorized, telephonic and in-person interpreters; c) how to work with interpreters in the field; d) cultural diversity and language barrier policing; and e) basic command Spanish for officers assigned to patrol areas with significant LEP
populations.

15

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 16 of 55
42. Within 60 days of Effective Date, the Town shall designate a language access coordinator who shall coordinate and ensure EHPD's compliance with its language assistance plan.
43. Within 60 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a process of consultation with representatives of the LEP community to develop and at least annually review: implementation of the language assistance plan, including areas of possible collaboration to ensure its effectiveness; identification of additional languages that would be appropriate for translation of materials; accuracy and quality of EHPD language assistance services; and concerns, ideas, and strategies for ensuring language access.
VI. STOPS, SEARCHES, AND ARRESTS
44. EHPD shall ensure that all EHPD investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are conducted in accordance with the rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws ofthe United States. EHPD shall ensure that investigatory stops, searches, and arrests are part of an effective overall crime prevention strategy; are consistent with community priorities for enforcement; and are carried out even-handedly. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.
A. Investigatory Stops and Detentions
45. EHPD officers shall conduct investigatory stops or detentions only where the officer has reasonable suspicion that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in the commission of a crime.
46. E1-IPD officers shall not use "canned" or conclusory language in any reports documenting investigatory stops, detentions and searches. Articulation of reasonable suspicion and probable cause shall be specific and clear.
47. EHPD officers shall not use or rely on information known to be materially false or incorrect in effectuating an investigatory stop or detention.
48. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category as a factor, to any extent or degree, in establishing reasonable suspicion or probable cause, except as part of an actual and credible description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.
B. Searches
49. EHPD officers shall not use demographic category in exercising discretion to conduct a warrantless search or to seek a search warrant, except as part of an actual and credible description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.
50. Where an officer seeks consent for a search, the officer shall affirmatively inform the subj ect of his or her right to refuse and to revoke consent at any time, articulate and document the independent legal justification for the search, and document the subject's consent on a written form that explains these rights.
16

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 17 of 55
51. EHPD shall ensure that the consent to search form includes separate signature lines for civilians to affirm that they understand they have a right to refuse, and for officers to certify that they have read and explained the right to refuse to the civilian.
52. An affidavit or sworn declaration supporting an application for a search warrant shall provide an accurate, complete, and clear description of the offense, the place or thing to be searched, scope of the search, and time and method of the search.
53. A supervisor shall review each request for a search or arrest warrant, including each affidavit or declaration before it is filed by an officer in support of a warrant application, for appropriateness, legality, and conformance with EHPD policy and this Agreement. The supervisor shall aS$ess the information contained in the warrant application and supporting documents for authenticity, including an examination for "canned" or conclusory language, inconsistent information, and lack of articulation of a legal basis for the warrant.
54. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those warrant applications that are legally unsupported, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. The quality and accuracy of search warrants and supportive affidavits or declarations shall be taken into account in officer performance evaluations.
55. A supervisor shall review the operational plan for the execution of a search warrant and, absent exceptional circumstances, shall be present for execution of the search warrant. A supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her presence. Once executed, a supervisor shall review the execution of the search warrant. Supervisors shall memorialize their reviews in writing within 24 hours ofthe execution of a search warrant. The quality of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor's performance evaluations.
56. EHPD shall maintain centrally a log listing each search warrant, the case file where a copy of such warrant is maintained, the officer who applied for, and each supervisor who reviewed the application for a search warrant.
C. Arrests
57. EI-IPD officers shall only arrest an individual where the officer has probable cause. In effectuating an arrest, EHPD officers shall not rely on information known to be materially false or incorrect. Officers may not consider demographic category in effecting an arrest, except as part of an actual and credible description of a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation.
58. An officer shall immediately notify a supervisor when effectuating a felony arrest, an arrest where the officer used force, an arrest for obstructing or resisting an officer, any disorderly conduct type arrest, or a custodial arrest for a vehicle infraction, and the
17

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 18 of 55
supervisor shall, absent exceptional circumstances, immediately respond to the scene. A supervisor shall document in the case file the exceptional circumstances preventing his or her presence.
59. The responding supervisor shall approve or disapprove the officer's arrest recommendation, based on the existence of justifiable probable cause and EHPD policy. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in the officer's arrest recommendation, including releasing the subject, recommending non­ disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation.
60. At the time of presentment at EHPD headquarters, a watch commander or supervisor shall visually inspect each detainee or arrestee for injury, interview the detainee or arrestee for complaints of pain, and ensure that the detainee or arrestee receives medical attention from an appropriate medical provider, as necessary. The watch commander or supervisor shall document the results of the visual inspection inwriting.
61. EHPD officers shall complete all arrest reports before the end of shift. EHPD field supervisors shall review each arrest report of officers under their command and shall memorialize their review in writing within 12 hours of the arrest, absent exceptional circumstances. Supervisors shall review reports and forms for "canned" or conclusory language, inconsistent information, lack of articulation of the legal basis for the action, or other indicia that the information in the reports or forms is not authentic or correct.
62. As part of the supervisory review, the supervisor shall document in an auditable format those arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address violations or deficiencies in making arrests, including recommending non-disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken, to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each violation or deficiency is noted in the officer's performance evaluations. The quality of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor's own performance evaluations. EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to conduct reviews of adequate and consistent quality.
63. A command-level official shall review, in writing, all supervisory reviews related to arrests that are unsupported by probable cause, are in violation of EHPD policy or this Agreement, or that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy,
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _"'st"'ra"'t"'egy, tactics, or training. The commander's review shall be completed within seven days of receiving the document reporting the event. The commander shall evaluate the corrective action and recommendations in the supervisor's written report and ensure that all appropriate corrective action is taken, including referring the incident to the lAO for investigation.
18

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 19 of 55
D. Stop and Search Data Collection and Review
64. EHPD shall, consistent with this Agreement, develop a comprehensive policy on stops, searches and seizures. This policy shall have the following elements:
a) A requirement that prior to making traffic stops, officers notify dispatch about known information, including the number of occupants of the vehicle, the perceived race or ethnicity ofthe occupants, and a description of the basis for the stop;
b) A detailed description of the justification necessary for officers to make stops and arrests;
c) A requirement that all stops, searches, and seizures be documented in an Incident Report that records:
i. the officer's name and badge number; ii. date, time, and location of the stop; iii. duration of the stop; iv. the apparent race, color or ethnicity of the individual, based on the police
officer's reasonable observation and perception; v. the suspected violation that led to the stop; vi. whether any contraband or evidence was seized from any individual, and
nature of the contraband or evidence; vii. the post-stop action taken with regard to the violation (including a
warning, a citation, an arrest, or a use of force); and viii. whether any search was conducted, the kind of search conducted, the basis
for the search, whether the search was consensual or non-consensual, and the outcome of the search.
65. Within 270 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a system to collect data on all investigatory stops and searches, whether or not they result in an arrest or issuance of a citation. This system shall allow for analysis and searches and also shall be integrated into the EIS. EHPD's stop and search data collection system shall be subject to the review of the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall require officers to document all required information.
66. Officers shall submit documentation of investigatory stops and detentions, and any searches resulting from or proximate to the stop or detention, including a complete and accurate inventory of all property or evidence seized, to their supervisors by the end of the shift in which the police action occurred. Absent exceptional circumstances, within 12 hours of receiving a report on an investigatory stop and detention or search, a supervisor shall review the reRort and shall document: (a) those investigatory stops and detentions that appear unsupported by reasonable suspicion, (b) those searches that appear to be without legal justification; (c) stops or searches in violation ofEHPD policy or this Agreement, or (d) stops or searches that indicate a need for corrective action or review of agency policy, strategy, tactics, or training.
19

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 20 of 55
67. The supervisor shall take appropriate action to address all violations or deficiencies in investigatory stops or detention or executing a search, including recommending non­ disciplinary corrective action for the involved officer, and/or referring the incident for administrative or criminal investigation. For each subordinate, the supervisor shall track each violation or deficiency and the corrective action taken, if any, to identify officers needing repeated corrective action. The supervisor shall ensure that each violation or deficiency is noted in the officer's performance evaluations. The quality and completeness of these supervisory reviews shall be taken into account in the supervisor's own performance evaluations. EHPD shall take appropriate corrective or disciplinary action against supervisors who fail to conduct complete, thorough, and accurate reviews of officers' investigatory detentions and searches.
68. EHPD shall develop a protocol for comprehensive analysis, on at least a quarterly basis, of the stop and search data collected. This protocol shall be subject to the review of the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, and shall identify and incorporate appropriate benchmarks for comparison.
69. On at least a semi-armual basis, EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall issue a report summarizing the stop and search data collected, the analysis ofthat data, and the steps taken to correct problems and build on successes. The report shall be publicly available.
70. EHPD shall ensure that all databases containing individual specific data comply fully with federal and state privacy standards governing personally identifying information. EHPD shall develop a process to restrict database access to authorized, identified users who are accessing the information for a specific and identified purpose.
E. First Amendment Right to Observe and Record Officer Conduct
71. EHPD shall ensure that onlookers or bystanders may witness, observe, record, andlor comment on officer conduct, including stops, detentions, searches, arrests, or uses of force in accordance with their rights, immunities, and privileges secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. Officers shall respect the right of civilians to observe, record, and/or verbally comment on or complain about the performance of police duties occurring in public, and EI-IPD shall ensure that officers understand that exercising this right serves important public purposes.
72. Individuals observing stops, detentions, arrests and other incidents shall be permitted to remain in the proximity of the incident unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to move an individual, such as: an individual's presence would jeopardize the safety of the officer, the suspect, or others in the vicinity; the individual violates the law; or the individual incites others to violate the law.
73. Individuals shall be permitted to record police officer enforcement activities by camera, video recorder, cell phone recorder, or other means, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis to deny permission.
20

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 21 of 55
74. Officers shall not threaten, intimidate, or otherwise disconrage an individual from remaining in the proximity of or recording police officer enforcement activities.
75. Officers shall not detain, prolong the detention of, or arrest an individual for remaining in the proximity of, recording or verbally commenting on officer conduct directed at the individual or a third party, unless there is an actual and articulable law enforcement basis for the detention.
76. Officers shall report to their supervisors whenever they believe they have been recorded by a member of the public.
77. Officers shall not seize or otherwise coerce production of recorded sounds or images, without obtaining a warrant, or order an individual to destroy such recordings. Where an officer has a reasonable belief that a bystander or witness has captnred a recording of critical evidence related to a felony, the officer may secure such evidence for no more than three honrs while a legal subpoena, search warrant, or other valid order is obtained.
F. Stop, Search and Arrest Training
78. EHPD shall provide all officers with comprehensive training on stops, searches and arrests, including the requirements of this Agreement, of no fewer than 8 honrs within 180 days of the Effective Date and between 4 - 6 honrs on an at least an annual basis thereafter. Such training shall be taught by a competent legal instructor with significant experience litigating, or teaching at an accredited law school, Fonrth Amendment issues, and shall:
a) address Fonrth Amendment and related law; EHPD policies, and requirements in this Agreement regarding searches and seizures;
b) address First Amendment and related law in the context of the rights of individuals to verbally dispute, observe, and record officer conduct;
c) address the difference between various police contacts by the scope and level of police intrusion; between probable cause, reasonable suspicion and mere speculation; and voluntary consent from mere acquiescence to police authority;
d) provide guidance on the facts and circumstances that should be considered in initiating, conducting, terminating, and expanding an investigatory stop or detention;
e) provide guidance on proper and improper use of pretextual stops. f) provide guidance on the level of permissible intrusion when conducting searches,
such as "pat-downs" or "frisks"; g) provide guidance on the legal requirements for conducting searches, with and
without a warrant; h) provide guidance on the natnre and scoRe of searches based on the level of
permissible intrusion on an individual's privacy interests, including searches conducted pnrsuant to probation or parole release provisions; i) specify the procednres for executing searches, including handling, recording, and taking custody of seized property or evidence;
21

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 22 of 55
j) provide guidance on effecting an arrest with and without an arrest warrant; and k) provide guidance regarding the nature and scope of searches incident to an arrest.
VII. USE OF FORCE
79. EHPD shall develop and implement force policies, training, and review mechanisms that ensure that force by EHPD officers is used in accordance with the rights, privileges, and immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that any unreasonable uses of force are identified and responded to appropriately. EHPD shall ensure that officers use non-force techniques to effect compliance with police orders whenever feasible; use physical force only when strictly necessary; use physical force in a manner that avoids unnecessary injury to officers and civilians; and de-escalate the physical use of force at the earliest possible moment. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements set out below.
A. Use of Force Principles
80. EHPD uses of force, regardless of the type of force or weapon used, shall abide by the· following requirements:
a) officers shall use advisements, warnings, and verbal persuasion, when possible, before resorting to physical force;
b) physical force shall be de-escalated immediately as resistance decreases; c) supervisors shall determine whether the action or inaction of officers using
physical force, or of other EHPD officers on scene, resulted in the need to use physical force; d) officers will use disengagement, area containment, surveillance, waiting out a subject, summoning reinforcements, and/or calling in specialized units, when possible, in order to reduce the need for physical force and increase officer and civilian safety; e) officers shall allow individuals time to submit to arrest before physical force is used wherever possible; f) officers shall not use neck holds or a strike to the head with a hard object, except where lethal force is authorized; g) using physical force against persons in handcuffs is prohibited except in emergencies in which a reasonable officer would believe that bodily harm to another person or persons is imminent; h) unholstering and pointing a firearm at an individual constitutes a use of force and shall be limited accordingly; and i) immediately following a use of physical force officers and, upon arrival, a supervisor, shall inspect and observe subjects for injury or complaints of pain and ____________"ob"t"'a"'in"-'igmgm"e"'d"'i"'at"'e"l)'. an)' necessar)' medical care. This rna)' reQuire an officer to provide emergency medical care until professional medical care providers are on­ scene.
22

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 23 of 55
B. General Use of Force Policy
81. EHPD shall develop and implement an overarching agency-wide use offorce policy that complies with applicable law and comports with professional police practices. The comprehensive use offorce policy shall include all force techniques, technologies, and weapons, both lethal and less-lethal, that are available to EHPD officers. The comprehensive use offorce policy shall clearly define and describe each force option and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The general use of force policy will incorporate the use of force principles articulated above and shall specify that the unreasonable use of force will subj ect officers to discipline, possible criminal prosecution, and/or civil liability.
82. In addition to a primary agency-wide use of force policy, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and protocols for each authorized weapon, including each of the types of force addressed below. No officer shall carry any weapon or use force that is not authorized by the Department. EHPD use of force policies shall include training and certification requirements that each officer must meet before being permitted to carry and used the authorized weapon.
C. Use of Firearms
83. Officers shall not possess or use unauthorized firearms or ammunition, or obtain service ammunition from any source, except through official EHPD channels. All officers' firearms shall be filled with the capacity number of rounds while on duty.
84. Officers shall not fire at or fTOm a moving vehicle, unless use of lethal force is justified by something other than the threat from the moving vehicle; shall not intentionally place themselves in the path of or reach inside a moving vehicle; and where possible shall attempt to move out of the path of a moving vehicle before discharging their weapon.
85. 0 fficers shall successfully qualify with each firearm they are authorized to use or carry on-duty pursuant to Connecticut requirements. Officers who fail to qualify shall immediately relinquish those firearms on which they failed to qualify. Those officers who still fail to qualify after remedial training within a reasonable time shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment.
86. Critical firearm discharges by officers on- or off-duty shall be reported and investigated. Data and analysis related to critical firearm discharges shall be tracked in EIS and EI-IPD's Use of Force Annual Report.
D. Electronic Control Weapons
- --,i
87. EI-IPD shall limit the use of ECWs to only those situations in which such force is necessary to protect the officer, the subject, or another party from immediate physical harm.
23

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 24 of 55
88. Unless it would present a danger to the officer or others, officers shall issue a verbal warning to the subject that the ECW will be used prior to use. Where feasible, the officer will defer ECW application a reasonable time to allow the subject to comply with the warning.
89. ECWs will not be used where such deployment may cause serious injury or death from situational hazards, including falling, drowning, losing control of a moving vehicle, or becoming ignited from the presence of a potentially explosive or flammable material or substance, except where lethal force would be permitted.
90. After one standard ECW cycle (5 seconds), the officer shall reevaluate the situation to determine if subsequent cycles are necessary. Officers shall be trained in the risks of prolonged or repeated ECW exposure, including that exposure to the ECW for longer than 15 seconds (whether due to multiple applications or continuous cycling) may increase the risk of death or serious injury. Officers shall clearly articulate and justify each and every cycle used against a subject in a written Use of Force Report.
91. ECWs shall not be used in drive stun mode as a pain compliance technique.. ECWs shall be used in drive stun mode only to supplement the probe mode to complete the incapacitation circuit, or as a countermeasure to gain separation between officers and the subject so that officers can consider another force option.
92. ECWs may not be used against pregnant women, elderly persons, children, visibly frail persons or persons with a slight build and persons in medical or mental crisis, except where lethal force would be permitted, or the officer has reasonable cause to believe there is an imminent risk of serious bodily self-harm and lesser force options are not feasible. Officers shall be trained in the increased risks ECWs may present to the above listed vulnerable populations.
93. ECWs may not be applied to a subject's head, neck, and genitalia, absent exigent circumstances. ECWs shall not be used on handcuffed persons, except in emergencies in which a reasonable officer would believe that serious bodily harm to another person or persons is imminent.
94. Officers shall receive annual ECW certifications, which should consist of physical competency; weapon retention; EHPD policy, including any policy changes; technology changes; and scenario-based training.
95. Officers shall be trained in and follow protocols developed by EHPD in conjunction with medical professionals, on their responsibilities following ECW use, including: (a) the removal ofECW probes, including requiring medical or specially-trained EHPD
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.Rersonnel to remove Rrobes that are embedded in a subject's skin, exceRt for Rrobes that are embedded in a subject's head, throat, groin, or other sensitive area, which should be removed by medical personnel only; (b) transporting to a hospital for evaluation all subjects who: have been exposed to prolonged application (more than 15 seconds); are a member of one of the vulnerable populations listed above; had an ECW used against them in circumstances presenting a heightened risk of harm; or were kept in prone
24

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 25 of 55
restraint after ECW use; and (c) monitoring all subjects who have received ECW application while in police custody.
96. Officers shall report all ECW discharges, except for training discharges, to their supervisor and the communications command center as soon as possible.
97. EHPD shall develop and implement integrity safeguards on the use of ECWs to ensure compliance with EHPD policy, including conducting random and directed audits ofECW deployment data. The audits should compare the downloaded data to the officer's report on use offorce. Discrepancies within the audit should be addressed and appropriately investigated.
98. EHPD shall include the number of ECWs in operation and the number ofECW uses as elements of the EIS. Analysis of this data shall include a determination of whether ECWs result in an increase in the use of force and whether officer and subject injuries are affected by the rate ofECW use. ECW data and analysis shall be included in EHPD's Use of Force Annual Report.
E. Use of Force Reporting Policy and Use of Force Report
99. EHPD shall develop and implement a single, uniform, reporting system pursuant to a Use of Force Reporting policy and using a single, uniform, Use of Force Report. All officers using or observing force above un-resisted handcuffing shall report in writing, before the end of shift, the use of force in a Use of Force Report. The Use of Force Report shall include: (a) a detailed account of the incident from the officer's perspective; (b) the reason for the initial police presence; (c) a specific description ofthe acts that led to the use of force; (d) the level of resistance encountered; and (e) a description of every type of force used. The use offorce reporting policy shall explicitly prohibit the use of "canned" or conclusory language in all reports documenting use of force.
100. Officers who use or observe force and fail to report it, shall be held strictly accountable, and face discipline up to and including termination, regardless of whether the force was reasonable.
101. Each officer in a position to see or hear a use of force shall complete a Use of Force Report, before the end of the shift, documenting the officer's own actions and observations.
102. Officers' Use of Force Reports (whether primary or supplemental) shall completely and accurately describe the use of force. Officers shan be held strictly accountable for material omissions or inaccuracies in the Use of Force Report.
103. Officers who use or observe force shall notify their supervisors immediately following any use of force or upon receipt of an allegation of unreasonable or unreported use of force by any officer.
25

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 26 of 55

104. Use of Force Reports shall be maintained centrally by the lAO for tracking and analysis purposes, as required by this Agreement.

105. At least annually, EHPD shall analyze the year's force data, including force-related outcome data, to determine significant trends; identify and correct deficiencies revealed by' this analysis; and document its findings in a public report.

F. Force Reviews by Supervisors

106. Absent exceptional circumstances, the direct supervisor of any officer using force, upon notification of a use of force or allegation of excessive force, shall respond to the scene of the use of force. If a supervisor is unable to respond to the scene, the supervisor shall document in the case file the exigent circumstances preventing his or her presence. The direct supervisor of any officer using force shall review all uses of force except those incidents involving a serious use of force, a use of force that appears potentially unjustified or criminal, a use of force by EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or a use offorce reassigned to the lAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the lAO. No supervisor who was involved in the incident, including by participating in or ordering the force being investigated, shall be responsible for the investigation of the incident.

107. The reviewing supervisor shall:

a) respond to the scene, examine the subject of the force for injury, interview the

subject for complaints of pain, and ensure that the subject receives medical

attention from an appropriate medical provider;

b) notify the lAO immediately of the use offorce and obtain a use of force tracking

number;

c)

identify and collect all relevant evidence and shall evaluate that evidence to

determine whether the use of force: (i) was consistent with EHPD policy and/or

Oi) raises any policy, training, tactical or equipment concerns;

d) ensure collection of all evidence to establish material facts related to the use of

force, including audio and video recordings, and photographs and other

documentation of injuries or the absence of injuries;

e) ensure the canvass for and interview of civilian witnesses. In addition, civilian

witnesses should be encouraged to provide and sign a written report in their own

words;

t) ensure that all officer witnesses provide a statement regarding the incident.

Officers involved in a use of force incident shall be separated until they are

interviewed. Group interviews shall be prohibited. Supervisors shall ensure that

all use offorce reports identify all officers who were involved in the incident or

were on the scene when it occurred. Supervisors shall not ask officers or other

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _w=it"'n"'e~ss~e"'s_'I"'ea"'do"i"'nO_gguestions that improperlY-@ggestjustificationsforthe

officers' conduct, when such questions are contrary to appropriate law

enforcement techniques. Reviewing supervisors shall record all interviews with

subjects and civilian witnesses and all follow-up interviews with officers;

g) review all Use of Force Reports and ensure that all reports include the information

required by this Agreement and EHPD policy; and

26

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 27 of 55
h) consider all relevant evidence, including circumstantial, direct, and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations, if feasible. Supervisors will make all reasonable efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between the officer, subject, and witness statements, as well as inconsistencies between the level of force claimed by the officer and the subject's injuries. EHPD will train all of its supervisors on the factors to consider when evaluating credibility. Where a reasonable and trained supervisor would determine that there may have been misconduct, the supervisor shall immediately notify the lAO to respond to the scene.
108. Each supervisor shall provide a written report to the shift commander by the end of the shift documenting the supervisor's preliminary determination of the appropriateness of the use of force, including whether the force was reasonable and within policy; whether the injuries appear proportionate to the use offorce described; and summaries of subject, witness, and officer statements.
109. Each supervisor shall complete and document a use of force supervisory review using a Supervisor's Force Review Report, within 72 hours oflearning of the use offorce. This Report shall include:
a) the supervisor's narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the evidence that either justifies or fails to justify the officer's conduct based on the supervisor's independent review of the facts and circumstances of the incident;
b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers, and addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no known witnesses, the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a statement;
c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use offorce; d) the reviewing supervisor's evaluation of the basis for the use of force,
including a determination of whether the officer's actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent with state and federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have been avoided through the use of de-escalation techniques or lesser force options; and e) documentation of any non-disciplinary corrective action taken.
110. Upon completion of the Supervisor's Force Review Report, the investigating supervisor shall forward the report to the patrol commander, who shall review the report to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by a preponderance ofthe evidence.
27

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 28 of 55
The patrol commander shall order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant evidence that may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility ofthe findings.
111. Where the findings of the Supervisory Force Review Report are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the patrol commander shall modify the findings after consultation with the reviewing supervisor, and document the reasons for this modification, including the specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification. The patrol commander shall counsel the reviewing supervisor regarding the modification and of any investigative deficiencies that led to it, and order corrective action where appropriate. The patrol commander shall be held accountable for the accuracy and completeness of Use of Force Supervisory Review Reports completed by supervisors under the command of the patrol commander.
112. Where a reviewing supervisor repeatedly conducts deficient investigations, the supervisor shall receive the appropriate corrective action, including training, demotion, andlor removal from a supervisory position.
113. Whenever a reviewing supervisor or patrol commander finds evidence of apparent criminal conduct by an officer, he or she shall suspend the investigation immediately and notify the Chief of Police, the lAO, the State Attorney's Office, and the State Police. The lAO shall immediately notify the FBI and USAO, where appropriate.
114. When the patrol commander finds that the supervisor force review is complete and the findings are supported by the evidence, the force review file shall be forwarded to the Chief of Police and the lAO. The Chief of Police and the lAO shall review the force review to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by the evidence. At the discretion of the Chief of Police, his designee, or the lAO, a use of force review may be assigned or re-assigned to another supervisor, whether within or outside of the shift in which the incident occurred, or may be returned to the patrol commander for further review or analysis. This assignment or re-assignment shall be explained in writing.
115. Where, after a force review, a use of force is found to be out of policy, the Chief of Police shall direct and ensure appropriate discipline, including forwarding the outcome of the force review to the Board of Police Commissioners for disciplinary action. Where the use of force indicates policy, training, tactical, or equipment concerns, the Chief of Police shall ensure also that necessary training is delivered and that policy, tactical or equipment concerns are resolved.
G. Force Investigations by Internal Affairs
116. EHPD shall establish a single, uniform reporting and investigation/review system for all serious uses of force, including critical firearm discharges.
117. EHPD shall ensure that all serious uses offorce are investigated fully and fairly by individuals with appropriate expertise, independence and investigative skills to ensure
28

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 29 of 55

that uses offorce that are contrary to law or policy are identified and appropriately resolved; that policy, training, equipment, or tactical deficiencies related to the use of force are identified and corrected; and that investigations of sufficient quality to ensure that officers are held accountable as necessary. To achieve this outcome, EHPD shall:

a) Provide for an lAO to conduct administrative investigations of serious uses of force, uses of force by EHPD personnel of a rank higher than sergeant, or uses of force reassigned to the lAO by the Chief of Police or designee or the lAO.

b) Within 90 days from the Effective Date, EHPD shall recruit, assign, and train a sufficient number of lAOs to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement. Prior to performing lAO duties, lAOs shall receive a minimum of 24 hours of force investigation training; call out and investigative protocols; and proper roles of on­ scene counterparts such as crime scene technicians, State Attorney's Office, State Police EHPD detectives, and Joint Compliance Expert; and investigative equipment and techniques. lAOs shall also receive annual in-service training on proper force investigations.

c) EHPD shall create a force investigation procedural manual to ensure consistency with this Agreement. The procedural manual shall include:

1.

definitions of all relevant terms;

ii. clear statements of the mission and authority of the lAO regarding force

investigations;

iii. procedures on report writing;

iv. procedures for collecting and processing evidence;

v. procedures to ensure appropriate separation of criminal and administrative

investigations in the event of compelled subject officer statements;

VI. procedures for consulting with the State Attorney's Office and the State

Police, including ensuring that administrative investigations are not

unnecessarily delayed while a criminal investigation is pending;

vii. scene management procedures; and

viii. management procedures.

118. Where appropriate to ensure the fact and appearance of impartiality, investigations of serious uses of force or force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer shall be referred for investigation to an independent and highly competent entity outside EHPD.

119. In every incident involving a serious use of force, or any use of force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer, the supervisor shall immediately notify the lAO and obtain a use of force tracking nwnber.

120. The lAO shall respond to the scene of every incident involving a serious use offorce, any use of force indicating apparent criminal conduct by an officer, any use of force by an officer of a rank higher than sergeant, or as ordered by the Chief of Police or designee.

29

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 30 of 55
121. The lAO shall immediately notify and consult with the State Attorney's Office, State Police, FBI and USAO regarding any use of force incident indicating apparent criminal conduct by EHPD personnel, or any use of force in which an officer discharged his firearm, or where an individual has died while in or proximate to the custody ofEHPD.
122. If the case may proceed criminally, or where EHPD requests a criminal prosecution, any compelled interview of the subject officers shall be delayed, consistent with Paragraphs 148 and 150 of this Agreement. No other part of the investigation shall be held in abeyance unless specifically authorized by the Chief of Police in consultation with the agency conducting the criminal investigation.
123. The lAO shall complete its administrative use of force investigation within 60 days from the use of force. At the conclusion of each use of force investigation, the lAO shall prepare a report on the investigation. The report shall include:
a) a narrative description of the incident, including a precise description of the evidence that either justifies or fails to justify the officer's conduct based on the lAO's independent review of the facts and circumstances ofthe incident;
b) documentation of all evidence that was gathered, including names, phone numbers, and addresses of witnesses to the incident. In situations in which there are no Imown witnesses, the report shall specifically state this fact. In situations in which witnesses were present but circumstances prevented the author of the report from determining the identification, phone number or address of those witnesses, the report shall state the reasons why. The report should also include all available identifying information for anyone who refuses to provide a statement;
c) the names of all other EHPD employees witnessing the use of force; d) the lAO's evaluation of the basis for the use of force, including a determination of
whether the officer's actions appear to be within EHPD policy and consistent with state and federal law; whether there is any evidence of criminal conduct by the officer; and an assessment of the incident for tactical and training implications, including whether the use of force may have been avoided through the use of de­ escalation techniques or lesser force options; e) if a weapon was used, documentation that the officer's certification and training for the weapon are current; and 1) documentation of any disciplinary and/or non-disciplinary corrective action recommended.
H. Review by Chief of Police
124. The Chief of Police shall review all force reviews by supervisors and force investigations by the lAO. The Chief of Po"'I"'ic'':e"'s.h..,.al.I.:._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
a) review each force review and investigation within 30 days of receiving the force review/investigation report to ensure that it is complete and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence;
30

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 31 of 55
b) order additional investigation when it appears that there is additional relevant evidence that may assist in resolving inconsistencies or improve the reliability or credibility of the findings. Where the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the Chief of Police or hislher designee shall modify the findings and document the reasons for this modification, including the specific evidence or analysis supporting the modification;
c) determine whether the force violated EHPD policy. If the force violated EHPD policy, the Chief of Police ofhislher designee shall take appropriate disciplinary action, including referring the review or investigation report to the Board of Police Commissioners for appropriate disciplinary action;
d) determine whether the incident raises policy, training, equipment, or tactical concerns, and refer such incidents to the appropriate commander or supervisor within EHPD to ensure they are resolved;
e) direct shift supervisors to talee and document non-disciplinary corrective action to enable or encourage an officer to improve his or her performance; and
f) document his or her findings within 45 days of receiving the force review or investigation.
J. Use of Force Training
125. EHPD shall provide all EHPD officers with 4 - 8 hours of use of force training within 365 days of the Effective Date, and 4 - 8 hours of use offorce training on at least an annual basis thereafter, including information on developments in applicable law and EHPD policy. EHPD shall coordinate and review all use offorce policy and training to ensure quality, consistency, and compliance with the Constitution, Connecticut law, this Agreement and EHPD policy. EHPD's use offorce training shall include the following topics:
a) EHPD's use of force model, as described in this Agreement; b) proper use offorce decision-making; c) use of force reporting requirements; d) the Fourth Amendment and related law; e) role-playing scenarios and interactive exercises that illustrate proper use of force
decision-maldng, including training officers on the importance and impact of ethical decision making and peer intervention; f) the proper deployment and use of all intermediate weapons or technologies, including canines and ECWs; g) de-escalation techniques that encourage officers to malce arrests without using force, and instruction that disengagement, area contaiument, surveillance, waiting out a subject, summoning reinforcements, calling in specialized nnits, or delaying arrest may be the appropriate response to a situation, even when the use of force _____________________w~ou~l~d~b~e~l~egally~iu~s~ti~fi~e~dL;____________________________________________ h) threat assessment; i) basic crisis intervention and interacting with people with mental illnesses, including instruction by mental health practitioners and an emphasis on de­ escalation strategies; j) factors to consider in initiating or continuing a pursuit;
31

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 32 of 55
k) appropriate training on conflict management; and I) supervisors of all ranks, as part oftheir initial and annual in-service supervisory
training, shall receive additional training in conducting use of force reviews and investigations; strategies for effectively directing officers to minimize uses of force and to intervene effectively to prevent or stop unreasonable force; and supporting officers who report unreasonable or unreported force, or who are retaliated against for using only reasonable force or attempting to prevent unreasonable force.
126. Included in the use of force training set out above. EHPD shall require firearms training for all officers within 365 days ofthe Effective Date and at least twice yearly thereafter. EHPD firearms training shall:
a) require officers to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and other service firearms on a semi-armual basis;
b) require cadets, officers in probationary periods, and officers who return from unarmed status to complete and satisfactorily pass firearm training and qualify for regulation and other service firearms before such personnel are permitted to carry and use firearms;
c) incorporate professional night training, stress training (e.g., training in using a firearm after undergoing physical exertion) and proper use of force decision­ making training, including continuous threat assessment techniques, in the annual in-service training program; and
d) ensure that firearm instructors critically observe students and provide corrective instruction regarding deficient firearm techniques and failure to utilize safe gun handling procedures at all times.
VIII. CIVILIAN COMPLAINTS, INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS, AND DISCIPLINE
127. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that all allegations of officer misconduct are received and are fully and fairly investigated; that all investigative findings are supported by a preponderance ofthe evidence and documented in writing; and that all officers who commit misconduct are held accountable pursuant to a disciplinary system that is fair and consistent. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD and the Town shall implement the requirements below.
A. Reporting Misconduct
128. EHPD shall require that all officers and employees report apparent misconduct by another EHPD officer or employee to a supervisor or directly to the lAO for review and investigation. Where apparent misconduct is reported to a supervisor, the supervisor shall immediately document and report this information to the lAO. Failure to report or document apparent misconduct or criminal behavior shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination of employment. The default discipline for a failure to report criminal behavior shall be termination.
32

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 33 of 55

B. Complaint Information

129. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, the Town and EHPD shall develop and implement a program to ensure broad knowledge throughout the East Haven community about how to make misconduct complaints, and the availability of effective mechanisms for making misconduct complaints. The requirements below shall be incorporated into this program.

130. The Town and EHPD shall mal(e complaint forms and informational materials, including brochures and posters, available at appropriate government properties, including EHPD headquarters, EHPD and Town websites, Town Hall, and the public library. Individuals shall be able to submit misconduct complaints through the EHPD and City websites and these websites shall include complaint forms and information regarding how to file misconduct complaints.

131. At the locations listed above, EHPD shall post and maintain a permanent placard

describing the external complaint process that includes relevant contact information, such

I ,

as telephone numbers, email addresses, and Internet sites. EHPD will require all officers

• I

to carry complaint forms, containing basic complaint information, in their department

vehicles at all times. Officers shall also provide complaint forms and the officer's name

and badge number upon request. If an individual objects to an officer's conduct, that

officer will inform the individual of his or her right to make a complaint and shall provide

the complaint form, informational brochure, and the officer's name and badge number. If

the individual indicates that he or she would like to mal(e a complaint, the officer shall

immediately inform his or her supervisor.

132. Complaint forms and related informational materials shall be made available and posted in English and Spanish.

C. Complaint Intake, Classification, and Tracking

133. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall revise policy and train all officers and supervisors to ensure that all officers properly handle complaint int~e, including how to properly provide complaint materials and information; and the consequences for failing to take complaints; and strategies for turning complaints into positive police-civilian interactions.

134. The refusal to accept a misconduct complaint, discouraging the filing of a misconduct complaint, or providing false or misleading information about filing a misconduct complaint, shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination.

135. EHPD shall accept all misconduct complaints, including anonymous and third-party complaints, for review and investigation. Complaints may be made in writing or verbally, in person or by mail, telephone (or TDD), facsimile, or electronic mail. Any LEP individual who wishes to file a complaint about an EHPD officer or employee shall be provided with a complaint form in Spanish or, for less common languages in East Haven, EHPD will m~e arrangements to ensure that the LEP person is able to make a complaint. Such complaints will be investigated in accordance with this Agreement.
33

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 34 of 55
136. All officers and employees who receive a misconduct complaint in the field shall immediately inform a supervisor of the misconduct complaint so that the supervisor can ensure proper intake of the complaint. All misconduct complaints received outside of EHPD headquarters shall be forwarded to the lAO before the end of the shift in which it was received.
137. EHPD shall ensure that allegations of officer misconduct made during criminal prosecutions or civil lawsuits are identified and investigated as misconduct complaints.
138. Within three business days of the receipt of a misconduct complaint, the lAO shall determine whether the complaint will be assigned to the subject officer(s)' supervisor(s) or retained by the lAO for an administrative investigation. The lAO shall also determine whether the misconduct complaint warrants a referral to the State Attorney's Office and/or USAO for a criminal investigation. EHPD shall develop and implement a complaint classification protocol that is allegation-based rather than anticipated outcome­ based to guide the lAO in determining where a complaint should be assigned. This complaint classification protocol shall ensure that the lAO investigates allegations including:
a) serious misconduct, including but not limited to: criminal misconduct; unreasonable use of force; discriminatory policing; false arrest or planting evidence; untruthfulness/false statements; unlawful search; retaliation; sexual misconduct; domestic violence; and theft;
b) misconduct implicating the conduct of the supervisory or command leadership of the subject officer; and
c) any other violations as determined by the Chief of Police.
139. The Chief of Police shall not be authorized to personally conduct an investigation of officer misconduct or violation of policy, nor prevent the conduct of such an investigation. A misconduct complaint investigation may not be conducted by any officer who used force during the incident; whose conduct led to the injury of a person; who authorized the conduct that led to the reported incident or complaint; or who was on the scene of the incident leading to the allegation of misconduct.
140. EHPD shall track, as a separate category of misconduct complaints, allegations of discriminatory policing, along with characteristics of the complainants. EHPD shall ensure that complaints of discriminatory policing are captured and tracked appropriately, even if the complainant does not specifically label the misconduct as such.
141. Within 180 days of the Effective date, the lAO shall develop and implement a centralized numbering and tracking system for all misconduct complaints. Upon the receipt of a
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _""co"'mcg.l2laint, the lAO shalll2rom!l1lJ' assign a uniQue numerical identifier to the coml2laint,_ __ which shall be provided to the complainant at the time the complaint is made. Where a misconduct complaint is received in the field, a supervisor shall obtain the unique numerical identifier and provide this identifier to the complainant.
34

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 35 of 55
142. EHPD's centralized numbering and tracking system shall maintain accurate and reliable data regarding the number, nature, and status of all misconduct complaints, from initial intake to final disposition, including investigation timeliness and notification to the complainant of the interim status and final disposition of the investigation. This system shall be used to determine the status of complaints and to confirm that a complaint was received, as well as for periodic assessment of compliance with EHPD policies and procedures and this Agreement, including requirements on the timeliness of administrative investigations.
143. Where a supervisor receives a misconduct complaint in the field alleging that misconduct has just occurred, the supervisor shall gather all relevant information and evidence and provide this information and evidence to the lAO. This information includes the names and contact information for all complainants and witnesses, the names of all EHPD officers and employees on the scene at the time of the alleged misconduct, and any available physical evidence such as voluntarily provided video or audio recordings, or documentation of the existence of such recordings where the witness chooses not to provide the recording. The supervisor shall take photographs of apparent injuries or the absence thereof.
D. Investigation of Complaints
144. Investigations of officer misconduct shall be as thorough as necessary to reach reliable and complete findings. The misconduct complaint investigator shall interview each complainant in person, absent exceptional circumstances, and this interview shall be recorded in its entirety, absent specific, documented objection by the complainant. All officers in a position to hear or see an incident, or any significant event before or after an incident, shall provide a written statement regarding their observations, even to state that they did not see or hear anything.
145. Where the alleged misconduct is particularly serious or information from an officer or other witness may be necessary to resolve an allegation, the investigator shall conduct an in-person interview of the officer or other witness. Each officer, witness, and complaimmt shall be interviewed separately. An EHPDAI not involved in the underlying complaint will be used when taking statements or conducting interviews of any LEP complainant or witness.
146. All officer and civilian witness statements should be documented in their entirety, including any statement that the witness saw or heard nothing. All interviews should be recorded. All recordings shall be stored and maintained in a secure location within lAO.
147. EHPD shall require officers to cooperate with administrative investigations, including _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-"almearing for an interview when requested by an EHPD investigator and Qroviding-'a"ll'--_ __
requested documents and evidence. Supervisors shall be notified when an officer under their supervision is summoned as part of an administrative investigation and shall facilitate the officer's appearance, absent extraordinary and documented circumstances.
35

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 36 of 55
148. The subject officer shall not be compelled to provide a statement to administrative investigators where there is a potential criminal investigation or prosecution of the officer, until consultation with the criminal investigative agency (e.g. State Attorney's Office or USAO) and approval by the Chief of Police. EHPD, the Town, and the State Attorney's Office shall develop and implement protocols to ensure that the criminal and administrative investigations are kept appropriately separate after a subject officer has provided a compelled statement.
149. Nothing in this Agreement or EHPD policy shall hamper an officer's obligation to provide a public safety statement regarding a work related incident or activity. EHPD shall make clear that all officer statements in incident reports, arrest reports, use of force reports and similar documents, and statements made in interviews such as those conducted in conjunction with EHPD's routine use of force review and investigation process, are part of each officer's routine professional duties and are not compelled statements. Where an officer believes that providing a verbal or written statement will be self-incriminating the officer shall affirmatively state this and shall not be compelled to provide a statement without prior consultation with the criminal investigative agency (e.g. State Attorney's Office or USAO), and approval by the Chief of Police.
150. If at any time during complaint intake or investigation the investigator determines that there may have been criminal conduct on the part of any officer or employee, the investigator shall immediately notify the Chief of Police and the Joint Compliance Expert, and shall consult with the State Attorney's Office, USAO and the local office of the FBI regarding the initiation of a criminal investigation, as appropriate. Where an allegation is investigated criminally, the lAO shall continue with the administrative investigation of the allegation, except that it may delay or decline to conduct an interview ofthe subject officer(s) or other witnesses until completion of the criminal investigation unless, after consultation with the investigating agency and the Chief of Police, such interviews are deemed appropriate.
151. In each investigation, EHPD shall consider all relevant evidence including circumstantial, direct and physical evidence, and make credibility determinations based upon that .evidence. There will be no automatic preference for an officer's statement over a non­ officer's statement, nor will EHPD disregard a witness' statement merely because the witness has some connection to the complainant or because of any criminal history. During its investigation, EHPD may take into account the criminal history of a complainant that involves a crime of dishonesty. EHPD may also take into account the record of any involved officers who have been determined to have been deceptive or untruthful in any legal proceeding, Internal Affairs investigation, or other investigation. EHPD shall make efforts to resolve material inconsistencies between witness statements.
152. The misconduct investigator shall explicitly identify and recommend one of the following dispositions for each allegation of misconduct in an administrative investigation:
a) "Unfounded," where the investigation determines, by a preponderance ofthe evidence, that the alleged misconduct did not occur or did not involve the subject officer;
36

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 37 of 55
b) "Sustained," where the investigation determines, by a preponderance ofthe evidence, that the alleged misconduct did occur;
c) "Not Sustained," where the investigation is unable to determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, whether the alleged misconduct occurred; or
d) "Exonerated," where the investigation determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the alleged conduct did occur but did not violate EHPD policies, procedures, or training.
153. In addition to determining whether the officer committed the alleged misconduct, administrative investigations shall assess and document whether: (a) the police action was in compliance with training and legal standards; (b) the use of different tactics should or could have been employed to achieve a potentially better outcome; (c) the incident indicates a need for additional training, counseling or other non-disciplinary corrective measures; and (d) the incident suggests that EHPD should revise its policies, strategies, tactics, or training. This information shall be shared with the relevant commander(s) who shall document the commander's disagreement or agreement with these findings; refer any recommendations to the appropriate individual to implement the recommended change; document the implementation of these recommendations; and return the documentation to the lAO.
154. EHPD shall respond to each complaint within 48 hours and shall resolve each stage of a complaint investigation in a reasonable time frame. EHPD shall complete all investigations of civilian complaints within 60 days of receiving the complaint. Upon a showing of good cause, officers may receive no more than two extensions of up to 30 days each. Requests for extensions must be in writing and approved by the Chief.
155. A misconduct investigation shall not be closed simply because the complaint is withdrawn or the alleged victim is unwilling or unable to provide additional information beyond the initial complaint, or because the complainant pled guilty or was found guilty of an offense.
156. Each misconduct complainant will be kept informed periodically regarding the status of the investigation. The complainant will be notified of the outcome of the investigation, in writing, within ten business days of the completion of the investigation, including regarding whether any disciplinary or non-disciplinary action was taken.
E. Discipline
157. EHPD shall ensure that discipline for sustained allegations of misconduct is based on the nature of the allegation and defined, consistent, mitigating and aggravating factors, rather than the identity of the officer or his or her status within EHPD or the broader
_ _ _ _ _ _ _----'c"'o"'m"'m"'u"n""'it)'. EHPD and the Town shall develoQ and imQlement Qrocedures to ensure that discipline is fair and consistent including:
158. EHPD, in consultation with the Board of Police Commissioners and the Town, shall create a disciplinary matrix that:
37

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 38 of 55
a) establishes a presumptive range of discipline for each type of rule violation; b) increases the presumptive discipline based on both an officer's prior violations of
the same or other rules; c) sets out defined mitigating·or aggravating factors; d) requires that any departure from the presumptive range of discipline must be
justified in writing; e) . provides that EHPD shall not tal(e only non-disciplinary corrective action in cases
in which the disciplinary matrix calls for the imposition of discipline; and f) provides that EHPD shall consider whether non-disciplinary corrective action also
is appropriate in a case where discipline has been imposed.
159. EHPD, the Board of Police Commissioners, and the Town shall establish a unified system for reviewing sustained findings and assessing the appropriate level of discipline pursuant to EHPD's disciplinary matrix to facilitate consistency in the imposition of discipline. All disciplinary decisions shall be documented, including the rationale behind any decision to deviate from the level of discipline set out in the disciplinary matrix.
160. EHPD and the Board of Police Commissioners shall develop and establish written policies and procedures to ensure that the Town Attorney provides close guidance to EHPD and the Board at the disciplinary stage to ensure that EHPD's and the Board's disciplinary decisions are as fair and legally defensible as possible.
IX. SUPERVISION AND MANAGEMENT
161. EHPD and the Town shall ensure that EHPD supervisors provide the close and effective supervision necessary for officers to improve and grow as police officers; to police actively and effectively, and to identify, correct, and prevent misconduct. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below.
A. Duties of Supervisors
162. EHPD supervisors shall provide, and shall be held accountable for providing, the close and effective supervision necessary to direct and guide officers. Close and effective supervision requires that supervisors: (a) respond to the scene of certain arrests; (b) review each arrest report; (c) respond to the scene of uses of force; (d) investigate each use offorce (except those investigated by the lAO); (e) confirm the accuracy and completeness of officers' written reports; (f) respond to each complaint of misconduct; (f) ensure officers are working actively to engage the commtmity and increase public trust and safety; and (g) provide counseling, redirection, support to officers as needed, and are held accountable for performing each of these duties.
163. On-duty field sUj)ervisors shall be available throughout their shift to resRond to the field to provide supervision to officers under their direct command and, as needed, to provide supervisory assistance to other shifts.
38

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 39 of 55
164. Shift commanders shall closely and effectively supervise the officers under their command. All EHPD Commanders and supervisors shall ensure that all supervisors and officers under their command comply with EHPD policy, state and federal law, and the requirements of this Agreement.
165. EHPD shall hold commanders and supervisors directly accountable for the quality and effectiveness of their supervision, including whether commanders and supervisors identify and effectively respond to misconduct, as part of their performance evaluations and through non-disciplinary corrective action, or through the initiation of formal investigation and the disciplinary process, as appropriate.
166. Within twelve months of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement an EHPD-specific system t<1 accurately evaluate officer performance in areas related to integrity, community policing, and critical police functions on both an ongoing and annual basis that comports with professional police practices and the requirements of this Agreement. As part of this program, EHPD shall establish a formalized system documenting annual performance evaluations of each officer by the officer's direct supervisor which shall include assessment of:
a) community engagement and communication with the public; b) use of community-policing and problem-solving strategies; c) civilian commendations and complaints; d) disciplinary actions; e) compliance with policies on usage of sick leave and other leave; f) compliance with policies on secondary employment; g) safety (e.g., POST officer safety standards and vehicle operations); h) training; i) report-writing; and j) decision-maldng skills.
167. Annual performance evaluations shall be based upon work performance completed during the specific rating period. The officer's current direct supervisor shall complete the performance evaluation, but all supervisory personnel who supervised the officer during the rating period should provide written input, which shall be considered by the officer's current supervisor and incorporated into the performance evaluation.
B. Early Identification System
168. EHPD shall develop, implement and maintain an early identification system ("EIS") to support the effective supervision and management of EHPD officers and employees, including the identification of and response to potentially problematic behaviors as early as possible. EHPD will regularly use EIS data to promote ethical and professional police practices; to manage risk and liability; and to evaluate the performance of EHPD employees across all ranks, units and shifts.
39

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 40 of 55
169. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a protocol setting out which fields in EIS shall include historical data; deadlines for inputting data related to current and new information; and the individuals responsible for capturing and inputting data.
170. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and begin implementing a protocol for using the EIS and information obtained from it. The protocol for using the EIS shall address data storage, data retrieval, reporting, data analysis, pattern identification, identifying officers for intervention, supervisory use, supervisory/departmental intervention, documentation and audit. Among protocol requirements EHPD shall include:
a) comparative data analysis, including peer group, shift and unit analysis, to identify patterns of activity by individual officers and groups of officers;
b) EHPD commander and supervisor review, on a regular basis, but not less than bi­ weekly, ofEIS reports regarding each officer under the commander or supervisor's direct command and, at least quarterly, broader, pattern-based reports;
c) EHPD commanders and supervisors to initiate, implement, and assess the effectiveness of interventions for individual officers, supervisors, and shifts, based on assessment of the information contained in the EIS;
d) require an array of intervention options to facilitate an effective response to identified problems. Interventions may take the form of counseling or training, or of other supervised, monitored, and documented action plans and strategies designed to modify activity. All interventions will be documented in writing and entered into the automated system;
e) specify that the decision to order an intervention for an employee or group using EIS data shall include peer group analysis, including consideration of the nature of the employee's assignment, and not solely on the number or percentages of incidents in any category of information recorded in the EIS;
f) prompt review by EHPD commanders and supervisors of the EIS system records of all officers upon transfer to their supervision or command;
g) evaluation of EHPD commanders and supervisors based on their appropriate use of the EIS to enhance effective and ethical policing and reduce risk; and
h) mechanisms to ensure monitored and secure access to the EIS to ensure the integrity, proper use, and appropriate confidentiality ofthe data.
171. The EIS shall include all relevant information available to EHPD to assess the conduct of each officer, including:
a) all awards and commendations received by employees; b) investigations of the officer; c) complaints (including civil lawsuits) against the officer and their dispositions; d) data collected regarding the officer's stops, search and seizures and uses of force; e) data about officer's arrests, including arrests for interfering with a police officer,
resisting arrest, assault on a police officer, and disorderly conduct; f) training history;
40

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 41 of 55
g) supervisory reviews; h) all vehicle pursuits and traffic collisions involving EHPD equipment; i) all loss or theft of EHPD property or equipment in the custody ofthe employee,
including currency, firearms, force instruments, and identification cards; and j) any disciplinary or other corrective action taken against the officer.
172. The EIS shall include appropriate identifying information for each involved officer (i.e., name, badge number, shift and supervisor) and civilian.
173. EHPD shall maintain all personally identifiable information about an officer included in the EIS for at least five years following the officer's separation from the agency. Information necessary for aggregate statistical analysis will be maintained indefinitely in the EIS. On an ongoing basis, EHPD will enter information into the EIS in a timely, accurate, and complete manner, and shall maintain the data in a secure and confidential manner. No individual within EHPD shall have access to individually identifiable information that is maintained only within EIS and is about an officer not within that individual's direct command, except as necessary for investigative, technological, or auditing purposes.
174. The EIS, including any computer programs and hardware, will be operational, fully implemented, and be used in accordance with policies and protocols that incorporate the requirements of this Agreement within 365 days of the Effective Date. Prior to full implementation of the new EIS, EHPD will continue to use existing resources to the fullest extent possihle, to identify patterns of conduct hy employees or groups of officers.
C. Visual and Audio Documentation of Police Activities
175. EHPD shall maintain and operate video cameras and AVL in all police vehicles and shall repair or replace all non-functioning video cameras or AVL units. EHPD shall ensure that that recordings are captured, maintained, and reviewed as appropriate by supervisors, in addition to any review for investigatory or audit purposes, to assess the quality and appropriateness of officer interactions, uses of force, and other police activities.
176. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement policies and procedures regarding AVL, in-car recorders, ECWs, and similar equipment that require:
a) activation ofin-car cameras for all traffic stops and pursuits until the motor vehicle stop is completed and the stopped vehicle departs, or until the officer's participation in the motor vehicle stop ends;
b) activation ofECW cameras when the ECW is unholstered; c) activation ofin-car cameras for incidents in which a prisoner being transported is
violent or resistant; d) supervisors to review AVL, in-car camera recordings, and ECW recordings of all
officers listed in any EI-IPD report regarding any incident involving injuries to a prisoner or an officer, uses of force, vehicle pursuits, or misconduct complaints; e) supervisors to review recordings regularly and to incorporate the knowledge gained from this review into their ongoing evaluation and supervision of officers;
41

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 42 of 55
f) that EHPD retain and preserve recordings for at least five years, or, if a case remains under investigation or litigation longer than five years, at least three years after the final disposition of the matter, including appeals; and
g) that an officer notify a supervisor immediately when an event was not recorded.
177. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop and implement a schedule for testing AVL, in-car recorder, and ECW camera recording equipment to confirm that it is in proper working order. Officers shall be responsible for ensuring that recording equipment assigned to them or their car is functioning properly at the beginning and end of each shift and shall report immediately any improperly functioning equipment.
178. Within 180 days ofthe Effective Date, EHPD shall provide each supervisor with handheld recording devices and require that supervisors use these devices to record complainant and witness statements taken as part of use of force or misconduct complaint investigations.
X. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT
179. EHPD shall create robust community relationships and engage constructively with the community to ensure collaborative problem-solving, ethical and bias-free policing, and increase community confidence in the Department. EHPD shall establish community and problem-oriented policing principles in its policing operations. EHPD shall also engage the public in the reform process through the dissemination of public information on a regular basis. EHPD and the Town shall develop, implement, and maintain systems to ensure comprehensive, effective, and transparent oversight ofEHPD that will be sustained after the completion of this Agreement. To achieve these outcomes, EHPD shall implement the requirements below. .
180. EHPD shall, in all of its policing operations, adopt the professional police practices of commtmity oriented and problem-solving policing, including robust community partnerships, cooperative strategies, and promoting trust in the community.
181. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall appoint and/or hire a Community Liaison Officer who is a sworn officer fluent in English and Spanish. The Community Liaison Officer shall also have formalized training in the nature and scope of federal and state civil rights law as applied to law enforcement activity.
182. EHPD shall make the contact information and duty hours of the Community Liaison Officer public on its website and on any EHPD document generally available to the public. The Community Liaison Officer shall be directly available for public contact during normal business hours. The Community Liaison Officer shall have the following duties:
a) The Community Liaison Officer shall arrange for a monthly meeting of East Haven residents designed to permit residents to voice their concerns and ask questions. The meeting shall be conducted as follows:
42

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 43 of 55

i.

The meeting shall be attended by the Community Liaison Officer, at least

one senior EHPD command staff member, and by officers responsible for

patrolling, or supervising patrol, in each of the three East Haven districts.

All EHPD personnel present shall be identified, in uniform, and available

for responses to questions from residents of East Haven.

ii. Names shall not be required of persons attending the meeting, nor shall

any investigative law enforcement action be taken at or after this meeting

that involves attendees in any way, absent an emergency. EHPD may act

based on information explicitly communicated at the meeting for that

purpose.

iii. EHPD shall notify the public of this meeting and the requirements of this

provision, including anonymity, regarding this meeting in the local press

two weeks in advance of the meeting.

iv. The meeting shall rotate among the three East Haven districts, so that the

meeting is held in each district every three months.

b) The Community Liaison Officer shall review, on a monthly basis, all complaints submitted to EHPD by members of the community to assess community concerns. For those complaints that do not rise to the level of requiring formal action under EHPD policy, code of conduct, and the terms of this Agreement, the Community Liaison Officer shall notify the complainant of the availability of the Community Liaison Officer to answer the complainant's qnestions and respond to any further concerns.

c) The Community Liaison Officer shall meet monthly with the Chief of Police, the Mayor, and the Board. During these meetings, the Community Liaison Officer shall communicate the concerns that the Community Liaison Officer has received during the previous month, along with any other relevant information pertaining to the relationship of EHPD with East I-raven residents.

183. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall develop a strategic recruitment plan that includes clear goals, objectives, and action steps for attracting high-quality applicants for employment across all levels of EHPD, sworn and civilian. EHPD's strategic recruitment plan shall establish and clearly identify the duties and goals ofEHPD's recruitment efforts. The strategic recruitment plan shall include specific strategies for attracting a diverse pool of applicants, including members of groups that have been historically underrepresented in EHPD and applicants fluent in Spanish.

184. All EHPD audits and reports related to the implementation ofthis Agreement shall be made publicly available via website and at the Police Department, Town Hall, and other public locations, in English and in Spanish, to the fullest extent pern1issible under law.

185. EHPD shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to facilitate and ensure transparency and wide public access to information related to EHPD decision making and activities, as permitted by law.

43

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 44 of 55
XI. AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT
A. Role of the Joint Compliance Expert
186. The Parties shall select a Joint Compliance Expert ("JCE") to assist the Parties in determining whether the terms of this Agreement have been fully and timely implemented, including reviewing and making recommendations on new or revised policies, training curricula, standard operating procedures, plans, protocols, and other operational documents related to this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall also assess and report whether the requirements of this Agreement have been implemented, and whether this implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD.
187. The Joint Compliance Expert shall only have the duties, responsibilities and authority conferred by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not, and is not intended to, replace or assume the role and duties of the Mayor, Board, Chief of Police, or EHPD.
188. In order to assess and report on the Town's implementation of this Agreement and whether implementation is resulting in constitutional policing, increased community trust, and the professional treatment of individuals by EHPD, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct the compliance reviews and audits, outcome assessments, and incident reviews specified below, and such additional audits, reviews, and assessments as the Joint Compliance Expert or the Parties deem appropriate.
B. Compliance Reviews and Audits
189. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct compliance reviews or audits as necessary to determine whether the Town has implemented and continues to comply with the material requirements of this Agreement. Compliance with a material requirement of this Agreement requires that the Town has: (a) incorporated the requirement into policy; (b) trained all relevant personnel as necessary to fuifill their responsibilities pursuant to the requirement; and (c) that the requirement is being carried out in actual practice. Compliance reviews and audits shall contain both qualitative and quantitative elements as necessary for reliability and comprehensiveness.
C. Outcome Assessments
190. In addition to compliance reviews and audits, the Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct qualitative and quantitative outcome assessments to measure whether the Town's implementation of this Agreement has promoted effective and constitutional policing. These outcome assessments shall include collection and analysis, both quantitative and qualitative, of the following outcome data:
a) Bias-Free Policing and Community Engagement measurements, including:
44

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 45 of 55

i.

A reliable, comprehensive, and representative annual survey of members

of the East Haven community regarding their experiences with and

perceptions of EHPD and of public safety. This comprehensive

community survey shall include measures to ensure input from individuals

of each significantly represented demographic category;

ii. Number and variety of community partnerships, with particular

consideration of partnerships with youth, and qualitative assessment of the

depth and effectiveness of those partnerships.

b) Stop, Search and Arrest measurements, including:

i.

The number and rate of arrests for which there is articulated reasonable

suspicion for the stop and probable cause for the arrest, overall and broken

down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category;

ii. The number and rate of arrests which are prosecuted, overall and broken

down by geographic area; type of arrest; and demographic category; and

iii. The number and rate of searches which result in a finding of contraband,

overall and broken down by geographic area; type of arrest; and

demographic category.

c) Use of Force measurements including:

1.

Rate offorce used per arrest by EHPD overall and by force type;

geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic

category;

ii. Rate offorce complaints that are sustained and rate that are not sustained,

overall and by force type; geographic area (i.e. street address); source of

complaint (internal or external); type of arrest; and demographic category;

iii. Uses of Force that were found to violate policy overall and by force type;

geographic area (i.e. street address); type of arrest; and demographic

category;

iv. Number and rate of Use of Force administrative investigations/reviews in

which each finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence; and

v. Number of officers who frequently or repeatedly use force, or have more

than one instance offorce found to violate policy.

d) Recruitment and Training measurements, including:

i.

Number of highly-qualified recruit candidates that have a demonstrated

ability to serve diverse communities;

ii. Number of candidates with Spanish language fluency;

iii. Officer and agency reports of adequacy of training in tYJle and freguencY2-;_ __

and

iv. Role oflack of training reflected in problematic incidents or by

performance trends.

45

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 46 of 55

e) Supervision measurements, including:

i.

Initial identification of officer violations and performance problems by

supervisors, and effective response by supervisors to identified problems.

f) Accountability measurements, including:

i.

The number of misconduct complaints, with a qualitative assessment of

whether any increase or decrease appears related to access to the

complaint process;

ii. Rate of sustained, not sustained, exonerated and unfounded misconduct

complaints;

iii. Number and rate of misconduct complaints in which the finding for each

allegation is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;

IV. Number of officers who are subjects of repeated misconduct complaints,

or have repeated instances of sustained misconduct complaints.

v. Number and nature of civil suits against EHPD officers for on or off duty

police conduct, regardless of whether the Town or EHPD is a defendant in

the litigation, and settlement or penalty amounts;

vi. Arrests/Summons of officers for on or off duty conduct; and

vii. Criminal prosecutions of officers for on or off duty conduct.

191. In conducting these outcome assessments the Joint Compliance Expert may use any relevant data collected and maintained by EHPD, provided that it has determined that this data is reasonably reliable and complete. To conduct the annual community survey, the Joint Compliance Expert shall retain an individual or entity which shall:

a) develop a baseline of measures on public satisfaction with policing, attitudes

among police personnel, and the quality of police-citizen encounters;

b) conduct baseline surveys of Town residents, police personnel, and detained

arrestees, and follow-up surveys on at least an annual basis;

,

c) ensure that the resident surveys are designed to capture each demographic

category; and

d) conduct the survey in English and Spanish.

D. Outcome Assessment Plan and Review Methodology

192. Within 90 days of the Effective Date, the Joint Compliance Expert shall develop a plan for conducting the above outcome assessments and compliance reviews and audits, and shall submit this plan to the Parties for review and approval. This plan shall:

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--"a) b)

clearly--<lcli.necat<lJlLe~uirements of~greement to be assessed for compliance, indicating which requirements will be assessed together; set out a schedule for conducting outcome measure assessments for each outcome measure at least annually, except where otherwise noted, with the first assessment occurring within 18 months of the Effective Date; and

46

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 47 of 55
c) set out a schedule for conducting a compliance review or audit of each requirement of this Agreement within the first two years of the Agreement, and a compliance review or audit of each requirement at least annually thereafter.
193. Where the Joint Compliance Expert recommends and the Parties agree, the Joint Compliance Expert may refrain from conducting a compliance audit or review of a requirement previously found to be in compliance by the Joint Compliance Expert pursuant to audit or review, or where outcome assessments indicate that the outcome intended by the requirement has been achieved.
194. At least 90 days prior to the initiation of any outcome measure assessment or compliance review or audit, the Joint Compliance Expert shall submit a proposed methodology for the assessment, review or audit, to the Parties. The Parties shall submit any comments or concerns regarding the proposed methodology to the Joint Compliance Expert within 45 days of the proposed date of the assessment, review or audit. The Joint Compliance Expert shall modify the methodology as necessary to address any concerns or shall inform the Parties in writing of the reasons it is not modifying its methodology as proposed.
E. Review of Use of Force and Misconduct Investigations
195. EHPD shall provide each completed investigation of a serious use of force or use of force that is the subject of a misconduct investigation, and each misconduct complaint report, to the Joint Compliance Expert. The Joint Compliance Expert shall review each use of force investigation or review and each misconduct investigation and recommend for further investigation any use of force or misconduct complaint investigations the Joint Compliance Expert determines to be incomplete or for which the findings are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
F. Joint Compliance Expert Recommendations and Technical Assistance
196. The Joint Compliance Expert may make recommendations to the Parties regarding measures necessary to ensure timely, full and effective implementation of this Agreement and its underlying objectives. Such recommendations may include a recommendation to change, modify, or amend a provision of the Agreement, a recommendation for additional training in any area related to this Agreement, or a recommendation to seek teclmical assistance. In addition to such recommendations, the Joint Compliance Expert may also, at the request of DOJ or the Town and based on the Joint Compliance Expert's reviews, provide technical assistance consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert's responsibilities under this Agreement.
_ _ _ _ _--'JG"._---'C""o"'m"'prehensive Re-Assessment
197. The Joint Compliance Expert shall conduct a comprehensive assessment two years after the Effective Date to determine whether and to what extent the outcomes intended by this Agreement have been achieved, and any modifications to the Agreement that are necessary for continued achievement in light of changed circumstances or unanticipated
47

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 48 of 55
impact (or lack of impact) of the requirement. This assessment shall address also areas of greatest achievement and the requirements that appear to have contributed to this success, as well as areas of greatest concern, including strategies for accelerating full and effective compliance. Based upon this comprehensive assessment, the Joint Compliance Expert shall recommend modifications to the Agreement necessary to achieve and sustain intended outcomes. Where the Parties agree with the Joint Compliance Expert's recommendations, the Parties shall stipulate to modify the Agreement accordingly. This provision in no way diminishes the Parties' ability to stipulate to modifications to this Agreement as set out below.
H. Joint Compliance Expert Reports
198. The Joint Compliance Expert shall file with the Court semi-annual written, public reports covering the reporting period that shall include:
a) a description of the work conducted by the Joint Compliance Expert during the reporting period;
b) a listing of each Agreement requirement indicating which requirements have been: (i) incorporated into implemented policy; (ii) the subject of sufficient training for all relevant EHPD officers and employees; (iii) reviewed or audited by the Joint Compliance Expert to determine whether they have been fully implemented in actual practice, including the date of the review or audit; and (iv) found by the Joint Compliance Expert to have been fully implemented in practice;
c) the methodology and specific findings for each audit or review conducted, redacted as necessary for privacy concerns. An unredacted version shall be filed under seal with the Court and provided to the Parties. The underlying data for each audit or review shall not be publicly available but shall be retained by the Joint Compliance Expert and provided to either or both Parties upon request;
d) for any requirements that were reviewed or audited and found not to have been fully implemented in practice, the Joint Compliance Expert's recommendations regarding necessary steps to achieve compliance;
e) the methodology and specific findings for each outcome assessment conducted; f) qualitative assessment of EHPD's progress in achieving the desired outcomes for
each area covered by the Agreement--noting issues of concern or particular achievement; and g) a projection of the work to be completed during the upcoming reporting period and any anticipated challenges or concerns related to implementation of the Agreement.
199. The Joint Compliance Expert shall provide a copy of semi-annual reports to the Parties in draft form at least ten business da)'s prior to Court filing and public release of the report",s_ __ to allow the Parties to informally comment on the reports. The Joint Compliance Expert shall consider the Parties' responses and make appropriate changes, if any, before issuing the report.
48

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 49 of 55
200. The Joint Compliance Expert shall maintain regular contact with the Parties in order to ensure effective and timely communication regarding the status of the Town's implementation of and compliance with this Agreement.
I. Public Statements, Testimony, Records, and Conflicts oflnterest
201. Except as required or authorized by the terms of this Agreement or the Parties acting together: neither the Joint Compliance Expert, including, for the purposes of this paragraph, any agent, employee, or independent contractor thereof, shall make any public statements or issue findings with regard to any act or omission of the Town or its agents, representatives, or employees; or disclose non-public information provided to the Joint Compliance Expert pursuant to the Agreement. Any press statement made by the Joint Compliance Expert regarding its employment or assessment activities under this Agreement shall first be approved by the Parties.
202. The Joint Compliance Expert may testify as to observations, findings, and recommendations before the Court with jurisdiction over this matter, but the Joint Compliance Expert shall not testify in any other litigation or proceeding with regard to any act or omission of the Town or any of its agents, representatives, or employees related to this Agreement or regarding any matter or subject that the Joint Compliance Expert may have received knowledge of as a result of his or her performance under this Agreement. This paragraph does not apply to any proceeding before a court related to performance of contracts or subcontracts for monitoring this Agreement.
203. Unless such conflict is waived by the Parties, the Joint Compliance Expert shall not accept employment or provide consulting services that would present a conflict of interest with the Joint Compliance Expeli's responsibilities under this Agreement, including being retained (on a paid or unpaid basis) by any current or future litigant or claimant, or such litigant's or claimant's attorney, in connection with a claim or suit against the Town or its departments, officers, agents or employees.
204. The Joint Compliance Expert is not a state or local agency, or an agent thereof, and accordingly the records maintained by the Joint Compliance Expert shall not be deemed public records subject to public inspection.
205. The Joint Compliance Expert shall not be liable for any claim, lawsuit, or demand arising out of the Joint Compliance Expert's performance pursuant to this Agreement.
J. EHPD Compliance Coordinator
206. Within 30 days of the Effective Date, EHPD shall identify a compliance coordinator to _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-"s"'e"-rv"e,.,a"'s'-t"h"'e"s""ingkj:>oint of contact to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ. The
Compliance Coordinator shall coordinate the Town's compliance and implementation activities; facilitate the provision of data, documents, materials, and access to the Town's personnel to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ, as needed; ensure that all data, documents and records are maintained as provided in this Agreement; and assist in
49

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 50 of 55
assigning implementation and compliance related tasks to EHPD persOlmel, as directed by the Chief of Police or his/her designee.
K. Implementation Assessment and Report
207. The Town shall collect and maintain all data and records necessary to: (a) document implementation of and compliance with this Agreement, including data and records necessary for the Joint Compliance Expert to conduct reliable outcome assessments, compliance reviews, and audits; and (b) perform ongoing quality assurance in each of the areas addressed by this Agreement.
208. Beginning with the Joint Compliance Expert's first semi-annual report, the Town shall provide to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ a status report no later than 45 days before the Joint Compliance Expert's semi-annual report is due. The Town's report shall delineate the steps taken by the Town during the reporting period to implement this Agreement; the Town's assessment of the status of its progress; plans to correct any problems; and response to any concerns raised in the Joint Compliance Expert's previous semi-annual report.
L. Access and Confidentiality
209. To facilitate its work, the Joint Compliance Expert may conduct on-site visits and assessments without prior notice to the Town. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to.all necessary individuals, facilities, and documents, which shall include access to Agreement related trainings, meetings, and reviews such as critical incident reviews; use of force reviews, and disciplinary hearings. EHPD shall notify the Joint Compliance Expert as soon as practicable, and in any case within twelve hours, of any critical firearms discharge, arrest of any officer, or any other potentially high-profile serious incident.
210. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have timely, full and direct access to all of the Town's staff, employees, and facilities that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall cooperate with the Town to access people and facilities in a reasonable manner that, consistent with the Joint Compliance Expert's responsibilities, minimizes interference with daily operations.
211. The Town shall ensure that the Joint Compliance Expert shall have full and direct access to all of the Town's documents and data that the Joint Compliance Expert reasonably deems necessary to carry out the duties assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-"A-'greement, except any documents or data protected by the attorney-client privileg",e,-._ _ __ Should the Town decline to provide the Joint Compliance Expert access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform the Joint Compliance Expert and DO] that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.
50

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 51 of 55
212. To the extent necessary to ensure proper implementation of this Agreement, DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall have full and direct access to all of the Town's staff, employees, facilities, documents and data. DOJ and its consultative experts and agents shall cooperate with the Town to access involved personnel, facilities, and documents in a reasonable manner that, consistent with DOl's responsibilities to enforce this Agreement, minimizes interference with daily operations. Should the Town decline to provide DOJ with access to documents or data based on attorney-client privilege, the Town shall inform DOJ that it is withholding documents or data on this basis and shall provide DOJ with a log describing the documents or data.
213. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall provide the Town with reasonable notice of a request for copies of documents. Upon such request, the Town shall provide in a timely manner copies (electronic, where readily available) ofthe requested documents to the Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ.
214. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all records and information relating to criminal investigations of EHPD officers as permissible by law. The Joint Compliance Expert shall have access to all documents in criminal investigation files that have been closed by EHPD. The Joint Compliance Expert shall also have reasonable access to all arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications whether or not contained in open criminal investigatiiln files. Where practicable, arrest reports, warrants, and warrant applications shall be obtained from sources other than open criminal investigation files.
215. The Joint Compliance Expert and DOJ shall maintain all non-public information provided by the Town in a confidential manner. This Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any privilege or right the Town may assert, including those recognized at common law or created by statute, rule or regulation, against any other person or entity with respect to the disclosure of any document or communication.
M. Selection and Compensation ofthe Joint Compliance Expert
216. .Within 60 days of the Effective Date, the Town and DOJ shall together select an independent Joint Compliance Expert, acceptable to both, which shall assess and report on EHPD's implementation of this Agreemellt. The selection of the Joint Compliance Expert shall be pursuant to a method jointly established by the Town and DOJ, and will not be governed by any formal or legal procurement requirements. The Joint Compliance Expert and his/her team shall be individuals of the highest ethics.
217. If the Parties are unable to agree on a Joint Compliance Expert or an alternative method of selection within 60 days of the Effective Date, they reserve the right to seek the Court's assistance by asking the Court to select a Joint Compliance Expert. In that case, each Party shall submit the names of three candidates, or three groups of candidates, along with resumes and cost proposals, to the Court, and the Court shall select a Joint Compliance Expert from among the qualified candidates/candidate groups.
51

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 52 of 55
218. The Joint Compliance Expert shall be appointed for a period of fonr years from the Effective Date and shall have its appointment extended automatically should the Town not demonstrate full and effective compliance at the end of this fonr-year period.
219. The Town shall bear all reasonable fees and costs of the Joint Compliance Expert. In selecting the Joint Compliance Expert, DO] and the Town recognize the importance of ensnring that the fees and costs borne by the Town are reasonable, and accordingly fees and costs shall be one factor considered in selecting the Joint Compliance Expert. In the event that any dispute arises regarding the reasonableness or payment of the Joint Compliance Expert's fees and costs, the Town, DOJ, and the Joint Compliance Expert shall attempt to resolve such dispute cooperatively prior to seeking the assistance of the Court to resolve such dispute.
220. The Town shall provide the Joint Compliance Expert with permanent office space and reasonable office support such as office furniture, telephones, access to internet, secure document storage, photocopying and scanners.
221. The Joint Compliance Expert, at any time after its initial selection, may request to be allowed to hire or employ or contact with such additional persons or entities as are reasonably necessary to perform the tasks assigned to the Joint Compliance Expert by this Agreement. Any person or entity hired or otherwise retained by the Joint Compliance Expert to assist in furthering any provision of this Agreement shall be subject to the provisions of this Agreement. The Joint Compliance Expert shall notify the Town and DOJ in writing if the Joint Compliance Expert wishes to select such additional persons or entities. The notice shall identify and describe the qualifications of the person or entity to be hired or employed and the task to be performed. If the Town and DOJ agree to the Joint Compliance Expert's proposal, the Joint Compliance Expert shall be authorized to hire or employ such additional persons or entities. The Town or the DOJ have ten business days to disagree with the proposal. If the Town and DOJ are unable to reach agreement within ten business days of receiving notice of the disagreement, the parties reserve the right to seek the Court's assistance to resolve the dispute.
222. Should any of the Parties to this Agreement determine that the Joint Compliance Expert's individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors have exceeded their authority or failed to satisfactorily perform the duties required by this Agreement, the Party shall meet and confer to resolve outstanding concerns. If the Parties are unable to agree on a solution, either Party may petition the Conrt for such relief as the Court deems appropriate, including replacement of the Joint Compliance Expert, and/or any individual members, agents, employees, or independent contractors.
N. Court Jurisdiction, Modification of the Agreement, and Enforcement
223. This Agreement shall become effective upon entry by the Conrt.
224. The Parties agree jointly to file this Agreement with the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. The joint motion shall request that the Court enter the Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procednre 41 (a)(2), conditionally dismiss
52

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 53 of 55
the complaint in this action, and retain jurisdiction to enforce the Agreement. Should the United States determine that the Town has failed to comply with the Agreement, the case will be reinstated for the purposes of enforcing the Agreement only. The Town may not challenge liability nor the necessity for Agreement terms.
225. To ensure that the requirements of this Agreement are properly and timely implemented, the Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for enforcement purposes until such time as the Town has achieved full and effective compliance with this Agreement and maintained such compliance for no less than two years. If the Town believes it has reached full compliance and moves the Court to terminate this Agreement, the Town shall bear the burden of demonstrating full and effective compliance with this Agreement.
226. The United States acknowledges the good faith of the Town in trying to address the remedial measures that are needed to promote police integrity and ensure constitutional policing in East Haven. The United States, however, reserves its right to seek enforcement of the provisions of this Agreement ifit determines that the Town has failed to fully comply with any provision of this Agreement. Prior to initiating any enforcement proceedings in Court for an alleged failure to comply with any provision of this Agreement, the United States will notify the Town in writing of the facts supporting its beliefthat the Town is not in compliance. The Town will investigate the allegations and respond in writing within 30 days. If the dispute remains unresolved, the parties will conduct negotiations to resolve the issue(s). If the parties are unable to resolve the issue(s) satisfactorily within 30 days of the Town's written response, the United States may move the Court for any relief permitted by law or equity and demonstrate that the relief is necessary to implement this Agreement.
227. Failure by any Party to enforce this entire Agreement or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other provision herein shall not be construed as a waiver, including of its right to enforce other deadlines and provisions of this Agreement.
228. Any modification of this Agreement shall be executed in writing by the Parties, shall be filed with the Court, and shall not be effective until the Court enters the modified agreement and retains jurisdiction to enforce it.
229. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as an acknowledgement, an admission, or evidence of liability of the Town under the Constitution ofthe United States, federal or state law, and this Agreement may not be used as evidence of liability in this or any other civil or criminal proceeding.
230. The Parties agree to defend the provisions ofthis Agreement. The Parties shall notify each other of any court or administrative challenge to this Agreement. In the event any-:-_ __ provision of this Agreement is challenged in any Connecticut court, removal to a federal court shall be sought by the Parties.
53

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 54 of 55

231. The Town agrees to promptly notify DOJ if any term of this Agreement becomes subject to a collective bargaining dispute and to consult with DOJ in a timely manner regarding the position the Town takes in any collective bargaining dispute connected with this Agreement.

232. The Town shall require compliance with this Agreement by its respective officers, employees, agencies, assigns, or successors.

O. Termination of the Agreement

233. The Parties anticipate that the Town will have reached full and effective compliance with this Agreement within four years of its Effective Date. The Parties may agree to jointly ask the Court to terminate this Agreement prior to or after this date, provided that the Town has beel) in full and effective compliance with this Agreement for two consecutive years. "Full and Effective Compliance" shall be defined to require both sustained compliance with all material requirements of this Agreement and sustained and continuing improvement in constitutional policing and public trust, as demonstrated pursuant to the Agreement's outcome measures.

234. If after four years from the Effective Date the Parties disagree whether the Town has

been in full and effective compliance for two years, either Party may seek to terminate

this Agreement. In the case of termination sought by the Town, prior to filing a motion

to terminate, the Town agrees to notify DOJ in writing when the Town has determined

that it is in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and that such compliance

has been maintained for no less than two years. Thereafter, the Parties shall promptly

confer as to the status of compliance. If, after a reasonable period of consultation and the

completion of any audit or evaluation that DO] and/or the Joint Compliance Expert may

wish to undertake, including on-site observations, document review, or interviews with

the Town's personnel, the Parties cannot resolve any compliance issues, the Town may

file a motion to terminate this Agreement. If the Town moves for termination of this

Agreement, DOJ will have 60 days after the receipt of the Town's motion to object to the

motion. IfDOJ does not object, the Court may grant the Town's motion. IfDOJ does

make an objection, the Court shall hold a hearing on the motion and the burden shall be

on the Town to demonstrate that they are in full and effective compliance with this

Agreement ~d have maintained such compliance for at least two consecutive years.

Agreed to this /9 day of I/e~

, 2012.

~

For the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR. Attorney General of the United States of America

Q -------==

, United Sates Attorney for the District of Connecticut

THOMAS E.~EREV=¥
Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division

54

Case 3:12-cv-01652-AWT Document 2-1 Filed 11/20/12 Page 55 of 55

JOHN B. HUGHES, Civil Chief MICHELLE McCONAGHY, AUSA United States Attorney' s Office District of Connecticut
For the TOWN OF EAST HAVEN:

JONATHAN M. SMITH, Chief LUIS E. SAUCEDO, Acting Deputy Chief ANlKA N. GZIFA, Trial Attorney AARON S. FLEISHER, Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section

For the EAST HAVEN BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS

IT IS SO ORDERED, this _ _ day of _ _ _ _, 2012. U.S. District Judge

55

 
 19 de diciembre de 2011

VIA CORREO ELECTRÓNICO Y DE PRIMERA CLASE

Honorable Joseph Maturo, Jr. Alcalde, Municipio de East Haven 250 Main Street East Haven, Connecticut 06512

Asunto:

Investigación del Departamento de Policía de East Haven

Apreciado Alcalde Maturo:

Le escribimos para reportar los hallazgos de la investigación de la División de Derechos Civiles sobre el Departamento de Policía de East Haven (en adelante, “EHPD” por sus siglas en inglés), conforme a lo estipulado en la Ley de Control de Crimen Violento y Orden Público de 1994 (en adelante, “Sección 14141”), 42 U.S.C. § 14141, y las disposiciones antidiscriminatorias de la Ley de Control de Crimen y Calles Seguras de 1968 (en adelante, “Ley de Calles Seguras”), 42 U.S.C. § 3789d, y el Título VI de la Ley de Derechos Civiles de 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d (en adelante, “Título VI”). La Sección 14141 prohíbe que agencias de orden público, tal como EHPD, participen en actividades que constituyan un patrón o práctica de violaciones a la Constitución o a las leyes de los Estados Unidos. El Título VI y sus reglamentos de implementación disponen que los recipientes de asistencia financiera federal, tal como EHPD, no puedan discriminar por motivo de raza, color u origen nacional. Estas leyes le otorgan a los Estados Unidos la autoridad para interponer una acción legal y obtener el remedio necesario a fin de asegurar que se cumpla con la Constitución y las leyes de los Estados Unidos.

Nuestra investigación, la cual comenzó en septiembre de 2009, se enfocó en alegaciones de que oficiales del EHPD efectuaban actividades policiales parcializadas, registros e incautaciones inconstitucionales y el uso de fuerza excesiva. Esta investigación se efectuó de manera completamente independiente, y los hallazgos establecidos en esta carta no contienen ninguna información recopilada durante ninguna investigación criminal en curso que envuelva al EHPD.

Nuestra investigación ha sido exhaustiva. Hemos revisado un gran volumen de documentos del Departamento de Policía, entrevistamos funcionarios de la policía y el Municipio y nos reunimos con diversos miembros de la comunidad de East Haven. Al llegar a nuestros hallazgos, dependimos de consultores altamente respetados que cuentan con una extensa experiencia en la prestación de servicios policiales, así como en el análisis de actividades policiales discriminatorias, datos y estadísticas.

Sustentados en nuestra revisión, encontramos que EHPD efectúa un patrón o práctica de discriminación sistemática contra los latinos en violación a la Decimocuarta Enmienda de la

- 2 -
Constitución, el Título VI, y la Ley de Calles Seguras. En particular, encontramos que EHPD efectúa actividades policiales discriminatorias contra la población latina, incluyendo, pero no limitándose a persiguiendo latinos mediante la aplicación discriminatoria de las leyes de tránsito, tratando a los conductores latinos con más severidad que a los conductores no-latinos durante las detenciones de tránsito; y fallando de manera intencional y crasa en diseñar e implementar sistemas de control interno que identifiquen, rastreen y prevengan tal mala conducta. El patrón o práctica de actividades policiales discriminatorias que observamos está profundamente arraigado en la cultura del Departamento y interfiere de manera significativa con la habilidad de EHPD de ofrecer servicios a toda la comunidad de East Haven.
En adición a nuestro hallazgo formal de la existencia de actividades policiales discriminatorias contra los latinos, existen dos áreas adicionales de seria preocupación las cuales aunque no justifican un hallazgo formal de patrón o práctica, requieren investigación adicional. Primero, tenemos una seria preocupación de que las prácticas administrativas y los sistemas de asignación de responsabilidad de EHPD fallan en garantizar que las personas no estén sujetos a registros e incautaciones ilegales y al uso de fuerza excesiva. En segundo lugar, nos preocupa gravemente que la dirección del Departamento esté creando un ambiente hostil e intimidante contra cualquiera que busque proveer información relevante sobre nuestra investigación.
Dada la persistente y arraigada naturaleza de las violaciones delineadas en esta carta, una resolución efectiva y sostenible requerirá el desarrollo de un acuerdo amplio y escrito sujeto a supervisión judicial federal. Las medidas remediales que delineamos en esta carta no solo ayudaran a que EHPD cumpla con la Constitución y las leyes federales, sino que también mejorarán la seguridad pública y contribuirán al desarrollo de confianza comunitaria. La prestación de servicio policial eficaz y servicio policial constitucional van de mano en mano, y las medidas correctivas delineadas en esta carta le permitirán al EHPD asegurar que pueda proveer servicios policiales justos y efectivos a toda la comunidad.
El Fiscal General podrá iniciar una demanda en conformidad con la Sección 14141, el Título VI y la Ley de Calles Seguras para garantizar el cumplimiento con la Constitución y la ley federal y proteger a individuos de conducta ilegal adicional. Véase 42 U.S.C. § 14141(b); 42 U.S.C. § 2000d-1; 42 U.S.C. § 3789d(c)(3). En adición, los Estados Unidos puede suspender o terminar la otorgación de fondos federales específicos si el Municipio no atiende de manera voluntaria las violaciones de derechos civiles. Nosotros buscamos evitar cualquier litigio o eliminación de fondos al acordar un acuerdo judicialmente vinculante. Buscaremos entrar en negociaciones con el Municipio en las próximas semanas para determinar si es posible llegar a una resolución. Independientemente del camino futuro, le recordamos que es ilegal interferir o tomar represalias contra cualquier individuo que coopere con una investigación federal.
I. Resumen de Hallazgos
Concluimos que EHPD efectúa un patrón o práctica de actividades policiales parcializadas1 contra la población latina, en violación de la Decimocuarta Enmienda de la
1 “Actividad policial parcializada” o “actividad policial basada en parcialización” se refiere al ejercicio de la autoridad policial de forma discriminatoria por motivos de raza, color, origen nacional, género, religión, edad u orientación sexual. Dado que incluye estas categorías, este término es más abarcador que “discriminación racial”,

- 3 -
Constitución de los Estados Unidos y la ley federal. Específicamente, tenemos motivo fundado para creer que oficiales del EHPD intencionalmente persiguen a latinos para aplicarle las leyes de tránsito de manera desigual por motivos de su raza, color u origen nacional. Nuestra conclusión se basa en lo siguiente:
• un análisis estadístico que demuestra que los conductores latinos son objeto de detenciones de tránsito de manera desproporcional utilizando justificaciones no-estándar y en algunos casos inaceptables las cuales no son utilizadas al detener conductores nolatinos;
• un análisis de conducta posterior a la detención que demuestra que EHPD trata a los conductores latinos con más severidad que a los conductores no-latinos;
• serios incidentes de abuso de autoridad y represalias contra individuos que critican o se quejan de trato discriminatorio por parte del EHPD hacia los latinos.
• una falla en remediar un historial de discriminación y de indiferencia deliberada de los derechos de las minorías; incluyendo, la falla del EHPD en orientar, adiestrar, supervisar y disciplinar a los oficiales que cometen actos discriminatorios ilícitos.
• desviaciones significativas a las prácticas policiales estándares, que resultan en el encubrimiento o en la exacerbación del trato desigual de los conductores latinos, incluyendo:
o una falla en colectar y reportar detenciones de tránsito, en conformidad con las leyes estatales contra la discriminación racial;
o una falla en implementar políticas que prohíban la discriminación; o una falla en responsabilizar a los oficiales mediante investigaciones internas; o una falla en proveer acceso adecuado al idioma a los latinos con un dominio
limitado del inglés; o una falla en proteger los derechos consulares de los individuos; y o serias deficiencias en los sistemas de administración y de asignación de
responsabilidad del EHPD.
Estas deficiencias y nuestras observaciones nos han generado una seria preocupación de que el EHPD efectúa registros e incautaciones ilícitos y utiliza fuerza excesiva. En adición, nos preocupan las denuncias de que los miembros del EHPD hayan generado un ambiente hostil e intimidante contra las personas que desean cooperar con nuestra investigación.
de uso más común, que se puede entender como actividades policiales de discriminación racial solamente. En consecuencia, en este documento utilizamos el término “discriminación racial” solo para efectos de coherencia con otros usos, tales como la designación de una política o de una ley pero, en cualquier caso, su uso no se limita exclusivamente a la discriminación racial.

- 4 -
II. Metodología
El 30 de septiembre de 2009, les notificamos a los funcionarios de East Haven que estábamos iniciando una investigación del EHPD. Luego, solicitamos y recibimos documentos detallando la organización, políticas y procedimientos del EHPD. También recibimos aproximadamente dos años de reportes de incidente y otra data que refleja la actividad policial del EHPD. Aunque el Municipio y los comandantes del EHPD se comprometieron en ofrecer su total colaboración, encontramos resistencia de varios oficiales del EHPD cuando les solicitamos entrevistas y documentos específicos, incluso después de que el Abogado Municipal autorizara que se cumplieran nuestras solicitudes. También confrontamos demoras excesivas en la producción de información electrónica, a pesar de numerosos intentos de facilitar la producción de dicho material. Lo más preocupante fue recibir serias alegaciones de que los oficiales y el personal del EHPD que cooperaban con nuestra investigación eran objeto de represalias e intimidaciones. Estas alegaciones son consistentes con mensajes que observamos publicados en los tableros de expresión pública en la sede central del EHPD y en otras áreas de la estación.2
En marzo, abril, mayo y septiembre de 2010, efectuamos inspecciones en la sede del EHPD y nos reunimos con diversos miembros de la comunidad. En dos recorridos, fuimos acompañados por dos consultores expertos en prácticas policiales, ambos ex ejecutivos de policía. Durante nuestra inspección, entrevistamos a agentes y a comandantes de la policía, anduvimos con patrulleros en servicio, entrevistamos a funcionarios del Municipio y a residentes de la comunidad, observamos las prácticas del EHPD, y revisamos documentos pertinentes.
Consistente con nuestro compromiso de efectuar nuestras investigaciones de manera transparente y ofrecer asistencia técnica cuando sea apropiado, llevamos a cabo una conferencia de salida con el Jefe del EHPD, Leonard Gallo y con los funcionarios de East Haven el 9 de abril de 2010, durante la cual nuestros consultores presentaron sus observaciones y preocupaciones preliminares. Le dimos seguimiento a la conferencia de salida por medio de una carta fechada el 15 de abril de 2010, informándole a los funcionarios de East Haven nuestras preocupaciones preliminares. En esta carta, resaltamos seis áreas de preocupación: 1) políticas y procedimientos no actualizados; 2) fallas en la presentación y revisión de informes sobre el uso de fuerza; 3) procesos inadecuados para atender quejas de la población civil e investigación internas; 4) carencia de un sistema de identificación y alerta temprana; 5) acercamiento comunitario fragmentado; y 6) capacitación limitado. Del 28 de abril al 1 de mayo de 2010, regresamos a East Haven, en compañía de nuestros consultores expertos, y conversamos con miembros de la comunidad y otras personas de interés sobre sus experiencias particulares con el EHPD. Posterior a nuestras visitas, obtuvimos una extensa cantidad de documentos del Municipio, incluyendo información recibida en el otoño de 2011, y hemos continuado buscando información de los funcionarios de East Haven y de los miembros de la comunidad.
2 El 2 de diciembre de 2011, le solicitamos mediante carta al Alcalde de East Haven, Joseph Maturo, información sobre las iniciativas del Municipio y de la Junta de Comisionados de la Policía para proteger a las personas de represalias e intimidación por cooperar con los investigadores federales.

- 5 -
III. Trasfondo
A. Municipio de East Haven
El municipio de East Haven está ubicado en la costa de Connecticut, aproximadamente a 68 millas (cerca de 110 Km) al noreste de la ciudad de Nueva York. De acuerdo con el Censo de Estados Unidos de 2010, East Haven tiene una población de 29,257 personas. La mayoría de los residentes de East Haven, esto es, el 88.5%, son blancos, y el 2.9% son negros o afroamericanos. De igual modo, las cifras del Censo muestran que el 10.3% de las personas de East Haven se identifican como hispanos o latinos. Esto representa un crecimiento sustancial en la población latina desde el Censo del 2000, el cual identifico a 4.4% de los residentes de East Haven como hispanos o latinos. De acuerdo con los datos del informe de delitos del FBI (“Uniform Crime Report”), los delitos violentos en East Haven han disminuido de manera general durante el mismo período, y los delitos contra la propiedad han permanecido relativamente constantes.
B. Departamento de Policía de East Haven
El EHPD emplea a aproximadamente 50 oficiales uniformados, siendo solo uno de ellos fluyente en el idioma español. La mayoría de estos oficiales se dividen en tres escuadrones de patrullaje: El escuadrón A cubre el turno de 12:00 a. m. a 8:30 a. m.; el escuadrón B cubre el turno de 8:00 a. m. a 4:30 p. m., y el escuadrón C cubre el turno de 4:00 p. m. a 12:30 a. m.. Existen aproximadamente diez oficiales asignados a cada escuadrón. Un teniente y dos o tres sargentos supervisan los escuadrones de patrullaje. También hay una unidad de detectives. El Jefe de Policía, designado por el Alcalde de East Haven, comanda el EHPD. Al comienzo de la investigación, Leonard Gallo era el Jefe de Policía, cargo que ha ocupado por más de una década.
Cada año, el Alcalde nombra a la Junta de Comisionados de Policía (“la Junta”), la cual supervisa al EHPD. La Junta es responsable de, entre otras cosas, establecer las políticas y normas de conducta del Departamento. Entre las facultades de la Junta está la de nombrar y destituir oficiales y empleados del EHPD. Todas las facultades de la Junta están sujetas a la Carta Municipal y a cualquier acuerdo colectivo aplicable.
IV. Violaciones a la Constitución y de la Ley Federal
Las prácticas del EHPD constituyen un patrón o prácticas de actividades policiales discriminatorias. Nuestra investigación reveló que los latinos son sujetos a tratamiento desigual y que el impacto en los latinos solo puede ser atribuido a una parcialización intencional. Al llegar a esta conclusión, hemos examinado la naturaleza y los métodos utilizados para efectuar detenciones de tránsito; desviaciones a las prácticas policiales estándar que resultan en un tratamiento desigual; incapacidad de adiestrar, supervisar o corregir; incapacidad de recopilar y revisar la data referente a las detenciones de tránsito; el historial de ejercicio policial parcializado y tensión racial en el Municipio. Nuestro análisis de la totalidad de las circunstancias no lleva a concluir que la conducta del EHPD fue motivada, al menos en parte, por un propósito discriminatorio.

- 6 -
A. El EHPD efectúa un Patrón o Prácticas de Actividades Policiales Discriminatorias en Violación a la Decimocuarta Enmienda
Oficiales del EHPD efectúan un patrón o práctica de discriminación contra los latinos en violación a la Cláusula de Igualdad de Protección de la Decimocuarta Enmienda la cual es justiciable bajo la Sección 14141. La Sección 14141 estipula que “[s]erá ilegal para cualquier autoridad gubernamental, o cualquier agente de éste, o cualquier persona actuando en nombre de una autoridad gubernamental, que efectué un patrón o práctica de conducta por agentes del orden público… que prive a las personas de los derechos, privilegios o inmunidades garantizados o protegidas por la Constitución o las leyes de los Estados Unidos”.3 42 U.S.C. § 14141(a). La Cláusula de Igualdad de Protección prohíbe cualquier conducta gubernamental que “deniegue a cualquier persona…la protección igual de las leyes”. Const. E.U. XIV § 1.
Para demonstrar que una agencia policial viola la Cláusula de Igualdad de Protección se requiere prueba de que ésta actuó con intención o propósito discriminatorio.4 Pueblo de Arlington Heights v. Metro. Hous. Dev. Corp., 429 U.S. 252, 265 (1977) (citando a Washington v. Davis, 426 U.S. 229, 242 (1976)). Una acción discriminatoria por parte de una jurisdicción no se debe basar de manera exclusiva o predominante en la intención o propósito discriminatorio, sino necesita solo ser “un factor motivante” en la acción en cuestión. Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. en 265-66. En algunos casos, el efecto discriminatorio de por sí puede demostrar la intención discriminatoria como “un patrón claro e inexplicable por motivos diferentes a la raza”. Id. en 266; Farm Labor Org. Comm. v. Ohio State Highway Patrol, 308 F.3d 523, 534 (6th Cir. 2002) (estableciendo que el propósito discriminatorio puede inferirse por el efecto de la práctica en disputa contra un grupo racial).
En adición al impacto discriminatorio de una acción, el propósito discriminatorio podrá ser inferido por la “la totalidad de la evidencia pertinente”. Davis, 426 U.S. en 242. En efecto, el Tribunal Supremo ha identificado numerosas fuentes de evidencia que podrán demostrar intención discriminatoria, como el trasfondo histórico del curso de acción en tela de juicio, eventos específicos anteriores al curso de acción en cuestión y desviaciones en los procedimientos estándares que por lo general guiarían a la acción en cuestión. Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. en 266-67.
En consecuencia, nuestro hallazgo que establece que los oficiales del EHPD han efectuado actividades policiales discriminatorias contra los latinos se basa en lo siguiente: 1) El
3 La piedra angular de un “patrón o práctica”, por lo general, es el grado de regularidad o rutina de la acción en cuestión. Al interpretar el lenguaje paralelo del Título VII de la Ley de Derechos Civiles de 1964, el Tribunal Supremo estableció que: “un patrón o práctica [está] presente solo cuando la negación de derechos consiste en algo más que un incidente aislado y esporádico, es de naturaleza repetitiva, rutinaria o generalizada”. Int’l Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Estados Unidos, 431 U.S. 324, 336 n.16 (1977) (se omitieron las comillas internas). En los casos de discriminación, las pruebas estadísticas y anecdóticas pueden demostrar en conjunto un “patrón o práctica” bajo esta definición. Id. en 338-39.
4 Entre las clases de personas protegidas por la Cláusula de Igualdad de Protección se encuentran aquellas que tienen una ascendencia común extranjera. Hernandez v. Texas, 347 U.S. 475 (1954). Es importante señalar que las personas indocumentadas que se encuentren dentro de los Estados Unidos tienen derecho a la igual protección de la ley. Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 210 (1982) (se rechaza el argumento de que “los extranjeros indocumentados, debido a su estatus migratorio… no tienen derecho a la igual protección de las leyes de Texas”).

- 7 -
EHPD persigue a la población latina mediante una aplicación discriminatoria de las leyes de tránsito; 2) el EHPD abusa su autoridad al tomar represalias contra individuos que critican o se quejan ante de la conducta discriminatoria del EHPD; 3) el EHPD falla en tomar acción correctiva en reacción a hallazgos judiciales que establecen que dentro del EHPD existen costumbres y prácticas discriminatorias, incluyendo la indiferencia deliberada a los derechos de las minorías de East Haven; y 4) el EHPD intencionalmente hace caso omiso a los procedimientos básicos y comunes que utilizan los organismos policiales y que ordenan las leyes estatales para evitar la actividad policial parcializada. Por tanto, nuestra evidencia demuestra que el EHPD singulariza a los latinos en su trato discriminatorio.
1. El EHPD Intencionalmente Persigue a la Población Latina mediante una Aplicación Desigual de las Leyes de Tránsito
Nuestro análisis estadístico de la data de EHPD sobre detenciones de tránsito demuestra que los latinos son objeto de tratamiento vastamente desigual en las carreteras de East Haven en comparación con los automovilistas no-latinos. El tamaño de esta desproporción ilustra el grado en que el EHPD sufre de deficiencias institucionales significativas. Una agencia de orden público con sistemas de supervisión y asignación de responsabilidad adecuados, hubiera descubierto este problema y lo hubiera corregido rápidamente, en vez de permitir que continuaran ininterrumpidamente por años.
El EHPD nos proporcionó todos los registros relacionados a las intervenciones de tránsito efectuadas durante un período de dos años, desde el 1 de enero de 2009, hasta el 31 de diciembre de 2010. Analizamos esta data para determinar si los oficiales del EHPD en su totalidad detenían a los latinos en una tasa desproporcional y si se trataba de escuadrones individuales del EHPD u oficiales en particular.
Si bien nuestro análisis demostró una significativa desproporción en cada nivel de actividad de detención vehicular del EHPD---por departamento entero, escuadrones independientes y oficiales individuales--- la desproporción más impactante se observó al nivel de escuadrones y de oficiales individuales. Al analizar la actividad de los escuadrones y de los oficiales, comparamos la actividad de detenciones vehiculares de cada escuadrón contra los otros escuadrones, y la de oficiales individuales versus los otros oficiales. Este tipo de comparación entre iguales es de utilidad particular al identificar unidades y oficiales problemáticos. A pesar de que EHPD tenía disponibilidad inmediata a ésta información sobre detenciones de tránsito, el EHPD falló en efectuar un análisis interno, así permitiendo conducta desproporcional sin tomar medida correctiva alguna.
Al nivel de escuadrones, encontramos que de todos los escuadrones el escuadrón C, el cual cubre el turno de 4:00 p. m. a 12:30 a. m., detuvo la mayor proporción de latinos5 durante intervenciones de vehículos de motor, con 24.8%. Aunque esta cifra no refleja las diferencias individuales entre los oficiales del escuadrón C, la desviación estadística en el número de intervenciones es considerablemente significativa según comparada con otros escuadrones y debería haber servido de base para que el EHPD investigara de inmediato al escuadrón C y su
5 La población latina se identifica a través de las determinaciones del EHPD y el método de aceptación general del análisis de los apellidos.

- 8 -
actividad de detención vehicular. En respecto a los demás escuadrones, los latinos comprendían el 17.8% de los conductores que fueron detenidos por el escuadrón A y el 14.7% de los conductores por el escuadrón B.
De manera similar, encontramos algunos oficiales del EHPD con disparidades masivas en sus detenciones de latinos, según comparado con otros oficiales del EHPD. En efecto, un oficial tenía una tasa de detención de latinos que llegaba al 40.5%, una desviación extraordinaria según comparada con la línea de base de las actividades de otros oficiales del EHPD. Respectivamente, el EHPD permitió que oficiales con tasas de intervención de latinos que se acercaban a uno de dos o uno de tres operaran sin supervisión o disciplina, lo que constituye prueba fehaciente de que el EHPD al menos permitía su conducta discriminatoria.
Por último, analizamos la actividad de detenciones del EHPD en conjunto. Dado que no existen referentes internos con que comparar las actividades de todo el departamento, utilizamos a la población latina de East Haven y todos los pueblos aledaños, ajustado para capturar solo los latinos con edad suficiente para conducir, para aproximar el número probable de latinos que conducen en East Haven en un momento determinado. Cuando se considera la actividad de todos los oficiales, incluyendo aquellos que rara vez detienen a latinos, encontramos que más del 19.9% de las detenciones de tránsito eran aún de latinos. Esta tasa es mayor a un nivel estadísticamente considerable que el 15.5% de los conductores latinos que, según nuestros cálculos, hay en East Haven y las pueblos limítrofes. La disparidad es aún mayor si solo se toma en cuenta East Haven, donde el 8.3% de los conductores son latinos, o East Haven y los tractos contiguos de censo, donde el 11.1% de los conductores son latinos.
La anteriormente mencionada evidencia estadística revela una predominante discriminación contra la población latina en cada nivel de actividad de aplicación de las leyes de tránsito por parte del EHPD. Las discriminatorias detenciones de tránsito efectuados por los escuadrones y oficiales del EHPD constituyen una problemática particular: no solo encontramos una alta tasa de detenciones desproporcionadas por parte de los escuadrones y oficiales, sino que tal obvia conducta era ignorada por el EHPD, y no corregida. La amplitud de las acciones discriminatorias, así como el efecto discriminatorio de estas acciones, constituye evidencia contundente de la intención discriminatoria. Véase Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. en 266.
Nos basamos en mucho más que impacto solamente para llegar a nuestros hallazgos. Encontramos evidencia de tácticas ampliamente utilizadas por parte de los oficiales del EHPD para perseguir a la población latina. El efecto discriminatorio de las acciones de las agencias policiales es un componente crítico al identificar una violación de igual protección, véase Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. en 265-66, y las estadísticas, así como los hechos y circunstancias que las rodean, son maneras comunes de demostrar el efecto discriminatorio. Teamsters, 431 U.S. en 339-40. La naturaleza generalizada de esta conducta es suficiente para constituir un patrón o práctica de discriminación. Véase Ottaviani v. Universidad Estatal de Nueva York, 875 F.2d 365, 371 (2d Cir. 1989).
a) El EHPD recurre a métodos no-estándar e inaceptables para justificar su trato desigual hacia los latinos durante las detenciones de tránsito

- 9 -
Analizamos cerca de 1,000 reportes de incidentes generados por el escuadrón del EHPD a cargo del turno de la noche, donde la actividad de detenciones de tránsito son generalmente más elevadas. Los reportes de incidentes demuestran que los oficiales del EHPD: 1) centran sus actividades de control del tránsito en zonas donde se concentra la población latina; 2) utilizan métodos no-estándar, y en ocasiones inaceptables, a fin de hallar motivos para detener a los conductores latinos; las cuales no son utilizadas al detener conductores no-latinos, y 3) tratan a los conductores latinos de manera más punitiva que a los no-latinos después de una detención de tránsito.
Durante nuestra investigación, recibimos numerosos reportes de que los oficiales del EHPD singularizan a establecimientos comerciales latinos al enfocar sus actividades de detenciones de tránsito en los clientes que abandonan estos establecimientos. En armonía con estos reportes, encontramos que los oficiales del EHPD también persiguen zonas específicas de las carreteras Frontage y Foxon para efectuar sus actividades de control del tránsito: aéreas donde es conocido que se concentra la población latina. Basados en los reportes de incidentes del EHPD, encontramos que sus oficiales seleccionan estos lugares de manera deliberada para esperar en sus patrullas a que los conductores latinos transiten y así puedan detener estos vehículos, una técnica conocida entre las autoridades policiales como “sandbagging.”
El hecho de que ciertos oficiales del EHPD persigan específicamente a los conductores latinos se ve demostrado por las tácticas extremas a las que recurren para justificar estas detenciones de tránsito. Una vez que estos oficiales han identificado al conductor latino, utilizan varios métodos a fin de hallar un motivo para detenerlo, los cuales, por lo general, no utilizan contra conductores no-latinos. Con los conductores latinos, los reportes de incidentes demuestran que los oficiales del EHPD primero tratan de identificar un defecto cosmético en la matrícula del auto. Si no hay un defecto evidente y el auto tiene una matrícula de otro estado, los oficiales lo detienen con el argumento de que, según su experiencia, estas matrículas son falsificadas con frecuencia. En otras ocasiones, los oficiales siguen al conductor latino y esperan a que cometa una infracción de tránsito a la que puedan recurrir, una táctica que raramente utilizan contra los conductores no-latinos. En otros casos, los oficiales se refieren al exceso de velocidad como justificación para detener el auto, pero, contrario a las prácticas policiales normales, no suministran ninguna indicación sobre cómo sabían que el auto iba con exceso de velocidad, fallando en indicar si siguieron el paso del vehículo o utilizaron una pistola de radar. En al menos un caso, el oficial tomó una medida muy fuera de lo común, que consistió en mirar la información del seguro del vehículo en movimiento para encontrar una causa de detención, lo cual demuestra el grado en que el control legítimo del tránsito pasa a ser una consideración secundaria cuando se trata de conductores latinos. En efecto, la regularidad de estas tácticas, sus desviaciones de las prácticas policiales estándares y su aplicación inequitativa a los conductores latinos demuestran que los oficiales del EHPD de este escuadrón no son partícipes de funciones de control de tránsito legítimas, sino que, en su lugar, toman a los conductores latinos como blanco.
Si bien las detenciones de automovilistas mediante pretexto puedieran ser lícitas en un caso ordinario, se infringe el debido proceso y la igual protección de la ley si obedecen a fines inadecuados, como la parcialización. Véase Whren v. los Estados Unidos, 517 U.S. 806 (1996). Esto es particularmente cierto en las circunstancias donde existe un patrón de comportamiento por parte de los oficiales de policía el cual resulte en un efecto desproporcional. Véase ciudad de

- 10 -
Indianápolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 45-46 (2000) (“aunque las intenciones [s]ubjetivas no juegan un rol de ordinario, el análisis de causa probable de la Cuarta Enmienda,’…los propósitos programáticos pueden ser relevantes a la validez de las injerencias a la Cuarta Enmienda sobrepuestas de conformidad con un esquema general sin sospecha individualizadas. En consecuencia, Whren no precluye una investigación del propósito programático en tales contextos”).
Los reportes de incidentes revelan un patrón de tratamiento discriminatorio después de la detención vehicular. Después de que una detención vehicular es iniciada, encontramos que algunos oficiales del EHPD someten a los conductores latinos a un tratamiento más severo que a los conductores no-latinos. En particular, estos oficiales del EHPD suelen arrestar a los conductores latinos, exigiendo que sus vehículos sean remolcados por una grúa. En consecuencia, los latinos que son detenidos por estos oficiales no sólo pierden el disfrute de sus vehículos, sino que también son requeridos a pagar una fianza para poder ser liberados. En contraste, los mismos oficiales del EHPD por lo general tratan a los conductores no-latinos de una manera mucho menos punitiva, con frecuencia, dejándolos ir de la escena después de emitirles una citación escrita de comparecencia ante un tribunal. Por lo general, a estos conductores no se le remolcan sus vehículos en grúa. La política del EHPD para el remolque de automotores es ambigua y, al parecer, les permite a los oficiales tomar decisiones discrecionales las cuales han sido utilizadas para discriminar contra las personas latinas. Más aún, los supervisores responsables de revisar estos reportes han fallado en cuestionar o corregir este comportamiento.
El uso de tácticas por parte del EHPD, dirigidas casi en su totalidad hacia los latinos, demuestra el grado en que esta población se ve afectado por las prácticas del EHPD. En efecto, el uso de estas tácticas discriminatorias es tan generalizado que demuestra de forma independiente que fueron utilizadas con la intención de perseguir la población latina en violación de la Decimocuarta Enmienda. Véase Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. en 266.
b) El EHPD aplica las leyes migratorias de manera asistemática e descoordinada para perseguir a la población latina
El programa del EHPD para aplicar las leyes migratorias es asistemático y se desvía de las prácticas policiales profesionales. Las desviaciones de los procedimientos estándar que resultan en un impacto desigual, son evidencia de una parcialización intencional. Véase Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. en 267.
El EHPD no tiene un acuerdo con el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (“ICE”) del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional de los Estados Unidos, en el cual se delegue la autoridad de cumplimiento de las leyes migratorias a ningún oficial del EHPD. Estos acuerdos, comúnmente conocidos como “acuerdos 287(g)”, permiten que designados y capacitados oficiales de orden público local efectúen funciones de aplicación de las leyes migratorias bajo la supervisión de los oficiales del ICE. No obstante, el EHPD ha permitido que sus oficiales participen en esfuerzos de aplicación de las leyes migratorias asistemáticos y descoordinados con el fin de perseguir conductores latinos mediante detenciones de tránsito. El personal de comando del EHPD nos informó que han autorizado a oficiales a que efectúen investigaciones de inmigración al momento de hacer un arresto por un delito grave o cuando un individuo detenido

- 11 -
presente un pasaporte extranjero. Aunque el EHPD lleva a cabo investigaciones de inmigración regularmente, esta autorización no existe como política formal del EHPD y no es consistentemente aplicada o adecuadamente revisada. Como resultado, los oficiales del EHPD realizan investigaciones de inmigraciones muy fuera al margen de los límites identificados por el EHPD. Revisamos numerosos reportes de incidentes donde los oficiales del EHPD contactaron al ICE para corroborar el estatus de inmigración o solicitar órdenes de detención migratorias de latinos. En todos estos incidentes, los arrestos se debieron a infracciones de tránsito y no a delitos mayores, pero los oficiales del EHPD le solicitaban al ICE que expidiera una orden de detención migratoria. El hecho de que los oficiales del EHPD se desvíen incluso de las políticas de aplicación de las leyes migratorias mínimamente restrictivas que posee el EHPD---y la incapacidad del EHPD en corregir estas desviaciones o administrar el cumplimiento de las leyes migratorias de forma más general---demuestra que sus prácticas a este respecto no son encauzadas hacia el ejercicio legítimo de las autoridad local para el cumplimiento de las leyes migratorias en cooperación con el gobierno federal.6 Por el contrario, dado el historial de discriminación del EHPD, estas carencias en las políticas constituyen un medio para que sus oficiales hostiguen e intimiden a la comunidad latina.
El ejercicio asistemático de la autoridad policial del EHPD, realizado sin la orientación del gobierno federal, o la capacitación del EHPD en materia de actividades policiales constitucionales, ha tenido implicaciones negativas en la relación entre las agencias de orden público locales y las comunidades minoritarias afectadas a las que sirve. Por esta razón, las agencias de orden público locales que busquen hacer cumplir las leyes migratorias sin disminuir su capacidad de adecuadamente servir a estas comunidades hacen uso de procedimientos que garanticen la transparencia y la asignación de responsabilidad durante el ejercicio de su autoridad, incluyendo el actuar en cooperación con el gobierno federal.7 Estas agencias de orden público también comúnmente realizan actividades de acercamiento comunitario para describir sus políticas relacionadas al cumplimiento de las leyes migratorias, incluyendo información referente a cuando las investigaciones de estatus migratorio son autorizadas. Comunicaciones de esta naturaleza son necesarias para conservar la capacidad de la policía de establecer contacto con testigos y víctimas, que con frecuencia rehúsan ofrecer información por temor a repercusiones personales hacia ellos, sus amigos o familiares. Encontramos que la aplicación de las leyes migratorias por parte del EHPD, sin observar las prioridades o guías federales, sin capacitación o supervisión por parte del personal de comando del EHPD, y sin una aplicación consistente, carece de todas estas protecciones y, en lugar de ello, es utilizada para hostigar e intimidar a los latinos, en vez de ir en pos de objetivos legítimos de cumplimiento de la ley.
6 De hecho, el ICE ya ha hecho claro que su intención ni siquiera es que los organismos locales que participan formalmente en el programa de cumplimiento de las leyes migratorias recurran al control y vigilancia del tránsito con el fin de ejercer su autoridad. Véase Departamento de Seguridad Nacional de los Estados Unidos, Hoja técnica, Delegación de las Autoridades Migratorias; Sección 287(g) Ley de Inmigración y Nacionalidad (2007) (en archivo). 7 Los parámetros de tal cooperación podrán ser encontrados en la Guía de Ayuda de Gobiernos Estatales y Locales sobre el Cumplimento de Leyes Migratorias y Asuntos Relacionados (2011), del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional de los Estados Unidos, disponible en http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/guidance-state-local-assistanceimmigration-enforcement.pdf.

- 12 -
2. El EHPD toma Represalias contra las Personas que Critican y Expresan su Inconformidad ante el Tratamiento Desigual contra los Latinos
El EHPD perpetúa una cultura de miedo e intimidación en East Haven al tomar represalias contra las personas que critican y expresan su inconformidad ante el tratamiento desigual contra la población latina. El patrón de hostilidad contra una comunidad distintiva, como el que encontramos aquí, sirve como evidencia importante de la conducta discriminatoria. Véase Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. en 265-66; Doe v. Pueblo de Mamaroneck, 462 F. Supp. 2d 520, 548-49 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (al examinar los factores del caso Arlington Heights, se encuentra que, si se consideran en conjunto, estos demuestran que la campaña contra los jornaleros fue motivada por un ánimo racial y se centraba en los jornaleros latinos). Entrevistamos a miembros de la comunidad que relataron incidentes de primera mano de comportamientos de abuso y represalias. El siguiente incidente es uno de muchos que demuestran la conducta de represalia por parte de los oficiales de la policía:
Después de las quejas de las personas de East Haven sobre el tratamiento discriminatorio por parte del EHPD, un sacerdote local comenzó a documentar la actividad que el EHPD dirige a los latinos. Como resultado, el sacerdote comenzó a ser objetivo de la intimidación y hostigamiento del EHPD. Por ejemplo, en marzo de 2009, los oficiales del EHPD ingresaron a un establecimiento propiedad de latinos y acusaron al propietario de tratar de vender matrículas de tránsito, una acusación que aparentemente se basó en el simple hecho de que el propietario tuviese 80 matrículas en una de las paredes de la tienda como decoración. El propietario negó que las matriculas tuvieran un propósito diferente al de servir como artículo decorativo, pero luego dos oficiales del EHPD iniciaron una investigación criminal de esta actividad, la cual, a lo mucho, culminaría con una infracción menor de las leyes estatales de registro, si de algún modo consistiese en una violación. El sacerdote comenzó a grabar un video de las actividades de los oficiales en la tienda. Cuando vieron que estaban siendo objeto de grabaciones, los oficiales le exigieron al sacerdote que detuviese la grabación. Cuando el sacerdote se negó, los oficiales del EHPD hicieron uso de la fuerza en su contra y finalmente lo arrestaron. El oficial que realizó la captura informó de manera falsa que no sabía que el sacerdote tenía una videocámara y que pensó que en realidad tenía un arma, por lo que tuvo que recurrir al uso de la fuerza y al consecuente arresto. En la cinta de video del incidente que analizamos, se puede escuchar con claridad que los oficiales estaban enterados de que el sacerdote llevaba una videocámara. Sustentados en nuestra investigación, el personal de comando del EHPD no llevó a cabo ninguna investigación significativa del incidente en cuestión, ni impuso medida disciplinaria alguna, a pesar de estar de acuerdo en que el incidente sucedió como lo reflejaba la videocinta.
Las acciones inusuales y altamente agresivas que emprendieron los oficiales del EHPD en este caso, unido a su deshonestidad y la falta de corrección o de medidas disciplinarias del EHPD demuestran la cultura de hostilidad contra la comunidad latina y la tolerancia de las represalias.

- 13 -
3. EHPD ha Fracasado en Remediar su Historial de Discriminación
Nuestras investigación encontró que East Haven tiene un extenso historial de discriminaciones en su pasado que ha fracasado en abordar o remediar de manera significativa. Este trasfondo histórico sirve como evidencia del propósito discriminatorio, en especial, si “revela una serie de medidas oficiales tomadas con fines injustos”. Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. en 267.
Durante una década, East Haven y EHPD han sido objeto de un pleito judicial en los que se acusa a oficiales del EHPD de conductas discriminatorias en contra de afroamericanos. Este pleito terminó con un fallo del jurado en contra de East Haven. En el 2007, el tribunal federal concluyó que durante el juicio se presentó evidencia suficiente para que el jurado determinara que “dentro del EHPD existía una costumbre o práctica de indiferencia deliberada a los derechos constitucionales de los afroamericanos, [y] que el Jefe de Policía estaba consciente de esta costumbre o práctica y de manera deliberada le era indiferente”. Jones v. Town of East Haven, et al., 493 F. Supp. 2d 302, 338 (D. Conn. 2007).
La singularización de la comunidad afroamericana por parte del EHPD para ejercer sobre ellos una serie de acciones discriminatorias es un problema serio y los efectos prolongados de la discriminación puede ser evidencia de la intención discriminatoria en el trato de otras minorías. Véase Rogers v. Lodge, 458 U.S. 613, 626 (1982) (señalando que las acciones discriminatorias pasadas pueden servir como evidencia de prácticas discriminatorias actuales) y Abramson v. American University, No. 86-1413, 1988 WL 152020, en *1 (D.D.C. 13 de junio de 1988) (estableciendo que evidencia de discrimen previo de un empleador contra otros grupos minoritarios es “pertinente frente al problema de su intención discriminatoria en general”.); cf. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 805 (1973) (señalando la pertinencia de las prácticas generales de contratación de minorías como evidencia en una demanda de discrimen laboral presentada por un empleado negro).
Más aun, nuestra investigación no descubrió evidencia de que el EHPD haya implementado cambios significativos en ninguna de sus políticas después del veredicto del caso Jones. En efecto, los oficiales involucrados directamente en los incidentes que dieron origen al veredicto en Jones siguen en el personal del EHPD y, en algunos casos, han recibido ascensos a puestos de supervisión. No encontramos evidencia de que fuesen sometidos a medidas disciplinarias apropiadas ni que recibieran nuevamente capacitación como consecuencia de su participación en los incidentes del caso Jones. El mantener a personas en cargos de autoridad, sin que se tomen medidas disciplinarias evidentes o se realicen modificaciones responsivas en las políticas, es una prueba fehaciente de la intención discriminatoria por parte de EHPD. Véase Estados Unidos v. Ciudad de Yonkers, 96 F.3d 600, 612 (2d Cir. 1996) (señalando que “los patrones de nombramientos oficiales para ocupar posiciones claves con personas que probablemente mantengan un status quo de segregación” es prueba de la intención discriminatoria).
4. La Persecución de EHPD Contra Los Latinos Surge de una Falla Intencional de Prevenir Discrimen en sus Practicas Institucionales
EHPD se desvía considerablemente de las prácticas convencionales que emplean las agencias del orden público diseñadas para evitar las actividades policiales parcializadas. Véase

- 14 -
Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. en 267 (señalando que las desviaciones de un oficial o personal gubernamental de las prácticas normales en la aplicación convencional de las leyes o procedimientos pueden apuntar hacia un propósito discriminatorio cuando estas desviaciones permiten o generan conductas discriminatorias). El ejercicio imparcial de la autoridad en departamentos de policía convencionales tiene muchos componentes críticos generalmente aceptados: Oficiales1) deben tener capacitación adecuada sobre el ejercicio constitucional de la aplicación de la ley; 2) deben ser guiados por políticas detalladas y códigos de conducta; y 3) deben estar sujetos a un sistema de asignación de responsabilidad, que incluya mantenimiento de registros significativo, supervisión, investigaciones internas y control. Las desviaciones sistemáticas y serias de EHPD en cada uno de estos principios del ejercicio eficaz del orden público son evidencia de que EHPD no ejerce su autoridad policial de manera imparcial, sino que promueve o condona la aplicación discriminatoria de la ley.
a) EHPD no cumple con la ley estatal diseñada para evitar la discriminación racial
Según requerido por las leyes estatales, las agencias del orden público en Connecticut deben documentar todas las detenciones de tránsito e incluir información demográfica, y comunicar esta información a los organismos estatales. Véase Estatuto General de Connecticut § 54-1m (2010). Este estatuto, uno de los primeros de su clase en la nación, está diseñado de manera específica para evitar la discriminación racial de parte de las agencias del orden público de Connecticut. Véase id. El 7 de marzo de 2009, la prensa hizo público el fracaso total del EHPD en cumplir con este estatuto. Durante nuestra investigación, confirmamos con el personal de comando del EHPD que dicho fallo no había sido remediado. Aunque EHPD posee terminales de información sofisticados con capacidad para recopilar la información necesaria, EHPD nunca ha realizado revisiones significativas de los datos recopilados y nunca se los ha enviado al estado, según requerido por el estatuto. El fracaso por parte de EHPD en auditar la información asimismo los hace estar fuera de cumplimento con la ley estatal. Nuestra propia revisión de la información reveló que en relación con las detenciones de tránsito faltaba la entrada de datos étnicos o estos datos aparecían errados en los informes. Dado que el EHPD fallo en auditar sus propios datos, no podía cumplir con los requisitos del estatuto de reportar estos datos con exactitud.
El fracaso del EHPD en cumplir con la ley estatal diseñada para evitar las actividades policiales parcializadas es evidencia de que el personal de comando del EHPD buscaba enmascarar las actividades ilícitas de sus oficiales.
b) EHPD no mantiene políticas para evitar la discriminación parcializada
Las políticas y procedimientos de EHPD en relación con la parcialización son defectuosas y un reflejo de la indiferencia deliberada para proteger los derechos de los latinos en su comunidad. El personal de comando del EHPD está al tanto de estas deficiencias, pero no realizó las correcciones necesarias.
EHPD solo ha promulgado una política para tratar las actividades policiales parcializadas después de 2009. La política llegó luego de que se encontrara que EHPD no cumplía con el estatuto estatal sobre caracterizaciones raciales y de que fuera objeto de una serie de acusaciones

- 15 -
de esta índole. Es evidente la premura con la que se expidió dicha política en sus definiciones contradictorias y superficiales sobre la caracterización racial. Por ejemplo, la política establece que EHPD no será partícipe de actividades para hacer cumplir la ley “cuando dicha actividad sea motivada por características de raza, color, etnia, edad, género u orientación sexual”. Sin embargo, en la política luego se define caracterización racial como las actividades para hacer cumplir la ley que se “basan exclusivamente en la raza de (...) una persona”. Mediante el uso de la palabra “exclusivamente”, EHPD en el mejor de los casos aporta ambigüedad sobre si un oficial del EHPD puede tener en cuenta la raza cuando realice detenciones de tránsito y, en el peor de ellos, le dice a los oficiales que puede recurrir a la raza como motivo para realizar una detención vehicular siempre que tengan (o crean) otra razón como mínimo.
Identificamos otras deficiencias en la política que se relacionan con las faltas del EHPD para abordar las actividades policiales parcializadas. EHPD no ha implementado ninguna política que les ayude a los oficiales a comunicarse con los miembros de habla hispana de la comunidad y, por tanto, ha evitado que sus oficiales establezcan relaciones que puedan mejorar su seguridad y ha privado a una parte considerable de la comunidad latina de los servicios policiales. EHPD tampoco tiene políticas formales que se encarguen del cumplimento de las leyes migratorias o de las tácticas correctas que se pueden utilizar en las detenciones de tránsito, por ejemplo, requerir constatar los medios que utiliza un oficial para elaborar una posible causa para la detención de un vehículo.
c) EHPD no capacita a los oficiales para evitar las actividades policiales parcializadas
A parte de la capacitación que se ofrece en la Academia de Estándares y Capacitación para Oficiales de Paz (“POST”) en todo el estado, encontramos que EHPD les ofrece a sus oficiales capacitación mínima sobre actividades policiales y, prácticamente ninguna capacitación en asuntos relacionados con actividades policiales parcializadas. La dependencia exclusiva en la capacitación de la academia sobre esta materia -que se caracteriza por la evolución de normas y prácticas entre las agencias de policías- es una desviación significativa de las prácticas policiales generalmente aceptadas. Esta dependencia les provee a los oficiales el único recurso de una capacitación estática y anticuada que no aborda los cambios en las leyes o en las diversas circunstancias a las que se puede encontrar un oficial y que van más allá de las contempladas o de las que puede afrontar en un curso de nivel académico. Más aún, los oficiales del EHPD no reciben capacitación alguna en temas que son complemento necesario para evitar la actividad policial parcializada, incluida la capacitación sobre los aspectos de diversidad y de sensibilidad cultural. Estas fallas son particularmente atroces a la luz de las quejas recientes de los ciudadanos relacionadas con discriminación, los reportes de los medios noticiosos , y los litigios, además de las resoluciones judiciales de discriminación por oficiales del EHPD en el caso Jones.
d) EHPD no responsabiliza a los oficiales en los casos de actividades policiales parcializadas
(1) EHPD dificulta la posibilidad de que los latinos presenten sus quejas
Un sistema funcional y accesible de quejas es esencial para mantener la rendición de cuentas en una agencia del orden público y para asegurar una relación estrecha de trabajo con las

- 16 -
comunidades a las que sirve. EHPD opera un sistema con graves deficiencias para actuar sobre las quejas presentadas por miembros de la comunidad. Con base en nuestra revisión de los documentos del EHPD y en las observaciones realizadas durante nuestro recorrido, este sistema de quejas está diseñado de tal manera que desalienta la participación comunitaria y, en especial, de la comunidad latina.
En abril de 2010, durante nuestra investigación de campo, EHPD tenía un procedimiento altamente limitante para aceptar quejas. Un sistema de quejas que cumpla con las prácticas de aceptación general de las agencias del orden público debe estar diseñado para aceptar quejas de diversas fuentes con pocos obstáculos para su presentación. Por el contrario, EHPD adoptó una serie de prácticas conocidas para limitar las quejas que recibe una agencia del orden público. Los formularios para la presentación de quejas del EHPD solo están disponibles en su sede, lo que desalienta a las personas de presentar una queja por temor a tener contacto con la policía, dado que dicho proceso requeriría desplazarse hasta la sede y solicitarle al oficial de turno dicho formulario. De manera similar, los formularios para la presentación de quejas contenían repetidas advertencias en negrita sobre la responsabilidad criminal que implicaba realizar declaraciones falsas a los oficiales de policía, lo que constituye otro factor disuasivo bien conocido para la presentación de quejas. Más aún, el proceso de presentación de quejas en ese entonces requería que un oficial de policía certificara las declaraciones y la certificación requería que el querellante presentara ciertos formularios específicos de identificación.
Es de gran importancia que, durante el período de nuestra investigación, el formulario necesario solo estaba en inglés. Si un latino con dominio limitado del inglés fuese a la estación de policía, el único formulario para presentar su queja le sería inútil. El fracaso en proveer formularios de quejas accesibles a latinos se hacía aún más atroz a la luz de las tensiones que han existido entre EHPD y la comunidad latina, y el conocimiento que tenía EHPD sobre estas tensiones.
El sistema de quejas implementado al momento de nuestra investigación de campo era una preocupación que señalamos en nuestra carta del 15 de abril de 2010 posterior a la visita. Posteriormente, EHPD modificó sustancialmente su proceso de quejas y el formulario mismo. EHPD ahora tiene en su sitio web versiones para impresión de los formularios de quejas en inglés y en español. EHPD también ha eliminado el requisito de certificación notarial así como las advertencias sobre la responsabilidad criminal. Sin embargo, el proceso anterior para la presentación de quejas y el hecho de que la reforma solo llegase a instancias de los Estados Unidos, proporciona un contexto importante para la discriminación que ocurrió cuando funcionaba el sistema anterior y para la cultura de parcialización que prevalece.
(2) EHPD limita el comienzo, el alcance y las medidas disciplinarias resultantes de las investigaciones internas
Es esencial que una agencia del orden público cuente con un sistema independiente de investigación interna para que tenga la capacidad de supervisar de manera significativa a sus oficiales. El hecho de no contar con un proceso de revisión interna, particularmente ante quejas graves y repetidas de actividad policial parcializada – más notable ante el fallo del tribunal federal y una investigación federal de derechos civiles, es evidencia de intención.

- 17 -
El proceso de investigación interna del EHPD se desvía ampliamente de las prácticas policiales de aceptación general, lo que les permite a los oficiales contar con la solidaridad del personal de comando del EHPD para actuar con impunidad. Esto reviste particular importancia en estas circunstancias, donde hemos identificado a ciertos oficiales que persiguen a los latinos. Al EHPD carecer de un sistema principal que le permitiría identificar y solucionar los problemas de conducta individual de los oficiales substancialmente permite la conducta inapropiada de los mismos.
Las prácticas policiales de aceptación general requieren que las investigaciones internas sean objetivas y que se realicen de manera que garanticen que el investigador inicie y concluya la investigación de forma consistente. Con base en nuestra investigación, las investigaciones internas del EHPD no funcionan de acuerdo con estas prácticas aceptadas. EHPD ha fracasado en establecer procedimientos en los que se indique los tipos de denuncias sobre conducta inapropiada que darían pie a una investigación interna inmediata, ni ha establecido normas sustanciales que guíen la investigación. En lugar de ello, las investigaciones se inician por petición del Jefe del EHPD, quien ejerce autoridad exclusiva sobre cuándo se debe comenzar una investigación.
Una revisión de las denuncias sobre conducta inapropiada por parte de oficiales demuestra que la ausencia de normas claras para dar inicio a una investigación ha resultado en decisiones arbitrarias para ignorar las quejas serias de conducta inapropiada. Por ejemplo, hace dos años aproximadamente, se puso en aviso al EHPD de una serie de quejas contra oficiales y contra el departamento en general, que implicaba detenciones de tránsito ilegales y actividades policiales discriminatorias. En lugar de que se condujera una revisión interna independiente, el Jefe del EHPD mismo asumió la investigación y determinó que las quejas de conducta inapropiada eran infundadas. Encontramos que este incidente era parte de un mayor patrón de resoluciones informales de quejas graves que no se revisaron de manera independiente, sino que se realizaron a través de procesos de investigación interna rutinarios.
Además de esto, en otra desviación de las prácticas policiales de aceptación general, encontramos que los procedimientos o las prácticas del EHPD no requieren que los resultados sean publicados, ni requieren que la investigación se realice de manera exhaustiva. Por ejemplo, en una investigación que implicaba acusaciones graves de conducta inapropiada por parte de un oficial en servicio, la investigación aparenta haber sido cerrada cuando no se pudo localizar a los querellantes. El archivo de la investigación interna no contenía ninguna declaración del oficial, pese a la gravedad de las acusaciones. Estos informes que reflejaban las investigaciones también eran insuficientes porque no citaban ningún reglamento ni política que haya violado el objeto de la querella, ni hay un sistema vigente para designar los resultados de una investigación.
Muchos de los informes no contienen determinaciones formales o las conclusiones no concuerdan con los hechos. En la investigación de una de las quejas, se encontró que sí había ocurrido la conducta inapropiada, pero la queja finalmente se desestimó por “falta de fundamentos”, una resolución que EHPD definió como que “no había pruebas suficientes para demostrar o refutar la acusación”. Sin embargo, las bases para la desestimación fueron simplemente el historial de trabajo del oficial y su compromiso con mejorar en el futuro, ninguna de las cuales tienen que ver con el hecho de que haya o no haya cometido la conducta en cuestión.

- 18 -
El sistema deteriorado para manejar la conducta inapropiada de los oficiales dentro de EHPD, les permite perseguir a la población latina sin temer las consecuencias. Las investigaciones que se realizan son superficiales, permiten que se tomen decisiones arbitrarias y dan lugar a la conclusión de que los oficiales pueden involucrase en problemas de conducta inapropiada siempre y cuando cuenten con el apoyo del personal de comando del EHPD. En efecto, los oficiales del EHPD con los que hablamos informaron precisamente este tipo de favoritismo.
e) EHPD ejerce supervisión mínima de sus oficiales
Nuestra investigación no identificó ningún medio sistemático por el que EHPD vigilara la actividad de los oficiales. EHPD no cuenta con un sistema para rastrear y analizar las quejas, los incidentes en los que un oficial haya hecho uso de la fuerza o cualquier otra actividad policial que permitiese al personal de comando determinar si un oficial se ha visto involucrado en actividades policiales discriminatorias. Es notable que la ausencia de tal sistema está perjudicando al oficial, al igual que al EHPD y a la comunidad en general: tales sistemas los utilizan con regularidad las agencias de policías como medio para intervenir en respuesta a conducta inapropiada, reales o potenciales, de un oficial antes de que este se exponga o exponga a miembros de la comunidad a riesgo de daños. Sin dicho sistema, EHPD carece de la capacidad de responder con precisión ante las acusaciones de actividades policiales parcializadas, dado que su personal de comando no reúne la información ni conduce los análisis necesarios para refutar tales denuncias.
Asimismo, EHPD nos entregó documentos donde se detallan los cargos de comando responsables de garantizar el cumplimiento de las políticas y códigos de conducta por parte de los oficiales. Nuestra investigación encontró que estos puestos de importancia estuvieron vacantes durante un período considerable. De esta forma, aunque parece que EHPD depende de la percepción del personal de comando en lugar de, y no además de, un sistema de análisis de conducta inapropiada de los oficiales, no tiene siquiera este nivel mínimo de supervisión para ejercer el control adecuado de la organización.
f) EHPD se ha negado a ofrecerles acceso lingüístico significativo a los latinos
Con el crecimiento de la población latina en East Haven, cada vez son más las personas cuyo idioma principal es el español. De conformidad con el Título VI, EHPD, como recipiente de fondos federales, tiene las obligación de ofrecer servicios lingüísticos a las personas con dominio limitado del inglés y se le ha avisado sobre esta obligación mucho antes de que se iniciara esta investigación.8 A pesar de que EHPD tiene conocimiento sobre su obligación, nuestra investigación encontró que los esfuerzos del EHPD han sido escasos para ofrecerles asistencia lingüística en español a las personas con las que los oficiales del EHPD entran en contacto. EHPD ha fracasado en utilizar una línea9 de comunicación en otros idiomas para las
8 Decreto ley 13,166, 65 Fed. Reg. 50,121 (11 de agosto de 2000); Departamento de Justicia, Guía para los receptores de ayuda financiera federal sobre las prohibiciones del Título VI contra la discriminación por motivos de nacionalidad que afecte a las personas con dominio limitado del inglés, 67 Fed. Reg. 41,455 (18 de junio de 2002).
9 Una línea de comunicación en otros idiomas es un servicio de interpretación telefónica disponible de inmediato las 24 horas del día.

- 19 -
personas que no dominan el inglés y no ha puesto en práctica ninguna política formal que oriente a sus oficiales de campo cuando se encuentren con estas personas.
No ofrecer estos servicios en español constituye una obligación legal independiente de conformidad con el Título VI y los reglamentos adjuntos, así como una evidencia de la parcialización intencional. Más aún, al no prestar sus servicios a todas las partes de la comunidad EHPD limita su capacidad para proporcionar seguridad pública en todo el Municipio. A menos que se puedan comunicar, los oficiales no podrán adecuadamente investigar crímenes mediante el interrogatorio de víctimas y testigos, explicar los motivos que subyace a una detención vehicular ni comunicar los diversos derechos amparados por la constitución y las leyes federales. Por lo tanto, los procedimientos de ayuda lingüística son un elemento crítico para un ejercicio policíaco efectivo y legítimo en una jurisdicción diversa.
g) EHPD ha ignorado los derechos consulares de los latinos
EHPD caso omiso de los derechos de los latinos de East Haven incluye la violación de los tratados que ha pactado Estados Unidos, mediante los cuales las agencias del orden público de toda la nación están obligadas a notificarles a los extranjeros que arresten su derecho a contactar a sus consulados respectivos. Nuestra investigación encontró que EHPD con regularidad entra en contacto con latinos que son ciudadanos de otros países. En estas circunstancias, dependiendo de la nacionalidad de la persona involucrada, EHPD debe comunicarse con el consulado correspondiente y dar aviso del arresto o notificarle al detenido que tiene derecho a comunicarse con su consulado. No obstante, encontramos que EHPD no ha entendido por completo o no ha protegido estos derechos claramente definidos. A pesar de que el personal de comando del EHPD está al tanto de la cuantiosa población latina de nacionalidad extranjera que vive en su jurisdicción y viaja a través de ella, EHPD no ha adoptado ninguna capacitación o política que asegure la observancia de los derechos de notificación consular.
h) EHPD ha rehusado relacionarse de manera significativa con la comunidad latina, a pesar de su crecimiento
Nuestra investigación encontró que, contrario a las prácticas policiales contemporáneas, EHPD prácticamente no ha hecho ningún intento significativo para acercarse a la comunidad latina. Las agencias de policía , por lo general, se empeñan en llegar a las comunidades que sirven para ganar su confianza, concientizarlas de las iniciativas que se realizan en ellas y establecer líneas de comunicación que contribuirán a cumplir los objetivos de cumplimiento de la ley. Las relaciones con la comunidad también mejora la seguridad de los oficiales al darse a conocer ante la comunidad y sus miembros. Contrario a esta práctica común, encontramos poca o ninguna evidencia de que los oficiales y el personal de comando del EHPD hayan realizado algún esfuerzo importante para entablar relaciones con la comunidad latina a través de las iniciativas de acercamiento. Nuevamente, estas iniciativas son necesarias para garantizar que EHPD se relaciona de manera correcta con todas las comunidades, para realizar sus actividades policiales y ganar la confianza y legitimidad necesarias para poder atender eficazmente a las víctimas y recurrir a los testigos de la comunidad latina. Durante nuestra investigación, encontramos latinos reacios a buscar ayuda policial debido a la desconfianza y al temor que les despertaban los oficiales del EHPD. Por tanto, el fracaso del EHPD en establecer relaciones con la comunidad latina ha tenido consecuencias previsibles en la limitación del nivel en que las personas latinas de East Haven reciben servicios de la policía.

- 20 -
i) Una auditoría encargada por el Municipio de East Haven también encontró que el EHPD sufre de graves deficiencias institucionales
Nuestros hallazgos en relación con las fallas de administración del EHPD encontraron eco en el informe suministrado al EHPD por el Foro de Investigación de Ejecutivos de la Policía (“PERF”) en marzo de 2011.10 El Municipio de East Haven contrató al PERF para que realizara una auditoría operativa del EHPD, que incluía: revisión de la estructura administrativa y organizacional; examinar la efectividad de las responsabilidades administrativas del EHPD en materia de planificación, dirección, y control; evaluación de las interacciones actuales entre el departamento y la comunidad; examen de los niveles de personal, y revisión y evaluación de la infraestructura. Si bien el PERF funcionaba solo como consultor de los funcionarios del Municipio y realizó los hallazgos respectivos, sin embargo, su informe arroja luz de manera provechosa sobre las disfunciones institucionales que se describimos anteriormente.
El informe PERF que las políticas del EHPD “estaban muy por debajo de las mejores prácticas profesionales”, incluidas aquellas relacionadas con el uso de la fuerza, armas no letales, quejas de civiles e investigaciones internas y el sistema de intervención temprana.11 El informe PERF resaltaba que “muchas de las directrices de las políticas actuales están desactualizadas” y le recomendaba al EHPD que tomara medidas para actualizarlas.12 Durante la auditoría, PERF se enteró de que algunos oficiales del EHPD ignoraban las políticas. Este problema de oficiales ignorando políticas se complicaba aún más por EHPD “ejecución inequitativa de violaciones a las políticas y la aplicación inconsistente de medidas disciplinarias”.13
Asimismo, el informe PERF señala que EHPD no financió la capacitación de sus oficiales en los años que antecedieron inmediatamente a la auditoría. Se concluyó que la falta de refuerzo de las capacitaciones expone a los oficiales, al público y al Municipio a un riesgo mayor. De igual modo, después de revisar las políticas de EHPD en relación con la captura y el registro de datos de caracterización racial, los auditores consideraron necesario elaborar una nueva política modelo para la caracterización racial del EHPD. En esa misma dirección, la auditoría hacía énfasis en la necesidad de que los oficiales del EHPD “ofrecieran el mismo nivel de servicio a todos aquellos que viven, trabajan y conducen en East Haven”.14 El informe PERF destacaba que el EHPD debería trabajar en mejorar las relaciones con todas las comunidades del Municipio, y prestar particular énfasis en la comunidad latina.
Los hallazgos del PERF en relación con la insuficiencia de políticas y procedimientos, capacitación, medidas disciplinarias y la interacción con la comunidad sustentan nuestra conclusión de que las prácticas institucionales del EHPD facilitaban el patrón y práctica de discriminación contra los latinos. En efecto, PERF encontró muchos de los mismos fallos que describimos anteriormente, lo que indica que las graves deficiencias del EHPD se pueden
10 El Foro de Investigación de Ejecutivos de la Policía, Auditoría operativa del Departamento de Policía de East Haven: Informe final (2011) (“Informe PERF”).
11 Id. en 7.
12 Id. en 43. 13 Id. en 6.
14 Id. en 42.

- 21 -
observar de manera fácil y extensa. Sin embargo, EHPD ha respondido a las recomendaciones del PERF de manera limitada: de quince nuevas políticas específicas recomendadas por PERF, EHPD nos ha informado solo de tres nuevas políticas y procedimientos promulgados durante nuestra investigación .15
B. EHPD viola el Título VI y la Ley de Calles Seguras al participar en Prácticas Discriminatorias contra la Población Latina
Las acciones e inacciones deliberadas que se discutieron anteriormente constituyen una violación del Título VI y de la Ley de Calles Seguras. Sin embargo, los Estados Unidos están aplazando las determinaciones finales sobre el incumplimiento del Título VI y la Ley de Calles Seguras en este momento para ofrecerles la oportunidad de cooperar de manera voluntaria en la resolución de estos asuntos a fin de que los fondos federales proveniente del Departamento de Justicia ya no estén en riesgo. El Título VI prohíbe la discriminación por motivos de raza, color o nacionalidad en cualquier programa o actividad que reciba ayuda financiera federal y autoriza a los Estados Unidos a buscar remedios judiciales en caso de que se no se cumpla de manera deliberada con estas prohibiciones. Véase 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d, 2000d-1(2). Similar a la Cláusula de Igual Protección, el Título VI prohíbe la discriminación intencional. Véase Gratz contra Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244, 276 n.23 (2003) (señalando que las violaciones de la cláusula de Igual Protección también constituyen violaciones del Título VI). Además, el Departamento de Justicia, al igual que otras agencias federales, han adoptado reglamentos de aplicación del Título VI, los cuales prohíben las prácticas que tienen un efecto discriminatorio por motivo de raza, color o nacionalidad. Véase, por ejemplo, 28 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(2) (donde se prohíben los “métodos de administración que tengan un efecto de someter a individuos a la discriminación por motivos de su raza, color o nacionalidad”). En consecuencia, se puede determinar que las jurisdicciones que reciban ayuda financiera federal han violado el Título VI cuando sus procedimientos o prácticas tienen un efecto desigual en las personas de una raza, color o nacionalidad particular, y cuando tales prácticas carecen de una “justificación legítima sustancial”. New York Urban League v. Nueva York, 71 F.3d 1031, 1036 (2d Cir. 1995).
La Ley de Calles Seguras prohíbe que los departamentos de policía que reciben ciertos fondos federales discriminen por motivos de raza, color, religión, nacionalidad o sexo. Los Estados Unidos tienen la facultad para interponer una demanda civil ante el correspondiente tribunal de distrito de los Estados Unidos para tratar un patrón o práctica de discriminación por parte de una agencia de justicia criminal, ya sea estatal o local, que reciba fondos federales. Tanto la jurisprudencia como la norma han interpretado que la Ley Calles Seguras prohíbe la actividad gubernamental que tenga un efecto discriminatorio. Véase los Estados Unidos v. la Mancomunidad de Virginia, 454 F. Supp. 1077 (E.D. Va. 1978); Los Estados Unidos v. la ciudad de Miami, 614 F.2d 1322, 1328-29 (5th Cir. 1980); 28 C.F.R. § 42.203(e).
Los patrones o prácticas de parcialización descritos anteriormente, incluido el hecho de que EHPD persigue a la población latina, en particular en el control del tránsito, y tenga patrones de hostilidad hacia la comunidad latina y varias prácticas institucionales que permitan la
15 Estas tres políticas nuevas son las órdenes administrativas de un Código de conducta, un Código de ética y una Política de cumplimiento y disciplina de asuntos internos. No queda claro si estás órdenes se han puesto en marcha de manera formal dentro del EHPD, dado que no incluyeron las fechas de expedición.

- 22 -
discriminación, también sustenta hallazgos independientes de violaciones al Título VI y la Ley de Calles Seguras.
Hemos identificado fondos que East Haven y EHPD reciben de la Oficina de Programas de Justicia del Departamento de Justicia, y que reúnen los requisitos de conformidad con ambas leyes. Asimismo, EHPD ha recibido fondos federales que reúne las condiciones a través de su participación en el programa de Distribución Equitativa del Departamento de Justicia. Como recipiente de fondos federales, EHPD firmo garantías para cumplir con las leyes federales que prohíben la discriminación. Asimismo, certificó, en parte que “ está en cumplimiento con los requisitos antidiscriminatorios del [Título VI] y [los] reglamentos de aplicación del Departamento de Justicia”.
V. Áreas Adicionales de Seria Preocupación
Además de las violaciones a la Constitución y las leyes federales señaladas anteriormente, hay otras dos áreas de gran preocupación en las que no hemos llegado a hallazgos formales de patrón o práctica, pero nuestra investigación continuara. En primer lugar, nuestra investigación reveló serias deficiencias en la rendición de cuentas y supervisión de los oficiales creando riesgos irracionales de otras violaciones constitucionales. En particular, encontramos deficiencias institucionales serias en los sistemas de administración y rendición de cuentas del EHPD, como se describe en la carta del 15 de abril de 2010, los cuales fracasaron en proteger a las personas de los allanamientos y registros ilegales y del uso excesivo de la fuerza. (Carta adjunta como Anexo A). Nosotros continuaremos examinando este problema.
En segundo lugar, también nos preocupan las denuncias de que el Jefe Gallo y otros oficiales del EHPD generaron un ambiente hostil e intimidante en el EHPD para las personas que deseaban colaborar con nosotros en la investigación. Durante nuestros recorridos, observamos notas desplegadas públicamente fuera de las oficinas individuales donde se referían a nuestras investigaciones de manera despectiva y mensajes en el tablero de anuncios públicos del sindicato policial que aludían a “ratas” en el EHPD. También nos enteramos de que el Jefe Gallo le había advertido al personal que el Departamento de Justicia había aceptado suministrarle los nombres de las personas que cooperaran con la investigación, un hecho que contradice las discusiones sostenidas con él. En efecto, antes de este incidente le comunicamos que mantendríamos confidencial los nombres de los oficiales o empleados que hablaran con nosotros durante la investigación para protegerlos de represalias potenciales. La hostilidad que observamos también fue dirigida hacia civiles de la Comisión Policial. Por ejemplo, durante uno de nuestros recorridos, los oficiales se referían a la sede del EHPD como “estanque envenenado” cuando un Comisionado de la Policía entró al edificio para llevar a cabo una entrevista programada con nosotros. El Comisionado de la Policía se mostró evidentemente enfadado y agitado ante los comentarios de los oficiales y canceló la entrevista.
Notablemente, personal del Departamento de Justicia también fue objeto de conductas similares cuestionables por parte de varios oficiales y representantes sindicales que se reunieron con nosotros antes de nuestro primer recorrido por las instalaciones del EHPD. En una reunión en las últimas horas de la noche, los oficiales les advirtieron al personal del Departamento de Justicia y al consultor de prácticas policiales que no podrían garantizar su seguridad durante las rondas con los oficiales, una afirmación muy extraña si se tiene en cuenta la naturaleza de nuestras rondas y la tasa relativamente baja de crímenes violentos en East Haven. Continuamos

- 23 -
recibiendo posteriores denuncias de hostilidad e intimidación de parte de los oficiales del EHPD y de representantes del sindicato policial. Estos informes recientes nos llevaron a informar al Alcalde a principios de diciembre de 2011 sobre su obligación de evitar las represalias. (Carta adjunta como Anexo B).
VI. Medidas correctivas
Nuestra investigación revela que EHPD participa en actividades policiales parcializadas contra la población latina, en violación de la Decimocuarta Enmienda de la Constitución de los Estados Unidos y de las leyes federales. Los oficiales del EHPD persiguen de manera deliberada a la población latina para las actividades de control del tránsito y la someten a un tratamiento desigual y discriminatorio después de las detenciones vehiculares. EHPD ha permitido de manera deliberada las conductas discriminatorias de sus oficiales al no instituir prácticas policiales de aceptación general que permitirían la capacitación, vigilancia y supervisión adecuada. Es necesario implementar las siguientes medidas correctivas a fin de corregir las deficiencias constitucionales y estatutarias que se señalaron anteriormente.
a. Políticas y procedimientos generales
• EHPD debe actualizar todas sus políticas de conformidad con las prácticas policiales de aceptación general, para mantener la coherencia interna y para facilitar su aplicación dentro del Departamento. Las políticas del EHPD deben complementarse con un extenso código de conducta en el que se describa de manera específica las actividades permitidas y prohibidas para los oficiales. Entre las políticas que EHPD debe actualizar y ampliar están aquellas que rigen el manejo de quejas, la dirección de las investigaciones internas, los manejos disciplinarios y las responsabilidades de los supervisores.
• EHPD debe elaborar una política antidiscriminatoria exhaustiva que les prohíba a sus oficiales basarse en la raza, el color, la etnia o la nacionalidad u origen para realizar detenciones vehiculares o detenciones o actividades posteriores a las detenciones vehiculares o detenciones, excepto cuando se trate de actividades propias de sospecha para identificar una persona o grupo particular sospechoso de conductas delictivas.
b. Capacitación
• EHPD debe capacitar de forma efectiva a sus oficiales sobre sus políticas y prácticas y ofrecerles capacitación actualizada de manera regular, incluso en los “roll-call”, en el campo y en sesiones de capacitación programada.
• EHPD debe capacitar de manera efectiva a sus oficiales en áreas específicas de actividades policiales no parcializadas, los requisitos para el ejercicio policial en comunidades diversas, el acercamiento a la comunidad y la justicia procesal.

- 24 -
c. Recolección y análisis de datos
• Los oficiales del EHPD deben documentar de manera exacta y completa todas las detenciones vehiculares y peatonales e incluir la raza o etnia del conductor y los pasajeros, la infracción que condujo a la detención y las medidas posteriores en relación con la infracción.
• La documentación presentada por los oficiales de patrulla debe ser auditada por los supervisores y por la cadena de comando para verificar su integridad y exactitud. Además los datos recopilados deben ser sometidos a un análisis sustancioso que permita detectar cualquier tendencia de conductas ilegales y, de ser posible, intervenciones tempranas para evitar tales conductas.
d. Manejo de riesgo
• EHPD debe desarrollar e implementar un sistema de manejo de riesgo que incorpore, de manera organice y sintetice la información relacionada con la conducta de los oficiales. Este sistema debe comprender información de varias fuentes, incluyendo las quejas, uso de la fuerza, las actividades de arresto y detención vehicular de los oficiales, entrevistas en campo, y detenciones y registros con consentimiento.
• EHPD debe utilizar este sistema de manejo de riesgo como herramienta de supervisión regular para promover los derechos civiles, manejar riesgos y responsabilidades a través de la intervención temprana y la disciplina, y para evaluar a todo el personal de EHPD.
e. Acceso lingüístico
• EHPD debe desarrollar e implementar un extenso programa de acceso lingüístico que les provea a las personas con domino limitado del inglés el acceso total a los servicios que ofrece EHPD y que permita que sus oficiales realicen de manera completa y efectiva sus deberes al encontrarse con tales personas.
• El desarrollo del programa de acceso lingüístico del EHPD debe incluir capacitación rutinaria y detallada de los oficiales en este programa y la elaboración de políticas detalladas que describan las obligaciones de los oficiales y empleados del EHPD en relación con el acceso lingüístico. El programa se debe caracterizar por rasgos como una orden clara de utilizar servicios lingüísticos formales, tales como una línea de comunicación en otros idiomas, señales, formularios, y sitios web traducidos, y otros documentos; y la responsabilidad a nivel de comando de la prestación de estos servicios.

- 25 -
f. Aplicación de las leyes migratorias
• En caso de que se opte por continuar aplicando las leyes migratorias, EHPD debe elaborar políticas claras sobre aplicación, de manera tal que tanto el Departamento como sus oficiales estén en todo tiempo en una posición de cumplimiento y de respuesta adecuada ante las políticas, prácticas e instrucciones de DHS. EHPD debe ofrecer capacitación y supervisión para garantizar que los oficiales cumplan constantemente con las políticas de aplicación de las leyes de migración de una manera no discriminatoria.
• Debido a su historial de discriminación y para recuperar la confianza de la comunidad y evitar el ejercicio descuidado de la aplicación de las leyes migratorias, el EHPD debe limitar sus acciones a este respecto solamente a los oficiales que hayan recibido una capacitación integral sobre leyes migratorias equivalente a la capacitación que el ICE les ofrece a los organismos locales y estatales que tienen relaciones de ejecución formal con ICE. En particular, los oficiales del EHPD que participen en actividades relacionadas con la aplicación de las leyes migratorias debe recibir capacitación integral sobre los parámetros de dichas leyes, incluyendo todos los elementos de las violaciones civiles o criminales, sobre las prioridades federales en la aplicación de leyes migratorias, sobre la naturaleza de la cooperación estatal y local con el gobierno federal y sobre los requisitos especiales para salvaguardar los derechos civiles en el contexto del ejercicio de la aplicación de las leyes migratorias. La actividad policial migratoria realizada por oficiales del EHPD no capacitados constituirá una violación de las políticas y del código de conducta del EHPD y aplicaran las medidas disciplinarias pertinentes.
g. Actividades policiales en la comunidad
• EHPD debe establecer un amplio programa de acercamiento comunitario con base en sus responsabilidades para ofrecerles servicios policiales a todas las comunidades a las que sirve. Este programa debe incluir la promoción y ejecución de los principios de la actividad policial en las comunidades, incluidas las alianzas con actores y miembros de todas las comunidades de East Haven, a fin de promover la seguridad pública y el control proactivo de los delitos.
• El programa de acercamiento comunitario del EHPD también debe incluir coordinadores comunitarios que puedan comunicarse de manera efectiva con la comunidad a la que sirve EHPD en su idioma nativo. EHPD también debe facilitar foros públicos donde se puedan expresar las preocupaciones de la comunidad sobre la seguridad pública y se puedan explicar las estrategias y prioridades del ejercicio de la autoridad del EHPD a aquellos que se vean afectados.

- 26 -

*

*

*

Las violaciones constitucionales y estatutarias que son identificadas en estos hallazgos solo se pueden subsanar con el compromiso y la participación constante del EHPD, los funcionarios del Municipio y los actores clave de la comunidad. Estas violaciones son graves y de mucho tiempo, y se han arraigado en la cultura de este Departamento. Una reforma sostenible requerirá una orden judicial formal y remedios supervisados. Reconocemos que no todos los miembros del EHPD han sido partícipes de las malas conductas descritas y muchos oficiales se esfuerzan por ofrecer servicios policiales dinámicos y por respetar a la vez los derechos constitucionales de los residentes de East Haven. La promulgación de las reformas descritas en este documento facilitará el trabajo de todos los oficiales y lo hará más gratificante.

Nos comunicaremos con usted en los próximos días para discutir el camino a seguir. Esperamos poder trabajar con ustedes en la implementación oportuna y efectiva de la solución a estos problemas. Si tienen alguna pregunta en relación con esta carta, comuníquese con Jonathan M. Smith, Director de la Sección de Litigios Especiales de la División de Derechos Civiles al (202) 514-6255.

Cordialmente,

Thomas E. Perez Fiscal General Adjunto

 
 Case: 3:12-cv-1652 As of: 11/02/2017 01:48 PM EDT 1 of 5
CLOSED,EFILE
U.S. District Court United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (New Haven)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:12−cv−01652−AWT

USA v. East Haven et al Assigned to: Judge Alvin W. Thompson Cause: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 11/20/2012 Date Terminated: 12/21/2012 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

USA

represented by Aaron S Fleisher U.S. Department of Justice−Civil Rights Special Lit. Sec., Civil Rights Div. 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20035−6400 202−307−6457 Fax: 202−514−0212 Email: aaron.fleisher@usdoj.gov TERMINATED: 06/27/2013 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Anika Gzifa U.S. Department of Justice−Civil Rights Civil Rights Division 601 D Street NW Room 5504 Washington, DC 20004 202−305−3216 Email: anika.gzifa@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

John B. Hughes U.S. Attorney's Office−NH 157 Church St., 23rd floor New Haven, CT 06510 203−821−3802 Fax: 203−773−5373 Email: john.hughes@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michelle Lynn McConaghy U.S. Attorney's Office−NH 157 Church St., 23rd floor New Haven, CT 06510 203−821−3700 Fax: 203−773−5373 Email: michelle.mcconaghy@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Town of East Haven

represented by Lawrence C. Sgrignari Gesmonde Pietresimone & Sgrignari, LLC 3127 Whitney Ave. Hamden, CT 06518 203−407−4200 x323

Case: 3:12-cv-1652 As of: 11/02/2017 01:48 PM EDT 2 of 5

Fax: 203−407−4210 Email: lsgrignari@gpsp.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sheila J. Hall Gesmonde, Pietresimone, Sgrignari, Pinkus & Sachs 3127−3129 Whitney Ave. Hamden, CT 06518 203−407−4200 Fax: 203−407−4210 Email: shall@gpsp.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant East Haven BD of Police Comm

represented by Lawrence C. Sgrignari (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sheila J. Hall (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 11/20/2012 11/20/2012 11/20/2012 11/20/2012
11/20/2012
11/20/2012
11/20/2012 11/26/2012 11/27/2012 12/07/2012 12/21/2012

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by USA. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Hughes, John) (Entered: 11/20/2012)
Judge Alvin W. Thompson added. (Oliver, T.) (Entered: 11/20/2012)
2 Joint MOTION for Entry of Settlement Agreement Order by USA. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Settlement Agreement)(Hughes, John) (Entered: 11/20/2012)
3 Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Motions to Dismiss due on 2/20/13. Amended Pleadings due by 1/19/2013 Discovery due by 5/22/2013 Dispositive Motions due by 6/21/2013. Signed by Clerk on 11/20/12. (Ferguson, L.) (Entered: 11/20/2012)
4 ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER − PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 11/20/12. (Ferguson, L.) (Entered: 11/20/2012)
5 NOTICE TO COUNSEL: Counsel initiating or removing this action is responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of 2 Joint MOTION for Entry of Settlement Agreement Order filed by USA, 4 Electronic Filing Order, 1 Complaint filed by USA, 3 Order on Pretrial Deadlines. Signed by Clerk on 11/20/12. (Ferguson, L.) (Entered: 11/20/2012)
6 NOTICE of Appearance by Sheila J. Hall on behalf of Town of East Haven, East Haven BD of Police Comm (Hall, Sheila) (Entered: 11/20/2012)
7 NOTICE of Appearance by Anika Gzifa on behalf of USA (Gzifa, Anika) (Entered: 11/26/2012)
8 NOTICE of Appearance by Lawrence C. Sgrignari on behalf of Town of East Haven, East Haven BD of Police Comm (Sgrignari, Lawrence) (Entered: 11/27/2012)
9 NOTICE of Appearance by Aaron S Fleisher on behalf of USA (Fleisher, Aaron) (Entered: 12/07/2012)
10 ORDER: The Joint Motion for Entry of the Parties Agreement on Constitutional and Effective Policing as an Order and For Conditional Dismissal (Doc. No. 2 ) is hereby GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 12/21/2012.

Case: 3:12-cv-1652 As of: 11/02/2017 01:48 PM EDT 3 of 5

12/21/2012 12/21/2012 12/21/2012
02/19/2013 02/25/2013 06/25/2013 06/27/2013 06/28/2013 07/01/2013 07/17/2013 07/17/2013 07/19/2013 11/18/2013 12/03/2013 12/10/2013 12/23/2013

(Trachtenberg, L) (Entered: 12/21/2012)
11 Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 12/21/12. (Ferguson, L.) (Entered: 12/21/2012)
12 ORDER: This case is hereby conditionally dismissed. The Clerk shall close the case. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 12/21/2012. (Trachtenberg, L) (Entered: 12/21/2012)
JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS SURVEY: The following link to the confidential survey requires you to log into CM/ECF for SECURITY purposes. Once in CM/ECF you will be prompted for the case number. Although you are receiving this survey through CM/ECF, it is hosted on an independent website called SurveyMonkey. Once in SurveyMonkey, the survey is located in a secure account. The survey is not docketed and it is not sent directly to the judge. To ensure anonymity, completed surveys are held up to 90 days before they are sent to the judge for review. We hope you will take this opportunity to participate, please click on this link:
https://ecf.ctd.uscourts.gov/cgi−bin/Dispatch.pl?survey (Ferguson, L.) (Entered: 12/21/2012)
13 Joint NOTICE by Town of East Haven, East Haven BD of Police Comm, USA re 11 Order on Selection of Joint Compliance Expert (Hughes, John) (Entered: 02/19/2013)
14 ORDER: The Joint Notice of Selection of Joint Compliance Expert (Doc. No. 13 ) is hereby APPROVED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 02/22/2013.(Trachtenberg, L) (Entered: 02/25/2013)
15 MOTION for Aaron Fleisher to Withdraw as Attorney by USA. (Fleisher, Aaron) (Entered: 06/25/2013)
16 ORDER: The Motion to Withdraw (Doc. No. 15 ) is hereby GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 06/26/2013. (Trachtenberg, L) (Entered: 06/27/2013)
17 Joint STATUS REPORT by USA, Town of East Haven, East Haven Bd of Police Comm . (Hughes, John) Modified on 7/1/2013 to include additional filers (Ferguson, L.). (Entered: 06/28/2013)
Docket Entry Correction re 17 Joint Status Report: modified to include additional filers (defendants) (Ferguson, L.) (Entered: 07/01/2013)
18 NOTICE of Appearance by Michelle Lynn McConaghy on behalf of USA (McConaghy, Michelle) (Entered: 07/17/2013)
19 Joint MOTION to Modify Certain Provisions of the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing re 11 Order by Town of East Haven, East Haven BD of Police Comm, USA.Responses due by 8/7/2013 (McConaghy, Michelle) (Entered: 07/17/2013)
20 NOTICE by Town of East Haven, East Haven BD of Police Comm, USA of filing of Joint Compliance Expert Semi−Annual Report (Attachments: # 1 Report of Joint Compliance Expert)(Hughes, John) (Entered: 07/19/2013)
21 ORDER: The Motion to Modify Certain Provisions of the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing (Doc. No. 19 ) is hereby GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 11/18/2013. (Bowers, J.) (Entered: 11/18/2013)
22 Joint MOTION to Amend/Correct 11 Order Agreement For Effective And Constitutional Policing by Town of East Haven, East Haven BD of Police Comm, USA.Responses due by 12/24/2013 (Hughes, John) (Entered: 12/03/2013)
23 ORDER: The Motion to Amend/Correct the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing (Doc. No. 22 ) is hereby GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 12/10/2013. (Bowers, J.) (Entered: 12/10/2013)
24 Joint NOTICE by Town of East Haven, East Haven BD of Police Comm, USA of Filing of Modified Settlement Agreement (Attachments: # 1 Modified Settlement Agreement)(McConaghy, Michelle) (Entered: 12/23/2013)

Case: 3:12-cv-1652 As of: 11/02/2017 01:48 PM EDT 4 of 5

01/27/2014 02/06/2014 04/10/2014
04/15/2014 08/14/2014 08/15/2014 08/29/2014 10/07/2014 12/16/2014
12/19/2014
03/24/2015 06/16/2015
09/25/2015 09/25/2015 11/18/2015
02/05/2016 02/10/2016

25 NOTICE by Town of East Haven, East Haven BD of Police Comm, USA re 24 Notice (Other) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 365 Day Compliance Report by Joint Compliance Expert)(Hughes, John) (Entered: 01/27/2014)
26 ORDER: The 365−Day Compliance Report (Doc. No. 25 ) is hereby REVIEWED and ACCEPTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 02/06/2014. (Bowers, J.) (Entered: 02/06/2014)
27 Joint MOTION to Amend/Correct 11 Order, 10 Order on Motion for Order, 12 Order Motion to Modify Certain Provisions of the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing by Town of East Haven, East Haven BD of Police Comm.Responses due by 5/1/2014 (Sgrignari, Lawrence) (Entered: 04/10/2014)
28 ORDER: The Motion to Amend/Correct the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing (Doc. No. 27 ) is hereby GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 04/15/2014. (Bowers, J.) (Entered: 04/15/2014)
29 Joint NOTICE by USA re 14 Order on Joint Compliance Expert (Hughes, John) (Entered: 08/14/2014)
30 ORDER: The Joint Notice of Replacement of Independent Joint Compliance Expert (Doc. No. 29 ) is hereby APPROVED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 08/15/2014. (Bowers, J.) (Entered: 08/15/2014)
31 NOTICE by USA of Filing of 18−Month Compliance Report (Attachments: # 1 Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing 18−Month Compliance Report)(McConaghy, Michelle) (Entered: 08/29/2014)
32 ORDER: The 18−month Compliance Report (Doc. No. 31 ) has been REVIEWED and ACCEPTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 10/07/2014. (Koehler, S) (Entered: 10/07/2014)
33 Joint MOTION to Amend/Correct 11 Order to Modify Certain Provisions of the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing by Town of East Haven, East Haven BD of Police Comm.Responses due by 1/6/2015 (Hall, Sheila) (Entered: 12/16/2014)
34 ORDER: The Joint Motion to Modify Certain Provisions of the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing (Doc. No. 33 ) is hereby GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 12/19/2014. (Koehler, S) (Entered: 12/19/2014)
35 NOTICE by USA (Attachments: # 1 COMBINED TWO−YEAR COMPREHENSIVE REPORT)(McConaghy, Michelle) (Entered: 03/24/2015)
36 ORDER: The Notice of Filing of Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing Combined Two−Year Comprehensive Report and 24−Month Compliance Report (Doc. No. 35 ) is hereby APPROVED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 06/16/2015. (Koehler, S) (Entered: 06/16/2015)
37 NOTICE by USA re 11 Order Joint Compliance Expert's 30−Month Compliance Report (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Joint Compliance Expert's 30−Month Compliance Report)(Hughes, John) (Entered: 09/25/2015)
38 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by USA re 37 Notice (Other) of Filing of joint Compliance Expert's 30−Month Compliance Report (Hughes, John) (Entered: 09/25/2015)
39 ORDER: The 30−month Compliance Report (Doc. No. 37 ) has been REVIEWED and ACCEPTED. (The court assumes that in the first full paragraph on page 10 (first line) the reference is to a six percentage point difference.) It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 11/18/15. (Mata, E.) (Entered: 11/18/2015)
40 Joint MOTION to Amend/Correct 24 Notice (Other) Settlement Agreement by USA.Responses due by 2/26/2016 (Hughes, John) (Entered: 02/05/2016)
41 ORDER: Joint Motion to Modify Certain Provisions of the Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing (Doc. No. 40 ) is hereby GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 2/10/2016. (Calle, K) (Entered: 02/10/2016)

Case: 3:12-cv-1652 As of: 11/02/2017 01:48 PM EDT 5 of 5

05/06/2016 06/21/2016 09/26/2016 12/07/2016 04/28/2017 05/03/2017 05/15/2017 07/13/2017

42 NOTICE by USA re 11 Order of Filing of Joint Compliance Expert's 36 Month Compliance Report (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit JCE 36 Month Compliance Report)(Hughes, John) (Entered: 05/06/2016)
43 ORDER: The 36−month Compliance Report (Doc. No. 42 ) has been REVIEWED and ACCEPTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 6/21/16.(Mata, E.) (Entered: 06/21/2016)
44 Joint NOTICE by USA of Filing of 42−Month Compliance Report (Attachments: # 1 42−Month Compliance Report)(McConaghy, Michelle) (Entered: 09/26/2016)
45 ORDER: The 42−Month Compliance Report (Doc. No. [44−1]) has been REVIEWED and ACCEPTED. It is ordered. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 12/7/16. (Mata, E.) (Entered: 12/07/2016)
46 Joint NOTICE by USA of Status of 48−Month Report of Joint Compliance Expert (McConaghy, Michelle) (Entered: 04/28/2017)
47 ORDER: The joint Notice (Doc. No. 46 ) of intention to file the 48 Month Report of the Joint Compliance Expert by May 16, 2017 is hereby APPROVED. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 5/3/17. (Mata, E.) (Entered: 05/03/2017)
48 NOTICE by USA of Filing 48 Month Compliance Report (Attachments: # 1 Agreement for Effective and Constitutional Policing 48 Month Report)(McConaghy, Michelle) (Entered: 05/15/2017)
49 ORDER: The 48−Month Compliance Report (Doc. No. 48 −1) has been REVIEWED and ACCEPTED. Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 7/13/17. (Mata, E.) (Entered: 07/13/2017)

 
 u.s. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division

Office of the Assistant Attorney General

Washington, D. C. 20530
Decenlber 19,2011

VIA FIRST-CLASS AND ELECTRONIC MAIL
The Honorable Joseph Maturo, Jr. Mayor, Town of East Haven 250 Main Street East Haven, Connecticut 06512
RE: Investigation of the East Haven Police Department
Dear Mayor Maturo:
We write to report the findings of the Civil Rights Division's investigation of the East Haven Police Department ("EHPD"), pursuant to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 ("Section 14141"),42 U.S.C. § 14141, the anti-discrimination provisions of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 ("Safe Streets Act"), 42 U.S.C. § 3789d, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C. § 2000d ("Title VI"). Section 14141 prohibits law enforcement agencies, such as EHPD, from engaging in activities that amount to a pattern or practice of violating the Constitution or laws of the United States. Title VI and its implementing regulations provide that recipients of federal financial assistance, such as EHPD, may not discriminate on the basis of race, color or national origin. These laws give the United States the authority to file a legal action and obtain the necessary relief to ensure compliance with the Constitution and laws of the United States.
Our investigation, which began in September 2009, focused on allegations that EHPD officers engage in biased policing, unconstitutional searches and seizures, and the use of excessive force. This investigation was conducted completely separate from, and the findings contained in this letter do not contain any information collected during, any ongoing federal criminal investigations involving EHPD.
Our investigation has been exhaustive. We reviewed a large volume of documents from the Police Department, interviewed police and Town officials, and met with diverse members of the East Haven community. In reaching our findings, we relied on highly respected consultants who have extensive experience in the delivery of police services, biased policing, and data and statistical analysis.
Based on our review, we find that EHPD engages in a pattern or practice of systematically discriminating against Latinos in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the

-2 ­
Constitution, Title VI, and the Safe Streets Act. In particular, we find that EHPD engages in discriminatory policing against Latinos, including but not limited to targeting Latinos for discriminatory traffic enforcement, treating Latino drivers more harshly than non-Latino drivers after a traffic stop, and intentionally and woefully failing to design and implement internal systems of control that would identify, track, and prevent such misconduct. The pattern or practice of discriminatory policing that we observed is deeply rooted in the Department's culture and substantially interferes with the ability of EHPD to deliver services to the entire East Haven community.
In addition to the formal finding of discriminatory policing against Latinos, there are two additional areas of serious concern that, while not warranting a formal pattern or practice finding at this juncture, require additional investigation. First, we have serious concerns that EHPD's management practices and accountability systems fail to ensure that individuals are free from unlawful searches and seizures and use of excessive force. Second, we have grave concerns that Department leadership is creating a hostile and intimidating environment for anyone seeking to provide relevant information in our investigation.
Given the longstanding and deeply-rooted nature of the violations outlined in this letter, effective, sustainable resolution will require the development of a comprehensive written agreement along with federal judicial oversight. The remedial measures we outline in this letter will not only assist EHPD to comply with the Constitution and federal law, but will also improve public safety and build community trust and confidence. Effective policing and constitutional policing go hand-in-hand, and the corrective measures outlined in this letter will enable EHPD to ensure that it can fairly and effectively police the entire community.
The Attorney General may initiate a lawsuit pursuant to Section 14141, Title VI, and the Safe Streets Act to ensure compliance with the Constitution and federal law and protect individuals from further unlawful conduct. See 42 U.S.C. § 14141(b); 42 U.S.C. § 2000d-l; 42 U.S.C. § 3789d(c)(3). In addition, the United States may suspend or terminate certain federal funding if the Town does not voluntarily address civil rights violations. We seek to avoid either litigation or funds termination by entering into a binding, court enforceable agreement. We will seek to enter into negotiations with the Town in the coming weeks to determine whether a resolution is possible. Regardless of the path forward, we remind you that it is illegal to interfere with or retaliate against any individuals because of their cooperation with a federal investigation.
I. Summary of Findings
We conclude that EHPD engages in a pattern or practice of biased policing! against Latinos in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and federal
1 "Biased policing" or "biased-based policing" refers to discriminatory enforcement of the law based on categories that include race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, and sexual orientation. Because it incorporates these categories, it is more broadly applicable than the commonly used term "racial profiling," which may be understood as referring to discriminatory policing based on race alone. Accordingly, we use "racial profiling" in this letter only for consistency with other usage, such as the designation of a policy or a statute, but, in any case, its usage is not limited to race-based discrimination. In addition, the terms "biased policing" and "discriminatory policing" are used interchangeably throughout this letter.

-3­
law. Specifically, we have reasonable cause to believe that EHPD officers intentionally target Latinos for disparate traffic enforcement and treatment because oftheir race, color, or national origin. We based our conclusion on the following:
• a statistical analysis demonstrating that Latino drivers are disproportionally targeted for traffic stops;
• an analysis of traffic stops showing that officers use non-standard and, in some cases, unacceptable, justifications for stops that are not employed against non-Latino drivers, and post-stop treatment that shows EHPD treating Latino drivers more punitively than non-Latino drivers;
• serious incidents of abuse of authority and retaliation against individuals who criticize or complain ofEHPD's discriminatory treatment of Latinos;
• a failure to remedy a history of discrimination and a deliberate indifference to the rights of minorities, including EHPD's failure to guide, train, supervise, and discipline officers engaged in unlawful discrimination; and
• ' significant deviations from standard police practices that result in covering up or 
 exacerbating the disparate treatment of Latino drivers, including: 

o a failure to collect and report traffic stop data in accordance with state racial profiling laws;
o a failure to implement policies prohibiting discrimination;
o a failure to hold officers accountable through internal investigations; o a failure to provide limited-English proficient Latinos with appropriate language
access; o a failure to abide by individuals' consular rights; and o serious deficiencies in EHPD's management and accountability systems.
These deficiencies and our observations have also caused us to have serious concerns that EHPD engages in unlawful searches and seizures and the use of excessive force. In addition, we are concerned with reports that members of EHPD have created a hostile and intimidating environment for persons who wished to cooperate with our investigation.
II. Methodology
On September 30,2009, we notified East Haven officials that we were opening an investigation ofEHPD. We then requested and received documents detailing EHPD organization, policies, and procedures. We also received approximately two years worth of incident reports and data reflecting EHPD's policing activity. Although the Town and EHPD commanders pledged their full cooperation, we encountered resistance from several EHPD officers when we requested interviews and specific documents, even after the Town Attorney had authorized compliance with our requests. We also encountered inordinate delays in the production of electronic data, despite numerous attempts to facilitate production. Most troubling, we received serious allegations that EHPD officers and staff who cooperated with our

- 4­
investigation were subjected to retaliation and intimidation. These allegations are consistent with messages that we observed posted on public bulletin boards at EHPD headquarters and other areas of the station house.2
In March, April, May, and September 2010, we conducted onsite inspections ofEHPD and met with community stakeholders. Two expert consultants in police practices, both former police executives, accompanied us during two of these tours. While onsite, we interviewed line police officers and comnland staff, rode with on-duty patrol officers, interviewed Town officials and community residents, observed EHPD practices, and reviewed pertinent EHPD documents.
Consistent with our comnlitnlent to conduct our investigations in a transparent manner and to provide technical assistance where appropriate, we conducted an exit conference with EHPD Chief Leonard Gallo and East Haven officials on April 9, 2010, during which our consultants conveyed their preliminary observations and concerns. We followed the exit conference with a letter on April 15, 2010, advising East Haven officials of those preliminary concerns. In that letter, we highlighted six areas of concern: 1) outdated policies and procedures; 2) flaws in reporting and reviewing uses of force; 3) inadequate citizen complaint and internal investigation processes; 4) lack of an early identification or warning system; 5) fragmented community engagement; and 6) limited training. From April 28 through May 1,2010, we returned to East Haven with our expert consultants and spoke to community menlbers and other stakeholders regarding their specific experiences with EHPD. Following our site visits, we obtained extensive documents from the Town, including information received in the fall of 20 11, and we have continued to seek information from officials from East Haven and community members.
III. Background
A. The Town of East Haven
The Town of East Haven is located along the coast of Connecticut, approximately 68 miles northeast of New York City. According to the 2010 United States Census, East Haven has a population of29,257 persons. The majority of East Haven's residents, 88.5%, are white, and 2.9% of residents are black or African American. Additionally, Census figures state that 10.3% persons in East Haven identify themselves as Hispanic or Latino. This represents a substantial growth in the Latino population from the 2000 Census, which identified 4.4% of East Haven residents as Hispanic or Latino. According to FBI Uniform Crime Report Data, violent crime in East Haven has generally decreased over the same period, and property crimes have remained relatively constant.
B. East Haven Police Department
EHPD employs approximately 50 uniformed officers, only one of whom is fluent in Spanish. The majority of these officers are divided into three patrol squads: Squad A covers the 12:00 AM to 8:30 AM shift; Squad B covers the 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM shift; and Squad C covers
2 On December 2,2011, we wrote to East Haven Mayor Joseph Maturo requesting information on the Town and Police Commission's efforts to protect individuals from retaliation and intimidation for cooperating with federal investigators.

-5­
the 4:00 PM to 12:30 AM shift. There are approximately ten officers assigned to each squad. A lieutenant and two or three sergeants supervise the patrol squads. There is also a unit of detectives. The Chief of Police, appointed by the Mayor of East Haven, commands EHPD. At the commencement of our investigation, Leonard Gallo was the Chief of Police, a role he has occupied for over a decade.
The Mayor annually appoints the Board of Police Commissioners ("Board"), which oversees EHPD. The Board is responsible for, among other things, setting policy and rules of conduct for the Department. The Board's power also includes the authority to appoint and remove EHPD officers and employees. All of the Board's powers are subject to the Town Charter and any applicable collective bargaining agreements.
IV. Violations of the Constitution and Federal Law
The practices of the EHPD constitute a pattern or practice of discriminatory policing. Our investigation revealed that Latinos are subjected to disparate treatment, and that the impact on Latinos can only be explained by intentional bias. In reaching this conclusion, we have examined the nature and methods used to conduct traffic stops; departures from standard police practices resulting in disparate treatment; the failure to train, supervise or correct; the failure to collect and review stop data; and the history of biased policing and racial tension in the Town. Our review of the totality of circumstances leads us to find that the conduct of EHPD was motivated, at least in part, by a discriminatory purpose.
A. EHPD Engages in a Pattern or Practice of Discriminatory Policing in Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment
EHPD officers engage in a pattern or practice of discrimination against Latinos in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment that is actionable under Section 14141. Section 14141 provides that "[i]t shall be unlawful for any governmental authority, or any agent thereof, or any person acting on behalf of a governmental authority, to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers ... that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.,,3 42 U.S.C. § 14141(a). The Equal Protection Clause prohibits governmental conduct that would "deny any person ... equal protection of the laws." U.S. Const. amend. XIV § 1.
A violation of the Equal Protection Clause by a police agency requires proof that the agency acted with discriminatory intent or purpose.4 Vill. ofArlington Heights v. Metro. Hous.
3 The touchstone of a "pattern or practice" is generally the degree of regularity or routine of the action in question. In interpreting parallel language in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Supreme Court held that a "pattern or practice [is] present only where the denial of rights consists of something more than an isolated, sporadic incident, but is repeated, routine, or of a generalized nature." Int'l Brotherhood o/Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324, 336 n.16 (1977) (internal quotation marks omitted). In discrimination cases, statistical evidence and anecdotal evidence can together show a "pattern or practice" under this definition. Id. at 338-39.
4 Among the classes of persons protected by the Equal Protection clause are those having a common foreign ancestry. Hernandez v. Texas, 347 U.S. 475 (1954). Importantly, undocumented persons within the United States are entitled to equal protection of the law. Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202,210 (1982) (rejecting the argument that "undocumented aliens, because of their immigration status ... have no right to the equal protection of Texas law.").

- 6 -

Dev. Corp., 429 U.S. 252, 265 (1977) (citing Washington v. Davis, 426 U.S. 229,242 (1976». A jurisdiction's discriminatory action need not be based solely or even dominantly on a discriminatory intent or purpose, but instead need only be "a motivating factor" in the action in question. Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. at 265-66. In some cases, the discriminatory impact alone can also show discriminatory intent as "a clear pattern, unexplainable on grounds other than race." Id. at 266; Farm Labor Org. Comm. v. Ohio State Highway Patrol, 308 F.3d 523, 534 (6th Cir. 2002) (noting that discriminatory purpose may be inferred from impact of the disputed practice on one racial group).
In addition to the discriminatory impact of an action, discriminatory purpose may be inferred from "the totality of relevant evidence." Davis, 426 U.S. at 242. Indeed, the Supreme Court has identified numerous sources of evidence that may show discriminatory intent, such as the historical background of the challenged course of action, specific events leading up to the challenged course of action, and departures from the standard procedures that would normally guide the action in question. Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. at 266-67.
Accordingly, our finding that EHPD officers have engaged in discriminatory policing against Latinos is based on the following: 1) EHPD targets Latinos for discriminatory traffic enforcement and treatment; 2) EHPD abuses its authority by retaliating against individuals who criticize or complain of EHPD' s discriminatory conduct; 3) EHPD fails to take corrective action following judicial findings of discriminatory customs and practices within EHPD, including a deliberate indifference to the rights of minorities in East Haven; and 4) EHPD willfully disregards basic and common procedures used by police agencies and mandated by state law to prevent biased policing. Our evidence therefore shows that EHPD singles out Latinos for discriminatory treatment.
1. EHPD Intentionally Targets Latinos for Disparate Traffic Enforcement and Treatment
Our statistical analysis of EHPD's traffic stop data shows that Latinos experience vastly disparate treatment on East Haven roads compared to non-Latino motorists. The size of this disproportion illustrates the degree to which EHPD suffers from significant institutional deficiencies. A law enforcement agency with adequate systems of oversight and accountability would have discovered this problem and rapidly corrected it, rather than permitting it to continue unabated for years.
EHPD provided us with all records pertaining to traffic stops for a two-year period, from January 1,2009, through December 31, 2010. We analyzed this data to determine whether EHPD officers as a whole stopped Latinos at a disproportionate rate and to determine whether individual EHPD squads or particular officers were stopping Latinos at a disproportionate rate.
Although our analysis showed significant disproportion on every level of EHPD traffic stop activity-by the entire department, by independent squads, and by individual officers-the most striking disproportion was on the squad and officer level. In analyzing squad activity and officer activity, we compared the traffic stop activity of each squad against other squads, and of individual officers against other officers. This kind of peer-based comparison is particularly useful in identifying problematic units and officers. Despite the ready availability ofEHPD

-7­
traffic stop data, EHPD failed to perform this analysis on its own, permitting obvious disproportionate behavior to continue without any corrective action.
At the squad level, we found that Squad C, which covers the 4:00 PM to 12:30 AM shift, stopped the highest proportion of Latinos5 during motor vehicle stops of all squads, at 24.8%. While this figure does not account for individual differences among officers in Squad C, the deviation in stops of the squad as a whole is highly statistically significant as compared to the other squads and should have caused EHPD to immediately investigate Squad C and its traffic stop activity. With respect to the remaining squads, Latinos comprised 17.8% of motorists stopped by Squad A and 14.7% of motorists stopped by Squad B.
We similarly found some EHPD officers with massive disparities in their stops of Latinos as compared to other officers in EHPD. Indeed, one officer had a stop rate of Latinos of 40.5%, an extraordinary deviation from the baseline of other EHPD officer activity. EHPD accordingly permitted officers with stops rates of Latinos that approached one in two or one in three to operate without oversight or discipline, strong evidence that EHPD at the very least enabled their discriminatory conduct.
Finally, we analyzed the stop activity ofEHPD as a whole. Because there is no internal benchmark against which to compare the activities of an entire department, we used the Latino population of East Haven and all of its surrounding towns, adjusted to capture only Latinos old enough to drive, to approximate the probable number of Latinos driving in East Haven at any given time. When taking all officer activity into account, including those officers who rarely stopped Latinos, we found that over 19.9% of all traffic stops were still of Latinos. This rate is greater to a statistically significant degree than the 15.5% of Latino drivers we approximated to be in East Haven and surrounding towns. The disparity is even greater if only East Haven is taken into account, which is 8.3% Latino drivers, or East Haven and contiguous census tracts, which is 11.1 % Latino drivers.
The aforementioned statistical evidence shows pervasive discrimination against Latinos on every level ofEHPD traffic enforcement activity. The discriminatory traffic stops by squads and officers in EHPD is particularly problematic: not only did we find high rates of disproportionate stops by squads and officers, but such obvious conduct was ignored by EHPD, and not corrected. The breadth of the discriminatory actions, as well as the discriminatory impact of these actions, constitutes strong evidence of discriminatory intent. See Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. at 266.
We relied on much more than impact alone to reach our findings. We found evidence of broadly-used tactics used by EHPD officers to target Latinos. The discriminatory effect of a police agency's actions is a critical component of an equal protection violation, see Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. at 265-66, and statistics and the facts and circumstances surrounding the statistics are common ways to demonstrate discriminatory effect. Teamsters, 431 U.S. at 339-40. The widespread nature of this conduct is sufficient to constitute a pattern or practice of discrimination. See Ottaviani v. State Univ. ofNew York, 875 F.2d 365,371 (2d Cir. 1989).
5 Latinos were identified through EHPD determinations and the generally accepted method of surname analysis.

-8­
a) EHPD relies on non-standard and unacceptable methods to justify its disparate treatment of Latinos during traffic stops
We analyzed approximately 1,000 incident reports generated by the EHPD squad tasked with the evening shift, where traffic enforcement activity is generally at its highest. The incident reports demonstrate that EHPD officers: 1) focus their traffic enforcement activity on areas where Latinos congregate; 2) use non-standard, and, in some cases, unacceptable, methods to generate reasons for stopping Latino drivers that are not employed for non-Latino drivers, and 3) treat Latino drivers more punitively than non-Latino drivers after traffic stops.
During our investigation, we received numerous reports that EHPD officers target Latino places of business by focusing their traffic enforcement activity on customers leaving those businesses. Consistent with these reports, we found that EHPD officers also target specific areas of Frontage and Foxon Roads for their traffic enforcement activity: areas where Latinos are known to congregate. Based on the EHPD incident reports, we found that EHPD officers deliberately choose these locations to wait in their patrol cars for Latino drivers to pass so that they can initiate traffic stops on these vehicles, a tactic known in law enforcement as "sandbagging."
That certain EHPD officers are specifically targeting Latino drivers is demonstrated by the extreme tactics they employ to justify these traffic stops. Once these EHPD officers target a Latino driver for a traffic stop, they employ a variety of methods to find cause to initiate the traffic stop, methods they typically do not employ on non-Latino drivers. With Latino drivers, the incident reports show that EHPD officers will first attempt to identify a facial defect on the license plate of the car. If there is no obvious defect, and the car has an out-of-state license plate, the officers will stop the car based on claims that, in their experience, such out-of-state plates are often forged. On other occasions, the officers will follow the Latino driver and wait for a traffic violation to occur that they can cite, a tactic rarely used against non-Latino drivers. In other instances, the officers cite speeding as the justification for a stop, but, contrary to standard police practice, give no indication of how they know a car is speeding, failing to state that they paced the vehicle or used a radar gun. In at least one case, the officer took the highly unusual step of looking up the insurance information for a moving vehicle in order to find cause for the stop, demonstrating the degree to which legitimate traffic enforcement is a secondary consideration to targeting Latino drivers. Indeed, the regularity of these tactics, their deviation from standard police practice, and their unequal application to Latino drivers all demonstrate that EHPD officers in this squad are not engaged in legitimate traffic enforcement but are instead targeting Latino drivers.
While pretextual stops of motorists may be lawful in the ordinary case, they violate due process and equal protection if motivated by an improper purpose, including bias. See Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996). This is especially true under circumstances where there is a pattern of behavior by police officers that result in a disparate impact. See City ofIndianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 45-46 (2000) ("while '[s]ubjective intentions play no role in ordinary, probable-cause Fourth Amendment analysis,' ... programmatic purposes may be relevant to the validity of Fourth Amendment intrusions undertaken pursuant to a general scheme without individualized suspicion. Accordingly, Whren does not preclude an inquiry into programmatic purpose in such contexts.").

- 9­
The incident reports further reveal a pattern of discriminatory treatment following the stop. After a traffic stop is initiated, we found that some EHPD officers subject Latino drivers to much harsher treatment than non-Latino drivers. In particular, these EHPD officers will typically arrest Latino drivers and have their vehicles towed. Consequently, Latinos stopped by these officers not only lose the use of their vehicles, but they are required to post a surety bond in order to be released. In contrast, the same EHPD officers typically treat non-Latino drivers in a less punitive fashion, often releasing them from the scene after giving them a written notice to appear in court. These drivers generally do not have their vehicles towed. EHPD's towing policy is ambiguous, and appears to permit officers to make discretionary decisions regarding towing that have been used to discriminate against Latinos. Moreover, the supervisors responsible for reviewing these reports have failed to question or correct this behavior.
EHPD's use of tactics that are directed almost entirely at Latinos demonstrates the degree to which Latinos are disparately impacted by EHPD practices. Indeed, the use of these discriminatory tactics is so pervasive as to independently show that they were taken with the intent to target Latinos in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. See Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. at 266.
b) EHPD utilizes haphazard and uncoordinated immigration enforcement to target Latinos
EHPD's program for enforcing immigration laws is haphazard and departs from professional police practices. Departures from standard procedures that result in a disparate impact are evidence of intentional bias. See Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. at 267.
EHPD does not have an agreement with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") delegating immigration enforcement authority to any EHPD officer. These agreements, commonly referred to as "287(g) agreements," permit designated and trained local law enforcement officers to perform immigration enforcement functions under the supervision of ICE officers. Nonetheless, EHPD has allowed its officers to engage in haphazard and uncoordinated immigration enforcement efforts to target Latino drivers for traffic stops. EHPD command staff informed us that they have authorized officers to conduct immigration investigations if they make a felony arrest or if a detained individual provides a foreign passport. Although EHPD immigration investigations regularly occur, this authorization does not exist as a formal policy within EHPD, and it is not consistently enforced or adequately reviewed. As a result, EHPD officers conduct immigration investigations well outside even the limits EHPD identified. We reviewed numerous incident reports where EHPD officers contacted ICE to ascertain immigration status or seek an immigration hold on Latinos. In all of these incidents, the arrests were for traffic infractions, rather than felonies, but EHPD officers requested that ICE issue an immigration detainer. EHPD officers' divergences from even the minimally restrictive immigration enforcement policy adopted by EHPD-and the failure of EHPD to correct these divergences or manage the enforcement of immigration law more generally-demonstrates that EHPD practices in this respect are not directed at legitimate local enforcement of immigration law in cooperation with the federal government.6 Instead, given
6 Indeed, ICE had previously made clear that it did not intend even for the local agencies formally involved in its official immigration enforcement program to make regular use of traffic enforcement to exercise their immigration

- 10­
EHPD's history of discrimination, these gaps in policy constitute a means for EHPD officers to harass and intimidate the Latino comn1unity.
EHPD's haphazard local enforcement of immigration law, conducted without the guidance of the federal government or training from EHPD on constitutional policing, has negative implications for the relationship between a local law enforcement agency and the impacted minority communities it serves. For that reason, local law enforcement agencies seeking to enforce immigration law without diminishing their ability to adequately serve these communities make use of procedures to ensure transparency and accountability in enforcement, including acting cooperatively with the federal government.7 These law enforcement agencies also often conduct outreach to describe their policies relating to the enforcement of immigration law, including when such investigations of immigration status are authorized. Communication of this nature is necessary to preserve the ability of the police to make contact with witnesses and victims, who will often refuse to come forward for fear of personal consequences or consequences for friends or family. We found that EHPD's enforcement of immigration law, conducted as it is without conformity with federal priorities or guidance, training, oversight by EHPD command staff, and consistent application, lacks all of these protections and is instead used to harass and intimidate Latinos rather than pursue legitimate law enforcement objectives.
2. EHPD Retaliates Against Individuals who Criticize or Complain of Disparate Treatment of Latinos
EHPD perpetuates a culture of fear and intimidation in East Haven by retaliating against individuals who criticize or complain ofEHPD's disparate treatment of Latinos. A pattern of hostility towards a discrete community, such as that found here, serves as important evidence of discriminatory conduct. See Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. at 265-66; Doe v. Vill. ofMamaroneck, 462 F. Supp. 2d 520, 548-49 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (examining Arlington Heights factors and finding that, taken together, the factors showed that an anti-day laborer campaign was motivated by racial animus and targeted Latino day laborers). We interviewed community members who recounted first hand incidents of abusive and retaliatory behavior. The following incident is one of many that illustrate retaliatory conduct by police officers:
Following complaints from individuals in East Haven about discriminatory treatment by EHPD, a local priest began documenting EHPD activity directed at Latinos. As a result, the priest became the target of intimidation and harassment by EHPD. For instance, in March 2009, EHPD officers entered a Latino-owned business and accused the owner of attempting to sell license plates, an allegation apparently based solely on the approximately 80 license plates the business owner had decorating a store wall. The owner denied that the plates were other than decorative, but two EHPD officers then initiated a criminal investigation of this activity, which, at most, would culminate in a minor infraction of State
authority. See United States Department of Homeland Security, Fact Sheet, Delegation of Immigration Authority; Section 287(g) Immigration and Nationality Act (2007) (on file).
7 The parameters of such cooperation may he found in United States Department of Homeland Security, Guidance on State and Local Governments' Assistance in Immigration Enforcement and Related Matters (2011), available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlihrary/assets/guidance-state-Iocal-assistance-immigration-enforcement.pdf.

- 11 ­

registration laws if it comprised a violation at alL The priest began videotaping the officers' activities in the store. Upon seeing that they were being videotaped, the officers demanded that the priest stop recording. When the priest refused, the EHPD officers used force against him and ultimately arrested him. The arresting officer falsely reported that he did not know that the priest was holding a video recorder, and falsely reported that he thought the priest was instead holding a weapon, necessitating the use of force and subsequent arrest. In a videotape of the incident that we reviewed, the officers can clearly' be heard acknowledging that the priest was carrying a video recorder. Based on our investigation, EHPD command staff conducted no meaningful investigation of the incident in question, and meted out no discipline, despite agreeing that the incident took place as the videotape showed.

The unusual and highly aggressive actions taken by the EHPD officers in this case, coupled with the officers' dishonesty and the failure ofEHPD to correct or discipline, illustrate the culture of hostility towards the Latino community and a tolerance for retaliation.

3. EHPD Has Failed to Remedy a History of Discrimination
Our investigation found that East Haven has an extensive history of past discrimination that it has failed to meaningfully address or remedy. This historical background serves as evidence of discriminatory purpose, especially if "it reveals a series of official actions taken for invidious purposes." Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. at 267.

East Haven and EHPD have been the subject of litigation for a decade in which EHPD officers were accused of discriminatory conduct towards African Americans. This litigation ended with a jury verdict against East Haven. The federal court concluded in 2007 that sufficient evidence was presented at trial for a jury to find that "there existed within the EHPD a custom or practice of deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of African-Americans, [and] that the Chief of Police was aware of the custom or practice and deliberately indifferent to it." Jones v. Town ofEast Haven, et al., 493 F. Supp. 2d 302, 338 (D. Conn. 2007).

EHPD's singling out of the African-American community for a series of discriminatory

actions is a serious matter and the lingering effects of the discrinlination may be evidence of

discriminatory intent in the treatment of other minorities. See Rogers v. Lodge, 458 U.S. 613,

626 (1982) (noting past discriminatory actions may serve as evidence of current discriminatory

practices) and Abramson v. American University, No. 86-1413, 1988 WL 152020, at *1 (D.D.C.

June 13, 1988) (holding that evidence of an employer's prior discrimination against other

minority groups is "relevant towards the issue of his discriminatory intent in generaL"); cf

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 805 (1973) (noting relevance of general

minority hiring practices as evidence in claim of employment discrimination brought by black

employee).

'

Moreover, our investigation uncovered no evidence that EHPD instituted any meaningful changes in any of its policies following the Jones verdict. Indeed, officers directly involved in the incidents giving rise to the Jones verdict remain with EHPD and have been, in some cases, promoted to supervisory roles. We found no evidence that they were subject to meaningful discipline or retraining as a consequence of their roles in the Jones incidents. Retention of

- 12 ­
persons in places of authority-and with no apparent disciplinary or responsive policy modifications-is strongly probative of discriminatory intent on the part of EHPD. See United States v. City of Yonkers, 96 F.3d 600, 612 (2d Cir. 1996) (noting that "patterns of official appointments that fill key positions with persons who are likely to maintain a segregated status quo" is probative of discriminatory intent).
4. EHPD's Targeting of Latinos Arises from a Willful Failure to Prevent Discrimination in its Institutional Practices
EHPD substantially departs from conventional practices used by law enforcement agencies designed to prevent bias-based policing. See Arlington Heights, 429 U.S. at 267 (noting that departures by an official or a government body from standard practices in the conventional application of a law or procedure can point to a discriminatory purpose when those departures enable or cause discriminatory conduct). Even-handed enforcement of the law in conventional police agencies has numerous generally-accepted critical components: Officers 1) must be adequately trained on the constitutional enforcement of the law; 2) must be guided by detailed policies and codes of conduct; and 3) must be subject to a system of accountability, which includes meaningful recordkeeping, supervision, internal investigations, and oversight. The systematic and serious departures of EHPD from each of these principles of effective law enforcement are evidence that EHPD does not engage in even-handed enforcement, and instead promotes or condones discriminatory application of the law.
a) EHPD does not comply with state laws designed to prevent racial profiling
Law enforcement agencies in Connecticut are required by State law to document all traffic stops, including demographic information, and report this information to a State body. See Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-1 m (2010). This statute, one of the first of its kind in the nation, is specifically designed to prevent racial profiling by Connecticut law enforcement agencies. See id. On March 7,2009, the press made public EHPD's failure to have ever fully complied with this statute. During the course of our investigation, we confirmed with EHPD command staff that this failure had not been remedied. Although EHPD possesses sophisticated data terminals capable of recording the required information, EHPD has never meaningfully reviewed the data it collects, nor has it turned it over to the State as required by the statute. EHPD's failure to audit the data also places it out of compliance with the State statute. Our own review of the data showed that a large number of entries reflecting traffic stops were devoid of ethnicity data or appeared to misreport ethnicity data. Because EHPD failed to audit its own data, it could not comply with the statute's requirement to accurately. report such data.
EHPD's failure to comply with a state statute designed to prevent biased policing is evidence that EHPD command staff sought to obscure the unlawful activities of EHPD officers.
b) EHPD does not maintain policies preventing biased policing
EHPD policies and procedures regarding bias are flawed and reflect deliberate indifference to protecting the rights of Latinos in its community. EHPD command staff are aware of those flaws and did not make the necessary corrections.

- 13 ­
EHPD only promulgated a policy addressing biased policing after 2009. The policy came after EHPD was found to be out of compliance with the State racial profiling statute and had been subjected to a series of allegations of racial profiling. The haste with which the policy was issued is evident in its contradictory and superficial definitions of racial profiling. For instance, the policy states that EHPD will not engage in enforcement activity "when such activity is motivated by race, color, ethnicity, age, gender, or sexual orientation." But the policy then goes on to define racial profiling as enforcement activity taken "solely on the basis of racial status of . . . a person." By use of the word "solely," EHPD at best injects ambiguity into whether an EHPD officer may take race into account when conducting a traffic stop and at worst tells officers that they can use race as a reason to conduct a traffic stop as long as they have (or create) at least one other reason.
We identified other policy deficiencies that are connected to EHPD's failure to address biased policing. EHPD has put in place no policies to help its officers communicate with Spanish-speaking members of the community, thereby preventing EHPD officers from building relationships that can enhance officer safety and depriving a significant portion of the Latino community of policing services. Nor does EHPD have formal policies addressing enforcement of immigration law, or the appropriate tactics that may be used in conducting a traffic stop, such as requiring the means that an officer used to develop probable cause for the stop to be recorded.
c) EHPD does not train officers to avoid biased policing
Outside of training offered at the statewide Peace Officer Standards and Training Academy ("POST"), we found that EHPD offers its officers minimal training in policing, and virtually no training on matters related to bias-based policing. Reliance only on academy training in this area-which is characterized by evolving standards and practices among police agencies-is a significant departure from generally accepted police practices. Such reliance gives officers recourse only to static and dated training that does not address changes in law or the many different circumstances that an officer n1ay encounter beyond those contemplated or capable of being addressed in an academy-level course. Moreover, EHPD officers receive no training in the topics that are necessary supplements to avoiding biased policing, including diversity training or cultural sensitivity training. These failures are particularly egregious in light of recent discrimination-related civilian complaints, media reports, and litigation, as well as the finding of discrin1ination by EHPD officers in Jones.
d) EHPD does not hold officers accountable for biased policing
(1) EHPD hinders the ability ofLatinos to file complaints A functional, accessible complaint system is critical in maintaining accountability in a law enforcement agency and in ensuring a close working relationship with communities that the agency serves. EHPD operates a seriously deficient system for acting upon complaints submitted by community members. Based on our review of EHPD documents and observations during our tour, this complaint system is designed in a way that discourages community participation and especially participation by the Latino community.
In April 2010, during our ol1site investigation, EHPD had a highly limited procedure for accepting complaints. A complaint system that comports with generally accepted law

- 14­
enforcenlent practices should be designed to accept complaints from a variety of sources with minimal barriers to the submission of a complaint. EHPD had, in contrast, adopted a number of practices known to limit the complaints that a police agency receives. EHPD complaint forms were available only at EHPD headquarters, deterring persons who might fear contact with the police from ever filing a complaint, since such a complaint would necessitate travelling to the office and asking the on-duty officer for a complaint form. Similarly, the complaint forms contained bolded and repeated admonitions regarding criminal liability for making false statements to police officers, again a well-known deterrent to filing a complaint. Moreover, the complaint process in place at that time required that statements be notarized by a police officer and notarization requires the complainant to produce certain specified forms of identification.
It is of great significance that, during the time period of our investigation, the required form was available only in English. Had a Latino person with limited English proficiency come to the station house, the only available complaint form was useless. The failure to provide accessible complaint forms to Latinos was even more egregious in light of the tensions that have existed between EHPD and the Latino community, and EHPD's awareness of those tensions.
The complaint system in place at the time of our onsite investigation was a concern that we highlighted in our April 15, 2010, post-tour letter. Subsequently, EHPD substantially changed its complaint process and the complaint form itself. EHPD now makes a printable version of the complaint form avail~ble on its website in English and in Spanish. EHPD has also lifted the notarization requirement and removed admonitions about criminal liability. Still, the previous complaint process, and the fact that reform only came at the behest of the United States, provides important context for the discrimination that occurred while it was in place and the culture of bias that remains.
(2) EHPD limits the initiation, scope, and resulting discipline ofinternal investigations
An independent system for conducting internal investigations is vital to a law enforcement agency's ability to meaningfully supervise its officers. The failure to have an internal review process, particularly in the face of repeated and serious complaints of biased policing-most notably a federal court judgment and a federal civil rights investigation-is evidence of intent.
EHPD's internal investigation process deviates widely from generally accepted police practices, enabling officers that have the sympathy of EHPD command staff to act with impunity. This is particularly significant in the circumstances here, where we have identified certain officers who target Latinos. That EHPD lacks the primary system that would allow it to identify and remedy individual officer misconduct substantially enables officer misconduct.
Generally accepted police practices require internal investigations to be objective and done in a way that ensures that the investigator initiates and concludes the investigation in a consistent manner. Based on our investigation, EHPD's internal investigations do not function according to acceptable practices. EHPD has failed to establish procedures indicating the types of complaints of misconduct that will immediately cause an internal investigation, nor has it set meaningful standards guiding that investigation. Instead, internal investigations are initiated at

- 15 ­
the behest of the EHPD Chief, who exercises sole decision-making authority over when investigations occur.
A review of complaints of officer misconduct shows that the absence of clear standards for initiating investigations has resulted in arbitrary decisions to ignore serious complaints of misconduct. For example, approximately two years ago, EHPD was made aware of a number of complaints against individual officers and the department as a whole involving unlawful stops and discriminatory policing. Rather than engage in an independent internal review, the EHPD Chief undertook the investigation himself and informally determined that the complaints of individual misconduct were unsubstantiated. We found that this incident was part of a larger pattern of informal resolution of serious complaints without independent review done through routine internal investigation procedures.
Further, in another departure from generally accepted policing practices, we found that EHPD procedures or practices do not require findings to be issued, nor do they require the investigation to be conducted in a thorough manner. For example, in an investigation involving allegations of serious misconduct by an officer while on duty, the investigation appears to have been closed when the complainants could not be reached. The internal investigation file contained no statement from the officer, despite the seriousness of the allegations. The reports reflecting the investigations are also insufficient because they do not cite any particular rule or policy that the target of the complaint has broken, nor is there any system in place for designating the findings of an investigation.
Many of the reports further do not make formal detern1inations or the findings do not comport with the facts. For one complaint, the investigation found that the misconduct had occurred, but the complaint was ultimately dismissed as "unsustained," a finding defined by EHPD policy as meaning there was "[n]ot enough evidence to prove or disprove the allegation." But the grounds for the dismissal were simply the officer's work record and amenability to future improvement, neither of which bear on whether he committed the conduct in question.
The broken system for handling officer misconduct within EHPD permits officers to target Latinos with little fear of consequences. Investigations that are completed are superficial, permitting arbitrary decisions giving rise to an inference that officers may engage in misconduct so long as it is supported by the relevant EHPD command staff. Indeed, EHPD officers we spoke to reported precisely this kind of favoritism.
e) EHPD exercises minimal oversight of its officers
Our investigation identified no systematic means by which EHPD monitors officer activity. EHPD has no system to track and analyze complaints, incidents in which an officer has used force, or any other policing activity that would allow its command staff to determine whether an officer has engaged in discriminatory policing. Notably, the absence of such a system is damaging to the officer as well as to EHPD and the broader community: such systems are used regularly by policing agencies as a means to intervene in response to officer misconduct or potential misconduct before the officer has put him or herself or members of the community at risk of harm. Without such a system, EHPD lacks the ability to accurately respond to accusations of biased policing because EHPD command staff does not collect the data or conduct the analysis necessary to refute such claims.

- 16 ­
Additionally, EHPD provided us with documents detailing the command staff positions responsible for ensuring officer compliance with policy and codes of conduct. Our investigation found that three of these critical positions were vacant for a significant period. Thus, while EHPD appears to rely on command staff awareness in place of, rather than in addition to, a system of analyzing officer misconduct, it does not have even this minimal level of supervision in place to exercise adequate control over the agency.
f) EHPD has refused to provide meaningful language access to Latinos
The growth of the Latino population in East Haven has increased the presence of persons whose primary language is Spanish. EHPD, as a recipient of federal funds, is obliged under Title VI to provide language services to persons with limited English proficiency and has been on notice of that obligation since well before the initiation of this investigation.8 Despite EHPD's awareness of this obligation, our investigation found that EHPD has made scant effort to provide Spanish language assistance to fersons with whom EHPD officers come into contact. EHPD has failed to utilize a language line for communication with persons that are not proficient in English and has no formal policies guiding EHPD officers in the field for their encounters with such persons.
The failure to provide services in Spanish is an independent legal obligation under Title VI and the accompanying regulations, as well as evidence of intentional bias. Moreover, the failure to serve all parts of the community limits the ability of EHPD to provide for public safety throughout the Town. Unless they can communicate, officers cannot adequately conduct investigations of crimes through questioning of victims and witnesses, explairi the reasons behind a traffic stop, or communicate various rights guaranteed by the Constitution and federal law. Procedures for language assistance are therefore a critical element of effectively and lawfully policing a diverse jurisdiction.
g) EHPD has disregarded the consular rights of Latinos
EHPD's disregard for the rights of Latinos in East Haven includes failure to abide by treaties entered into by the United States obligating law enforcement agencies nationwide to notify arrested foreign nationals of their right to contact their respective consulates. Our investigation found that EHPD regularly comes into contact with Latinos who are nationals of other countries. In these circumstances, depending on the nationality of the person involved, EHPD must either contact the appropriate consulate and notify the consulate of the arrest, or notify the arrestee that the arrestee has the right to make such contact. But we found that EHPD has entirely failed to understand or protect these clearly-defined rights. Despite EHPD command staff s awareness of the numerous Latinos of foreign nationality that live in and travel through its jurisdiction, EHPD has adopted no training or policies assuring that their consular notification rights will be respected.
8 Executive Order 13,166,65 Fed. Reg. 50,121 (Aug. 11,2000); Dep't of Justice, Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons, 67 Fed. Reg. 41,455 (June 18, 2002).
9 A language line is a telephone-based interpretation service available immediately and 24 hours a day.

- 17 ­
h) EHPD has refused to meaningfully engage with the Latino community, despite the Latino community's growth
Our investigation found that, contrary to contemporary policing practices, EHPD has made almost no attempt to conduct meaningful outreach to the Latino community. Police agencies typically engage in outreach to the communities they serve in order to gain that community's trust, make the community aware of policing efforts being conducted in that community, and establish lines of communication that will aid the law enforcement objectives of the agency. Engagement with the community also enhances officer safety through familiarity with the community and its members. In contrast to this standard practice, we found little or no evidence that EHPD officers or command staff have made any serious attempt to engage with the Latino community through any conlmunity outreach efforts. Again, such efforts are necessary to ensure that EHPD is adequately engaged with all the communities it is required to police and has the trust and legitimacy necessary to be able to effectively serve victims and utilize witnesses in the Latino community. During our investigation, we encountered Latinos who described being reluctant to seek police assistance out of distrust and fear of EHPD officers. EHPD' s failure to engage with the Latino community has therefore had the foreseeable consequence of limiting the degree to which Latinos in East Haven receive police services.
i) An audit commissioned by the Town of East Haven also found that EHPD suffers from significant institutional deficiencies
Our findings regarding EHPD' s management failures and deficiencies were echoed in a report issued to EHPD by the Police Executive Research Forum ("PERF") in March 2011. 10 The Town of East Haven contracted with PERF to conduct an operational audit ofEHPD, which included: reviewing the management and organizational structure; examining the effectiveness ofEHPD's managerial responsibilities of planning, direction, and controlling; assessing current department and community interactions; examining staffing levels; and reviewing and assessing infrastructure. Although PERF functioned only as consultant to Town officials, and made its findings accordingly, its report nevertheless sheds useful light on the institutional dysfunctions we describe above.
The PERF Report found that EHPD policies "fell well short of best professional practices," including policies regarding use of force, less lethal weapons, civilian complaints and internal investigations, and an early intervention system. 11 The PERF report emphasized that "many of the current policy directives are outdated" and encouraged EHPD to take action to update them. 12 During the course of the audit, PERF learned that some EHPD officers ignored the policies that existed. This problem of officers disregarding policies was further complicated by EHPD's "uneven enforcement of policy infractions and inconsistent application of discipline." 13
10 Police Executive Research Forum, Operational Audit of the East Haven Police Department: Final Report (2011) ("PERF Report").
11 Id at 7.
12 Id at 43.
13 Id at 6.

- 18 ­
Additionally, the PERF Report noted that EHPD failed to fund training for its officers in the years immediately preceding the audit. It concluded that lack of reinforcement from training leaves the officers, the public, and the Town at greater risk. Also, after reviewing EHPD's existing policy for capturing and recording racial profiling data, the auditors found it necessary to develop a Model Racial Profiling Policy for EHPD. Along similar lines, the audit emphasized the need for EHPD officers to "provide the same level of service to all those who live, work, and drive in East Haven.,,14 The PERF Report highlighted that EHPD should work to improve relationships with all of the Town's communities, but placed a particular emphasis on the Latino community.
PERF's findings regarding insufficient policies and procedures, training, discipline, and community engagement support our conclusion that EHPD institutional practices facilitated the pattern and practice of discrimination against Latinos. Indeed, PERF found many of the same failures that we have described above, indicating that EHPD's serious deficiencies are readily and widely observable. EHPD has nevertheless responded to PERF's recommendations in a limited manner-of the fifteen specific new policies recommended by PERF, EHPD has informed us of only three new policies and procedures promulgated during our investigation. 1s
B. EHPD Violates Title VI and the Safe Streets Act by Engaging in Discriminatory Practices Against Latinos
The actions and willful inactions discussed above constitute a violation of Title VI and the Safe Streets Act. However, the United States is deferring formal determinations of noncompliance with Title VI and the Safe Streets Act at this time to provide you an opportunity to voluntarily cooperate in resolving this matter so that your federal funding from the Department of Justice is no longer at risk. Title VI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance and authorizes the United States to seek judicial remedy for failure to voluntarily comply with those prohibitions. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d, 2000d-l(2). Similar to the Equal Protection Clause, Title VI prohibits intentional discrimination. See Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244, 276 n.23 (2003) (noting that violations of Equal Protection clause are violations of Title VI). Further, the Department of Justice, like other federal agencies, has adopted regulations implementing Title VI that prohibit practices that have the effect of discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin. See, e.g., 28 C.F.R. § 42. 104(b)(2) (prohibiting "methods of administration which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination because of their race, color, or national origin"). A jurisdiction receiving federal financial assistance can accordingly be found in violation of Title VI when its procedures or practices have a disparate impact on individuals of a particular race, color, or national origin, and such practice lacks a "substantial legitimate justification." New York Urban League v. New York, 71 F.3d 1031, 1036 (2d Cir. 1995).
The Safe Streets Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex by police departments receiving certain federal funds. The United States is
14 Id. at 42.
15 The three new policies are Administrative Orders for a Code of Conduct, a Code of Ethics, and an Internal Affairs Complaint and Discipline Policy. It is not clear whether these orders have been formally activated within EHPD as they did not include issue dates.

- 19 ­
authorized to bring a civil action in an appropriate United States district court to address a pattern or practice of discrimination by 'any state or local criminal justice agency receiving such federal funds. The Safe Streets Act has been interpreted by both case law and regulation to prohibit government activity having a discriminatory impact. See United States v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 454 F. Supp. 1077 (E.D. Va. 1978); United States v. City ofMiami, 614 F.2d 1322, 1328-29 (5th Cir. 1980); 28 C.F.R. § 42.203(e).
The pattern or practice of bias described above, including EHPD's targeting of Latinos, particularly in traffic enforcement, the pattern of hostility towards the Latino community, and numerous institutional practices enabling discrimination, supports finding independent violations of Title VI and the Safe Streets Act.
We have identified qualifying funds under both statutes received by East Haven and 
 EHPD from the DOJ's Office of Justice Programs. In addition, EHPD has received qualifying 
 federal funding through its participation in the DOJ's Equitable Sharing program. As a federal 
 fund recipient, EHPD signed assurances agreeing to abide by federal law prohibiting 
 discrimination. EPHD certified, in part, that it "is in compliance with the nondiscrimination 
 requirements of [Title VI] and [its] Department of Justice implementing regulations." 

v. Additional Areas of Serious Concern
In addition to the violations of the Constitution and federal law outlined above, there are two additional areas of serious concern where, at the moment, we do not make a formal pattern or practice finding, but our review continues. First, our investigation revealed serious deficiencies in the accountability and supervision of officers that creates an unreasonable risk of other constitutional violations. In particular, we found serious institutional deficiencies in EHPD's management and accountability systems, as outlined in our April 15, 2010, letter, that fail to protect individuals from unlawful searches and seizures and use of excessive force. (Letter attached as Exhibit A). We are continuing to review this issue.
Second, we are also concerned with reports that Chief Gallo and other EHPD officers created a hostile and intimidating environment for persons who wished to cooperate with our investigation at EHPD. During our tours, we observed notes that were publicly displayed outside individual offices referencing our investigation in a disparaging manner and messages on a police union bulletin board that referred to "rats" at EHPD. We also learned that Chief Gallo had warned staff that DOJ had agreed to provide him with the names of individuals who cooperated with the investigation, contradicting our discussions with Chief Gallo. Indeed, prior to this incident we notified Chief Gallo that we would keep the names of officers or staff who spoke to us during our investigation confidential in order to protect individuals from potential retaliation. The hostility we observed was also directed at civilian members of the Police Commission. For example, during one of our tours, officers referred to EHPD headquarters as a "poisoned pond" when a Police Commissioner entered the building for a scheduled interview with us. The Police Conlmissioner became visibly upset and agitated at the officers' comments and canceled the interview.
Remarkably, DOJ staff members were also the object of similar questionable conduct by several officers and union representatives who met with us prior to our first on-site tour of . EHPD. At a late evening meeting, officers warned DOJ staff and a police practices consultant

- 20­

that that they could not guarantee their safety during ride-alongs with officers, a highly unusual statement given the nature of our ride-alongs and the relatively low violent crime rate in East Haven. We continued to receive subsequent reports of hostility and intimidation by EHPD officers and police union representatives. These recent reports caused us to advise the Mayor in early December 2011 of his obligation to prevent retaliation. (Letter attached as Exhibit B).

VI. Remedial Measures
Our investigation reveals that EHPD engages in biased policing against Latinos in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and in violation of federal law. EHPD officers intentionally target Latinos for traffic enforcement activities, and subject Latinos to disparate, discriminatory treatment after traffic stops. EHPD has willfully enabled the discriminatory conduct of its officers by failing to institute generally accepted policing practices that would allow appropriate training, oversight, and supervision. The following remedial measures must be implemented in order to correct the constitutional and statutory deficiencies identified above.

a. General Policies and Procedures

•

EHPD must update all of its policies for conformity with generally

accepted police practices, for internal consistency, and for ease of use

within the Department. EHPD policies should be supplemented by a

comprehensive code of conduct that describes permitted and prohibited

officer activity with specificity. Among the policies that EHPD must

update and expand are those policies governing the handling of

complaints, conduct of internal investigations, handling of discipline, and

the responsibilities of supervisors.

•

EHPD must develop a comprehensive non-discrimination policy that

forbids EHPD officers from using race, color, ethnicity, or national origin

in conducting stops or detentions, or activities following stops or

detentions, except when engaging in appropriate suspect-specific activity

to identify a particular person or group suspected of specific criminal

conduct.

b. Training

•

EHPD must effectively train its officers on its policies and practices, and

provide updated training to its officers on a regular basis, including at roll­

call, in the field, and at scheduled training sessions.

•

EHPD must effectively train its deputies in the specific areas of

non-biased policing, the requirements of policing diverse communities,

community outreach, and procedural justice.

- 21 ­

c. Data Collection and Analysis

•

EHPD officers must document all of its traffic and pedestrian stops

accurately and completely, including the race or ethnicity of the driver and

passengers, the violation that led to the stop, and the post-stop action taken

with regard to the violation.

•

Documentation submitted by patrol officers must be audited by

supervisors and by the chain of command for completeness and accuracy.

The collected data should then be subjected to meaningful analysis to

enable detection of any trends of unlawful behavior and, if possible, early

interventions to prevent unlawful behavior.

d. Risk Management

•

EHPD must develop and implement a risk management system that

incorporates, organizes, and synthesizes data regarding officer conduct.

This system should include information from a variety of sources,

including complaints, uses of force, officers' arrest and traffic stop

activity, field interviews, and consent stops and searches.

•

EHPD must use this risk management system as a regular supervisory tool

to promote civil rights, to manage risk and liability through early

intervention and discipline, and to evaluate all EHPD personnel.

e. Language Access

•

EHPD must develop and implement a conlprehensive language access

program that will enable persons of limited English proficiency full access

to the services that EHPD provides and that will enable EHPD officers to

fully and effectively carry out their duties when encountering such

persons.

•

EHPD's development of a language access program must include routine

and detailed training of its officers on this program and development of

detailed policies describing the obligations of EHPD officers and staff

relating to language access. The program should be characterized by such

features as a clear mandate to use formal language services, such as a

language line; translated signs, forms, and websites, and other documents;

and command-level responsibility for the provision of these services.

f. Immigration Enforcement

•

Should it choose to continue enforcement of immigration laws, EHPD

must develop clear policies on immigration enforcement so that it and its

officers are in a position to be and are at all times in compliance with and

responsive to DHS policies, practices, and directions. EHPD must provide

- 22­

training and oversight to ensure that officers adhere to its imnligration enforcement policy consistently and in a non-discriminatory manner.

•

Due to its history of discrimination and to regain the community's trust

and prevent haphazard immigration enforcement, EHPD must limit officer

enforcement actions related to immigration law to only those officers who

have received comprehensive training in immigration law equivalent to

the training that ICE offers state and local agencies that have formal

enforcement relationships with ICE. In particular, EHPD officers who

engage in any enforcement activity related to immigration law must be

comprehensively trained on the parameters of immigration law, including

the elements of all civil and criminal violations of immigration law, on

federal enforcement priorities in immigration law, on the nature of state

and local cooperation with the federal government, and on the special

requirements for preserving civil rights in an immigration enforcement

context. Immigration enforcement activity carried out by an untrained

EHPD officer must be treated as a violation of EHPD policy and code of

conduct and appropriate discipline applied.

g. Community Policing

•

EHPD must establish a comprehensive program of community outreach

based on its responsibilities to provide policing services to all the

communities it serves. This program should include promotion and

execution of the principles of community policing, including partnerships

with stakeholders and community members in all East Haven communities

in order to promote public safety and proactive crime control.

•

EHPD's community outreach program must also include establishing

community liaisons that are able to effectively communicate with the

communities that EHPD serves in their native language. EHPD must also

provide public forums so that community concerns relating to public

safety may be voiced and EHPD enforcement strategies and priorities

explained to those impacted by them.

*

*

*

The constitutional and statutory violations identified in these findings can only be remedied with the persistent commitment and engagement of EHPD, town officials, and key community stakeholders. These violations are serious and longstanding, and have become engrained in the culture of this Department. Sustainable reform will require a formal court-ordered and monitored remedy. We recognize that not all members of EHPD have engaged in the misconduct described above, and many EHPD officers strive to provide vital policing services while at the same time respecting the constitutional rights of East Haven residents. Enacting the reforms outlined in this letter will make every officer's job easier and more rewarding.

- 23 ­
We will be in touch with you in the coming days to discuss a path forward. We look forward to working with you to implement prompt and effective solutions to these issues. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please call Jonathan M. Smith, Chief of the Civil Rights Division's Special Litigation Section, at (202) 514-6255.
~C~r~lY'
Thomas E. Perez Assistant Attorney General

 
 - - - - -­ - - _.
Office of IllI' AssisllInI Altomey General

u.s. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
Wu,/Zington, D.C. 20530
OCT 22 2012

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
The Honorable Joseph Maturo, Jr. Mayor of the Town of East Haven 250 Main Street East Haven, CT 06512
RE: Investigation of the East Haven Police Department
Dear Mayor Maturo:
We write to memorialize the intent to enter into an agreement between the Town of East Haven ("East Haven" or "the Town") and the Department of Justice ("DOJ") to resolve DOJ's pattern or practice investigation of the East Haven Police Department ("EHPD"). Please review the terms below and indicate your agreement by your signature, and return the countersigned letter to our attention.
I. In September 2009, DOJ, through the Civil Rights Division and the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Connecticut, initiated an investigation of EHPD, pursuant to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, 42 U.S.c. § 14141 ("Section 14141 "), and the anti-discrimination provisions of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. § 3789d ("Safe Streets Act"). The investigation also included a review ofEHPD's compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-4a ("Title VI"). These statutes authorize DOJ to file a civil action and seek equitable relief to remedy a pattern or practice of police misconduct.
2. On December 19,2011, DOJ issued a report detailing its investigative findings regarding EHPD. DO] indicated it would engage the Town in negotiations to reach a court-enforceable agreement to resolve DOJ's investigation. Shortly after the release of the DOJ report, the Town pledged to work collaboratively with DOJ to implement sustainable reforms in EHPD.
3. DOJ sent a draft settlement agreement to the Town on August 23, 2012. DOJ and the Town of East Haven, through counsel (collectively, "the Parties"), have negotiated the

-2­
agreement over the course of several months. After thorough review by the Mayor, the EHPD Chief of Police, the Town Attorney, and the Town's outside counsel, the Parties have expressed their intent to enter into the attached Settlement Agreement. The Parties have determined that the proposed Settlement Agreement, rather than protracted and costly litigation, is the most effective means of resolving the DOJ investigation and ensuring constitutional and effective policing.
4. The Mayor agrees to promptly seek the necessary approvals from the Board of Police Commissioners, the East Haven Board of Finance, and the East Haven Town Council to effectuate the proposed Settlement Agreement and ensure transparency in EHPD's path toward reform. To that end, the Mayor agrees to seek approvals on the following schedule:
a. The EHPD Chief will request that the Board of Police Commissioners approve the proposed Settlement Agreement at its next Regular Meeting on October 30,2012.
b. The Mayor will request that the Board of Finance approve the initial funding necessary to commence implementation of the proposed Settlement Agreement at a Special Meeting to be called on November 5, 2012.
c. The Mayor will request that the Town Council consider the proposed Settlement Agreement at an Informational Session to be called on November 8, 2012.
d. The Mayor will request that the Town Council approve the proposed Settlement Agreement at its Regular Meeting on November 13,2012.
e. The Mayor agrees to personally recommend approval ofthe proposed Settlement Agreement in presentations to the Board of Finance and the Town Council. Immediately upon approval of the proposed Settlement Agreement by the Town Council, but in no event later than November 15, 2012, the Mayor will sign and fully execute the proposed Settlement Agreement.
5. DOJ agrees to withhold the filing ofa civil action under Section 14141, Title VI, or the Safe Streets Act, or otherwise take other civil enforcement action, until November 15, 2012, to provide the Mayor an opportunity to obtain necessary approvals on the proposed Settlement Agreement. However, if the Mayor fails to make reasonable efforts to obtain necessary approvals, acts in bad faith, or is otherwise unable to secure necessary approvals, DO] reserves the right to file a civil action or take other appropriate enforcement action at any time.
6. The Parties may issue press releases or make other public announcements regarding the proposed Settlement Agreement after this letter is countersigned indicating an assent by all Parties. The Parties agree to make the proposed Settlement Agreement publicly available upon request. The ToWn may provide copies of the proposed Settlement Agreement to members of the East Haven Board of Police Commissioners, Board of Finance and Town Council immediately upon signing.

-3­
If the foregoing tenns are acceptable to you, please so indicate with your signature below and return this executed letter to us. By your signature, you represent that you are authorized to sign on behalf of the Town of East Haven.
Sincerely,

;2:E;~Gy
Assistant Attorney General

David B. F In United States Attorney District of Connecticut

O(p DAY OF

,2012.

cc: Lawrence C. Sgrignari, Esq.

 
 Department of Justice Releases Investigative Findings on the East Haven, Connecticut, Police Department | OPA | Department of Justice

Search this site

Search

HOME ABOUT AGENCIES BUSINESS RESOURCES NEWS CAREERS CONTACT Home » Office of Public Affairs

JUSTICE NEWS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs

SHARE Monday, December 19, 2011

Department of Justice Releases Investigative Findings on the East Haven, Connecticut, Police Department
WASHINGTON – Following a thorough investigation, the Justice Department today announced its findings that the East Haven Police Department (EHPD) has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination against Latinos in violation of the Constitution and federal law.

Launched in September 2009, the investigation was conducted under provisions of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Specifically, the investigation found that EHPD intentionally targets Latinos for traffic enforcement and treats Latino drivers more harshly after traffic stops in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, Title VI and the Safe Streets Act. The investigation further found that EHPD has willfully enabled discrimination by failing to put in place basic law enforcement practices and procedures used by law enforcement agencies across the country to prevent discrimination.
The Department of Justice findings are based on:
a statistical analysis demonstrating that Latino drivers are disproportionally targeted for traffic stops; an analysis of traffic stops showing that officers use non-standard and, in some cases, unacceptable, justifications for stops that are not employed against non-Latino drivers, and post-stop treatment that shows EHPD treating Latino drivers more punitively than nonLatino drivers; serious incidents of abuse of authority and retaliation against individuals who criticize or complain of EHPD’s discriminatory treatment of Latinos; and

Report a Crime
Get a Job
Locate a Prison, Inmate, or Sex Offender
Apply for a Grant
Submit a Complaint
Report Waste, Fraud, Abuse or Misconduct to the Inspector General
Find Sales of Seized Property
Find Help and Information for Crime Victims
Register, Apply for Permits, or Request Records

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-releases-investigative-findings-east-haven-connecticut-police-department[8/17/2016 2:21:23 PM]

Department of Justice Releases Investigative Findings on the East Haven, Connecticut, Police Department | OPA | Department of Justice

a failure to remedy a history of discrimination and a deliberate indifference to the rights of minorities, including EHPD’s failure to guide, train, supervise and discipline officers engaged in unlawful discrimination.
The department also found a number of serious deficiencies in EHPD’s management, oversight and accountability systems that have enabled discriminatory policing by EHPD officers. These deficiencies include:
a failure to collect and report traffic stop data in accordance with state racial profiling laws; a failure to implement policies prohibiting discrimination; a failure to hold officers accountable through internal investigations; a failure to provide limited English proficient Latinos with appropriate language access; and a failure to abide by individuals’ consular rights.

Identify Our Most Wanted Fugitives
Find a Form
Report and Identify Missing Persons
Contact Us

In addition, although not making formal findings, the department noted two areas of serious concern regarding allegations of use of excessive force and unconstitutional searches and seizures. The department also expressed concern with EPHD leadership creating and condoning a hostile and intimidating environment for anyone seeking to provide relevant information in this investigation.

“These findings show that the East Haven Police Department systematically violated the constitutional rights of people it is supposed to serve and protect. By failing to have in place the most basic systems designed to protect individuals from unlawful discrimination, EHPD has fallen short of its obligations,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “The recommendations we make will put the police department on a path towards correcting the serious deficiencies that have long plagued the department and regaining the community’s trust.”

“The residents of East Haven should not have to choose between effective crime-fighting and constitutional policing,” said U.S. Attorney David Fein. “By addressing the serious deficiencies we uncovered, EHPD will not only ensure constitutional policing, but will also give the men and women of EHPD the support they need to combat crime effectively.”

The Justice Department’s comprehensive and independent investigation was conducted by department attorneys, investigators and police executives and other experts who interviewed EHPD officers and residents in East Haven. The investigation also involved exhaustive review of documents and data, including EHPD policies and procedures, incident reports and traffic stop activity. This civil investigation was separate from any ongoing criminal investigations of EHPD.

Federal law permits the attorney general to initiate a civil action in the name of the United States against the town of East Haven, EHPD and its officials to remedy the pattern or practice of misconduct and ensure compliance with the Constitution and federal law. The department will work with town officials to obtain voluntary compliance through a court-enforceable agreement that will lead to sustainable reforms. Should EHPD and East Haven choose to not cooperate in reaching an agreed-upon remedy, the department may seek relief unilaterally from the federal courts.
This investigation was conducted by the Special Litigation Section of the Civil Rights Division in coordination with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut and with the assistance
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-releases-investigative-findings-east-haven-connecticut-police-department[8/17/2016 2:21:23 PM]

Department of Justice Releases Investigative Findings on the East Haven, Connecticut, Police Department | OPA | Department of Justice
of expert police consultants. Starting tomorrow, members of the community who may wish to provide information to the department in furtherance of this investigation may call 1-855-2021830 or email Community.EHPD@usdoj.gov
The findings letter can be found at www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/easthavenpd.php. For more information on the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, please visit www.justice.gov/crt.

11-1668

Civil Rights Division Updated September 15, 2014

ABOUT The Attorney General Budget & Performance Strategic Plans History
AGENCIES
BUSINESS Business Opportunities Small & Disadvantaged Business Grants

| 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530-0001

RESOURCES Forms Publications Case Highlights Legislative Histories Information for Victims in Large Cases

CAREERS Legal Careers Interns, Recent Graduates, and Fellows Veteran Recruitment
CONTACT

NEWS The Justice Blog Public Schedule Videos Photo Gallery

JUSTICE.GOV

Archive

Social Media

Accessibility

For Employees

Adobe Reader

Office of the

FOIA

Inspector General

No FEAR Act

Government

Information QualityResources

Privacy Policy

Open Government

Legal Policies & Plain Writing

Disclaimers

USA.gov

BusinessUSA

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-releases-investigative-findings-east-haven-connecticut-police-department[8/17/2016 2:21:23 PM]

 
 Justice Department Reaches Proposed Agreement with the Town of East Haven, Connecticut, to Resolve Allegations of Misconduct by the East Haven Police Depar...

Search this site

Search

HOME ABOUT AGENCIES BUSINESS RESOURCES NEWS CAREERS CONTACT Home » Office of Public Affairs

JUSTICE NEWS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs

SHARE Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Justice Department Reaches Proposed Agreement with the Town of East Haven, Connecticut, to Resolve Allegations of Misconduct
by the East Haven Police Department
The Justice Department today announced that the town of East Haven, Conn., memorialized its intention to enter into a settlement agreement to resolve the department’s civil investigation of allegations that the East Haven Police Department (EHPD) engaged in a pattern or practice of unlawful discrimination against Latinos on account of their race, color or national origin. The proposed agreement also resolves allegations that EHPD engaged in a pattern or practice of use of excessive force, unconstitutional searches and seizures and retaliation against persons who witnessed police misconduct or criticized EHPD’s practices.
Joseph Maturo Jr., the mayor of East Haven, outlined in a letter of intent a schedule to obtain necessary approvals from other town officials to enter into a binding agreement that will lead to broad institutional changes in EHPD’s policies and practices. The proposed agreement builds on reforms initiated by the town and is intended to strengthen the community’s trust in EHPD. Once fully executed by the town, the proposed agreement will be filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut for approval.
“We are pleased that Mayor Maturo has made a clear commitment to rebuild the East Haven Police Department by agreeing to enter into a court-enforceable agreement that will result in constitutional and effective policing for all persons who live, work and travel in East Haven,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “The proposed agreement will serve as a blueprint for sustainable reform that will provide the police department with the necessary tools and guidance it needs to restore trust from all segments of the East Haven community.”

Report a Crime
Get a Job
Locate a Prison, Inmate, or Sex Offender
Apply for a Grant
Submit a Complaint
Report Waste, Fraud, Abuse or Misconduct to the Inspector General
Find Sales of Seized Property
Find Help and Information for Crime Victims
Register, Apply for Permits, or Request Records

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-reaches-proposed-agreement-town-east-haven-connecticut-resolve-allegations[8/17/2016 2:24:19 PM]

Justice Department Reaches Proposed Agreement with the Town of East Haven, Connecticut, to Resolve Allegations of Misconduct by the East Haven Police Depar...

“There is no place for invidious discrimination by law enforcement officers, and today’s commitment from the mayor signals a new day for the East Haven Police Department,” said David B. Fein, the U.S. Attorney for the District Connecticut. “Once the proposed agreement is in place, the men and women who courageously serve on the police department will get the support they need to carry out their duties in a lawful and respectful manner, while ensuring strong public safety for the people of East Haven.”
The proposed agreement provides for comprehensive reforms in seven core areas and provides for a joint compliance expert who will independently assess EHPD’s implementation of the agreement. The seven core areas are:

Identify Our Most Wanted Fugitives
Find a Form
Report and Identify Missing Persons
Contact Us

Biased-free policing, including measures on mandatory training, collection and analysis of data on police encounters, development of a meaningful language access plan, notification to consulates when foreign nationals are detained and steps to promote biased-free policing in EHPD’s hiring, promotion and performance assessment processes;

Use of force, including the development of current policies on use of force and measures that provide for comprehensive training, consistent force reporting and thorough force reviews and investigations by supervisors and the internal affairs officer;

Searches and seizures, including the development of up-to-date policies and measures on applying for search warrants, documenting consent searches, notifying supervisors of felony arrests and other “contempt-of-cop” situations, inspecting detainees for injuries, and preserving individuals’ First Amendment rights to observe and record police activity;

Policies and training, including measures to ensure that officers and supervisors have sufficient guidance to carry out their law enforcement responsibilities in a lawful, effective and ethical manner;

Civilian complaints, internal investigations and discipline, including measures to ensure that all allegations of officer misconduct are received and thoroughly investigated and that officers who engage in misconduct are held accountable by a disciplinary system that is fair and consistent;

Supervision and management, including steps that provide for close and effective supervision to assist officers in carrying out their duties in lawful manner and systems that allow supervisors to identify, correct and prevent misconduct; and

Community engagement and oversight, including measures to create robust partnerships with all segments of the East Haven community, disseminate public information on reforms and policing activities, and solicit feedback on the relationship between EHPD and the community.

In September 2009, the Justice Department opened a pattern or practice investigation into allegations that EHPD officers engaged in discriminatory traffic enforcement, use of excessive force, and unconstitutional searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution and federal antidiscrimination laws. In December 2011, the department completed its investigation and issued a letter finding reasonable cause to believe that EHPD engaged in a pattern or practice of unlawful discrimination against Latinos and other misconduct. The investigation was conducted jointly by the Civil Rights Division’s Special Litigation Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut.

The full text of the 2011 Findings Letter, the Letter of Intent and the proposed settlement https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-reaches-proposed-agreement-town-east-haven-connecticut-resolve-allegations[8/17/2016 2:24:19 PM]

Justice Department Reaches Proposed Agreement with the Town of East Haven, Connecticut, to Resolve Allegations of Misconduct by the East Haven Police Depar...
agreement are available at www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/findsettle.php. For more information on the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, please visit www.justice.gov/crt.

12-1274

Civil Rights Division Updated September 15, 2014

ABOUT The Attorney General Budget & Performance Strategic Plans History
AGENCIES
BUSINESS Business Opportunities Small & Disadvantaged Business Grants

| 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530-0001

RESOURCES Forms Publications Case Highlights Legislative Histories Information for Victims in Large Cases

CAREERS Legal Careers Interns, Recent Graduates, and Fellows Veteran Recruitment
CONTACT

NEWS The Justice Blog Public Schedule Videos Photo Gallery

JUSTICE.GOV

Archive

Social Media

Accessibility

For Employees

Adobe Reader

Office of the

FOIA

Inspector General

No FEAR Act

Government

Information QualityResources

Privacy Policy

Open Government

Legal Policies & Plain Writing

Disclaimers

USA.gov

BusinessUSA

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-reaches-proposed-agreement-town-east-haven-connecticut-resolve-allegations[8/17/2016 2:24:19 PM]