|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Crime & Police |
|
Police Review Board - "Duh!" |
Current rating: 0 |
by Ricky Baldwin
Email: baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (verified)
Phone: 217-328-3037
Address: 801 E California Ave, Urbana IL 61801 |
28 Dec 2004
Modified: 12:15:30 AM |
|
The Champaign County Coalition for Citizen Police Review will meet Thursday Jan. 6, 6:30-7:30 pm, Douglass Branch Library, and Thursday Jan. 20, 6:30-7:30, Douglass Branch Library, to work on spring campaign in Urbana. |
In the wake of this year’s controversies between local police and community members -- Tasers, eavesdropping, the Unity March and now jail suicides -- Champaign County residents are reviving an idea that supporters say is high on the “duh” factor.
It’s the idea that no government agency, especially one with heavily armed officers and broad authority to intervene in the lives of ordinary people, can operate without direct citizen oversight. At least not in a democracy.
Urbana mayoral candidate Laurel Prussing agrees, as do several Urbana City Council members and candidates for office, all of whom have either been involved directly or expressed some level of support for the idea.
The Champaign County Coalition for Citizen Police Review counts as supporting organizations a wide range of local groups, from the Champaign County NAACP to the Common Ground Food Co-op, from St Luke’s CME Church to the local Green Party, and from the American Association of University Women (AAUW) to the Anti-War Anti-Racism Effort (AWARE).
According to the group’s website, “A citizen police review board is an impartial body of ordinary citizens, independent of the police department, empowered to receive and investigate citizen complaints against police officers and to perform other oversight functions.”
Activities listed on the site for the review board include:
-- Evaluating citizen complaints about police conduct.
-- Examining policies and procedures of the police department to ensure that they genuinely serve the interests of justice for all in the community.
-- Issuing periodic reports to the community about complaint resolution and about police activities and procedures.
At the present time, complaints about police conduct are investigated internally in both Champaign and Urbana. In other words, the agency investigates itself. This situation, supporters say, discourages citizen input and promotes secrecy.
A citizen review, on the other hand, would not only promote openness in government but also inspire increased confidence in the system by avoiding the public perception of bias associated with the internal process.
But such a board must not be biased AGAINST the police either, supporters say. The history of police review boards indicates that neutrality must be a priority. Get too cozy with the police, and lose any legitimacy as a neutral investigative body. Allow an adversarial relationship to develop between the board and police, and sacrifice effectiveness that depends on the cooperation of police officers.
The coalitionhas researched these pitfalls, including the experience of other cities that have had citizen police review for some time. This spring during municipal elections the CPRB campaign will focus on demonstrating public support for a citizen police review board in Urbana before moving on to Champaign.
The next meeting of the Champaign County Coalition for Citizen Police Review wis scheduled for 6:30-7:30 pm on Thursday January 6 in the Douglass Branch Library Community Room.
The next meeting after that will be Thursday January 20 from 6:30-7:30 pm in the Douglass Branch Library Conference Room. All who support a citizen police review board and want to help are welcome and invited to attend. |
See also:
http://www.prairienet.org/cprb/
http://nacole.org/
|
This work is in the public domain |
|
Re: Police Review Board - "Duh!" |
by Local Yocal
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
28 Dec 2004
|
I wonder if the group has invited police officers to the meetings to get their input about such a review board. Some initial conversations with police officers I've had, indicates they are opposed to the idea of a citizen's review board. They believe citizens don't understand police procedure, policies, and the law; and if a Review Board were in place, police would practice "defensive policing". That is, just like doctors, police would be timid in pursuing investigations, and generally getting involved in suspicious matters, because they don't want to get the Review Board coming down on them for being racially biased or unconstitutional. Police are concerned they would avoid doing their job so as not to get in trouble for doing their job. So the conversations have gone.
The local cities have assembled groups of citizen-experts on a variety of issues from homelessness to historical buildings to public art. There is no reason we could not assemble a representative from all 4 police departments, the public defender's office, the state's attorney's office, a retired circuit judge perhaps, along with other citizen groups to be a comprehensive group with the necessary expertise to gage the legitimacy of police conduct. It is necessary to gain the trust of the police. It is in their best interest to accept oversight. Both the educating of the public through this Review Board: that what they think is police misconduct may actually not be. And getting rid of rogue officers from the ranks of all the departments would benefit the police greatly. Once the citizens trust that officers will be held to account, and once the police feel their conduct is protected from unnecessary criticism, a Review Board will be a very great thing for our community at making peace with the police and folks who feel preselected for harsher treatment. Police work should be like a parade. When they roam the streets of our friendly cities, they should be waving to people on both sides of the street and be treated to a hero's welcome when they arrive into our neighborhoods. This fear and dread that a squad car represents an unknown shark cruising into the area for purposes of only hunting and arresting is not good for the community nor good for the police. I applaud the work of Mr. Balwin et al for getting this overdue project off the ground. Let's get Chief Adair and officer Anthony Cobb involved as well. |
|
Re: Police Review Board - "Duh!" |
by John Hilty
jhilty (nospam) shout.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
28 Dec 2004
|
Yes, there should be a police review board -- it's long overdue. It should be dominated by private citizens, rather than people who are formally affiliated with the criminal justice system.
The current system of petitioning the police chief is a total joke. |
|
Re: Police Review Board - "Duh!" |
by Joe Futrelle
futrelle (nospam) shout.net (verified) |
Current rating: 0
29 Dec 2004
|
> And getting rid of rogue officers from the ranks of all the departments would benefit the police greatly.
I think there is some consensus that this is the highest-priority objective of many of us who are calling for a review board, so much so that it is being pursued concurrently with trying to set up the board. The goal is to protect people now from abusive officers (and not, of course, to prevent conscientious officers from doing their jobs).
I want to underscore the importance of voting for candidates who support the board. Don't forget to vote in the upcoming primaries as well as the election, because the primaries are going to be critical to getting candidates who are committed to the board. |
