Independent Police Review Authority
CITY OF CHICAGO
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Office of the Mayor
0
Committee on Public Safety Office of the City Clerk Legislative Reference Bureau
Scott M. Ando
Acting Chief Administrator
Quarterly Report
DATE: July 15, 2013
Enclosed please find the Independent Police Review Authority's Quarterly Report provided pursuant to Municipal Code Section 2-57-110, which requires the filing of quarterly reports. The information contained in this report is accurate as of July 12, 2013. This quarterly report provides information for the period from April 1, 2013 through June 30, 2013.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact me at 312-746-
3551.
WEST CHICAGO AVENUE, -ITH FLOOR. CHICAGO. ILLINOIS «iO«ja:a 74«.a3rM (COMPLAINT LINE* ■ JJ12.74J).;j«ci» (GENERAL) »12.?45^^(TTY> - WVVW.lPRACHtCAGO.ORG
Independent Police Review Authority
Quarterly Report
April 1, 2013 - June 30,2013
July 15,2013
o
This report is filed pursuant to Municipal Code Section 2-57-110, which requires the filing of quarterly reports. This quarterly report provides information for the period April 1, 2013 through June 30, 2013. The information contained in this report is accurate as of April 11, 2013. All of IPRA's public reports are available at www.iprachicago.org.
Quarterly Overview
During the second quarter of 2013, IPRA initiated 558 investigations - a 15 percent increase from the first quarter. This includes the 96 investigations resulting from notifications of a Taser discharge. IPRA responded to 13 officer-involved shootings during the second quarter of 2013.
This past quarter, IPRA closed 668 investigations which represent a twenty four percent increase from the first quarter of the year. While IPRA starts the second quarter with a full staff of Supervising Investigators, there are currently 5 vacant Investigator positions. IPRA continues to work with the Mayor's Office and Budget Office to address these key personnel issues.
Between April 1, 2013 and June 30, 3013, IPRA completed 10 sustained investigations. Sustained cases were down during the first quarter of 2013 compared to the previous quarter. However, both the number of cases identified for mediation as well the number of officers who agreed to accept mediation more than doubled in both categories. There were 42 cases this past quarter identified where mediation was deemed appropriate and 39 officers agreed to accept compared to 40 and 34 respectively during the previous quarter. IPRA will continue to work with the Fraternal Order of Police to extend mediation to those cases where it is warranted, thus, leaving more investigative resources to close older cases.
Acting Chief Administrator Scott Ando replaced former Chief Administrator liana Rosenzweig who stepped down at the end of May after serving in the post since September of 2007. Acting Chief Administrator Ando was previously hired as the 1st Deputy Chief Administrator of IPRA in October of 2011.
1
IPRA Cumulative Figures
|
INTAKE (all allegations/ notifications)1 |
IPRA Investigations Opened2 |
IPRA Investigations Closed3 |
IPRA Caseload4 |
Sept. 2007 |
746 |
216 |
162 |
1290 |
4Q 2007 |
2273 |
613 |
368 |
1535 |
1Q2008 |
2366 |
590 |
554 |
1571 |
2Q 2008 |
2436 |
640 |
670 |
1541 |
3Q 2008 |
2634 |
681 |
667 |
1555 |
4Q 2008 |
2337 |
699 |
692 |
1562 |
1Q2009 |
2384 |
657 |
687 |
1532 |
2Q 2009 |
2648 |
755 |
651 |
1635 |
3Q 2009 |
2807 |
812 |
586 |
1981 |
4Q 2009 |
2235 |
617 |
654 |
1949 |
1Q2010 |
2191 |
640 |
561 |
2028 |
2Q 2010 |
2626 |
868 |
832 |
2048 |
3Q 2010 |
2591 |
942 |
835 |
2168 |
4Q 2010 |
2127 |
746 |
681- |
2233 |
1Q 2011 |
2023 |
610 |
711 |
2132 |
2Q 2011 |
2171 |
778 |
747 |
2159 |
3Q2011 |
2335 |
788 |
749 |
2173 |
4Q 2011 |
2038 |
688 |
594 |
2237 |
1Q2012 |
1995 |
620 |
649 |
2210 |
2Q 2012 |
2155 |
693 |
747 |
2155 |
3Q2012 |
2264 |
690 |
698 |
2147 |
1 Pursuant to the IPRA Ordinance, certain events trigger an IPRA investigation even in the absence of an allegation of misconduct. The term "notification" refers to those events that IPRA investigates where there is no alleged misconduct.
2 This number includes investigations opened and assigned to IPRA as of the end of the identified quarter. It does not include investigations "Re-opened" because of the settlement of litigation, new evidence, or the results of the Command Channel Review process.
3 This number may include some investigations "Re-closed" after being Re-opened.
4 The caseload number for periods prior to 3Q 2009 are the numbers that IPRA previously reported in quarterly reports. As discussed previously, due to a calculation error, over time these numbers became inaccurate. The caseload number for 3Q 2009 reflects the results of IPRA's complete audit of pending investigations.
5 The number of investigations closed and IPRA Caseload reflect a correction of numbers reported in a previous report.
2
IPRA Cumulative Figures (Continued)
|
INTAKE (all allegations/ notifications) |
IPRA Investigations Opened |
IPRA Investigations Closed |
IPRA Caseload |
4Q 2012 |
1824 |
543 |
759 |
1925 |
1Q2013 |
1828 |
475 |
509 |
1883 |
2Q 2013 |
2122 |
558 |
668 |
1754 |
IPRA Investigations Opened by Incident Type6
IPRA Investigations Opened by Incident Type (Continued)
|
IPRA (COMPLAINTS) |
IPRA (NOTIFICATIONS) |
EXTRAORDINARY OCCURRENCE (EO) |
HIT SHOOTING (U#) |
NON-HIT SHOOTING |
SHOOTING/ ANIMAL |
TASER |
OC DISCHARGE |
|
1Independent Police Review Authority CITY OF CHICAGO TO: FROM: RE: Office of the Mayor 0 Committee on Public Safety Office of the City Clerk Legislative Reference Bureau Scott M. Ando Acting Chief Administrator Quarterly Report DATE: July 15, 2013 Enclosed please find the Independent Police Review Authority's Quarterly Report provided pursuant to Municipal Code Section 2-57-110, which requires the filing of quarterly reports. The information contained in this report is accurate as of July 12, 2013. This quarterly report provides information for the period from April 1, 2013 through June 30, 2013. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact me at 312-746- 3551. WEST CHICAGO AVENUE, -ITH FLOOR. CHICAGO. ILLINOIS «iO«ja:a 74«.a3rM (COMPLAINT LINE* ■ JJ12.74J).;j«ci» (GENERAL) »12.?45^^(TTY> - WVVW.lPRACHtCAGO.ORG Independent Police Review Authority Quarterly Report April 1, 2013 - June 30,2013 July 15,2013 o This report is filed pursuant to Municipal Code Section 2-57-110, which requires the filing of quarterly reports. This quarterly report provides information for the period April 1, 2013 through June 30, 2013. The information contained in this report is accurate as of April 11, 2013. All of IPRA's public reports are available at www.iprachicago.org. Quarterly Overview During the second quarter of 2013, IPRA initiated 558 investigations - a 15 percent increase from the first quarter. This includes the 96 investigations resulting from notifications of a Taser discharge. IPRA responded to 13 officer-involved shootings during the second quarter of 2013. This past quarter, IPRA closed 668 investigations which represent a twenty four percent increase from the first quarter of the year. While IPRA starts the second quarter with a full staff of Supervising Investigators, there are currently 5 vacant Investigator positions. IPRA continues to work with the Mayor's Office and Budget Office to address these key personnel issues. Between April 1, 2013 and June 30, 3013, IPRA completed 10 sustained investigations. Sustained cases were down during the first quarter of 2013 compared to the previous quarter. However, both the number of cases identified for mediation as well the number of officers who agreed to accept mediation more than doubled in both categories. There were 42 cases this past quarter identified where mediation was deemed appropriate and 39 officers agreed to accept compared to 40 and 34 respectively during the previous quarter. IPRA will continue to work with the Fraternal Order of Police to extend mediation to those cases where it is warranted, thus, leaving more investigative resources to close older cases. Acting Chief Administrator Scott Ando replaced former Chief Administrator liana Rosenzweig who stepped down at the end of May after serving in the post since September of 2007. Acting Chief Administrator Ando was previously hired as the 1st Deputy Chief Administrator of IPRA in October of 2011. 1 IPRA Cumulative Figures INTAKE (all allegations/ notifications)1IPRA Investigations Opened2IPRA Investigations Closed3IPRA Caseload4Sept. 200774621616212904Q 2007227361336815351Q2008236659055415712Q 2008243664067015413Q 2008263468166715554Q 2008233769969215621Q2009238465768715322Q 2009264875565116353Q 2009280781258619814Q 2009223561765419491Q2010219164056120282Q 2010262686883220483Q 2010259194283521684Q 20102127746681-22331Q 2011202361071121322Q 2011217177874721593Q2011233578874921734Q 2011203868859422371Q2012199562064922102Q 2012215569374721553Q201222646906982147 1 Pursuant to the IPRA Ordinance, certain events trigger an IPRA investigation even in the absence of an allegation of misconduct. The term "notification" refers to those events that IPRA investigates where there is no alleged misconduct. 2 This number includes investigations opened and assigned to IPRA as of the end of the identified quarter. It does not include investigations "Re-opened" because of the settlement of litigation, new evidence, or the results of the Command Channel Review process. 3 This number may include some investigations "Re-closed" after being Re-opened. 4 The caseload number for periods prior to 3Q 2009 are the numbers that IPRA previously reported in quarterly reports. As discussed previously, due to a calculation error, over time these numbers became inaccurate. The caseload number for 3Q 2009 reflects the results of IPRA's complete audit of pending investigations. 5 The number of investigations closed and IPRA Caseload reflect a correction of numbers reported in a previous report. 2 IPRA Cumulative Figures (Continued) INTAKE (all allegations/ notifications)IPRA Investigations OpenedIPRA Investigations ClosedIPRA Caseload4Q 2012182454375919251Q2013182847550918832Q 201321225586681754 IPRA Investigations Opened by Incident Type6 IPRA Investigations Opened by Incident Type (Continued) IPRA (COMPLAINTS)IPRA (NOTIFICATIONS) INFO & CREXTRAORDINARY OCCURRENCE (EO)HIT SHOOTING (U#)NON-HIT SHOOTINGSHOOTING/ ANIMALTASEROC DISCHARGE40 2012 |
328 |
8 |
14 |
13 |
26 |
149 |
4 |
10 2013 |
329 |
24 |
11 |
9 |
15 |
87 |
5 |
20 2013 |
400 |
14 |
13 |
7 |
14 |
96 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2-57-110(1): The number of investigations initiated since the last report
Between April 1, 2013 and June 30, 2013, IPRA issued 2122 Log Numbers. Of these Log Numbers, IPRA retained 557 for resolution. IPRA forwarded the remaining 1564 Log Numbers to the Internal Affairs Division of the Chicago Police Department for appropriate resolution.
Of the 557 Log Numbers retained by IPRA, IPRA classified 193 as Complaint Register Numbers. In addition, IPRA began Pre-affidavit Investigations for 207 of the Log Numbers retained by IPRA. The remainder of the retained Log Numbers consisted of 13 Log Numbers for shootings where an individual was hit by a bullet and a "U Number" was issued, 7 for shootings where no one was hit by a bullet, 14 for shots fired at animals,
Note: A single investigation may fall into more than one Incident Type. For instance, an investigation may be both an Extraordinary Occurrence (EO) and a Complaint Register (CR). For this chart, the investigation is counted in all applicable Incident Types. They are counted only once, in the total Log Numbers retained by IPRA. As defined by ordinance, an Extraordinary Occurrence (EO) is a death or > injury to a person while in police custody or other extraordinary or unusual occurrence in a lockup facility.
3
96 for reported uses of tasers, 5 for reported uses of pepper spray, and 14 for Extraordinary Occurrences8.
2-57-110(2): The number of investigations concluded since the last report
Between April 1, 2013 and June 30, 2013, IPRA closed 668 Log Numbers. A Log Number is considered closed when IPRA completes its work on the matter, regardless of whether the Police Department is still processing the results.
2-57-110(3): The number of investigations pending as of the report date
As of June 30, 2013, there were 1770 investigations pending completion by IPRA. These include both allegations that have received Complaint Register Numbers, and those being followed under a Log Number, as well as officer-involved shootings, and Extraordinary Occurrences.
2-57-110(4): The number of complaints not sustained since the last report9
Between April 1, 2013 and June 30, 2013, IPRA recommended that 185 investigations be closed as "not sustained."
In addition, 176 cases were closed after a Pre-affidavit Investigation because the complainants refused to sign an affidavit. IPRA recommended that 94 investigations be closed as "unfounded," and 10 be closed as "exonerated."
2-57-110(5): The number of complaints sustained since the last report
Between April 1, 2013 and June 30, 2013, IPRA recommended that 39 cases be closed as sustained. Attached are abstracts for each case where IPRA recommended a sustained finding, and the discipline IPRA recommended.10
2-57-110(6): The number of complaints filed in each district since the last report11
7 As of December 31, 2007, IPRA issued a Log Number for notifications of uses of taser, pepper spray, or for shootings where no one is injured only if it received a telephonic notification of the incident or there was an allegation of misconduct. As of January 1, 2008, IPRA implemented procedures to issue Log Numbers for all uses of taser and shootings, regardless of the method of notification. In addition CPD issued a reminder to CPD personnel to provide notification to IPRA. IPRA continues to issue Log Numbers for discharges of pepper spray at the request of CPD personnel.
8 These numbers include one Log Number classified as both an Extraordinary Occurrence and a Complaint Register. This Log Numbers is counted only once in the total number of Log Numbers retained by IPRA, but included in the breakouts of all applicable incident types.
9 The term "not sustained" is a term of art in police misconduct investigations. It is defined in CPD G.O. 93-3 as "when there is insufficient evidence either to prove or disprove allegation." In addition, cases may be "unfounded," which means "the allegation is false or not factual."
10 Abstracts for all investigations where IPRA has recommended a sustained finding can be found at
11 "Complaints" is defined as all reports of alleged misconduct, whether from the community or from a
source internal to the Police Department, whether a Complaint Register number has been issued or not.
This does not include, absent an allegation of misconduct, reports of uses of Tasers, pepper spray,
4
Between January 1, 2013 and March 31, 2013, IPRA received complaints of alleged misconduct based on incidents in the following districts, as follows:
District 20 = 28 District 22 = 70 District 24 = 48 District 25 = 85
District 01 =91 District 02 = 116 District 03 - 125 District 04 = 102 District 05 = 126 District 06= 137
District 07 = 113 District 08= 108 District 09 = 81 District 10 = 70 District 11 = 154 District 12 = 81 Outside City Limits = 26
District 14 = 39 District 15 = 91 District 16 = 58 District 17 = 43 District 18 = 92 District 19 = 71
Unknown location =12
2-57-110(7): The number of complaints filed against each officer in each district since the last report
2-57-110(8): The number of complaints referred to other agencies and the identity of such other agencies
Between April 1, 2013 and June 30, 2013, IPRA referred 1592 cases to other agencies as follows:
Chicago Police Department Internal Affairs Division = 1564 Cook County State's Attorney = 27 Federal Bureau of Investigations =1
(See Attachment)
discharges of weapons whether hitting an individual or not, or Extraordinary Occurrences. Districts are identified based on the district where the alleged misconduct occurred. Some complaints occurred in more than one District, they are counted in each district where they occurred. This list does include confidential complaints.
12
This uses the same definition of "complaints" as the preceding section. Except as otherwise noted, if a member was assigned to one unit but detailed to another at the time of the complaint, the member is listed under the detailed unit.
5
ATTACHMENT: COMPLAINTS AGAINST CPD MEMBERS BY UNIT
District 001
Members 1 -23: 1 complaint each Member 24: 2 complaints District 002
Members 1-32: 1 complaint each Member 33:2 complaints District 003
Members 1-27: 1 complaint each Member 28: 2 complaints District 004
Members 1-31: 1 complaint each Member 32: 2 complaints Member 33: 3 complaints District 005
Members 1-40: 1 complaint each Members 41-42: 2 complaints each Member 43: 3 complaints District 006
Members 1-48: 1 complaint each Member 49-57: 2 complaints each District 007
Members 1-25: 1 complaint each Member 26: 2 complaints District 008
Members 1-42: 1 complaint each Member 43-44: 2 complaints each District 009
Members 1-14: 1 complaint each Members 15-16: 2 complaints each
District 010
Members 1-14: 1 complaint each Members 15-16: 2 complaints each District 011
Members 1-43: 1 complaint each Members 44-46: 2 complaints each Member 47: 3 complaints District 012
Members 1-16: 1 complaint each Members 17-18: 2 complaints each District 014
Members 1-12: 1 complaint each Member 13:2 complaints District 015
Members 1-30: 1 complaint each Members 31-33: 2 complaints each District 016
Members 1-12: 1 complaint each District 017
Members 1-12: 2 complaints Member 13: 2 complaints District 018
Members 1-32: 1 complaint each Members 33-34: 2 complaints each Member 35: 3 complaints District 019
Members 1-8: 1 complaint each District 020
Members 1-8: 1 complaint each
6
District 022
Members 1-16: 1 complaint each Member 17-19: 2 complaints each District 024
Members 1-16: 1 complaint each Members 17-18: 2 complaints each Member 19: 3 complaints District 025
Members 1-29: 1 complaint each
Member 30-32: 2 complaints each
Recruit Training (044)'
Members 1-3: 1 complaint each
District Reinstatement (045)
Member 1: 1 complaint
Airport Law Enforcement Unit North (050)
Members 1-5: 1 complaint each
Mounted Unit (055)
Member 1: 1 complaint
Special Investigations Unit (079)
Member 1: 1 complaint
Office of the Superintendent (111)
Member 1: 1 complaint
Office of Crime Control Strategies 015}
Member 1: 1 complaint Bureau of Administration (120) Member 1: 1 complaint Bureau of Internal Affairs (121)
Members 1-2: 1 complaint each
1 These numbers include CPD members who are detailed to a District as part of their training, but are officially still assigned to Recruit Training.
Finance Division (122)
Members 1-2: 1 complaint each Human Resources Division (123) Member 1: 1 complaint Education and Training Division (124) Member 1: 1 complaint Traffic Section (145) Members 1-10: 1 complaint each Members 11-12: 2 complaints each Traffic Court and Records Unit (148) Member 1: 1 complaint Records Inquiry Section (163) Members 1-3: 1 complaint each Field Services Section (166) Members 1-7: 1 complaint each Central Detention (171) Members 1-3:1 complaint each Narcotics Section (189) Members 1-24: 1 complaint each Members 25-27: 1 complaint each Intelligence Section (191) Members 1-2: 1 complaint each Asset Forfeiture Division (192) Members 1-2: 1 complaint each Gang Investigation Division (193) Members 1-2: 1 complaint each Bureau of Patrol - Area Central (211) Members 1-14: 1 complaint each Member 15:2 complaints Bureau of Patrol - Area South (212) Members 1-18: 1 complaint each Member 19: 2 complaints
7
Bureau of Patrol - Area North (213)
Members 1-11: 1 complaint each
Members 12-13:2 complaints each
Troubled Buildings Unit (241)
Members 1: 2 complaints
Court Section (261)
Member 1: 1 complaint
Member 2: 5 complaints
OEMC Detail Section (276)
Member 1: 1 complaint
Forensic Services - Evidence Technician Section (277)
Member 1: 1 complaint
Gang Enforcement - Area Central
om
Members 1-5: 1 complaint each
Gang Enforcement - Area South (312)
Members 1-12: 1 complaint each
Member 13-15:2 complaints each
Gang Enforcement - Area North (313)
Members 1-7: 1 complaint each
Members 8-9: 2 complaints each
Member 10: 3 complaints
Canine Unit (341)
Member 1: 1 complaint
Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) (353)
Members 1-6: 1 complaint each Alternate Response Section (376)
Members 1-7: 1 complaint each Member 8-9: 2 complaints each Members 10: 7 complaints
Juvenile Intervention Support Center (JISC) (384)
Members 1-2: 1 complaint each
Gang Enforcement Division (393)
Members 1-3: 1 complaint each
Special Activities Section (441)
Member 1: 2 complaints
Central Investigations Unit (606)
Members 1-8: 1 complaint each
Member 9: 2 complaints
Major Accident Investigation Unit (608)
Members 1-4: 1 complaint each
Bureau of Detectives - Area Central 16101
Members 1-11: 1 complaint each
Bureau of Detectives - Area South (620)
Members 1-18: 1 complaint each
Member 19: 2 complaints
Bureau of Detectives - Area North (630)
Members 1-11: 1 complaint each Public Transportation Section (701) Members 1-8: 1 complaint Transit Security Unit (704)
Member 1: 1 complaint
8
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
APRIL 2013 Log/C.R. No. 1023552
On February 1, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on February 1, 2009 in the 22nd District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer was inattentive to duty in that he failed to secure a loaded firearm and was inattentive to duty in that he accidentally discharged a firearm. Based upon a mediation, the accused Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" and a "Reprimand".
Page 1 of 1
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
Log/C.R. No. 1051595
On January 31, 2012, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents involving a Chicago Police Department (CPD) Sergeant (Sergeant A) and Officer (Complainant Officer B) that occurred on January 19, 2012, May 17, 2012, and May 18, 2012, in the 20th District. It was alleged that Sergeant A threatened Complainant Officer B, who were previously in a relationship, over the disputed possession of a vehicle on January 19, 2012; violated a Direct Order when he stopped his vehicle, exited his car, and waived at Complainant Officer B in an attempt to contact her on May 17, 2012; and violated a Direct Order when he contacted Complainant Officer B via text message on May 18, 2012. Based upon a mediation, the accused Sergeant agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegation that he violated a Direct Order when he contacted Complainant Officer B via text message on May 18, 2012. Sergeant A agreed through mediation to accept a written reprimand.
Log/C.R. No. 1042306
On December 28, 2010, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred on December 27, 2010 and other dates in the 8th District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged the Officer went to the marital residence and took items that belonged to the Complainant on December 27, 2010; sent the Complainant a harassing text message; drove by the marital residence and used a remote control to open the garage door to see if the Complainant's car was there on multiple dates; gave a postal carrier false information that prevented the Complainant's mail from being delivered for several months; failed to notify the CPD that he was being investigated by the United States Postal Inspection Service; and used CPD resources for personal gain. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegation that he used CPD resources for personal gain. The Officer agreed through mediation to accept a one (1) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1030851
On October 9, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred on October 9, 2009 in the 16th District involving an off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer verbally abused the Complainant; harassed the Complainant by using his vehicle to block her vehicle in a parking space; threatened the
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY Page 1 of 13
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
Complainant with bodily harm on several occasions; and used CPD resources for personal gain. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegation that he used CPD resources for personal gain. The Officer agreed through mediation to accept a one (1) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1043067
On January 31, 2011, a complaint was. registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on January 31, 2011 in the 8th District involving an off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer grabbed and squeezed the Victim's throat; was subsequently arrested and charged with Domestic Battery-Bodily Harm; and was found to be intoxicated when a Breathalyzer Test was administered. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for all allegations and a ten (10) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1014476
On February 26, 2008, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred in the 25th District on August 10, 2006, involving five on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officers (Officers A, B, C, D, and E). It was alleged that Officers A and B entered and searched the Complainants' (Complainants A, B, C, and D) residence without permission or warrant; directed profanities towards Complainants A and B; directed derogatory comments towards Complainants A and B; handcuffed Complainants A and B too tightly; completed false police reports on Complainant A; questioned Complainants C and D without consent (both minors); threatened to call the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) and have minor Complainants C and D removed from the home; took Complainant B's cell phone and threw it to the floor; threw items from the cabinets and damaged religious statues; and used personal funds for the purchase of a controlled substance. It was alleged that Officers C and D entered and searched the Complainants' residence without permission or warrant; directed profanities towards Complainants A and B; directed racial comments towards Complainants A and B; handcuffed Complainants A and B too tightly; completed false police reports on Complainant A; threw items from the cabinets and damaged religious statues; and stated "We got the wrong crack house." It was also alleged that Officer E told Complainant B that there were videos of Complainant A selling drugs. Based on statements from the accused Officers and Complainants, department reports, court and OEMC records, and photographs, IPRA
Page 2 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
recommended to "NOT SUSTAINED" the allegations that Officers A and B entered and searched the Complainants' residence without permission or warrant; directed profanities towards Complainants A and B; directed derogatory comments towards Complainants A and B; handcuffed Complainants A and B too tightly; completed false police reports on Complainant A; questioned minor Complainants C and D without consent; threatened to call DCFS and have minor Complainants C and D removed from the home; took Complainant B's cell phone and threw it on the floor; and threw items from the cabinets and damaged religious statutes. IPRA recommended to "NOT SUSTAINED" the allegations that Officers C and D entered and searched the residence without permission or warrant; directed profanities towards Complainants A and B; directed racial comments towards Complainants A and B; handcuffed Complainants A and B too tightly; completed false police reports on Complainant A; threw items from the cabinets and damaged religious statues; and stated "We got the wrong crack house." IPRA recommended to "NOT SUSTAINED" the allegation that Officer E told Complainant B that there were videos of Complainant A selling drugs. IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegation that Officers A and B used their personal funds for the purchase of a controlled substance. IPRA recommended a ten (10) day suspension for Officers A and B.
Log/C.R. No. 1025809
On April 25, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on April 24, 2009 in the 3rd District involving two on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officers (Officers A and B) and an on-duty CPD Lieutenant (Lieutenant C). It was alleged that Officers A and B pulled the Victim's arms through a fence causing the Victim to hit his head and kicked the Victim about the head and body. It was further alleged that Officer A kicked the Victim about the legs. It was alleged that Lieutenant C failed to initiate a complaint regarding the alleged misconduct of Officers A and B. Based on interviews with the accused Members, the Victim and witnesses, police reports, photographs, and OEMC and court records, IPRA recommended a finding of "UNFOUNDED" for the allegation that Officer A pulled the Victim's arms through a fence causing him to hit his head. IPRA recommended to "NOT SUSTAINED" the allegation that Officer A kicked the Victim about the head and body. IPRA recommended a finding of "EXONERATED" for the allegation that Officer A kicked the Victim about the legs. IPRA recommended a finding of "UNFOUNDED" for the allegations that Officer B pulled the Victim's arms through the
Page 3 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
fence causing the Victim to hit his head and kicked the Victim about the head and body. IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegation that Lieutenant C failed to initiate a complaint regarding the alleged misconduct of Officers A and B. IPRA recommended a written reprimand for Lieutenant C.
Log/C.R. No. 1032585
On December 16, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on December 16, 2009 in the 11th District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer was inattentive to duty when he accidentally discharged his weapon. Based on interviews with the accused Officer, photographs, and lab and department reports, IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegation that the Officer was inattentive to duty. IPRA recommended a one (1) day suspension for the Officer.
Log/C.R. No. 1053106
On April 5, 2012, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on April 5, 2012 in the 3rd District involving an off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer was inattentive to duty when she accidentally discharged her weapon. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" and a one (1) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1050607
On December 10, 2011, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on December 10, 2011 in the 10th District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer breached and entered the wrong apartment when executing a search warrant. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" and a "Violation Noted."
Log/C.R. No. 1048463
On September 13, 2011, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on September 13, 2011 in the 12th District involving one off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer (Officer A) and one on-duty CPD Officer (Officer B), who were previously in a relationship. It was alleged that Officer A used abusive language towards Officer B. It was alleged that Officer B swung his cane at Officer A in a threatening
Page 4 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
manner; verbally threatened Officer A; used abusive language towards Officer A; and provided a false statement to IPRA. Based on statements from the accused Officers, witnesses, security videos, and OEMC records, IPRA recommended a finding of "UNFOUNDED" for the allegation that Officer A used abusive language towards Officer B. IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegations that Officer B swung his cane at Officer A in a threatening manner; verbally threatened Officer A; used abusive language towards Officer A; and provided a false statement to IPRA. IPRA recommended separation for Officer B from the Department.
Log/C.R. No. 1050541
On December 6, 2011, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred on December 6, 2011 and December 13, 2011 in the 8th District involving an off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer committed the offense of Endangering the Life/Health of a Child on December 6, 2011 and was arrested and charged with Endangering the Life/Health of a Child on December 13, 2011. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for both allegations and a one (1) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1032704
On December 22, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred on November 17, 2009, June 20, 2010, July 18, 2010, and September 21, 2010 in the 16th District involving one on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer (Officer A) and one off-duty CPD Officer (Complainant Officer B). It was alleged that Officer A verbally abused Complainant Officer B during a phone conversation; provided false information to her supervisor in order to gain permission to pick up her minor child from school while on duty and in a marked squad car outside of her district of assignment; operated the marked squad car in emergency mode without proper justification while on her way to pick up her minor child; failed to notify the Office of Emergency Management and Communications (OEMC) as to her location or assignment while on her way to pick up her minor child; and placed the minor child in the front seat of the squad car on November 17, 2009. It was also alleged that Officer A left voicemail messages for Complainant C and Complainant Officer B that were verbally abusive and profane in nature on June 20, 2010. It was further alleged that Officer A provided her superior with false information in order to
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY Page 5 of 13
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
receive permission to retrieve her minor child and transport her in a squad car; arrived at Complainant Officer B's residence while on duty, in an unmarked vehicle and demanded custody of the minor child Officer A has in common with Complainant Officer B; and attempted to impede Complainant Officer B's effort to learn the identity of the officers that accompanied Officer A to his residence on July 18, 2010. Finally, it was alleged Officer A left her district of assignment and the Chicago city limits while on duty and in an unmarked department vehicle on September 21, 2010. Based upon a mediation, Officer A agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegations that Officer A left voicemail messages for Complainant C and Complainant Officer B that were verbally abusive and profane in nature on June 20, 2010 and left her district of assignment and the Chicago city limits while on duty and in an unmarked CPD vehicle on September 21, 2010. Officer A agreed through mediation to accept a one (1) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1026082
On May 5, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on May 4, 2009 in the 7th District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Sergeant (Sergeant A) and two on-duty CPD Officers (Officers B and C). It was alleged that Officers B and C struck the Complainant with a CPD vehicle; failed to report a traffic accident; failed to obtain medical treatment for the Complainant; failed to remain on the scene after striking the Complainant; and failed to report misconduct. It was also alleged that Sergeant A failed to register a complaint. Based on statements from the accused Officers, Complainant and witnesses, photographs, Chicago Fire Department and CPD reports, and medical and OEMC records, IPRA recommended a finding of "UNFOUNDED" for the allegations that Officers B and C struck the Complainant with a CPD vehicle; failed to report a traffic accident; failed to obtain medical treatment for the Complainant; failed to remain on the scene after striking the Complainant; and failed to report misconduct. Based upon a mediation, Sergeant A agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegation that he failed to register a complaint and a "Violation Noted".
Log/C.R. No. 1017385
On June 15, 2008, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on June 14, 2008 in the 2nd District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Sergeant. It was alleged that the Sergeant failed
Page 6 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
to give immediate notification after his involvement in a weapons discharge incident; failed to ensure that an arrest report was generated for a detained subject; and failed to follow the Department's Use of Deadly Force Policy when he fired at an unarmed subject. Based upon a mediation, the Sergeant agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegations that the Sergeant failed to give immediate notification after his involvement in a weapons discharge incident and failed to ensure that an arrest report was generated for a detained subject. The Sergeant agreed through mediation to accept a one (1) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1022580
On December 20, 2008, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on December 20, 2008 in the 22nd District involving an off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer and Victim, who were in a relationship. It was alleged that the Officer struck the Victim about the face and/or threw her in the snow; struck the Victim on the mouth while inside a vehicle; verbally abused the Victim; and bit the Victim on the thigh. Based on statements from the accused Officer and the Victim, photographs and Department reports, IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegations that the Officer struck the Victim about the face and/or threw her in the snow; struck the Victim on the mouth while inside a vehicle; verbally abused the Victim; and bit the Victim on the thigh. IPRA recommended a fifteen (15) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1014082
On February 10, 2008, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred on December 17, 2007, February 9, 2008, February 10, 2008, and other unknown dates in 2007 and 2008 in the 8th District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Sergeant (Sergeant A) and an off-duty CPD Officer (Officer B). It was alleged that Officer B harassed and stalked Complainant C (his estranged wife) by following her home in his vehicle, repeatedly circling her block, and staring at her in a menacing manner on February 10, 2008; harassed Complainant C by following her home and repeatedly circling her block in his vehicle on February 9, 2008; physically abused her by throwing a glass of water at her, slapping her on the face and throwing a metal chair at her in July 2007; harassed Complainant C by making numerous unwanted phone calls to her cell phone and sending her disturbing letters causing her to fear for her safety since October 2007; harassed Complainant C by following her and stalking her on
Page 7 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
unknown dates; and caused her to be in fear of receiving bodily harm by statements he made to her on an unknown date. It was further alleged that Officer B followed Complainant D (Officer A's stepson), causing him to call 911 to summon police to his residence and to report that he was being followed by Officer A on December 17, 2007 and another unknown date in December 2007. It was also alleged that Sergeant A failed to register a log number on behalf of Complainant D on December 17, 2007; failed to generate a case report on December 17, 2007; failed to register a log number on behalf of Complainant D on an unknown date in December 2007; and failed to generate a case report when summoned to Complainant D's residence on an unknown date in December 2007. Based on statements from the accused members, Complainants and witnesses, and OEMC and Department records, IPRA recommended to "NOT SUSTAIN" the allegations that Officer B harassed Complainant C by following her and stalking her on unknown dates; caused Complainant C to be in fear of receiving bodily harm by statements he made to her on an unknown date; and harassed Complainant C by making numerous unwanted phone calls to her cell phone since October 2007. IPRA recommended a finding of "UNFOUNDED" for the allegation that Officer B had sent Complainant C disturbing letters causing her to fear for her safety since October 2007. Further, IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegations that Officer B harassed and stalked Complainant C by following her home in his vehicle, repeatedly circling her block, and staring at her in a menacing manner on February 10, 2008; harassed Complainant C by following her home and repeatedly circling her block in his vehicle on February 9, 2008; physically abused Complainant C by throwing a glass of water at her, slapping her on the face and throwing a metal chair at her in July 2007; and followed Complainant D on December 17, 2007. IPRA recommended a finding to "NOT SUSTAIN" the allegations that Sergeant A failed to register a log number on behalf of Complainant D and failed to generate a case report on an unknown date in December 2007. IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegations that Sergeant A failed to register a log number on behalf of Complainant D and failed to generate a case report on December 17, 2007. IPRA recommended a written reprimand for Sergeant A and a ten (10) day suspension for Officer B.
Log/C.R. No. 1039847
On September 15, 2010, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on September 15, 2010 in the 4th District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the
Page 8 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
Officer engaged in an unjustified argument with the Complainant; pushed the Complainant on the arm; and issued the Complainant a false parking ticket. Based on statements from the accused Officer and the Complainant, a photograph, and Department and OEMC records, IPRA recommended to "NOT SUSTAIN" the allegations that the Officer engaged in an unjustified argument with the Complainant and pushed the Complainant on the arm. IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegation that the Officer issued the Complainant a false parking ticket. IPRA recommended a two (2) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1036412
On May 19, 2010, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred on December 5, 2008 in the 8th and 11th Districts involving a Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that while on duty, the Officer left the district without permission while an investigation was being conducted by the CPD; failed to submit a report regarding a lock-up incident; and later, while off duty, the Officer failed to obey a direct order given by a supervisor. Based on statements from the accused Officer, Complainant and witnesses, and Department records, IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegations that while on duty, the Officer left the district without permission while an investigation was being conducted by the CPD; failed to submit a report regarding a lock-up incident; and later, while off duty, the Officer failed to obey a direct order given by a supervisor. IPRA recommended a ten (10) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1025239
On April 3, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred on April 2, 2009 in the 15th District involving two on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officers (Officers A and B). It was alleged that Officer A stopped, detained, and/or handcuffed the Victim without justification; pointed a firearm at the Victim without justification; threatened to shoot the Victim; pushed and/or slammed the Victim against a wall and onto the ground without justification; forcibly kicked the Victim's feet apart; threw the Victim's personal property to the ground and/or kicked his shoes into the street; failed to complete a Field Contact Card for the Victim and an unknown male; and later provided IPRA with false statements. It was alleged that Officer B stopped, detained, and/or handcuffed the Victim without justification; pushed the Victim against the wall; threw the Victim's personal property to the ground; failed to complete a Field Contact Card for the
Page 9 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
Victim and an unknown male; observed misconduct by a fellow Officer and failed to report it to the CPD; and later provided IPRA with false statements. Based on statements from the accused Officers, Department and medical records, and surveillance video footage, IPRA recommended to "NOT SUSTAIN" the allegation that Officer A threatened to shoot the Victim. IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegations that Officer A stopped, detained, and/or handcuffed the Victim without justification; pointed a firearm at the Victim without justification; pushed and/or slammed the Victim against a wall and onto the ground without justification; forcibly kicked the Victim's feet apart; threw the Victim's personal property to the ground and/or kicked his shoes into the street; failed to complete a Field Contact Card for the Victim and an unknown male; and later provided IPRA with false statements. IPRA further recommended a finding of "UNFOUNDED" for the allegations that Officer B pushed the Victim against the wall and threw the Victim's personal property to the ground. IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegations that Officer B stopped, detained, and/or handcuffed the Victim without justification; failed to complete a Field Contact Card for the Victim and an unknown male; observed misconduct by a fellow Officer and failed to report it to the CPD; and later provided IPRA with false statements. IPRA recommended separation from the department for both Officers A and B.
Log/C.R. No. 1025073
On March 28, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred on March 26, 2009 in the 25th District involving two on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officers (Officers A and B). It was alleged that Officer A directed profanities at the Complainant; pushed and/or took the Complainant to the ground without justification; failed to complete a Tactical Response Report (TRR) for the Complainant; falsely-arrested the Complainant; completed false CPD reports relative to the Complainant's arrest; later provided IPRA with a false statement; and brought discredit upon the CPD by his overall actions during the incident. It was alleged that Officer B observed and/or was aware of misconduct by a fellow Officer and failed to report it to the CPD; falsely arrested the Complainant; completed false CPD reports relative to the Complainant's arrest; and brought discredit upon the CPD by her overall actions during the incident. Based on statements from the accused Officers, Complainant and witnesses, surveillance video footage; and OEMC and Department reports, IPRA recommended a finding of "NOT SUSTAINED" for the allegation that Officer A
Page 10 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
directed profanities at the Complainant. IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegations that Officer A pushed and/or took the Complainant to the ground without justification; failed to complete a TRR; falsely arrested the Complainant; completed false CPD reports relative to the Complainant's arrest; later provided IPRA with a false statement; and brought discredit upon the CPD by his overall actions during the incident. IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegations that Officer B observed and/or was aware of misconduct by a fellow Officer and failed to report it to the CPD; falsely arrested the Complainant; completed false CPD reports relative to the Complainant's arrest; and brought discredit upon the CPD by her overall actions during the incident. IPRA recommended separation from the department for both Officers A and B.
Log/C.R. No. 1033610
On February 2, 2010, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on February 2, 2010 in the 12th District involving a off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Sergeant. It was alleged that while off duty working as a security officer, the Sergeant put the Complainant in a headlock and displayed a knife. Based on statements from the accused Sergeant, Complainant and witnesses, photographs and department reports, IPRA recommended to "SUSTAIN" the allegations that the Sergeant put the Complainant in a headlock and displayed a knife. IPRA recommended a five (5) day suspension for the accused Sergeant.
Log/C.R. No. 1023952
On February 9, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on February 9, 2009 in the 2nd District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Sergeant. It was alleged that the Sergeant failed to ensure that a case report was completed for a domestic incident and failed to initiate a Complaint Register Log number when informed of misconduct. Based upon a mediation, the Sergeant agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for both allegations and a "Violation Noted".
Log/C.R. No. 1034490
On March 11, 2010, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on March 10, 2010 in the 5th District involving an off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Sergeant. It was alleged that the Sergeant was
Page 11 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
intoxicated inside his residence and caused a domestic disturbance by being verbally abusive and throwing things about the residence. Based upon a mediation, the Sergeant agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for both allegations and a written reprimand and mandatory alcohol counseling.
Log/C.R. No. 1041705
On November 26, 2010, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on November 25, 2010 in the 26th District involving an off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer engaged in a verbal altercation with two Complainants (Complainants A and B); kicked Complainant A on the leg; struck Complainant B on the face; shoved Complainant B; and was intoxicated, arrested, and charged with Battery. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for all allegations and a twenty (20) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1053659
On April 29, 2012 a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on April 29, 2012 in the 11th District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer accidentally discharged her taser. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegation and a "Violation Noted".
Log/C.R. No. 1031858
On November 15, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred on November 15, 2009 in the 3rd District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Sergeant (Sergeant A) and an on-duty CPD Officer (Officer B). It was alleged that Sergeant A failed to ensure that Officer B completed a Contact Card and failed to ensure that Officer B completed a Tactical Response Report (TRR). It was further alleged that Officer B struck an unknown subject on the head during a street stop; failed to complete a Contact Card; and failed to complete a TRR. Based upon a mediation, Sergeant A agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegation that he failed to ensure that Officer B completed a TRR. The Sergeant agreed through mediation to accept a "Violation Noted". Based upon a
Page 12 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
MAY 2013
mediation, Officer B agreed through mediation to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for all allegations and a "Violation Noted".
Page 13 of 13
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
JUNE 2013
Log/C.R. No. 1032468
On December 12, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on December 11, 2009 in the 8th District involving an off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer accidentally discharged his weapon. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" and a "Violation Noted".
Log/C.R. No. 1016380
On May 8, 2008, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred on May 8, 2008, May 9, 2008, and an unspecified date in .the 6th District involving two off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officers (Officer A and Victim Officer B). It was alleged that Officer A verbally abused Victim A (her mother), on May 8, 2008. It was also alleged that during a domestic altercation, Officer A struck Victim Officer B (her brother) on the head with her fist; scratched Victim Officer B on the face and neck; verbally abused Victim Officer B; and was subsequently arrested for Domestic Battery on May 9, 2008. It was alleged that Officer A stole Victim A's Social Security check and charged trips on Victim A's credit card without her permission. It was alleged that Victim Officer B physically abused Officer A; verbally abused Officer A; and engaged in conduct which brought discredit upon the Department on May 9, 2008. Based on statements from the accused Officers, victims and witnesses, photographs, and OEMC, Department and court records, IPRA recommended to "NOT SUSTAIN" the allegations that Victim Officer B physically abused Officer A; verbally abused Officer A; and engaged in conduct which brought discredit upon the Department on May 9, 2008. Based upon a mediation, Officer A agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegations that she scratched Victim Officer B on the face and neck and was subsequently arrested for Domestic Battery on May 9, 2008. Officer A agreed through mediation to accept a suspension of two (2) days.
Log/C.R. No. 1029918
On May 8, 2008, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding incidents that occurred between October 2, 2009 and October 16, 2009 in the 2nd District involving two off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officers (Officer A and Complainant Officer B). It was alleged that Officer A violated an Order of Protection on numerous dates and times by
Page 1 of 5
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
JUNE 2013
sending Complainant Officer B (her brother) text messages, e-mails and phone communications between October 2, 2009 and October 16, 2009. Based upon a mediation, Officer A agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" and a three (3) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1048865
On September 27, 2011, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on September 27, 2011 in the 13th District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer accidentally discharged his taser. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" and a "Violation Noted".
Log/C.R. No. 1058351
On November 11, 2012, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on November 11, 2012 in the 22nd District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer accidentally discharged his taser while in pursuit of a juvenile subject. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" and a "Violation Noted".
Log/C.R. No. 1029834
On September 4, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on September 4, 2009 in the 22nd District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer failed to maintain control of his weapon by accidentally discharging it. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" and a "Written Reprimand".
Log/C.R. No. 1051600
On February 1, 2012, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on February 1, 2012 in the 7th District involving an on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the Officer accidentally discharged his weapon twice. Based upon a mediation, the Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" and a three (3) day suspension.
Page 2 of 5
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
JUNE 2013
Log/C.R. No. 1056878
On September 6, 2012, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on September 6, 2012 in the 4th District involving two on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officers (Complainant Officer A and Complainant Officer B). It was alleged that Complainant Officer A engaged in an unjustified verbal altercation with Complainant Officer B; physically maltreated Complainant Officer B in that he punched him; and engaged in conduct which brought disrespect upon the Department. It was alleged that Complainant Officer B engaged in an unjustified verbal altercation with Complainant Officer A; physically maltreated Complainant Officer A in that he punched him; and engaged in conduct which brought disrespect upon the Department. Based upon a mediation, Complainant Officer A agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for all allegations and a one (1) day suspension. Based upon a mediation, Complainant Officer B agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for all allegations and a one (1) day suspension.
Log/C.R. No. 1032760
On December 26, 2009, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on December 26, 2009 in the 7th District involving eight on-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officers (Officers A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H) and an on-duty CPD Sergeant (Sergeant I). It was alleged that Officer A hit Victim A on the head with a bat; punched Victim A in the stomach; and kneed Victim A in the neck. It was alleged that Officer B verbally abused Complainant Victim B; referred to Complainant B using racial slurs; punched Victim A; and kneed Victim A. It was alleged that Officers C, D, E and F threw Victim C to the ground and beat him; threw Victim D to the ground and beat him; and threw Victim E to the ground and beat him. It was alleged that Officers G and H punched Victim A in the stomach; kneed Victim A in the neck; threw Victim C to the ground and beat him; threw Victim D to the ground and beat him; and threw Victim E to the ground and beat him. It was alleged that Sergeant I failed to register a complaint. Based on statements from the accused members and victims, medical records, photographs, Department reports, IPRA recommended a finding of "UNFOUNDED" for the allegation that Officer A hit Victim A on the head with a bat. IPRA recommended a finding of "UNFOUNDED" for the allegation that Officer B punched and kneed Victim A. IPRA recommended a finding of "UNFOUNDED" for the allegation that Officers C, D, E and F threw Victims C, D, and E to the
Page 3 of 5
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
JUNE 2013
ground and beat them. IPRA recommended a finding of "UNFOUNDED" for the allegations that Officers G and H punched Victim A in the stomach; kneed Victim A in the neck; and threw Victims C, D and E to the ground and beat them. IPRA recommended to "NOT SUSTAIN" the allegations that Officer A punched Victim A in the stomach and kneed Victim A in the neck. IPRA recommended to "NOT SUSTAIN" the allegations that Officer B verbally abused Complainant B and referred to her using racial slurs. Based upon a mediation, Sergeant I agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegation that he failed to register a complaint. Sergeant I agreed through mediation to accept a "Violation Noted".
Log/C.R. No. 1034730
On March 18, 2010, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on March 18, 2010 in the 6th District involving an off-duty Chicago Police Department (CPD) Officer. It was alleged that the accused Officer stalked the Complainant, with whom the Officer had previously been in a relationship, by following her vehicle in his own vehicle; displayed a gun to the Complainant and making threatening statements; directed profanity at the Complainant; intentionally blocked the Complainant's vehicle with his own vehicle; harassed the Complainant by ringing the doorbell of her residence after she requested no contact with her; harassed the Complainant by repeatedly calling her residence after she requested he have no contact with her; harassed the Complainant by going to her residence and ringing the doorbell after she requested he have no contact with her, which resulted in the Officer's arrest for Telephone Harassment and Aggravated Assault; and stalked the Complainant by watching her residence and then questioning her about visitors and relationships. Based upon a mediation, the accused Officer agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegations that he harassed the Complainant by repeatedly calling her residence after she requested he have no contact with her and harassed the Complainant by going to her residence and ringing the doorbell after she requested he have no contact with her, which resulted in the Officer's arrest for Telephone Harassment and Aggravated Assault. The accused Officer agreed through mediation to accept a written reprimand.
Log/C.R. No. 1046609
On July 1, 2011, a complaint was registered with the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), regarding an incident that occurred on June 15, 2011 in the 5th District involving two on-duty Chicago Police
Page 4 of 5
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Abstracts of Sustained Cases
JUNE 2013
Department (CPD) Officers (Officers A and B). It was alleged Officer A directed profanities at the Victim; struck the Victim on the right shoulder with a taser; struck the Victim on the back of the head with a taser; punched the Victim about the back and left shoulder; placed his foot on the Victim's neck and held him to the ground; placed his knee on the Victim's back and held him to the ground; pulled the Victim from the ground by the handcuffs; failed to inventory or return the Victim's Driver's License and State ID; physically abused the Victim; and failed to complete a Tactical Response Report (TRR). It was alleged Officer B directed profanities at the Victim; forcefully tackled the Victim to the ground; slammed the Victim to the ground; kneed the Victim in the back; placed his foot on the Victim's neck and held him to the ground; placed his knee on the Victim's back and held him to the ground; punched the Victim about the back and left shoulder; pulled the Victim up from the ground by the handcuffs; physically abused the Victim; and failed to complete a TRR. Based upon a mediation, Officer A agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegation that he failed to complete a TRR. Officer A agreed through mediation to accept a "Violation Noted". Based upon a mediation, Officer B agreed to accept IPRA's finding of "SUSTAINED" for the allegation that he failed to complete a TRR. Officer B agreed through mediation to accept a "Violated Noted".
Page 5 of 5
Created by INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY