Civilian Police Review Board (CPRB) Meeting

Cleveland Office of Professional Standards
Criminal Justice

Cleveland, OH (Directions)

Remote

NOTE: This meeting is scheduled to be 8 hours long. However, OPS has informed us that this meeting will more likely be 2 to 5 hours long.

The CPRB currently meets on the second Tuesday of every month at 10:00am. Agendas are subject to revision and are handed out the day of the meeting.

Meetings are streamed live on the Office of Professional Standards’ YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/channel/UCjvji5gYnraY74Emrj6N5wg

About the Civilian Police Review Board: The CPRB is comprised of 9 members. The Mayor appoints five members and the City Council appoints the remaining four members. In an effort to be representative of all of Cleveland’s diverse communities, each of the police districts is represented by at least one member who resides in that district. Additionally, at least one member of the Board is between the ages of 18 and 30 at the time of appointment.

More Information: www.city.cleveland.oh.us/CityofCleveland/Home/Government/CityAgencies/OPS/CPRB

Check the source website for additional information

Reporting

Edited and summarized by the Cleveland - OH Documenters Team

Note-taking by Marvetta Rutherford

CPRB presents recommendations in Chappman case, despite prior CPD discipline of 2 officers

Note-taking by McKenzie Merriman

CPRB presents recommendations in Chappman case, despite prior CPD discipline of 2 officers

Live reporting by Gennifer Harding-Gosnell

CPRB presents recommendations in Chappman case, despite prior CPD discipline of 2 officers

Gennifer with a G

Good morning, #Cleveland! I’ll be covering the Civilian Police Review Board meeting today starting at 10 a.m. for @cledocumenters #CLEdocumenters & @NeighborUpCle. You can watch along on the Office of Professional Standard’s YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjvji5gYnraY74Emrj6N5wg

08:22 AM Apr 13, 2021 CDT

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 2/64

@cledocumenters @NeighborUpCle Have questions? Think we got something wrong? Send any enquiries on the meeting or these tweets to @cledocumenters or email us at lcaswell@neighborhoodgrants.org

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 3/64

@cledocumenters @NeighborUpCle The chase that led to the death of 13-year-old East Clevelander, Tamia Chappman, is atop the agenda. According to @CLEdocumenters notes of the March mtg, the case was “moved to the April agenda due to the amount of information and gravity of the case.”
https://cleveland.documenters.org/documents/cprb-meeting-minutes-3-09-2021-56496/

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 5/64

Plot twist - as of yesterday, @CLEpolice has handed down its punishment to two officers prior to today’s mtg & says their discipline will stand regardless of CPRB recommendations.
https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2021/04/city-disciplines-two-officers-in-chase-that-ended-in-13-year-old-tamia-chappmans-death-ahead-of-citizen-complaint-boards-hearing.html

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 6/64

Shout-out to @Doug_Pitorak & @RachelDissell for their information-gathering so @cledocumenters are then able to pass all this background information to you. https://t.co/Iyq8AeVTKv

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 7/64

Cleveland resident David Lima is presenting as a public commenter regarding the Tamia Chappman case.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 8/64

Investigator David Hammons is now presenting the details of the chase.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 9/64

Hammons notes the officers & supervisors were not familiar with area they were carrying out the pursuit, & decisions were not made with regard to context (time of day, schools in the area, etc.)

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 10/64

Hammons found in his investigation into Sergeant M. Chapman that the AVL (Automatic Vehicle Locator) system was not utilised, “they [officers] were essentially blindfolded, and deprived of their ability to see.”

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 11/64

According to Hammons’ investigation, Sgt. Chapman & Lt. Farmer relied on radio communications to determine the location and speed of vehicles involved in the pursuit. The suspect’s vehicle was traveling 90 mph, the fastest pursuit vehicle behind him was traveling 88 mph.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 12/64

Hammons is presenting his findings by one individual officer at a time, and by each individual charge of a violation of the General Police Orders, the operations manual for all policing situations.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 13/64

Hammons’ investigation shows confusion by officers & supervisors over who was authorised to join the pursuit, called a violation of “self-dispatch”.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 14/64

Other GPO violations Hammons’ investigation found included Failure To Terminate Pursuit, Excessive Speed, and Failure To Yield.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 15/64

Hammons: “As a result, OPS recommends that all of the above allegations against all officers involved in this presentation be sustained.” https://t.co/ksjBCqTCB1

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 16/64

CPRB members are now asking questions of the investigation. Roslyn Quarto has opened a discussion of the procedure and decision-making. She says she does not understand how Officer P. Singh is charged with a Failure to Terminate if he was not the driver & had asked to slow down.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 17/64

The group is discussing at what point the officer is responsible for the pursuit if they are a passenger. Meeting Chair Roger Smith says there are communication responsibilities placed on the passenger that did not occur with PO Singh.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 18/64

CPRB member Michael Hess has asked if any of the officers received specialised, hands-on, or extended training on high-speed pursuits. Two officers were asked and said no beyond the Academy, and no others officers mentioned having received anything like that in their testimony.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 19/64

CPRB member Ernest Turner points out that a lack of familiarity with the area they were pursuing in seems to have significantly impacted this incident. Chair Roger Smith says the failure to utilise the AVL system made this situation significantly more difficult for officers.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 20/64

Hammons and Chair Smith explain there was confusion as to which officers were actually in pursuit vs. those who were just heading into the area to assist.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 21/64

The complainant, Ms. Mason, who’s daughter was also injured in this incident, and her atty, were invited to make a statement to the Board. The attorney is speaking now.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 22/64

Ms. Mason’s attorney states they believe these violations are evidence of a “bigger issue” with the Cleveland Police. “[There is] No accountability, and no care from the top all the way down to these officers.”

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 23/64

The Board is now making their recommendations. The allegation against Sgt. Chapman for Improper Procedure is sustained, that he failed to log-in to the AVL system, a violation of General Police Orders.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 24/64

The Board is voting on the recommended disciplinary action using the Disciplinary Matrix. A Group III violation was rejected. Group I was accepted, the lowest level of violation.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5651f9b5e4b08f0af890bd13/t/5d8109b27a152a6219032be9/1568737716132/Ex+A+-+Amended+Disciplinary+Matrix.pdf

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 25/64

The allegation against Officer C. Stipkovich, one of the drivers, for Improper Vehicle Pursuit is sustained. It is determined he did not terminate pursuit as he should have, showed no regard for safety, and used excessive speed. A Group I violation is recommended.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 26/64

Motion against Officer Singh for a Vehicle Pursuit violation has failed. The investigation found he did not notify a supervisor as a passenger in the car with Stipkovich though he had asked him to slow down, but it was not enough for the Board to support a violation.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 27/64

The allegation against Officer Stipkovich failed to yield to other officer vehicles involved in the pursuit. The motion is sustained. The recommendation is a Group I violation disciplinary action.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 28/64

The allegation against Stipkovich for Failing to Terminate the pursuit is considered addressed by the Board as part of the Failure To Yield disciplinary action.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 29/64

The Failure to Terminate allegation against Officer Singh is marked as addressed with the Board’s prior vote on his actions.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 30/64

The allegation against Sgt. Chapman for failing to order the termination of the pursuit is sustained. The Board recommends a Group I violation disciplinary action.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 31/64

The allegation against Lt. Farmer for failing to terminate the pursuit is sustained. A Group I violation is recommended.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 32/64

The allegation of a violation of Emergency Response Driving by Officer Stipkovich is sustained. The Board recommends a Group I disciplinary action.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 33/64

The allegation of a violation of Emergency Response Driving against Officer Singh is determined unfounded, as he was not the driver of the vehicle.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 34/64

The allegation of a Vehicle Pursuit violation on Sgt. Chapman on multiple vehicles is determined unfounded because only one vehicle was found to be actively chasing the suspect. This motion carries.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 35/64

The Emergency Response Driving allegation by Sgt. Chapman for failing to monitor his officers and the pursuit by not utilizing AVL. A Group I violation disciplinary action has been recommended.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 36/64

An allegation against Lt. Farmer for a violation of Emergency Response Driving for failing to monitor the AVL system. This motion is determined unfounded because there were no more than two vehicles involved in the chase, and the AVL is not required for any less.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 37/64

The allegation for a violation of Self-Dispatch against Officer M. Staskevich. Board Administrator Michael Graham wants to see this determined unfounded because the officer did not actually enter the pursuit, only entered the area. https://t.co/Cv7m1OdYsu

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 38/64

The allegation on Staskevich is determined unfounded.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 39/64

The allegation for a violation of Self-Dispatch against Officer B. Sabolik is determined unfounded.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 40/64

The allegation for a violation of Self-Dispatch against Officer J. Miller is sustained; the Board has determined he did pursue the suspect’s vehicle. A Group I disciplinary measure is recommended.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 41/64

The allegation against Officer Miller for a violation of Emergency Response Driving is sustained. A Group I violation is recommended.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 42/64

An allegation of a violation of Self-Dispatch against Det. Warnock is determined unfounded because the detective did not actively pursue the suspect’s vehicle.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 43/64

An allegation of a violation of Self-Dispatch against Officer J. Crivel is also determined unfounded because the officer did not actively pursue the suspect’s vehicle.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 44/64

The allegation of a violation of Self-Dispatch by Officer J. Dunn is also unfounded as he did not take direct part in the pursuit.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 45/64

The allegation against Sgt. Chapman for failing to determine the number of vehicles involved in the pursuit is determined unfounded.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 46/64

The board is moving on to the next case, one of Unprofessional Conduct. The complainant says he got an improper citation & was threatened with arrest by the officer in question if he didn’t sign the ticket. The Board has video evidence & determined the allegation unfounded.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 47/64

The allegations of Unprofessional Conduct against Officers, Lehman, Wagner, and Harhay was determined unfounded. The Board’s investigation showed all proper procedures and supervisory actions were followed.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 48/64

There is an allegation of Unprofessional Conduct against an officer for not wearing a face mask in the airport, and when asked about it, gave a sarcastic response. The Board finds there is insufficient evidence to support either the officer’s or complainant’s version of events.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 49/64

A combined allegation against three officers for Improper Search, Damaged Property, and Lack of Service by three complainants is now being considered. The investigation recommends exoneration of two of the allegations, and insufficient evidence for the Damaged Property complaint.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 50/64

Chair Michael Graham is recusing himself from voting on this case because he has worked with one of the detectives in question on a crime committed on his home street.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 51/64

A dispatcher has been accused of a social media violation. She posted on her private Facebook page about ‘hating Cleveland’, among other comments. She does ID herself on her page as an employee of CPD but denied in the interview with investigators that she made the post.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 52/64

Investigator Wynne and the Board are discussing the application of the personal social media policy for CPD to determine the dispatcher’s fault. https://t.co/EalpbVBKGB

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 53/64

This motion is sustained. The Board recommends a Group I violation.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 54/64

An allegation against a Cleveland police officer for a lack of service while investigating a suicide is determined unfounded.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 55/64

The Board is moving on to reviewing the Chief of Police’s disciplinary decisions. Any decisions the Board doesn’t agree with, they can file an appeal with the Public Safety Director.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 56/64

They are now reviewing a case of an Improper Tow. Chief Williams dismissed this charge saying the officer followed the signs. The Board moves to appeal this, as the street signs were shown to contain conflicting information.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 57/64

A case of an officer not charging a suspect fleeing the scene of an accident and an OVI. The Board moves to appeal this as the decision to dismiss was based on the time lapse in reporting the accident, but the investigation shows evidence may have still existed hours later.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 58/64

A case of two officers charged with Unprofessional Conduct & Lack of Service was dismissed by the Chief, saying the officers left for a higher priority situation, and upon return found a legal party. The Board wonders how that party was legal if it was on a vacant lot.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 59/64

There is some confusion with who’s property the party was on. Chief Williams did suspend one of the officers for one day. The Board accepts the Chief’s decision.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 60/64

A failure to investigate a crime by a Cleveland officer was determined a Group II violation by the Board, but the Chief chose to instill a Group I violation and letter. The Board has decided not to appeal this any further.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 61/64

A case alleging CPD Capt. J. Dziuba with violations of Excessive Force, Improper Citation & Improper Arrest - the Board recommended Group II and III violations on these charges but Safety Dir. Howard dismissed them, saying the officer acted reasonably.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 62/64

A Missing Property charge against Dziuba still stands, as well as a WCS violation for failing to activate his body cam and telling other officers to do the same. Dir. Howard issued a two-day suspension.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 63/64

No comments were made regarding Director Howard’s decisions. The meeting is adjourned.

Gennifer with a G @GenniferwithaG_ 64/64

This concludes my coverage of today’s @ClevelandOPS Civilian Police Review Board meeting for @cledocumenters & @NeighborUpCle. Visit the #CLEdocumenters website for ongoing coverage of local government meetings and happenings. https://cleveland.documenters.org/reporting/

Agency Information

Cleveland Office of Professional Standards

The Office of Professional Standards (OPS) is an independent agency within the City of Cleveland Department of Public Safety and is composed of civilian employees only. It has the responsibility of receiving and investigating non-criminal complaints filed by members of the public against sworn and non-sworn Cleveland Division of Police employees.

OPS is also empowered to make findings and recommend action to the Civilian Police Review Board (“CPRB”) regarding those complaints. The CPRB reviews misconduct complaints investigated by OPS and makes recommendations for resolution to the Chief of Police. Prior to recommending discipline or determining that a complaint warrants no action, the CPRB may hold a public hearing. Upon making its decision, the CPRB submits its findings and recommendations to the Chief of Police and notifies the complainant of the disposition.

The mission of OPS and CPRB is to increase accountability and improve public confidence in the police by receiving and fairly, thoroughly, objectively, and timely investigating and resolving misconduct complaints against Cleveland Division of Police employees.

As part of its mission, OPS is also empowered to make policy recommendations that will improve the citizen complaint process, increase understanding between the public and CDP employees, reduce the incidence of misconduct and reduce the risk of the use of force by CDP officers.

OPS and CPRB are committed to providing the community with an accessible and safe environment in which to file complaints and have their complaints heard.

More from this agency

Civilian Police Review Board Hearing

Cleveland Office of Professional Standards

Tuesday, April 8, 2025

9:00 a.m. EDT

Civilian Police Review Board Hearing

Cleveland Office of Professional Standards

Tuesday, May 13, 2025

9:00 a.m. EDT

Civilian Police Review Board Hearing

Cleveland Office of Professional Standards

Tuesday, June 10, 2025

9:00 a.m. EDT