Civilian Police Review Board (CPRB) Meeting

@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

@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/

Here is the full agenda for today’s @ClevelandOPS meeting:
https://cleveland.documenters.org/documents/cprb-meeting-agenda-4-19-2021-56495/
#CLEpolice #Police #accountability #localgov

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

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

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

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

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.)

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.”

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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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

The allegation on Staskevich is determined unfounded.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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/