Editorial
Police punishment system is outdated
Comparative discipline isn't working for the DPD. We hope the department can come up with a standards-based system.
By The Denver Post Editorial Board
Posted:08/22/2007 01:00:00 AM MDT
An overhaul of the Denver Police Department's discipline system is long overdue.
The compendium of bad actors and light punishments detailed in a Sunday Denver Post story by Christopher N. Osher makes that clear.
That's why we were glad to see city Safety Manager Al LaCabe pushing forward with a proposal to replace Denver's "comparative discipline" system with one based on standards.
Change is necessary, but it will be politically difficult. The current precedent-based system forces the department to mete out discipline consistent with prior punishments. It was meant to guard against unequal punishment.
But problems have arisen when the department has been forced to rely upon precedents set by prior administrations - some of them operating in more lenient eras. Another fundamental problem is that no two cases are exactly alike and the forced reliance on precedent has resulted in serious cases going without meaningful penalty. LaCabe wants to replace that structure with one that would set specific punishment guidelines for specific department violations.
The details still are being hashed out, but the system would mean that presumptive discipline would be set for certain offenses. There also would be set guidelines for evidence and mitigating factors, such as an officer's record, to be considered.
Denver's comparative discipline rule has been targeted for reform six times before, but has survived. It is used in other police departments, but by and large it isn't applied with the same strict parameters that it is here. Former Mayor Wellington Webb has said that one of his greatest regrets is his inability to change that rule.
The chief opponent of reform is the city's police union. Union supporters contend the rule protects against other factors, such as racism or sexism, coming into play when disciplinary decisions are being made.
Another issue that likely will arise is the potential that the Denver City Charter would have to be changed to reform the system.
The charter says that when the city's Civil Service Commission reviews an appeal of a disciplinary decision, the commission has to decide whether the punishment is "consistent with discipline received by other members of the department under similar circumstances."
LaCabe, the safety director, has optimistically said he thinks the system can be changed without altering the charter, which would have to go before voters. Even if the charter has to be modified, it's a political battle worth fighting.
Two high-profile police shootings in the last four years have brought the issue into focus.
After Officer James Turney shot and killed a mentally disabled teen, Paul Childs, in July 2003, LaCabe had suspended him for 10 months. The action has undergone various appeals - and still is under appeal - but at one point Turney had received only a five-day suspension and a one-day fine for the shooting. Meanwhile, the city reached a $1.325 million settlement with the Childs family.
A year later, Officer Ranjan Ford Jr. shot and killed Frank Lobato as he sat in bed. Ford's original 90-day suspension was reduced to a 50 days.
The story published in Sunday's Post detailed several officers who had severe and repeated incidents on their record but remained on the force.
The examples included Karl Coleman, who has been investigated on 50 internal offenses and disciplined 21 times. His transgressions included a May 2002 drunken driving crash in which he pleaded guilty. He remains at DPD, though he's working at headquarters answering phones.
LaCabe has been struggling with these sorts of situations as he has tried to reform disciplinary procedures and build trust with the community and within the rank and file.
It's an important mission, and we look forward to seeing the full proposal in the coming months.