La Oficina de Fiscalización de la Policía publicó un memorándum en respuesta a las investigaciones conducidas por el departamento de Policía de Austin sobre las faltas de conducta de la policía durante las recientes manifestaciones contra la brutalidad policial. Estas investigaciones se ejecutaron como resultado de más de 300 quejas presentadas por el la Oficina de Fiscalización de la Policía.
Contenido del documento
Aviso: El siguiente texto fue extraído de un documento PDF para hacerlo más accesible. Este contenido generado por máquina puede contener errores de formato. El texto se mostrará en el idioma original del documento. En algunos casos, el texto no se cargará si el documento original es una imagen escaneada o si el texto no tiene capacidad de búsqueda. Para mirar la versión completa, favor de ver el documento PDF.
M E M O R A N D U M
Brian Manley, Chief of Police
Farah C. Muscadin, Director - Office of Police Oversight
August 12, 2020
SUBJECT: Protest Complaints
The Office of Police Oversight (OPO) has grave concerns about how the Austin Police Department
Internal Affairs Division (IA), specifically the protest investigation team, is processing complaints
related to the protests that began in May of this year. The purpose of this memo is to bring your
attention to these concerns and update you on the status of some of these complaints. I trust that
after these issues are brought to your attention you will intervene.
The OPO strongly objects to the manner in which the IA protest team is currently handling
complaints. It appears that the team of investigators assigned to handle the protest complaints are
limiting their investigations to those officers and allegations that have been specifically identified
rather than conducting a full and thorough investigation of each incident.
For example, if there is a complaint that a subject officer and a witness officer, while in a moving
vehicle, sprayed protesters with a chemical agent while the protesters were standing behind a
guardrail on IH-35, the OPO strongly believes that both the witness officer and the subject officer
should be fully investigated. IA has disagreed with this position and has stated that it would be
imprudent to investigate the witness officer because there is no policy that explicitly prohibits the
deployment of chemical agents from a moving vehicle.
Summary of IA Determinations
As of August 11, 2020, the OPO has been notified of the following:
2 protest complaints closed with D memos. These memos are written when APD believes
that none of the allegations rise to the level of a policy violation and believes that the
allegation is not true.
1 protest complaint closed via the Officer Final Classification Agreement (OFCA)
option with informal discipline. The stated purpose of the OFCA option is “to shorten
the investigative and discipline process time for minor complaints.”
An additional 4 protest complaints that IA has administratively closed. Here, this means
that there has been no investigation and APD either (1) believes that the allegations do not
rise to the level of a general order violation or (2) is closing the complaint at the discretion
of the Chief of Police or a designee.
The OPO Strongly Objects to the Determinations Made by IA in Each of These Seven
Complaint Closed via the OFCA Option
The complaint that was closed via the OFCA option involved allegations from a female
protester that an APD officer in full uniform looked her up and down and blew her a kiss
during the protests. She expressed that this made her feel sexually assaulted and scared.
The alleged conduct of this subject officer constituted a potential policy violation under
more than one policy that would have made the officer ineligible for the OFCA option.
IA did not investigate this incident; instead, the officer’s chain of command (COC)
allowed the officer to handle the allegation via the OFCA option and addressed this
conduct as a violation of only the Customer Service and Community Relations policy.
The COC disciplined the officer with an oral reprimand (i.e., informal discipline), which
the OPO objected to. The officer then retired a few days after the reprimand was given.
The actions of this officer’s COC likely thwarted the complaint process to facilitate the
officer’s unobstructed transition into retirement.
Complaints Closed as D Memos
Neither of the incidents closed as D memos were investigated; the allegations were
reviewed by IA and closed.
o One incident involved a woman who was arrested and allegedly touched
o Another incident alleged that two officers in front of APD headquarters were
behaving inappropriately while on protest duty.
Complaints Closed Administratively
IA has chosen to administratively close four complaints. The OPO objects to the
administrative closure of these complaints due to the lack of investigation.
o One complaint was closed because the complainant hired an attorney and stopped
o Another complaint was closed because the video that the complainant provided did
not identify any specific APD officer.
o A third complaint was closed because the name of the identified officer provided
by the complainant did not match records on that exact date.
o The fourth complaint was closed because IA determined it was a third-party
complaint, ignoring the initial allegations that the complainant made about his own
experience and injuries sustained during the protests.
People formulate their opinions about systems based upon the extent to which they perceive that
system’s processes to be fair. APD has an opportunity in this moment to rebuild trust with the
community by demonstrating that the complaint process works and that APD can thoroughly and
fairly investigate its own employees. The only way to do that, though, is to ensure that these
complaints are actually investigated.
APD should handle all complaints through the lens of procedural justice and the pivotal role it
plays. Such a lens is especially important when the complaints being processed relate to
encounters that community members had with APD officers while protesting issues surrounding
police misconduct. The manner in which IA is currently handling community complaints will do
the exact opposite of achieving procedural justice and instead solidify an already pervasive belief
that fair investigations cannot happen when officers are investigating other officers.
The OPO has submitted over 300 formal complaints to IA related to the protests. As a result,
your intervention into the IA protest team’s handling of these complaints is urgently necessary in
order to appropriately address the concerns we have raised and ensure that each of these
complaints is judiciously processed. I look forward to hearing from you about the immediate
steps that will be taken to ensure that all complaints are investigated thoroughly and fairly.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Farah C. Muscadin, Director
Office of Police Oversight
Spencer Cronk, City Manager
Nuria Rivera-Vandermyde, Deputy City Manager
Rey Arellano, Assistant City Manager