Citizen Complaints Against Officers
2008 2nd Quarter

All citizen complaints against officers are documented and investigated by the department’s supervisors. Once the investigation is complete it is reviewed by the Section Commander, Division Commander and then forwarded to the Office of the Chief where the decision is made as to the finding of the complaint. Complaints questioning the basis for a citation or arrest are not documented and those complainants are advised to go through the court system.

There are four different categories of complaint findings:

• Sustained - The investigation produced a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation did in fact occur and the action of the officer was improper.
• Not Sustained - The investigation failed to produce a preponderance of evidence to either prove or disprove the allegation.
• Exonerated - The allegation in fact did occur but the actions of the officer were legal, justified, proper, and in accordance with the law and the department’s policies and procedures.
• Unfounded - The allegation in fact did not occur, based on the evidence.

Throughout the 2nd quarter of 2008, the Sioux Falls Police Department responded to 22,079 calls for service. 5,571 traffic stops were made. 9,978 citations were issued 2,178 adult arrests and 566 juvenile arrests were made.

During this period, there were five citizen’s complaints against officers. The findings for these complaints are as follows:

• Sustained - 0
• Not Sustained - 1
• Exonerated - 0
• Unfounded - 3
• Pending - 1

The following is a summary of each of those complaints:

1. On 02-10-08, an officer stopped a vehicle for an equipment violation. Upon stopping the car, the officer could smell a strong odor of marijuana coming from inside. One of the occupants was eventually arrested for outstanding warrants. During the search of the suspect, his property was placed inside the patrol car for safe keeping. When the suspect was booked into the jail, he claimed to have more money than was booked in with him. The matter was investigated and there was nothing to indicate that the officer involved did anything incorrectly. This matter was unfounded.
   
   
2. On 02-24-08, officers were dispatched to Borrowed Bucks for a report of a male armed with a gun. Upon arrival at the scene officers determined that a male suspect had pointed a handgun at a crowd of people outside of the establishment. The handgun was taken from the suspect by Buck's staff. The suspect then took off running on foot and was seen possibly getting into a blue Honda. The car was later located on 41^st and stopped. The occupants of the vehicle were handcuffed for officer safety during the stop. A bag containing what appeared to be narcotics was found and the occupants were transported to jail for possession of a controlled substance. After the arrest, one of the occupants arrested claimed that his handcuffs had been placed on too tight. Investigation revealed that the officers properly placed the handcuffs on the suspects and followed department policy. This complaint was unfounded.
   
   
3. On 2-24-08, an officer arrested an individual. During the arrest, the defendants wallet was located in the front pocket of his sweatshirt. When he left jail, his wallet was not in his possessions. Initially the individual claimed that $500 was missing. After he retraced his steps it was an amount less than $50 that he thought was missing. An investigation of the incident revealed that the officer involved returned the wallet back to the suspect’s pocket. Attempts were made to re-contact the complainant, but he failed to return calls. This complaint was not sustained.
   
   
4. On 03-10-08, an individual was arrested for assault. The complainant claims that during the arrest that he was twisted in an aggressive manner which caused him leg pain. Investigation revealed that prior to and during the arrest, the complainant was running in the parking lot. At one point he was even balancing on the leg he claimed that officers injured. After review of the incident, this complaint was unfounded.
   
   
5. On 06-23-08, an individual called police seeking assistance to retrieve some property. When the incorrect property was retrieved this individual became agitated and disorderly. After attempts to calm him down failed, he was arrested for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. During the arrest, the officer involved had to physically restrain the individual until backup arrived. During this process, the individual received injuries consistent with his actions that were resisting the arrest. This matter is still an open investigation.