Citizen Complaints Against Officers
2009 2^nd 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 2^nd quarter of 2009, the Sioux Falls Police Department responded to 21,547 calls for service. 6,799 traffic stops were made. 11,023 citations were issued 2,249 adult arrests and 523 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 - 0
Exonerated – 1

Unfounded - 5

The following is a summary of each of those complaints:

1. On 04-07-2009, a man called to complain that an officer was rude to him on the telephone and displayed an obvious bias toward him regarding his ability to care for his child. The man stated that a female officer told him that he could not relate to women in power and that she would come over and explain it in person if that needed to happen. The man stated that he felt threatened by the officer. The audio and video recording of the incident revealed no inappropriate conduct on behalf of the officer. This complaint was unfounded.

2. On 4-22-09, officers were dispatched to the area of 235 N Cliff Avenue for a report of a fight disturbance. A woman that was walking toward them was identified as being involved. In speaking to her the officers found that she was highly intoxicated, loud, and using profanity. Officers placed the woman under arrest for disturbing the peace and later transported her to booking. In booking she claimed that her wrists were injured from the handcuffs. A supervisor investigated the allegation. He found some swelling and some bruising; however there was not the typical handcuff marking on either wrist. The shift supervisor reviewed the video of the arrest of the female. Neither officer involved in the arrest used any force while handcuffing or placing the subject in the back of the patrol vehicle. The rear seat video was reviewed as well. The woman was seen moving around while waiting to be transported. While she was being transported to booking, she continued to be extremely agitated thrashing around the back seat and at one point she was able to kick the screen divider. At no point during the entire time that the woman was handcuffed did she make any statement about the handcuffs being too tight. After reviewing the video of the incident, it was determined both officers involved followed proper policy and procedure. This complaint was unfounded.

3. On 5-9-09 an individual who was in jail that had been arrested for resisting arrest, obstructing, disorderly conduct, possession of marijuana, and possession of paraphernalia wanted to complain that he was the victim of excessive force. The intoxicated man told a shift supervisor that he was tackled in the hallway for no reason, kneed in the head, and kneed in the groin. He complained that an old knee injury was re-aggravated. He also complained about how the officers carried him down the stairs since he refused to walk, and how he had marks on his wrists as a result of the method used to carry him. As the supervisor was investigating the complaint, the man became belligerent again. A review of the audio and video associated with the call revealed that the officers used the appropriate amount of force necessary to gain control of a very combative subject. During a follow-up contact with the man the next day, he began to embellish further as to the events that happened. It was determined the officer’s actions were appropriate. This complaint was unfounded.

4. On 05-10-09 a man complained that he had his feet stepped on and his thumb twisted by an officer while being arrested for an outstanding warrant at Wiley's Tavern. A review of the video capturing the incident revealed that one of the officers recognized the man and asked him his name as he believed the he had warrants. The man immediately became defensive over being asked about the warrants. He seemed to expect the officers to turn their heads to the fact that he had warrants. The man progressively became more vocal and his tone was increasingly turning hostile. The officers remained professional and calm the entire time while they waited for confirmation on the warrants. Once the warrants were confirmed an officer moved in to place him under arrest. The man initially placed his hands behind his back, but would not comply with the request to keep his palms in the right direction. After repeated commands to quit moving his hands the man eventually told the officer to get his hands off of him. He proceeded to spin around in an aggressive manner towards the officers. In an attempt to regain control of the man the officers directed him to the side of a vehicle close by. Their action was quick and deliberate. The man ceased to struggle with the officers. At that point he complained of his wrist hurting. A review of this incident found that the actions of the officers were within policy and procedure. The officers were exonerated of any wrong doing.

5. On 6-9-09, officers responded to a medical emergency at a residence. The resident asked officers to use the rear door. Upon their arrival, one of the officers entered the rear door and then opened the front door for the other first responders. The man made a complaint to the department that this was an unauthorized search of his premises. This complaint was unfounded as the officers were called to the scene and followed proper protocols in responding medical emergencies.

6. On 6-26-09, officers responded to Borrowed Bucks Roadhouse for a call. They attempted to arrest an individual for disorderly conduct. During the arrest, the man resisted the officer’s efforts. The officers had to apply a minor amount of force to get the man to comply. He was transported to the jail. From the jail, the man indicated that he had been the subject of excessive force. He also complained that he had been denied medical treatment. A supervisor reviewed the audio and video recording of the arrest, as well as personally contacting witnesses that were at the scene. The supervisor found that the officers acted in a professional manner in attempting to arrest the man. Their actions were consistent with department policy. This complaint was unfounded.