Post by WaTcHeR on Mar 22, 2006 17:59:08 GMT -5
03/21/2006 - LOS ANGELES – The judge overseeing federally mandated changes designed to weed out corruption and cut racial profiling at the Los Angeles Police Department said on Tuesday his oversight would not end until “real reform” was achieved.
The statements by U.S. District Judge Gary Feess means that federal monitoring of the department – which started in 2001 in the wake of the corruption scandal at the city's Rampart Division – could last for several more years past a June deadline and possibly cost the city millions more dollars.
Police Chief William Bratton and the federal monitor overseeing the department have strongly indicated in recent months that the consent decree would be extended past June because of delays in creating a computerized system to track problem officers, known as TEAMS II.
“There is no way the consent decree can expire at this point,” Feess said, adding that TEAMS II is “the heart and soul” of changes needed in the department.
Feess, who made his comments during a court hearing, noted that since the Watts riots in 1965 through time of the Rodney King beating, reports on how to improve the LAPD have been issued and “ignored.”
“That's not going to happen again,” he said. “This consent decree is going to effect real reform. It is not going to be extinguished until that happens.”
With Feess' statements Tuesday, the only questions remaining about the extension of the consent decree were how long it would last and what areas it would continue to cover.
The consent decree was reached in 2001 after U.S. Department of Justice officials determined that the LAPD engaged in a pattern and practice of civil rights violations. Attention on the department intensified following the testimony of a corrupt police officer who told authorities about misconduct by fellow officers in exchange for a lighter sentence for stealing cocaine from an evidence room.
The proposed changes included improved police training, a better system of monitoring officers' performance, increased oversight of the department's anti-gang units and a ban on racial profiling.
Bratton said the judge's statements did not surprise him.
“The consent decree is going to be around in some form for several years,” he said outside court.
By some accounts, extending the consent decree could cost the city $30 million to $50 million per year. But Bratton has disputed that there would be additional costs.
A hearing on the future of the consent decree will be set for later this year.
Feess' statements came during a hearing he called to address a proposed change to a section of the consent decree that forces police officers to regularly make financial disclosures.
The financial reviews are recommended as a way of making sure officers are not taking bribes or earning money by some other corrupt means. The proposed change would limit which officers are forced to make regular disclosures.
The changes were agreed to by the city and the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division lawyers, but Feess said he was “not at all persuaded” the changes would improve the consent decree. Feess did not make a final ruling on the matter.
The statements by U.S. District Judge Gary Feess means that federal monitoring of the department – which started in 2001 in the wake of the corruption scandal at the city's Rampart Division – could last for several more years past a June deadline and possibly cost the city millions more dollars.
Police Chief William Bratton and the federal monitor overseeing the department have strongly indicated in recent months that the consent decree would be extended past June because of delays in creating a computerized system to track problem officers, known as TEAMS II.
“There is no way the consent decree can expire at this point,” Feess said, adding that TEAMS II is “the heart and soul” of changes needed in the department.
Feess, who made his comments during a court hearing, noted that since the Watts riots in 1965 through time of the Rodney King beating, reports on how to improve the LAPD have been issued and “ignored.”
“That's not going to happen again,” he said. “This consent decree is going to effect real reform. It is not going to be extinguished until that happens.”
With Feess' statements Tuesday, the only questions remaining about the extension of the consent decree were how long it would last and what areas it would continue to cover.
The consent decree was reached in 2001 after U.S. Department of Justice officials determined that the LAPD engaged in a pattern and practice of civil rights violations. Attention on the department intensified following the testimony of a corrupt police officer who told authorities about misconduct by fellow officers in exchange for a lighter sentence for stealing cocaine from an evidence room.
The proposed changes included improved police training, a better system of monitoring officers' performance, increased oversight of the department's anti-gang units and a ban on racial profiling.
Bratton said the judge's statements did not surprise him.
“The consent decree is going to be around in some form for several years,” he said outside court.
By some accounts, extending the consent decree could cost the city $30 million to $50 million per year. But Bratton has disputed that there would be additional costs.
A hearing on the future of the consent decree will be set for later this year.
Feess' statements came during a hearing he called to address a proposed change to a section of the consent decree that forces police officers to regularly make financial disclosures.
The financial reviews are recommended as a way of making sure officers are not taking bribes or earning money by some other corrupt means. The proposed change would limit which officers are forced to make regular disclosures.
The changes were agreed to by the city and the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division lawyers, but Feess said he was “not at all persuaded” the changes would improve the consent decree. Feess did not make a final ruling on the matter.