Last year when the Palo Alto City Council requested a review of all cases in which an officer pointed their firearm, members agreed that such instances should not be treated as common tactics but rather as dramatic and potentially traumatic episodes.
A new report from The OIR Group, the city's independent police auditor, tracked five such incidents over a six-month period leading up to June, as well as a sixth one that occurred earlier but had not been documented until recently. While the report suggests that Palo Alto officers generally show "appropriate restraint," auditors found numerous discrepancies in the department's documentation of these instances.
The auditors paid particular attention to a recent incident in which an officer pointed a gun twice at a shoplifting suspect who crashed her car into a cruiser before speeding away from the scene. According to the report, an officer who was responding to an alert about a retail theft spotted a woman in a vehicle at a nearby parking lot and suspected her involvement. She exited the car while talking on her phone, then returned to the car and closed the door over the officer's objections, the report states.
The officer then unholstered his gun and, moving toward the driver's side, pointed it at her. He then backed away as she placed her car in reverse, struck the patrol car, switched to forward gear, went over a curb and drove away. The officer turned on his vehicle's lights and sirens, pursued her and ultimately observed her vehicle rolling over. He approached her again with his firearm pointed at her but she ignored him and began to run away, the report states. He chased her and tackled her to the ground before other officers arrived and helped him handcuff her, according to the report.
The auditors didn't take any issues with the officer's use of his firearm but noted that he had initially failed to disclose that in his report and was ordered by a supervisor to write a supplemental report. The supervisory memorandum on this incident also failed to note that the officer drew his weapon twice, though the officer ultimately included that detail in his supplemental report.
Auditors also found discrepancies in the way in which police supervisors documented the vehicle chase. The supervisory memo noted that the officer failed to stop at one controlled intersection, while a review of the dashboard footage from the police vehicle showed him running through six such intersections. The cameras also showed the vehicle crossing into the opposing lane to pass two large trucks and then doing so once again later in the pursuit. The supervisor only noted that the police car crossed over to the opposite lane to pass one truck.
Furthermore, supervisors didn't review the officer's tackling of the subject, notwithstanding the fact that the officer reported the action and told a supervisor that he saw blood on the woman's hands after she went down. He wasn't sure if this was because of the tackle or the rollover accident, the report states.
The audit details five other cases that involved officers drawing firearms.
One case involved an officer who pointed a gun at a young man who reportedly brandished a firearm during a dispute at a grocery store. A police officer reportedly saw the man after he walked out of the store and detained him at gunpoint.
In another case, officers used a locator app to track a man who was reportedly involved in a robbery and assault in a neighboring city and found him in a stolen vehicle. After a foot pursuit, the officer caught the man in a parking lot and pointed his gun at him while ordering him to get on his knees. Subsequently, the man was taken into custody.
The third instance pertained to the same case and involved someone whom a police officer spotted walking away from the area of the stolen vehicle after the initial suspect fled the scene.
The fourth case involved a robbery suspect who was spotted walking along the freeway by an officer who then used his car for cover and pointed his gun at the man, ultimately arresting him.
The fifth case pertained to a person who, according to the police, was involved in several hit-and-run collisions and was ultimately spotted by an officer who then used his car to block the man's escape route.
The auditors concurred with the department's conclusion that each of these five cases was "consistent with police and training." They took issue, however, with one case in which an officer simultaneously unholstered both his Taser and his firearm and pointed both at a man while issuing commands.
"Because of potential for 'weapons confusion' and inadvertent trigger pull, this is considered tactically problematic, to the point where a specific admonitory reference is included in Department policy," the report states.
While the officer quickly holstered the gun, the auditors faulted the supervisors for failing to make note of what they called a "tactical misstep."
The auditors disagreed with the supervisors' evaluation of an incident in which an officer was shouting profanities while pointing a firearm at a subject. While the supervisors concluded that this "terse and provocative language" was effective in gaining the subject's compliance, the auditors noted that the subject was already cooperating and was "lying down on the sidewalk and extending his arms – when the officer punctuated an additional command with a particularly harsh profanity."
As per the OIR Group's recommendation, the police department should encourage supervisors to treat the "pointed firearm review process as an opportunity for holistic assessment of officer performance." The group also said the police department should document and address issues where relevant. It suggested that the department "continue to scrutinize officer profanity and emphasize the limited nature of exceptions to the general prohibition."
The report calls the department's enhanced attention to incidents that involve pointed firearms "an important addition to its mechanisms for meaningful review."
"Public recognition of these events as a significant exercise of police authority has increased in recent years, and what was once treated as a routine tactic is now subject not only to policy limitations but to a new level of formal review," the report states.
Comments
Registered user
Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Sep 12, 2023 at 11:56 am
Registered user
on Sep 12, 2023 at 11:56 am
It is very sad that the city pays a large fee to this supposed watchdog named OIR Group. I recommend reviewing their staff backgrounds which have none having any business or police experience, have no idea what it is like to wear the uniform, be sworn to protect citizens, to confront someone that is purposely about to do them or someone else harm.
The participation of the OIR Group, state AG and local DAs that don't prosecute are the reason our good men and women of the PA PD are so frustrated. The city should terminate the contract today and put the money to better use.
Registered user
Professorville
on Sep 12, 2023 at 12:44 pm
Registered user
on Sep 12, 2023 at 12:44 pm
The "watchdog group" and "their staff backgrounds" is more transparent than "Ocam's Razor" seems to think. Michael GENNACO is the name of the independent auditor, and here are his credentials.
Web Link
The "watchdog group" and "their staff" is one person. Michael makes up the team. His email is also listed on the site.
I spoke to him when I served a partial term on the Human Relations Commission in Palo Alto. He struck me as very experienced, thoughtful, professional and he had his heart in the right place. He was generous with his time, and patiently answered all my questions. This is anecdotal, and I realise an n=1, but it is a direct experience that I am sharing.
Registered user
Stanford
on Sep 12, 2023 at 1:03 pm
Registered user
on Sep 12, 2023 at 1:03 pm
I don't understand what the issue is. Is the article about proper record keeping or whether unholstering a service weapon was appropriate? If the latter, the incidents described seemed very appropriate. A police officer can not defend themselves very well with a holstered gun.
Registered user
Duveneck/St. Francis
on Sep 13, 2023 at 12:02 am
Registered user
on Sep 13, 2023 at 12:02 am
9/12/2023
Hi Mike & Steve:
See my comments in this piece( see at the very bottom of my comments) re the importance of recording the race of the person who members of the PAPD pull a gun on. Also consider in making your decision to release the racial demographics o
Hi Mike & Steve:
See my comments in this piece( see at the very bottom of my comments) re the importance of recording the race of the person who members of the PAPD pull a gun on. Also consider in making your decision to release the racial demographics of those who guns were pulled on, in your just released report, the recent trend of California law acknowledging the importance of releasing just such information in order to work towards eliminating racial bias in the entirety of our criminal injustice system: See the RJA, Racial Justice Act:
Web Link In addition please see RIPA, Racial Identity and Profiling Act:
Web Link
Finally, viewing both the current state of the law in California on compelling more transparency on racial bias issues, as well as California's robust PRA, public records act, in combination with the Palo Alto Police Departments long and despicable history of racially discriminatory policing, I am hereby requesting the racial demographics of the six individuals who had guns pulled on then
by the PAPD as outlined in your most recent OIR report. I look forward to your response.
Aram James
415-370-5056
Web Link
Web Link
***The OIR Group is based in Los Angeles and is made up of multiple members including Michael Gennaco.
**The OIR group currently has a 5 year 7.5 million dollar contract to oversee the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Department