Archive for Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Shooting calls for new investigation policy

September 26, 2006


Lawrence Police Department procedures call for a team within the department to investigate after an officer is involved in a shooting.

"When an officer of the Lawrence Police Department is involved in a fatal shooting on or off-duty, a thorough and objective investigation of the facts and circumstances will be initiated immediately and completed as soon as possible," the procedures state.

One person, at least a rank higher than the officer who fired the shot, is designated as the primary investigator for the department and oversees a process that includes interviews, collection of physical evidence and inspecting the officer's weapon.

The officer who fired is required to be available for interviews and is prohibited from discussing the case with anyone other than prosecutors, investigating officers, and confidants such as attorneys, spouse, clergy or counselors.

Once that investigation is finished, the chief appoints an "Officer Involved Shooting Review Board" that does not call witnesses but reviews the record, requests follow-up interviews if needed, and forwards its findings to the chief for review.


Sigmund 11 years, 9 months ago

How does this article support it headline? Who has called for a new policy? What facts surrounding the shooting motivated this unnamed person to call for a new policy? Where and when did they make this call?

I hearby nominate this LJW article as the stupidest of the year. If Dolph pays this person minimum wage he overpaid the unnamed author.

monkeywrench1969 11 years, 9 months ago

Wow a new low for the LJWorld. No supporting data for the headline. It should say "Hey buy a paper to see I was scammed"

Sybil which personality is talking here...the one who has been keeping up with all the stories on the subject or one who wants to fling poo. If you read the various stories the KBI is involved and the Douglas COunty Sherrif's Office is on board. I would assume if the autopsy does not support their findings then they could call in another agency like some agency in the Feds. Don't see this as the "good ole boys"

My other question is why should a group of citizens with no police training or experience who I am assuming would be elected (because that would be fair...right) be the ones to review how a police officer responding in a police related conflict.

I am not qualified through education or technical expertise to be part of a doctors review board if he or she screwed up during an operation nor would I put my self on a police review board to question the actions of a police officer who was being shot at by a person. WHo do you think should be on such a owner of the Merc, A barista from downtown, one of our full time protestors, a local shop owner, a realtor, a defense attorney ...what could they possibly know that would shed light on this situation

parsimoniousjayhawker 11 years, 9 months ago

I agree Sigmund... SENSATIONALISM at its best... Journal World rookies trying to stir the pot at the police department's expense AGAIN.....

monkeywrench1969 11 years, 9 months ago


Many of these example of how the review boards work complaints are investigated by a section of the cops. You complain about the LPDs system now and it sounds similar.

Still you can't have people with no knowledge and experience in police work reviewing whether they did it right. hence the previous post. Those who want these citizen review boards usually have an ax to grind and it would be more of a political unit than anything.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.