Police discipline has long been shrouded in mystery in part because personnel records are confidential and not subject to disclosure to the public. As a result, unless criminal charges are filed or the records are disclosed for other reasons such as new legislation, the specifics of individual officer discipline are unknown. There is a deep sense that law enforcement is not held accountable for their misconduct and that secrecy erodes trust in the community. Historically, police have advocated to maintain secrecy and the efforts to keep investigations and complaints out of public view have been largely successful. Moreover, California has enacted a Police Officer Bill of Rights which, among other things, gives the individual officer advantages in any misconduct investigation beyond any due process rights granted to ordinary citizens. Civilian review boards exist, but typically they lack the ability to fire officers or even mandate discipline and must rely on the police to provide the information they review. Therefore, they do not provide necessary safeguards.
This report focuses on the discipline of law enforcement officers in San Diego County. Because personnel files are confidential, it is difficult to determine the precise consequences, if any, imposed for specific misconduct of sworn personnel in both the San Diego Police Department (SDPD) and the San Diego Sheriff’s Office (SDSO). However, records show the two agencies are very different in their approach to disclosure of information that is not confidential or is required to be disclosed by recent legislation. SDPD, with an appointed Chief of Police accountable to the City of San Diego, has been proactive in addressing some officer misconduct and compliant with disclosure laws, while the SDSO, with its elected Sheriff, has taken steps to limit compliance with laws requiring disclosure and is generally more secretive.
Read the full report.