Sonny Foster, a member of the Board of Directors of the Nebraska Urban League in Omaha, remarked that the process needs to be changed because citizens have lost faith in it.86 The complaint process was described by George Garnett as "useless." He added that in his opinion the influence of the police chief and public safety director would have more impact on police-community relations than improvement in the citizens complaint process. 87 Wayne Tyndall asserted that American Indians in Omaha are afraid to use the complaint process and believed their complaints will not be taken seriously.88 Wilda Stephenson said the process needs to be more objective.89

The Midwest Guardian members interviewed by staff see citizen input in the complaint process as critical. One officer commented that if civilians on such groups as the city's personnel board are qualified to judge disciplinary action taken on police officers, civilians should be qualified to judge

90

allegations of police abuse. Mary Jane Harvey said the recommendation to establish a citizen review board was made to the city by a task force on police-community relations established by then Mayor Zorinsky. Ms. Harvey, who was a member of the task force, said the recommendation was not well received by then Chief of Police Andersen.91 A newspaper report in 1981 indicated Chief Andersen still opposed any form of civilian review, other than the existing administrative and legal remedies.92 Many others agreed with the members of the Midwest Guardians that citizen input is needed or that the process needs to be more objective.93 Ruth Jackson, director of the Omaha human relations department, said she is aware that her office has been mentioned by some in the community as a possible department to do an independent review of citizen's complaints. Ms. Jackson said she would not mind having the job but additional staff would be needed and her department given access to the confidential records of internal security.9 94

But Ms. Jackson supported the existing citizen's complaint process

itself. As a member of the Mayor's Administrative Review Board, she has seen some internal security investigation reports and believes they are thorough.95 A.B. Hogan also believes the citizen's complaint process is adequate but said that few people even know it exists and they are confused about the procedures. He believes a civilian review board for citizen

complaints cannot work in Omaha because the city would not give such a board the power to discipline officers. The current system with the first review done by the police division and appellate review by the Mayor's Review Board 96 is workable, according to Mr. Hogan.

The Mayor's Administrative Review Board, established by executive order by Mayor Zorinsky, hears appeals from citizens who are dissatisfied with the results of the police division's complaint process. Its membership consist of the mayor, the public safety director, chief of police, human relations director and city attorney.9 97 Citizens have ten days after receipt of the letter notifying them of the results of the internal police investigation in which to file their appeal with the mayor's office.98 The review board then has 30 days to decide whether or not to hear the appeal. However, Mayor

99

Mike Boyle said that all appeals are heard.100 Only members of the review board and the complainants are allowed to be present at the hearing. No

101

transcripts or recordings are made of the proceedings. The review board

issues its finding at the conclusion of the hearing and can either concur with 102 the decision of the police chief or make an alternate recommendation.

The city attorney, Herbert Fitle, who is one of its members, stated that over the last couple of years the board had heard six or seven cases. He stated that the complaining party is allowed to come to the board and give any relevant information. The usual rules of evidence are not strictly followed to allow the citizens as much freedom in presenting their case as possible.

The officer complained against does not appear, instead the board depends upon the reports from the police division's internal security unit.103 Mayor Mike Boyle stated that the board had met about two times since he became mayor. He estimated that about one percent of the citizen complaints are appealed to the review board.104 Ms. Ruth Jackson stated that over the last two years she could recall 10-12 cases and that most had been brought by whites; only three or four blacks had used the procedure. She believed that if there is a large number of concerns from blacks about police behavior, they are either satisfied with the police investigation or not filing formal complaints.105

City Council President Bernie Simon said he and Mayor Boyle had discussed criticisms of the mayor's administrative review board during the summer of 1981 when citizen input on the board was an issue. The mayor and Mr. Simon discussed putting Mr. Simon on the board. As an elected official, they thought citizens might see him as their representative while he might be more acceptable to the police who oppose a citizen review board. Now that the issue of civilian participation is discussed less, Mr. Simon said, no action has been taken. He said that in his opinion it still remained an option.106 Another appeals unit involved in police disciplinary procedures is the city personnel board. The Omaha city charter authorizes the personnel board to:

Hear appeals in case any officer or employee in the classified service is suspended, or removed, or reduced in classification or pay by the mayor or a department or division head, and report in writing to both parties its findings and decision, which shall be binding on the mayor or department or division head, but subject to all remedies available to the officer or employee.107

There are five members on the board, appointed by the mayor for five year 109

terms.108

The personnel board has subpoena powers. According to John

Herdzina, chairperson of the board, the burden is on the appellant to show why the disciplinary action is excessive. 110 Minutes are kept of the

proceedings. 111

A.B. Hogan was critical of the board. He said the board was supportive of police officers to the point that it seemed they thought officers could do no wrong.112 Sam Walker asserted that the police chief can hand out tough discipline knowing that the board will overturn his decision.

Professor

Walker believes the police officers know this and it adds to the overall insensitivity of the division.113 City Council President Bernie Simon

believes the board is necessary as a check and balance. Officers may for one reason or another need discipline and the personnel board helps insure that

114

the discipline is reasonable and fair. Responding to the allegation that the board is "easy on police officers," the city attorney estimated that on major cases resulting from citizen's complaints, the board had supported tough discipline half the time. He does not believe officers were kept on the force when their records show that they should be terminated.115

The president of the personnel board said that while the board has sometimes overturned the police chief's decisions, he does not believe it happens as often as the community thinks it does. He commented that the police division considers itself a quasi-military organization and as such tries to maintain strong discipline. Sometimes, in the board's opinion, the division "comes down too strong.

Other Remedies

116

An agency independent of the police division and city government was organized in 1981 to help citizens with complaints against the police division. The Public Interest Law Center of Omaha provides referral service to persons seeking legal assistance in cases of police misconduct or abuse.117 The Law Center is run by volunteers and does not provide legal services itself. Rather, a paralegal conducts an initial interview over the telephone and the case is then referred to a private attorney who has agreed to handle such cases without charging initial attorney fees. Charges are made for such costs as depositions, however.118

The Law Center opened in May 1981 and received dozens of calls the first week but now averages one or two calls a week.119 The calls come from all segments of the community but because there are so few, it is difficult to

determine if there are any patterns developing. 120

A pamphlet distributed by the Law Center advises victims of police abuse or misconduct to write down as much as they can remember about the incident.

Names and addresses of witnesses as well as names and badge numbers of the 121 police officers should be included.

In addition to local remedies, if a citizen's civil rights are violated by police misconduct or abuse of authority, action may be brought under 18 U.S.C. 241 or 242.122 Section 241 provides:

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any citizen in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured--they shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more then ten years, or both; and if death results, they shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life.123

Sec. 242 is the more useful statute though because proof of conspiracy is not

needed. Sec. 242 provides:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such inhabitant being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if death results shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life.124

The U.S. Attorney for Nebraska told staff that primary responsibility for the cases alleging violation of sec. 242 rests with Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice.125 Complaints alleging violations of a citizen's civil rights by police misconduct can be made to either the U.S. Attorney or