Attached is the full text of the Consent Decree between the United States and the Baltimore Police Department.? It is a length

3/1/22, 11:52 AM Justice Dept. Restores Use of Consent Decrees for Police Abuses – The New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/16/us/politics/justice-department-consent-decrees.html 1/2

Justice Dept. Restores Use of Consent Decrees for Police Abuses Attorney General Merrick Garland rescinded a Trump administration policy curbing use of the decrees, which provide a way to force changes in police departments.

By Katie Benner

April 16, 2021

WASHINGTON — Attorney General Merrick B. Garland on Friday rescinded a Trump administration policy that curbed the use of consent decrees to address police misconduct, as the Justice Department prepared to step up its role in investigating allegations of racist and illegal behavior by police forces amid a nationwide outcry about the deaths of Black people at the hands of officers.

Mr. Garland’s widely expected decision revives one of the department’s most effective tools in forcing law enforcement agencies to evaluate and change their practices. Consent decrees are court-approved deals between the Justice Department and local governmental agencies that create a road map for changes to the way they operate.

Mr. Garland’s announcement came against the backdrop of fresh unrest and protests sparked by the ongoing murder trial of Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer who knelt on George Floyd’s neck for more than nine minutes before Mr. Floyd died, and the recent police killings of a motorist named Daunte Wright in the suburbs of Minneapolis and a 13-year-old boy named Adam Toledo in Chicago.

And it is one of the Biden administration’s first significant moves to hold police forces accountable in cases where they are found to have violated federal laws. President Biden has called Mr. Floyd’s death a travesty and signaled support for the George Floyd Justice in Policing legislation that Democrats in the House recently passed. But he has reversed course on a campaign promise to establish a police oversight commission during his first 100 days in office.

“Consent decrees and underlying pattern and practice investigations are one of the most powerful tools any administration has to address policing issues,” said Kristy Parker, a veteran of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division who now works at the nonprofit legal group Protect Democracy.

“Unlike passing legislation, it’s a tool the administration controls,” she said. “The ability to conduct exhaustive investigations and reform police departments by negotiating consent decrees allows an administration to produce a public airing of the systemic failures that produce excessive force and to work with jurisdictions to make meaningful comprehensive changes.”

In a memo to U.S. attorney’s offices, Mr. Garland said that he was lifting restrictions on the use of consent decrees that had been imposed by Jeff Sessions at the tail end of his tenure as attorney general during the Trump administration.

Mr. Garland said in his memo that consent decrees have historically been used in a wide array of contexts, including “to secure equal opportunity in education, protect the environment, ensure constitutional policing practices, defend the free exercise of religion” and more.

“A consent decree ensures independent judicial review and approval of the resolution” between the federal government and government entities found to have violated federal law, Mr. Garland said in his memo. They also allow for “prompt and effective enforcement” if those local government agencies do not comply with the terms of the agreement.

Under the Obama administration, the Justice Department aggressively used consent decrees and court monitors to push changes at police forces found to engage in a consistent pattern of abuse, as people nationwide decried the police killings of Black men in Baltimore, Chicago and Ferguson, Mo.

In some cases the Justice Department has not found sufficient evidence to charge officers in civil rights investigations, but it used consent decrees to address patterns of abuse by police forces, attacking the underlying issues even when no individuals were held accountable for a person’s death.

In the 2014 death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., the Justice Department issued an 86-page report that essentially cleared Darren Wilson, the officer who shot him, of wrongdoing. However, a six-month investigation found that the Ferguson Police Department routinely violated the constitutional rights of its Black residents and was incentivized to do so to generate revenue for the city.

Sign Up for On Politics, for Times subscribers only.  A Times reader’s guide to the political news in Washington and across the nation. Get it

with a Times subscription.

3/1/22, 11:52 AM Justice Dept. Restores Use of Consent Decrees for Police Abuses – The New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/16/us/politics/justice-department-consent-decrees.html 2/2

In the killing of Tamir Rice, a 12-year-old Black boy shot by a Cleveland police officer in 2014, Justice Department officials doubted that they could build a civil rights case against the officer, but they obtained a consent decree to overhaul the Cleveland Police Department. Lawyers for Tamir’s family have asked Mr. Garland to reopen the inquiry into his death in light of allegations by a whistle-blower that Trump-era officials stopped prosecutors from pursuing a false statements case against the officer.

Police officials generally acknowledge that consent decrees can be useful, and they have on some occasions asked the Justice Department to appoint monitors to help advance changes to their departments.

“They can help restore integrity to a police department, hold people accountable and help come up with policies, programs, procedures and best practices,” said Daniel Linskey, a managing director in Kroll’s Security Risk Management practice and the former superintendent in chief of the Boston Police Department.

But he said that police departments sometimes lose their ability to deploy resources and respond to threats when outside monitors, usually judges, are given too much power. There can also be financial incentives to extend the monitorship, he said.

“Who decides that you need to continue the monitorship?” Mr. Linskey said. “Usually, the monitor, who is being paid a pretty significant amount of money,.” He noted that Kroll does monitor work. He said he hoped that Mr. Garland would collaborate as much as possible with police departments in performing reviews and coming to consent decrees.

By the time a new wave of police killings sparked nationwide protests last summer, the Justice Department under the Trump administration had all but stopped using consent decrees to curb police abuses. Mr. Sessions said that the agreements handcuffed police departments and made it difficult for them to do their jobs.

In a final act before stepping down in November 2018, Mr. Sessions sharply limited the Justice Department’s ability to overhaul police departments by imposing three new requirements on their use, the most stringent of which forced career Justice Department lawyers to have any agreements signed off by politically appointed officials in the department.

Mr. Sessions also said that the department’s lawyers needed to lay out evidence of additional violations beyond unconstitutional behavior; and that consent decrees needed to have an end date, rather than end when the court was satisfied that improvements had been made.

Mr. Garland’s memo lifted those three restrictions.

The move “is a clear sign that, unlike during the previous administration, Justice Department leadership now supports the Civil Rights Division’s critically important work investigating police departments to detect and correct patterns of unconstitutional conduct,” said Christy E. Lopez, the co-director of Georgetown Law’s Innovative Policing program and a former official in the Civil Rights Division.

She said that the department could and should go even further by setting up a task force to review all of the Civil Rights Division’s open and proposed police investigations, evaluate the impact that the Sessions memo had on the division’s work and decide how to address that impact.

“Much more needs to be done to enable the division to rise to this moment,” Ms. Lopez said. “But this is a good step.”

An o�icial website of the United States government Here’s how you know

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Wednesday, August 10, 2016

JUSTICE NEWS

Department of Justice

Office of Public Affairs

Justice Department Announces Findings of Investigation into Baltimore Police Department

Justice Department Finds a Pattern of Civil Rights Violations by the Baltimore Police Department

The Justice Department announced today that it found reasonable cause to believe that the Baltimore City Police Department (BPD) engages in a pattern or practice of conduct that violates the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution as well as federal anti-discrimination laws.  BPD makes stops, searches and arrests without the required justification; uses enforcement strategies that unlawfully subject African Americans to disproportionate rates of stops, searches and arrests; uses excessive force; and retaliates against individuals for their constitutionally-protected expression.  The pattern or practice results from systemic deficiencies that have persisted within BPD for many years and has exacerbated community distrust of the police, particularly in the African-American community.  The city and the department have also entered into an agreement in principle to work together, with community input, to create a federal court-enforceable consent decree addressing the deficiencies found during the investigation. 

“Public trust is critical to effective policing and public safety,” said Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch.  “Our investigation found that Baltimore is a city where the bonds of trust have been broken, and that the Baltimore Police Department engaged in a pattern or practice of unlawful and unconstitutional conduct, ranging from the use of excessive force to unjustified stops, seizures and arrests.  The results of our investigation raise serious concerns, and in the days ahead, the Department of Justice will continue working tirelessly to ensure that all Baltimoreans enjoy the safety, security and dignity they expect and deserve.  I am grateful to all of the community members, local officials, faith leaders and current and former police officers who spoke with us during the course of our inquiry, and whose input will remain critical to our efforts as we move forward.  Additionally, I commend the city and BPD for its proactive and collaborative approach to our inquiry and for demonstrating a strong commitment to restoring public confidence by already taking steps to make needed changes.  I look forward to continuing our work together to implement urgent and necessary reforms.”

“We found that BPD has engaged in a pattern or practice of serious violations of the U.S. Constitution and federal law that has disproportionately harmed Baltimore’s African-American community and eroded the public’s trust in the police,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta, head of the Civil Rights Division.  “The agency also fails to provide officers with the guidance, oversight and resources they need to police safely, constitutionally and effectively.  In communities across America, even in communities where trust has been broken, we’ve seen transformative reform rebuild relationships and advance public safety.  In the weeks ahead, as we negotiate our consent decree with the city, we will seek input from law enforcement and community members.  With the city and commissioner’s commitment to reform, I am optimistic that we will work to drive that same progress in Baltimore.”

In May 2015, Attorney General Lynch announced the comprehensive investigation into the BPD after considering requests from city officials and hearing directly from community members about a potential pattern or practice of constitutional violations.  The investigation focused on BPD’s use of force, including deadly force; stops, searches and arrests; and discriminatory policing.

In the course of its pattern or practice investigation, the department interviewed and met with city leaders and police officials, including BPD Commissioner Kevin Davis, former commissioners and numerous officers throughout all ranks of the police department; accompanied line officers on dozens of ride-alongs in every police district; conducted hundreds of interviews and participated in meetings with community members, activists, and other stakeholders; reviewed hundreds of thousands of pages of police documents, including all relevant policies and training materials; and analyzed BPD’s data on internal affairs, use of force, sexual assault cases and pedestrian stops, searches and arrests.

During the course of its investigation, the department found that the legacy of “zero tolerance” street enforcement, along with deficient policies, training and accountability systems, resulted in conduct that routinely violates the Constitution and federal anti-discrimination law.  Throughout the investigation, the department heard consistently from both the community and law enforcement that BPD requires significant reforms to address problems that undermine its efforts to police constitutionally and effectively.   

The department found reasonable cause to believe that BPD engages in a pattern or practice of:

Conducting stops, searches and arrests without meeting the requirements of the Fourth Amendment; Focusing enforcement strategies on African Americans, leading to severe and unjustified racial disparities in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Safe Streets Act; Using unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment; Interacting with individuals with mental health disabilities in a manner that violates the Americans with Disabilities Act; and Interfering with the right to free expression in violation of the First Amendment.

The department also identified serious concerns about other BPD practices, including an inadequate response to reports of sexual assault, which may result, at least in part, from underlying gender bias.  Another significant concern identified by the department was transport practices that place detainees at significant risk of harm.

In the agreement in principle, both parties agreed that compliance with the consent decree will be reviewed by an independent monitor.  The agreement in principle highlights specific areas of reform to be included in the consent decree, including:

Policies, training, data collection and analysis to allow for the assessment of officer activity and to ensure that officers’ actions conform to legal and constitutional requirements; Technology and infrastructure to ensure capability to effectively monitor officer activity; Officer support to ensure that officers are equipped to perform their jobs effectively and constitutionally; and Community policing strategies to guide all aspects of BPD’s operations and help rebuild the relationship between BPD and the various communities it serves. 

The agreement in principle provides a framework for change, but the department will be doing community outreach to solicit input in developing comprehensive reforms.  Comments may be provided by email at [email protected]    

Throughout the department’s investigation, BPD leadership remained receptive to preliminary feedback and technical assistance, and started the process of implementing reforms.  BPD leadership has proactively taken steps to address some of the findings, including updating its policies, instituting new trainings and responding to other issues identified by the department.  While these measures are an important start to cooperative reform, a comprehensive agreement is still needed to remedy all of the department’s findings.   

In October 2014, city and BPD leadership requested to enter a collaborative reform process with the Justice Department’s Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS office).  While the Civil Rights Division opened the pattern or practice investigation in May 2015, the COPS office, the Justice Department’s Office of Justice Programs and others have maintained their ongoing efforts to offer federal resources, such as technical assistance, to the BPD, city officials and community leaders.

This investigation was conducted by the Civil Rights Division’s Special Litigation Section with the assistance of law enforcement professionals pursuant to the pattern or practice provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.  Over the last seven years, the Special Litigation Section has opened 23 investigations into

law enforcement agencies.  The section is enforcing 17 agreements with law enforcement agencies, including 14 consent decrees and one post-judgment order.  For more information on the Civil Rights Division and the Special Litigation Section, please visit www.justice.gov/crt. 

BPD Findings Report

BPD Agreement in Principle

BPD Executive Summary

SPL Police Accomplishments 8.10.16

Topic(s):  Civil Rights

Component(s):  Civil Rights Division

Press Release Number:  16-927

Updated August 10, 2016

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff; v.

POLICE DEPARTMENT OF BALTIMORE CITY, et. al.,

Defendants.

Civil Action No. ___

CONSENT DECREE

i   

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………………………… 1

A. Background ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 2

II. COMMUNITY OVERSIGHT TASK FORCE …………………………………………………. 4

III. COMMUNITY POLICING AND ENGAGEMENT …………………………………………. 6

A. Community Policing …………………………………………………………………………… 6

B. Community Engagement …………………………………………………………………….. 7

C. Community Engagement Assessments ………………………………………………….. 9

IV. STOPS, SEARCHES, ARRESTS, AND VOLUNTARY

POLICE-COMMUNITY INTERACTIONS …………………………………………………….. 11

A. Stops, Searches, Arrests, and Voluntary Police-Community

Interactions Principles …………………………………………………………………………. 11

B. Voluntary Contacts Between BPD Officers and the Public ………………………. 12

C. Involuntary Investigatory Stops and Detentions (Non-Vehicle Stops) ……….. 13

D. Vehicle Stops …………………………………………………………………………………….. 17

E. Searches ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 19

F. Arrests ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 22

G. Stops, Searches, and Arrests Training …………………………………………………… 24

H. Supervisory Review of Stops, Searches, and Arrests ………………………………. 25

I. Stop, Search, and Arrest Data Collection and Review …………………………….. 28

V. IMPARTIAL POLICING ………………………………………………………………………………. 30

VI. RESPONDING TO AND INTERACTING WITH PEOPLE

WITH BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DISABILITIES OR IN CRISIS …………………….. 34

A. BPD Crisis Intervention ………………………………………………………………………. 35

B. Behavioral Health Disability or Crisis Data Collection,

Analysis, and Reporting ………………………………………………………………………. 42

VII. USE OF FORCE …………………………………………………………………………………………… 42

A. Use of Force Principles ……………………………………………………………………….. 42

B. Policies on Officers’ Use of Force ………………………………………………………… 43

C. Training …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 54

ii   

D. Reporting, Investigating and Reviewing Force ………………………………………. 56

E. Data Collection, Analysis, and Reporting ………………………………………………. 72

VIII. INTERACTIONS WITH YOUTH ………………………………………………………………….. 74

IX. TRANSPORTATION OF PERSONS IN CUSTODY ……………………………………….. 76

A. Transportation Equipment …………………………………………………………………… 76

B. Transportation Procedures …………………………………………………………………… 77

C. Monitoring of Transportation Practices …………………………………………………. 79

D. Policies and Training ………………………………………………………………………….. 81

X. FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTED ACTIVITIES………………………………………… 81

A. Right to Criticize Law Enforcement or Engage in Expressive

Activity, as Protected by the First Amendment ………………………………………. 82

B. Right to Engage in Lawful Public Protest or Assembly,

as Protected by the First Amendment ………………………………………………………………. 83

C. Right to Observe and Record, as Protected by the First Amendment ………… 84

D. Policy and Training for First Amendment Protected Activity …………………… 86

E. Supervision of First Amendment Related Arrests and Seizures ………………… 86

F. Ongoing Assessment and Improvement ………………………………………………… 87

XI. HANDLING OF REPORTS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT ……………………………………… 87

A. Policy and Training …………………………………………………………………………….. 87

B. Sexual Assault Investigations, Supervision, and Internal Oversight ………….. 89

C. Community Collaboration and External Oversight …………………………………. 93

XII. TECHNOLOGY …………………………………………………………………………………………… 93

A. Development and Implementation of Updated Technology ……………………… 93

XIII. SUPERVISION…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 97

A. Policies Generally ………………………………………………………………………………. 97

B. Training Generally ……………………………………………………………………………… 100

C. Field Training Officer Program ……………………………………………………………. 104

D. Supervisory Character, Duties and Training …………………………………………… 104

E. Early Intervention System……………………………………………………………………. 107

F. Ongoing Assessment and Improvement ………………………………………………… 112

iii   

XIV. MISCONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS AND DISCIPLINE…………………………………. 112

A. BPD’s Office of Professional Responsibility …………………………………………. 112

B. Complaint Intake, Classification, and Communication with Complainants … 113

C. OPR Administrative Misconduct Investigations …………………………………….. 120

D. Criminal Misconduct Investigations ……………………………………………………… 131

E. Referral of Criminal and Administrative Misconduct

Investigations to Outside Entities …………………………………………………………. 133

F. Disciplinary Charges …………………………………………………………………………… 134

G. Disciplinary Hearings …………………………………………………………………………. 136

H. Imposition of Discipline ……………………………………………………………………… 137

I. Community-Centered Mediation of Misconduct Complaints ……………………. 137

J. Tracking Misconduct Investigations ……………………………………………………… 139

K. Transparency Measures ………………………………………………………………………. 141

L. Additional Measures to Encourage Proper Oversight ……………………………… 145

M. Training …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 147

XV. COORDINATION WITH BALTIMORE CITY SCHOOL POLICE FORCE ………. 150

XVI. RECRUITMENT, HIRING AND RETENTION ………………………………………………. 151

XVII. STAFFING, PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS, AN

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.