►
From YouTube: Citizen Police Review Commission 5-4-2022 (Part 1)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
No
problem,
so
it
looks
like
we
have
a
quorum,
so
I
will
call
the
meeting
to
order.
B
C
D
B
B
All
right,
oh
and
dave,
I'm
sorry
I
don't
know,
do
we
need
to
do
with
the
official
call
of
who
is
present
or
can
we.
B
The
roll
call
just
okay,
perfect.
B
All
right
next
item
up
is
the
public
comment.
So
is
there
anyone
on
the
call
that
wants
to
give
public
comment
at
this
time.
B
So
hearing
none,
we
can
move
on
to
the
the
items
up
for
consideration
tonight,
the
first
being
the
review
of
complaint
register
21-03.
A
B
Great,
and
can
we
get
a
vote
on
that
to
move
on
to
discuss
cr
21-03.
D
B
All
right,
and
so
we'll
start
off
the
discussion
with
commander
glue,
giving
us
a
summary
of
cr
21-03.
E
Okay,
we'll
talk
about
cr2103,
also.
In
addition,
this
is
about
about
13
minutes
of
bodywork,
camera
footage
we
will
need
to
review,
so
this
was
related
to
a
traffic
stop
on
september
3rd
of
2021,
the
professional
standards
received
a
complaint
from
a
driver
stated
that
he
was
cited
for
running
a
stop
sign,
but
did
not
also
say
the
accused
officer
entered
the
vehicle
without
permission
and
the
accused
officer
made
contact
with
his
children.
The
complainant
further
stated
that
children
were
scared,
they'd
not
feel
safe.
E
During
the
stop,
the
complaint
of
the
complainant
requested
an
investigation
in
the
matter,
so
it
was
regis.
It
was
classified
as
a
complaint
register.
Also
in
this,
the
complainant
talked
about.
E
and
lexical
policy
312.3,
which
oversees
searches
of
vehicles.
E
Myself
and
the
ops
sergeant
at
that
time,
we
interviewed
the
complainant
and
he
basically
basically
talked
about
it
was
there
was
a
search
without
consent
that
he
was
nervous
and
scared.
There
was
touching
of
his
children,
we
interviewed
the
accused
officer.
Many
of
the
many
of
the
facts
were
consistent
and
I
would
say
that
a
lot
of
the
facts
were
differences
were
based
on
interpretation
or
reported
context.
E
The
officer
did
say
that
he
went
and
checked
the
safety
of
the
safety
seats,
but
did
so
pursuant
to
the
lawful
reason
of
the
safety
of
minor
children
being
properly,
basically
not
being
properly
secured,
and
the
danger
that
presented
also
was
part
of
a
larger
conversation
said
that
he
did
not
touch
the
children
and
nobody
seemed
fearful,
or
there
was
no
duress
at
the
time
of
the
stop
we
completed
the
investigation
turn
it
over
to
the
traffic
sergeant.
The
immediate
supervisor.
E
E
B
I
just
had
a
logistics
question
before
we
go
into
executive
session
for
the
next
incident
that
we
have
to
to
review
tonight
as
well.
The
di
21-02
does
that
one
also
have
camera
footage.
Yeah,
someone.
E
C
I'm
making
a
suggestion
that
you
move
that
into
make
a
motion
to
discuss
the
next
one
as
well,
since
we're
already
starting
to
yes
and
then
after
we
get
the
report
from
commander
glue,
then
we
can
move
in
the
exact
section
on
both
of
them.
B
Okay,
all
right
so
can
I
have
a
motion
to
begin
discussing.
Di21
21-02.
D
A
C
Just
making
notes
commissioner
richmond
approved
commissioner
strickland.
C
B
All
right
so
commander
glue,
if
you
could
give
us
the
summary
of
21
dash
of
di
21-02.
E
Sure
so,
on
july,
21st
of
2021
ops
received
an
online
complaint
complaint
was
referee,
was
from,
I
believe,
the
parent
about
their
juvenile
daughter
being
dragged
and
kicked
by
an
officer.
While
the
officer
was
trying
to
break
up
a
fight.
There
was
also
some
accusations
of
what
they
would
consider
to
be
if
they
were
true
on
professional
behavior
on
the
officer's
part
base.
There
was
two
officers
in
the
original
incident
officer.
One
the
allegations
were
true:
it
appeared
that
they
may
have
violated
rules,
1,
2,
18,
19,
20
and
51.
E
E
It
was
discovered
that
one
of
the
accused
officers
did
not
initially
activate
their
bodywork
camera
but
did
activate
it
after
the
incident
happened.
That
would
have
been
due
to
the
fact
that
it
was
a
on
view,
large
disturbance
and
sometimes
activating
the
body,
weren't
camera
footage,
taking
the
immediate,
necessary
actions
or
or
not
can't
be
done.
At
the
same
time,.
E
So
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna
trust
and
I
can
follow
up
with
answering
any
questions.
I
trust
everybody's
kind
of
read
the
summary,
so
I'm
gonna
kind
of
touch
on
some
of
the
elements,
probably
a
little
bit
more
briefly
than
I
did
with
the
last
one.
So
it
comes
down
to
there
was
an
accusation
of
unprofessional
behavior.
On
the
officer's
part,
our
review
showed
that
officer
number
two
may
have
been
inattentive
to
duty
before
the
incident
occurred.
E
There
was
also
the
review
show,
a
question
that
we
wanted
to
answer
prior
to
bringing
this
to
cprc
was.
There
was
an
accusation
that
the
investigating
patrol
sergeant
that
was
investigating
the
use
of
force,
which
is
a
separate
incident
from
this
or
separate
investigation
from
this
if
they
violate
any
rules
by
denying
the
juvenile
apparent
before
their
question
about
the
use
of
force.
E
It
was
this
office
that
did
do
the
review
and
located
the
answer
that
needed
the
question
of
did
a
sergeant
violate
policy
by
not
making
an
adult
available
to
the
juvenile.
Before
questioning
we
sent
that
down
the
patrol
commander
reviewed,
it
found
it
to
be.
In
their
estimation,
a
policy
failure,
the
deputy
chief
reviewed
it
and
found
that
that
decision
did
violate
rule
2,
6
and
20.
E
Recommended
a
written
reprimand,
basically
a
paraphrasing
but
centers
around
the
fact
that
a
sergeant
the
decision,
the
sergeant's
gonna,
have
to
make
a
decision
in
these
gray
areas
and
the
decision
should
have
been
better.
So
with
that
do
I
have
any
questions
or
clarification.
I
know
that
was
a
little
abbreviated.
A
A
Something
that
the
department
is
looking
at
to
make
it
less
gray
or
is
that
just
a
strictly
a
sergeant's
decision
the
next
time
an
incident
like
this
occurs.
E
I
think
in
this
instance
once
this
is
the
review
of
this
is
done,
we'll
look
at
this
and
see
if
there,
if
there's
a
opportunity
to
address
this
particular
policy
issue
and
make
it
less
gray
if
that's
what's
necessary.
So,
yes,
that
will
be
part
of
the
review
going
forward.
Great.
Thank
you.
B
E
B
All
right,
so
I
think
we
can
have
a
motion
to
move
into
executive
session
and
for
that
one
we'll
need
to
read
the
full
executive
session
motion.
That's
on
the
linked
on
the
agenda.
So
can
someone
make
that
motion
so.
D
I'll
move
to
convenient
to
executive
session
pursuant
to
five
illinois
compiled
statutes.
I
guess
I
move
that
the
citizen
police
review
commission
convenient
to
executive
session
to
discuss
agenda
items
regarding
personnel.
These
agenda
items
are
permitted
subjects
to
be
considered
an
executive
concession
on
and
are
enumerated
exceptions
under
the
open
act.
The
exception
is
five
illinois
cs
one
twin:
do
we
need
also
do
all
that
122,
a
c
one
as
set
forth
as
follows:.
D
Okay,
a
public
body
may
hold
closed
meetings
to
consider
the
following
subjects:
one,
the
appointment,
the
appointment,
employment,
compensation,
discipline,
performance
or
dismissal
of
specific
employees
of
the
public
body
or
legal
counsel
for
the
public
body,
including
hearing
testimony
on
a
complaint
lodged
against
an
employee
of
the
public
body
or
against
legal
counsel.
For
the
public
body
to
determine
its
validity.
B
All
right
so
at
this
time
we're
gonna,
leave
this
meeting
and
join
the
executive
session.