Long after Progressives protesting George Floyd’s murder went home satisfied with themselves for making a powerful statement against police injustice, and long after the City first sought an independent police auditor, it has, for the modest price of $75,000 a year, hired OIR Group to absolve the city of its sins.
My cynical and dour prediction has both historical justification and moral rationale. Past police auditors have come and gone, left behind reports which resemble previous reports, and not enabled meaningful change in LCPD performance. Citizen distrust of police abides. The main reason for OIR Group’s inevitable failure is the culture of Las Cruces, in which honesty is poorly understood, scarce, and impotent to prompt action.
Honesty may be defined as the combination of candor and truth in its entirety and purity. Thus, the oath for legal testimony is swearing “to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” No such oath commits Councilors or city personnel to do their duties honestly; even so, no such oath would be self-enforcing. Locally, honesty is a virtue more honored in the breach than in the observance.
Consider these breaches in my case. All City Councilors, City Manager Ifo Pili, and Police Chief Miguel Dominguez know the facts and have done nothing about them:
Officer Juan Valles lied in alleging five municipal code violations, about each of which I complained. IA confirmed the truth of my complaints—“Mr. Hays’ warning notice had several violations marked to which there was no physical evidence or proof an actual violation had occurred”—but hid its confirmation under “Ancillary Issues.” Neither Pili nor Dominguez has enforced General Orders, Code of Conduct, 103.17 Truthfulness: “Employees shall not knowingly make a false statement in connection with any investigation, assignment, or inquiry.”
LCPD retains the warning notice of these five violations in its files. Pili admitted and Dominguez did not deny this fact in the presence of Councilor Bencomo. Yet no one has acted to have the LCPD purge its files of this false, defamatory document.
The Law Office broke the Inspection of Public Records Act (IPRA). It lied about an exemption to justify redacting two and withholding two documents. It lied not only to me, but also to the New Mexico Office of the Attorney General. The officers of the court involved were Attorney Robert Cabello, who drafted the lies, and City Attorney Jennifer Vega-Brown, his supervisor, who likely approved this lawbreaking and these lies.
Meanwhile, Dominguez tries to sell truthfulness, transparency, and accountability even as he gives them the lie. On 18 June 2020, before his promotion, he told Council that the LCPD makes mistakes but admits them—except in my case. On a recent KRWG program, he said that he wanted complaint investigations to be “thorough, fair, and just”—except in my case. New chief, old lies; long live the status quo.
A police auditor coming across my case might stop with its close-out letter finding that the officer failed to record our conversation—not much to prompt suspicion. But, if he did not stop there, he might wonder how I knew, and why I made a complaint, about that failure. He might wonder whether my complaint concerned other items or whether many other cases had been wrongly closed. He might review internal documents and discover IA’s one-sided report of a two-sided conversation, the recording of which IA claims was never made (likely destroyed); and unwritten policies (citizens are guilty till proven innocent); slippery vocabulary (warnings are for “possibilities,” not “violations”). He might do these things, but likely not. They are too labor-intensive, time-consuming, costly, and unprofitable.
No police auditor is apt to pierce the protective shield of Council and LCPD interests in sustaining the status quo. Indeed, as OIR discovers their dishonesty, indifference, and inaction, it will understand their real wishes. So it will investigate only the LCPD and skip other government units. Like previous auditors, it will rely largely on suspect documentation, unreliable information, and distorted interpretations; accept pledges stressing transparency and accountability; focus on policies and ignore their non-enforcement; disregard the effects of risk-management on police performance; write a report echoing past reports; and give the impression that, with a few tweaks here and there, the LCPD will become the police force which Las Cruces desires and deserves. For police auditors know to shield their clients from the truth; it keeps them in business. If OIR wants to win four, optional, 1-year, follow-on contracts, it had better do a good job of it. Or Council and the LCPD will not be happy.
No comments:
Post a Comment