April 2024 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks

Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General April 2024 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in June 2024 Prison Oversight From April 1, 2024, through April 31, 2024, the OIG’s Local Inquiry Team monitored and closed seven cases. This document presents all monitored and closed cases during this period. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 24-0075403-INQ Poor Case Summary In December 2022 and January 2023, four officers allegedly routinely allowed unauthorized incarcerated people to handle trash that contained an incarcerated person’s confidential information. On January 5, 2023, a fifth officer allegedly sexually discriminated against a second transgender incarcerated person by opening her cell door while she was in the shower, which enabled ten other incarcerated people to enter and steal property from the cell. Case Disposition The Centralized Screening Team appropriately routed the complaint to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation only after the OIG recommended referral because the complaint contained allegations of staff misconduct listed in the Allegation Decision Index that could result in disciplinary action. The OIG did not monitor the investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The Centralized Screening Team originally determined that the allegations alleged by the incarcerated person who submitted the complaint were allegations listed in the department’s Allegation Decision Index. However, the department did not investigate the allegations because the complaint fell into a backlog of cases, and the Centralized Screening Team subsequently routed the allegations as routine grievances and the case was sent back to the Office of Grievances. The Office of Grievances denied the staff misconduct grievance, but the incarcerated person reasserted the allegations after a successful appeal of the denial. The Centralized Screening Team subsequently determined that the allegations, which had not changed, no longer included those listed in the Allegation Decision Index and routed the case to the hiring authority for assignment as a local inquiry. The Centralized Screening Team agreed to route the allegations to Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation only after the OIG recommended the referral. The department initially received the incarcerated person’s complaint on January 11, 2023, but did not properly route it to the Office of Internal Page 1 of 5 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General April 2024 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in June 2024 Prison Oversight Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit until March 25, 2024, 439 days thereafter, and beyond the one-year statute of limitations permitting the department to take disciplinary action. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0068655-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On October 19, 2023, a sergeant allegedly required an incarcerated person to remain outside in extreme heat during an alarm, thereby endangering the incarcerated person who was sensitive to heat due to his medications. The sergeant also allegedly used profane and threatening language toward the incarcerated person. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegation that the sergeant required the incarcerated person to stand outside in excessive heat but sustained the allegation that the sergeant used inappropriate language toward the incarcerated person. The hiring authority issued the sergeant an employee counseling record as corrective action. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 24-0072113-INQ Poor Case Summary On December 13, 2023, two officers allegedly searched an incarcerated person’s cell and left it in disarray, damaged his television, and confiscated his legal materials. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegation. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The investigator was not prepared to discuss his investigative plan during the initial case conference with the OIG. The Page 2 of 5 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General April 2024 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in June 2024 Prison Oversight investigator had not collected any evidence and had not considered who he should interview to complete a thorough inquiry. Further, the investigator failed to request video-recorded evidence prior to the interview with the incarcerated person, despite OIG recommendations to request and review the video in advance of commencing interviews. The investigator interviewed the incarcerated person who submitted the complaint and failed to provide a confidentiality admonishment during the interview. Finally, the investigator interviewed a pertinent witness only after the OIG recommended the witness be interviewed. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 24-0072673-INQ Poor Case Summary On January 17, 2024, an officer allegedly ignored an incarcerated person’s request for medical assistance while the incarcerated person experienced chest pains. Case Disposition The Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager suspended the inquiry and referred it to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation after the manager discovered evidence of staff misconduct listed in the Allegation Decision Index. The OIG did not monitor the investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The Centralized Screening Team improperly routed the allegation that the officer ignored the incarcerated person’s request for medical assistance, potentially endangering the incarcerated person’s health and safety, which is an allegation listed on the Allegation Decision Index. The investigator failed to interview the officer who was a subject of the inquiry and instead relied solely on security video and body-worn camera recordings as determinative evidence. The investigator failed to retrieve all relevant body-worn camera recordings until the OIG recommended the investigator review the recordings. In addition, during the inquiry, the investigator discovered evidence the officer improperly deactivated his body-worn camera; however, the investigator failed to identify the evidence as staff misconduct listed in the Allegation Decision Index and refer the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation. The Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager referred the allegations to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation only after the OIG recommended the referral. Page 3 of 5 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General April 2024 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in June 2024 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 24-0073337-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On January 29, 2024, two officers allegedly ordered an incarcerated person to stand shirtless for a series of photos in front of two additional female officers as part of an unnecessary search. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegation. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 24-0076473-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On February 27, 2024, an officer allegedly forged the signatures of three incarcerated people on work change forms without their consent and without justification, and because the incarcerated people were of a certain race. Case Disposition The investigator suspended the inquiry after discovering evidence of staff misconduct that could result in disciplinary action and referred the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation. The OIG did not monitor the investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. Page 4 of 5 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General April 2024 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in June 2024 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 24-0075903-INQ Poor Case Summary On March 4, 2024, an officer allegedly abandoned his post as control booth officer and approached an incarcerated person’s cell. The officer allegedly attempted to close the incarcerated person’s food port, but the incarcerated person wedged his hand into the opening. When the incarcerated person refused to remove his hand, the officer allegedly stated that he was battered by the incarcerated person and the officer verbally insulted the incarcerated person. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG during all phases of the inquiry report review and approval process, including submission of the final inquiry report to the hiring authority, thereby preventing the OIG from conducting contemporaneous monitoring and providing feedback of the case. In addition, the hiring authority determined a finding for only one allegation against the officer and failed to address the second allegation that the officer abandoned his post. The investigator included as exhibits to the inquiry report the records of departmental policy and procedure applicable to the allegations only after a recommendation by the OIG. Page 5 of 5 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov