January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks

Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight From January 1, 2023, through September 30, 2023, the OIG’s Local Inquiry Team monitored and closed 68 cases. This document presents all monitored and closed cases during this period. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0043459-INQ Poor Case Summary On May 23, 2022, during an escort, officers allegedly handcuffed an incarcerated person with his hands behind his back contrary to a special handcuffing approval requiring the incarcerated person to be in waist restraints. The incarcerated person alleged his hands were handcuffed behind his back for two hours causing pain to his arm. Officers also allegedly failed to obtain medical assistance when the incarcerated person requested medical aid. 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 investigator did not request video recorded footage within 90 days of the incident, which resulted in the video being deleted by the department before the investigator could review it. Due to the deletion of the footage, the investigator was unable to identify a subject officer. Further, the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager inappropriately determined the draft inquiry report was sufficient, complete, and unbiased. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0043967-INQ Poor Case Summary On July 13, 2022, an officer allegedly failed to stop other incarcerated persons from taunting and insulting an incarcerated person. On July 14, 2022, the officer and a second officer allegedly verbally harassed the incarcerated person when he was obtaining his medications, and the officers refused to rehouse the incarcerated person to another housing unit. Page 1 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and determined that the inquiry conclusively proved the misconduct did not occur. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The investigator did not provide an admonishment at the beginning or end of a witness and subject interviews. The investigator failed to notify the OIG of scheduled witness interviews. The department also failed to adequately confer with the OIG, preventing real-time monitoring of the inquiry report. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044223-INQ Poor Case Summary On August 9, 2022, an officer allegedly damaged an incarcerated person’s property and threw some of his other property items in the trash. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and determined that the inquiry conclusively proved the misconduct did not occur. The hiring authority determined officers needed training for improper wearing of facial coverings and improper inventorying of the inmate’s property. The hiring authority referred both matters to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The department failed to complete the inquiry within the required 90-day time goal. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when he submitted the draft inquiry report to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager and when he submitted the final inquiry report to the hiring authority. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044375-INQ Poor Case Summary Between July 7, 2022, and August 21, 2022, officers allegedly failed to address an incarcerated person’s complaint that two other incarcerated persons engaged in sexual activity. On August 10 and 11, 2022, an office technician allegedly failed to Page 2 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight deliver legal mail to an incarcerated person and failed to log and mail the incarcerated person’s outgoing legal mail. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations. Overall Inquiry Assessment The department poorly handled the inquiry. The investigator failed to notify the OIG of a scheduled witness interview. The investigator did not provide confidentiality admonishments at the end of all interviews he conducted. The department failed to adequately confer with the OIG, preventing real-time monitoring of the inquiry report. The department also failed to complete the inquiry within the required 90-day time goal. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044787-INQ Poor Case Summary On September 27, 2022, two officers and a sergeant allegedly denied a shower to an incarcerated person based on his race and also because the incarcerated person requested to wear sweatpants while being escorted to a shower as an intersex individual. One of the officers allegedly referred to the incarcerated person using an inappropriate comment. 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 department did not assign an investigator of the appropriate classification to conduct the inquiry. The department failed to complete the inquiry within the required 90-day time goal. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when she submitted the draft inquiry report to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager and the final inquiry report to the hiring authority. Page 3 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0045228-INQ Poor Case Summary On October 5, 2022, an officer allegedly attempted to extort an incarcerated person for one hundred dollars in exchange for the incarcerated person’s canteen. The officer also allegedly inappropriately removed the incarcerated person from his porter job, denied his shower accommodation, and made unprofessional remarks. 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 investigator failed to conduct interviews using video conferencing technology. The investigator failed to properly admonish witnesses during interviews. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when he submitted the draft inquiry report to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager and the final inquiry report to the hiring authority. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044895-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary Between September 24, 2022, and October 13, 2022, an officer allegedly denied an incarcerated person his medication, medical attention, access to a shower, and access to his mail. In addition, the officer allegedly failed to address the incarcerated person’s complaint that a nurse was harassing him. On October 8, 2022, the officer allegedly inappropriately turned the water off to the incarcerated person’s sink and toilet. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. Page 4 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0045348-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On October 21, 2022, an officer allegedly confiscated a prayer rug from an incarcerated person and responded unprofessionally to the incarcerated person’s objection. 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 22-0044240-INQ Poor Case Summary On July 11, 2022, an officer allegedly failed to provide an incarcerated person meals he requested following a medical procedure. 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 department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day departmental goal. The investigator did not provide confidentiality admonishments at the end of all interviews he conducted. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when he submitted the draft inquiry report to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager and when he submitted the final inquiry report to the hiring authority. Page 5 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044239-INQ Poor Case Summary On July 15, 2022, an officer allegedly damaged an incarcerated person’s disability equipment, which included his wheelchair, mobility vest, and eyeglasses. The officer also allegedly stole the incarcerated person’s legal documents and other personal items. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and determined that the inquiry conclusively proved the misconduct did not occur. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day departmental goal. The investigator did not provide confidentiality admonishments at the end of all interviews he conducted. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when he submitted the draft inquiry report to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044360-INQ Poor Case Summary On July 27, 2022, a sergeant allegedly ignored an incarcerated person’s request to move to another cell after the incarcerated person mistakenly signed an acknowledgment to share a cell with another incarcerated person the previous day. On July 28, 2022, the sergeant allegedly laughed at the incarcerated person when the incarcerated person stated he was housed with an incompatible cellmate and told the incarcerated person, who identified as nonbinary and transgender to “Man up.” Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, department performed poorly. The investigator did not review all relevant body-worn camera and visual recording footage of the incident prior to the interview of the sergeant who was the subject of the inquiry. The investigator failed to interview witnesses prior to the sergeant. The investigator failed to timely request all relevant body-worn camera and visual recording footage of the incident, which resulted in the Page 6 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight department deleting relevant video evidence. The hiring authority did not make the appropriate finding for each allegation. The department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day departmental goal. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044372-INQ Poor Case Summary On August 26, 2022, an officer allegedly failed to contact health care staff for an incarcerated person’s urgent health care need and refused to request an emergency transport vehicle for the incarcerated person. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations submitted in the complaint. However, the hiring authority reviewed video recordings for this case and determined that officers did not properly wear facial coverings during the incident. Therefore, the hiring authority caused training to be provided to the officers regarding proper wearing of facial coverings. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day departmental goal. The investigator only interviewed the incarcerated person who submitted the complaint and failed to complete interviews of other relevant witnesses or the officer who was the subject of the inquiry. Further, the investigator failed to provide the OIG with all relevant body-worn camera and visual recording footage of the incident prior to the interviews. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044371-INQ Poor Case Summary On August 27, 2022, while conducting a cell search, an officer allegedly did not double lock an incarcerated person’s handcuffs in violation of departmental policy, which resulted in injury to the incarcerated person’s wrists. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegation. Page 7 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The hiring authority did not make the appropriate finding for the allegation. The department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day departmental goal. The investigator failed to provide advance notification to the OIG of all scheduled interviews. The investigator did not share pertinent documentation and video evidence with the OIG in a timely manner. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0048046-INQ Poor Case Summary On October 23, 2022, a lieutenant and a sergeant allegedly inappropriately placed an incarcerated person in administrative segregation without sufficient justification. Additionally, a second lieutenant allegedly placed the incarcerated person in administrative segregation housing at another prison without providing a proper placement notice to the incarcerated person. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and did not sustain the allegation regarding the sergeant and the lieutenant. However, the hiring authority sustained the allegation that the second lieutenant failed to provide the incarcerated person with the required administration segregation placement notice. The second lieutenant received training. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The investigator did not provide the draft inquiry report to an Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager for review. In addition, the investigator did not provide confidentiality admonishments at the end of the interviews. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0048714-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary From December 27, 2022, to January 17, 2023, officers allegedly failed to provide an incarcerated person access to her legal materials. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and determined that the inquiry conclusively proved the misconduct did not occur. Page 8 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0048735-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On January 16, 2023, an officer allegedly inappropriately disconnected the phone calls of two incarcerated persons and directed unprofessional and offensive language to one of the incarcerated persons. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044830-INQ Poor Case Summary Between September 8, 2022, and October 2, 2022, an officer allegedly failed to provide an incarcerated person with a required 15-minute reminder prior to his daily scheduled medication time, resulting in the incarcerated person not receiving his medication. 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 did not request video recordings and body-worn camera video footage related to the incarcerated person’s allegation. The investigator failed to use effective interviewing techniques when he asked leading questions during a witness interview. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when the draft inquiry report was submitted to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager and when the inquiry was reopened for Page 9 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight additional inquiry work. In addition, the grievance coordinator did not notify the OIG that the grievance coordinator submitted the inquiry report to the hiring authority. The department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day departmental goal. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0051526-INQ Poor Case Summary On January 25, 2023, after officers found drugs in an incarcerated person’s cell, a sergeant allegedly failed to read the incarcerated person his constitutional rights. The sergeant allegedly directed expletives at the incarcerated person and threatened to “charge [him] with every little thing possible.” 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 Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager failed to identify the investigator made conclusory statements regarding the decision in the draft inquiry report. The investigator failed to obtain departmental policy for Miranda rights, and failed to include a pertinent witness statement in the draft inquiry report. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044164-INQ Poor Case Summary On March 10, 2022, a control booth officer allegedly failed to secure an incarcerated person’s cell door, resulting in the theft of the incarcerated person’s canteen items. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry, sustained the original allegation, and imposed training for the officer. During the inquiry, the investigator further discovered that the officer, being in an armed post, failed to carry his Mini-14 according to policy. The hiring authority sustained this allegation and imposed training for the officer. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day departmental goal. During the inquiry, the investigator failed Page 10 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight to identify misconduct listed in the Allegation Decision Index. The investigator also failed to thoroughly and appropriately conduct the inquiry and did not provide the OIG with advance notice of a witness interview. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when the draft inquiry report was submitted to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager and the final inquiry report was submitted to the hiring authority. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0045362-INQ Poor Case Summary On October 26, 2022, an officer allegedly threatened an incarcerated person to remove his religious headgear, or the incarcerated person would be issued a rules violation. 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 did not provide confidentiality admonishments at the end of two interviews he conducted. The investigator did not ask follow-up questions during an interview, and did not use video footage evidence appropriately until after the OIG offered a recommendation. The investigator failed to obtain relevant evidence pertaining to the inquiry. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0047365-INQ Poor Case Summary On November 30, 2022, an officer allegedly failed to thoroughly address an incarcerated person’s claim that another incarcerated person broke her television and that the officer allegedly laughed at her when she reported the damage to him. Additionally, the officer allegedly has incarcerated persons do his “dirty work” and allowed one incarcerated person to slap another incarcerated person and steal her property. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and determined that the inquiry conclusively proved the misconduct did not occur. Page 11 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The Centralized Screening Team failed to determine that the complaint contained an allegation of staff misconduct listed in the Allegation Decision Index and route the allegation to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation. The investigator also failed to refer the inquiry to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit despite discovering evidence of staff misconduct listed in the Allegation Decision Index. The investigator failed to provide a draft inquiry report to an Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager for review. The investigator did not interview a pertinent witness. In addition, the investigator failed to provide confidentiality admonishments to the incarcerated person who submitted the complaint, three witnesses, and the subject of the inquiry. The hiring authority failed to timely notify the OIG of the completed inquiry; thus, the OIG was unable to provide real-time feedback during the department’s review of the inquiry report. Finally, the hiring authority failed to refer the inquiry to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit after reviewing the investigator’s draft inquiry report and becoming aware of the allegation that would have required the referral. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0047836-INQ Poor Case Summary Between December 26, 2022, and December 28, 2022, an officer allegedly harassed and intimidated an incarcerated person by repeatedly walking by his cell, questioning and making faces at him, and attempting to house another incarcerated person with him despite his mental health crisis condition. 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 investigator failed to notify the OIG of the decision not to interview witnesses or the subject and failed to provide video recordings to the OIG prior to completing the draft inquiry report. The investigator’s lack of communication prohibited the OIG from providing real-time feedback. The department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day departmental goal. Page 12 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0050973-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On February 3, 2023, an officer allegedly allowed an incarcerated person to assault another incarcerated person for ten minutes before the officer pressed his personal alarm and stopped the assault. 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 23-0050623-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On February 9, 2023, a captain allegedly allowed an incarcerated person to have a tablet in an administrative segregation intake cell. On the same day, when another incarcerated person informed a sergeant about the first incarcerated person having a tablet, the sergeant allegedly stated he could not do anything because the captain allowed it. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations against the sergeant and the captain. However, body- worn camera footage revealed an incarcerated person had a tablet while housed in an administrative segregation intake cell. The hiring authority caused training to be provided to all administrative segregation unit staff regarding administrative segregation procedures, including the sergeant who was a subject of the complaint. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. Page 13 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0052858-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On March 8, 2023, an officer allegedly called an incarcerated person an “idiot,” searched the incarcerated person’s shower bag, and threw his clothes on the floor. A second officer allegedly stood between the incarcerated person and the first officer with his arms crossed over his chest in an aggressive manner. As the incarcerated person was walking away, the first officer allegedly yelled, “What [incarcerated person’s name]? You don’t want to go home on your date?” Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0053740-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On April 4, 2023, two officers searched an incarcerated person’s cell and allegedly confiscated sentimental cards, photographs, shoes, and a watch. The officers also allegedly threw items on the floor and damaged the incarcerated person’s property. Further, during the cell search, one of the officers allegedly used racial slurs directed at the incarcerated person. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegation. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. Page 14 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0054286-INQ Poor Case Summary On April 11, 2023, an officer allegedly made unprofessional comments toward an incarcerated person during a clothed body search and allegedly did not return the incarcerated person’s phone book the officer confiscated during the clothed body search. 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 failed to conduct interviews in the standard order of best practices, beginning with the incarcerated person who submitted the complaint and ending with the subject of the complaint, or document a reason for deviating from the standard order, and did not gather documentary evidence substantiating the officer and witnesses’ work hours and location on the date of the incident. The Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager failed to identify the investigator’s deviation from conducting interviews in the standard order. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0055755-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary In May 2023, an officer allegedly used profanity toward an incarcerated person and called her a derogatory term in Spanish. Specifically, the incarcerated person could not recall the exact date but was certain two officers were present. Telestaff report showed one of the officers only worked in the location one time, on May 1, 2023. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegation. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. Page 15 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0045349-INQ Poor Case Summary On June 2, 2022, a sergeant allegedly hit a table and yelled at an incarcerated person during an interview after the incarcerated person requested an attorney. A lieutenant who was present during the interview allegedly failed to correct or report the sergeant’s behavior. 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 investigator failed to use effective interviewing techniques during the interview with the incarcerated person who filed the complaint. The department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90- day departmental goal. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when he submitted the draft inquiry report to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager and when he submitted the final inquiry report to the hiring authority. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044118-INQ Poor Case Summary Between July 1, 2022, and August 22, 2022, an officer allegedly denied an incarcerated person yard, shower, phone privileges, and conducted back-to-back cell searches without documenting the searches. Further, the officer allegedly told other incarcerated persons he disliked the first incarcerated person and intended to have him removed from his position as a porter. The officer allegedly made fun of the incarcerated person due to his housing status. The officer also allegedly extorted information from incarcerated persons concerning other incarcerated persons with contraband and threatened to terminate their prison jobs if they did not provide the information. Between July 1, 2022, and August 22, 2022, on multiple occasions, a second officer allegedly released the first incarcerated person for showers minutes before his substance abuse class, thus not allowing the incarcerated person enough time to take a shower. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations but determined an officer needed training for proper wearing of Page 16 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight facial coverings. The hiring authority also determined 61 officers needed training for allowing an incarcerated person with emergency-only telephone privileges to use the telephone for nonemergency calls 148 times between July 1, 2022, and August 22, 2022. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The department completed the inquiry 224 days after the department’s Centralized Screening Team received the grievance, well beyond the 90-day departmental goal. In addition, the investigator failed to include a pertinent departmental policy as an exhibit to the report. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0057533-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On October 14, 2022, a sergeant and an officer allegedly denied an incarcerated person the opportunity to wear a nylon jacket assigned to the incarcerated person for medical reasons. 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 23-0052472-INQ Poor Case Summary On February 22, 2023, a sergeant allegedly intimidated an incarcerated person during an administrative hearing by standing over the incarcerated person and kicking the wall. Further, the sergeant allegedly violated departmental policy by being present at the administrative hearing after having approved the rules violation report that was the subject of the hearing. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and determined the allegations were unfounded. Page 17 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The investigator failed to conduct interviews in a timely manner and the department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day departmental goal. In addition, the Office of Grievances failed to notify the OIG when the final inquiry report was submitted to the hiring authority, thereby denying the OIG the opportunity to provide real-time feedback. Finally, the hiring authority failed to identify both allegations against the sergeant and made an inappropriate finding for the allegation identified. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0054277-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On February 24, 2023, a sergeant allegedly threatened an incarcerated person with a rules violation if the incarcerated person requested to move to an alternate housing unit or refused to sign a document stating that his safety was not threatened after the incarcerated person expressed safety concerns. 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 23-0056635-INQ Poor Case Summary On May 12, 2023, an officer was allegedly discourteous towards an incarcerated person and ignored the incarcerated person’s statement that he missed a medical appointment because he failed to receive written notice. Consequently, the incarcerated person received a rules violation report stating that he neglected to respond to appointment notices. The officer was allegedly not wearing a body-worn camera during his interaction with the incarcerated person. Case Disposition The inquiry was suspended and referred to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation after the OIG discovered the allegation that the Page 18 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight officer failed to wear a body-worn camera warranted the referral. The OIG did not monitor the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit’s investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The Centralized Screening Team failed to properly screen the complaint and identify the allegation that the officer’s failure to wear a body-worn camera was staff misconduct listed in the Allegation Decision Index that required referral to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit. The investigator also failed to properly identify the allegation and refer the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0053061-INQ Poor Case Summary On March 7, 2023, two sergeants allegedly refused to assist an incarcerated person who reported having safety concerns, which resulted in the incarcerated person engaging in self-harm in an attempt to be moved to another housing unit. 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 failed to refer the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation after discovering both sergeants and a third sergeant violated the department’s body-worn camera policies. Both the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit and the hiring authority failed to open a separate investigation into the three sergeants’ violations despite the violations being identified in the Allegation Inquiry Report. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0052993-INQ Poor Case Summary On March 16, 2023, an officer was allegedly verbally unprofessional and rude toward an incarcerated person and refused to give the incarcerated person a new pair of sweatpants the incarcerated person ordered to replace a previously stolen pair. Page 19 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations submitted in the complaint. However, after reviewing video-recorded evidence, the hiring authority determined that a second officer violated departmental policy when conducting a search of the incarcerated person’s cell and took corrective action by issuing the officer an employee counseling record. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The prison’s investigative services unit impeded the investigator’s inquiry by failing to provide a comprehensive copy of the video evidence that the investigator requested. The investigator delayed 123 days after completing the final inquiry interview before submitting the draft Allegation Inquiry Report to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for review, and the draft report failed to include a summary of all relevant evidence. The department failed to complete the inquiry within 90 days, per departmental goals, and failed to adequately communicate with the OIG, preventing the OIG from providing contemporaneous monitoring of the case. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0053719-INQ Poor Case Summary On March 28, 2023, an officer allegedly prohibited an incarcerated person from making a telephone call. Later, a second and third officer allegedly cut off the incarcerated person’s personal clothes after the incarcerated person reported being suicidal. A fourth officer then allegedly placed the incarcerated person in a holding cell contaminated with bodily fluids. A lieutenant and two sergeants allegedly failed to intercede to prevent the misconduct by the second, third, and fourth officers. Case Disposition The hiring authority suspended the inquiry and referred it to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Central Intake Unit for a formal investigation after the OIG identified evidence of staff misconduct that could result in adverse disciplinary action. The OIG did not monitor the investigation following the referral to the Office of Internal Affairs. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The hiring authority failed to identify that the first investigator had a conflict of interest that required the assignment of a new investigator. The new investigator failed to provide a confidentiality admonishment during the interview of the incarcerated person who submitted the complaint. The investigator also failed to recognize an additional officer allegedly engaged in potential misconduct which could result in adverse disciplinary action and failed to Page 20 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight refer the misconduct to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit until prompted by the OIG. The Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager caused unreasonable delays by failing to complete a timely review of the draft inquiry report. Finally, the hiring authority referred the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Central Intake Unit rather than the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit, as required. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0053720-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On March 28, 2023, an officer allegedly prevented a wheelchair-bound incarcerated person from obtaining his medication when the officer did not allow the incarcerated person to pass a security check point unless he stood for a clothed-body 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 23-0058173-INQ Poor Case Summary On April 8, 2023, two officers allegedly searched an incarcerated person’s beverage and food without gloves and did not replace them after allegedly contaminating them. Separately, on April 28, 2023, a sergeant allegedly improperly canceled the incarcerated person’s family visit. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and determined that the search of the incarcerated person’s beverage was justified, lawful, and proper. The hiring authority further determined that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the allegation against the sergeant. Overall Inquiry Assessment While the department performed satisfactorily in completing the inquiry, the Office of Grievances failed to communicate with the OIG at each step of the inquiry report Page 21 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight review and approval process, thereby prohibiting the OIG from completing important monitoring functions. Moreover, the hiring authority failed to notify the OIG after the hiring authority made a final decision on the allegations. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0056889-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On May 18, 2023, an officer allegedly locked an incarcerated person in a shower, searched the incarcerated person’s cell, and confiscated a fan as an act of retaliation against the incarcerated person. The officer allegedly threatened to discipline the incarcerated person to increase the incarcerated person’s custody level. Case Disposition The investigator suspended the inquiry and referred the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for an investigation after the investigator discovered evidence of potential staff misconduct that could result in adverse disciplinary action. The OIG concurred with the referral. The OIG did not monitor the investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0061898-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On July 10, 2023, a sergeant allegedly placed a handcuffed incarcerated person into a holding cell for 12 hours without offering any restroom breaks or water, which caused the incarcerated person pain and to urinate on himself. Case Disposition The investigator suspended the inquiry and referred the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit after the investigator discovered evidence of potential staff misconduct that could result in disciplinary action. The OIG concurred with the referral. The OIG did not monitor the investigation after the referral. Page 22 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. However, the Centralized Screening Team failed to properly screen the allegation. The OIG recommended the Centralized Screening Team revise its classification of the case for local inquiry and reassign the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit, but the Centralized Screening Team declined. After the review of the video evidence, the investigator suspended the inquiry and referred the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for an investigation. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0063247-INQ Poor Case Summary On August 28, 2023, three officers allegedly completed a retaliatory cell search by throwing an incarcerated person’s property all over the cell, ripping his bedsheets and clothing, and improperly confiscating his medical equipment. Case Disposition Initially, the Centralized Screening Team incorrectly assigned this complaint for a local inquiry. After the OIG questioned the Centralized Screening Team’s routing determination, the Centralized Screening Team redirected the matter to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation. The OIG concurred with the referral but did not monitor the subsequent investigation. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The investigator conducted three interviews without notification or coordination with the OIG. During the interviews the OIG did monitor, the investigator provided the advisement of rights to multiple witnesses outside the presence of the OIG, thereby preventing contemporaneous monitoring of this aspect of the inquiry. The investigator also asked leading and compound questions. While the department did properly reroute the complaint for an investigation with the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit, it was not until after the OIG questioned the classification of the case for local inquiry. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044786-INQ Poor Case Summary On August 26, 2022, a lieutenant allegedly denied an incarcerated person’s request for a confidential setting for a disciplinary hearing. Further, the lieutenant Page 23 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight allegedly told the incarcerated person he was guilty before hearing the incarcerated person’s evidence. 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 department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day departmental goal. In addition, the grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when the final draft inquiry report was submitted to the hiring authority. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0046347-INQ Poor Case Summary On November 27, 2022, an officer allegedly refused to provide an incarcerated person with a cell search receipt after the officer conducted a cell search. 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 failed to provide the OIG with the names of witnesses she scheduled to interview until the day of the interviews, despite the OIG’s multiple requests for the information. The investigator did not provide a confidentiality admonishment to any of the individuals she interviewed. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when the draft inquiry report was submitted to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager. In addition, the grievance coordinator did not notify the OIG that the grievance coordinator submitted the inquiry report to the hiring authority. Lastly, the department failed to complete the inquiry within the 90-day time departmental goal. Page 24 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0047911-INQ Poor Case Summary On December 27, 2022, two officers allegedly conducted an unclothed body search of an incarcerated person with the officers’ body-worn cameras turned on and in a location where other incarcerated people could observe the search. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and determined that the inquiry conclusively proved the misconduct did not occur. Further, the hiring authority determined that during the course of the inquiry the officers did not properly wear facial coverings during the incident. Therefore, the hiring authority caused training to be provided to the officers regarding the proper wearing of facial coverings. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The investigator did not conduct interviews with witnesses and the two subjects to corroborate body-worn camera evidence. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0047368-INQ Poor Case Summary Between September 10, 2022, and December 13, 2022, five officers and one sergeant allegedly failed to address an incarcerated person’s report that he was harassed and threatened by a cellmate. On December 2, 2022, a lieutenant allegedly told the incarcerated person the cellmate would be rehoused but failed to do so. On December 13, 2022, one of the officers allegedly told the cellmate that the incarcerated person submitted a complaint against the cellmate. Case Disposition The hiring authority referred the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit after the investigator appropriately identified allegations of staff misconduct that could result in adverse disciplinary action. The OIG concurred with the referral. The OIG did not monitor the case following referral to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit. Overall Inquiry Assessment The department performed poorly. The hiring authority assigned an investigator that held the same rank as one of the subjects, who was a lieutenant. The department’s regulations require that the investigator shall be at least one rank higher than Page 25 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight the highest-ranking subject allegedly involved in the misconduct. In addition, the investigator failed to provide a confidentiality admonishment at the end of a witness interview. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0057212-INQ Poor Case Summary In May 2023, a sergeant allegedly refused to address an incarcerated person’s concerns regarding denied access to yard time, religious property, legal assistance for a rules violation report, and a restriction from wearing his sweater, sweatpants, and thermal underwear when participating in restrictive housing yard time. The sergeant also allegedly told staff she did not care about the needs of incarcerated people. 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 department failed to conduct an initial conflict of interest check and reassigned an investigator three times before assigning an investigator who had no conflict of interest with the sergeant, who was the subject of the inquiry. Additionally, the investigator failed to provide a confidentiality admonishment to the sergeant at the end of the interview and failed to document in the draft allegation inquiry report that the OIG monitored several interviews. Finally, the department failed to adequately communicate with the OIG, preventing the OIG from providing contemporaneous monitoring of the case. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044168-INQ Poor Case Summary On August 5, 2022, an officer allegedly refused to permit an incarcerated person a shower after the incarcerated person experienced incontinence. After the incarcerated person entered another shower, the officer allegedly turned off the shower’s water supply. Case Disposition The inquiry was suspended after the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager reviewed the case and accepted it for investigation after identifying Page 26 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight allegations of staff misconduct that could result in adverse disciplinary action. The OIG concurred with the referral. The OIG did not monitor the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit’s investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The investigator failed to provide appropriate advisements and admonishments during all of the interviews he conducted. The investigator also failed to identify and interview all pertinent witnesses, then ignored the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager’s instructions to identify and interview additional witnesses. As a result, the investigator submitted an inquiry report that was not thorough or complete. The Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager ultimately referred the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for a full investigation. In addition, the investigator failed to provide the OIG all case materials in a timely manner to enable the OIG to analyze the evidence and provide real-time feedback and recommendations during the inquiry. Finally, the grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when the revised inquiry report was submitted to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for a manager’s review; therefore, the OIG was prohibited from providing real-time feedback and recommendations regarding the revised inquiry report. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0044902-INQ Poor Case Summary On August 31, 2022, an officer allegedly ignored an assault on an incarcerated person, waited three days to ask the incarcerated person about the assault, and then moved the incarcerated person to another housing location instead of moving the incarcerated person who committed the assault. In addition, the officer informed the incarcerated person that the officer discarded a written message advising him of the planned assault. Case Disposition The inquiry was suspended after the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager reviewed the case and accepted it for investigation after discovering evidence of possible staff misconduct that could result in adverse disciplinary action. The OIG concurred with the referral. The OIG did not monitor the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit’s investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The investigator failed to identify and request all video-recorded evidence within 90- days of the incident, which resulted in Page 27 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight a loss of relevant evidence that was erased under the department’s 90-day retention policy. The investigator failed to obtain all relevant supporting evidence until the OIG recommended the investigator obtain the evidence, and the investigator’s draft inquiry report failed to summarize departmental policy relevant to the allegations of staff misconduct and failed to adequately summarize the video-recorded evidence. Finally, the evidence obtained during the inquiry identified staff misconduct not listed in the Allegation Decision Index that may result in adverse disciplinary action, but the investigator did not properly identify the evidence, cease the inquiry, and refer the case to the hiring authority for review. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0045361-INQ Poor Case Summary On October 3, 2022, a correctional lieutenant and two correctional sergeants allegedly ordered multiple unclothed body searches of incarcerated persons in the view of other incarcerated persons. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and determined that the conduct did occur, but the actions were justified, lawful, and proper. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The initial inquiry report did not include a copy of the incident report relating to the incident that was the basis of the incarcerated person’s allegation, and the investigator did not interview the sergeant who gave instructions for the unclothed body searches until the hiring authority returned the inquiry to the investigator based on the OIG’s recommendations. Additionally, the hiring authority did not issue a decision on the inquiry until 202 days after receiving the complaint, and 112 days beyond the department goal. Moreover, the hiring authority’s final decision did not differentiate the findings that were applicable to the lieutenant and each of the two sergeants, who were subjects of the staff misconduct complaint. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0045944-INQ Poor Case Summary On November 17, 2022, a counselor allegedly approved an incarcerated person’s housing placement to a general population facility after advising the incarcerated person that his housing would not change. The following day, after being rehoused Page 28 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight on the general population facility, and after four officers allegedly ignored the incarcerated person’s safety concerns about being housed on the general population facility, three incarcerated people battered the first incarcerated person. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and sustained the allegations against two officers who failed to report the incarcerated person’s safety concerns to a supervisor. Both officers were issued employee counseling records. The hiring authority found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations against the counselor and two other officers. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The investigator failed to provide confidentiality admonishments at the conclusion of each interview. In addition, the investigator failed to identify and interview an additional officer, who was a subject of the inquiry. The investigator interviewed the additional officer only after the hiring authority returned the inquiry with instruction to interview the officer. The draft inquiry report was returned to the investigator five times for additional inquiry work before the hiring authority deemed it sufficient. Subsequently, the grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when the hiring authority approved the final inquiry report. The department completed the inquiry 204 days after the department’s Centralized Screening Team received the grievance, 114 days after policy goals. The hiring authority failed to sustain an allegation against a second officer until the OIG recommended the allegation be sustained. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 22-0046349-INQ Poor Case Summary On December 7, 2022, two correctional counselors allegedly reviewed an incarcerated person’s legal document without authorization, and on December 8, 2022, the second correctional counselor allegedly threatened, pressured, and harassed the incarcerated person to sign the legal document or receive a rules violation report. 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 hiring authority did not complete the inquiry and issue a determination until 148 days after receiving the complaint, 58 days beyond departmental goals. The investigator failed to provide confidentiality Page 29 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight admonishments during interviews. In addition, the Office of Grievances failed to communicate adequately with the OIG and prevented the OIG from providing contemporaneous monitoring and feedback. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0047908-INQ Poor Case Summary On January 5, 2023, an officer allegedly used profanity towards an incarcerated person. The officer then allegedly placed the incarcerated person in a holding cell and the incarcerated person was not provided water or restroom breaks for 90 minutes. Case Disposition The hiring authority referred the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit after the investigator appropriately identified an allegation of staff misconduct that could result in adverse disciplinary action. The OIG concurred with the referral. The OIG did not monitor the case following referral to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The investigator failed to timely request all relevant video-recorded evidence, which allowed the video-recorded footage to be deleted. The investigator also unjustifiably delayed completing the draft inquiry report for submission to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0054280-INQ Poor Case Summary On January 22, 2023, a lieutenant allegedly threatened to find an incarcerated person guilty at his forthcoming disciplinary hearing after the incarcerated person received a rules violation for not being in his assigned bunk and causing a delay in conducting count. On February 7, 2023, the lieutenant allegedly acted with prejudice and found the incarcerated person guilty at his disciplinary hearing. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations. Page 30 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The hiring authority initially assigned an investigator to conduct the inquiry who had a conflict of interest. The second investigator failed to provide appropriate advisements and admonishments during interviews, failed to use effective interviewing techniques, failed to identify and interview all pertinent witnesses, and failed to draft an inquiry report that included all relevant evidence. In addition, the grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG during the inquiry report approval process which prevented the OIG from providing real- time monitoring and feedback to the department. Finally, the hiring authority failed to accurately summarize the allegation in the initial closure memorandum that was provided to the incarcerated person who submitted the complaint. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0051616-INQ Poor Case Summary On January 27, 2023, and February 24, 2023, an officer allegedly used her personal mobile phone during work hours and used a departmental phone to conduct personal calls. A second officer allegedly refused to report or address the first officer’s misconduct. Case Disposition The hiring authority suspended the inquiry and referred it to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation after the investigator discovered potential staff misconduct that could result in disciplinary action. The OIG concurred with the referral. The OIG did not monitor the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit’s investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed poorly. The Centralized Screening Team failed to properly screen the complaint and identify the allegation that the second officer failed to report or address the first officer’s use of a personal mobile phone was staff misconduct listed in the Allegation Decision Index that required referral to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit. The investigator also failed to identify the allegation and refer the case to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation. Page 31 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0050613-INQ Poor Case Summary On February 1, 2023, and February 2, 2023, two officers allegedly opened an incarcerated person’s cell door when he was not present, and items were stolen from his cell. The officers also allegedly failed to properly observe who entered and exited cells because they were distracted while browsing on the internet and using mobile phones. 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 investigator relied on security video footage and body-worn cameras and did not interview the officers that were the subjects of the inquiry. The investigator did not identify all relevant policies and procedures and did not review all pertinent security and body-worn camera footage available until recommended by the OIG. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when the inquiry report was approved by the hiring authority, preventing the OIG from providing contemporaneous monitoring. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0051091-INQ Poor Case Summary On February 3, 2023, two counselors allegedly failed to properly approve an incarcerated person for transfer to another prison and denied the incarcerated person access to his mental health clinician during a classification committee hearing. 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 investigator did not appropriately provide an advisement of rights at the beginning and a confidentiality admonishment at the end of each witness and subject interview, and did not identify a departmental policy relating to incarcerated person transfers due to mental health status, which was relevant to the inquiry. In addition, the grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG Page 32 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight during each step of the inquiry report review and approval process, thereby preventing the OIG from providing contemporaneous monitoring and feedback. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0051581-INQ Poor Case Summary Between February 23, 2023, and March 3, 2023, an officer allegedly denied an incarcerated person daily incontinence showers. 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 department failed to complete the inquiry within the required 90-day time period, and 23 days beyond departmental goals. In addition, the investigator failed to provide a confidentiality admonishment during the interviews of the incarcerated person who submitted the complaint, three witnesses, and the officer. The investigator also asked compound and leading questions during witness and officer interviews, and the investigator also failed to face those being interviewed during questioning. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0051527-INQ Poor Case Summary On February 26, 2023, an officer allegedly singled out an incarcerated person and issued him a retaliatory counseling rules violation report because the incarcerated person insulted the officer after the officer informed him he was out of bounds. On the same day, the officer also allegedly slept during his shift. 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 investigator failed to consistently provide confidentiality admonishments during interviews, failed to notify the officer Page 33 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight that he was the subject of the complaint, and failed to attach relevant documentary evidence to the inquiry report. The grievance coordinator failed to notify the OIG when submitting the revised, draft inquiry report to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager which prohibited the OIG from providing contemporaneous monitoring and feedback to the department. Finally, the department failed to complete the inquiry within 90 days, per departmental goals. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0052476-INQ Poor Case Summary On March 10, 2023, an officer allegedly ordered an incarcerated person to remain in the kitchen following a medical incident. A second officer later entered the kitchen and allegedly accused the incarcerated person of being out of bounds, while the first officer failed to intervene. 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 failed to provide confidentiality admonishments at the end of all interviews he conducted, used leading questions, and did not correct the draft allegation inquiry report to reflect the OIG’s monitoring and the correct dates of interviews. The Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit manager did not return the allegation inquiry report to the investigator to reflect the OIG’s monitoring and the correct dates of interviews. The department did not complete its inquiry for 143 days, 53 beyond the department goal. The hiring authority did not update the date and signature of the closure memorandum to reflect the hiring authority’s decision to return the allegation inquiry report to the investigator for edits to document the OIG’s monitoring and the correct dates of interviews. As a result, the date of the closure memorandum pre-dates the hiring authority’s signature and approval of the allegation inquiry report by 65 days. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0054296-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On March 13, 2023, two officers allegedly searched an incarcerated person’s cell and damaged the incarcerated person’s personal property in retaliation for a prior use-of- force incident involving the incarcerated person. Page 34 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight 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 23-0054274-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On April 8, 2023, an officer allegedly falsely stated that an incarcerated person refused to accept a package. The officer also allegedly and repeatedly failed to properly open cell doors to release Black incarcerated persons. Case Disposition The hiring authority suspended the inquiry and referred it to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for a formal investigation after the investigator discovered evidence of potential staff misconduct that could result in adverse disciplinary action. The OIG concurred with the referral. The OIG did not monitor the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit’s investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0054291-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On April 12, 2023, an officer allegedly yelled at an incarcerated person who asked the tower officer to open a gate so the incarcerated person could retrieve his evening medications. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegation. Page 35 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0055802-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On April 27, 2023, two officers allegedly refused to confirm a transgender incarcerated person’s search preference was on file and disregarded the incarcerated person’s request to be searched by a female officer, resulting in the incarcerated person missing a medical appointment. Case Disposition The hiring authority suspended the inquiry and referred it to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for a formal investigation after the investigator discovered evidence of potential staff misconduct that could result in adverse disciplinary action. The OIG concurred with the referral. The OIG did not monitor the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit’s investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0055753-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On May 3, 2023, an officer allegedly verbally threatened to cause physical harm to an incarcerated person when the incarcerated person returned to his housing unit to retrieve an identification card. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegation. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. Page 36 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0055794-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On May 3, 2023, an officer allegedly left an incarcerated person in the shower for two and a half hours, causing the incarcerated person to have an anxiety attack. The officer also allegedly improperly used handcuffs instead of waist restraints when escorting the incarcerated person to the shower. A second officer allegedly failed to have his body-worn camera activated during the movement of incarcerated people. Case Disposition The hiring authority completed an inquiry and sustained the allegations against both officers. The hiring authority provided the first officer an employee counseling record and training. The hiring authority provided the second officer a letter of instruction. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0057043-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On May 24, 2023, an officer allegedly acted unprofessionally, threatening, and discriminatory toward an incarcerated person by mocking his report of a second incarcerated person’s threats against him. Case Disposition The hiring authority conducted an inquiry and found insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, department performed satisfactorily. Page 37 of 38 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 January Through September 2023 Local Inquiry Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0057683-INQ Satisfactory Case Summary On May 26, 2023, an officer allegedly failed to honor an incarcerated person’s handcuffing chrono for use of waist chains and inappropriately applied handcuffs on the incarcerated person. Case Disposition The hiring authority suspended the inquiry and referred it to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation after the investigator discovered evidence of possible staff misconduct that could result in adverse disciplinary action. The OIG concurred with the referral. The OIG did not monitor the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit’s investigation following the referral. Overall Inquiry Assessment Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. Page 38 of 38 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov