Yes,I feel the cheif should give a written statement of why he exonerates an officer when the opa director suggests otherwise. I feel it should then be appealable by the opa director as well as someone else, such as a civilian review to get a closer look at the facts.

Robert,
All employees, whether private or government, are obligated to tell the truth to their employers (the tax payers).

Secrecy is for third world governments.

Yes, I believe the chief of Police should give a written statement re. exonerating officers in the named offences which have been reported.

After watching this interview my impression was that the civilian committee is struggling within a system that seeks to mariginalize their findings especially if they do not concur with those of the Mayor or the Police Chief. I certainly think that any decision to exonerate an officer, whomsoever takes it, should be absolutely transparent and fully explained. The Police Service is supposed to 'protect and serve' and a full explanation is part of this service. I have noticed that in the 7 years I have lived in this area, the attitude of the police has changed markedly overall, becoming more heavy-handed and intimidating. I do not believe this to be a good thing and would like to see a return to a greater understanding that most folk are just going about their business every day and it is only in the most extreme curcumstances that anyone needs to be beaten to a pulp. If that happens we, the public, are entitled to know every detail of the circumstances of why the people employed to protect us are hurting us, unless we want to go down the slippery slope of becoming a Police State.

After watching your Upfront this morning the question that begs to be answered is, if several review boards have been formed to oversee officers conduct, why then is it not necessary for the police chief to clearly define his decision when not in concurrence with the recommendation by the review board(s). If the police chief has the final decision, fine, but there should be guidelines to which he must adhere to when making those decisions. A simple "no discipline required" is not acceptable.
Why have review boards? Why waste other people's time when ultimatly their recommendation will be overruled.

This Chief & Mayor may think they have to resolve the controversial issues in secrecy as if nothing was wrong to "keep the public's confidence in police" Isn’t it just a convenient way out for not training and managing the force properly in the first place? Policing is very difficult work, no doubt. Officers naturally have good days & bad days, and they are human beings just like us. Imagine, though, what happens to their mind when they see no proper disciplinary measures are taking place. They would start feeling working with great self discipline to keep themselves in the highest ethical standard does not worth their while, and they start using their own "discretion”, as they know their chief and Mayor will cover for them. When this kind of mentality spread within the force, it becomes uncontrollable. When the police force is not functioning properly, who needs criminals? I admire the work of those OPA, and I think the structure needs review.

I am very troubled by the lack of explanation and accountability of both the Mayor and Police Chief. Rather than explaning their actions, and the actions of the officers involved, it certainly smacks of a cover-up by both the Police Chief and Mayor using the common tactics of attacking the authors of the audit report and redirecting public attention away from the facts. They also attemp to marginalization the function and office of the OPA.

I think the mayor HAS to explain his reasons for disreguarding the boards recomendations. They (police officers) choose a job w/the public. We (the public) are not children whose parents can get away with ansering our questions with "BECAUSE I SAID SO". Why? is a question that can be answered if your are honest and have morals. Privacy of oficers "issues" (as stated in the report as a reason) is not acceptable. Don't take a job policing the people if you can't follow the LAW yourself. We are all human and make mistakes, be able to admit it. Some cops are just plain mean. Citizens have a right to answers.

I think the Chief should be accountable by letting the board know why he is not going by the recommendations--when it appears that excessive force (especially when people are already in custody), and planting evidence is concerned). This doesn't look good for the police force in general. It casts a shadow on the professionalism of the field as a whole. You wouldn't want to start looking like the Los Angeles Police Department!

It appears that he is saying it's okay to continue business as usual for certain officers, which gives the green light to continue with bad behavior.

Personally, I hope those severly injured, or injured for no apparent reason will file lawsuits. It seems that it will be the only way to curtail certain behaviors--since the Chief won't.

Remember, the police are there to protect and to serve. That's what I pay my taxes for!

PS: The Chief is lucky to have people (civilian board) concerned about what's going on. He should pay attention for his own good. Everything the officers do, is a reflection of his command.

So does Seattle stoop to the performance of Daryl Gates? No, goddamit, this is MY hometown. Seattle represents better. You "news" types had better keep drilling!

This clearly shows a conflict of interest for the Chief of Police. The Chief is beholden to the Union. The Union will remove any Chief who might actually police his men.

It is impossible to expect justice under this system!

Under current law, the Seattle PD is incapable of policing itself honestly:

A change in this law is needed to place police accountability firmly under civilian authority and permanently remove such power from the office of the Chief of Police.

I hope that efforts to change the current law are already underway and if not, citizen leadership must arrise to tackle this problem. Only the *Citizens of Seattle* can create this change! The Mayor will do nothing and the council is powerless.

I am outraged at the gall the Mayor and the Chief demonstrate in tolerating this "Police bully" behavior, then thumbing their noses at the public when it's exposed - as it ought to be.

How about this: let's vote the Mayor out of office and then elect someone who will rid us of this continually embarrassing chief.

Then as the reward for their insulting behavior, lets legislate that the Police (chief) no longer have authority in whether the rogue Police bullies "get off" when they lose restraint and their honor, climb into their (base) ego's and then reduce our community in maddeningly violent ways.

What If Chief Gates had done nothing, and the Police had overlooked some important piece of evidence or a wittness? These same complainers would hold him responsible for doing nothing. Cut the politics and let them do their job.