A judge Friday granted a request by the ACLU of Southern California for access to some of the Inglewood Police Department’s use-of-force and other officer misconduct records.
The city of Inglewood “has set forth no valid grounds upon which the petition should be denied,” Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Curtis A. Kin wrote.
The ACLU petition sought the information under the California Public Records Act and Senate Bill 1421, which was enacted in 2018 by the state Legislature and enables the public to access peace officer records concerning uses of force and police misconduct that had been previously unavailable.
Among the records sought by the ACLU’s petition were those involving allegations of use of excessive force, even if that allegation was not sustained; findings that an officer failed to intervene against a colleague using force that is unreasonable or excessive; and statements, writings, online posts and other communications involving prejudice or discrimination against a person on the basis of race, religion or physical or mental disability.
In a sworn declaration, Assistant City Attorney Derald Brenneman said he reviewed the ACLU’s January 2019 records request.
“I confirmed that some records potentially responsive to (the ACLU’s) CPRA request should be temporarily withheld because they concerned incidents that are subject to a pending criminal, civil or administrative investigations, and on that basis (the city) is withholding certain records until either a statute of limitations has run, or when the matters are no longer pending, such as when the district attorney has decided whether or not pursue criminal charges,” Brenneman wrote.
But in his ruling, the judge said the ACLU had demonstrated that the Inglewood Police Department “has not been sufficiently diligent to obtain the requested records.”
Kin also ruled that if the IPD’s records indicate that a document sought cannot be found despite the department’s best efforts, the ACLU should be notified that the record is no longer within the IPD’s possession. The judge also found that the ACLU is entitled to know the destruction dates of any records they seek that were disposed.
