Recommendation 18.1

IAD investigations should be more proactive and be conducted in parallel fashion to the criminal investigation of a critical incident.

Current:

IAD supervisors respond to the scene of critical incidents, but do not conduct interviews at the scene so they do not interfere with or otherwise jeopardize the criminal investigation. The criminal investigation is to determine whether or not a crime has been committed. The administrative investigation is to determine whether or not a violation of the department Code of Conduct or standard operating procedures has occurred, which includes, but also goes beyond whether or not a crime has been committed.

Some evidence gathered during the IAD investigation often cannot be used in the criminal investigation, which is required by law under Wis. Stat. § 164 (Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights), and MPD makes every effort to comply with this requirement by having a clear separation between the criminal and administrative process. Also, Wis. Stat. § 175.47 requires that an outside investigator conduct the criminal investigation into all police-related deaths. Consequently, MPD often does not have access to all of the necessary information for our internal administrative review until the criminal case is completed and reviewed by the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office. We are in agreement with the concept of concurrent criminal and administrative investigations and we do initiate both investigations at the same time, but we find that legal as well as procedural barriers often slow down the internal case. While Wis. Stat. § 175.47(3)(c) does allow for an internal investigation to be conducted, it cannot interfere with the outside agencies investigation.

Future:

A best practice review would be helpful in this area and the department would require technical assistance for this review.