Geer
case has Fairfax supervisors taking another look at attorney
By Tom Jackman and Antonio
Olivo February 27
Members of the Fairfax County
Board of Supervisors plan to order their longtime county attorney to answer for
what they see as his missteps in the handling of the investigation into the
2013 police shooting of an unarmed man.
Several supervisors said they
plan to take up the shooting death of John Geer at their next meeting on
Tuesday. They said they may talk about the possibility of reprimands, and
possibly even termination, for the county attorney or his top deputies.
“Everything is on the table,”
Supervisor Jeff C. McKay (D-Lee) said. “There has to be action, both swift and
long-term. There have to be consequences for actions like this. There have to
be consequences so people understand who is running this county. It’s not the
people who were hired to work for the county. It’s the people who were
elected.”
The supervisors said their
legal advisers, led by longtime County Attorney David P. Bobzien, failed to
keep them apprised of a dispute between police and county prosecutor Raymond F.
Morrogh in 2013 as he investigated the shooting, didn’t tell them the county
was refusing to provide files to federal prosecutors in 2014, and didn’t tell
them that Morrogh wanted to meet with the supervisors to discuss the advice
Bobzien’s staff was giving police.
The supervisors said they
learned of the developments from a series of e-mails from 2013 and 2014 that
were published Friday in The Washington Post. In the e-mails, between Morrogh
and deputy county attorneys Karen L. Gibbons and Cynthia Tianti, Morrogh
expressed frustration with the county’s decision not to let him see internal affairs
files and with what he said was the attorneys’ advice to police internal
affairs investigators that they should not interview officers involved in
brutality allegations.
The e-mails also show that
Morrogh tried unsuccessfully to discuss his concerns with the board chairman,
Sharon Bulova (D), and the other supervisors.
“It’s clear we can redraw the
organizational chart” of Fairfax government, Supervisor Pat Herrity
(R-Springfield) said Friday, “and put the county attorney at the top. They
appear to be making decisions without consulting the board. This is another
indication it’s time for change in the county attorney’s office.”
Also Friday, details began to
emerge about what the supervisors were and weren’t told about the death of Geer
by their attorneys and by Police Chief Edwin C. Roessler Jr. and what they have
since learned from legal filings and news reports.
Morrogh’s e-mails said the
county attorneys instructed the police internal affairs bureau not to interview
officers involved in shootings because of the possibility that statements would
conflict with ones given in future civil cases. In a statement issued Friday,
county spokesman Tony Castrilli said that is not the case. “It is not correct
to suggest that [internal affairs] was advised to avoid taking statements from
officers,” the statement said.
Supervisor John W. Foust
(D-Dranesville) said it would be “highly inappropriate” to give such
instructions to officers. “We’ll follow up and get to the bottom of it,” he
said.
Foust said he and other board
members have felt blindsided by learning new information about investigation of
the Geer case through media reports and not Bobzien’s office.
Neither Bobzien nor Tianti, who
is overseeing the Geer case, responded to a request for comment.
Although Bobzien, who has been
with the county for 20 years, is generally well regarded, several board members
said the Geer matter exposed a serious communication gap between his office and
the county’s governing body. Bulova said she and other board members are taking
steps to bridge that gap, including the creation of a commission to review
police policies.
Bulova said “I don’t know”
whether anyone in the county attorney’s office should be dismissed. But she and
other board members said that if a meeting with Morrogh had occurred, they
would likely have chosen to cooperate fully with his office.
Geer, 46, was fatally shot Aug.
29, 2013, as he stood in the doorway of his Springfield townhouse with his
hands on top of the screen door, police witnesses said. The police waited 70
minutes to render aid to Geer, who had already shown them a holstered handgun,
because they didn’t know whether he would try to fire back at them.
The supervisors received their
first briefing on the case on Sept. 10, 2013, in a closed briefing from
Roessler, board records show. Herrity said the chief told them there were
differing accounts of where Geer’s hands were and that there was a delay in
reaching Geer. The board did not receive any details about how many officers
contradicted the version of events given by Officer Adam D. Torres, who shot
Geer, or about Torres’s prior blowup at a Fairfax prosecutor, though that was
well known to top police officials, police documents released last month show.
The board was briefed again in
closed session on Nov. 19, 2013, records show. According to Herrity, members
were informed that Morrogh was seeking the internal affairs files of Torres in
other cases and that the county attorneys were refusing to provide them.
Morrogh’s e-mails show that the
county attorneys and Roessler had already refused to turn over the files in a
meeting five days earlier, on Nov. 14, 2013.
Herrity said the board is made
up mainly of non-lawyers and that when county attorneys provide advice, “absent
something compelling to dispute it, the board tends to follow it. But an
attorney’s job is to give you the pros and cons and lay out options. Not to
make decisions. The board should be the one making the decisions. That clearly
didn’t happen.”
Rebuffed again by county
attorneys in January, Morrogh sent the case to federal prosecutors in
Alexandria. The supervisors learned of that development through the media,
Herrity said.
The board received another
briefing in April and another on Sept. 9, shortly after Geer’s longtime
girlfriend sued Roessler. In the meantime, county attorneys again refused to
produce Torres’s internal affairs files for federal prosecutors, the Justice
Department revealed in a letter in November. That was the first time the supervisors
learned that, Herrity said.
“The board was very upset,”
Herrity said, “at the fact that they hadn’t turned the files over to the feds.
We weren’t told any of that.”
Also in September, another
police shooting occurred, and Morrogh said he wasn’t told of it for hours.
Morrogh asked Virginia State Police to take over the new investigation, but
they declined, county officials said.
Morrogh then sought a meeting
with Bulova and the board to discuss the county attorney’s seemingly new
policies on internal affairs files and interviews. But the prosecutor’s request
was never passed on to Bulova or the supervisors, Bulova said, and the meeting
didn’t happen.
“If a fellow elected official
wants to meet with me, we’re meeting. It’s not even a debate,” McKay said.
With no decision made on
whether to charge Torres, police had refused to release his name or any details
of the case until January, when a Fairfax judge ordered them to do so in the
civil suit. On Jan. 30, the county posted 11,000 documents, photos, audio and
video files of the case online, which Herrity said was the first time the
supervisors learned the details of the shooting.
Herrity said he was willing to
listen to Bobzien and his staff defend their work. “I’m still trying to decide
whether we got overprotective legal advice or just bad legal advice,” Herrity
said.
Tom Jackman is a native of
Northern Virginia and has been covering the region for The Post since 1998.
Antonio covers government,
politics and other regional issues in Fairfax County. He worked in Los Angeles,
New York and Chicago before joining the Post in September of 2013.
Geer
case emails show tension between Fairfax leaders
FAIRFAX, Va. (WUSA9) -- An
exchange of emails regarding the fatal police shooting of John Geer in 2013
shows tension between Fairfax County Commonwealth's Attorney Ray Morrogh and
other county leaders.
Morrogh recenty received the
internal affairs reports that the police department had previously refused to
provide to him about the August 29th, 2014 shooting. He also sent the case to
the Justice Department after he was unable to continue his own investigation.
Letters from Senator Charles Grassley, chair of the judiciary committee, forced
the latest release of the IA report to the commonwealth's attorney. Murrow has
the files he needs now and he is evaluating the case again.
Morrogh handed all of the files
over to Fauquier Commonwealth's Attorney to take out statements made by Officer
Adam Torres, who shot Geer, because officers interviewed by Internal Affairs
cannot have those statements used against them in court.
WUSA obtained a December to
January email exchange between Morrogh and Senior Assistant County Attorney
Karen Gibbons that shows the tension between officials regarding obtaining the
files.
Read the emails below:
From: Morrogh, Ray F.
Sent: Wednesday, December 04,
2013 3:38 PM
To: Gibbons, Karen L.
Subject: Officer Involved
Shooting of John R. Geer
Ms. Karen Gibbons,
Deputy County Attorney
Dear Karen:
I write at the suggestion of
the Virginia State Bar to seek clarification with respect to the scope of the
County Attorney's representation of the Chief of Police with respect to the
investigation of the officer involved shooting of Mr. John R. Geer. Is the
County Attorney's Office representing the Chief only with respect to the issue
of turning over the internal affairs files to my office or does the County
Attorney's Office purport to represent the Chief generally in regard to all
aspects of the investigation of the subject police officer?
The purpose of this query is so
that I may remain in compliance with the Virginia Rules of Professional
Conduct, specifically, Rule 4.2 concerning communication with persons
represented by counsel. At this point I have been advised that I may not
communicate with the Chief of Police any further with regard to the subject of
the internal affairs files. Do you represent the Detectives who have been
assigned to investigate this officer involved shooting and if so do you only
represent them on the internal affairs file or do you purport to represent them
generally with respect to all aspects of the investigation ?
When we met on November 14,
2013 it was the Chief's position, as stated by his counsel, that he would not
turn over the Internal Affairs files to this office without a subpoena. You
indicated as his counsel that your office would probably file a motion to quash
any such subpoena if one were obtained by this office in the course of this
investigation. Is this still the case? Again I formally request that your
client turn over the Internal Affairs files to this office so that we may
direct them to a "taint team" and fulfill our duty in this case.
Thank you for your attention to this email.
Sincerely,
Ray
Raymond F. Morrogh
Commonwealth's Attorney
From: Gibbons, Karen L.
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014
1:43 PM
To: Morrogh, Ray F.
Subject: RE: Officer Involved
Shooting of John R. Geer
Dear Ray:
The County Attorney represents
all County agencies, including the Police Department and its Chief of Police,
in regard to civil matters only. As the internal investigations are
non-criminal in nature and conducted for the purpose of determining whether an
officer's conduct, actions, or performance was in compliance with Police Department
general orders or policies, the County Attorney represents the Police
Department and Chief Roessler in regard to internal investigations. Because
internal investigations are confidential under Virginia law, see e.g., Va. Code
Ann. § 2.2-3706(A)(2)(i), Chief Roessler will not voluntarily provide you with
the prior internal affairs files regarding the officer who shot and killed Mr.
Geer. As you know, because an officer is compelled to answer questions during
an internal investigation, it has always been the practice of the Police
Department that no internal investigation into this or any other
officer-involved shooting will be conducted until the conclusion of the ongoing
criminal investigation. This practice ensures that the criminal investigation
is not tainted by any compelled statements made by the involved-officer(s)
during the internal investigation.
In regard to the criminal
investigation into this officer-involved shooting, the County Attorney does not
regularly provide legal advice or counsel to the Criminal Investigations Bureau
(CIB) detective(s) who have been assigned to investigate the shooting because
it is a criminal matter. It has always been my understanding that you lead the
criminal investigation and provide whatever legal advice as necessary. The
criminal investigation into the officer-involved shooting of Mr. Geer has
always been, and continues to be, under your direction and legal advice. If
this is not your understanding of our separate roles, please let me know.
Of course, it is the Police
Department's intention to cooperate in your investigation to the extent
provided by law. As you know, the Police Department's position regarding your
request for any prior internal investigations of the officer involved in the
shooting of Mr. Geer is based, at least in part, on the Court of Appeals for
the Fourth Circuit's case of In re Grand Jury, John Doe No. G.J.2005-2 v.
United States, 478 F.3d 581 (4th Cir. 2007). In that case, the Fourth Circuit
found that a Police Department's interest in keeping its internal affairs
investigations confidential was a significant one and upheld a district court's
quashing of a grand jury subpoena duces tecum. I believe I provided you with a
copy of that case at our meeting on November 14, 2013. It is simply the Police
Department's position that if you require such prior internal investigations,
you issue a subpoena for those files, at which point there will be a legal
vehicle to put this matter before a judge who can then decide whether such
files should be produced. Absent such a legal ruling, it is the Police
Department's position that it does not have the right to turn over any such
internal investigative files to you.
Sincerely
Karen L. Gibbons
Senior Assistant County
Attorney
From: Morrogh, Ray F.
Sent: Thursday, January 16,
2014 1:12 PM
To: Gibbons, Karen L.
Cc: Lingan, Casey; McClain,
Robert D.
Subject: RE: Officer Involved
Shooting of John R. Geer
Karen
Thanks for the follow up on
this issue. In light of the Police Department's position, and the concerns I expressed
at our meeting, I have requested federal law enforcement assistance in this
case.
Sincerely,
Ray
Fairfax
prosecutor asked state police to investigate Fairfax police shooting
By Tom Jackman
Fairfax County’s chief
prosecutor called for the Virginia State Police to investigate a Fairfax police
shooting outside a church in September because he had lost confidence in the
county police department’s ability to cooperate fully with him, newly released
e-mails show.
Commonwealth’s Attorney Raymond
F. Morrogh took the extraordinary step of requesting an outside agency after he
had been stonewalled by Fairfax police in the August 2013 police shooting of
John B. Geer in Springfield, the e-mails indicate. Morrogh had sought the
internal affairs records¬ of the officer involved in the Geer case, but Chief
Edwin C. Roessler, on the advice of the county attorney, refused to turn over
the files, the e-mails show.
Morrogh also was disturbed that
the Fairfax county attorney had advised the police internal affairs bureau “to
avoid taking statements from officers accused of employing excessive force,” to
eliminate the possibility of an inconsistent statement being used “later in
civil proceedings,” according to the e-mails, released by Morrogh.
The e-mails underscore the rare
dissension and tension within the Fairfax County government that have been a
part of the Geer case. Geer was unarmed and witnesses say had his hands up when
he was killed by Officer Adam D. Torres. Fairfax officials had been silent for
more than a year about what happened and did not release details until ordered
to by a judge in a civil case filed by Geer’s family.
Morrogh turned the
investigation into the shooting over to the U.S. Justice Department because of
the county’s obstruction, he has said. The newly released e-mails show that the
tension was sharper than previously known.
Morrogh tried to set up a
meeting with County Board of Supervisors Chairman Sharon Bulova (D) to let her
know about the advice to the internal affairs bureau from County Attorney David
P. Bobzien and his top deputies, Karen L. Gibbons and Cynthia L. Tianti. But
Bulova never was informed of Morrogh’s request, and the meeting never happened,
the chairman said.
Morrogh also expressed interest
in speaking to the full County Board of Supervisors about the difficulties he
was having investigating police cases¬, the e-mails show. But Tianti advised
him that he could only do so at a public meeting, perhaps during the “Public Comments”
portion of a board meeting, where he would be limited to five minutes.
Bulova said she has since “told
Bobzien that the Board should have known of his request.”
Eventually, Morrogh said the
police internal affairs commander, Maj. Michael Kline, refused to heed the
county attorney’s advice, and the county attorney and police agreed to allow
the prosecutor to review internal affairs files, starting with the September
church shooting. The state police declined to get involved in the
investigation, a county spokesman said.
Fairfax spokesman Tony
Castrilli said in a statement that internal police investigations of excessive
force “always include interviews of the subject officers,” but he declined to
say whether county attorneys ever advised police to stop such interviews. He
said Morrogh and the county attorneys met Sept. 15 and “developed a protocol
for handling requests” for internal affairs files “that satisfied both sides’
legal obligations.”
But the county attorneys
continued to resist turning over internal affairs files in the Geer case. An
e-mail written by Gibbons in January 2014 explained the county’s reasoning:
that “internal investigations are confidential” under Virginia’s Freedom of
Information Act.
The state law allows law
enforcement agencies to withhold “administrative investigations relating to
allegations of wrongdoing by employees of a law-enforcement agency.” But it
also states that such records “may be disclosed by the custodian, in his
discretion.”
Gibbons wrote: “Chief Roessler
will not voluntarily provide you with the internal affairs files regarding the
officer who shot and killed Mr. Geer.”
At the time, Morrogh was
seeking records on other internal affairs cases¬ involving Torres, not on the
Geer case, to get a full picture of the officer and his background. “It
wouldn’t be fair to the officer,” Morrogh said in a brief interview, “to the
decedent, or be true to my investigation to not look at all the evidence before
making a decision” on filing charges¬.
After receiving Gibbons’s e-mail
in January 2014 and believing that even a state grand jury subpoena could not
extract the internal files from the police, Morrogh turned the case over to the
U.S. attorney in Alexandria. Federal prosecutors apparently obtained the files,
but no decision has been made on whether Torres should be charged with a civil
rights violation.
Earlier this month, a Fairfax
judge ordered the internal affairs files be provided to the attorneys for
Geer’s family, who sued Roessler in September. The files were then given to
Morrogh last week, and he said prosecutors were screening them.
Morrogh said in an e-mail to
Tianti that he had received internal affairs files before the Geer case, but in
light of the new policy denying them, he had summoned the state police to the
church shooting. “My concern is that this office can’t investigate a case fully
and fairly where the police, or the county attorney, decide what information
they will turn over to the prosecution,” Morrogh wrote.
The county attorney’s office
did not tell Bulova or the supervisors of Morrogh’s interest in speaking to
them. “It’s completely unacceptable,” said Supervisor Pat Herrity
(R-Springfield).
Tom Jackman is a native of
Northern Virginia and has been covering the region for The Post since 1998.
Fairfax
County Board of Supervisors calling for outside input on improving information
disclosure policies.
By Tim Peterson
When Alexandria resident
Natasha McKenna was removed from life support and died on Feb. 8, the Fairfax
County Sheriff’s Office posted a release on the county website. It was an
update to an earlier post on Feb. 5 that explained McKenna was an inmate at the
Fairfax County Adult Detention Center who experienced a “medical emergency” on
Feb. 3.
McKenna was scheduled to be
moved to the Alexandria Adult Detention Center that day. When she fought
against deputies transporting her, they used tasers to restrain her. At that
point, the Fairfax County Police Department was notified and an investigation
of McKenna’s “in-custody inmate death” began.
February 19, the Police
Department released another update, an 800-word description of the events
leading up to McKenna’s arrest and death. She had called Fairfax County police
herself on Jan. 25 to report being assaulted. Officers accompanied her to a
hospital and through a record check discovered an outstanding arrest warrant
for assaulting an Alexandria police officer back on Jan. 15.
Though the officers involved
have yet to be named, the content and amount of information released in under
two weeks since McKenna’s death is comparable to that which it took the county
over a year to release following the officer killing of Springfield resident
John Geer.
According to Fairfax County Board
of Supervisors Sharon Bulova, that was indicative of the board’s commitment to
“making a stronger effort than before to make sure that we’re putting out as
much info as possible.”
Amid Sen. Charles Grassley
(R-Iowa), the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, writing letters to the
county as to why Geer’s investigation has taken so long and how it’s been
handled, as well as public pressure from organizations such as the Justice for
John Geer Facebook group and Citizens Coalition for Police Accountability,
Bulova previously announced the board would seek outside expertise to examine
its policies for releasing information on police action.
AT THE FEB. 17 MEETING of the
board, supervisor Pat Herrity (R-Springfield) introduced a draft policy for
transparency that had been making its way to the Fairfax City Council.
“You don’t have to look far to
find a good policy on transparency,” said Herrity. “If this had been enforced,
we wouldn’t have had a lof of the problems with the Geer case”.
That Fairfax proposal mandated
a release of basic facts, any conflicting information and confirmed identities
of individuals involved with the incident -- all within 72 hours of the
incident itself.
“There were some good
recommendations,” Bulova said, “but I’m not sure that is the only thing that we
want to consider. We’re prepared to take a look at a number of models and best
practices, to include the one the city of Fairfax is considering.”
#February 20, Bulova took
another step and announced the creation of a new commission, made up of
citizens, members of the legal community and other organizations such as the
NAACP, to review police policies.
#“This gives the community an
opportunity to take part in our review,” said Bulova.
#In her release, the Chairman
named Michael Hershman, founder of the Fairfax Group and a citizen appointee to
the Board of Supervisors Audit Committee, chair of this commission. She plans
to bring it before the Board in its March 3 meeting for endorsement. At that
time, Bulova has said she will also announce the rest of the commission’s
membership.
#Though the commission is a
step, Herrity remains critical of the Board’s lack of open discussion on the
Geer case and others involving excessive and or lethal force by police
officers.
#“The most disturbing thing to
me is we haven’t had a Public Safety Committee meeting in well over a year,” he
said. “I don’t know why not, there’s not a good answer. And too much of the
board’s discussion has been in closed session. We need to get out into open
session and have a dialog on our policies and practices and get them fixed.”
#BULOVA’S COMMISSION will have
the opportunity to review both the county’s search for “independent expertise”
on releasing information on officer-involved incidents and the Police
Department’s policies and training regarding use of force.
Fairfax
prosecutors ready to pick up Geer case again
FAIRFAX, Va. (WUSA9) -- After a
year and half, the Fairfax County Commonwealth Attorney is once again
evaluating the fatal police shooting of John Geer, a man who was standing
unarmed, with his hands up.
It happened on August 29th,
2013. Now, County Commonwealth's Attorney Ray Morrogh has finally received the
internal affairs reports that the police department had previously refused to
provide.
RELATED:Family reacts to
release of materials on Geer case
Morrogh sent the case to the
Justice Department after he was unable to continue his own investigation. Now
that he has all the files he needs, Morrogh is evaluating the Geer case once
again.
"If this particular
incident does not warrant the convening of a grand jury.... then no case in
Fairfax County ever will," said Jeff Stewart, a witness the fatal shooting
of his friend.
Stewart blames county
supervisors for not stepping in to force the police department to cooperate
with the Commonwealth's Attorney.
Morrogh told the Washington
Post Saturday, that "protecting the county coffers" in anticipation
of a civil lawsuit, "can't be a factor in a criminal investigation."
But Morrogh declined to say that was the problem. "I don't know why they
didn't want the documents released," said Morrogh.
"We were not aware,"
County Board of Supervisors Chairman Sharon Bulova answered when asked if they
knew Morrogh could not get documents he needed from the police department.
"I would be extremely
disappointed if I were to find there was an interference because we were trying
to prevent the county from having to respond to a lawsuit," Bulova stated.
It took letters from Senator
Charles Grassley, chair of the judiciary committee, to force the latest release
of the IA report to the commonwealth's attorney.
Though the Internal Affairs
report has been made available to Ray Morrogh, he's handed all of the files
over to Fauquier Commonwealth's Attorney to take out statements made by Officer
Adam Torres. When officers are interviewed by Internal Affairs, their
statements cannot be used against them court.
Sharon Bulova will request that
Supervisors create a new commission to review police department policies in
order to ensure better transparency and communication in the event of another
major incident.
Fairfax
County Board to announce new commission to review police practices after John
Geer fatal shooting
By The Associated Press,
Jeannette Reyes
March 3, 2015 - 06:33
FAIRFAX, Va. (AP/WJLA) - Nearly
two years after a police officer shot an unarmed man outside of his home, the
Fairfax County Board of Supervisors will introduce Tuesday a new commission to
review police practices.
Fairfax County Board of
Supervisors Chairman Sharon Bulova initially announced the creation of the new
commission in February. The 25-member panel will include law enforcement
personnel, citizens from local neighborhoods and scholars.
The police review comes after
the county was criticized for withholding investigative documents for 17 months
related to the 2013 shooting of an unarmed man, John Greer, by a police
officer.
Bulova says the commission was
created to maintain public trust and is part of an effort by county officials
to take a "hard look" at how police inform the public about major
incidents.
The commission will recommend
changes to Fairfax policies to improve transparency around police-involved
incidents.
Time
to Get Serious About Police Reform and Oversight
The View From Over Here, a
Letter to the Editor, submitted by Patch reader John Lovaas
By Mary Ann Barton (Patch
Staff) March 2, 2015 at 3:21pm
Finally the Fairfax County Board of
Supervisors has taken the first step toward reining in the Fairfax County
Police Department, a heavily armed force which in matters of life and death has
been accountable to no one but themselves. In the 75 years since the Board
created its Police Department, not one officer has been charged with wrongdoing
in killing an unarmed civilian.
But, there have been many
killings of unarmed civilians, including ones under questionable
circumstances—a half dozen of the latter in the last 10 years alone. (To see a
rare, and creative, report on such a killing, google “Killing of Salvatore
Culosi—Report to the Community by [then] Police Chief David Rohrer”.)
But, it has taken the public
uproar over the shooting death of unarmed John Geer by an officer in front of
several witnesses (including civilians this time) and seventeen months of FCPD
stonewalling the public, the Commonwealth Attorney, and the Department of
Justice to sufficiently embarrass Chairman Sharon Bulova and nine District
Supervisors into their first tentative action.
Before you conclude that Mr.
Geer did not die in vain, however, we should watch closely and verify that the
historically non-supervising Supervisors in fact effect genuine reform, ending
the impunity FC Police have so long enjoyed. Thus far, the Board’s action
consists only of an announcement of INTENT to form an Ad Hoc Commission to
study FCPD operations as manifest in the Geer case.
Chairman Bulova and the
Supervisors have yet to reveal the scope of work for the consultant charged
with forming and, presumably, heading the Ad Hoc Commission.
After all, it is this body that
ultimately will recommend the measures needed to bring transparency and
accountability to the FCPD. It would help if Chairman Bulova introduced her
consultant to the community, revealed the content of his contract and the
Board’s charge to the Commission, and revealed how its members are selected and
indeed who they are.
The Supervisors need to
understand that their dereliction of police oversight duty has eroded public
confidence to the point where it rivals that accorded to the U.S. Congress. The
Ad Hoc Commission is potentially key to restoring some of the lost trust.
The Commission should shape not
only critically needed reform of the FCPD, but also the civilian oversight
function of the Board itself, and indeed the community, which in the future
must have an independent oversight role investigating complaints involving
police use of force, especially lethal force.
Let’s see if the Supervisors
are up to the job, notably in an election year when they often look to the cops
for union endorsements, campaign cash, and campaign labor
Stonewalling
in Fairfax County, again
By Editorial Board March 1
IT’S BEEN a month since an
elite, specially trained team of sheriff’s deputies went to extract Natasha
McKenna from her cell at the Fairfax County jail and, when she resisted, shot
her repeatedly with a stun gun. Taken to the hospital, Ms. McKenna, 37, who was
mentally ill, died a few days later without regaining consciousness.
There are a number of
extraordinary aspects to Ms. McKenna’s death, not least that the incident at
the jail was recorded. The 45-minute video spans the attempt to remove her from
her cell to her departure from the jail in an ambulance.
Two weeks after Ms. McKenna’s
death, Sharon Bulova (D), who chairs Fairfax County’s Board of Supervisors,
asked to see the video. She directed her request to Sheriff Stacey A. Kincaid,
whose department runs the jail, and Police Chief Edwin C. Roessler Jr., whose
department is investigating Ms. McKenna’s death. So far the request by the
county’s top elected official has not been honored, nor has it been denied.
At the same time, neither the
sheriff’s office nor the police have released relevant information to the
public about Ms. McKenna’s death. For example, a spokesperson for the police
department told us in an e-mail that the department cannot say when or if the
six deputies involved in the incident at the jail will be identified.
Many law enforcement agencies
resort reflexively to stonewalling. The Fairfax police have become notorious
for it, having spent 18 months refusing to release information on the 2013
death of John Geer, an unarmed man shot to death by a county police officer in
front of fellow officers who saw no reason to pull the trigger. Now it appears
the police are at it again.
It may be many weeks before the
medical examiner’s office makes public the official cause of Ms. McKenna’s
death. In the meantime, it seems highly probable that the incident at the jail,
specifically the repeated use of the stun gun to subdue her, played a major
part.
Yet there is no sign so far
that the sheriff’s office is reexamining its policies or procedures for
removing inmates from their cells or even for the use of stun guns. Nor have
the deputies involved been put on probation while Ms. McKenna’s death is
investigated. If this is the result of an interaction with a female prisoner
who was, by her lawyer’s account, just 5 feet 3 inches tall, why should anyone
be confident that sheriff’s deputies are competent to extract a bigger and more
physically powerful inmate from a cell?
When unarmed people die at the
hands of uniformed officers, the public deserves an accounting. That accounting
is still lacking in the death of Mr. Geer, and it is now lacking in the case of
Ms. McKenna. In both cases, top officials of the relevant law enforcement
agencies have promised openness and transparency. In both cases their deeds
have contradicted their words
