Avoiding Common Pitfalls in the Internal Affairs Function
tial resources in this area to ensure that internal affairs investigators are well-trained to meet the needs of this challenging , high liability role , even if it is an ancillary duty . As alluded to above , there are several unique legal nuances in internal affairs investigations that investigators must thoroughly understand . If these legal requirements are not met , this could become very problematic for the department .
Also , once IA investigators are trained , chief executives should strongly consider providing opportunities for them to become involved in state and national internal affairs investigators associations so that they may develop a network of professionals with whom to collaborate . Often , departments have only one IA investigator , and they cannot discuss cases internally , of course . Having other IA professionals to reach out to in order to assist with decision-making in challenging cases can be an invaluable resource . Having investigators “ on an island ” who are not welltrained for internal investigations is another common pitfall that may be easily avoided with appropriate planning and resource allocation .
Acceptance of Complaints Another common snare in the internal affairs function lies in the means by which the department receives complaints . While it is understandable that departments would have a vested interest in discouraging false complaints against employees , such tight restrictions as having citizens print and write out an affidavit detailing the allegation and having a notarization requirement are all too common . Some departmental IA webpages or complaint forms even threaten prosecution if a complaint is proven false . This type of approach certainly does not promote trust and transparency , especially among individuals who already may be distrustful of the police . A complex citizen complaint reporting process may also serve to keep negative officer behaviors from coming to light , thus increasing the department ’ s liability .
Departments are encouraged to accept complaints from any source ( yes , even anonymously ) so that they may be thoroughly investigated . Many chiefs have discovered the hard way that when citizens do not have a clear avenue for redress of their complaints through a well-defined internal aaffairs process , they will often find other avenues such as network media , social media , or attorneys . Of course , sometimes this will occur anyway . However , relaying to citizens in a public forum that a complaint is being thoroughly investigated and any
There are numerous highly regarded national-level internal affairs investigator training programs available . Chief executives are encouraged to review the options carefully and allocate substantial resources in this area to ensure that internal affairs investigators are well-trained to meet the needs of this challenging , high liability role , even if it is an ancillary duty .
policy violations will be addressed accordingly can go a long way in maintaining trust within the community . No chief executive wants to be blindsided with a complaint , especially one with widespread implications . Ensuring that the department has a clearly defined and well-publicized internal affairs process that accepts complaint information from a variety of sources will help chiefs avoid this common pitfall .
SPRING . 2021 43