Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis has refused a federal judge’s order to release the names of officers who have at least five citizen complaints filed against them since 2000.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Maria Valdez had given Weis until 4 p.m. Friday to do so.
The list was being sought, along with a list of excessive-force complaints, by attorneys suing the city over an allegation that an officer falsely arrested and used excessive force against two children.
First off, all kidding aside, this is a good move. Anything that pisses off Flint Taylor, scumbag attorney extraordinaire, is a good move. Everyone knows this wasn't J-Fed's decision - it was Corp Counsel. The Cline regime refused to release the names also. Taylor, the plaintiff attorney, says the list would be under tight control for this case only and is only to be used for statistical purposes.
Bullshit. That list would be "accidentally" leaked within 10 days as part of some filing or brief or inter-office communication and blamed on some "intern" who didn't know any better and then, oh well, since the cat is out of the bag, we might as well make the whole thing public and some judge would "admonish" the law firm to put in place some safeguards so this never happens again.
Secondly, a large portion of this list is already the subject of an appeal in the Federal Courts, and obeying this Magistrate's order would be counter productive when an appeal is already ongoing for what is essentially the exact same list.
In any case, the claim that...
- ...to hand over the list because it would, "compromise officers’ performance, threaten safety, reduce morale and improperly impugn many officers’ otherwise well-deserved good reputations.”
...is disingenuous at best. Handing over a list of unproven and unsubstantiated allegations that in many cases have no basis in reality would be morally abhorrent and quite possibly a violation of an Officer's Civil Rights. If an accused person is cleared in court or cleared by investigation, there is no way in hell a judge allows a single mention of his previous history under any circumstances in the future. It would be overly prejudicial to the supposition of "innocent until proven guilty." But should this list be released, every single time an Officer is called to testify in a criminal or civil case, attorneys will be throwing this in their face. And it will continue for the entirety of the Officer's career (Officer, isn't it true that in the early 2000's, you were named on a list of officers...)
Don't think it won't happen.
Labels: department issues