COLUMBIA, 1/17/11 (Beat Byte)
-- Veteran investigative journalist Steve Weinberg (left) has penned an
eye-opening account of his controversial tenure on the Columbia Citizens Police
Review Board (CCPRB), published just seven days before he announced his resignation from
the board.
"I would never have guessed that I would end up as the
center of controversy—not in my usual role as an investigative journalist, but
in my insider role as a commission member," Weinberg writes in the January 6
issue of The
Crime Report, a news magazine of the
Center on Crime, Media, and Justice.
Rhetorically wondering why he applied for a volunteer job where he was sure to make enemies, "many of whom wear badges and carry guns," the 27-year Columbia resident partly cites civic duty. "Police-community relations had soured—mostly, but not exclusively, in African-American residential areas—and I wanted to help improve the status quo."
Rhetorically wondering why he applied for a volunteer job where he was sure to make enemies, "many of whom wear badges and carry guns," the 27-year Columbia resident partly cites civic duty. "Police-community relations had soured—mostly, but not exclusively, in African-American residential areas—and I wanted to help improve the status quo."
He also wanted to "experience governance as an insider."
About the board's first case—a California (state)-based
complaint regarding a well-publicized 2010 Columbia police SWAT raid—Weinberg
says he "agreed the raid had been mishandled" and that "lack of a local
complaint did not bother me, but it did bother some of my
colleagues."
He then explains his "deciding vote in an otherwise evenly split board" against police officer discipline.
He then explains his "deciding vote in an otherwise evenly split board" against police officer discipline.
"Sure, after viewing the video released by the police I
wanted to discipline SWAT team members. But we possessed no independent
corroborating information...my investigative reporting background told me we
could not clearly establish violations of existing police policy based solely on
the video, nor could I identify which helmeted police officer committed which
acts. I reluctantly voted against discipline for individual
officers...."
A different complaint Weinberg characterizes as "more
satisfying," his investigative reporting skills helping sway the board. After a
local bartender complained he'd been roughed up by a Columbia police officer,
police chief Ken Burton ruled "he could not find enough information to determine
the truth, so would not discipline the officer."
Weinberg says he "helped guide my colleagues through an
independent fact-finding process. Eventually, I felt confident we had collected
enough solid evidence to recommend the officer be admonished for use of
excessive force. Two of my colleagues disagreed, but I carried a substantial
majority. My evidence-gathering and the conclusions I drew from the evidence
seemed to influence at least some of the others constituting the
majority."
Burton and members of the police officer's union
"disagreed with the ruling, spewing harsh language in public," Weinberg notes.
"I could have ignored the lashing out, but I felt the incendiary language caused
harm to the nascent Citizens Police Review board process. So I employed my
journalism training to shed light as well as heat."
Ultimately, Weinberg writes that he was, "pleased that I
had decided to cross a professional line the day I applied to serve on the
Citizens Police Review Board. I recommend that other journalists do the same,
with the caveat that those journalists should not be involved in local coverage
of law enforcement."
by Steve
Weinberg
No comments:
Post a Comment