������Ƶ

Several videotapes have surfaced that call into question the conduct of the Honolulu Police Department and its personnel. These tapes have documented a number of disturbing values displayed by police including the tendency to dissuade or not report crime, a failure to protect those they are legally obligated to protect, assault and battery on citizens, and unlawful use of force, all of which have led to multiple lawsuits and costly financial settlements. Reasons for answers to why departmental policies are not followed by Honolulu police officers have been absent.

Questions as to why official reporting and internal investigation policy was not followed during the Sgt. Darren Cachola incident have not been answered, but have no doubt obstructed the official investigation. Meanwhile, videos revealing apparent federal (Title 42 U.S.C. ss 1983) civil rights violations, and more cover-ups by non-reporting by “decorated” officers and supervisors have surfaced.

This has revealed a stark contrast between the Police Department’s professed values and Honolulu police officers underlying values. This contrast was highlighted when Police Chief Kealoha pointed to “union stakeholders” as being the reason policy was not being reformed surrounding police misconduct.

Police unions, unlike other professional unions, are compulsory upon entering the police profession (i.e., peer pressure, and departmental sanctioning are part of the induction process). This requisite joining is due to the officer’s constant scrutiny and liability that surrounds the function of their duties to the state.

Police unions are designed to ensure the same due process rights as for citizens accused of a crime, or who become the focus of investigations from internal departmental and external oversight mechanisms. Because the officer is under constant scrutiny from external mechanisms, the union constantly advises officers on conduct both on duty and off, and acts as a guide to negotiate internal policing policies based on the collective mentoring from “seasoned” officers. This means that although policies may be set by individual departments, officers’ conduct is primarily guided by union advisors whose focus is to negotiate both laws and policies that can negatively affect an officer’s career.

SHOPO’s recent paid advertisements addressed current policy by making unclear and vague statements on how the Honolulu Police Department forms policies. Nationally, police policies are normally crafted around best police practices, local, state and federal laws, and are then exposed to external scrutiny on both a state and local level through oversight mechanisms.

Testimony by Police Chief Kealoha, and Gregory Gilmartin (Honolulu Police Commission’s Chief Investigator) during the Domestic Violence policy review by the Legislature revealed that the external local mechanism designed for police oversight (the Honolulu Police Commission) had been repositioned (through SHOPO driven legislation) to be a “lame duck” organization which has no current purpose. Testimony by Honolulu Police Major Hite (Director of the Honolulu Police Training Program) to the City and County Public Safety Board also revealed that Honolulu Police Administrators are currently tasked with creating and setting training itinerary that has focused on “first shooter” training, rather than community-centric issues. This exposed problematic decision making in the Honolulu Police Department, surrounding training that focuses on domestic violence, mental health, and other interpersonal communication skills.

City and County Legislators assigned to the Public Safety Committee asked Chief Kealoha why police misconduct and training issues were not being met with policy revisions during the Sgt. Cachola inquiry. Chief Kealoha, at that time, pointed to “union stakeholders” as one of the reasons.   Although the union can lobby against legislation, legislators have the power to make revisions surrounding external police oversight through positioning the Honolulu Police Commission. Historically police reform has been brought about by legislators and reformers, working together to expose and root out large scale police corruption (e.g The Knapp Commission, The Wickersham Commission, etc.)

On the City and County level, legislators are in a position to pass legislation that repositions the existing Honolulu Police Commission and empower it with independent and knowledgeable criminal justice professionals, academics, and community leaders. This model is being used in Albuquerque, Los Angeles, and Chicago. This would allow the Commission to better perform the functions of investigating all citizen complaints and advising on discipline to which the police chief is accountable. The Commission currently performs the annual review, hiring, and terminating of the police chief, and the annual budget and policy reviews.

SHOPO also lobbied legislators against the creation of a Statewide Training and Standards Board that would certify or license all law enforcement officers and whose function mirrors other states nationally. Training and Standards Boards typically work with national nonprofit stakeholders and other agencies to create a statewide standard training curriculum in line with national best practices, and to ensure relief from liability surrounding training (e.g. Failure to Train or Manage lawsuits).

Although Chief Kealoha and his staff have signaled a willingness to address reform ideas, the SHOPO president, the State Prosecutor’s Office, and several elements of the mass media seem intent on obstructing real progress. It continues to be the community and certain legislators that are rallying to eliminate corrupt police conduct, actions, and speech.

In January 2014, Hawaii legislators introduced to address this statewide void. Although this bipartisan-supported bill was drafted with input from experts in the law enforcement field, the bill was sent to the Hawaii Senate’s Public Safety Committee where, regrettably, it was never introduced and died.

Currently, Hawaii remains as a holdout from the national model of having a law enforcement statewide certification and training standards board. Should the new state senators and representatives be serious about police reform, they would re-introduce and pass this bill in the upcoming legislative session.