The main function of the Department of Public Safety Oversight Committee is to make sure campus police officers are acting in accordance with internal policies and state laws governing their actions.

The committee does this by addressing citizens’ grievances against campus police officers and making recommendations to University officials so that action can be taken to amend a situation and prevent it from happening again.

When someone has a problem with DPS, campus policy dictates that a citizen has two options to take action: file a complaint with DPS itself or file a grievance with the DPS Oversight Committee.

A grievance is essentially the same thing as a complaint, except that a different body handles the case.

When a citizen files a complaint, DPS officials handle the investigation themselves, and the oversight committee is only notified about it when it’s completed. On the other hand, if a citizen files a grievance with the oversight committee, there is a possibility that top University officials could review the grievance. While a DPS officer may be punished as a result of a complaint, University executives have the power to change policies to try to prevent a similar incident from occurring in the future.

But a detailed look at the two separate processes sheds light on how similar issues may be handled differently by each system — and the implications those differences could have on a case’s ultimate outcome and its impact on campus police policy moving forward.

GOING THE COMPLAINT ROUTE

Any citizen who has a problem with an officer or DPS can go to DPS and directly file a complaint. With this option, the incident is not thoroughly reviewed by the oversight committee.

DPS spokeswoman Diane Brown said DPS deals with complaints on an individual basis.

“We look at what the initial complaint is, and depending on that specific complaint and the severity of that complaint, we’ll decide whether or not to step up to an internal investigation,” Brown said.

She said most complaints are from people who are not satisfied with the way an officer treated them and from people who are not happy about being thrown out of a football game for being drunk.

Regardless of the incident, DPS reviews each complaint by talking to the officer in question, available witnesses, the person who filed the complaint and viewing any evidence like video footage.

Brown said an investigation is never led by the supervisor of the officer in question “so that there’s some sort of independent eye.”

After an investigation is completed, a complaint is deemed either unfounded or founded.

Brown said DPS investigations determine most of the complaints to be “unfounded,” meaning a citizen voiced concern about an officer, but the investigation concluded that the officer acted appropriately in the particular situation.

A complaint also will be labeled unfounded if there is a lack of evidence.

Out of 17 complaints received by in 2007 and 2008, 13 were classified as unfounded.

A complaint is only labeled founded when it is determined an action a person is complaining about did take place and that the officer did not follow protocol or engage in proper conduct.

Depending on the incident, DPS Executive Director Ken Magee will determine any final discipline or corrective action. Brown said an officer will typically attend counseling, but that it’s possible for an officer to be suspended or terminated.

According to the February 2009 Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA) report — a document obtained by the Daily through a Freedom of Information Act request — one DPS officer was suspended and one was terminated in 2008 while five officers were suspended in 2007.

Once the investigation of a complaint is completed, the person who brought the complaint receives a written response about the outcome from the investigating lieutenant officer.