California prison guards violated department policy in nearly half of incidents in which force was used against inmates, according to a report from the state Office of Inspector General (OIG).
The OIG reviewed 3,709 force incidents reviewed by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) between July and December 2017.
Out of the more than 3,700 incidents involving force against prisoners, just 52 percent met the state’s standards. A total of 1,774 did not.
In 47 of the incidents, the OIG’s review found that guards’ actions may have unnecessarily contributed to the need to use force against an inmate.
In one of those incidents, an officer let an agitated inmate who was cursing and yelling out of a medical holding cell. The unrestrained inmate attacked the officer, who had to use physical force and pepper spray to gain control of the situation.
A CDCR policy requires that interviews of inmates who allege excessive or unnecessary force, or who are seriously injured by a use-of-force, be recorded on video. Corrections officers complied with the rule in just 57 percent of the cases, however.
Additionally, the OIG found that in 68 of 292 cases in which inmates complained of unnecessary or excessive force, guards failed to adequately justify that there was an imminent need for a use-of-force.
While these instances accounted for a small portion of the thousands of incidents, the Inspector General pointed out that any “unnecessary force is a serious issue and could increase tension between staff and inmates and, ultimately, expose the department to legal liability.”
In a total of 44 of the 68 inadequately justified instances, the department determined unnecessary force was used.
In one case identified in the OIG report, an officer ordered an inmate to hand the guard a paper that another inmate had given him. Instead, the inmate tried to flush the paper down the toilet. The guard pepper sprayed the inmate. When the inmate continued to try to flush the piece of paper, the guard used physical force on the man, and then a second round of chemical spray.
The guard, who was unable to show an imminent threat leading to the use-of-force, was formally disciplined.
In another case, a prisoner failed to comply with a guard’s order to provide identification, and walked away from the guard “while making a derogatory comment.” When the inmate refused the officer’s order to stop walking, the officer grabbed the inmate from behind and forced the man to the ground.
This guard, too, could not show that an immediate threat preceded the force, and was disciplined.
In the incidents found to be out of policy, review committees most often recommended additional training for the officers involved. In a handful of cases, officers’ actions were met with more serious consequences, like formal counseling and disciplinary action.
In at least 1,685 of the 1,774 out-of-policy incidents, the department required involved officers to complete additional training. In 111 of the incidents, counseling was required. Supervisors took disciplinary action against officers in 16 cases, and sent 18 other incidents to the Office of Internal Affairs to be investigated.
The OIG’s report commends the CDCR’s recent implementation of a new use-of-force data collection system, which the OIG says will likely improve compliance with force-related policies.
The report also recommends that the department’s training for guards focuses on “the most common and serious times of violations identified from the department’s new use-of-force tracking system,” and that prison officials should “consider stronger progressive discipline for staff who repeatedly violate use-of-force policies.
I’m not sure about the CDCR policies regarding use of force, but I would imagine “an imminent threat” is not the only instance under which OC spray can be used. OC spray, for most LEO’s and corrections too probably, represent the minimal force necessary to gain compliance from someone who’s not following your orders. I guess, if you would prefer officers going hands on instead, which I guarantee will lead you to a much more escalated and physical encounter most of the time so be it.
Or…just let it go…”rules…smules”, what’s the big deal, they’re already in prison anyone.
Also, what is the scope of these “policy” violations. Just as the law identifies levels of crimes (infractions, misdemeanors, felonies) and is keen on how they are accurately reported and captured, I’m sure these CDCR “policy violations” vary from the lightweight and inconsequential to the more serious.
Truth in reporting and the spirit of transparency require all the details be caste into the light, not just the self serving, “news flash”, headline gathering, cherry picked ones.
Taylor, my God the the title of your article is so misleading. The only way you get to your “half the time” is by categorizing all contacts, force or not, that may have had some procedural violation. Actual force was at 3%, if you throw out the undefined “overall*” category you have about a 23% “non-compliance” figure. I guess it’s all about the lens you view the world with, but my reaction is that the 3% figure is a sound positive. My guess is that the 3% actual use would be much higher if the prison staff was way out of compliance. State prisoners are masters of exploiting the system & they would act out accordingly. The State prison population isn’t exactly like your neighborhood & while fairness is in order, please give the staff some credit, they’re very professional.
Past, I thought it was just me. Maybe she is an expert in “new math” while you and I plod along with “old math” but the two don’t seem to mix.
Or maybe it is just her desire to make the proverbial mountain out of a molehill when it comes to her articles.
Thats what cops/co’s do…who is surprized?
Taylor like her boss care more about the health and well being of the criminal on the street and the ones locked up for years if not forever than they do for any average citizen and certainly for any cop. That Celeste obviously feels that way is especially disgusting. Two more gunned down cops yesterday, don’t expect to find out anything about it here, more important to cry about a career criminal being pepper sprayed.
@SureFire, Smh, at the “average citizen and certainly for any cop” comment. The average citizen is law abiding, constitutional abiding. There are rule and regulations set in place so the under the guarantees of the constitution everyone rights are protected. Cop, Citizen, and Criminal. One you turn the blind eye to the corruption in these institutions it gets dangerous. Not only am I looking under another Lens @ThePast but I think mine is not bias. The Office of Inspector General puts out this report every year, Monitoring the Use of Force. Don’t forget if you use hand cuffs, pepper spray, leg shackles, then physical force. Maybe it the use of a baton, each individual strike is an application of force, restraints an application, chemical agent an application. In 2020 when I first started reading this report thinking that the OIG was keeping CDCR honest until i got to this one part that stood out to me, the OIG was basically telling the department that the violations were in the report writing and that CDCR needed to do a better job at expressing an imminent threat so that the force that was used can be justified. You can try with body cameras to keep it fair, but so percentages you’ll never get right and the brutality on inmates is one because the COs then falsify reports to make the inmate combative, resistive, and put false charges on them. Now average citizens of American, “A violation is a violation no matter who commits it, and a criminal is a criminal even wearing a badge”.