i first want to welcome and thank must ago adopt sheet for joining us today. the week following the death of jeff adachi and the subsequent league to police report to the press, i call for this hearing on the policies and protocols within the san francisco police department governing the public release of private citizen information particularly during an active investigation. i was outraged by the inappropriate nature of the leak and extremely concerned about whether laws are broken in the process of the leak. the issue is, at its core, about violation of public trust in our police department. in addition to the leak, police support following the public defender's death, there was a high-profile issue in january od employee publicly presented an individual's rap sheet as -- at a community forum for purely political purposes. this former sfpd employee should never have access to these

records to begin with, and certainly this records should not be on public display for political reasons. it is reported this action was in violation of state law. i understand that it is not ordinary for anyone to have immediate access to police reports. i have actually heard that it can take a significant and sometimes frustrating amount of time to gain access to police reports from the public defender 's office, district attorney's office and even within the department. there are protections around privacy for a death case, sexual assault, or a case where there is a need to protect the victim, and for a death case, there is a significant restriction on who has access while the case is still under investigation. it is only the inspector who has access. even uniform officers cannot access this info. it was shocking with the ease and speed with which this police report about an active death case was released to the press. today i have asked the police department to present at this

committee to address the following questions. what are the departmental general orders governing the release of private information? who has access to sensitive private information? what is the protocol for what information can be made public and by whom? what is the accountability mechanism within a department if staff were found to release private information in violation of departmental general orders or in violation of state law? and how is a san francisco police department ensuring that improper conduct with regard to the release of private information is prevented in the future? this is about whether members of the public contrast that they and their left ones are not being exposed to unwarranted invasion of privacy or confidential information, whether as a subset, a victim, or informant, and that we ensure that nobody is above the law. today we have captain barconi to

present to us today. rejoined also by supervisor ronen. thank you. >> do you want me on this one? >> that is the san francisco government and you may speak in any microphone. >> okay. good afternoon, supervisors. i am from the san francisco police department's investigation bureau. i'm here representing chief scott as a command staff member, and i will be able to answer any questions you have after. as you mentioned, supervisor fewer, the acting captain is a captain in charge of a risk-management division and he will give you a presentation on many of the questions that you posed a minute ago, and then we will take any questions after. >> thank you very much. thank you, commander. >> good afternoon, members of the board.

i am the acting captain for the risk management division of the san francisco police department, and i will present a powerpoint that will go over the general outline of the policies, hopefully it answers many of your questions. to start, i would like to address the san francisco administrative code that talks about private information. the code says private information shall mean any information that could be used identify an individual including without limitation name, address , social security number, medical information, financial information, date and location of birth, and names of relatives , basically that this ordinance forbids the disclosing of. the ordinance, whoever gives an exception for much of this information as it relates to law enforcement, as there are state and federal laws that direct the

department to provide some of these things. so in talking about information typically released by the police department, obviously copies of police reports that are requested by members of the public, victims, and media. the sfpd media release to the public regarding investigations can be limited based on certain factors. we also are responsible for releasing mugshots as well. the procedure for releasing police reports is covered -- the easiest access to police reports is through the sfpd website, and the gov qa system which blogs these releases, creates a

reference number, and a history of the release. police reports are released under department general order 3.16, and just to discuss and make sure we are all aware of what the department general order is, this is the most authoritative and permanent directive established revised and adopted by the police commission after public hearing for the overall administration and management of the department , and the general conduct of members. the policy is to release copies of police reports upon request unless that release would endanger citizens, law enforcement personnel, and law enforcement investigation. here are some examples of how the department may deny disclosure of some of this information.

it is a list that is dictated by administrative codes and the california government code as it relates to the california public records relief act. that is section 6254 of the government code. i can go over these real quickly endanger the safety of persons involved in an investigation, endanger law enforcement personnel, endanger the successful completion of an investigation, reveal secret investigative techniques or procedures, reveal information regarding the identity of competent -- confidential informants, reveal the name of any victim of sexual assault to specifically request nondisclosure, reveals medical or other information constituting an unwarranted invasion of privacy, and reveals a name or address of any person detained to do too well for an

institution code 5150 which is a site called -- which is a psychological hold. these are the conditions we must ally the release -- denied the release of information. this is juvenile suspect, arrested or detained or any information that might lead to the identity of the juvenile, vehicle collision reports involving death or personal injury, and exceptions have to do with insurance companies, the victim's insurance companies, primarily, any report regarding child abuse or any report regarding assault or abused conduct made confidential and in these penal code sections, and the address of any victim of sexual assault. this is a list of the things that must be released under 6254 of the government code. i can go over this as well. let's see.

individual arrested including the name, address, occupation and physical description, facts surrounding the arrest including but not limited to time and date of arrest, and booking location of arrest, the amount of bail, location of arrestee or time and manner of release, charges brought including outstanding warrants and parole information holds, time, substance and location of all complaints or requests for assistance, and time and nature of responses thereto including where an incident report has been made, the time and date of location and occurrence, and the time and date of report, factual circumstances surrounding the crime or incident, general description of any inquiries and property and weapons involved. okay so i think we are getting more towards the nuts and bolts of your inquiry as to who can authorize a release of a report, and i will tell you that i

formerly was an investigator with the homicide detail, and these are important issues, especially as it relates to homicide investigations, so the assigned investigator in charge of the unit that is charged with investigating the crime, the record management section officer in charge if the case was not assigned, so in other words, if it was not assigned to an investigative bureau, the media and public information officer, but again, after consultation with the assigned investigator, and the department of operation center after consultation with the assigned investigator. so really, the driver of the release of a police report, of a case that is under investigation will be the lead investigator. this is a bulletin, this is a synopsis of a bulletin regarding specifically homicide

investigations. here is the synopsis of this. officers, and this is officers as in patrol officers, not the person assigned to the case generally, will provide the type of investigation being conducted , and the general location of the incident. any other information regarding the open homicide investigation shall not be released to the public or media without expressed approval of, and then this is a list of people who can give that approval. i will go over it real quick. chief of police, assistant chief of operations, deputy chief of the field operations bureau, commander of investigations, captain of major crimes or the officer in charge of the homicide detail. in this slide, i want to talk a little bit about -- about the release of mugshots. 6254 describes what law

enforcement agencies shall make available to the public, and again, the overriding concern here is if it compromises an investigation, that would be the police department's shield if they did not want to provide some of this information, otherwise the government code expressly encourages law enforcement to provide this information. i will read that to you quickly. state and local law enforcement agencies shall make public the full name and occupation of every individual arrested by the agency, the individual charge of physical description, including color bias and hair, sex, wait mac, height, the time and date of arrest, the time and date of booking, the location of arrest, the circumstances surrounding the arrest, the amount of bail said, the time and manner of release or the location where the individual is currently being held, and all charges individual is being held upon, including any outstanding warrants from other jurisdictions and parole or

probation holds. the california attorney general provided an opinion in 2003 which describes the law-enforcement ability to release mugshots in that the information to be released should be so specific in describing the person in a mug shot falls under the date of birth, color of hair, height and pound mac. the attorney general's opinion is the police department may release mugshots. the san francisco police department does not restrict the release of arrest photos to the public unless that release would compromise the investigation or prosecution. a lot of times example of that would be i.d. pending. if there's witnesses that need to identify a person as part of a case, that mugshots is often withheld. this is a list of general orders

, department orders, department bulletins, penal code sections that all give the officers guidance in what can and cannot be released to the public. so here is, again, a synopsis of what the department, how the department sees discipline as it relates to some of these issues with releasing information, and these are some of the ones that we generally look at. the department general order is the general rules of conduct, and in there it is described that a member shall obey all written orders, policies and procedures of the department and probably obey all lawful, written, or verbal directives of superiors. the san francisco disciplinary penalty and referral guidelines for sworn members describes these violations may be classed

a violations which is the most serious violation of misconduct. as it relates to these topics, we have conduct, it constitutes a felony in the release of collected information, which is one of our databases of law enforcement, and then unauthorized use and dissemination of confidential information as it relates to this, that could be collected information that could be other confidential information as it relates to an investigation, and serious violations that bring discredit upon the department, a penalty for a first offensive any of these types of misconduct could be suspension or up to termination. that concludes the presentation of the department. >> inc. you very much, captain.

supervisor ronen has just joined us. she has some comments. >> i have questions, actually. thank you so much. i'm sorry i am only able to be here for ten minutes. is expecting this hearing to go a bit earlier, and i -- i have a conflict. we are not in budget. >> yeah, yeah. >> what supervisor fewer mentioned in the first place, the impetus for this hearing were at least two incidences, one very high-profile that really disturbed all of on the board of supervisors was the immediate release of information that was potentially misleading, inflammatory, et cetera, that appeared to be in political

retribution for the work of our late public defender, jeff adachi. so what have you done, what has the police department done since the release of that information, and has anybody been disciplined so far for that release. >> i can answer that question. my division that i oversee includes the administrative and criminal investigations in the department for internal misconduct and internal criminal activity. so that case is currently, actively under investigation in our criminal investigations division. >> okay. , so you can't speak to it. >> no, it is a current and ongoing investigation. >> so you won't discuss any details about whether that was proper or not proper? >> i will say that the reason it

is under investigation is because it is believed to be not proper or potentially improper, but is under investigation, so can't provide any conclusions to that at this point. >> okay. >> because we can't have detailed discussion about that particular case, i just want to make clear to you today, and two commanders and to the chief of police, is that when there are these politically motivated attacks on individuals, whether it is a public defender, our city and county, the elected public defender, or a member of our community, it is absolutely a road -- erodes the public charge of trust in the police department to be objective, in your ability to serve the community in a way that we can all rely on and depend on. as we are undergoing tremendous police reform with hundreds of

recommendations from the department of justice about how we have a system in need of reform, this type of activity moves us backwards. we are having hearing after hearing of the board of supervisors to go over those 272 recommendations and progress reports, in looking at charts, where you save her age recommendation where you are, if you were blue, red, yellow, green, all of that is meaningless, and we might as well just throw that in the trash if when our community's hearts are broken, when jeff adachi's widow is grieving, when his staff is hoping and unclear about the future of their work and their lives, to have that type of maligning going on of a

public official in san francisco is disgusting, and we want answers. we want a full investigation and we want accountability. i don't know when you will be able to talk about the investigation and the outcome, but if you could give us a sense of the timeline so we know and we can have a conversation about this? >> i absolutely understand your concern, and i understand where it is coming from completely. i want to tell you personally that i have been overseeing the investigation. i have 20 years of investigative experience through robbery, major crimes, special investigations, homicide, i run investigative unit at bayview station, i've run investigative unit in internal affairs and internal affairs criminal. i absolutely understand importance of a thorough investigation, and i want to let you know that we are working tirelessly on this case. it is a priority case and in our

unit. [please stand by]

>> the criminal investigation, depending on the outcome, it certainly has the potential to be made public. >> supervisor ronen: okay. so what would you not be able to release? >> what types of offenses? >> supervisor ronen: that's right. >> well, 1421, if it's an administrative case, it covers officer-involved shootings, which this isn't, in-custody deaths, and use of force with great bodily injury, which this

isn't. it does cover related sexual assault, which this isn't, and it may cover dishonesty. if dishonesty becomes a factor in this investigation, it will be something that could be made public. >> supervisor ronen: and this is something we should know if you meet your goals within a few weeks. >> hopefully. >> supervisor ronen: either way, i know that you are investigating this, but i believe that miss adachi and the public defender's office deserves an apology from the san francisco police department. this has caused incredible heart break and hardship for the family, and i don't know that that apology has been issued so far, but if not, it's expected, and it's expected so that we can begin to restore some trust that you're not going to target individuals whether, you know, they're

adversaries in individual cases or they're accused of a crime that you just don't like, but that the release of information, this should be a professional department, should not be used as a way to harm anyone. and you certainly don't have my confidence that the department is able to not use information like this in a retaliatory way at this point. >> supervisor ronen, commander greg mc eachern. when we have information like this that's released, whether it's a police report or some other information, we have the protocols in place and policies to investigate it. often, it's an individual that makes a choice on your own to decide that. but what's key as you said, we

are going through a lot of changes in this department and reforms, trying to bridge the gaps in the communities that we have. when incidents like this happen, it undermines the trust that we have been working very hard over the last few years. i spoke to the chief about it kbr yesterday, and wanted to relay to you that we understand it. most of all, in this instance here, while we harm the community, there's a definite harm to the family of mr. adachi, to his wife, to his loved ones that had a report that was released within hours that it was completed. so on behalf of chief scott and the department, we apologize, i apologize. regardless of what happened, they deserve an apology, and i'm offering that today.

>> supervisor ronen: thank you very much. i appreciate that. thank you. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. so i have some questions about the january 2018 incident where a retired police inspector who at the time worked for the police union used a rap sheet as a political prop. i'd like to call up someone who was at that meeting and share with us what he witnessed there. >> thank you, supervisor. i should clarify, i'm retired from the aclu working on police issues many, many years. i'm just speaking for myself. let me just clarify, they cannot release on the administrative investigation the name of the officer. they can tell you if that investigation is over and whether or not it was sustained and whether or not there will be discipline. this is not a situation where the officer or officers', plural name, is known.

you have a right to know, the public has a right to know when this investigation is over. the captain is correct that sometimes investigations are complicated. the incident that i observed is very simple. the facts are not in dispute. there was an event at the lgbt community center. i'm a district eight resident. i suspected this wasn't about public safety, it was politics. i showed up, and sure enough, it was a p.o.a., talking about why they didn't like the d.a., why prop eight should have been adopted, to get rid of regulations on tasers, why they needed more officers. it was a political meeting, and at the beginning of this meeting, they had taped to the front wall an old-style printout, if you can imagine the school paper, not sheet by sheet printer, but like a scroll came down the wall and down out into the aisle, about

15 or 20 feet long. during the hearing, they represented that as a particular individual's rap sheet information. and they were saying look, this guy hasn't had any consequences. it was a political prop. it was january 2018, so 15, 18 months ago. this was a front page article in the chronicle where they admitted they did this. there was a person talking about this who had no right to this information, bragged in the newspaper -- this was a quote from gary delanis, we will continue to use these records until someone tells us not to. my question is, has anyone told them not to? i was contacted by internal affairs perhaps six months after this incident, and i'm like why am i just hearing about this now? there's no dispute about the facts. they're bragging about it in the newspaper, and the investigator didn't want to

answer that question, but ultimately, you can have very good rules -- right, so the law and criminal history information is members of the public don't have access to it. and if it is going to be used, it has to be used for a legitimate law enforcement purpose. politics is not a legitimate law enforcement purpose. >> supervisor fewer: thank you, mr. crew. >> thank you. i don't know if you wanted that information now, but thank you for holding this hearing. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. so commander and captain, i understand that we are not disputing the facts that this happened. i think there was an eyewitness there. i think the chronicle also mentioned it in their paper. i also understand this is against state law which bans the unlawful furnishing of state criminal record summary information. the only people allowed to see these records are law enforcement workers and people

with special authorization from a court. the person who provided it to be charged with a misdemeanor. under state law, this retired police inspector should not have access to these records, is that correct? >> i'll go ahead and answer that. a criminal record includes things such as f.b.i. numbers, driver's license numbers, things that are restricted from the public. >> supervisor fewer: and it's my understanding that the public cannot access information in clets, it has to be for some purpose, is that correct? >> correct. it has to be for a law enforcement purpose, a need to know, right to know purpose.

>> supervisor fewer: so for example, commander, if you wanted to go on clets, and he wanted to find out the language -- and you wanted to find out the longest rap sheet you could find, would you be able to sign in and get that or would you be restricted from that if you are not in an active investigation about that particular person? >> so i would be able to access it, but you are correct, unless i am involved in that active investigation and have a right or need to know, i do not have access to it, either. >> supervisor fewer: so even a commander would not have it until they're part of an active investigation. so what we see here is this is a clear violation of your department general orders to use arrest records for curiosity of political purposes, is that correct? >> i can't comment on whether -- the reasons for this being used, whether it was political purposes.

i can only say that access to those items are either criminal violations and certainly administrative violations unless there is an active investigation, so access to that by someone as unauthorized is a criminal violation and certainly an admin that we require and complete an investigation on. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. so we heard that in the chronicle that retired inspector was quoted as saying we'll continue to use these records until someone tells us not to. was he told not to do that? >> i can say our unit made an effort to speak to mr. delanis, and he refused to speak to us. >> supervisor fewer: so did sftd request an investigation from our state attorney general since this is a violation of

state law? >> i know our office did an investigation into this. as mr. crew had mentioned, the general consensus of the witnesses that were interviewed was the document was quite old, in that it was, as he said, a spool of perforated paper by all the witness accounts, which would put us back before we could do any of those searches that you talked about where we could access the information. in other words, this was a very old document, possibly ten years or more -- i wasn't there, i didn't see it. but based on all descriptions, the document that was used, i have no idea whose name -- it was never revealed, and no one at the event never saw the name, so we don't know the person allegedly who this rap sheet was about. i mean, no one could actually

even verify that it was a rap sheet and not a prop. so there was some issues with it. while it was purported to be by mr. delanis a rap sheet, it may have been bluster. it's impossible to tell, it's so old. >> supervisor fewer: so my question was, has sfpd requested an investigation by the state attorney general. >> no. >> supervisor fewer: did you do an investigation? >> yes. >> supervisor fewer: and what was the outcome of that investigation? >> i kind of synopsisized it a few minutes ago. >> supervisor fewer: excuse me, captain. i'm sorry to interrupt you. are you telling me that this incident happened, and you're telling me you could not say this was in violation of any of the general orders or any of your protocols, is that

correct? >> no, that's not what i'm saying. the person in possession of the item, mr. delanis, was not a law enforcement officer at the time or retired law enforcement order, so he would not fall under the general orders. >> supervisor fewer: and what became of that criminal investigation? >> it's at this point insufficient evidence. there's -- it's inconclusive. as i said, the document that was described by the witnesses, including mr. crew, was so old, ten years or more, based on the type of paper if it was in fact our document. we haven't used perforated paper in approximately ten years in the department. so no one could provide us with a name so we could search in that direction. we dated it over ten years old,

so we couldn't compile enough information to identify if in fact that was a true rap sheet. >> supervisor fewer: so, you know, this hearing is really about public trust, so how are you ensuring the public that this isn't happening again, that these rap sheets aren't displayed for political reasons as a prop during a public safety forum? or are you concerned about that or do you feel like that is a concern? >> supervisor, it's actually a concern. >> supervisor fewer: thank you, commander. >> we -- officers in our department have to go through clets compliance training every two years that tells us what we can and cannot release. there are times we issue reminder bulletins, although we

shouldn't have to, because of the clets bulletin, the officer should know. when you use a rap sheet outside the manner of what the scope of their investigation is, we have a duty to investigate it, as i mentioned. we can't ensure that every officer doesn't go down this route and doesn't make -- and take an action like that. what we can ensure for the public is that when we find out about it, we will do an investigation, whether it's criminal or administratively. and if we need to address it with additional training, counseling, whatever comes out of it, we have a duty as a police department to do that. >> supervisor fewer: so have you had violation of police officers accessing information through clets that is not authorized? >> i'm sorry. can you repeat the question? >> supervisor fewer: yes, so sorry, commander. have you had instances where police officers, sworn personnel have accessed information to clets that has

not been authorized? >> yes. >> supervisor fewer: and what has happened in those cases? >> there's in one instance been a criminal arrest. >> supervisor fewer: and have there been any terminations? >> sorry? >> supervisor fewer: terminations, because actually -- >> i don't -- >> supervisor fewer: -- you gave us this sheet that said it could be suspension or termination, depending on the severity. >> yeah. depending on the past practice of the individual, termination could be a decision, depending on the violation that was received. >> supervisor fewer: okay. thank you. i have a few questions about this latest leak that the public is concerned about about jeff adachi. i have a memo from an investigation at the public

defender's office, from someone at kron that jeff adachi's was being sold by a stringer. i'd like to bring someone up from the public defender's investigation unit to explain this memo, if you wouldn't mind. >> good afternoon. i'm the managing attorney of the investigation unit of the public defender's office. thank you, supervisor fewer, for calling this hearing and bringing attention to these issues, many of which impact our clients and we care about very deeply. so on february 24, two days after mr. adachi passed away, an investigator in our office, senior investigator jackson holland who's in the audience today went to the location where mr. adachi was located shortly before his death.

and he made contact with a kron 4 news reporter who said a stringer was offering to sell mr. adachi's death report for $2500 a copy. kron could not afford to buy the copy but other news outlets could and did according to this kron 4 news reporter. she gave mr. holland a copy of her business card, and he informed myself, matt gonzalez, and the new public defender. and on march 4, our office provided a memo written by mr. holland to sfpd. on march 4, mr. holland asked me for a copy of the -- for the

name of the reporter and i gave it to him. the report was released prematurely at best, and far more concerning was sold to the media. now, i appreciate that today, the commanders have stated that they acknowledge that this was -- this release was believed to be improper, but if it is true that this report was actually sold, it bears grave concerns, in the public defender's office, a concern for jeff's family, and his wife, who's here today -- and something that the public should be aware of -- is that the police report was in the hands of the media within hours

of mr. adachi's death in a situation where the police themselves viewed the location as a possible crime scene and an ongoing investigation. the fact that this happened involving the elected public defender who had a history of battling the police, exposing misconduct, is all the more troubling. now, again, i want to say that i appreciate that the police department has stated today that they're conducting an investigation. we appreciate that they've offered and extended an apology, but there remain a number of unanswered questions, some of which i think can be answered today. so first of all, who released or leaked the report containing the information to the media? did the lead investigator authorize this release, and when? was the report -- is there any evidence that the report was

sold to the media? was a police officer or were police officers involved in selling the report to the media? has the police department identified any suspects? how many witnesses have they interviewed? has the reporter been contacted -- the contact from kron 4 whose name that we provided 46 days ago, on march 12, been identified? if not, why not? if so, what did that person say? did the police department contact the members of the media who had the report in hand in hours to determine how they obtained the report and from whom they obtained the report? have all officers who responded to the scene and identified in the police report been interviewed? have suspects been interviewed, any investigations been initiated? what's the status of the investigation, and as supervisor ronen mentioned,

when will the investigation be made public? you know, as a public defender myself for 13 years in san francisco, and i've handled many different types of cases, i know that most -- even the most serious cases that are investigated by the police department and even charged by the district attorney, that arrests and investigations are completed sometimes within days, and then, questions are asked later. and our concern is there's a double standard being applied here because it involves the former public defender, someone who did battle the police department. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. so commander, captain, i think that we have some questions here, and i know i do. so can you respond to this memo, and -- that the police report was being sold to media outlets, and are you able to answer any of the questions

that the public defender managing attorney has brought forth? >> so i am aware of his memo, and all of the questions he asked are being investigated, but to be perfectly honest, i can't answer them all here. >> supervisor fewer: because i think what you showed in your powerpoint, there is a specific chain of command on which this kind of information is released, is that correct? >> that's absolutely correct, and i absolutely concur with the inappropriateness of early release of information in an active investigation. i completely stand by that. that's totally inappropriate. >> supervisor fewer: thank you, captain. what is the procedure by which media can obtain information?

and in particular, do you ever release pictures of crime scenes, possible crime scenes to the media within hours of taking those photos? >> so i'm not prepared to answer the question of -- you know, specifically, but that wouldn't be totally out of the ordinary to release the crime scene photos under certain circumstances. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. so what is the protocol for media to obtain the police reports and in your history, you've worked for the police department how many years? >> 24 years. >> supervisor fewer: 24 years? thanks for your service. in your opinion, how long does it normally take to get a police report released? >> the police report should be released within ten days.

now, a police report could be released within hours. that's not totally -- it's not against any protocol. for the media, generally, they go through the public information office, and they make a request through the public information office, and they generally prepare that release, and it's normally released to all media at once. once it's released to one media outlet, they all should get it. >> supervisor fewer: so can you tell me if there have been in this particular incident any request through your public information officer from the media for a copy of the police report? >> i don't know the specific answer to that question. >> supervisor fewer: okay. so i would imagine you would be researching that, though. if you're telling me the official way is to obtain a police report is through a request, then, i would assume

that you would be investigating whether there were any official requests from the media to obtain these reports. is that correct? >> as it relates to my investigation, i'm investigating the unofficial request. i don't have any information from the public information officer as to how many official requests were made at a later date. >> supervisor fewer: captain, i think what i'm trying to say, if the media has it in hand, and we saw it, and you're telling me that it is through these channels that they get it, then there would be a record, if it were released to the media via your protocols, there would be a record. my question to you, sir, is this is part of your investigation, i'm assuming. >> i apologize, i misunderstood the question. no, this release was not done through the -- we are investigating. it was not done through the official channels through the

p.i.o. >> supervisor fewer: so what you're telling me today, you're taking this very seriously, as is the rest of the public, and many of the things you cannot tell us today because it's confidential information and the investigation is ongoing, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> supervisor fewer: and then, i think -- commander, did you want to add something? i'm so sorry. >> no, he answered the question exactly as you -- >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. and i just want to say that i know that when you release police reports, that there is a difference between different types of reports that you take -- accidents. but in the case of a death and -- that you are investigating, would you say, then -- and if -- did you say one of you worked in homicide before? >> yes, i did. yeah. >> supervisor fewer: okay. so in the case of a death that a criminal -- i mean, an

investigation is pending, would you normally not release that report until after you have finished your investigation? >> when there is a -- an investigation that may be criminal, it's unusual for us to release that police report until that investigation is concluded because we don't want to compromise that investigation. >> supervisor fewer: and in that case, commander, it would take your protocol, one of these -- the folks that you mentioned in this to actually release that, give authorization to release that information, that is correct? >> that's correct. so an instance like this, if it was made through the public information officer, they would contact myself or the officer in charge of homicide or the investigation and ask for it to be released, and then, we would release it with the approval of the investigation often through the p.i.o. >> supervisor fewer: okay, and then concerning some of the questions that the public defender had, i think what we want to know is have there been

individuals already identified that could have violated your protocol? >> i'm going to have to decline to answer because it's under investigation. >> supervisor fewer: and do you think that after your investigation is conducted that you would be able to comment on that? >> i would believe so. >> supervisor fewer: so i would ask the chair to continue this item to the call of the chair so you can come back to us and report on this. we appreciate it. and the timeliness of reports, what i'm hearing from different city entities and even police officers, that they are unable to get reports in that timely of a manner. would you agree with that? that the hours of release after

is very unusual? >> once reports are signed off, they're generated for the district attorney's office, for the public defender's office. they get generated quickly for booking situations, o.r. situations. so i can't say there's a spoesk timeli -- specific timeline that prevents a report from being released in a certain situation. >> supervisor fewer: these are the questions that the public wants answered. we understand that it's under investigation, but the reason i also ask these questions is because public trust has been

eroded from this. and i think that a thorough investigation and having you come back afterwards is -- after your investigation is conducted, and all these things that i bring up, the violation of your own protocol, the fact that it is unusual and unlikely that this was authorized. that you, too, are disturbed by this, and that this is -- this misconduct actually of police can actually be -- is punishable by -- that the penalty for the first offense of a class a misconduct is termination or suspension. i think that's probably what the public will be looking for after your investigation. so i thank you, gentlemen, for taking this seriously. i'd like to open this up for public comment now, so i'd like

to call up masuko adachi, please. >> hi. thank you. my name's masuko adachi, and i'm jeff adachi's widow. it was despicable what the police did to myself and my daughter. i saw the police report. it was less than 12 hours, and they released the police report with pictures, and it was all over the news. we had no privacy. it was an ongoing investigation, and i don't believe that they should have released it. since then, we have requested a police report copy, and i've

only received a partial police report with no pictures and not the complete police report, but to say that it doesn't affect the family is an understatement. it's incredibly painful to have the police department to this to you. thank you. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. >> julie su. >> thank you, supervisor. my name is julie su, and i speak as an individual, but i also will have my commission on the status of women on. you've seen the anguish with mrs. adachi and the entire family. this doesn't just extend to the police department but also the medical examiner's office

because exactly one month to the date of jeff adachi's passing, the medical examiner released a report with the home address and a social security number. that is outrageous. i don't know who is reviewing these reports before it's released to the media. i spent all day friday -- i spent all day with the public defender's office. i also took the personal anywhe initiative to have the media redact that information. i am an attorney with a public agency. vital information is often redacted. i also make sure that information is redacted before i conduct administrative hearings so that public cannot get that kind of information. also, d.t.o. 3.6 has victims of sexual assault -- have to opt out before their identities are

kept private. the equal access ordinance isn't even fulfilled by the police department. supervisor mar, i know you from working on that particular ordinance. finally, it's curious that the sfpd may be sued because they don't timely release reports on domestic violence cases, and that's by bay area legal aid victims of domestic violence. thank you. >> supervisor fewer: thank you, miss su. taku wilson. >> good afternoon, and thank you, supervisor fewer, for having us here today. i just want to point out that as you saw the pain from mrs. adachi. and not only did that pain affect her, it affected their daughter, and it affected the public defender's office as has been pointed out. imagine if jeff were your loved

one, and then imagine that jeff was our loved one. and if -- hopefully, nothing like this ever happens to any one of you or the chief of police, but would this matter have been handled this way? this was clearly a political retribution. with regard to the manner in which the police report was released, it was released within a matter of hours. what is more troubling is that on april 4, 2019, mrs. adachi made the same request for the police reports, and she was told that it would take some time. they replied back to her on april 5. they said we have received your request, but due to the nature of the report, we must route the request to the investigative unit for review. please be patient as this may add several days to our processing time.

thank you. then, on april 10, what she received back -- that is mrs. adachi is please find attached the report you requested, and it was four pages. there were no photos, no consent to search form, and it also said that if you want to request photos, statements, or evidence, a public records request must be filled out. why wasn't that done in the instance of the police on february 22 and 23, when this information was released? additionally, the public made -- >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. redi prasad. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> supervisor fewer: public comment? okay. any other speakers -- yes, mr. wright. >> i can tell you from hands-on

demonstrating experience, when you have an incident pertaining to the police, and a police report is documented, they tell you right off the top you have to wait ten days until after the report is taken. then you have to go down to the main headquarters on third street and fill out an additional form, requesting a copy of the police report with the police case number on it. a lot of times, the police will come to an incident, and you tell them that you want to give them a report, and they'll just give you a c.a.d. number, and you have to make it your business to tell them that you want a case number which makes the officer write a report detailed on what took place. if you don't, they'll give you a slip with a c.a.d. number on it which gives them an excuse not to write a report, so you have to point that out. and after you get that case number, then, you have to