Thread by @HatesTech

I'm going to be tweeting off and on about the MD House Police reform and Accountability Workgroup meeting today. Have others things to do today, but will catch what I can.

Here is the link to meeting that starts at 1.

@VAtterbeary starting with the meeting with going over the reason for the task group. Reminding people these are not the only issues that will be heard during 2021 session. Will continue voting on recommendations today.

Starting with Creating statewide use of force statue. Long list that all the recommendations that MPC recommendations and other things that go above those recommendations. A-T list

A: Duty to intervene when unreasonable use of force.
Del. McComas has things to say. "It would me, and other members if you could provide use of force that is objectionably reasonable. Has questions about word objectionably. How is it defined int he law?

Claire Rothmark is counsel for judicatory committee responding. Hard to answer, Part of MPTC model, comes from that agency. Objectively reasonable definition will probably be determined by the chief of the agency.

McComas: We hearing that public, that issues with it being police deciding, not law. Black people, people who "feel" they have issues that need a legal definition.

Del. Rosenberg. Other states have definitions in their laws.

@Delgatemoom explaining that objectively reasonable is an established legal idea. The new thing is the "duty to intervene"

Del. Jackson Training commission is operating under case law, so when wee those terms that is typically what that means. Follows best practices across the country.

Roll Call for Q. A: Unanimous Yes.

Del. Szleiga OK with consent vote B-K. Has concerning starting with L. A consent vote would allow to move forward with no discussion to help this meeting go faster.

Del McComas has questions with item D. about training for providing medical care. It might already be happening, but if we are codifying, it needs to be made clear.

Del Michael Jackson responding that all officers are trained in basic first aid. Officers concern is with securing scene first.

Del Buckle has question about item B about being allowed use objectively reasonable force as defined by Supreme Court.

Del Buckle would like retraining for things are mild infractions of misuse of power and what would trigger early warnings.
Attabeary: Police chiefs support

Del. Buckle good with vote for B-K

@WanikaFisher has concerns about item B language "seems to be" Depending how B is codified, it might not have the result wanted.

Attabeary looking for a consent vote for B-K

@GabrielAcevero Also questioning language of Item B. Concerns how this might not work in the real world. Gives #AntonBlack

Roll Call Items A-K Vote all yes.

Recommendation 2L. "Only use deadly force to stop death or major injury to officer or citizen"

@WanikaFisher has a technical question about word citizen, is it all inclusive, does cover people of all statuses.

Staff counsel says bill drafting conventions would make "another" and would be standard legal language.

Del. McComas wants "objectionably reasonably" language inserted to give LEO some sense of protection. Otherwise it is ambiguous for LEO.

Del. Anderson - has deadly force been defined?

Counsel is looking it up.

Del. Moon responding to McComas. Reads to her the salient points from B and L that should be paired. Then it makes sense.

McComas: The problem they are not together in this. thank Del. Moon for his "draftmanship".

Counsel Rothman now reading legal definition of deadly force for McComas.

Attabeary now suggesting consent vote for Items L-M. Not looking a nuisances of language, just intent. Language will be worked out in later steps.

Vote for Items L-N
Del Buckle - No
Del. Malone No

All others Yes

Item 2O Prohibit use of choke holds.

Del. Szeliga: Balt. Co. language of "neck restraint" instead of "choke hold" Balt. Co. FOP OK with that language.

Attabeary: Reads Chiefs OK with language of neck restraint.

Del. Buckle OK with just the language. "You can legislate a fight" Absolutely not OK if person is already restrained like with George Floyd, but if they are trying to get person under control, they might still need to use. Not OK with complete ban.

@DDavisCharlesCo We do legislate fights. "I don't believe this doesn't go far enough" When you cut off someone's right to breathe, you are using deadly force. I would extend definition.

Del. McComas: I believe choke holds should be "Discouraged" because of all the drugs out there. Drugs give people the strength of the strongest football player. You can't ban something like this. Would rather a choke hold than shooting the person We can't just out and out ban it.

Vote on amendment to try and make language more wishy washy.
Yes from McComas, Buckle, Szligel, Maolone
All else No. Amendment fails

Vote on 20

No from McComas, Buckle, Szligel, Maolone
Yes from all else. Item O passes

Item 2P about forcing people to lay prone.

Del Rosenberg speaking in support. Prompted to advocate this after speaking Prof Larry Gibson,

Del McComas - why was language from Prof. Gibson not used in his OpEd. Basically gives more legal wiggle room to officers.

Del Rosenberg Response: Wasn't putting forth bill language because we are not doing that right now. But would have no objection to that language

Quick break for another thing. Be back soon

Quick catch up: Item P - No Knock Warrants; Would be a allowed for danger of life" Taking out "destruction of property.

McComas "Wants destruction of proporty included because you have think of terrorists, and there are terrorists on both sides."

Szeliga wants destruction of property clause included because of all those drugs being flushed down the toilet.

Item P Greatly reducing use of No Knock warrants passes

(Missed whatever Q was)

Item 2R Bans gets getting armored or weaponized vehicles from feds. Szeliga doesn't see why citizens have to pay more when it is available from feds. Buckle doesn't feel this fits into task force goals.

Item 2R passes
.

Moving on to Item S Violations of use force made a misdemeanor.

Buckle has serious concerns about making a criminal law that only applies to LEO

Wanika Fisher Feels the criminal needing to be "Knowingly" is almost impossible to prove

Buckle also has issue with 5/10 year split of maximum sentencing

Ducking back out ...

Came back to the end McComas talking nonsense.

Vote on Item S taking place.

Attabeary responding to McComas talking about knowing and willful" language being important and hard to prove. As far as LEO should not have separate criminal laws, they are different category than ordinary citizens.

Wanika Fisher is yes, feels this doesn't go far enough.

Szeliga, Jackson, Buckle (claims this just virtue signaling), Malone, McComas Are a No.

Item 2S passes

2T last of the Use of Force recommendations: MPSC is the organization that would hold officers accountable. Would be responsible for decertifying. Would create database of use of force.

Attabeary: Important accountability piece of Use of Force laws. Reading from LEO org. that they feel it should be LEO in charge of accountability. They support decertification. Somewhat support database.

McComas: Wants vote on 4 separate points individually.

@GabrielAcevero Wants specifics about makeup of the MPTSC wants greater civilian participation.

(MPTSC = MD Police Training and Standards Committee)
8 Civilians sit on the board, 4 civilians, 4 legislators. 4 civilians have voting rights)

Del. Acevero would like civilians to make up half of board. This would become a powerful group in MD. Needs civilian oversight.

Attabeary wants Acevero to craft a 5th point about number of civilians on board.

@DDavisCharlesCo Adding an amendment to make decertification for be found guilty of a felony, perjury, or certain misdemeanors.

T1 MPTSC Revoke certification of violation of Use of Force, perjury, felonies, or misdemeanors that go to truth or voracity.

Szeliga, Buckle, Malone, McComas Are No
T1 passes

T2 Officer can not be hired is found guilty of violating Use of Force. (Szeliga thinks this is current practice)

Unanimous Yes

T3 Creation of database for improper use of force.

Unanimous Yes

T4 GoCap money will with held for agency that violates Use of Force policy

Buckle, Malone, McComas are a No

T5 newly added about make up of MPTSC. Attabeary asking for it to be set up for further review. Lots of questions in the chat asking questions that can't be answered right now.

Del. Acevero Clarifying some information. 24 on board, 4 are legislators that do not vote, leaving 10 voting members. Asking for 10 voting civilians.

Del. Wanika Fisher, supports the amendment. Agency needs more civilian oversight.

Attabeary: Should there be incorporation of training?
Fisher: Other hearing boards have trainings required. Shouldn't be a problem.

Del. Jackson this isn't a hearing board. MPTSC can provide info about trainings.

Attabeary: Del. Acevero, can we add a training element?
Acevero: Yes. Also would like to add geographic diversity. Would also need notice of openings language

T5 vote on MPTSC board makeup

Szeliga - no because we need to take more time.
Jackson - no because we don't need that many civilians
Buckle, Malone, McComas No

This was just the first item. Still looking at Items 3, 11, and 12. 5 minute break. Restarting at 3:30

Now on recommendation 3. require AG to investigate and prosecute Use of force death caused by LEO.

@DDavisCharlesCo asking about separating investigations, prosecution (now 3A and 3B)

Correction: Not use of force, but serious bodily injury

Attabeary: Question if there is concurrent investigations, you could have two sets of discovery, could have 2 different stories from those interviewed.

Del. Davis: Has heard questions about people outside jurisdiction investigating.

Del. Wanika Fisher likes having local SAO first chance to investigate. Uses #AntonBlack example of prosecutor who won't bring charges, needs have avenue for AG to bring charges. One agency investigating is good.

Del. Fisher saying have two agency make decision about prosecution gives a check and balance.

Del. Szeliga asking about cutting out concurrent investigations.

Attabeary: Right now single AG investigation. Del. Davis is recommending concurrent.

Del. Szeliga asking about fiscal note.

Attabeary. AG office has already responded. Ready to move forward with death investigation. Serious bodily injury would require extra staff.

Szeliga: Local SAO elected. AG less accountable to the people in the communities.

Del Buckle: Concern about SAO office because they are too close to police. But if AG investigate and prosecute, you still have the same issue? Questioning how t o eliminate issue of bias. Are police biased or SAO? Need non bias investigation, local prosecutors.

Del. Buckle now explaining that SAOs don't just bring charges for no reason or without just cause.

Del. Jackson likes idea of State police doing investigation

McComas. Short version. Elected officials shouldn't need oversight. It would make them uncomfortable.

McComas: I think we are just doing change for the sake of change. We aren't in the trenches so can't make policy about this.

In general, in the work group, almost no one in the work group is settled on how to work out this issue or what specific to recommend.

Vote on 3A - Independent investigation of serious bodily injury or death.

No Szeliga (wants dual investigation), Buckle No (wants it to state police investigate, not AG) Malone No, McComas No Needs more details

Passes

Next recommendation is 3 B. AG prosecute if death of bodily injury or death.

Szeliga No Wants local prosecution) Fisher No (Wants concurrent local and AG prosecutor) Jackson No (Wants local proscecutor) Acevero (wants Wants concurrent local and AG prosecutor)

Buckle - No, Davis wants concurrent prosecution. Malone - No, McComas, No

Vote fails

Only Independent investigation moves forward, not AG prosecution.

On to Recommendation 11 - Repeal of LEOBR.

Del. Rosenberg has question for counsel. Since supreme court has said state employees have protections of due process, How does this work in other states.

Answer: Process could look different in each jurisdiction.

Del. Wanika Fisher: Asking to amend that local level can't codify at local level.

Attabeary: Voted on last week on recommendation that would stop that.

@VAtterbeary Sound is lost on the Zoom

And now Zoom is frozen ...

Everything is back. Vote is happening.

Jackson is a no.
Buckle is a no
Malone is a no
McComas is a no

Recommendation passes

Now Recommendation 12 If LEOPR repealed, items that would need to be in depart. policies.
Item Q if Civilian oversite, 1/2 must be civilian
B Open and ransparent
Missed C
D If PBJ would not have a review, handled by cheif
missed E
F permits wiretaps for internal investigations

Item q = Item A

Del Davis asking that Civilian oversight boards be required.
Attabeary adding as G

Del. Wanika Fisher wants to make sure citizens on review boards have a vote

Del. Szeliga questions about training of civilians, specifically around charging officers.

Attabeary: Yes

Szeliga - in A why did you pick a third?

Attabeary: Different jurisdictions have different numbers on the committee

Now going through them individually.

A - any discipline process must include a trial board made up of 1/3 civilians. Voting

No Szlegia, doesn't like the 1/3 number
No Buckle
No Malone
No McComas because now it isi negotiated between FOP and County and they have better idea

B - process must be open and transparent

No Malone

All others Yes. Recommendation passes

C any charging committee would have civilians and they would receive training

No Szeliga due to not knowing qualifications of citizens
No Jackson
No Buckle
No Malone
No McComas

Recommendation passes

D - Officers who are guilty of misdemeanor or get a PBJ do not get a trial board but it is handled by chief.

No Buckle has issue with misdemeanors.
No Malone
No McComas

Recommendation passes

E Departments must use an early warning system database tool.

unanimous yes
Passes

F Allow wiretaps for internal investigations

Lots of confusion if this is already allowed. Wiretaps are for criminal issues.

McComas blathering about what she heard from Shellenberger. Excuse while I take break to get my balls back in place.

Back to voting

No Szeliga - can already be done for criminal investigations
No Barnes

Need quick step off ....

The wiretap did not pass

G Each jurisdiction would be required to have a civilian review board (or complaint oversight board) Not much opposition from the chiefs and sheriffs.

Szlegia: Some don't have their own law enforcemnt, like Carroll County.

Davis: So each agency.
Szliga: So like Havre De Grace with 6 officers, I'm not sure about the practicability.

Barnes: PG COunty has one, but they have no power. Are you looking at subpoena power?

Attabeary: If we are going to look at all that, then we should table for the judiciary committee look at this issue.

McComas: Local government should handle this, there are avenues already.

Del. Davis. As written, it is not specific about how big or powers. Local citizens can decide size and powers

Del. Jackson suggests 1 per jurisdiction, not per agency.

New wording civilian review board, 1 per county and Baltimore City. No powers laid out in the recommendation

Vote now happening

No Buckle
No McComas

Recommendation passes

That is it for today. A few change in votes:

12B Malone is a yes
12D Jackson is a No

After last vote, twitter went down ...

Reminder: These are recommendations for bills in MD. Reading tea leaves, those that passed easily have a strong chance of being passed in some form in 2021 session

Those that had the block of no votes, will have strong fights against them. Mostly from FOP and SAOs

There is overlap with Senate bills, but House has more, broken down in smaller bits.

Am looking for any info on prefiled bills (or how to find that info) in this area.

And now I’m going to eat trash food and watch trash tv. Thanks for following along.

@UnrollHelper unroll please and thank you

@threadreaderapp Please unroll