An open review
Anyone hoping for a healthy public debate over civilian oversight of the Boston Police Department should have been disappointed, though not surprised, to read this weekend that a long-awaited report on how such oversight might work has been gathering dust for months now in City Hall.
The study is by Northeastern University criminologist Jack McDevitt. A summary, obtained last week by the Globe's Suzanne Smalley, recommends a review panel, made up of an equal number of civilians and police officers. The panel would review allegations of police misconduct. The report also recommends the establishment of an ombudsman, reporting to the mayor, who would be empowered to review investigations by the department's Internal Affairs division. If dissatisfied with the findings of an investigation, the ombudsman could request further inquiry into a complaint.
Mayor Thomas M. Menino seems to want nothing to do with any form of civilian review. The administration refused to release McDevitt's report to the Globe, saying that it is a ``draft" that falls outside the Freedom of Information Act.
It's too bad that Menino apparently can't see the need for some form of civilian oversight and doesn't understand why it is especially important now.
One of the largest issues facing the department is the erosion of its relationship with the community, especially the minority community. That is reflected in the police's inability to solve homicides in Roxbury, Dorchester, and Mattapan -- the direct result of reduced community cooperation. The main reason for that, many would say, is a lack of trust in the Boston Police Department. As much as anything, that distrust has created the momentum for a civilian review.
Unfortunately, it has run headlong into another powerful force: the police unions, which oppose any new disciplinary apparatus. The unions aren't about to sign off on what they envision as attacks from agenda-driven advocates.
Civilian review has a tortured history in Boston. Under pressure after the St. Clair Commission of the early 1990s, then-Mayor Raymond L. Flynn reluctantly approved the creation of a panel that had no real power. It was so toothless that when vacancies on the panel stopped being filled, no one in or out of city government even noticed.
That was the situation when Commissioner Kathleen O'Toole recruited McDevitt to look into establishing a workable civilian review. She learned shortly after becoming commissioner that there were a handful of cases before the committee, but no committee to hear them.
Menino has declined to discuss the latest idea for independent review, which is a statement in itself. But he has to know that the so-called Boston Miracle ran out of steam years ago. He must know that convening meetings of friendly black ministers isn't working anymore as a means of addressing the crime problem. It isn't that the ministers don't care, or aren't trying; the issue is the deep suspicion between the community and the department, which an independent review would be a first step in addressing.
There has been one successful model of what civilian review might be -- the commission led by former US attorney Donald Stern that looked into the death of Victoria Snelgrove. That panel was effective in ensuring a thorough investigation of the killing of the Emerson College student who was shot by police while celebrating a Red Sox playoff win in 2004. Its report led to needed reforms in the use of deadly force.
It is understandable that Menino and the police unions fear losing control of such sensitive investigations -- understandable, but wrong-headed. While a report can be buried, this issue can't be. The administration says McDevitt's report is a starting point that is being studied and refined. That deliberation vitally needs to take place in plain sight, and it should end in a review process that bolsters public trust in the police instead of one that continues to erode it.
Adrian Walker is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at walker@globe.com. 
