1 2 2 . 2 2 Rivera Aud it1Rep0rt 1 2 Canton,UGeorgia Police Department 1 January 12, 2012 . . no . li Rivera Audit Report Louis M. Delcmar TABLE OF CONTENTS . Synopsis of the Incident. . . 1 Methodology . . . First Responder Responsibilities and Agency Response.. . - Supervisory Responsibilities and Agency Response . . 6 - . Investigating Officers Responsibilities and Agency Response",. L. 6 Compliance Reviews with Agency Policy and Accepted Police .. 7 Findings .. . 10 i Recommendations . . ..16 Conclusions .. The Endings and recommendations in this matter are rendered pursuant to a request on December 21, 2011, by Mr. Scott Wood, City Manager, Canton, Georgia to conduct a review and assessment of the Canton Poliw Departments response to the December 2, 2011, abduction and murder of Jorelys Rivera, a sevemyear-old female, at - River Ridge Apartments, Canton, Georgia. This review focusesnarrowly on the law . enforcement duties and responsibilities, as outlined in the Canton Police Department's "Missing Persons" policy, generally accepted police practices in these type of incidents and the agency's initial response and subsequent following-up investigation of the - Jorelys Rivera case. . Synopsis of the Incident: - . On December 2, 2011, at approximately 7:30 Canton police responded to a . report of a missing seven-year-old child, Jorelys Rivera, at an apartment complex at 9102 River Rid e. Rivera was last seen on that date at approximately 5:15 near a - playground area of the complex She was wearing boots, jeans and a long sleeve shirt. Within an hour of arriving, Canton police responded with addwonal officers, and with Canton Fire Department personnel. They requested additional assistance from Cherokee County Sheriffs Office deputies nd the Cherokee County Search and - - Rescue Team. 'l'he Canton Police Department established an incident Commander and - a Command Post at the apartment complex clubhouse and leasing office. (Hereinafter, the searchers are collectively referred to as the "eearch team.') - -- The search team suspended the search effort at 2 December 3, 2011, some four hours after commencing the operation. Canton police maintained a pmence in the apartment complex until the incident command was re-established inside the apartment complex ofticelclubhouse, at apprordmately 5:30 a.m. investigative efforts -- - along with search and rescue activities continued throughout the day of December 3, 201 1 without revealing any viable lead relatin to the location of the missing child. lt was later leamed that the apparent homicide crime scene was searched for the Rivera child, and that the significance of some evidence was not recognized at the time by Cherokee County Sheriffs Deputies and Canton Fire Dep rtment personnel. At 3 Canton police reclassified the incident from a missing child to abduction. Search efforts were concluded at 7 p.m. that day. On December 4, 2011, Canton police and Cherokee Emergency Man gement met. As a result, at approximately 10 on December 4, 2011 the search team established a command post in the parking lot of the Carmike Cinema. Cherokee County Search and Rescue efforts were re-activated along with the Canton Fire Department and other outside agencies. At approximately 4 the Cherokee County Sheriff spoke with the Director of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI). After receiving approval from Canton police officials, the Sheriff requested the assistance of the GBI and their Child Abduction Recovery Team (CART). At approximately 9 Canton officers again searched apartments that had previously been inspected and located what was determined to be the Rivera crime scene vacant apartment at River Ridge Apartments. On December 5, 2011, the body of Jorelys Rivera was recovered in a trash compactor located on the River Ridge apartment complex property. On December 7, 2011, an employee of River Ridge Apartments was - arrested and charged with the murder of Rivera. The prosecution of that suspect is pending. . The following were considered in forming the basis of this report: - 1.Documents: . Canton Police Department Offensellncident Report, Complaint No. . . 201124295, 7 pages - . Canton Police Department Standard Operating Procedure (S.O.P.) 16-7 Missing Persons - 2. Interviews: `o Donny Arp Canton Assistant Fire Chief . i . Matt Baldwin Canton Police Detective Sergeant Jody Caldwell Georgia State Patrol Corporal of Dean Floyd Canton Fire Chief . Roger Garrison - Cherokee County Sheriff - Dustin Hamby Georgia Bureau of investigation Special Agent Jeff Hall Canton Emergency Management Director Drew Henson Canton Police Detective . Vemon Keenan Georgia Bureau of lnvestigationpirector- Edward Lacey Cherokee County Sheriffs Oliice Major . . Brian Lamkin Federal Bureau of Investigation-Atlanta - Special Agent-ln?Charge Jeff Lance Canton Police Chief Ken Logan Cherokee County Search and Rescue Leader Danell Mitchell Cherokee County Special Operations Chief - Joel Parker Canton Police Department Corporal Thomas Pinyan Cherokee County Sheriffs Oflice Lieutenant . -- Chris Sims Cherokee County-Sherifl's Oflice Lieutenant - . 2 - Robbie Westbrook Cherokee County Emergency Management Director Kim - Georgia Bureau of investigation Special Agent-in-Charge Todd Vande Zande Canton Assistant Police Chief . 3. Publications: "Investigative Checklist for First Responders,' National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) . Abduction Response Plan,' United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau Investigation, Edition (2008) FEMA ICS 300 Intermediate ICS for Expanding Incidents Methodology: This review and assessment is a survey of the Canton Police Departments initial response and investigative follow-up from December 2, 2011 through December 4, 2011. This matter continues to be the subject of an active criminal prosecution; consequently, the specific investigative facts leading up to and surrounding the abduction and homicide of Jorelys Rivera were not a part of this This is not an ezdwaustive intemal investigation or analysis of the agency or its personnel. The focus of this evaluation i the agency's response to the. incident; It examines, in particular, whether the agency's response followed the policy in effec: at the time of the incident and was in keeping with contemporary accepted police practices. 'l'l1e assessment consisted of a point--by-point review of all action steps required under the Canton Police Department Missing Person Policy whenever agency personnel encounter a critical missing person event. It examines each of the tasks that agency personnel completed in the Rivera_ case in light of that policy and in light of amepted police practices involving such incidents. Personnel famtiar with the initial police, tire, emergency management, and search and rescue responses, along with those who had access to the documents necessary for this assessment provided the responses needed to complete the inquiry. The Canton Police Department, particularly`PoIice Chief Jeff Lance- and Assistant Police Chief Todd Vande Zande were professional and candid throughout this review, and provided all the information requ without delay. Likewise, all other agencies' personnel interviewed were cooperative, professional, and recemive to this review. 3 First Responder Responsibilities and Agency Response: . According to the Canton Police Department report and infomation provided during intenriews, the responding officer interviewed the parent and babysitter of the missing child within the first hour or so after receiving_ the missing child report. The - responding officer advised that he used the Canton Police Department Checklist for Missing Persons and an ACIM Worksheet (A Child ls Missin as a guide during his . initial investigation. He also provided the command post a copy of the ACIM Worksheet along with maps and diagrams of the apartment complex and surrounding areas. The officer was able to conlimt that the child was, in fact, missing. He verified the child's custody status, along with the circumstances of the disappearance. He determined . when, where, and by whom the missing child last was seen. Individuals who last had contact with the child were interviewed. . Based on the available information, the ofncer made an initial determination that this was a case of a runaway or otherwise missing child case, which would be solved in - the same manner as dozens of other such cases that the agency had handled in 2011. He obtained a detailed description and secured photographs of the missing child; He provided a detailed description of the child to the communications center for broadcast to other units, with periodic updates. The required notihcation was made through his chain of command, but neither the assistant chief nor police chief responded to the scene. He detennlned the need for additional personnel, including investigative and supervisory staff, resulting ultimately in a response by the Canton Emergency Management Director, Canton Fire Department, and the Canton Police Detective Division. They were later joined by Cherokee County deputies and Search and Rescue pemonnel. All searchers were briefed and advised that this child was missing, but had a history of running away and/or staying away from home. According to the agency, potential witnesses were identified and separately - interviewed at the scene. Those interviews and identifyln information are properly recorded, with the name, address, home and business telephone numbers of each person. The responding officer determined. each person's relationship to the missing child and the infonnation the person may have had regarding the d1ild's` disappearance. He inquired when and where each person last saw the child and asked each one, 'What do you think happened to the child?" He obtained the names and addresses and telephone numbers of the child's friendslassociates and other relatives and friends of the family. He continued to keep other responding units apprised of all appropriate developing infonnation. During the initial response, he obtained pennission to search the apertrnent and checked all areas wherein he thought the missing child might have been hiding or concealed, conducting an immediate, thorough search of the child's home even though the child was reported missing from a different location. . The Police Department indicates that they initially. sealed and protected the scene and the area of the child's apartment (including the child's personal articles such as hairbrush, diary, photographs, and items with the child's 4 . impressions) so that evidence would not be destroyed during or after the initial search and to help ensure that items which could help in the search for andlor to identification of the child were preserved. However, the scene was released later that evenin without being processed. I Canton Police Department personnel indicate they initially checked to determine if any of tfre child's personal items were missing. They also photographed the area, evaluated the contents and appearance of the child's room. The Department extended the search to surrounding areas, including vehicles and other places of potential concealment. officers checked for the existence of surveillance or security cameras within the vicinityto detemrine whether they may have ~=ptured infomation about the child's disappearance. It located no such cameras. The responding officer followed--up and interviewed other family members, friends and associ_ates of the child, and friends of the family to determine when each of them had last seen the child and what they thought might have happened to the child. The Police Department obtained information and . photographs to provide for the preparation of fllerlbulletin with the child's photograph and . descriptive information. These later were distributed in appropriate geographic regions . and to the media.- An initial report was prepared reports and the initial officer made all required notifications. - The Police Department evaluated whether the circumstances of the child's . dl appearance met AMBER Alert lt determined that circumstances did not fit the criteria. The agency did initiate Child ls Missing' immediate community notification protocol. However, this did not occur until December 3, 2011, at 1:24 more than six hours after the Police Department received its first report of the missing child. lt delivered three similar community notifications during the next 38 hours. The initial officer indicated that he did not identify the child's zone of safety for her age and developmental stage. Likewise, the other responding units failed to activate their patrol-vehicle-mounted video camera when approaching the scene to record - vehicles, and anything else of note for later investigative review. The initial did not inquire if the child had access to the Intemet in order to evaluate the possible intemet role in the child's disappearance. He also did not ascertain whether the drild had a cellular telephone or other electronic communication device. Other investigative personnel did this later. The initial officer did not complete a review of the sex-offender registry to determine if individuals designated as sexual predators lived, worked, or might othenrvise be associated with area of the child's disappearance. This reportedly was later completed by Canton police detectives and Cherokee County Sheriffs Ohice personnel. 1'he initial officer also failed to enter the infomration regarding the missing child into the National Crime information Centers (NCIC) Missing Person File within two - hours of report receipt, but did so about 23 hours alter the child was last seen. The . agency did not immediately treat areas of interest as potential crime scenes. . 5 1 . Supervisory Responsibilities and Agency Response: I The on-duty supervisor, who was also the first responder in this missing child incident, detemrined that circumstances of the child's disappearance did not meet the protocol in place for activation of an Amber Alert.- The Department did not immediately initiate Child ls Missing" community notification. The supervisor determined additional . personnel were needed to assist in the search and investigation, and he requested the . assistance previously described. 'l'he Department established a command post in the apartment_ complex clubhouse, an area located away from the child's residence. The Police Department determined that it was unnecessary to obtain additional resources from the Cherokee County Sheriffs Office, Georgia Bureau of investigation, Georgia State Patrol, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Missing-Children Clearinghouse, Victim- - Wrtness Services, and NCMEC's Project ALERTfl`eam Adam, in addition to the ones initially requested because the Department believed the victim was a runaway. The Police Department indicated it had the required resources, equipment, and assistance necessary to conduct an efficient investigation and search. According to the information provided by the Police Department during this audit, there was appropriate coordination - and cooperation among all law-enforcement personnel involved in the investigation and search effort. The acting supervisor verified that all required notihcations were made through his chain of command in compliance with all Departmental policies and procedures. According to the Police Department, a supervisor was available to make any decisions or determinations as the need for such developed during the course of this event. information was obtained and generated for use of the media, including radio, television, and newspapers, to assist in the search throughout the duration of the case. Investigating Officers and Agency Response: According to the Canton Police Department. detectives arrived at River Ridge Apartments between-9:30 and 10 2 1I2 hours after the initial report was _disp tched and Eve hours after the child had disappeared. The detectives obtained a briefing from the first responding officer and other on-scene personnel. They verified and obtained more accurate descriptive information and other details developed during the preliminary investi atlon. A neighborhood canvas and search then was underway and the responding detectives assisted with that effort. The investigatin detectives obtained a brief, recent history of the victim's family dynamics and an account of the facts surrounding the missing child. They found no conflicting information offered by witnesses and other individuals. The first responding officer had collected article(s) of the child's clothing for scent--tracl