INTRADEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE April 6, 2017 3 .2 TO: The Honorable Board of Police Commissioners 23 33419;! 3131 FROM: Chief of Police .8 =2 H4 9- Hill are: . ?ii?iit SUBJECT: DEATH FID N0. 034-16 Honorable Members: Thefollowing is my review, analysis, and ?ndings for In-Custody Death (1CD), Force Investigation Division (F ID) No. 034-16. A Use of Force Review Board (U OFRB) was convened on this matter on March 13, 2017. In this case, the recommended ?ndings were not unanimous with a minority opinion rendered regarding the Less-Lethal Force ?ndings for Of?cer -ierial No- I have carefully weighed each opinion, considered the case in its entirety and adopted the recommendations of the minority opinion. I hereby submit my ?ndings in accordance With Police Commission policy. SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS1 On June 9. 2016 at approximately 1825 hours, Of?cers -Serial No. and -{erial No.- Harbor Gang Enforcement Detail (GED), responded to a GED umt requesr at McDonald Street and Street. According to Of?cer-t they were responding to a request for a gang unit to aSSiSt With determining if any of the subjects at scene were in violation of any injunction. ifmmediateiy recognized one of the sutjects as A. Aguilar, because?atrested him on a prior occasion for an injunction violation. .and Of?cer-determined that Aguilar was in violation of a court ordered gang injunction and placed him under arrest. According to Of?ce- conducted a search for weapons prior to placing Aguilar in the backseat of their police vehicle. While transporting Aguilar to Harbor Station for booking, I observed that Aguilar was ?dgeting. Upon arrival, they took Aguilar to Sergeam Serial N0.EWatch Commander, Harbor Patrol Division, for the intake questions. During the intake questions, Aguilar couidn ?t stay still and kept moving wound. The Honorable Board of Police Commissioners Page 2 3.2 According to Of?cer-Jased on .vbservations of Aguilar?s behavior, nonstOp talking, fidgeting, and inability to stay still, .formed the opinion that Aguilar was under the in?uence of a stimulant. Considering those factors, along of Aguilar?s previous narcotics arrests..requested authorization to conduct a strip search of Aguilar to ensure he did not have narcotics 011 his person. Sergeant?then gave approval for the strip search. According to the of?cers, they took Aguilar to the strip search area, removed his handcuffs, and directed him to face the wall. During the strip search Aguilar stated he was hot and then asked if he could take of his shirt. Aguilar would not remain facing the wall despite multiple commands to do so. Aguilar lifted up his shirt and the of?cers observed a plastic bindle in his belly button. Of?cer-removed the bindle and placed it in Aguilar?s property bag. Note: The investigation later revealed that the bindle contained methamphetamine. According to Of?cer-Aguilar kept reaching to his buttocks area, putting his hands inside his boxers. .ardemd Aguilar to turn around and put his hands on the wall. As Aguilar turned to face the wall, he simultaneously removed a good sized white colored bindle from inside of his boxers and put it in his mouth prior to putting his hands on the wall. .believed that Aguilar was attempting to ingest narcotics and pushed the back of his head toward his chest to prevent him?'om swallowing the possible narcotics. .erered Aguilar to spit it out, but Aguilar did not comply. According to Of?cer -3f?CBT-Drd6r6d Aguilar to put his hands on the wall, and stop moving. Aguilar faced the wall and then reached into his underwear with his left hand and then moved his left hand to his mouth. Of?cer-stated, ?He ?s swallowing dope.? Of?cer -pushed Aguilar?s head down so he wouldn?t swallow the narcotics while Of?cer- attempted to control his arms. According to Officer- Aguilar went to the ?oor on all fours as I continued to 1311311 his head forward as he was given commands to spit it out. Aguilar ignored .zommands and started to resist being detained .1ttempted to get control of Aguilar?s hands but was unable to get control. -old Of?cer-that-nas going to tase Aguilar. .then WASER, removed the cartridge, and attempted to dry stun Aguilar on his back (Less-Lethal Use of Force and Additional Tactical Debrief Topics Use of Force Warning and Proper Use of Taser in Drive-Stun Mode). According to Of?ce- Aguilar went to the ground and was combative while pushing the of?cers away. .used a firm grip on one of Aguilar ?s legs to pull it out of the way and then told O?icer-o get the TASER in order to control Aguilar. .3bserved Of?cer-place the ASER on Aguilar?s back in close contact mode. .heard the TASER deploy. but it didn?t have any efect on Aguilar (Non-Lethal Use of Force). According to Of?cer -\guilar pushed of the ground turned around, and then attempted to grab the TASER from -backed up, re-inserted the TASER cartridge. 311d t01d Of?cer - ?stand by, stand by, stand by to le-lcnowmas going to use the TASER. - then discharged the ASER at Aguilar in probe mode with the probes making contact near me The Honorable Board of Police Commissioners Page 3 3.2 navel area. The TASER had no effect and Aguilar ripped them out and threw them at Of?cer -(Less-Lethal Use of Force). According to Of?cer- Aguilar stood up, faced them and attempted to grab .arrn. - pinned Aguilar to the waii to prevent Aguilar ?om reaching for their guns while Of?cer- continued to use the TASBR against Aguilar with no effect. Aguilar continued to resist and took a ?ghting stance. Aguilar had control of his arms and Of?cer-arsed him again. but they still could not gain control of Aguilar (Non-Lethal Use of Force). According to Officer - they kept moving around inside the strip search area and they were unable to get control of Aguilar?s arms to handcuff him. Settempted to dry stun Aguilar again in the arm or shouider area but Aguilar kept trying to grab the TASER. :hen observed Of?cer-hit Aguilar with a closed?st, .twoor three times, in the face (Less-Lethal Use of Force). According to Of?cer- Aguilar turned towards the wall, but continued to resist and was still combative. Switched Aguilar three times in the cheek in an attempt to stop his resistance and get control of him. Aguilar then fell to the ?oor and began choking at which time they were able to handcuff Aguilar?s hands behind his back (N on-Lethal Use of Force and Additional Tactical Debrief Topics Punches to Bony Areas). After handcuffmg Aguilar, Of?cers -and -observed that Aguilar was continuing to choke. According to Of?ceril Sergeant -errived at their location and requested _a Rescue Ambulance (RA) as they simultaneously took the handcuffs off and attempted abdominal thrusts to clear Aguilar?s airway. According to the of?cers, when they observed Aguilar was no longer breathing, they began cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The of?cers continued providing CPR at the direction of Sergeant- until relieved by Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) personnel. Aguilar failed to respond to medical treatment and was pronounced deceased at 1959 hours. Note: During an autopsy conducted by the Los Angeles County Coroner?s O?ice, Doctor - recovered a plastic bindle containing heroin ?rom back of Aguilar-?3 throat. Doctor -letermined the cause of death to be due to an obstructed airway. During review of the incident, no Debrie?ng Points were noted. ADDITIONAL TACTICAL DEBRIEF TOPICS Simultaneous Commands (N on-Con?icting) The investigation revealed that O?cers - andi were giving simultaneous commands to the suspect. Although the commands were non-con?icting, the of?cers are reminded that simultaneous commands can sometimes lead to_ con?rsion and non-compliance. I will direct that this be a topic of discussion during the Tactical Debrief. The Honorable Board of Police Commissioners Page 4 3.2 Use of Force Warning The investigation revealed that the officers did not give Aguilar a use of force waming prior to utilizing the TASER and did not provide a reason for not giving the use of force warning. The of?cers are reminded to provide a warning, when feasible, prior to using a TASER. Additionally, if a warning is not feasible, the of?cers are reminded to provide Speci?c reasons to justify their actions. I will direct that this be a topic of discussion during the Tactical Debrief. Proper Use of TASER in Drive-Stun Mode The investigation revealed that Of?cer - removed the TASER cartridge prior to activatinggl?ASER in drive-stun mode. Of?cer - is reminded that for maximum effectiveness, the cartridge should remain attached to the TASER when the TASER is applied in drive-stun to an area of the body away from the impact site. I will direct that this be a topic of discussion during the Tactical Debrief. Punches to Bony Areas The investigation revealed that O?icer -punched Aguilar with a closed ?st three times to the bony portion of his face. Fist strikes should be used on soft tissue areas to prevent injury to an of?cer?s hands. Of?cer- 5 reminded to consider using other force options prior to using ?st strikes to bony areas. I will direct that this be a toprc of discussion during the Tactical Debrief. FINDINGS Tactics - Tactical Debrief, Officers-and - Non-Lethal Use of Force - In Policy, No Further Action, Of?cer- Less-Lethal Use of Force Out of Policy, Administrative Disapproval, Of?cer- messes. Department policy relative to Tactical Debrie?? is: ?The collective review of an incident to identz?) those areas where actions and decisions were efective and those areas where actions and decisions could have been improved The intent of a Tactical Debrief is to enhance future performance. (Los Angeles Police Department Manual. Volume 3: Section 792. 05) The evaluation of tactics requires that consideration be given to the fact that of?cers are forced to make split-second decisions under very stressful and dynamic circumstancw. conceptual and intended to be ?exible and incident speci?c, which requires that each mcrdent be looked at objectively and the tactics be evaluated based on the totality of the Circumstances. Each tactical incident also merits a comprehensive debrie?ng. In this case, there were identi?ed areas where improvement could be made and a Tactical Debrief is the appropriate fornrn for the involved personnel to review the of?cer?s individual actions that took place during mcrdent. Therefore, I will direct that Of?cer-and -attend a Tactical Debrief and that the speci?c identi?ed topics are also covered. The Honorable Board of Police Commissioners Page 5 3.2 Note: Additionally, the Tactical Debrief shall also include the following mandatory discussion points: 'Use of Force Policy; Equipment Required/Maintained; Radio and Tactical Communication (including Code Six); Tactical De-escalation; Command and Control; and, Lethal Force. NON-LETHAL USE OF FORCE It is the policy of this Department that personnel may use only that force Which is ?objectively reasonable? to: Defend themselves; Defend others; E?bct an arrest or detention; Prevent escape; or, Overcome resistance (Los Angeles Police Department Manual, Volume 1. Section 556.10). Strikes and/or kicks can be used when is objectively reasonable to accomplish the following: Overcome active resistance to arrest; Create distance ?om a suspect; Protect self or others from injury; Stop or stun a suspect; or, Distract a suspect (Los Angeles Police Department Use of Force - Tactics Dwell?? No. 14, Strikes and Kicks -- December 20l2). Of?cer-? Firm grip, bodyweight, and strikes According to Of?ce-used a ?rm grip on one of Aguilar?s legs to pull it out of the way. O?icer -ecalled, I was trying to like move his foot out of the way, because I was behind him. So I kind of I pulled I kind of pulled one of his legs, just the The Honorable Board of Police Commissioners Page 6 3.2 According to stood up, faced them and attempted to grab-am. . then used-bodyweight to pin Aguilar to the wall to prevent Aguilar from reaching for their guns. Of?cer-ecallcd, -rtood up and he turned around and he faced me, and he kind of he?s trying to grabbing my arms, and so I was trying to hold him hold his arms up, because I didn ?t want him to either reach for me gun or reach for my partner ?s gun. So I was trying to hold-4p with his arms, and I was kind of I had him pinned to the walli According to Of?cer: Aguilar continued to resist. Sheri used three closed ?st strikes to the right side of Aguilar?s face in an attempt to control him. Of?ce-recalled, A?er the tase, he turned around and he still he was still like resisting with us. And I ?m not sure if my partner still had the TASER in the hand in his hand, but I my partner was on his le? side, trying to control him. And I was still trying to get his arm out to handcu?? him behind But it wasn ?t working so I punched him three in his right face. Based upon the totality of the circumstances, the UOFRB determined, and I concur, that an of?cer with similar training and experience as 'O?icera while faced with similar circumstances, would believe this same application of non-lethal force would be reasonable to overcome Aguilar?s resistance. Therefore, I ?nd Of?cer-Non-Lethal Use of Force to be objectively reasonable and In Policy, No Further Action. . LESS-LETHAL USE FORCE It is the policy of this Department that personnel may use only that force which is ?objectively reasonable to: Defend themselves; Defend others; E?'ect an arrest or detention; Prevent escape; or, Overcome resistance (Los Angeles Police Department Manual, Volume l, Section 556.10). The TASER may be used on suspects who are violent, or who pose an immediate threat to themselves or others when an o?cer believes: The Honorable Board of Police Commissioners Page 7 3.2 Attempts to subdue the suspect with other tactics have been, or will likely be, ine?zctive in the situation; or There is reasonable belief that it will be unsa?efor officers to approach within contact range of the suspect. Verbal threats of violence by a suspect do not alone justi?z the use of the TASER Any threat must be a credible one (Use of Force Tactics Directive No. 4.4, June 2015). . Of?cer-? TASBR, X26P, one ?ve-second activation and one two-second activation in drive-sum made, three ?ve-second activations in probe mode. According to Df?cer -Aguilar went to the ?oor on all fours and started to resist being detained. .ittempted to control Aguilar?s hands but was unable to get control-drew. TASBR, removed the cartridge, and applied the ASER to Aguilar?s back. Aguilar then stood up and attempted to take the TASBR hour?s-inserted the TASBR cartridge and then activated the TASBR in probe mode, striking Aguilar on his right side. Aguilar continued to resist and-lotivated the TASBR two additional times in probe mode to stop Aguilar?s actions. Of?ce-recalled, At that point, I believe I remember telling my partner, I ?m going to rare him, I?m going to tase him. As I did that, I stepped back, took my TASER out, took the cartridges out, and attempted to do a dry stun on him. That ?s when he pushed of the ground And as I was about to dry stun him, he turned around and tried to grab the me. So I backed up, reinserted the probes, and told my partner, stand by, stand by, stand by, to let him Imow that I?m going to deploy the probes on him. Shot the probes at his navel area. As soon as I made contact, he immediately grabbed them, ripped them out, and threw them at me. I tried to dry stun him again with the probes, the wires still hanging out in his arm area, shoulder area He just kept trying to grab it like that, trying to grab the TASER. pushing me away, and that?s when my partner proceeded to strike hit. Based on the totality of the circumstances, I have determined that an of?cer with similar training and experience as Of?cer-would not reasonably believe Aguilar? actions were violent or posed an immediate threat to himself or others at the time Of?ce- applied the TASER to Aguilar?s back and therefore, the use of Less-Lethal Force would not be objectively reasonable. Therefore, I ?nd Of?cer-Less-Lethal Use of Force to not be obj ectively reasonable and Out of Policy, Administrative Disapproval. The Honorable Board of Police Commissioners Page 8 3.2 AUDIONIDEO RECORDINGS Digital In?Car Video System (DICV S) - Of?cers -and .police vehicle was equipped with DICVS. Their DICVS captured Aguilar?s actions in the backseat of their vehicle while being transported to Harbor Station. Body Worn Cameras (BWV) Harbor Area Patrol of?cers were not equipped with BWV at the time'of this incident. Departinent Video Harbor Division jail facility was equipped with surveillance cameras that captured Aguilar being interviewed by Sergeantj-Dupon his arrival at Harbor station. The cameras also captured the of?cers taking Aguilar to the strip search area and LAFD emergency personnelpulling Aguilar into the hallway to administer medical treatment. No cameras captured the use of force or Aguilar ingesting narcotics. COMMAND AND CONTROL Sergeanteresponded and assumed the role of Incident Commander, requested an RA, and ensured the separation and monitoring of the involved of?cers. Sergeant _ictions were consistent with Department supervisory training and my expectations of a ?eld supervisor at a critical incident. GENERAL TRAINING UPDATE On July 7, 2016, Of?cers ?1nd -attend a GTU. In addition to the mandatory topics, Of?cers End-received training on In-Custody Death. Respectfully, 0 IE BECK Chief of Police Date: