When the Department of Justice released its report on policing in Baltimore a few weeks ago, it was called “scathing” and “damning,” amongst other things. That report found that that Baltimore’s cops routinely violated the constitutional rights of the folks they came in contact with. Additionally, according to the Associated Press, the DOJ also found that Baltimore’s cops routinely violate the Americans with Disabilities Act when interacting with individuals who have disabilities. Specifically, the DOJ found that:
BPD uses excessive force against individuals with mental health disabilities or in crisis. Due to a lack of training and improper tactics, BPD officers end up in unnecessarily violent confrontations with these vulnerable individuals. BPD provides less effective services to people with mental illness and intellectual disabilities by failing to account for these disabilities in officers’ law enforcement actions, leading to unnecessary and excessive force being used against them. BPD has failed to make reasonable modifications in its policies, practices, and procedures to avoid discriminating against people with mental illness and intellectual disabilities.
The DOJ’s report says that about 20 percent of the Baltimore Police Department’s use of force incidents involved people who had a mental health disability or were in crisis. And that number is based on the files provided to the DOJ, so it could actually be higher. The DOJ report cites one instance of a woman named “Ashley:”
In one of many such incidents we reviewed, in 2013, three officers and one sergeant responded to a call to transport an individual to a hospital for a mental health evaluation. According to their report, the officers arrived at the back of a house and found a woman, “Ashley,” the subject of the petition, sitting on the ground with a clenched hand. Ashley reportedly had a “small” build and was yelling “don’t shoot me.” One officer asked her to empty her hands and she refused, stating, “you have to shoot me first I am not giving it up [sic].” There is no indication that the officers attempted to verbally persuade Ashley in any way to open her hands or calm her down. Rather, the officers physically attempted to force her hands open. Ashley resisted the officers’ physical attempts and began to “kick[] and swing[]” at them. According to the report, one officer used a taser in drive-stun mode “to try to calm [her] down.” Because drive-stunning an individual causes great pain, it did not calm her. The technique also carries a heightened risk of serious harm or injury when used on individuals with mental health disabilities or in crisis. Ashley continued to resist. In response, the officer drive-stunned her two more times, with similar results.
The officers were eventually able to physically pry open Ashley’s hands, which held two vials, the contents of which emptied onto the ground. Ashley was transported to the hospital for a psychiatric evaluation. Use of the taser in drive-stun mode three times against a woman experiencing crisis, who was unarmed, posed no serious threat to the officers or others, and was not being arrested for any crime, was unnecessary and unreasonable.
Problematically, it appears the only investigation of this incident was conducted by the sergeant who was at the scene. A sergeant who participated in the incident lacks the necessary objectivity and independence to fairly assess whether officers on the scene acted appropriately. Having an involved sergeant investigate the force undermines the integrity of the investigation.
According to the DOJ their findings are “intended to chart a path to what federal officials hope will be far-reaching improvements, including better training for dispatchers and officers, diversion of more people to treatment rather than jail and stronger relationships with mental health specialists.”
Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department's civil rights division, stated in an interview that, based on their work in the past, “we've seen how important it is to get at the mental health issues as early in the system as possible."
Indeed.