HPD report shows jump in offenses committed by officers

The Honolulu Police Department last year fired or recommended for firing police officers in 25 cases involving offenses ranging from sex assault and kidnapping to terroristic threatening and theft, according to an annual report the agency submitted to the Legislature and made public Monday.

The 25 cases easily topped the 16 from the previous six years combined — an increase that legislators called alarming. The lawmakers said the report should give momentum to a pending bill that would make public the names of suspended and fired officers from all county police departments.

Although the report cited 25 cases, the actual number of Honolulu officers who were discharged last year was eight, and nine more were recommended for discharge but still are going through the grievance or arbitration process, according to HPD Deputy Chief Marie McCauley.

While the HPD report lists 25 discharge cases, it’s unclear why the numbers the agency provided to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser — eight officers discharged and nine recommended for discharge — are different.

In 2014 three officers were fired.

The HPD report comes at a time when police misconduct is receiving heightened scrutiny locally and nationally and as Hawaii legislators are about to consider Senate Bill 3016, which would remove the exemption that allows police departments here to keep confidential the names of officers challenging suspension or termination decisions.

No other state or county employee is afforded such secrecy.

SB 3016, introduced by Sen. Kalani English (D, Molokai-Lanai-East Maui), Senate majority leader, is being heard by that chamber’s Public Safety, Intergovernmental and Military Affairs Committee at 1:15 p.m. Thursday in Conference Room 229 at the state Capitol. The measure has 10 co-sponsors.

The effect of the existing law became evident Monday when HPD released the names of only two of the eight officers who received termination notices last year after exhausting their appeals process.

Police recruit Gerren Silva was fired because he “unnecessarily brandished a department-issued AR-15 rifle in the police station parking lot and in the squad room,” according to HPD and the legislative report.

Another recruit, Kinohi Warrington, was fired because he “drove under the influence of alcohol and was involved in a motor vehicle collision,” according to HPD and the legislative report.

HPD declined to release the names of the six other officers whose terminations were listed as final in the report.

They resigned prior to their discharges taking effect, and therefore their names are protected from disclosure under the exemption to Hawaii’s public-records law, according to HPD spokeswoman Michelle Yu.

Sen. Les Ihara (D, Moiliili- Kaimuki-Palolo), an open-government advocate and co-sponsor of SB 3016, has long been a supporter of removing the exemption, saying disciplined police officers should be provided the same privacy protections — not more — as other disciplined state and county workers.

“I don’t think that (privacy concerns) trumps the public’s right to know, especially for police who are carrying guns,” Ihara said.

Sen. Will Espero (D, Ewa Beach-Iroquois Point), another co-sponsor, was among the legislators who said the latest HPD report should provide momentum to advance the pending bill.

In prior years similar measures have failed to muster enough support to pass, thanks in part to the lobbying of the police union.

“This report clearly shows a need for some changes and reforms within the law enforcement community,” Espero said.

Asked about the increase in disciplinary actions, HPD’s McCauley attributed the rise to the department’s effort to clear older cases and to shorten the length of time required for administrative investigations.

“HPD officers are held to a higher standard, and all allegations of misconduct are taken seriously,” she said in a written statement. “The department is committed to holding officers accountable for their actions and to conducting thorough, fair investigations on a timely basis.”

Because of the disclosure exemption, the annual reports that police departments submit to the Legislature do not contain names of the disciplined officers.

Some cases, however, are publicly known because of criminal prosecutions or media coverage.

One officer who was terminated but resigned before the firing took effect assaulted two people while searching for a suspect in a game room. A security video capturing the assault received lots of media coverage.

The former officer, Vincent Morre, last year was sentenced to 30 months in prison for the assault.

Thirty-one of the 76 discipline cases listed in the report triggered criminal investigations; domestic violence was the most common reason cited, noted in seven cases, according to a Star-Advertiser analysis. Assault was listed in six cases.

One-third of the overall cases were referred to prosecutors.

In one pending discharge case, the unnamed officer “committed criminal acts of a sexual nature against the victim,” according to the report. A sex assault and kidnapping investigation was initiated.

In another pending case, the unnamed officer handcuffed an individual, drove him to an undisclosed location, threatened him and damaged his property, the report said. It noted that the officer did not submit appropriate incident reports to document his actions.

In 15 of the 76 cases, discipline was either withheld or reduced “pursuant to grievance process,” and a total of 56 days of suspension were shaved from officers’ discipline, according to the Star-Advertiser analysis.

In one case, for instance, an officer had an argument with his girlfriend that became physical, and he also got into an argument with a taxi driver, tossing out the driver’s belongings from the vehicle and damaging the cab, according to the report.

The officer’s 10-day suspension was reduced to five days via the grievance process, the report said.