Hawaii lawmakers consider proposal to ID police fired or suspended for misconduct

Lawmakers are again considering a bill to require that police departments disclose the names of officers suspended or fired for misconduct, a controversial subject that has prompted years of debate and litigation in Hawaii.

The four county police departments are required by state law to submit annual reports of police misconduct cases to lawmakers. The law requires that the reports include a summary of facts, the discipline meted out, the status of any grievances and whether the incidents were reported to prosecutors.

House Bill 285, which was tentatively approved by the House and the Senate, would require the names of suspended or fired officers be included starting in 2021.

Some of the cases involving officers have been notorious, such as a 2014 incident in which police Sgt. Darren Cachola was captured on video in a Waipahu restaurant apparently pummeling his girlfriend.

The annual report filed by Honolulu police this year said the department fired the officer involved in that case, but an arbitrator reversed that decision. In the end the incident resulted in a six-month suspension, and the case was referred to prosecutors. Cachola is not named in the department’s report.

Other incidents recounted in the annual police misconduct report are not as well known, but just as alarming.

They include an officer who was suspended for 20 days for failing to investigate or file proper reports from a crime scene involving another officer, and an officer who was fired for committing “multiple criminal acts of sexual assault against a relative who was a minor,” according to the report.

The report also recounts an incident in which an officer failed to immediately investigate an accident involving another officer who smelled of alcohol, and instead “instructed another officer to transport the impaired officer home without approval from a supervisor.” That drew a 10-day suspension.

The Honolulu report also includes cases where officers were disciplined for driving drunk or allegedly covering for fellow officers who did so, and one case where an officer was suspended for 60 days for seizing drugs without filing a police report or submitting the drugs into evidence.

Another case involved an officer who was involved in a physical altercation with his ex-wife and was given a six-month suspension; another who slapped and kicked his girlfriend during an argument and was suspended for 20 days; and another who was fired for conducting “personal business by engaging in sexual activity while on duty and under the color of police authority,” according to the Honolulu report.

The annual report for Hawaii County described cases where two officers were fired for striking juveniles, another was fired for failing a drug test and another was suspended for a day for issuing “traffic citations with false violations.”

The State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers opposes the bill. In its written testimony it included a list of recent situations where officers faced armed and dangerous suspects and had to make split-second decisions.

“Publicly disclosing an officers’ name adds absolutely nothing to the multi-layered disciplinary procedures and protocols that are already in place which holds each and every officer responsible for his/her actions,” wrote SHOPO President Malcolm Lutu. “What HB 285 will promote is the selling of newspapers, shaming our officers’ families and discouraging new recruits from joining the department.”

Officers who are accused of criminal wrongdoing are investigated by the Internal Affairs Division, and officers could also face administrative inquiries. Cases may also be forwarded to county prosecutors or the state attorney general for further review, Lutu said in his written testimony.

Police chiefs in Hawaii have the authority to discipline officers, and they “do not hesitate to exercise that authority as they feel is appropriate,” he wrote.

The bill is supported by the state Office of Information Practices, which noted in its testimony that “this proposal would treat information about an officer’s suspension the same way as information about any other government employee’s suspension.”

The measure is also backed by Common Cause Hawaii, the League of Women Voters of Hawaii, the Society of Professional Journalists Hawaii Chapter and the American Civil Liberties Union of Hawaii.

Brian Black, executive director of the Civil Beat Law Center for the Public Interest, said in written testimony that Civil Beat sued in 2013 to obtain the names of officers who were listed in reports to the Legislature on police misconduct. Five years later that case is still in litigation, he said.

“The long history of police discipline reflected in the annual legislative reports shows that suspended police officers have committed exceptionally troubling conduct,” Black wrote. “The public deserves clear and timely access to information about suspended police officers.”

Bills seeking to open access to the records of suspended police officers have been introduced every year since 2015, he wrote.

Lawmakers would need to meet in conference committee in the days ahead and work out the differences between House and Senate versions of HB 285 before the end of session for the measure to pass this year. Session is scheduled to adjourn May 2.

Mike Tsai is on leave. His Incidental Lives column will resume when he returns.