SEATTLE_In a landmark ruling, U.S. District Judge James Robart on Wednesday found the Seattle Police Department in "full and effective compliance" with court-ordered reforms imposed on the city more than five years ago after a string of high-profile incidents involving use of force.
The city will enter into a two-year review period in which it must show the sweeping reforms are locked in place and address a list of issues Robart laid out in his ruling.
But, for the moment, the ruling represents a major turning point for the Police Department, recognizing its accomplishments since the city entered into a consent decree with the U.S. Justice Department in July 2012 to address allegations that officers had engaged in a "pattern or practice" of using excessive force and displayed troubling evidence of biased policing.
Robart, who has overseen the consent decree, granted a motion, filed by the city in September, to be found in full compliance with the agreement. The Justice Department and Community Police Commission, a citizen body created as part of the consent decree, had joined in the city's request.
The department began to move toward compliance under the leadership of former Seattle Police Chief Kathleen O'Toole, an ex-Boston police commissioner who was hired by the city in June 2014 at a time the reform effort was foundering. She stepped down Dec. 31, citing mostly personal reasons for her decision.
Interim Police Chief Carmen Best, who has said she wants the permanent job, will inherit the responsibility of maintaining the changes, bolstered by a boost in department morale that is certain to greet Robart's ruling.
The ruling also clears the path for new Mayor Jenny Durkan_who was the U.S. attorney in Seattle when the Justice Department in 2011 found deficiencies in the Police Department_to push for continued reforms she has pledged to carry out.
Years of friction between police and minority communities_many centered on allegations of officers escalating petty situations into confrontations, and then using force to quell them_came to a head in 2010 and 2011 with a series of publicized and controversial incidents, many of which were caught on video.
Included was an officer's threat to beat the "Mexican piss" out of a prone Latino man.
The public outrage reached a peak on Aug. 30, 2010, when Officer Ian Birk shot and killed a First Nations totem carver who was walking downtown carrying a piece of wood and a small folding knife. A dashboard camera in Birk's patrol car captured the audio of the encounter and revealed that only about 4 seconds passed between the time Birk issued commands to put down the knife and when he fired the shots that ended the life of John T. Williams.
The shooting proved a catalyst within the communities that had over the years witnessed repeated attempts at police reform falter or fail. This time they responded with a single voice and to a higher authority, the Justice Department.
In December 2010, the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, joined by 34 community groups, sent a letter to the DOJ asking for a formal investigation into the Police Department.
When the Justice Department gave credence to the complaints in a scathing report in December 2011, then-Mayor Mike McGinn and then-Police Chief John Diaz reacted defensively, setting off a tortured, months-long process that culminated in the consent decree. City Attorney Pete Holmes had warned that McGinn's strategy had put the city on the verge of a civil-rights lawsuit that could have dire consequences.
The consent decree led to the appointment of a court monitor, Merrick Bobb, whose initial reports to Robart raised concerns about the pace of reform.
But after the election of Mayor Ed Murray, who took office in January 2013, and the hiring of O'Toole, Bobb began issuing increasingly positive report cards.
The most significant finding occurred last April, when Bobb issued a glowing report concluding the department had carried out a dramatic turnaround in the use of force.
Citing data and case samples over a 28-month period, the monitor found overall use of force dropped across time under the consent decree and when compared to the period that led to the Justice Department's findings in 2011.
In contrast to the 2011 numbers, there had been what appeared to be a net decrease of 743 incidents_a 60 percent drop_in the use of moderate and high-level use of force. Of 2,385 incidents, 39, or 1.6 percent, stemmed from the most serious type of force, including 15 officer-involved shootings.
Yet Bobb filed court papers in September in which he told Robart the city had not met all of its obligations in the consent decree. Sources not authorized to publicly discuss the matter contended Bobb subsequently softened his position.
The city argued in its motion that it had successfully completed all 10 key assessments conducted by the monitor and that Bobb was seeking more than is required.
"The parties and the Monitor have spurred reform that goes further than the Consent Decree, but those reforms are not a prerequisite to 'full and effective compliance,'" the motion said. "The ten assessments document SPD's hard work to reach that milestone. It would be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Decree to move that milestone farther down the road."
In November, Robart asked the city for more information on the Police Department's finding that the fatal shooting on June 18 of a black woman, Charleena Lyles, was reasonable before he decided on the city's motion.
Lyles, a 30-year-old mother of four children, was shot by two white officers, who said they fired after she pulled one or two knives on them while they were investigating a burglary call from her at her Northeast Seattle apartment.
In submitting the finding to Robart, city attorneys argued the conclusions should have no bearing on the motion.
Lyles' death occurred after Bobb's assessments, they wrote, noting that if the department was found to be in compliance with the consent decree, it will be required to keep that status during the two-year "sustainment period."
"If Ms. Lyles's death or the City's response to it demonstrate, along with other evidence, that SPD has failed to comply with one or more requirements of the Decree, the court can make that determination on a complete record at that time," their brief says.
