Counter Report Reveals Fundamental Dishonesty of Bratton's Board of Inquiry

The LAPD SWAT Board of Inquiry report that Police Chief William Bratton unveiled this morning is a remarkable insult to the people and police officers of Los Angeles. It recommends a litany of politically correct changes that have been used to eliminate 13 of the 18 standards SWAT has used for two decades in selecting its new officers. It even goes so far as to describe SWAT - not the criminals it captures - as “a threat to” Los Angeles as a whole.

In my research on this issue, I’ve interviewed officers whose experience totals more than 150 years on the department, a century in SWAT. Their comments on a draft copy of the un-released BOI report have been consolidated in a “Counter Analysis,” which will be released later today. It is a point-by-point review of both the BOI’s recommendations and their methodology for reaching them. In short, there was none.

These officers refuse to be identified because of an unprecedented campaign of intimidation LAPD management has pressed on SWAT. Bratton has gone so far as to remove officers from operations because of the comments of their wives and threatening to transfer out any officer who speaks his mind – publicly or privately.

These comments prove the BOI report is riddled with factual error; blatantly biased; ignorant of basic tactics; vaguely stated so as to be meaningless; and dramatically self-contradictory. Its recommendations are almost universally unsubstantiated. First hand evidence is almost non-existent.

And they make some compelling points. The BOI’s statement “we observed SWAT operations” is factually supported only by a single board member having observed only a single warrant service, officers say. Yet, Bratton wants to use that “examination” to trash procedures has saved countless lives.

Perhaps the two most bothersome aspects of the report are these: First, the BOI’s stated purpose – to investigate the death of a child – was a lie to the people of Los Angeles The BBOI was allegedly convened to review the July 10, 2005 killing of 19-month-old Suzie Pena during a SWAT standoff. Bratton’s statements and the LAPD press release were unambiguous. Yet, the BOI report clearly states that the BOI didn’t even attempt to examine the incident – and Bratton himself privately described the Pena case as a mere “catalyst” for a long-desired review, the report shows

Second, the 67-page report acknowledges then blatantly ignores SWAT’s remarkable record: In nearly 4000 call-outs (through 2005), the team lost only one hostage (Suzie Pena) and had killed only 31 suspects – less than 1% of the total they’ve confronted among the City’s worst offenders.

The analysis of these officers reveals that the BOI report is rife with factual errors. It repeatedly refers to SWAT having “Few African Americans.” In fact, there are more African Americans on SWAT than the LAPD as a whole (by percentage); something that would have been obvious if the board had simply shown up.

In reviewing a specific incident, the BOI (which had three lawyers but only one tactical expert) faulted SWAT for not using techniques “so that the less lethal weapon could be fired and its results evaluated before the (shot)gun was fired.” But, the BOI’s account clearly proves the officers did exactly that.

In reviewing a set of cases, the BOI said “In each of these instances, mental illness was not… taken into account in formulating an operational plan.” In fact, the LAPD Behavioral Science Services unit was on hand and making recommendations.

But, like any Politburo-style finding, the facts aren’t going to get in the way of these conclusions.

The BOI’s ignorance of tactical practices is shocking. In reviewing SWAT’s command and control methods, one member was quoted as saying “I like the sergeant being there. It establishes fire arms control.” However, most sergeants in SWAT have no SWAT experience where as many of SWAT’s Team Leaders have been on hundreds or thousands of missions. And sergeants can’t have a finger on every trigger.

The board’s pre-disposition to support rank (of which Bratton has the most) over SWAT experience (of which Bratton has none), and was obvious and gravely insulting to officers who have amassed such a reputation. Disparaging remarks about rank pepper the report, as though stripes and stars are actually brain cells.

The report is riddled with pre-conceived notions and bias. The phrase “military mind-set” is undefined yet repeatedly used disparagingly. What is wrong with having strict discipline among the most heavily armed officers in a peaceful democracy? The report doesn’t say.

Perhaps most insulting is this statement: “SWAT culture and insularity pose a certain danger to the LAPD and the Los Angeles community as a whole.” Yes, the Chief of Police’s handpicked board described his premier unit as “a danger to the community.”

Finally, the report is blatantly self-contradictory. In one matter, it states, “The Board was not presented with anyone espousing contrary views.” Yet, the BOI recommended a contrary course of action anyway.

It repeatedly recommends SWAT train less (despite officers stating they already have reduced effectiveness) yet also suggests multiple new training tasks and an expansion of the platoon that would require far more training than it has previously undertaken.

This Seinfeld-like self-contradictory farce climaxes on page 47 with a recommendation that SWAT use computer analysis to determine “…does or does not SWAT fail to make effective use of negotiation?” Yet almost all of the report’s recommendations flow from that specific conclusion. Well, if we need a computer to figure out the truth, what are the conclusions based on?

I submit: bias and pre-disposition.

The Officers I interviewed held out hope that this BOI would have found opportunities to improve on its already excellent record. Instead, Chief Bratton has chosen to shovel political correctness down the platoon’s throats, regardless of facts and impacts.

A handful of ideas in this report are harmless and potentially even positive. However, in the e-mailed words of a two-decade veteran of the team, in the main “these ideas will get people (officers/citizens/suspects) killed, and have no benefit.”

Chief Bratton should have the courage, humility and intellectual honesty to discard the BOI report and conduct a real analysis of SWAT.