Was this really necessary, or was it just a knee-jerk reaction to a bunch of police termination cases that didn't produce the desired results of the politicos (i.e. firing police officers)?
After years of resistance, a Chicago alderman's plan to shed more light on the largely secretive work of the city's police discipline review board gained momentum today.
Under Ald. Robert Fioretti's proposal, the votes of the nine-member Police Board would have to be posted online within 10 days. The board also would have to list the rationale behind its decisions, as well as the reasons members voted against rulings.“For far too long the decisions have remained without reasons,” Fioretti, 2nd, told members of the Public Safety Committee at today's hearing. “Two people who were charged with the same offense, one would receive a few days suspension, and the other one could be up to a year, two years.”
But we're pretty sure this is the real reason:
- Tracy Siska, executive director of the Chicago Justice Project, wrote a study two years ago that found the board declined to fire about two-thirds of the officers that the police superintendent recommended for dismissal. He also concluded the board was rife with rampant absenteeism.
We're pretty sure that two-thirds of the cases were pretty much BS and the Police Board saw though them. But that isn't the desired result of our liberal betters.