Internal Affairs Division

[Notorious]

I've never really heard any horror stories about our background investigators. But then, we only deal with them very rarely.

The Polygraph guys suck too. Having worked in personnel and reading these reports, it's clear the agendas of some of these guys.

Small department the IAD is generally awesome, they are fair, dont try to screw over officers and will do a full investigation, get into a larger department such as LASO, LAPD etc and you get cops who want to burn others because they think it will help them promote, hell in LAPD they wont promote you to LT if you havent done a loan to IAD/PSB. You get a lot of half assed investigations that will simply get there side across and the officer is holding the short end of the stick, alot of one sided questions that meets there needs and the more officers they can get canned or suspended the better they look to brass. Not to mention the many stupid audits they will do, such as in west bureau of LAPD they would set up mock accidents and have one of the "drivers" smell like alcohol yet they will ace the FST, so the officers were doing a FI card on the drivers and writing on the back, "Passed FST in field" Well there is a small policy that states that when you do an FST you have to do DUI face sheet. When a DUI face sheet was not turned in they would hit the officers with write ups or suspension days.

Don't forget planting stuff in the backseats of the units to see if the officers do a thorough unit inspection.

[yzErnie]

Don't forget planting stuff in the backseats of the units to see if the officers do a thorough unit inspection.

I did plant a headless rattlesnake under the seat of one of my guys units. The reaction was gut busting funny and I almost sharted myself.

[Tacobandit]

The Polygraph guys suck too. Having worked in personnel and reading these reports, it's clear the agendas of some of these guys.



Don't forget planting stuff in the backseats of the units to see if the officers do a thorough unit inspection.

That doesnt happen as much anymore, they have other dumb stuff to do to burn cops

[Ron-Solo]

TPT and I both work for the same department. He has much more time on and experience than I do. But in my short time on, I have had a run-in with IAB that left a bad taste in my mouth. At best, they are a neccessary evil.

I was notified via email, that I was the subject of an investigation. Apparently, I hurt a civilian coworker's (male) feelings. The civilian filed a POE against me (Deputies will know what this is).

I was respectful to the two investigators, and cooperated fully. Basically, I made a joke about myself, but it offended the civiian employee. I admitted to what I did, and explained to them why I made the joke. I even gave them evidence that it was a running joke about myself, that went back to when I first came on. The whole time they were smiling and laughing with me, and putting on a show. I knew it was all fake, but wasn't worried because I came into the meeting with the intention of telling the truth.

They ignored the evidence, and took the investigation in a completely different direction. Their findings were disgusting. They nailed me to the cross, for the sake of making an example out of me. They labeled me a hate monger. As a result of IAB's "findings", I received five days off without pay.

I went into the investigation a happy-go-lucky person, and came out jaded and distrustful of IAB and the executives on my department.

I beefed the discipline through my union. Three years later, my department executives conceeded, removed the POE, and refunded most (not all) of my days off.

SCREW IAB! They're a bunch of wannabe detectives that make their money by taking money away from other cops! There, I said it! Flame on.

Hey Gnome, to POE investigators are a separate part of IAB and assigned to the Equity Unit. They have their own agenda. Always tell the truth, but never talk to them without a rep.

As an LT, I did a lot of "Unit Level" investigations. My notification to the employee always went something like this...."You are the subject of an investigation for a violation of......whatever policy section and are scheduled for an interview on ...... You are entitled to representation during this interview. If your representative is not available at that time, please ascertain what time he/she is available and contact me.

I never had an issue with the employee having a rep present, but then again, I wasnt on a witch hunt. Keep in mind, I usually already knew the answer to the question and have usually already interviewed all the other parties first. If you tell the truth, you might be found in violation of policy. If you get caught in a lie, you will get double the days off, and could get fired.

[Bobby Ricigliano]

I have never had to deal with IA in more than a decade and hope I never do. If I do I will be doing it through my Union rep for the reasons other posters have indicated above.

[Notorious]

I did plant a headless rattlesnake under the seat of one of my guys units. The reaction was gut busting funny and I almost sharted myself.

I planted some "out of service" magnetic signs on a coworker's pov once. He didn't think it was that funny....

That doesnt happen as much anymore, they have other dumb stuff to do to burn cops

I think sticking narco in a back seat to burn a patrol guy is pretty bad.

[Bert Gamble]

I think sticking narco in a back seat to burn a patrol guy is pretty bad.[/QUOTE]

If they are planting stuff in cop cars, do you think they were doing it to civillians when they were working the street? Seems to be a logical connection.

[Notorious]

I think there is a bit of difference there. You are not planting the drugs and saying it's theirs so you can send them to prison on a false charge. IAD is checking to see if the patrol guys are doing the backseat check of the units in a diligent manner.

[biochembruin]

If they are planting stuff in cop cars, do you think they were doing it to civillians when they were working the street? Seems to be a logical connection.

No, conducting an internal investigation is different from a criminal investigation. There are very few laws regarding entrapment, hearsay, search/seizure, presumption of innocence, etc, when it comes to internal investigations. In that regard, an officer undergoing an internal investigation has fewer rights than a person charged with a crime. Also, "planting" evidence in a patrol car doesn't lead to arrest, but to internal discipline.

It's really more along the lines of an undercover officer posing as a prostitute. In that case, it's up to the suspect to break the law. It is similar when IA plants contraband in a police vehicle and expects the officer to find it. It's up to the officer to follow policy (not law). If the officer breaks policy, an IA investigation is opened. The kicker is when IA plants something very difficult to discover in the car, then claims the officer neglected their duty when they didn't (couldn't) find it and report it per policy.

There's no logical connection between IA stings of "planting" evidence in an internal investigation, and a cop planting evidence on a suspect for a criminal investigation.

[Notorious]

Methinks logic may be a lost cause here.

[Bert Gamble]

I think there is a bit of difference there. You are not planting the drugs and saying it's theirs so you can send them to prison on a false charge. IAD is checking to see if the patrol guys are doing the backseat check of the units in a diligent manner.

I see the difference. Makes sense. To the uninformed, it sounds the same. I had no idea you guys got in trouble if someone left something in your car and you didn't find it.

Thanks for the explanation.

[Notorious]

There are very valid reasons to have the protocol to check your backseat arty the beginning and end of your shift as well as anytime someone sits in there.