View Complaints

Citizen Complaints Against Officers

Complaints of misconduct filed against officers are investigated by the Professional Standards Unit. The investigations are for the purpose of internal department review and not for criminal prosecution. The unit tracks all complaints and commendations for all department employees. Reports of complaints and the investigation findings are posted here on a quarterly basis.

All citizen complaints against officers are documented and investigated by the department’s supervisors. Once the investigation is complete, it is reviewed by the Section Commander, Division Commander and then forwarded to the Office of the Chief where the decision is made as to the finding of the complaint. Complaints questioning the basis for a citation or arrest are not documented and those complainants are advised to go through the court system.

There are four different categories of complaint findings:

Sustained: The investigation produced a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation did in fact occur and the action of the officer was improper.

Not Sustained: The investigation failed to produce a preponderance of evidence to either prove or disprove the allegation.

Exonerated: The allegation in fact did occur but the actions of the officer were legal, justified, proper, and in accordance with the law and the department’s policies and procedures.

Unfounded: The allegation in fact did not occur, based on the evidence.

2024

1st Qtr

1. On January 15, 2024, a citizen reported officers had used excessive force during their arrest. It was also alleged that an officer made an inappropriate comment during this incident. An investigation into the incident was conducted by way of interviews and reviews of body-worn camera and in-car video evidence. It was determined that the officers acted within policy and the law regarding the use of force; this complaint was unfounded. In regard to the allegation of an inappropriate comment; this complaint was sustained.

2. On January 16, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint noting that an officer acted inappropriately on a call and failed to thoroughly investigate an incident. An investigation into this complaint was completed and found the complaint was not sustained.

3. On January 24, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer alleging that they had lied under oath during court proceedings. An investigation into the officer’s actions during the incident leading up to trial and during the trial itself, it was determined the officer had not lied. This complaint was unfounded.

4. On January 30, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer noting that they had not thoroughly investigated an incident and refused to make an arrest. A review of this incident, including interviews and video reviews, determined that the officers acted appropriately. This complaint was unfounded.

5. On February 4, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint of excessive use of force during an arrest. A review of the incident, including interviews and reviews of body-worn camera and in-car camera footage, revealed that the officers acted within policy and state law. This complaint was unfounded.

6. On February 6, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint of excessive force during an arrest. A review of the incident, including interviews and reviews of body-worn camera and in-car camera footage, revealed that the officers acted within policy and state law. This complaint was unfounded.

7. On February 14, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint of false arrest against an officer. A review of this incident was completed which showed the complainant committed the crime he was accused of. His arrest was valid. This complaint was unfounded.

8. On February 21, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for injuring them during handcuffing procedures. A review was completed and found the officers acted appropriately and within policy. This complaint was unfounded.

9. On February 19, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint alleging false arrest. A review of the incident was completed including a review of body-worn camera and in-car camera footage. The officers in this complaint have been exonerated.

10. On February 29, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for excessive use of force. A review of this incident was completed, including a review of body-worn camera and in-car camera footage. The review found the officer’s actions were appropriate and the complaint has been unfounded.

11. On March 4, 2024, a citizen filed a third-party complaint of inappropriate behavior by an officer in a non-official capacity. An investigation into the incident was completed and the complaint was determined to be unfounded.

12. On March 17, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for excessive force and improper handcuffing. A review of this incident was completed, including a review of body-worn camera and in-car camera footage. This review showed officers acted within policy and state law. This complaint was unfounded.

13. On March 27, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint against several officers for excessive use of force during an arrest. A review of the incident, including body-worn camera and in-car camera footage, showed officers acted within policy and state law. This complaint was unfounded.

14. On March 28, 2024, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer alleging harassment. An investigation into the complaint was completed and found that officers were investigating an incident that required them to be where they were. This complaint was unfounded.

2nd Quarter

On April 2, 2024 a complaint was filed against an officer for improperly handling an investigation. An internal review of the incident found the complaint to have merit. This complaint was sustained.
On April 4, 2024 a complaint was filed against an officer alleging discrimination during a traffic stop. A review of this incident was completed, including a review of the video which captured the entirety of the interaction with the complainant. At the conclusion of the investigation it was determined that this complaint was unfounded.
On April 7, 2024 a complaint was filed against an officer for rudeness during a traffic stop. A review of the complaint was completed which included the body-worn and in-car camera footage. The complainant’s allegations were false, and this complaint was unfounded.
On April 16, 2024 a complaint was filed against an officer for using abusive language and improper handcuffing during an arrest. A review of this complaint was completed which included a review of the body-worn and in-car cameras. The complainant’s allegations were false, and this complaint was unfounded.
On April 16, 2024 a complaint was filed against two officers alleging conduct unbecoming (assault). A review of this incident was completed which included a review of the officer’s body-worn cameras which captured the entire incident. This complaint was unfounded.
On May 1, 2024 a complaint was file against an officer alleging harassment. After an investigation and an interview with the complainant, it was determined that this situation was a misunderstanding, and the complainant withdrew the complaint. This complaint was unfounded.
On May 7, 2024 a complaint was file against an officer alleging illegal entry into the complainant’s home during a hit-and-run investigation. After an investigation into the complaint including a review of the officer’s body-worn camera, it was determined that the officer followed the fleeing individual into their home. This complaint was unfounded.
On May 8, 2024 a complaint was lodged against an Animal Control Officer alleging a lack of service when responding to a complaint of a barking dog. After an investigation which included a review of body-worn camera and in-car camera footage, this complaint was unfounded.
On May 11, 2024 a complaint was filed against an officer alleging rudeness and improper handcuffing. A review of this incident which included a review of body-worn camera and in-car camera footage determined this complaint to be unfounded.
On May 22, 2024 a complaint was filed alleging discrimination and poor job performance during a traffic stop. After an investigation into this incident including a review of body-worn cameras and in-car cameras, it was determined that no discrimination occurred, and the officers acted professionally. This complaint was unfounded.
On May 31, 2024 a complaint was filed alleging rudeness from two officers during a traffic stop and subsequent arrest. After an investigation into this incident including a review of body-worn cameras and in-car cameras, it was determined that officers acted appropriately and within policy. This complaint was unfounded.
On June 12, 2024 a complaint was filed alleging conduct unbecoming of an officer during a prisoner transport. After an investigation into this incident including body-worn camera footage, it was determined that officers acted within policy. This complaint was unfounded.
On June 23, 2024 a complaint was filed alleging rudeness during a traffic stop. After an investigation in to this incident including body-worn camera footage, it was determined that the officer acted within policy. This complaint was unfounded.

3rd Quarter

On July 2, 2024 a citizen reported a lack of service by a Sioux Falls Police Officer while handing a call for service. A review of camera footage and body-worn-camera footage was reviewed and determined to be false. This complaint was unfounded.
On July 3, 2024 a citizen reported that an officer was discourteous during a traffic stop. Body-worn-camera and in-car camera footage was reviewed. At the conclusion of this investigation, the complaint was determined to be unfounded.
On July 17, 2024 a citizen reported being falsely accused of intoxication during an interaction with a Sioux Falls Police Officer. A review of the officer’s body-worn-camera was completed and found the line of questioning to be appropriate during the investigation. This complaint was determined to be unfounded.
On July 23, 2024 a report was made that an officer conducted a traffic stop and acted with racial bias and improperly handled evidence. A review of this incident was completed to include a review of in-car and body-worn-camera footage. The allegation of racial bias was unfounded. The allegation of improper evidence handling was sustained.
On July 28, 2024 a citizen reported a lack of service by a Sioux Falls Police Officer following a call for service. A review of body-worn-camera footage was review and the complaint was determined to be unfounded.
On August 9, 2024 a report was made by a citizen of excessive force used by an officer during an arrest. A review of the incident was completed to include a review of body-worn-camera footage. This complaint was determined to unfounded.
On August 12, 2024 a citizen reported a lack of service following a call for service. A review of the incident was completed to include body-worn-camera footage. This complaint was determined to be unfounded.
On August 14, 2024 a citizen reported that an officer made illegal entry into a residence of an acquaintance, although they weren’t present at the residence themselves. A review of the incident was completed to include body-worn-camera footage. The officer was allowed into the residence; this complaint is unfounded.
On August 16, 2024 a report was made of potential dishonesty by a Sioux Falls Police Officer during a non-police related function. This incident was investigated, and no evidence of dishonesty was found. This complaint is unfounded.
On September 24, 2024 a citizen reported excessive force and improper handcuffing by a Sioux Falls Police Officer. A review of body-worn-camera footage was conducted and the complaint was determined to be unfounded.

4th Quarter

On October 17, 2024 a report was made by a citizen complaining excessive force during their arrest. A review of the incident was completed to include a review of available camera footage. This complaint was determined to be unfounded.
On October 28, 2024 a report was made my a citizen claiming false arrest and excessive force during their arrest. A review of the incident was completed to include a review of available camera footage. It was found that there was probable cause for the arrest and that the force used was appropriate. This complaint was determined to be unfounded.
On October 29, 2024 a report was made by a citizen that officers had not conducted a thorough investigation. A review of the incident was completed to include all available camera footage. The complaint was determined to be unfounded.
On November 5, 2024 a report was made by a citizen that a detective had been rude during an investigation. A review of this incident, to include all available camera footage and interviews with those present, was completed. This complaint was determined to be unfounded.
On November 11, 2024 a report was made by a citizen that two officers had been rude during an interaction. A review of this incident was completed and the complaint was determined to be not-sustained.
On December 1, 2024 a report was made by a citizen who claimed officers had shown a lack of service during a call two-years prior. A review of the incident was completed and the complaint was determined to be unfounded.
On December 5, 2024 a report was filed by a citizen claiming excessive use of force. A review of the incident was completed to include all available video footage. This report was determined to be unfounded.
On December 9, 2024 a report was made by a citizen claiming damage to their property. A review of the incident was completed and it was determined that the property was mishandled which resulted in damage. This complaint was determined to be sustained.
On December 16, 2024 a report was filed by a citizen claiming that an Animal Control Officer had used abusive language during their interaction. A review of this incident was completed and the complaint was determined to be not-sustained.
On December 14, 2024 a report was made by a citizen alleging false arrest, excessive force, and rudeness during a police interaction. A review of the incident was completed to include all available video footage. The officers were found to have acted within policy. The complaint was determined to be unfounded.
On December 24, 2024 a report was made by a citizen claiming false arrest and excessive force during their arrest. A review of the incident was completed to include all available video footage. The officers were found to have acted within policy. The complaint was determined to be unfounded.

2023

1st Qtr

On 1/18/2023, a citizen filed a complaint regarding their displeasure with how a case they had filed was handled. The case was multi-jurisdictional with multiple agencies involved. Sioux Falls PD was not the primary investigating agency for the incident. After a review of the incident and subsequent involvement in the investigation, it was found that the matter was handled appropriately, and the complaint was unfounded.
On 2/10/2023, a citizen filed a complaint that their juvenile son was the subject of a traffic stop where the young man was asked to step out of the car and asked for consent to check for weapons on their person. A review of the officer’s video showed that the juvenile was asked to step out of the car to deal with the traffic stop inside the officer’s squad car. The officer asked for consent to check for weapons and the juvenile, who was old enough to consent, did consent to the quick pat down. The traffic stop proceeded, and the juvenile was released from the stop. The investigation showed that no policy violations occurred, and the complaint was unfounded.
On 2/3/2023, a citizen filed a complaint against officers for not providing adequate service. An investigation into the incident occurred. The result of the investigation showed the complainant had tried to call 911 for an ambulance but that they were disorderly with the call taker and the call taker couldn’t determine the nature of the call. They dispatched officers to the scene. On scene the officers contacted the complainant who was disorderly and said she wanted an ambulance. The officers attempted to assist in this, but the complainant was uncooperative. Eventually they were able to contact the patient who advised they didn’t need medical assistance. The complainant mostly wanted to file a complaint against the hospital from a previous visit. The officers eventually cleared the scene with no ambulance needed. The officers followed policy in their investigation. The complaint was unfounded.
On 2/7/2023, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for being rude and discourteous. An investigation into the incident was conducted. A review of the audio / video from all officers on scene showed that the officer was neither rude nor discourteous. The complaint was unfounded.
On 2/22/2023, a citizen filed a complaint that an officer was being unprofessional in their conduct. An investigation into this incident was conducted. The investigation showed that the officer responded to a local hospital at the hospital’s request to transport a person. The parameters of the transport were not within department policy and the hospital contracts a third party to conduct these transports. The officer provided this information politely and the hospital staff then requested his name and badge number. He provided these and left. The hospital employee called and stated the officer raised his voice and was threatening in his demeanor. A review of the body camera footage showed this wasn’t true. The officer maintained his professional tone and demeanor. The complaint was unfounded.
On 3/8/2023, a citizen filed a complaint that an officers kidnapped him and entered his apartment without a warrant. An investigation into this incident was conducted. The investigation showed that the officer responded to a call for service of a noise complaint. They investigated the noise complaint from the hallway and eventually arrested the citizen who was the subject of the noise complaint in the hallway outside of his apartment. They did not kidnap him and followed policy and procedure. The complaint was unfounded.
On 3/18/2023, a citizen filed a complaint that officers entered his home against his stated wishes. An investigation into the incident was conducted. Officers were dispatched to a family dispute and upon arrival contacted the parties outside of their residence. An officer asked to speak to one half of the dispute inside and the person said no. The officer entered the residence with that party against their wishes. The investigation revealed that this officer acted against policy and the complaint was sustained.

2nd Qtr

Citizen Complaints against Officers
2023 2nd Quarter

There are four different categories of complaint findings:

Sustained - The investigation produced a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation did in fact occur and the action of the officer was improper.
Not Sustained - The investigation failed to produce a preponderance of evidence to either prove or disprove the allegation.
Exonerated - The allegation in fact did occur but the actions of the officer were legal, justified, proper, and in accordance with the law and the department’s policies and procedures.
Unfounded - The allegation in fact did not occur, based on the evidence.

During this quarter, there were six citizen’s complaint against officers. The findings for that complaint is as follows:

On 4/14/2023, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for making a rude gesture toward them as the officer drove by. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. On 4/21/2023, a second citizen filed another complaint against the officer for the same incident that occurred on 4/14/2023. This was added to the ongoing investigation. The investigation revealed that the officer did make a rude gesture toward a group of citizens on 4/14/2023 and the complaint was sustained.
On 4/28/2023, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for an excessive use of force. An investigation into the incident was conducted. A review of the incident, to include body camera footage and in-car camera footage, revealed that the responding officer used an appropriate level of force in arresting the complainant. The investigation showed that no policy violations occurred, and the officer’s actions were exonerated.
On 5/8/2023, a citizen filed a complaint against officers for an excessive use of force. An investigation into the incident was conducted. A review of the body camera footage and in-car camera footage showed that officers did use legal and justified force against the citizen who filed this complaint, and that they used the appropriate level of force to accomplish the arrest. The officers were exonerated.
On 5/10/2023, a citizen filed a complaint against a K9 officer for allegedly allowing their police service dog to scratch the paint of his car during a K9 search. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. The investigation revealed there wasn’t enough evidence to prove the damage was caused by the K9 search. The complaint was not-sustained.
On 5/15/2023, a citizen filed a complaint that an officer used excessive force. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. A review of the body camera and in-car footage was also conducted. As a result of the investigation, it was found the officer did not use excessive force during this incident as alleged. The complaint was unfounded.
On 6/13/2023, a citizen filed a complaint that officers used excessive force against her. An investigation into the incident was conducted. A review of footage from body cameras as well as surveillance footage from the location of the incident showed that the force alleged by the complainant never occurred. The complaint was unfounded.

3rd Qtr

Citizen Complaints against Officers
2023 3rd Quarter

There are four different categories of complaint findings:

Sustained - The investigation produced a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation did in fact occur and the action of the officer was improper.
Not Sustained - The investigation failed to produce a preponderance of evidence to either prove or disprove the allegation.
Exonerated - The allegation in fact did occur but the actions of the officer were legal, justified, proper, and in accordance with the law and the department’s policies and procedures.
Unfounded - The allegation in fact did not occur, based on the evidence.

During this quarter, there were eight citizen’s complaint against officers. The findings for these complaints are as follows:

On 07/04/2023, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for rude behavior toward them while making a report over the phone. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. The investigation revealed that the officer was rude and acted unprofessionally. The complaint was sustained.
On 07/24/2023, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for improper handcuffing. An investigation into the incident was conducted. A review of the incident, including body camera footage and in-car camera footage, revealed that the responding officer applied the handcuffs in an appropriate manner consistent with department policy. The investigation showed that no policy violations occurred, and the complaint was unfounded.
On 07/14/2023, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for making a false arrest. An investigation into the incident was conducted. A review of the body camera footage and in-car camera footage showed that the officer’s actions were legal and within policy and that the complainant had violated the law. This complaint was unfounded.
On 07/15/2023, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for making a false arrest and discrimination. An investigation into the complaint was conducted which included a review of body camera footage and in-car camera footage. The investigation revealed that the officers acted professionally and within policy and the law. The complaint was unfounded.
On 08/12/2023, a citizen filed a complaint of a false arrest and reported that the officer lied during their interaction. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. A review of the body camera footage was conducted. As a result of the investigation, it was found the officer was truthful and the arrest was based on probable cause. The complaint was unfounded.
On 08/22/2023, a citizen filed a complaint that officers failed to make an arrest when required to do so. An investigation into the incident was conducted. The incident the complainant was referring to occurred more than one year prior to the complaint and, as such, no camera footage was available to be reviewed. Based on the results of the investigation, this complaint was unfounded.
On 08/22/2023, a citizen filed a complaint that officers used excessive force, were rude, and were discriminatory. An investigation into this complaint was conducted. A review of body camera footage and in-car footage was completed. As a result of the investigation this complaint was unfounded.

On 09/04/2023, a citizen filed a complaint that an Animal Control Officer was discourteous during their interaction. An investigation into this complaint was conducted. A review of body-camera footage was completed and, as a result, it was determined that this complaint was unfounded.

4th Qtr

Citizen Complaints against Officers
2023 4th Quarter

There are four different categories of complaint findings:

Sustained - The investigation produced a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation did in fact occur and the action of the officer was improper.
Not Sustained - The investigation failed to produce a preponderance of evidence to either prove or disprove the allegation.
Exonerated - The allegation in fact did occur but the actions of the officer were legal, justified, proper, and in accordance with the law and the department’s policies and procedures.
Unfounded - The allegation in fact did not occur, based on the evidence.

During this quarter, there were six citizen’s complaints against officers. The findings for these complaints are as follows:

On 10/5/2023 a citizen complained that they had been falsely arrested after being called in for trespassing. An investigation into the complaint was conducted and determined that the arrest was legal and followed policy and law. This complaint was unfounded.
On 10/23/2023 a citizen complained that, during a traffic stop, an officer was not pleasant and wrote a ticket. Video footage of the stop was viewed which confirmed that the officer was professional and took appropriate enforcement action. This complaint was unfounded.
On 10/31/2023 a citizen complained that they were racially profiled during a traffic stop. Video footage of the stop was reviewed and showed that the officers’ actions were appropriate and followed policy and the law. There were no signs of discrimination. This complaint was unfounded.
On 11/29/2023 a citizen complained that officers acted inappropriately during an encounter at a public place. The citizen alleged that officers violated their rights and were unfit for duty. A video review of the contact was completed, and it was determined that officers acted within policy and the law. This complaint was unfounded.
On 12/14/2023 a citizen reported being falsely arrested for a warrant. A review of the incident found that a clerical error, outside the Sioux Falls Police Department, led a warrant to be incorrectly issued for the complainant. Once the error was found, accommodations were made to the complainant to return them to their home. The investigation into this incident revealed that officers followed policy and the law when making the arrest. The complaint regarding their performance was unfounded.
On December 23, 2023 a citizen reported abusive language, improper handcuffing, and excessive force during a DWI arrest following a crash. An investigation into this complaint was conducted which included a review of video. The officers actions were professional, no force was used, and the handcuffs were applied appropriately. This complaint was unfounded.

2022

1st Qtr

On 1/10/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that they were improperly detained by officers based on his race. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. A review of the incident, and of the video / audio from the incident showed that the officer was responding to a burglary in progress. The citizen was seen walking away from the victim residence on the sidewalk. The officer ordered the person to stop and they refused and were non-compliant. The officer then detained the person based on reasonable suspicion. Upon discovering the person was not involved, they were released. The officer acted under the color of South Dakota law and department policy and procedure. This complaint was unfounded.
On 1/12/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that he had been denied medical care by the police after he had requested it. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. The citizen said he had requested medical care because he had been drugged while out drinking. The review of the call for service and the audio / video from the incident showed that the citizen had ambulance personnel check him twice. He was uncooperative with them and never made mention of being drugged. The citizen was eventually arrested and never mentioned being drugged during the transport or booking processes. The citizen was never denied medical care and the complaint was unfounded.
On 2/7/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that his 5th Amendment rights had been violated by an officer. An investigation into this complaint was conducted. A review of the call for service, as well as the audio / video of the incident showed that the officer on the call for service was investigating a reported vandalism that the citizen was a suspect of. The citizen was detained after attempting to leave the scene. At no point did the officer violate any of the citizen’s Constitutional rights. The detention and investigation was based on reasonable suspicion in accordance with state law and department policy and procedure. The complaint was unfounded.
On 3/7/2022, a citizen filed a complaint of excessive force being used by officers. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. The citizen complained they had injuries and showed bruising on their arm that was allegedly caused by arresting officers. A review of the calls for service, audio and video from the incident showed that the citizen was arrested for several crimes. She was uncooperative and attempted to assault officers. Officers used the minimum amount of force necessary to control the citizen. The citizen, when being transported from the squad car to the booking area, collapsed under their own weight and forced officers to carry them by the arms into the booking area. Their actions necessitated this. At no time did the officers use any excessive force. They operated under state law and department policy and procedure. This complaint was unfounded.
On 3/14/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that he was harassed by officers. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. A review of the call for service, audio, and video from the incident revealed that officers were dispatched to a possible intoxicated driver call. Officers located the vehicle and driver, conducted a traffic stop and DWI investigation. The investigation revealed the driver was not intoxicated and the citizen was released. The officers were acting under state law and department policy and procedure. Their actions were appropriate and the complaint of harassment was unfounded.

2nd Qtr

On 4/12/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that they were required to follow the leash law by an Animal Control officer. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. The investigation showed the AC officer legally enforced the leash law and the citizen was just unhappy about it. This complaint was unfounded.
On 5/6/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that a relative of theirs was taken into custody and the handcuffs were put on too tightly. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. The review of the video showed the person pulling against the handcuffs while in custody, which is why there were red marks. The handcuffs were properly applied. This complaint was unfounded.
On 5/18/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that officers had injured her leg during an arrest. An investigation into this complaint was conducted. A review of the call for service, as well as the audio / video of the incident showed that the officers on the call for used no force during the arrest and the citizen advised she had pre-existing injuries to her leg. The officers did not injure her leg and the complaint was unfounded.
On 6/20/2022, a citizen filed a complaint of excessive force being used by officers. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. The investigation showed the citizen was stopped for a traffic violation. She became extremely disorderly and tried to walk away from the traffic stop. Officers briefly detained her in handcuffs. Once the investigation was complete they released her. There was no force used other than to handcuff her. This complaint was unfounded.
On 6/24/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that officers were rude to her. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. A review of the call for service, audio, and video from the incident revealed that officers were dispatched to a returned runaway call. During the course of that investigation the citizen complainant attempted to physically interfere with the investigation. Officers detained the citizen. The citizen felt disrespected and complained. The officers’ actions were appropriate and the complaint of rudeness was unfounded.

3rd Qtr

On 6/26/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that a relative of theirs was stopped for speeding by an officer under the basis that they were Hispanic. An investigation into the incident was conducted. A review of the squad car’s camera and the officers body camera revealed that the stop for speeding was legitimate at 18mph over the speed limit. A further review of the races of the people from his stops showed no pattern of targeting people for traffic stops based on race. This incident was unfounded.
On 7/5//2022, a citizen filed a complaint of excessive force used by police during their arrest. A Sergeant responded and investigated the incident. The complainant claimed they were injured by officers during an arrest by being taken to the ground. The investigation revealed that the complainant attacked another citizen in front of officers and was taken to the ground and placed into handcuffs. The force used was reasonable to protect the other citizen. The complainant’s injuries in this incident existed before the officer’s takedown and were clearly visible in the body camera footage before the takedown. This complaint is unfounded.
On 7/12/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against officers for an inappropriate arrest. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. The investigation revealed that officers conducted a DWI investigation against the complainant. Initially they intended to arrest the complainant for DWI based on their investigation, but after further discussion, they decided to release the complainant without arresting them for DWI. A review of the video and audio of the incident shows the officers conducted a lawful investigation and ultimately, they made the decision they thought was best and released the citizen. The complaint was not sustained.
On 7/13/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that a Sergeant was rude and discourteous to her over the phone. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. A review of the incident could neither prove nor disprove the allegations against the Sergeant. This incident is not sustained.
On 7/21/22, a citizen filed a complaint about a call for service that occurred on 7/14/22. The complainant stated that an officer was rude to her and injured her when he kicked her door open. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. A review of the audio and video footage from the incident showed that the officer was not rude and did not kick open the citizen’s door. There is nothing in the videos to corroborate her explanation of how she claimed the officer injured her. This incident is unfounded.
On 7/24/22, a citizen filed a complaint that he was assaulted by officers. An investigation into the incident was conducted. A review of the video, audio, and interview of witnesses showed that the complainant was not assaulted by officers. The citizen’s complaint was that he was touched by officers who extended their arm and touched his chest to keep him at arm’s length while he was intoxicated and being disorderly with them. This does not constitute assault and this complaint was unfounded.
On 7/29/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that excessive force was used on him by officers. An investigation into the incident was conducted. The investigation showed that the complainant was arrested by officers, and they had to forcibly put him into a squad car as he was resisting their efforts. He complaint that they pushed him and he hit his head on the car while getting in. A review of the video and audio from the incident clearly shows he did not strike his head getting into the squad car. This complaint is unfounded.
On 8/1/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for conduct unbecoming. An investigation was conducted into the complaint. An off-duty officer utilized an on-duty officer to check a license plate on a vehicle while looking into criminal activity while off duty. No violations of policy occurred, and the complaint was unfounded.
On 8/5/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for excessive force / improper handcuffing reference an incident from 7/22/2022. An investigation into the incident was conducted. The investigation showed that officers used the appropriate level of force necessary to arrest the complainant and applied the handcuffs properly. The complaint was unfounded.
On 8/17/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for lack of service. The complainant called to file a report reference an incident involving her children. She said an officer did not respond to investigate the incident or take any actions necessary to conduct a thorough investigation. An investigation into the incident was conducted. As a result of the investigation, the complaint against the officer for lack of service was sustained.
On 8/30/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer that he was inappropriately touched. An investigation into the incident was conducted. The investigation showed that the complainant fled from a traffic stop, was caught and arrested, and searched incident to custodial arrest. Once at jail, the complainant was moving around as if he might be concealing something. The arresting officer conducted another search to verify no weapons or contraband were being taken into the jail. The search was caught on video and was appropriate and within department policy and training. The complaint was unfounded.
On 9/9/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer reference an incident from 9/6/2022. The citizen claimed he was threatened and harassed by officers. An investigation into the incident was conducted. The investigation showed that the complainant committed a jaywalking infraction and was attempting to provoke officers who were busy investigating a traffic collision and DWI investigation. When the officers attempted to cite the complainant, he retreated into his home and wouldn’t come out or identify himself. Officers returned to their investigation. At no time did the officers harass the citizen or threated him. The complaint was unfounded.
On 9/9/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against officers for using excessive force against her during an incident occurring on 9/7/2022. An investigation into the incident was conducted. The investigation showed that officers attempted to stop a reckless driver who attempted to flee from them but became stuck in a traffic jam. The officers quickly approached and arrested the reckless driver who is the complainant in this case. The complainant pulled away from the officer and was uncooperative, even after being arrested. However, despite her actions, the officers did not use force beyond escorting her. Based on this, the complaint is unfounded.

4th Qtr

On 10/25/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that their vehicle was towed by police and, after the citizen incurred impound fees, that the police should pay for it. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. Review of video and audio showed that the citizen requested the vehicle to be towed and officers did so on their behalf. The citizen then failed to get the vehicle from the tow lot and incurred the fees. This incident was unfounded.
On 11/7/2022, a citizen filed a complaint of a lack of service from an Animal Control Officer (ACO). An investigation was conducted into the incident. A review of the incident showed that the ACO provided equipment to the citizen and spent 14 minutes helping the citizen try to locate the animal they’d called about. The ACO was also polite and professional during the call for service. This complaint is unfounded.
On 11/16/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against an Animal Control Officer (ACO) for being discourteous. An investigation into the complaint was conducted. The complaint in this case was not the citizen who the ACO spoke to, but rather their spouse. A review of the audio / video from the call for service showed the ACO was responding to a barking dog call at the address. They were professional and provided the standard information and warnings they do for anyone who has a complaint against them for a barking dog. The complaint of discourteousness was unfounded.
On 12/6/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for being rude and discourteous. An investigation into the incident was conducted. A review of the audio / video from all officers on scene showed that the officer was neither rude nor discourteous and attempted to conduct a thorough investigation into the incident with a citizen who was extremely erratic and uncooperative. The complaint was unfounded.
On 12/7/22, a citizen filed a complaint that an officer was being unprofessional in their conduct. An investigation into this incident was conducted. The investigation showed that the officer was being unprofessional in their conduct. This complaint was sustained.