Phoenix residents blast city's pushback against DOJ police investigation

Some residents and advocacy groups are condemning the Phoenix City Council's public pushback against the U.S. Department of Justice's investigation into the city's Police Department.

A mother whose two sons were killed by the police said she thinks city officials would rather spend money on protecting the institution than the public. Another resident said the city only meaningfully engaged the community after the feds showed up.

Advocacy groups say residents' complaints have fallen on deaf ears for years and that city officials have sided with the police unions over those victimized by the police.

Phoenix police's recent report about its reform efforts underway are "attempts to discredit the DOJ findings before they come out," said Ben Laughlin of Poder In Action, a nonprofit that seeks to "dismantle systems of oppression."

More than two years ago, the Justice Department launched an investigation into the Phoenix Police Department. The federal agency promised to look into unconstitutional policing practices, including excessive use of force and interactions between officers and protesters, people with disabilities and people experiencing homelessness.

It's unclear when the two-and-a-half-year investigation will end, but as anticipation has grown, the City Council has become increasingly vocal in its critiques of the federal agency.

Council members have offered media interviews, decrying the DOJ's practices as unfair and opaque, while boasting of the Phoenix police's history of proactive self-correction. The city and police brass have essentially said they can reform themselves and the feds will only hinder that effort.

City staff ramped up a series of meetings to brief the public on the investigation, scheduling 14 in January alone, including two this week: one in Sunnyslope on Jan. 30 and Maryvale the next day.

Also, the city attorney asked the DOJ to let the Police Department reform itself without a consent decree.

A consent decree would legally bind the city and Justice Department in a court-enforced agreement overseen by an independent monitor, which the city would pay for. The city would agree to make certain reforms and allow the monitor to determine the department's compliance.

Critics say consent decrees are so costly, bureaucratic and time-consuming, they actually hinder progress and slow reform, while proponents of consent decrees argue they are the best tool available to reduce police violence.

Councilmember Jim Waring blasted the Justice Department at a meeting in January, saying he would prefer litigation, with the risk of losing, over federal oversight.

"They expected us to just roll over like every other city does. ... I'd rather take my chance and fight it out," he said.

While some residents have cheered the city on, buying billboards and launching websites to write editorials to persuade the council against cooperating with the feds, other residents and advocacy groups are mystified and outraged by the city's posturing.

Laughlin questioned how City Council members could "feign bewilderment" about what prompted the investigation and why the city seems more interested in protecting the police than the public.

Jared Keenan, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, said, "Anyone who has been paying the least bit of attention to Phoenix police over the last decade has to know this report is going to shed light on one of the most violent and deadly police forces in the country."

Laughlin, Keenan and others believe the community's complaints have fallen on deaf ears over the years and that the police are not capable of policing themselves.

Some residents still hope the City Council will consider federal oversight. Others aren't sure what the solution should be. But all of them want the City Council to earnestly listen to community concerns and make changes, even when the concerns paint an unpleasant portrait of Phoenix police.

Waring, in response, told The Arizona Republic he acknowledges the Police Department has made mistakes and doesn't want to trivialize anyone's negative experiences with law enforcement. But he questioned why he should negotiate fairly with the Justice Department when he doesn't believe the agency will or has been fair itself.

"Why have a seat at the table or even pretend to negotiate when they clearly have already decided and are going to tell us what's what?" Waring said.

Mayor Kate Gallego and Councilmembers Betty Guardado and Kesha Hodge Washington responded differently.

Gallego addressed community concerns in a statement, writing, “I know there are some on both sides who want to prejudge a report that we haven’t seen. But I’m committed to moving forward in a thoughtful way that puts public safety outcomes first in our city."

She added that she prioritized police reform before the DOJ investigation, including launching the Community Assistance Program, improving transparency protocols around officer-involved shootings and fully deploying body-worn cameras.

"That work persists every day while we wait for the Justice Department to complete its inquiry, and when it does, I will take the time to understand any findings before making decisions on next steps—that is the responsible thing to do," Gallego said.

Guardado, who hasn't spoken publicly about the investigation, told The Arizona Republic she believes some council members were getting ahead of themselves and apologized on behalf of the council for confusing residents.

"Everyone's been talking about this consent decree for months now, and we're talking about something that still doesn't exist," Guardado said. "I think it's irresponsible, which is why you haven't seen a statement from me."

Guardado urged residents to have faith that the City Council will fairly consider the findings and make the right decisions, no matter what members have said so far.

Hodge Washington, who also hasn't spoken publicly about the aftermath of the investigation, said it would be "premature" to take a position before the community could read the report and respond.

"Many of these (police use of force controversies) occur in my district, and it would be inappropriate for me to make a statement without first understanding how it would affect my community," she said, adding that she attended the city's DOJ community meetings in her district to get feedback.

A series of controversies embroiled Phoenix police before DOJ

The DOJ has not explicitly stated which incidents prompted the investigation, but it came after years of media reports that rocked the department's reputation.

In 2018, The Arizona Republic highlighted how Phoenix police were more prone to shoot than any other department in the nation.

Doing the numbers: Every 5 days, an Arizona officer shoots someone, a Republic analysis finds

Phoenix had more police shootings than New York, Los Angeles, Chicago or Houston. The number of police shootings in Phoenix more than doubled from 2017, while at the same time, police shootings in similarly sized cities fell.

In 2019, a Republic investigation found officers used force five times as often against Black and Native residents of the city.

The same year, Phoenix police also were criticized after a report was released that showed hundreds of officers were posting violent and racist comments on social media.

In 2020, when social justice protests swept the nation after the murder of George Floyd, Phoenix police falsely claimed 15 protesters were working together as a gang and colluded with the Maricopa County Attorney's Office to charge the individuals.

Around the time, Phoenix police also were circulating a challenge coin mocking an injured protester with a phrase some have linked to hate speech.

The scandals resulted in multiple investigations into both the police and County Attorney's Office, and former police Chief Jeri Williams was temporarily suspended. Maricopa County prosecutor April Sponsel was fired and later suspended from practicing law for two years.

What you need to know: 3 reports about Phoenix police and Maricopa County prosecutors were released

In a separate 2020 incident, Phoenix police again captured national attention when they shot and killed a man who had been sleeping in his car shortly before the encounter. Then-presidential candidate Julian Castro criticized the police force on social media.

Instances like these are what residents, the ACLU, and Poder In Action have complained about for years. They believe the cumulation of controversies prompted the federal investigation, and they are frustrated by city leaders who in recent months have said they are unsure why the Justice Department is here.

"The city has basically turned a blind eye ... they're not going to highlight the experience of the protesters who were harshly accused and almost sent to prison," Keenan, from the ACLU, said. "They're going to highlight the person who has had a good experience."

Laughin said, "The fact that families are still fighting to get unredacted police reports and body camera footage shows that police transparency has not changed. The fact that so many of the officers who are killing our loved ones are still working in this police department, or are being rehired after being fired, shows that police accountability has not changed."

Mother whose two sons were killed by police: 'DOJ would be good for us'

Phoenix settled the lawsuit Lillian Cocreham brought against it and the Phoenix Police Department in July 2023 for $1 million. Police killed Cocreham’s two adult sons during a domestic disturbance call in the fall of 2020. She claimed police had failed to de-escalate the call and mistakenly shot her sons after they claimed one of them pointed a gun at officers.

Cocreham said she filed a lawsuit in 2021 after receiving conflicting stories suggesting that one of her sons had killed the other. Eventually, it came out that officers shot both.

Cocreham welcomes the DOJ investigation and believes the city needs an outside investigation to truly reform its Police Department. During the investigation into both her sons' deaths, she claimed the officer in charge of the investigation was related to one of the officers who shot her son.

She believes the city should be placed under monitorship.

Phoenix police unions and some on the council have claimed being under monitorship would doom Phoenix to higher crime rates and police staffing shortages and hinder reform efforts, but Cocreham said those fears have already come true.

There continues to be a staffing shortage, crime had been increasing coming out of the pandemic, and if the reforms they say they have already put in place were working, then she wouldn’t have needed to file a lawsuit to have gotten justice, Cocreham said.

She also criticized the city’s complaints about the cost of federal oversight. The city has pointed to Seattle spending $100 million since 2011 on federally mandated reforms. But Cocreham said to look at the $12 million the city spent just last year on police shooting settlements.

“Ten years of that and we would be worse off than Seattle,” she said.

“They rather spend their money on protecting their wrongdoings, foolishness and mayhem. The money belongs to the public. Not us. Not me. It just drives me crazy. It drives me crazy. You know, it really does. Because to me it's blood money,” Cocreham said. “I feel DOJ would be good for us and get us back on our feet. And that's the only way that's going to work is if they're willing to work with us.”

Victim says disability request has gone ignored

Ron Blake said he was beaten and raped in downtown Phoenix in 2011.

He developed post-traumatic stress disorder in the aftermath of his attack, he said, and asked Phoenix police for a disability accommodation during the department's investigation of his case.

"I am respectfully requesting regular updates on my case. Possibly once a week on a designated day. As a reasonable accommodation for that disability (PTSD) I have," Blake wrote in an email on June 14, 2022, to Phoenix police Detective Sonia Stanley.

He explained, "When I'm in the dark about what's going on with my case, I tend to isolate and distance myself from not only the Phoenix Police and your services. But on a larger scale as well."

Blake believes police were legally obligated to accommodate his PTSD because of the federal Americans With Disabilities Act.

The ADA broadly bars discrimination against people with disabilities, and it includes any physical or mental impairment that "substantially limits one or more major life activities." The act requires law enforcement agencies to ensure people with disabilities have equal access to the justice system.

Phoenix Lt. Sara Fields wrote back saying the department could update him monthly — it was the best she could offer given the high caseloads and decreasing staffing, she said.

"I understand survivor communication is vital in sex assault investigations and hope this assists in your healing and recovery," Fields wrote on June 15, 2022.

Stanley emailed Blake the next month to say there were no updates for the case. For Blake, it was helpful, but he said he never received updates after that July.

Blake doesn't view it as any individual police officer's fault, and he doesn't think officers are trying to harm him.

But "not taking the PTSD seriously is negligently playing Russian roulette with my life. Causing significant damage to me along the way," Blake said. "We're getting left behind by the Phoenix police."

Donna Rossi, communications director for Phoenix police, said she did not have enough information to determine whether the department was required to make Blake's accommodation.

The department also doesn't have a formal process for handling disability accommodation requests such as Blake's, she said. It wasn't as clear cut as providing a ramp for a wheelchair user, she explained.

The Phoenix police's employee manual includes a section on interacting with people with disabilities, but it mostly provides guidance for when individuals with disabilities are suspects, not victims.

Rossi said officers try to accommodate victims of crimes and be sensitive to their needs, but added that monthly calls to notify a victim of no updates would be unreasonable given staffing and workloads.

Justice Department guidance says law enforcement agencies must make "reasonable modifications in their policies, practices, and procedures that are necessary to ensure accessibility for individuals with disabilities, unless making such modifications would fundamentally alter the program or service involved."

For Blake, he struggles to see how a Police Department could be capable of reform without outside oversight given the department couldn't comply with his request, which he views as simple and reasonable.

"The Phoenix police have promised hope, and change has been on the horizon for folks like me for many years now. But they continue to violate my civil rights with impunity," Blake said. "It is time for a different path to be taken."

Other residents unsure of solution but know change is needed

Other Phoenix residents were skeptical that federal oversight would be the best solution but still wanted to see change from Phoenix police.

Zoe Ramirez, who attended the city's Jan. 17 community briefing at Burton Barr Library on the DOJ investigation, said she hopes reforms are made that incorporate community feedback.

She doubted the DOJ's capacity to implement effective change among Phoenix police but said it was important to have an outside agency there to try.

Molly McCurdy, another attendee, said she "watched as people ran from flash grenades and tear gas" during protests in the city in 2020.

She also wants to see change but said she feels left in the dark by both the feds and the city.

What we know: Phoenix police oversight director quits, citing lack of independence

Reporter Taylor Seely covers Phoenix for The Arizona Republic / azcentral.com. Reach her at tseely@arizonarepublic.com or by phone at 480-476-6116.

Miguel Torres covers public safety for The Republic. Reach him at Miguel.Torres@arizonarepublic.com.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Some in Phoenix welcome DOJ, say city sides with police over residents