Arcata Police Department*

The Arcata Police Department was not prepared to manage and investigate a large, violent crime scene of the magnitude of the David Josiah Lawson homicide. (R4) Police Chief Response: This finding is the subject of pending litigation in which the City, Arcata Police Department, and several City employees have been named as Defendants. The lawsuits [Lawson v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 4:18-cv-07238-TGR and Zoellner v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 3:18-cv-04471] concern the same homicide investigation that the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury investigated. The lawsuits will resolve many of the issues investigated by the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury, and the lawsuits are the appropriate legal vehicle for such a response. The respondent appreciates the hard work of the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury on this matter. On advice of legal counsel for the pending lawsuits, respondent cannot respond to this finding. In the initial minutes of the incident, officers at the scene focused on life-saving procedures

at the expense of crime scene management. (R1) Police Chief Response: This finding is the subject of pending litigation in which the City, Arcata Police Department, and several City employees have been named as Defendants. The lawsuits [Lawson v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 4:18-cv-07238-TGR and Zoellner v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 3:18-cv-04471] concern the same homicide investigation that the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury investigated. The lawsuits will resolve many of the issues investigated by the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury, and the lawsuits are the appropriate legal vehicle for such a response. The respondent appreciates the hard work of the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury on this matter. On advice of legal counsel for the pending lawsuits, respondent cannot respond to this finding.

Chief Chapman was not there to manage the homicide scene. His absence contributed to the discoordinated response. (R4) Police Chief Response: This finding is the subject of pending litigation in which the City, Arcata Police Department, and several City employees have been named as Defendants. The lawsuits [Lawson v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 4:18-cv-07238-TGR and Zoellner v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 3:18-cv-04471] concern the same homicide investigation that the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury investigated. The lawsuits will resolve many of the issues investigated by the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury, and the lawsuits are the appropriate legal vehicle for such a response. The respondent appreciates the hard work of the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury on this matter. On advice of legal counsel for the pending lawsuits, respondent cannot respond to this finding.

Though every officer receives basic evidence handling training during POST, the Arcata Police Department had no designated Evidence Technician available on April 15, 2017, leading to poor execution of evidence preservation and failed chain of custody at the crime scene. (R1) Police Chief Response: This finding is the subject of pending litigation in which the City, Arcata Police Department, and several City employees have been named as Defendants. The lawsuits [Lawson v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 4:18-cv-07238-TGR and Zoellner v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 3:18-cv-04471] concern the same homicide investigation that the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury investigated. The lawsuits will resolve many of the issues investigated by the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury, and the lawsuits are the appropriate legal vehicle for such a response. The respondent appreciates the hard work of the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury on this matter. On advice of legal counsel for the pending lawsuits, respondent cannot respond to this finding.

Securing the crime scene, specifically detaining potential witnesses, protecting physical evidence and properly preserving the weapon was not followed at the homicide of David Josiah Lawson. Police Chief Response: This finding is the subject of pending litigation in which the City, Arcata Police Department, and several City employees have been named as Defendants. The lawsuits [Lawson v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 4:18-cv-07238-TGR and Zoellner v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 3:18-cv-04471] concern the same homicide investigation that the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury investigated. The lawsuits will resolve many of the issues investigated by the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury, and the lawsuits are the appropriate legal vehicle for such a response. The respondent appreciates the hard work of the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury on this matter. On advice of legal counsel for the pending lawsuits, respondent cannot respond to this finding.

Arcata Police Department did not identify and question all potential witnesses in the David Josiah Lawson homicide after the arrival of emergency medical responders. (R4) Police Chief Response: This finding is the subject of pending litigation in which the City, Arcata Police Department, and several City employees have been named as Defendants. The lawsuits [Lawson v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 4:18-cv-07238-TGR and Zoellner v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 3:18-cv-04471] concern the same homicide investigation that the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury investigated. The lawsuits will resolve many of the issues investigated by the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury, and the lawsuits are the appropriate legal vehicle for such a response. The respondent appreciates the hard work of the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury on this matter. On advice of legal counsel for the pending lawsuits, respondent cannot respond to this finding.

Despite most Arcata Police Department officers having little experience navigating complex homicide cases, Chief Chapman declined multiple offers of additional help from other local law enforcement agencies with more experience in investigation and case review. (R4) Police Chief Response: This finding is the subject of pending litigation in which the City, Arcata Police Department, and several City employees have been named as Defendants. The lawsuits [Lawson v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 4:18-cv-07238-TGR and Zoellner v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 3:18-cv-04471] concern the same homicide investigation that the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury investigated. The lawsuits will resolve many of the issues investigated by the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury, and the lawsuits are the appropriate legal vehicle for such a response. The respondent appreciates the hard work of the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury on this matter. On advice of legal counsel for the pending lawsuits, respondent cannot respond to this finding.

The City of Arcata police officers lacked effective leadership and received insufficient training during the later tenure of Chief Chapman. (R1, R4) Police Chief Response: This finding is the subject of pending litigation in which the City, Arcata Police Department, and several City employees have been named as Defendants. The lawsuits [Lawson v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 4:18-cv-07238-TGR and Zoellner v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 3:18-cv-04471 concern the same homicide investigation that the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury investigated. The lawsuits will resolve many of the issues investigated by the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury, and the lawsuits are the appropriate legal vehicle for such a response. The respondent appreciates the hard work of the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury on this matter. On advice of legal counsel for the pending lawsuits, respondent cannot respond to this finding. A retired FBI agent provided pro bono investigative consultation to the City of Arcata and

Arcata Police Department. The Civil Grand Jury independently evaluated the agent's public assessments that the APD had poor management, lack of training, inadequate staffing and demonstrated a lack of transparency. We found these conclusions to be accurate. Police Chief Response: This finding is the subject of pending litigation in which the City, Arcata Police Department, and several City employees have been named as Defendants. The lawsuits [Lawson v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 4:18-cv-07238-TGR and Zoellner v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 3:18-cv-04471] concern the same homicide investigation that the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury investigated. The lawsuits will resolve many of the issues investigated by the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury, and the lawsuits are the appropriate legal vehicle for such a response. The respondent appreciates the hard work of the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury on this matter. On advice of legal counsel for the pending lawsuits, respondent cannot respond to this finding.

The current Arcata Chief of Police is focusing on strengthening community relationships, substantially increasing training, and diversifying the pool of officers and staff. He has also begun community policing and leadership development as part of the nationwide effort to reform policing. (R2, R3, R6, R7) Police Chief Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. The current Arcata Chief of Police has created an investigations division and brought on an

evidence technician in an effort to complete their investigative team. (R1) Police Chief Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. A decentralized dispatch system hampered communication and added delays to the

emergency and law enforcement response. (R5) Police Chief Response: This finding is the subject of pending litigation in which the City, Arcata Police Department, and several City employees have been named as Defendants. The lawsuits [Lawson v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 4:18-cv-07238-TGR and Zoellner v. City of Arcata, et al, N.D. Case No. 3:18-cv-04471] concern the same homicide investigation that the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury investigated. The lawsuits will resolve many of the issues investigated by the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury, and the lawsuits are the appropriate legal vehicle for such a response. The respondent appreciates the hard work of the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury on this matter. On advice of legal counsel for the pending lawsuits, respondent cannot respond to this finding.