Nevada County Grand Jury
• 2016-2017
Law Enforcement Evidence Handling Units Follow-Up Report
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Recommendations 1
-
R7Page 1The following describes our implemented actions related to each of them: 1. Adherence to the requirement for a complete inventory upon a change of evidence technician or supervisor: The Grass Valley Police Department has and will continue to adhere to this requirement. Audits will be diligently scheduled upon the change of an evidence technician or evidence supervisor. These audits will include a 100% inventory of all firearms, money, and narcotics. These audits were performed in 2012 and 2015 upon the change of evidence technicians, and again in 2016 upon the appointment of a new Chief of Police. 2. Random spot inventories need to be performed and documented: Although random “spot inventories” are performed on a regular basis by the evidence sergeant and Captain, they have not been consistently documented. GVPD has initiated a protocol for capturing and documenting these spot inventories. The evidence sergeant will keep and maintain the records of his audit and inventory activity and it will be available to the Captain, Chief of Police, or an independent auditor upon request. 3. Inventories of firearms, narcotics, and money must be conducted on at least a quarterly basis: The random spot inventories conducted by the evidence sergeant and captain have and will continue to include checking of firearms, narcotics, and money. These random spot inventories will be conducted quarterly at a minimum. 4. External audits must be conducted on a biennial basis at a minimum: External audits have been and will continue to be conducted on a biennial basis. Current GVPD Status GVPD has fully complied with
Conclusions 1
-
CL1With a few exceptions the Nevada County law enforcement agencies have been responsive to the recommendations contained in the 2015-2016 Report on EHUs. Law Enforcement Evidence Handling Units - Report on Responses The more significant exceptions are the failure of the NCSO to achieve the goal of having updated written policies and procedures in place by September 1, 2016 and the failure to schedule and have an external audit conducted prior to the end of 2016. TPD declined to accept the recommendation to conduct an external audit, however the Jury has learned that the TPD is preparing a contract for an external audit. Law Enforcement Evidence Handling Units - Report on Responses