San Diego County Grand Jury
• 2014-2015
San Diego Police Department Property & Evidence Room Review of Operations
⚠️ 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.
Findings 6 findings
F01
Use of a temporary private facility is an inefficient use of taxpayer money.
F02
The SDPD Headquarters facility property room does not appear to be in compliance with building codes. Fact: Property in the SDPD property room, suitable for disposition, is accumulating. Fact: The Grand Jury did not find written procedures or protocols for reviewing files to determine property disposition by SDPD. Fact: Often, at the request of the property room manager, SDPD Detectives decide when evidence in the property room can be disposed of or returned to its rightful owner. Fact: Generally, the offices of the City Attorney and District Attorney do not initiate the process for obtaining an “order for release of evidence” or for disposing of the evidence when a case is closed.
F03
The offices of the City Attorney and District Attorney usually do not take a proactive role in deciding when to dispose of evidence.
F04
The offices of the City Attorney and District Attorney are best qualified to determine if evidence will be needed in the future.
F05
Establishing procedures and protocol for reviewing files of property for disposal will make the process more effective and potentially save money used to lease additional storage facilities. Fact: At the time of the Grand Jury visit SDPD did not have security cameras in the property/evidence storage area. Fact: The facility manager and clerks are not CAPE or POST certified in their fields. Fact: There is no documentation of the property placement in or removal from the property room safe. Fact: There is no indication annual audits are being conducted, as recommended by the Peace Officers Standards and Training publication: Law Enforcement Evidence & Property Management Guide.
F06
A management review of security and evidence-handling procedures could insure the integrity of the evidence.
Recommendations 8
-
15-50Page 5Perform a management review to identify deficiencies in the Property
-
15-51Page 5Establish written procedures and protocol for when SDPD will review
-
15-52Page 5Initiate annual audits of the Property and Evidence Room operations
-
15-53Page 5Determine the amount of space needed for permanent Property and
-
15-54Page 5Perform a review of the Headquarters Property and Evidence Room
-
15-55Page 5Implement a Memorandum of Understanding with SDPD to include a
-
15-56Page 5<b>Develop uniform guidelines and standards for all San Diego County</b>
-
15-57Page 6Implement a Memorandum of Understanding with SDPD to include a