Six Cleveland police officers are accused of brutality and false arrest.

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Six Cleveland police officers, all accused in recent months of using excessive force, have scuffled with at least 39 suspects since February 2009.

But, based on reports completed by the officers and reviewed by The Plain Dealer under the state's public-records law, few posed an imminent danger to the men and women in blue.

All but one were unarmed. And 14 of the 36 suspects whose cases are closed -- 39 percent -- were never convicted of any crime. Eight were never charged, other police and court records show.

Yet in every case they investigated, police supervisors at multiple levels, up to and including Chief Michael McGrath, deemed the more than three dozen uses of nondeadly force to be justified.

Additionally, city officials said that in most cases, those who investigate the incidents have access to only black-and-white pictures of the injuries suffered by officers and suspects. Police said they lack enough color ink and memory cards to preserve all original images.

"If you have no prosecutions and convictions from these incidents, you have to ask: 'What is going on?' " said Samuel Walker, a retired criminal-justice professor from the University of Nebraska, Omaha, who has consulted with other police departments on use-of-force practices.

Just as concerning to some experts were the types of charges most frequently leveled against the suspects: failure to comply with police orders, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. Six of the cases involved only these charges.

Paul McCauley, a former police officer and criminology professor emeritus at Indiana University of Pennsylvania who has testified on similar issues, said such charges suggest officers had no legal reason to detain the suspect.

"How can you resist arrest if there wasn't a reason for you to be arrested?" he said.


Link:
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/05/cleveland_police_officers_accu.html