HomeMy WebLinkAboutPS 2018-10-15 Item 2B - Discussion - Revised King County Inquest ProcessCity of Tukwila
Allan Ekberg, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Public Safety Committee
BY Laurel Humphrey, Council Analyst
DATE: October 9, 2018
SUBJECT: Revised King County Inquest Process
ISSUE
The purpose of an inquest is to provide an open public forum, conducted by a neutral decision -
maker, to shed light on the facts surrounding a death at the hands of law enforcement. Inquests
are required by the King County Charter and established under state and county code. King
County has just revised its inquest process and these changes will go into effect next year.
DISCUSSION
King County Executive Constantine formed an Inquest Process Review Committee in December
2017 to examine the inquest process and recommend changes. The Committee submitted its
report on March 27, 2018. King County Police Chiefs met over the summer to discuss the
recommendations and surface concerns. On September 5, Mayor Law of Renton and Mayor
Walen of Kirkland emailed Sound Cities Association Mayors to sign onto a letter that would ask
the Executive to pause implementation of the reforms and allow the cities' elected officials to
have a seat at the table in further discussions. The letter also referenced the implication of
Initiative 940, the police accountability initiative, which will be on the November General Election
ballot. Mayor Ekberg signed the September 12, 2018 letter. The City Council received a copy of
the letter on September 18 and subsequently requested a Committee discussion on this topic.
On October 3, 2018 Executive Constantine announced the new process for police inquests,
expected to be up and running by the end of the first quarter 2019.
Chief Linton will be in attendance at the Committee meeting to share his perspective and
answer questions.
ATTACHMENTS
- 9/12/18 Letter to Executive Constantine from Mayors
- 10/3/18 Summary of Revised Inquest Process
- Matrix of process changes
-King County Executive Order
35
36
CITY OF
Fe.eraI
Centered on Opportunity
KING COUNTY
UBURN
.p
nSi ii,va roi.i Inl,tl.i Nt,4
CITY OF
N UMCLAW
Was ✓.INGTON
September 12, 2018
The Honorable Dow Constantine
King County Executive
401 5th Ave. Suite 800
Seattle, WA 98104
CITY OF
i ;" rya
N(TON
Thr City of
MAPLE VALLEY
RE: Proposal for revising process of King County inquests in use -of -deadly -force circumstances
Dear Executive Constantine:
We are writing as mayors who share your belief in fostering the most open and transparent
process possible for inquests that are conducted in the aftermath of deadly use of force. We
also want to ensure that process is fair, balanced, and premised on the best science, data, and
information available, which leads us to ask for further discussion at an elected official level.
The inquest process, in cases of lethal use of force by law enforcement, is meant to provide an
open public forum (conducted by a neutral decision maker) into the facts and circumstances
surrounding a death at the hands of law enforcement. These are very serious matters, and we
are fortunate in King County, because while all counties in Washington State have the option to
hold an inquest, only our county, by charter, requires that one occur.
We are also fortunate that law enforcement in Washington State recognizes that we need now,
more than ever before, to have police and the citizens they serve work together to find
37
Executive Dow Constantine
Page 2 of 3
September 12, 2018
compromises and solutions on how use of deadly force is evaluated and dealt with. During the
2018 Session of the Legislature in precedent -setting fashion, representatives of law
enforcement, De -Escalate Washington, and other organizations came together to enact both
Initiative 940 (1-940) and Substitute House Bill 3003 (SHB 3003) to amend that initiative.
I-940/SHB 3003 changed the legal standard for when officers are considered justified in using
lethal force, and it established landmark requirements for investigation and training of all
sworn officers.
Against that backdrop, we are aware that King County has been reviewing and re-examining its
inquest process, has issued a preliminary report (March 2018), and continues to consider
updates to the process. While we understand the concept of ensuring that the inquest policy
remain up-to-date and relevant, we want to ensure it takes several factors into account:
• We believe that whatever updates are made to the inquest process should first integrate
the statutory underpinning of I-940/SHB 3003 and see what, if any, substantive changes
should be made based upon the new state law going into effect.
• We believe the inquest process needs to continue to strike a balance in these emotional
and difficult cases, so that both families and law enforcement feel their issues and concerns
are being heard, represented, and evaluated appropriately. For example, we are being told
that the current inquest proposal guarantees families a voice, but does not provide any
assurances that decision makers will hear from subject matter and forensics experts. We
see these types of assurances as crucial to ensuring that the inquest process strikes a
delicate balance and that it is conducted in the most fair, equitable, and information- and
data -based manner possible.
For these reasons and others, we ask that you and your office push the pause button on
updates to the inquest process and allow more discussions with us as elected officials who are
accountable both to the citizens we serve and the law enforcement officers we employ. We
believe we have the time to undertake further discussion and do this right, particularly since
1-940 has now been placed on the ballot and SHB 3003 amendments are thus on hold.
Thank you in advance for your consideration of our concerns and our desire to have forthright
discussions with you and key players in your office who are working on updating the inquest
process.
Sincerely,
J\r.
Nancy Bates
Mayor, City of Auburn
l\��jy7 �zEl-Z•�__._
Carol Benson Jeffrey Wagner
Mayor, City of Black Diamond Mayor, City of Covington
38
Executive Dow Constantine
Page 3of3
September l2,2Ol8
Mayor, City ofDuvall
Mary Lou Pauly
Mayor, City nfIssaquah
-AIIA�
Mitzi]ohenknech1
King County Sheriff
'I -
,
Sean Kelly
Mayor, City ofMaple Valley
�
] an Molinaro
Mayor, City of Enumclaw Mayor, City of Federal Way
/
/
' [\.{l—
Dmvid ".'�—er Dana Ralph
Mayor, City of Kenmore Mayor, City of Kent
/
AnnyVVa|en
Mayor, City nfKirkland
0|// 0/'
// /8 ^ m^^ ,.r~^
r\\A-0~YVVV��v=w�_
|
\
ione
MaVdr�)City of Redmond
Christie K4a|chovv K41t Larson
Jeff Johnson
Mayor, City of Lake Forest Park
ALW'� 2a�—
Denis Law
Mayor, City ofRenton
Allan Ekberg
Mayor, City of Tukwila
39
40
King County Inquest Process
October 3, 2018
SUMMARY
Background
The inquest process is unique to King County, required by King County Charter in all law enforcement
related deaths, and established under state law and county code.
The purpose of an inquest is to provide an open public forum, conducted by a neutral decision -maker, to
shed light on the facts surrounding a death at the hands of law enforcement. A further purpose is to
promote public understanding of those crucial events in our community in which law enforcement takes
human life as a part of their official duties.
Current process:
• King County Prosecuting Attorney receives investigative materials from the investigating agency
and notifies the King County Executive.
• Executive requests King County District Court conduct an inquest.
• District Court presides over the inquest, determines the scope of the issues, and decides who
will be called as witnesses.
• Participating parties
o Family of the deceased, who must be represented by private counsel in order to
participate
o Officer involved in the death
o The law enforcement agency
o The Prosecuting Attorney's Office, whose role is to assist the judge in conducting the
inquest
• Inquests are heard by a jury of six. They answer questions from the judge, called interrogatories.
• Inquest interrogatories deal with questions of fact.
o Their purpose is to give the jury an opportunity to judge credibility and determine the
significant factual issues involved in the inquest, such as what actions occurred and
what the actors thought or knew.
• Inquest interrogatories do not deal with questions of law, policy, recommendations, or whether
anyone is civilly or criminally liable.
• The jury indicates the number of yes/no answers to the questions, and the Court sends that
information to the Executive.
Revised Process:
• Inquests will be administered by the Executive's Department of Executive Services (DES).
Inquests will be conducted by an Inquest Administrator. DES will hire experienced former judges
41
on a pro tern basis to serve as the Inquest Administrator, who oversees the inquest process and
is the neutral decision -maker. The Inquest Administrator, following the scope guidelines
provided in the executive order will determine the scope of the issues, and decide who will be
called as witnesses. This role was role previously served by District Court judges.
• King County Prosecuting Attorney receives investigative materials from the investigating agency
and notifies the King County Executive.
• The King County Prosecuting Attorney will no longer serve to assist the judge during the inquest.
Instead an Inquest Staff attorney, also hired on a pro-tem basis, will assist the Inquest
Administrator during the inquest. DES will also hire a manager to support the operational and
procedural requirements of the inquest process.
• Participating parties
o Family of the deceased, who will be provided a King County Public Defender or, may be
represented by private counsel.
o Officer involved in the death may participate at their request but will not be
subpoenaed. There is a presumption that the involved officer will not participate.
o The law enforcement agency. It is anticipated the agency chief or their designee would
testify about current policy, while the scene investigator would testify about the event.
• Inquests are heard by a jury of between four and six persons as required by state law. They
answer questions from the judge, called interrogatories.
• Inquest interrogatories deal only with questions of fact.
o Their purpose is to give the jury an opportunity to judge credibility and determine the
significant factual issues involved in the inquest, such as what actions occurred and
what the actors thought or knew.
• Scope of the Inquest
o As is currently the case, an inquest will result in the issuance of findings regarding
the cause and manner of death.
o Inquest interrogatories do not deal with questions of law, recommendations for future
policy or procedures, or whether anyone is civilly or criminally liable.
o However, the scope of the inquest will be expanded to include what the current
involved law enforcement agency policy is and whether the law enforcement
officer complied with applicable law enforcement agency training and policy as
they relate to the death. Testimony regarding what changes should be made to
existing policy, procedure, and training is not permitted.
• The jury indicates the number of yes/no/unknown answers to the questions, and the manager
sends that information to the Executive.
Timeline:
• It is anticipated that inquests under the revised Executive Order would begin by the end of the
first quarter of 2019.
42
43
• The manager within the Department of Executive Services will create and maintain a webpage with an
up-to-date schedule of all inquests, any relevant findings, audio recordings of past inquests when
possible, and an informational guide that outlines the inquest process. The manager will also submit a
report to the County Executive at the end of each year on the operations of the inquests. The County
Executive will call for a periodic review of the inquest process by an independent review committee to
determine if the inquest process conforms with updated laws and is adequately meeting the principles of
transparency, community engagement, and respect for all those involved in the inquest process.
• The Executive will ensure that the involved parties are directed to resources and processes within the
County that are designed to facilitate peace and promote healing, such as, Restorative Justice circles.
Where the affected parties agree to participate, these offer the potential for meaningful connection and
resolution.
• The 90-day timeline remains. The administrator may extend the 90-day timeline for good cause.
• The decedent's criminal history may not be introduced into evidence unless the administrator first
determines that it is directly related to the reason for an arrest, detention, or use of force (e.g. officers
are arresting an individual convicted of a felony who they believe is carrying a firearm). If such
information is admitted, it must be limited to the greatest extent possible and may not include specific
crime of conviction, the nature of the crime (e.g. violent or nonviolent), the deceased's incarceration
history, or any other criminal charge, unless the administrator makes a specific finding of relevance to a
contested issue in the inquest; that the evidence of criminal history serves as the basis for an officer
safety caution (or equivalent warning); and that the member of the law enforcement agency was aware
of the officer safety caution prior to any use of force; or if otherwise, contemporaneous knowledge of the
individual's criminal history was relevant to the actions the officer(s) took or how the officer(s) assessed
whether the person posed a threat. If such information is admitted, it must be limited to the greatest
extent possible, and may only include information both actually known to officer(s) at the time, and
actually forming a basis for their decision to use deadly force or their tactics in approaching the
individual. If criminal history is introduced into evidence under the above subsections, no information
regarding the type of sentence given to the deceased or any other criminal charge may be introduced
into the inquest, unless the administrator makes a specific finding of relevance to a contested issue in the
inquest.
• The administrator will transmit an inquest panel's findings to the County Executive. The administrator will
ensure that the findings and recommendations are published on its website in a timely manner.
• No formal public information materials about inquest process.
• No annual (or regular) review of process.
• County does not currently promote or provide restorative justice
options/services as a parallel process to the inquest hearing.
• EO requires inquest commence within 90 days of Executive's request to the
District Court. KCDC may extend the 90 days for good cause.
• Introduction of the decedent's criminal history into evidence is not within the
current scope of the inquest.
• PAO transmits jury's answered interrogatories to the Executive.
Public Education and Internal
Review
Restorative Justice
Timeline
W
u
Inquest Findings
C
Ul
a
w
v
G
f0
U
N
>
O
44
c o
v c o
o E v z
g o 4.: 2. o
m a c 0 v c,
> v > v
�p S �
0 0 E oo�
v 7 O N L
c v a c +- u
+�-
3 = —'o = •3
0 3 c o
�o =o. � c Lv o
Y +'
1 + �
y C o u
p O
m0.~ N O
o Y o f 3 L
> N c a
v C C 2 L � 3
r 00
o a 3 o c
o m w m v
$ Y o v
v i .0 -oo m .o
v c 0 o0
5 m y .E c
c o a o ob a
s v a c cc
c
u 5Y v o •0 v_
u o y c
W m L L .O
U 3 m a C v
Y O
C
O
c Y
v 0 a v n
m3.c 5v ='
Interrogatories/Panel Questions
45
46
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Department/Issuing Agency: County Executive Office
Effective Date: October 3 , 2018
Approved: Is/ Dow Constantine
Type of Action: Supersedes PHL 7-1-1 (AEO), "Conducting Inquests in King County" March 16,
2010
King County
WHEREAS, Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Chapter 36.24 authorizes the county coroner to
summon a jury to inquire into the death of a person by suspicious circumstances; and
WHEREAS, Section 895 of the King County Charter, as amended, provides that an inquest shall
be held to find facts and review the circumstances of any death involving a member of the law
enforcement agency of the county in the performance of the member's duties; and
WHEREAS, King County Code (KCC) Chapter 2.35A created a division of the medical examiner
within the Seattle -King County Department of Public Health and assigned to it most of the
coroner's duties under RCW Chapter 36.24, "except for the holding of inquests, which function
is vested in the County Executive" under KCC 2.35A.090.B; and
WHEREAS, the County Executive, in exercising the authority to hold inquests, has discretion to
determine how inquest proceedings are to be conducted, and to delegate the duty of presiding
over an inquest to another impartial public official; and
WHEREAS, the County Executive retains the ultimate responsibility for the exercise of the
inquest power and the performance of the delegated duty.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Dow Constantine, King County Executive, do hereby order, direct, and
implement the following policy and procedures for conducting an inquest, at appendices 1 and
2.
Dated this 3 day of Oc 0 8
Dow Constantine
King County utive
ATTE
NAlberg
Dir ctor, King County ecords and Licensing Division, Department of Executive Services
47
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 2of12
Appendix 1— Conducting Inquests in King County:
Conducting Inquests in King County
1.0. SUBJECT TITLE
Conducting Inquests in King County.
2.0. PURPOSE
2.1. To establish policies and procedures for conducting reviews into the facts and
circumstances of any death of an individual involving a member of any law enforcement agency
within King County while in the performance of the member's duties [and/or the exercise of
member's authority], and occasionally in other cases, as determined by the County Executive.
2.2. The purpose of the inquest is to ensure a full, fair, and transparent review of any such
death, and to issue findings of fact regarding the facts and circumstances surrounding the
death. The review will result in the issuance of findings regarding the cause and manner of
death, and whether the law enforcement member acted pursuant to policy and training.
2.3. The purpose of the inquest is not to determine whether the law enforcement member
acted in good faith or should be disciplined or otherwise held accountable, or to otherwise find
fault, or to determine if the use of force was justified, or to determine civil or criminal liability.
It is acknowledged that the facts determined in the course of the inquest may sometimes have
an indirect bearing on such determinations.
3.0. ORGANIZATIONS AFFECTED
King County Department of Public Defense; King County Executive; King County Prosecuting
Attorney; King County Superior Court; King County Medical Examiner's Office; King County
Department of Executive Services; Law Enforcement agencies within King County.
4.0. REFERENCES
4.1. RCW 36.24 Counties; County Coroner.
4.2. King County Charter, Section 320.20—The Executive Branch, Powers and Duties.
4.3. King County Charter, Section 895 — General Provisions: Mandatory Inquests.
4.4. King County Code 2.35A.090(B).
48
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 3 of 12
5.0. DEFINITIONS
5.1. "King County Executive" or "County Executive" means the official, or the designee of the
official, who is elected and serves as the County Executive of King County pursuant to Article 3
of the King County Charter.
5.2. "King County Prosecuting Attorney" means the official, or the designee of the official, who
is elected and serves as Prosecuting Attorney for King County pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of
the Washington State Constitution.
5.3. "Inquest" means an administrative, fact-finding inquiry into and review of the manner,
facts and circumstances of the death of an individual involving a member of any law
enforcement agency within King County while in the performance of his or her duties [and/or
the exercise of his or her authority], and occasionally in other cases, as determined by the
County Executive, where death occurs in the custody of or in the course of contact with other
non -law enforcement government agencies or employees.
5.4. "Law enforcement agency" means any agency having police powers as authorized under
Washington State law. For the purposes of this policy, "a member of any law enforcement
agency" shall mean commissioned officers and non-commissioned staff of all local and state
police forces, jails, and corrections agencies.
5.5. "Attorney representing the family of the deceased" means a privately -retained or publicly
funded attorney, pursuant to KC Ordinance 18652.
5.6. "Rules of Evidence" means the evidentiary rules adopted by the Supreme Court of the State
of Washington governing proceedings in the courts of the State of Washington, and such rules
as may be adopted by the King County Hearing Examiner pursuant to KCC 20.22.
5.7. "Voir dire" means an examination of a prospective panel as defined below.
5.8. "In camera review" means an examination of materials by the administrator in private
proceedings to rule on admissibility and use.
5.9. "Panel" refers to the jury of inquest provided by Superior Court pursuant to RCW Chapter
36.24.
5.10. "Administrator" means the presider of the inquest proceeding, selected from a roster
approved by the County Executive, who presides over a particular inquest proceeding.
49
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 4 of 12
5.11. "Manager" means the staff assigned to oversee the inquest program, to assign an
administrator and pro tern attorney to a particular inquest, to provide clerical support to the
administrator and pro tern attorney, and to report annually to the County Executive.
5.12. "Pro tern attorney" means the pro tern attorney assigned to assist the administrator and
to facilitate an inquest.
6.0. POLICIES
6.1. There shall be an inquest into the manner, facts, and circumstances of any death of an
individual involving a member of any law enforcement agency within King County while in the
performance of his or her duties, [and/or the exercise of his or her authority], and in any other
case as occasionally determined by the County Executive where death occurs in the custody of
or in the course of contact with other non -law enforcement government agencies or
employees.
6.2. While the term "involving" is to be construed broadly, there may be circumstances in which
law enforcement's role is so minimal as to not warrant an inquest, or where for other reasons
an inquest would impede the administration of justice. Factors to be considered include:
whether a decision to prosecute has been made; whether the death was the result of a
condition existing prior to and/or apart from the law enforcement involvement; whether the
individual was in custody at the time of the death; whether the family of the deceased desires
an inquest; and any other factor that touches on the connection between the manner of death
and the actions of law enforcement. However, the public has a strong interest in a full and
transparent review of the circumstances surrounding the death of an individual involving law
enforcement, so an inquest will ordinarily be held.
6.3. At the discretion of the County Executive, in exceptional circumstances there may be an
inquest into the causes and circumstances of a death involving an individual in King County
other than a member of a law enforcement agency.
7.0. RESPONSIBILITIES
7.1. The King County Prosecuting Attorney shall inform the King County Executive whenever an
investigation into a death involving a member of any law enforcement agency in King County is
complete and also advise whether an inquest should be initiated pursuant to the King County
Charter. If the King County Prosecuting Attorney advises that an inquest may be initiated, the
King County Prosecuting Attorney and the pro tern staff attorney shall (a) supply a complete
copy of the investigative file to the manager; (b) respond to public records requests for the
investigative file; and (c) issue subpoenas to witnesses and/or for records at the administrator's
request.
50
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 5 of 12
7.2. The King County Executive shall determine whether an inquest will be held. If an inquest is
to be held, the Executive shall direct an administrator conduct the inquest on the Executive's
behalf. The County Executive shall also request that the King County Superior Court facilitate
the inquest by supplying (a) jury, which shall be referred to as a panel; and (b) appropriate
facilities, including a courtroom, bailiff, reporter, and any necessary security. The inquest shall
be conducted pursuant to this Executive Order and to RCW 36.24, as amended.
8.0. PROCEDURES
Action By: Prosecuting Attorney
8.1. Receives information from a law enforcement agency within King County of a death of an
individual involving law enforcement that may require an inquest.
8.2. Promptly informs the County Executive of such a death.
8.3. Reviews the information and the investigative file and advises the County Executive as to
whether an inquest should be held.
8.4. Upon request of the County Executive, forwards the investigative file to the manager.
8.5. Upon request by an administrator, issues subpoenas for witnesses and/or documents;
except that a subpoena shall not be issued to the individual law enforcement officer who was
directly involved in an individual's death while in the performance of his or her duties [and/or
the exercise of his or her authority].
Action By: County Executive
8.6. Upon receiving the King County Prosecuting Attorney's advisory opinion, determine
whether to hold an inquest.
8.7. If an inquest is to be held, direct the manager to proceed with the inquest.
Action By: Manager
8.8, Select an administrator to preside over the inquest and a pro tem staff attorney to assist.
8.9. Support the administrator in scheduling a pre -inquest conference and with clerical tasks.
Action By: Administrator
8.10. Hold a pre -inquest conference.
51
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 6 of 12
8.11. Conduct the inquest according to the procedures in Appendices 1 and 2.
Action By: Department of Public Defense
8.12. Assign counsel for the family of the decedent unless the family indicates they have
retained other inquest counsel or do not wish to be represented by the King County
Department of Public Defense. The Department of Public Defense will not be assigned in
inquests where the family is to be represented by private counsel.
Action By: Superior Court
8.13. If an inquest is to be held, the Superior Court shall coordinate with the manager and
administrator to supply a panel, recorder, and facilities pursuant to RCW 36.24.020.
9.0. APPENDICES
Procedures for Conducting Inquests.
10.0. PRIOR ORDERS
This Executive Order rescinds and replaces PHL 7-1-1 (AEO), "Conducting Inquests in King
County," dated March 16, 2010.
Appendix 2 — Procedures for Conducting Inquests
If an inquest is to be held, the King County administrator shall conduct the review in accordance
with these procedures.
1.0. FACILITIES/COURTROOM
1.1. The inquest is an administrative hearing intended to be a fact-finding, non -adversarial
process. However, the King County Superior Court administers the jury process and maintains
facilities appropriate to comfortably support a jury. Therefore, where requested by the County
Executive, the Superior Court will coordinate with the manager to provide persons to serve as a
jury of inquest ("panel") and secure appropriate facilities. The manager shall arrange the room
in a manner that promotes transparency to the public and fair treatment of all participating
parties.
2.0. PARTICIPATING PARTIES
2.1. The family of the deceased, who shall be allowed to have an attorney(s) present.
52
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 7 of 12
2.2. The law enforcement member(s) involved in the death, who shall be allowed to have an
attorney(s) present, provided that the law enforcement member(s) elect(s) to participate in the
inquest proceeding.
2.3. The employing government department, which shall be allowed to be represented by its
statutory attorney or lawfully appointed designee.
2.4. The manager, who shall assign an administrator and a pro tern attorney to assist the
administrator.
2.5. An administrator, who shall preside over the inquest.
3.0. ROLE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR/SCOPE OF THE INQUEST
3.1. An administrator shall conduct the inquest. The proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature,
with represented parties, and the presentation of evidence through direct and cross-
examination, and subject to the Rules of Evidence. Administrators shall strive to promote an
atmosphere consistent with administrative fact-finding and shall strive to minimize delay, cost,
and burden to participants, while promoting fair and open proceedings. Although an inquest is
not a court proceeding, administrators shall be guided by open courts principles and GR 16.
3.2. The administrator, after consultation with the participating parties, shall determine the
inquest scope. Consistent with the purpose as set forth in the amended Charter, Executive
Order, and Appendix 1 and 2, the inquest scope shall include an inquiry into and the panel shall
make findings regarding the cause, manner, and circumstances of the death, including
applicable law enforcement agency policy. The panel shall make findings regarding whether the
law enforcement officer complied with applicable law enforcement agency training and policy
as they relate to the death.
3.3. The Rules of Evidence shall generally apply, but may be supplemented and/or modified by
additional rules governing administrative proceedings, at the discretion of the administrator.
The administrator shall construe the Rules of Evidence in a manner consistent with the goal of
administrative fact-finding proceedings and to promote fairness and to minimize the delays,
costs, and burdens that can be associated with judicial proceedings.
4.0. DISCOVERY AND ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
4.1. Discoverable material shall be exchanged among: the administrator and any pro tern
attorney; the attorney representing the family of the deceased; the attorney representing the
jurisdiction employing the involved law enforcement member(s); and the attorney representing
the involved law enforcement member(s).
53
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 8 of 12
4.2. Discovery materials are to be used by the attorneys solely for the inquest proceeding. Such
materials include the police and/or agency investigative file of the incident that resulted in the
death. They also include the report of the medical examiner, crime laboratory reports, and the
names, addresses, and summaries and/or copies of statements of any witnesses obtained by
any party.
4.3. In the event that confidential materials in the possession of any person or agency are
sought for use in the inquest, the administrator, upon a prima facie showing of necessity,
relevancy, and lack of an alternative source for the materials, shall examine the materials in
camera. These materials may include, and the administrator shall have the discretion to
consider the admissibility and use of, information that may be relevant to the incident. The
legal representative of the person or agency in possession of the materials shall have the right
to participate in the review of these materials.
4.4. The decedent's criminal history may not be introduced into evidence unless the
administrator first determines that: it is directly related to the reason for an arrest, detention,
or use of force (e.g. officers were arresting an individual convicted of a felony who they
believed was carrying a firearm); it served as the basis for an officer safety caution (or
equivalent warning) that the member(s) of the law enforcement agency was aware of prior to
any use of force; or other, contemporaneous knowledge of the individual's criminal history was
relevant to the actions the officer(s) took or how the officer(s) assessed whether the person
posed a threat.
4.5. If decedent's criminal history is admitted, it must be limited to the greatest extent possible.
It may only include information both actually known to officer(s) at the time, and actually
forming a basis for the decision to use deadly force or the tactics in approaching the individual.
It may not include the specific crime of conviction, the nature of the crime (e.g. violent or
nonviolent), the deceased's incarceration history, or any other criminal charge, unless the
administrator makes a specific finding of relevance to a contested issue in the inquest.
4.6. The disciplinary history of the law enforcement member(s) involved may not be introduced
into evidence unless the administrator first determines that it is directly related to the use of
force. If such information is admitted, it must be limited to the greatest extent possible.
4.7. Protective orders may be used to limit discovery, and the administrator may order the
return of all discretionarily-ordered discovery.
5.0. SCHEDULE AND PRE -INQUEST CONFERENCE
5.1. It is in the best interests of affected parties and the community to hold the inquest in a
timely manner. The manager and administrator will strive for timeliness and to limit
54
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 9 of 12
unnecessary delays; extensions shall be limited and granted only upon a showing of good
cause.
5.2. The manager and administrator shall schedule a pre -inquest conference with the
participating parties and may hold additional conferences if necessary. The administrator will
obtain proposed witness and exhibit lists, proposed panel instructions, and inquest time
estimates, and will inquire whether any special needs such as interpreters are required. The
conference shall be public unless compelling circumstances require an in camera hearing, in
which case the administrator must make findings of fact and conclusions of law justifying such
measures under Washington law.
5.3. The administrator shall solicit proposed stipulations of fact from the participating parties
and work diligently to narrow the scope of inquiry at the inquest. The administrator shall share
the stipulated facts with the panel at the start of the inquest.
5.4. The administrator shall instruct the panel at the start of the inquest.
5.5. The manager shall maintain a website publishing the schedule for the inquest, stipulated
facts, inquest file and, where possible, inquest recordings.
6.0. PANEL POOL
The administrator shall select the panel from the regular Superior Court juror pool pursuant to
RCW 36.24.020.
7.0. PANEL QUESTIONING (VOIR DIRE)
7.1, The administrator shall conduct voir dire, after consultation with the participating parties.
7.2. There is no set limit to the number of panelists the administrator may excuse. Panelists
may be excused for cause and/or because serving on the inquest panel will present a hardship.
8.0. PANEL QUESTIONS FOR PARTICIPANTS
After all parties have had an opportunity to examine a witness, panelists are allowed to submit
questions to the administrator that the panel wishes to pose to the witness. After consultation
with the parties, the administrator shall determine whether to submit a question to the witness
and the manner of the submission.
55
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 10 of 12
9.0. RECORDING
The manager shall ensure that the inquest proceedings are audio recorded and that the audio
recordings are made accessible to the public to the greatest extent consistent with GR 16.
10.0. MEDIA GUIDELINES
Consistent with Section 9, above, the administrator shall make the proceedings available to the
public and to the media, this includes video and audio recording and still photography.
11.0. ORDER OF PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
11.1. There shall be no opening statements by the parties. The judge's introduction will include
an instruction in substantially the following form: "You have been empaneled as members of a
coroner's panel in the inquest. This is not a trial. The purpose of the inquest is to provide public
inquiry into the causes and circumstances surrounding the death of [decedent]. It is not the
purpose of this inquest to determine the criminal or civil liability of any person or agency. Your
role will be to hear the evidence and answer questions according to instructions given to you at
the close of the proceedings. The pro tern staff attorney's role is solely to assist the
administrator in presenting the evidence. As administrator I have determined who will be called
as witnesses and the issues which you will be asked to consider."
11.2. The administrator through the pro tern attorney has the first opportunity to introduce
witnesses and evidence. The parties may then each introduce their own witnesses and
evidence.
11.3. The administrator, after consultation with the parties, decides the order of presentation
of evidence and witnesses. The administrator may direct that the pro tern attorney conduct the
initial examination of each witness.
11.4. The administrator shall make rulings on the admissibility of evidence and testimony based
on the Rules of Evidence and these procedures.
12.0. WITNESSES AND TESTIMONY
12.1. Each party, including the administrator, through the pro tem staff attorney, may proffer
its own witnesses to provide testimony that aids the panel in the understanding of the facts,
including factual areas of experts (e.g. ballistics and forensic medical examination).
12.2. The administrator shall base rulings on the admissibility of such testimony on the
proposed witness's qualifications, the Rules of Evidence, and these procedures. Testimony
56
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 11 of 12
regarding changes that should be made to existing policy, procedure, and training is not
permitted.
12.3. The employing government department shall designate an official(s) to provide a
comprehensive overview of the forensic investigation into the incident (e.g., statements
collected by investigators, investigators' review of forensic evidence, physical evidence
collected by investigators, etc.). Additionally, the chief law enforcement officer of the involved
agency or director of the employing government department shall provide testimony
concerning applicable law enforcement agency training and policy as they relate to the death
but may not comment on whether employees' actions related to the death were pursuant to
training and policy; or any conclusions about whether the employee's actions were within
policy and training.
12.4. The inquest is intended to be a transparent process to inform the public of the
circumstances of the death of a person that involved a representative of government. As such,
there is a strong presumption against the exclusion of witnesses until after their testimony, and
relevant, non -cumulative witnesses should only be excluded by the administrator in exceptional
circumstances.
12.5. At the conclusion of the testimony, the administrator will solicit from the pro tem
attorney and/or from the participating parties additional submissions of proposed stipulated
facts. The administrator will determine which, if any, proposed stipulated facts should be
submitted to the panel.
13.0. STATEMENTS OF SUMMATION
The pro tern attorney and the participating parties may offer statements of summation only if
preapproved by the administrator in consultation with the parties. Statements must be
consistent with the fact-finding purpose of the inquest and must not suggest conclusions of law
or bear on fault.
14.0. PANEL QUESTIONS
14.1. After the conclusion of testimony, each party shall submit to the administrator proposed
questions for the panel. After consultation with the parties, the administrator shall determine
which questions are within the scope of the inquest and should be submitted to the panel. Prior
to the statements of summation, the administrator shall provide the panel with the list of
questions.
14.2. The inquest administrator shall give written instructions to the panel and shall submit
questions to be answered, subject to the limitations of Section 3 (above) and keeping in mind
the purpose of an inquest. The administrator shall instruct the panel that it may not comment
on fault, or on justification —including the mental state of the involved officer(s), such as
57
Document Code No.: PHL-7-1-2-EO
Conducting Inquests in King County
Page 12 of 12
whether the officer thought the decedent posed a threat of death or serious bodily injury to the
officer(s)—or on the criminal or civil liability of a person or agency.
14.3. Beyond these limitations, the panel shall not be confined to the stipulated facts, but may
consider any testimony or evidence presented during the inquest proceeding. In answering any
question, the panel may not consider any information learned outside of the inquest.
14.4. Questions submitted to the panel must provide three response options: "yes," "no," and
"unknown." A panelist shall respond "yes" when the panelist believes a preponderance of the
evidence supports responding to the question in the affirmative. A panelist shall respond "no"
when the panelist believes a preponderance of the evidence supports responding to the
question in the negative. A panelist shall respond "unknown" if either (1) the weight of the
evidence equally supports responding to the question in the affirmative and the negative or (2)
not enough evidence was presented to allow the panelist to answer the question in the
affirmative or the negative.
14.5. The panel shall deliberate and panelists shall exchange their interpretations of the
evidence. However, the panel need not reach unanimity and each panelist shall be instructed to
answer the questions individually.
14.6. After every question, each panelist shall have the opportunity to provide a written
explanation of the panelist's answer. The administrator shall direct each panelist that the
panelist need only provide a written explanation when the panelist believes that a written
explanation would provide information helpful in explaining or interpreting the panelist's
answer.
15.0. FINDINGS
15.1. The manager shall transmit the panel's findings to the County Executive.
15.2. The manager shall ensure the findings and recommendations are published on its website
along with the inquest recording.
16.0. ANNUAL REVIEW
16.1. The manager shall submit a report to the County Executive at the end of each year on the
operations of inquests.
16.2. The County Executive will call for a periodic review of the inquest process by an
independent review committee to determine if the inquest process is conforming to updated
laws and adequately meeting the principles of transparency, community engagement, and
respect for all those involved in the inquest process.
58