Po POLICE DEPARTMENT RUSSELL P. JACK WAUKESHA aSCONSO150 10-3672 TELEPHONE: [25215243761 FAK (22) 5243914 May 7, 2015 ‘Tim Seltz 1120 Linden Street Waukesha, WI 53186 itizen Compl ‘The Waukesha Police Department takes every complaint concerning the conduet and actions of our officers very seriously. We count on citizens to advise us if an employce"s actions are questionable. An impartial and objective examination ofthe facts by the administration ofthe Department is conducted when any citizen requests a review in onder to feret out wrong-doing orto exonerate falsely accused officers. I light of this, your complaint against Lieutenant Hendricks, received on April 14, 2015 was thoroughly investigated. ‘Your allegation listed that you fel that there was a violation of our MAVRS General Order in your request for records, Based upon the thorough investigation, we have drawn, the following conclusions. ‘Conclusions ‘©The MAVRS hardware and software problems, particularly surrounding the days and Weeks surrounding September 21, 2014 prevented any of the fleets with MAVRS, 'DP2 hardware from recording, ‘© The investigation showed that a properly preserved MAVRS DP3 video was corrupted by an internal system error that was no fault ofthe Waukesha Police Department © The investigation revealed a flaw in the parameters se up in the MAVRS recording software that purges any recordings seven to fourteen days after being uploaded from a fleet that recording was not classified or labeled. This period is well below the ‘equited 120 retention period and was based on a storag-savings measure put in place under the guidance of the former administration, Chief Sharrock and Deputy Chief Dussaut ‘© MAVRS recordings searched by call number did not locate all related recordings. ‘womecinileshnpotee‘+ The investigation also showed that a video from this September 21, 2014 incident (1449404) was not “tagged” or labeled and as a result was not preserved with inthe 120 days upon receipt ofthe November 25, 2014 records request by Mr, Seliz, ‘© There is no indication that involved officers should have “Marked for Evidence” any -MAVRS recordings. The existing recording as well as the purged recordings do not appear to have any evidentiary value. ‘The aforementioned conclusions have led to the following action. ‘© Discipline for Officer Mullins and Officer Bousman for not folowing the MAVRS SOP regarding classifying and/or labeling recordings. Shift level counseling is recommended as there was nothing malicious about their actions, the video was apparently inconsequential tothe case, and nether officer has any history of MAVRS related Violations ‘* Tocnsure no MAVRS recordings are missed during a records search due to human cttor, the following change to the current MAVRS SOP has been implimented under “Vill, DATA MANAGEMENT": 5. a, Searches of the MAVRS software shall include all involved officers according to the CAD call and shall be conducted by timeframe and not just by eal number. The settings with the MAVRS software is compliant with the 120 retention period for any recordings not “Marked as Evidence”, In anticipation ofa future records request I have included the investigation with this letter. Sincerely, RUSSELL P. JACK CHIEF OF POLICE SS DENNIS J ANGLE DEPUTY CHIEF OF POLICE