Union Claims DPD Officers Prohibited From Wearing Riot Gear 'For Appearance's Sake'
DENVER (CBS4)- In a sternly worded letter to Denver Mayor Michael Hancock and Police Chief Robert White, Denver's police union warned Wednesday that its officers had been forbidden from wearing riot gear at recent Denver protests placing officer's safety at risk.
"But recently the officers on the street have been given orders not to deploy at protests with protective gear on, for fear that the officers will look intimidating and perhaps unwittingly escalate the intensity of the protests," wrote Sean Olson, an attorney representing Denver's Police Protective Association.
CBS4 obtained a copy of the letter Wednesday.
"Please do not place appearances above officer safety," wrote Olson. "Should the Department continue to place appearances above officer safety, the Department is now on notice that it will be held accountable for any injuries its decisions cause."
Olson wrote that DPD command officers have been handing down the orders not to wear protective gear during protests and demonstrations.
"The fact that the conditions are created solely for appearance's sake is unacceptable," said Olson.
In recent weeks, students at numerous area high schools have walked out and demonstrated against events in Ferguson, Mo.
In one protest by East High students, a car careened into a group of Denver bike officers leaving one officer with life threatening injuries.
Denver Police Bike Patrol Officer John Adsit, 35, was seriously injured while assisting with a protest on East Colfax Avenue by the students last Wednesday.
"The conditions existing at many of these protests are already dangerous," said Olson. "The orders being given to officers to avoid wearing protective gear makes those conditions even more dangerous."
Late Wednesday night, Amber Miller, a spokesperson for Denver Mayor Michael Hancock, responded to the letter obtained by CBS4, writing, "Regarding the events of this past week , the city has worked to ensure the public's safety while they exercise their right to speak out and at the same time protect the safety and well being of our officers. As the Mayor has said, we applaud both our officers and the demonstrators for what have been peaceful protests in Denver."
Miller's statement did not directly address the veracity of the union's accusations or the reasoning behind not allowing officers to wear riot gear during protests.
The following is the letter sent by the Denver Police Protective Association:
Dear Mayor Hancock and Chief White:
As you are aware, as a result of two incidents on the national stage, the City of Denver is experiencing a spate of protests, the scope of which has not been seen in many years. Already as a result of these protests, several officers have been injured, one very seriously. The intensity of the protests and the protesters continues to grow every day, both here and across the country - like the protest in California two days ago where two officers were injured when protesters threw bricks at them.
And every day, Denver's police officers place themselves in the street to protect those involved and the property around them.
But recently, the officers on the street have been given orders not to deploy at protests with protective gear on, for fear that the officers will look intimidating and perhaps unwittingly escalate the intensity of the protests. Those orders needlessly place the officers in harm's way, and force each of them to risk serious injury, simply for appearance's sake. It will not be long before one or more of those officers is injured, perhaps seriously.
Public officials can be held liable for their actions when the conditions allowing for a private individual to cause harm are created by the public official. The Supreme Court and the Tenth Circuit have recognized such liability on the part of public officials for nearly two decades. Those courts hold that "state officials can be liable for the acts of third parties where those officials 'created the danger'
that caused the harm." Thayer v. Washington County School Dist., 858 F. Supp. 2d 1269, 1273 (D. Utah 2012) (quoting Armijo v. Wagon Mound Public Schools, 159 F.3d 1253, 1262-63 (10th Cir. 1998)).
The conditions existing at many of these protests are already dangerous. The orders being given to officers to avoid wearing protective gear makes those conditions even more dangerous. Those conditions, created by the command officers who provide the orders, make for substantial liability both for the command officer and the Department. The fact that the conditions are created solely for appearance's sake is unacceptable.
Both the Denver Police Protective Board and I respectfully request that command officers cease and desist from giving orders to officers forcing them to forgo appropriate safety gear when tending to the ongoing protests in Denver. Please do not place appearances above officer safety. Should the Department continue to place appearances above officer safety, the Department is now on notice that it will be held accountable for any injuries its decisions cause.
If the Denver Police Protective Association is able to assist in any way in ensuring the safety of Denver's officers while patrolling the ongoing protests, it and its members stand ready and willing to assist. If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to call any time.
Very truly yours,
DENVER POLICE PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION
Sean T. Olson, In House Counsel
and on behalf of the DPPA Executive Board
