Three years after the death of George Floyd, efforts by Delaware police reform advocates have finally paid off with new legislation passed by the General Assembly aimed at enhancing transparency and rebuilding trust between the police and the community.
The police reform bill, which is expected to be signed into law by Governor John Carney, mandates that the state publicly release the names of officers who commit specific violations of agency policies, along with a narrative detailing their actions.
Violations include the use of force resulting in serious physical injury, sexual assault, sexual harassment, dishonesty, domestic violence and incidents involving the firing of weapons, regardless of policy violations. The information must be posted on the website of the state’s criminal justice council within 60 days of the investigation’s completion.
Representative Melissa Minor-Brown, the chief House sponsor of the bill, lauded the bill as a “serious and meaningful step” toward transparency in addressing police misconduct.
Similarly, Senator Tizzy Lockman, the chief Senate sponsor, expressed hope that the bill would repair trust between law enforcement and the community, arguing that it will help residents “differentiate between honest police officers upholding their oath and bad apples whose actions spread fear and distrust among our neighbors.”
Ironically, many reform advocates, including the state’s NAACP and American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) chapters, as well as the Wilmington Metropolitan Urban League, have criticized the measure as a weak initial effort to hold rogue officers and the agencies that protect them accountable.
John Reynolds, the ACLU’s deputy policy and advocacy director, argued that the system remains largely unchanged.
“This is not creating a pathway to true transparency … We still have a system that is going to be continuing in the same exact way, with police policing themselves.”
Reynolds argued that police still retain ultimate authority over whether to investigate citizen complaints, conduct formal or informal probes and substantiate or reject allegations. He also noted that the bill merely requires police to summarize their activities and investigations in cases where a small number of complaints are substantiated.
During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, the Attorney General’s office endorsed the bill, along with representatives from various police agencies and Richard McCabe, the head of the New Castle city police and a leader in the Delaware Association of Chiefs of Police.
McCabe, speaking on behalf of the Delaware Fraternal Order of Police union, said the legislation will promote transparency, public education and trust.
“We wanted to lift the veil of secrecy that so many believe surrounds our profession … This bill represents impactful change,” McCabe stated.
According to some reform advocates, the influence of the law enforcement lobby gradually weakened the provisions of the bill throughout the legislative process.
For instance, the original proposal called for public disclosure of all allegations, complaints or charges against Delaware police officers, including disciplinary hearing transcripts and case dispositions. It also allowed the creation of community review boards with the power to decide disciplinary matters and issue public reports on police discipline trends. These provisions were later removed, and subsequent versions of the bill narrowed the scope of misconduct subject to public disclosure.
Reynolds believes the revised bill fell short in bringing about meaningful reform, citing the case of former Wilmington officer Samuel Waters, whose assault conviction for slamming a man’s head against a wall during an arrest would not be disclosed under the new law because the victim did not sustain serious injuries.
Reynolds concluded that the changes to LEOBOR were insufficient, and that the bill essentially maintains the status quo of allowing police to investigate themselves.
Although Senator Lockman considers the reforms significant, she acknowledged the influence of the police lobby in diluting the bill’s impact.
“There has been a longstanding relationship of trust there versus the way that other stakeholders have been able to engage.”
Lockman believes that although progress may seem slow, initiating movement is crucial to building momentum for further reforms.
“Unfortunately, the way the sausage gets made is not always as rapid as we would like. But that’s why it’s important to get some movement going, because then that momentum can build. And I’m still confident that we will be able to continue to make reforms.”
