Public hearing June 29th at 6:30 p.m.

Call to order.

Madam Secretary, if you would do roll call.

Suzanne Berkey here.

Carolyn Franklin.

She's excused.

Excused.

Christopher Lewis.

Here.

Gino Toole.

Here.

Deborah Porter.

Here.

Alexa Stackhouse.

President.

Jules to make.

Thank you.

All present with the exception of Darwin Franklin.

Thank you.

Good evening, everyone.

I would ask my colleagues, um, board members to allow me a little leeway.

I would like to make an opening statement, although this opening statement is not on the formal agenda.

Uh, if there are no objections, I will take that as consent and I will make a brief statement.

Good evening, and thank you all for being here.

Before we begin, I want to acknowledge why we're all here.

On August 15th, 2025, Mr.

Alan Tucker Jr.

died while in custody of the Alexandria Police Department.

Behind every matter this board reviews is a person and the people that love them.

To Mr.

Tucker's family and friends who are with us tonight, we see you and we recognize the weight of this moment.

Let me explain the purpose and the procedure for tonight's hearing.

The board's role is to review the investigation conducted by the Office of the Independent Policing Auditor and the Alexandria Police Department's Office of Professional Responsibility, and to assess the auditor's investigation for fairness, objectivity, and thoroughness.

This is our charge under the city code.

It's important to understand what this hearing is not.

It is not a trial, it is not an evidentiary hearing, and we will not resolve disputed facts, admit or exclude evidence, permit cross-examination, or require responses tonight.

The purpose of this hearing is to receive public comment on matters that are within the board's authority.

A brief presentation from the auditor, followed by public comment.

If you would like to make public comment and have not signed up, please see the young lady in the back.

If you would raise your hand, and you can sign up with her.gov.

Finally, I trust that all of us, board, staff, and members of the public will conduct ourselves with respect and decorum.

This is a serious situation, and it deserves our seriousness and full attention.

I will maintain order to ensure every voice is heard fairly.

And with that, this public hearing is now open.

Member O'Toole, if you would read the introduction and board purpose.

Sure thing.

Good evening.

The creation of the independent community policing review board started with Alexandria City Council Resolution 2950 on June 9th, 2020, which condemned police brutality and systemic racism, reaffirmed that Black Lives Matter, and advocated for justice system reform.

The resolution emphasized the city's duty to protect all communities through action and accountability.

On April 17th, 2021, the council adopted an ordinance to create the ICPRB effective July 1st, 2021, and establish the Office of the Alexandria Independent Policing Auditor.

The ICPRB is an eight-member board focused on enhancing trust and legitimacy between the police, city leadership, and the public.

It reviews administrative investigations by the independent policing auditor and the Alexandria Police Department, evaluates policing policies and practices, and recommends reforms to address discriminatory discriminatory practices and inequities and to improve public safety.

Thank you.

Item number four.

We need a motion for the approval of or any changes to the meeting agenda.

I make a motion to approve the meeting agenda with one edit.

And that the edit being to change number nine to simply say board action.

Motion was made by member Suzanne Berkey and seconded by Vice Chair Stackhouse.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion passes with complete vote.

So that means the edit in number nine has been received.

Item number five.

We will also entertain a motion for adopting the public hearing procedures and rules.

It pleases the chair and move to adopt the public hearing procedures and rules.

Is there a second?

Yes, second note.

Motion made by Vice Chair Stackhouse, seconded by member Tommy Gay.

All in favor.

Sorry.

Any discussion?

Any discussion?

Okay.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion passes.

Okay, we will move on to item number six.

We will ask the auditor to come up to make her presentation of the administrative investigation of the in-custody death of Alan F.

Tucker II.

Thank you.

Good evening, Chair Porter, members of the ICPRB, members of Mr.

Tucker's family, and of course, community members joining us here today in person and online.

My name is Amaratu Kamara, and I am the independent policing auditor for the city of Alexandria.

Tonight, I will provide an overview of the independent investigation into the in-custody death of Alan Tucker Jr., who died in police custody on August 15th, 2025.

I will summarize the evidence reviewed, the findings reached, and the recommendations issued for the board's independent review.

I'll begin with the purpose of today's presentation and the and where it fits within Alexandria's civilian oversight structure.

Civilian oversight is built on three principles: transparency, accountability, and public trust.

The purpose of this presentation is to give the board and the community a clear overview of the investigation and the findings.

The public hearing allows community members to hear findings directly from the auditor, participate through public comment, and then inform the board's independent review.

Before discussing the facts of this case, it's important to briefly explain the legal framework in which my office operates.

The auditor and the board civilian oversight authority is established through city ordinances and a memorandum of understanding between the auditor, the board, and APD.

Our jurisdiction is limited to members and policies of the Alexandria Police Department.

The auditor conducts an administrative investigation into complaints of police misconduct and reviews critical incidents involving death or serious injury.

Administrative investigations determine whether officers involved complied with APD policies, directives, and city administrative regulations.

The auditor's office does not make criminal charging decisions, nor do we investigate matters involving personnel from agencies outside of the Alexandria Police Department.

And while the auditor can recommend discipline, it cannot impose it.

The chief of police retains final disciplinary authority.

That is not unique to Alexandria.

That is a standard model used across civilian oversight agencies across the country.

However, here, if the chief does decline to implement any of the recommendations made by the auditor or the board, the city ordinance does require that that rejection be made public and in writing to the board, auditor, and city council.

Now turning to the investigation timeline and the agencies involved.

This case involves several independent investigations that occurred over the course of 10 months.

There were three separate investigations.

First, the critical incident response team, who I will refer to as CERT, conducted a criminal investigation.

The critical incident response team is a multi-jurisdictional team made up of investigators and officers outside of the Alexandria Police Department.

The CERT team completes its final criminal investigation, recommending whether the officers will be charged with criminal charges, and they turn over their file to the Commonwealth Attorney's Office.

The Commonwealth Attorney's Office reviewed the cert findings.

The investigation concluded in December, and the Commonwealth Attorney declined to pursue criminal charges against the officers involved in January 2026.

Second, the Alexandria Police Department conducts its own independent, conducts its own internal investigation conducted by the Office of Professional Responsibility.

The Alexandria Police Department completed that internal investigation in April.

Third, once the Alexandria Police Department turns over its complete file and evidence to the Office of the Independent Policing Auditor, that officially begins the independent investigation by the auditor.

The investigation my investigation was completed on May 13th when the auditor's full investigative file was turned over to the board, including findings and recommendations.

The auditor's report was released to the public on June 22nd, bringing us here to today's hearing and the board's independent review.

With that said, we'll turn to the evidence.

And so now I'll walk through the incident, breaking it into four phases.

First, the initial response, then the transport of Mr.

Tucker to the adult detention center, the events that occurred in the adult detention center in the Sally port, and then the medical emergency.

I'll begin with the initial response.

On August 15th, dispatch received multiple 911 calls reporting a man running through an apartment building, screaming, banging on doors, and attempting to enter residences.

Officer one was the first one on the scene and encountered Mr.

Mr.

Tucker in the hallway outside of his apartment.

According to Officer One, Mr.

Tucker appeared to be sweating, wide-eyed, and speaking rapidly.

Mr.

Tucker was in distress and repeatedly stated that someone was in his apartment with a gun.

Officer one attempted to calm Mr.

Tucker down in the hallway and address his concerns while officers two and three joined.

The officer searched the apartment twice with Mr.

Tucker's consent.

The only other person inside the uh residence at the time was living with Musta Tucker.

Officers found no other person, and they did not recover a weapon.

Officers tried to encourage Mr.

Tucker to return inside, but Mr.

Tucker still believed that someone remained in his apartment and refused.

Officer one told Mr.

Tucker that if he did not go inside, he would be arrested.

Mr.

Tucker refused to return inside and did not resist arrest.

Mr.

Tucker was arrested for public intoxication and escorted out by the police to the police vehicle for transport, which will, which is covered in the next days.

Before transport, Mr.

Tucker asked to speak to a supervisor, and a sergeant responded.

While on scene, the sergeant briefly spoke with Mr.

Tucker, and then he instructed the officers to transport him to the adult detention center using emergency lights and sirens.

He also directed officers to notify the detention center that they were on their way with the disorderly individual.

The notification was made and acknowledged by the sheriff's office.

Officers one and three transported Mr.

Tucker to the detention center.

Officer three followed behind Officer One.

Officer two and the sergeant did not go to the detention center.

During transport, Mr.

Tucker became increasingly agitated, yelling and kicking inside the police vehicle.

As the vehicle passed the INOVA hospital, he repeatedly asked to be taken to the hospital.

Officer one acknowledged those requests.

However, she can the officer continued to transport Mr.

Tucker to the adult detention center.

The next phase will cover the officer's arrival and wait at the adult detention center.

Officers one and three arrived at the Sally Port of the Adult Detention Center at approximately 6-11 p.m.

The Sally port is a holding area where officers await sheriff's deputies to for to take individuals in for intake and booking.

While arrestees await booking in the Sally Port area, they remain in APD custody until booking is fully completed.

Upon entering the Sally Port, officers learned that there would that intake would be delayed due to a shift change going on in the sheriff's office.

Although the detention center had been notified that they were in route with Mr.

Tucker, no one provided no one from the sheriff's office provided the officers with an estimated time for wait for medical screening, intake, or booking.

As a result, Mr.

Tucker remained in the backseat of the patrol vehicle in APD custody while officers waited for approximately 40 to 45 minutes during the sheriff's office shift change.

During that time, Mr.

Tucker continued initially to yell and kick inside the police vehicle.

At some point, sheriff's deputies came out and told the officers to turn off the cruiser, but did not provide any updates on when Mr.

Tucker would be seen.

As time passed, Mr.

Tucker's behavior became noticeably quieter.

And at about 651 p.m.

after Ms.

Tucker after Ms.

Tucker after Mr.

Tucker had been quiet and stopped moving for some time.

Officer three approached the vehicle to check on Mr.

Tucker and found him unresponsive.

Officers then treated the situation as a medical emergency, which brings us to phase four.

Once the officers realized that Mr.

Tucker was unresponsive, they requested emergency medical assistance through dispatch and help from sheriff's deputies.

Officer one then administrated Narcan, which is an overdose prevention device that may revent that may reverse the effects of substances in someone's system.

Next, the officers cut Mr.

Tucker's seatbelt, which was tangled around him to remove him from the vehicle and begin CPR.

Officers performed CPR until fire and emergency medical services EMS personnel arrived.

Once EMS was on the scene, they continued life-saving efforts.

Unfortunately, though, Mr.

Tucker was pronounced deceased at the scene.

One key fact is that during booking, I mean, is that booking was never completed, and therefore transfer of custody between the APD and sheriff's office did not occur.

At the time of his death, Mr.

Tucker remained in custody of the APD.

Normally, before booking and transfer of custody to the sheriff's department, individuals who arrive at the jail are medically screened.

That screening does not replace medical treatment.

It is intended to identify individuals who may need a hospital evaluation before admission to the detention center.

That said, individuals may be rejected for booking if the screening indicates that they require additional medical care.

The medical screening checks for vitals, which can be important indicators of medical need.

It includes heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen levels, things that can reveal whether a medical evaluation is needed before someone is admitted into the detention center.

That completes the overview of the incident, and so now we'll turn to the officers involved in the investigation.

The investigation reviewed the actions of three officers and one sergeant.

Officer one has been a member of the Alexandria Police Department for four years.

Officer one was the primary responding officer and arresting officer.

Officer one also transported Mr.

Tucker to the jail in the back of their cruiser, along with Officer Three following behind.

Officer two has been a member of the Alexandria Police Department for approximately five years.

Officer two assisted with the initial response, the search of the residence arrest, but he did not, they did not go to the Alexandria detention center.

Officer three has been a member of the Alexandria Police Department for approximately five years.

Officer three assisted with the initial response and arrest, transport and the custody of Mr.

Tucker at the adult detention center.

Finally, the sergeant has been a member of the Alexandria Police Department for 22 years.

He authorized the transport to the jail initially and initially followed officers one and three to the jail before quickly disengaging.

Now let's take a look at the applicable policies.

The policies that were considered considered were Alexandria Police Department directives on the following.

Body worn camera, medical care for arrestees, prisoner transport, and the arrest policy.

We also considered the city administrative regulation AR-620, which is performance standards that apply to all city employees, as well as our oversight authority to ensure that we are in compliance.

And so that summarizes the officers and the policies involved.

I'll now turn to the findings, which are separated into three categories.

The findings and recommendations in the report address issues at the personnel, organizational, and systemic level, including recommendations to improve coordination and accountability among the various agencies that are involved in responding to critical incidents.

I'll start with the personnel findings for the officers involved.

The investigation resulted in sustained findings for all three officers.

For officer one, the investigation sustained findings for noncompliance on the following medical care for arrestees, prisoner transport, body worn camera, and AR-620, City Administrative Regulation 620.

For officer two, the investigation sustained it findings for non-compliance with the body worn camera policy.

For officer three, the investigation sustained findings for non-compliance with the body worn camera policy, as well as the city administrative regulation AR620.

My initial review did not identify a policy violation by the sergeant.

However, under the city ordinance, the board may recommend additional review or another look at that should they after considering the evidence and public comments that they received tonight.

Also submitted recommendations for discipline to the chief of police.

Now let's take a deeper look at the sustained findings by category, starting with Officer 1's violation of the medical care and prisoner transport policies.

The findings against Officer 1 are central in this investigation because it focuses on the officer's decision to ignore Mr.

Tucker's request to go to the hospital and continue to transport him to the Alexandria Police Department.

The evidence showed that Mr.

Tucker displayed signs of distress and repeatedly asked to be taken to the hospital as the vehicle passed INOVA Alexandria.

The Alexandria Police Department directives 10.1, medical care for arrestees, and 10.27 prisoner transport require officers to obtain medical care when an arrestee requests medical treatment.

Officer one violated those policies when Mr.

Tucker's requests for the hospital were ignored, and his transport continued to the adult detention center.

Furthermore, during the 40 to 45 minute wait, officers did not choose to transport him to the hospital despite his request, delayed medical screening, and signs for and earlier signs of impairment or intoxication.

That evidence is also supported a sustained finding under administrative regulation AR-620 regarding officers one's performance and duty of care owed to Mr.

Tucker.

Now let's turn to the violations under body worn camera policy 2.8.

The investigation determined that all three officers muted their body worn camera while Mr.

Tucker remained in custody and while the incident was actively still unfolding.

Under the department policy 2.8, officers may mute their cameras only under limited circumstances, and they must articulate the justification for muting their body worn camera before doing so.

For example, discussing tactical trap strategies for an undercover operation is one example of a limited circumstance where officers can uh mute their body worn camera.

In this case, officers were not authorized at any point to mute their body worn camera, and even if they did have that authorization, they still violate the policy because they did not articulate a justification for doing so.

And based on that evidence, the investigation sustained allegations uh for noncompliance with the body worn camera directive for officers one, two, and three.

The final personnel finding uh relates to the professional standards uh under AR620 for officer three.

Officer three's uh administrative uh violation under AR620 arose from a separate conduct while he was while they were at the Sally port.

During the wait at the Sally port, Officer Three made a profane statement uh directed towards sheriff's office personnel.

Based on this uh evidence, my office uh sustained a professionalism violation under AR620, and that covers all the personnel findings.

This next set of uh recommendations are policy and training improvements for the Alexandria Police Department as a whole to prevent and reduce the risk of another tragedy like this from happening.

Personnel findings and individual accountability are just one part of the investigation.

And while it is important to hold officers accountable to their duties and their service to the community, it is also important to improve systems through training and reviews of policies and procedures before the next critical incident occurs.

These organizational recommendations are especially meaningful to me because of a conversation I had with Mr.

Tucker's mother, who has remained absolutely engaged and focused not only on understanding what happened to her son, but also preventing something like this from happening to another family.

She asked me directly whether this investigation would lead to changes in policy, training, and procedures, and the answer is yes.

The investigation identified three areas for uh the Alexandria Police Department to consider for policy reviews and training.

First, all three officers violated the body worn camera policy.

Therefore, the report recommends a refresher training on body worn camera requirements.

Next, the report recommends a full review, revision, and training plan for the Alexandria Police Department's medical care for arrestees and prisoner transport directives.

It can be provided as a standalone training, or another recommendation is to integrate it within the department's existing crisis intervention training or CIT program, which prepares all officers to respond to mental and medical health emergencies.

The last recommendation under organizational reforms for consideration by the department is to implement dash cameras.

During this investigation, video and audio evidence were crucial to understanding the circumstances and events surrounding Mr.

Tucker's death.

However, because the Alexandria Police Department vehicles are not equipped with dash cams, there is no continuous view of Mr.

Tucker while he was in the in the back of the police vehicle during transport and during the wait at the Sally uh Sally port.

The report recommends prioritizing the implementation of Dash cams to provide investigating agencies with a more complete record and to prefer and to improve transparency overall.

The last category of recommendations and reforms are uh go towards increasing coordination and um go towards increasing coordination and accountability between the agencies involved in responding to critical incidents.

We'll start with the two that focus on reducing reliance on officer discretion uh for medical judgment calls.

First, the Alexandria Police Department, I mean, sorry, first Alexandria has limited alternatives for officers when they encounter individuals experiencing intoxication or impairment.

Up until 2020, Alexandria had a detoxification center that served as a diversion or alternative to the uh adult detention center for individuals suspected of to be intoxicated or impaired.

That center closed during uh 2020 after COVID, and the city currently relies on a memorandum of understanding with the Arlington with Arlington for their detoxification center.

The report recommends re-evaluating the need to reopen or rest re-establish our own detoxification city here in the city, as well as um as an alternative, ensure that all officers are trained on the existing diversion option in Arlington.

Second, the report also uh recommends exploring a partnership between Alexandria Police and FIRE and EMS for medical screenings before jail uh transport in certain situations.

The goal again is to reduce reliance on officer discretion in medical situations because they are not trained medical professionals.

The next interagency recommendations address the Sheriff's Department, who put out a statement earlier today.

And so before I begin, I want to acknowledge the sheriff's decision to put out a statement on the day of this uh scheduled public hearing in response to my previous inquiries related to this event.

Sheriff Casey did not respond to my previous inquiries, and this has been a 10-month long process involving various investigative bodies that have been transparent about their investigative processes since August 2025.

During the course of my investigation, I reached out to Sheriff Casey to confirm whether an investigation into the delayed intake and medical screening occurred.

Today, on the day of the public hearing, I learned with the public that the Sheriff's Office indeed did conduct an internal investigation and that they found no violations by their sheriff's deputies, and that that investigation report would not be made public.

While the Sheriff's Office and Detention Center fall outside of the office's jurisdiction, there are serious concerns regarding transparency and accountability, including the need for an independent assessment into the events that led to a 45-minute shift change and delay in Mr.

Tucker's medical screening and intake.

Accordingly, the report recommends an independent review by the city or another state agency of the sheriff's office as it relates to this incident.

One mechanism for doing that under the city is by adding jail oversight powers to the city's current oversight structure.

Jail and prison oversight is a growing area of the civilian oversight sector across the country.

Moving on from the sheriff's department, the final recommendation focuses on improving responses to critical incidents and strengthening the civilian oversight process as a whole.

The incident involved multiple public uh safety agencies, including the Alexandria Police Department, the Sheriff's Office, emergency communications, fire and EMS, and other city offices.

The report recommends an interdepartmental work group to clarify communication protocols, agency roles, and response procedures during critical incidents.

The report also recommends using the upcoming memorandum of understanding review between the auditor board and police department to incorporate lessons that we have learned from this investigation.

That concludes the presentation on the investigation and findings.

Again, uh, for those of you following along here in person and online, the report was released on June 22nd and remains available on the auditor's website.

And now the matter moves forward for the board's independent review.

The board's role is to determine whether this investigation was fair, thorough, and objective, considering the report, the evidence, the investigative file, and the public comments that they'll receive later tonight.

After public comment, the board may take any action authorized under the city ordinance, including concurring with some or all of the findings, recommending further review, recommending additional investigation or recommending a referral to the Commonwealth Attorney's Office for assessment of criminal charges against the officers.

Again, as a reminder, if the chief does decline to implement a recommendation from the board or the auditor, the city ordinance requires a written public response within 30 days.

And I'll close by returning to the central purpose of this report and investigation.

Before I conclude, I do want to thank everyone who supported this investigative process and for the public for being here and for your participation here tonight.

The investigation and findings stemming from it are about accountability, transparency, and prevention.

What I want the public to walk away with is that this process works.

Regardless of the charging decisions and the findings made by CERT, APD, the Sheriff's Department, and the Commonwealth Attorney's Office, the auditor and the board were created to ensure that there is an independent pathway for community members to not only seek justice but participate in public safety matters by sharing their perspectives.

Finally, to the Tucker family.

It has been an honor to work with all of you during this difficult time of grief.

And so please know that if you ever need support moving forward or city services, you are more than welcome to contact me.

Thank you, Chair Porter.

This concludes my presentation.

I want to say thank you to the auditor for the detailed and the time that you put into this report, the specifics that you've provided us this evening that will allow us to carry on now into the next part of our agenda.

And so I will open public comment at this time.

I would like to just read a couple things.

Submission of written statements is encouraged.

If you have prepared a statement or written comments for the record, you may email them to ICPRB at Alexandria VA.gov.

There is also a speaker form on that website as well.

Each speaker will be allotted a maximum of three minutes to provide comments.

Speakers with prepared statements are encouraged to provide a copy to staff to ensure inclusion into the official record.

So at this time, I will begin calling names in the order in which you signed up to speak.

We're asking that you stand at the podium, that you give your full name, and that if you are associated with an agency or with your place of employment or an advocacy group, if you would share that as well.

First person we have that signed up is Ms.

Brittany Tucker.

Yes.

Okay, I'm gonna have to go in order of the way that people signed up.

Okay.

Miss Sandra Jones.

Yes.

Thank you.

Good evening, board.

Good evening.

Family and friends, thank y'all so much for y'all's support.

Y'all have been there 100%.

And we thank y'all for all the love that y'all have given us.

As Alan's mother, reading the independent police auditors' findings have been one of the most painful experiences of my life.

No mother should have to read an official report stating her child asked for medical help, pleaded to go to the hospital and was ignored by police officers Chelsea Henry, Adam Clemens, and William McGuinness, who has sworn to protect and serve.

What makes the pain even harder to bear is that the report identifies systematic breakdowns, individual misconduct, policy violations, inadequate supervision, and a gap in accountability.

To me, these are not merely administrative findings.

These are moments when my son needed compassion, urgency, and humanity.

Yet those needs went unmet.

Behind every violation is a family forever changed and a community left to question whether this tragedy could have been prevented.

These findings are not just words on paper.

They reflect the irreversible loss of my son, a brother, a friend, and a life that mattered.

This loss is especially troubling because it is the second critical incident involving the Alexandria Police Department in roughly nine months to end in the loss of a human life.

For that reason, I believe this report should serve as a wake-up call to police chief McGuire.

I hope you recognize the fear my son must have felt while he was in your in the custody of your police officers and the profound harm they caused when their actions failed to meet ethical and moral standards that the public have a right to expect.

You stated you joined this profession because you desire to serve and help people.

Those words must now be matched with action.

True leadership is not measured by statements made after a tragedy, but the willingness to confirm failure, help people, help hold people accountable, and implement meaningful changes that prevent another family from enduring this unimaginable pain.

That same standard of accountability must also apply to Sheriff Sean Casey's response.

Rather than fully acknowledging the serious concerns raised about the sheriff's office intakes procedures, communication failures, oversight deficiencies, and prolonged shift changes, delayed identified in the auditor's report.

His statement appears to place primary responsibility on the Alexandra Police Department.

Every agency involved must be examined, but accountability cannot be selected.

Public trust is weakened when leaders are deflect responsibilities instead of confronting failures with their own organization.

True leadership requires acknowledging their failure, not acknowledging their failures, correcting them, and working together to ensure no other family is left grieving.

I respectfully ask that the state, Mayor Gaskins, and Alexandra City Council take immediate actions by monitoring funding for the Alexandra Sheriff's Office until meaningful accountability, transparency, and reform are demonstrated.

The council has a duty to ensure that taxpayers' dollars support agencies that uphold the highest standards of professionalism.

Public safety and constitutional responsibility standards that were not upheld with my son's case.

Budget decision decisions are among the most powerful tool available to demand meaningful change when public institutions fail the people that they are sworn to protect.

One more thing.

Above all, you're at your time, but I'll let you finish, Ms.

Thank you, ma'am.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Above all, Alan deserved better.

He deserved compassion when he asked for help.

Urgency when his life was in danger, and humanity from those that we that he trusted.

Every person into custody that goes into custody deserves to know that their safety, dignity, and medical needs will be protected.

I cannot bring my son home, but I will continue to carry his memory, his voice, and a mother's love forward until his life is honored.

Not only in words, but in real lasting change.

Let Alan's name be remembered, not for the failures that took him from us, but for change.

We demand change.

Change.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

We're going to move on to the next person that has comments, signed up for comments.

Mac White.

Mr.

Weich, I did allow Miss Jones to go over because she's the mama.

But we're we're at we're asking everyone to please limit their comment to three minutes.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you all for allowing us to speak.

I'm Mac Weich.

I'm Alan's.

Sorry.

Brittany's Dante.

I'm their bonus dad.

You know, and I don't say too much.

But this hurts.

Truly hurts.

I gotta get back to this.

You read it.

You got it.

You got it.

Go ahead.

Alan was not perfect.

None of us are.

But he had one of the biggest hearts anyone I have ever known.

When he saw someone struggling, he did whatever he could to help.

He believed in looking out for people and gave generously.

Money, his time, kindness, and love.

He often talked about wanting to do better, build a better future, and be there for people that he cared about.

That's the Allen that I know.

What breaks my heart is knowing that his final hours when he needed compassion the most, he was met with indifference.

He repeatedly asked for medical help.

He pleaded to go to the hospital.

Those cries for help should not have been, should have been heard.

That should have been answered.

Instead, they were ignored.

No family should ever have to read an official report confirming that their loved ones begged for medical help while in the police custody and was denied the basic humanity and dignity.

No parents should have to wonder if their child would still be alive today.

Has someone simply listened.

As a bonus dad, I carried the pain of knowing Alan died feeling helpless, knowing that the people entrusted with protecting him failed them.

The pain never goes away.

It follows our family every single day.

We are not standing here seeking sympathy.

We are standing here seeking accountability.

We want meaningful change so that no other family must endure the nightmare that we have since losing Alan.

To those with authorities to make the changes, I ask you to remember that behind every report, every policy and every investigation is a human life.

Alan was not just another case.

He was our son.

He was loved.

He mattered.

His life was valued.

The greatest way to honor Alan's memory is to make sure what happened to him never happens to another son, daughter, or any other family.

Justice for Alan.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Whites.

Thank you.

We will keep moving forward.

Mr.

Dante Jones.

Hello.

I'm the oldest brother of Alan Tucker.

So let's get right to business.

Officer Chelsea Henry, Officer William McGuinness, and Chief McGuire, you all took the same oath, the same oath that speaks on accountability, being courteous, competent, and being professional.

All of you failed this oath.

How are you competent and courteous when my brother was clearly in distress and need of help?

Yet you denied his multiple requests to go to the hospital.

Your reason being because of his mental state, he was not transported to the hospital.

Taking someone who's having a mental crisis to jail instead of a hospital.

A joke.

Then you consciously chose not to take him to get the help he needed.

At that point, it became voluntary.

You do not deserve that badge, but you do deserve criminal charges pressed against you alongside Officer William McGuinness, who was too busy worrying about getting his five guys in his weekend being ruined instead of worrying about my brother's life.

As far as professionalism, I've never seen a profession where someone asked for medical treatment and is denied it.

The only profession I've ever seen that in is for that of a hired killer.

It wasn't professional to whomever sent those handcuffs, my brother was in and the seatbelt that you cut off of him to my family.

Those weren't his items to begin with.

Those were cuffs that are government issued.

Then you had the audacity to ask for those trophies back.

Jamie Trainer, diabolical.

This is the first case in United States history where a family received the cuffs and the seatbelts their loved ones were in when they passed in police custody.

Fact check me.

Now let's talk about accountability, Officer William McGuinness and Chelsea Henry.

You need to be held accountable for the death of Alan Tucker.

It's because of their negligence.

My brother isn't here today.

If any of this, if any of us failed to follow policy at our workplace and were negligent enough for someone to lose their life, we would all be fired from our jobs and have criminal charges pressed against us.

These two should not be exempt.

Chief McGuire, you are an absolute failure.

You failed to see that your officers were in the wrong here.

You have failed this city, this community, your department, your own people, your hairline.

And most importantly, my family.

You do not deserve the title of chief.

We'll need to observe decorum, please.

I apologize.

If you can seriously let these same officers back out in the street to police community, diabolical.

You need to be relieved of duty.

Lastly, criminal charges need to be pressed against Officer Chelsea Henry and William McGuinness for the death of Alan Tucker.

I repeat, criminal charges need to be pressed against Officer Chelsea Henry and William McGuinness for the death of Alan Tucker.

Justice to Alan Tucker.

Thank you, Mr.

Jones.

We'll keep moving right along.

Miss Danielle Tucker.

Ms.

Danielle Tucker.

Miss Daniel Tucker, are you in the room?

Miss Tucker, can you hear us?

Miss Daniel Tucker, are you online?

Can you hear us?

Should we allow IT a few minutes to hear us?

Okay.

Miss Daniel Tucker, can you hear us now?

You can meet herself.

I just wanted to hear me.

I can hear you, but it's cutting out.

Can you all hear me?

Yes, we we can hear you just fine.

Your three minutes will start right now.

Okay.

Um, I just wanted to say to the board to the members of the board, um, you know, as Alan's cousin, as a member of the Tucker family, just reading this report has been incredibly painful.

You know, while I appreciate the time and effort that went into investigating what happened, no report can truly capture the loss of our family has lived every day since Alan has passed away.

It's heartbreaking to read that there were opportunities to provide medical care that were missed.

You know, knowing the policies were not followed raises difficult questions about how this could have happened and whether Alan's life might have been saved had those responsible acted differently.

For us, this is not just about policies or procedures.

You know, Alan was a son, a family member, a person who deserved to be treated with dignity, compassion, and humanity.

Every person in police custody should have trust that if they ask for medical help, that their request will be taken seriously.

I just hope that this report is not the end of accountability, but the beginning of meaningful change.

No other family should have to experience the pain that ours has endured.

We ask for the recommendations in this report be fully implemented, that those responsible are held accountable, and that every lesson from Alan's case leads to real improvements in how people in custody are cared for.

And you know, we'll continue to honor Alan's memory by seeking truth, accountability, and justice.

His life mattered, and he deserves to be remembered for more than just the circumstances of a set.

Um, I just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to listen to me.

Thank you, Miss Tucker.

We appreciate you taking the time.

We'll move on to Ms.

Dana Lawhorn.

I'm sorry, Mr.

Dana Lawhorn.

Dana Lawhorn.

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Your three minutes begins now.

Uh I was an Alexander police officer for 27 years.

I was the elected chair for 16 years for the city of Alexandria.

And I would just like to say that uh no chief or sheriff.

Um when it was an in-custody death.

Um, it's um, you know, it it affects them and um that is probably one of the worst days in uh in their career.

Um I would just like to say a couple of things about the a couple of things about the auditor's report.

Um, you know, I do know that no police officer was ever trained to take someone to the booking room for a medical screening.

The purpose of the medical screening is when somebody's actually entering uh into uh the detention center.

Um I do want to speak about real quickly about the auditors' authority and the scope of that authority by by law and MOU, and it's limited to the police department.

I felt like going into uh what the sheriff's office did was a little bit of a stretch and beyond what's um allowed by the MOU or by the city uh by the city code.

Um I do want to clarify one thing that in the auditors report on page nine, where she talks about the deputies northern medical personnel assisted the APD officers in attempts to revive Mr.

Uh Tucker.

And um I watched the video and you can clearly see that sheriff's deputy is there and the jail medical staff rendering assistance actually on the floor helping.

Um so um I would just ask that um the um board uh look at the the scope of the authority of uh the auditor, which is limited to the police department, because it really is a slippery slope when you start getting beyond uh that.

And you know the city code 24 uh dash two two nine, you know, says that the board uh shall not consider claims outside the scope of their responsibility.

And if you go beyond what is allowed by law, which is to investigate actions by the Alexander Police Department and not others, then that's where I think you um should uh ask that this report be sent back and that any references to what the sheriff's office uh did or didn't do should not be included in that because um it clearly is not allowed by the Virginia Code.

Um I do know Sheriff Casey well, and I do know that he has had communication with the auditor.

And um it's just unfortunate that um he was portrayed um that he didn't communicate with her because um I know that he did.

But um anyway, I just asked that the this board um stay true to the to the city code that says that uh this this the auditor nor the board should um you know go beyond what they've been given the authority to do so.

So thank you very much for your time.

Thank you, Mr.

Lawhorn.

Moving right along, Miss Belicia Tucker.

Thank you.

Please state your name.

Your three minutes will begin now.

My name is Felicia Tucker.

Good evening to the Independent Police and Review Board.

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you all for your time, your oversight, and your recommendations throughout this investigation.

To the independent police policing auditor's office, Amaratu Kamara.

The family would like to thank you for doing the job that you were hired to do with character and integrity.

May the Heavenly Father continue to protect you as you do your job.

To City Council and City Leadership, may the recommendations given to you assist in breaking down the walls of cultural, systemic barriers across the city of Alexandria as an organization into its entirety, including oversight within department agencies.

Dana Lawhorn, no matter who you know, irregardless of the policies and procedures that you spoke of, no one should be denied medical treatment.

And the sheriff's office needs to be held accountable as well.

Police Chief Tarek McGuire that August 30th, 2025, when I ran into you with Sam's Club the weekend prior to the family funeralizing Alan.

That wasn't a coincidence or happenstance.

It was a divine orchestrated meet.

Shocking to say the least.

However, I humbly introduced myself.

Numb, still in a state of shock.

Nevertheless, I spoke to you as a dignified human being.

I said to you, my family is trusting God for accountability, transparency, and truth.

And if there's a difference when someone needs mental health, medical treatment versus being arrested for public intoxification.

The sentiments are the same now.

We the family could only have wished in our wildest dreams, Alan would have been given the same respect and dignity.

In closing, recently I asked my pastor, why would God allow something like this to happen to me and my nephew in an organization that I work for?

And he looked at me.

And he said, so that you can learn how to forgive.

And I look back at him and I said, I'm a progress in work.

While I forgive the officers for what happened, I still think you should be held accountable when punished all the same.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Tucker.

Moving on to Ms.

Fatima Alexander.

Ms.

Fatima Alexander.

Please state your name.

Your three minutes begins now.

Um, my name is Fatima Alexander.

I stand before you once again on behalf of Alan Tucker and his family and anyone who has ever had to fight for answers after losing someone they love.

This is the final public hearing, but this isn't over for us.

We still have to live with the pain every day.

The City of Alexandria speaks often about transparency, accountability, and building trust with the community.

Unfortunately, that has not been our experience.

Throughout this process, we have experienced a lack of communication, a lack of transparency, and long periods of silence.

Policies are only meaningful.

Policies are only meaning meaningful when they are followed, not just written.

In my opinion, the leadership of the Alexandria Police Department has made little effort to ease this pain, painful process for the family.

No one can erase our grief, but leadership can choose compassion, communication, and transparency.

Instead, we have often felt in the dark while trying to navigate the worst tragedy of our lives.

As June comes to an end, we are approaching one year since Alan's death.

Think about that for a moment.

Nearly a year of waiting, nearly a year of unanswered questions, nearly a year of wondering whether whether the people interested to protect our community truly understand the pain their actions or the lack of communication have caused.

I have watched officers publicly stand together to our blue lives and fallen officers, especially the ones that were involved in Alan's death.

I respect the importance of supporting those who serve, but I cannot help but ask where has that same humanity been for Alan's family?

Where has the acknowledgement of our loss been?

Where has the effort to recognize the devastating impact this has had on everyone who knows him in the community that seeks answers?

I also believe this hearing should examine more than just one incident.

It should examine the systems that allow it to happen.

When officers have documented disciplinary histories or repeated policy violations, the public deserves to know how those patterns are addressed.

Transparency means more than releasing information after the fact.

It means demonstrating that misconduct is taken seriously before another family is left grieving.

In my opinion, officers with repeated disputes disciplinary issues should receive meaningful intervention, additional oversight, or when appropriate, be removed from the positions of public trust.

My concern is not just about the past, it is about protecting the future.

When parents of misconduct are not addressed, it can undermine confidence in an officer's judgment and decision making.

It also sends a message to the community that accountability depends on who is involved rather than on the standards everyone is expected to uphold.

As this process comes to a close, I asked the city of Alexandria one final question.

What does accountability look like if a grieving family can spend nearly a year asking for transparency and still feel unheard?

Ms.

Alexander, you are at your time.

Okay.

Well, justice for Alan and the family doesn't appreciate that the chief has made no efforts to be at any meetings.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Alexander.

We'll move right along.

David Lewis, Philip Parker, Mr.

David Lewis, Philip Parker.

Please state your name and your time will begin now.

David Parker.

I'm a member of the uh commission of human rights commission and the economic opportunities commission for the city of Alexandria.

I'm gonna be very brief.

Uh I'd like to echo a lot of what uh Mr.

Tucker's mother said, especially about uh civilian oversight for the sheriff's department.

I'd like to call for the termination of these officers, and I'd like to call for Brian Porter to consider filing charges against these officers.

Uh, they were at the very least neglectful, the very worst criminal in their lack of action.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Moving right along.

Ms.

Alice Pope, Ms.

Alice Pope.

Good evening.

My name is Ailees Pope.

Thank you for this opportunity to address you all.

I would like to thank the independent auditor and the board for doing an excellent job, even if it wasn't done in a timely manner.

I think the report was very thorough.

And many much of what she stated in her report is the things that I want to echo.

There needs to be some serious procedural changes.

Um, no family should ever have to go through this again.

Um, people put their public trust, and I'm glad that you all have put a system in place where the public has an opportunity to bring their voice to the table.

I would applaud the city of Alexandria for doing that.

However, that's just the first step.

And now what happens?

Um, when we talk about policing, policing is not just by the police department, it includes the sheriff's department.

If you are going to have a memo of understanding with another jurisdiction, the least you could do is have a memo of understanding within your own organization.

So if you can have communication with the city of Arlington about detoxification, you could have communication with the sheriff's department in the city of Alexandria about how intake will take place, what training will take place, and even especially how that grieving family is addressed after the fact.

The way the evidence was handled evidently was not proper because it should have never gone to the family if it had been properly handled.

The evidence had been properly handled.

The procedures for dealing with people with mental health issues, intoxication issues, intake, all that has to be looked at by both the sheriff's department and the police department because they do have to work together.

So if they're going to work together, then there has to be a system of understanding as to what the procedures are going to be.

So, how can you look at one entity and not look at the other entity?

You have to look at both.

But we thank you.

We hope that your work will continue.

We hope that changes will take place.

We hope that the community will continue to step forward to make sure that policies and procedures and their voices are heard.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Pope.

Mr.

Tyreek Jones.

Mr.

Tyreek Jones.

Please state your name and your three minutes will begin now.

I wanna say good afternoon to everybody.

Thank you to the board.

Thank you to the community.

I appreciate y'all, man.

First and foremost, today I just wanna speak on the morality, the character, the integrity of Alexandria City Police Department, and how they have treated me and my family throughout this process.

Detective Jamie Trainer, the same detective that came knocking on that door on August 15th at 11:30 to deliver that misconstrued information before the story started changing, left my house and shook my hand and told me and my father, we're gonna be with you here every step of the way.

I left two points, two points of contacts for him.

It was me and my mother.

But somehow I didn't hear from him once.

Somehow he was reaching out to my younger sister and my older sister.

Numbers I never gave him.

For what for some reason, from what I was told, the only reason from what I was told, Mr.

Trainer said to my sister, the only reason my brother even asked for a hospital was because he was driving by it and seen it.

And from his 20 years of experience, he would have died anyway.

You power-driven, condescending, classless, lack of integrity, having human being.

It was never on you to play God.

And say it was never a chance for our hard work and health care system, nurses and doctors to give my brother a chance to do what they're supposed to do.

They had approximately an hour from when he asked to go there to do what they were supposed to do.

And you're saying they couldn't.

And that the only reason my brother asked, the only reason my brother even asked for you guys even go to the hospital is because I told him to.

I was on the phone the whole time.

I talked to your officers.

When my dad went out there and handed them the phone, I said, get my brother help.

Take them to go get help.

I didn't know help meant shift change.

I didn't know help meant he ain't going nowhere but to jail and in a car.

But I was told he was in a jail cell.

Secondly, I just wanna address Detective McGuire.

Let me get there.

Chief McGuire.

Chief McGuire, where you at, brother.

Oh, yeah, Mr.

Trainer.

By the way, the half-sar you sent us is the only remorse you showed in your case.

And that's what I have no respect for, brother.

You came and called my sister.

The only sorry you gave is I'm sorry, I gave you those handcuffs.

Can I please get them back?

That's the only time I heard from you, brother.

There's no moral fiber in your bones, and that's a prime example of why there's distrust in the community and broken bridges between law enforcement and the community.

Secondly, Mr.

McGuire, you previously stated in your dis in your dissertation for your doctorate's degree that shift that the shift often causes others to pick aside, either between blue lives or black lives.

That as a male, black male officer, that the fear of the police interaction could turn negatively for your black sons, just like it did for my brother.

Thank you, Mr.

Jones.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Mr.

Dante Jones, Mr.

Dante Jones, Miss April Breslau.

Um, good evening.

Um, my name is April Breslau.

I live in Alexandria.

I am uh one of the vice chairs of the Alexandria Human Rights Commission.

Um, first, of course, my very, very deep condolences to Mr.

Tucker's family.

Really, nothing I can say um can come near what they've um experienced and shared with us.

Um, but I I did want to um uh focus on the auditor's lack of jurisdiction and therefore inability to thoroughly investigate um the actions of the sheriff's office.

Uh, with that in mind, I wanted to make sure that you all are aware that the Alexandria City Council has uh has budgeted for a comprehensive study of the operations of the sheriff's office because of unrelated but also serious concerns uh that have been raised about the way that office um has conducted business.

It's very important that the concerns raised through this investigation um are considered as that study is carried out.

Uh, Vice Mayor Bagley provided or led the effort to provide funding for that study, so she may be able to ensure that the auditor's report is considered by whoever uh carries out that study.

And I strongly encourage you to contact either her or the city manager to make sure that this situation receives the attention it deserves as the city council uh gives uh consideration to some significant changes that really should be made uh in the sheriff's office.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Keith Watson, Mr.

Keith Watson.

Please state your name and your three minutes will begin now.

Thank you for allowing me to speak today.

My name is Keith Watson.

Um, I grew up with Alan Tucker and Betty's Crossroads.

Um Alan was uh friend, a little brother to me.

I watched him he's younger than me.

I watched him grow into a fine young man that should never have to um go through what he had went through right now to be not here with us today because uh police is supposed to protect and serve, they didn't protect him.

He asked for help, they didn't give it to him.

Um I work with children every day with disabilities, autism, behavior issues.

Um, and our our duty is to follow protocol and procedures.

And if I do not follow that proposal and procedure, I would not have a job.

Children when they're in my care, I'm I have a duty to protect them, even when they're in behavior that we have protocols and procedures to initiate techniques and stuff to predict to prevent them from getting hurt if we prevent life life and keep them alive and well, and we then didn't do that for my brother, and the mother's not there have to bury their son.

And it just it's just sad that um our uh uh the Tucker family had the community has lost a very promising young man.

He didn't get a chance to have children, he didn't have the chance to just to grow and prosper as he was already doing before this happened.

Um kind of at loss for words because it's like where's the justice?

Where's the justice for my brother?

Like, I don't understand because police are supposed to protect and serve.

He's he asked to go to the hospital.

That's the first thing they should have done is get him the help that he needed.

And now we have we have to suffer this loss and is hurt because of police negligence.

And then as a fellow black man, I'm on my piece.

I'm I'm watching when I'm driving.

I'm I don't I'm scared to get pulled over because I don't know what could happen.

I'm I'm when I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm on my to on my P's and Q's because it's like uh his life was tragically taken away.

I mean could have just been helped and saved.

And I just uh I just want to say Tuck Gary Dallas, Tuck for Life, Justice for Alan.

Thank you, Mr.

Watson.

Wesley Pope, Wesley Pope.

Please state your name.

Your three minutes begins now.

My name is Wesley Pope.

Um Alan was dear friend of mine, true little brother.

Uh, I seen him grow up and turn into a man that was out here affecting this community, as you can see, uh doing big things.

Um throughout the pain and frustration, I'm not gonna you know keep you know banging the nail on the head with everything that's going on.

I do want to appreciate the people in this council and you all I saw that when you all saw last time that y'all were in the dark about some things, just like we were.

Y'all push the issue.

Y'all didn't turn the blind eye to some things.

I know it's Sony, you know, a small frame that you all can look at, but I appreciate especially, you know.

I'm saying I see that you are pushing and looking for change, and that's really all we can ask for at the end of the day.

Um, we can hurt, we can grieve, but we want change at the end of the day.

We want something to be done.

We don't want this to just go by the wayside, you know.

Uh once again, it's a lot of respect for you all to put yourselves out there and put yourselves in situations that hopefully it continues, and y'all don't let this go by the wayside.

Y'all hold people accountable, even to the you know, extent to the things you can't push those buttons.

It's it's people listening out there.

Somebody knows something that's already going on that can affect some change.

Justice for Allen and peace to the family, to be honest.

Thank you, Mr.

Pope.

Shakia Porter, Shakia Porter.

Please state your name and your three minutes will begin now.

My name is Jaquela Porter, and I'm in front of Alan because of his uncle, his brother.

For the sake of other junior of peace cousiny and stuff, I feel like for deaf people like me, I don't want to see none of my black person in no type of position where they had to protect themselves and as for somebody to kick into the hospital.

Before somebody like me who have disability to be in peace, because she where they can't fight and ask for somebody over and over.

You could talk about it.

I miss you.

Thank you.

You can finish.

You can finish.

I really miss you.

I miss everything that we've been doing, cooking, hanging out and making watching movies.

And every time I see every every news about somebody in peace, custody, something is happening.

I feel like it needs to be a change soon as possible.

For Allen Tucker.

Thank you, Miss Porter.

Victor Glassberg, Victor Glassberg.

Please state your name and your three minutes will begin now.

My name is Vic Glassberg.

Um, I've been practicing civil rights law in this city for 50 years.

I I didn't plan on speaking today.

Um, I wanna respond briefly to uh what I heard from Dana Lawhorn, who is a friend and neighbor, although I have sued him.

Um the auditor's report is entirely correct legally.

She did not overstep her ground.

She made recommendations, in fact, that the capacity of the city to look further than where she can now look, uh, is appropriate.

But there is absolutely no ground in the law for her report to be rejected on the ground that she overstepped.

I think her report is terrific and should be accepted or assessed on the basis of its merits and not on the thought that in one way or another it went into areas where it shouldn't have gone.

It certainly did not.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Glassburg.

Miranda feels Miranda feels yes.

Well, I still didn't plan on speaking because I did speak at the last time, so I know my three minutes start now.

So I have my notes.

And first I wanna say um emergency.

Um, let me get to my notes real quick.

First, I wanna ask why that they, as a police officer, I stressed again the last time the police officer said I did not come to work for this.

For what?

To help a person who's in crisis.

As a sworn police officer, her job is to assist the public in any possible way that she is supposed to.

As a taxpayer, I now feel as though I don't have the confidence to call 911.

If my child, me, my husband, or whoever have a crisis, and I need some help.

Alessandria has in place an emergency custody order.

If a person in crisis or in danger to themselves, she should take them to the hospital.

We say little Alan.

Little Alan did not resist arrest.

He said something was in his apartment.

In his mind, he believed that that right there was an indication something was wrong.

She should have called CIT, but she did not do her job.

Why?

She did not come to work for this.

As a taxpayer, I expect when I call 911, come for help.

If I call the fire department, they're gonna come to my house.

If I call 911, come to my house.

You should not say I didn't come to work for this.

That's where I have a problem at.

Okay.

I also have some notes.

I'm gonna be real quick.

I know my time is running, but um also I want to say that when little Alan went to the Sally port.

I don't know if if all of if Alexandria have turned off your cars in the Sally port, but the deputy should not have to tell you to turn off your car.

But the reason why they couldn't turn off the car was because of this.

They was in two their phones talking about their weekend and everything else.

They was mind their business.

When a person's in crisis, they usually in the jail, they usually put into a holding sale indicator, check every certain amount of time, minutes, whatever.

They did not do that.

They walked off on their phones talking about their weekend.

This right here should not be allowed if you are a police officer and you have an individual in custody.

Um again, there should be continuous monitoring of the person who's in custody without their phone.

And my question is is there gonna be a change for no phones are admitted into the Sally port when you have a person uh in cussy?

A big phone can be like banned for when you have because you have um your radio, your radio, your camera.

You don't need to be on your phone, talk to your mama, talking to your grandpa, talking to your boyfriend, husband, or whoever, talking about the weekend.

I didn't come work for this.

Do your job, use the monitor, don't cover up, don't do none of that.

Just do your job.

So my thing is is this gonna be banned from when you have individuals in custody?

And also when a person asked for help to go to the hospital, can they take them?

Because simple fact, little Alan asked to go to the hospital because he knew he was in crisis.

And a point, and when you were having when you are in crisis in CIT, your job is they should have called CIT for help to show this man was in crisis.

He needed some assistant.

Please come and educate the situation.

But they did not do it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Fields.

Sierra Northley.

Sierra Northley.

Please state your name, and your three minutes begins now.

Good evening.

My name is Sierra Norfleet.

I am a resident of Alexandria City, a member of the Children, Youth and Families Commission, and most importantly, I'm a loved one of Alan Tucker.

I stand before you today, deeply disappointed in Alexander City Police Department.

I understand this has been a long process, but all we have ever asked for was one simple thing.

Justice for Alan Tucker.

Justice delayed is justice denied.

As a resident of the city, how am I supposed to feel safe when the various people sworn to protect and serve fails to protect the lives of people who look like me?

Time and time again, we have witnessed over policing over policing in black communities, the harassment of black students in our schools, and now we have been we have believed is a devastating lack of accountability in the death of Alan Tucker.

So let me ask you a question.

What is the protocol when someone in police custody repeatedly asked to go to the hospital?

Now, let me ask you another question.

What is the protocol when the person is black?

Because from where we stand, it seems like there wasn't one.

A man asked for medical help.

A man said he needed to go to the hospital.

Instead of urgency, there was delay.

Instead of compassion, there was an inaction.

This that is where the system is failed, Alan Tucker.

For generations, black people's pain has been memorized, ignored, and demiss under the dangerous stereotype that we are somehow built to endure more suffering.

Yes, we are strong, but our strength should never be used as an excuse to deny us care, dignity, or humanity.

We are not here asking for special treatment.

We are demanding equal treatment.

We are demanding accountability.

We are demanding justice.

And let me be clear this fight does not end today.

We will continue to show up.

We will continue to speak out.

We will continue to demand justice for Alan Tucker until justice is finally served.

You know the saying no justice, no peace.

I'm not gonna say the rest of it.

But we love you, Tucker.

Thank you, Miss Northleet.

And now Brittany Tucker, Miss Brittany Tucker.

Good evening.

Thank you for having us tonight.

I'm Britney Tucker, Alan Tucker's baby sister.

For the last 10 months, my family has had has not had the opportunity to grieve.

Instead of mourning my brother, we've spent every day fighting to make sure his loss of life isn't written out of history.

This was a grand disaster, a major tragedy.

I still hear my brother's screams when he called to tell me Alan had died.

I still see the pain on my mother's face and hear the heartbreak in her voice every time she speaks about losing her child.

I still feel the hurt and disbelief when I open that evidence box and seen those handcuffs and seatbelt.

What makes this even harder is knowing that this tragedy was preventable?

I like to read a few excerpts.

As a father of, as a father of black sons, I share the fear that police interaction would turn negatively for my own children.

For this reason, I have dedicated my entire adult life to policing because I want to create a better world for my children, family, and all persons.

It is my inspiration as I awake every morning because I desire to see Darren, Dejahn, Isaiah, Camden, and Carter grow up in a society that is better than the one they were birthed into.

We do not have a policing problem or a political problem in our nation.

Some simply lack the humanity and dignity for civil and human rights.

These weren't my words.

They were written by Chief McGuire in his 2021 doctoral dissertation.

These words speak of humanity and dignity, but where was that humanity when Alan repeatedly asked to go to the hospital when he was left kicking and screaming in the back seat of that car?

Officer Chelsea Henry had already had three separate times for insubordination and improper body cam use.

Alan's case becomes a fourth.

If an officer repeatedly violates policies designed for accountability, what corrective action was ever taken?

The investigative report revealed that Officer Henry and Officer McGuinness knew there was a shift change at the detention center upon arrival.

They knew that there would be a waiting time in the Sally Port.

Officer Henry knew Alan had repeatedly asked to go to the hospital.

Officer Henry even discussed with Officer Adam Clements the possibility that Alan might not be medically clear about a detention center nurse.

Yet they chose to let him sit in the backseat of that cruiser instead of taking him to the hospital.

That wasn't a lack of opportunity.

It was a choice, pure negligence.

When Alan's body was finally released to our family, I saw contusions on the side of his head and a bus that lit.

He did not leave the house that way.

Those injuries happened in the back of that police cruiser where the officer stood outside.

Why aren't there police vehicles equipped with interior video?

There needs to be a policy change.

These two officers still have jobs.

They should be criminally charged and at the very least fired.

This was an interagency failure, and everyone involved, including Sean Casey and the sheriff's department, must be held accountable.

Lastly, thank you to Amaratu.

You didn't just witness Alan's death.

You stood beside my family through our darkest days.

You carried the responsibility of uncovering the truth while carrying the weight of our grief.

Thank you for refusing to let Alan's life be forgotten.

Those officers need to be charged and removed from the force immediately.

Justice for my brother, Justice for Alan Tucker.

Thank you, Ms.

Tucker.

Thank you.

We're going to keep moving forward.

That was the last public comment of the evening.

And with the conclusion of the comments and public comment period is hereby closed.

I will now entertain a motion to accept for discussion by the board as submitted the auditor's report in accordance with parliamentary process.

I will recognize each board member in the order that you choose to speak.

And I ask that in the interest of time, that you would please reserve and limit your comments and your commentary and questions to no more than 10 minutes.

The reason for this would be to allow each board member to be able to ask their questions.

So I will entertain that motion.

Again, that motion is for acceptance for discussion by the board as submitted the auditor's report.

Second.

Motion made by vice chair, seconded by member Lewis.

Any discussion?

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

We will move forward.

Who would like to start us out?

Recognize member O'Toole.

Good evening.

That's a lot.

And I have to express my deepest sorrow for the death of Alan Tucker.

And we've listened to you.

We've heard you over the past few months.

I feel like we've gotten to know you a little better.

And I sorry is seems very minimal, but deepest sympathies to you all.

It is never taken lightly as a city, as a board, as a community that we lose somebody in this manner.

So again, uh, we appreciate your patience during this process.

I can't imagine how difficult this has been.

And Amoretto, I want to thank you for all the diligence and dedication during this process.

Kept it all together.

So my name is Gene O'Toole.

I've been a member of the board since since its inception uh in 2021.

I am an ad hoc member of the board.

I am the retired law enforcement member of the board.

So just to give you a little context, I had 35 years in law enforcement, both with the park police and then at the Smithsonian.

And of that time, about 30 years of that was in supervision.

And Ms.

Jones, you said it in your very first remarks.

The report to me has uh a glaring error or missing part, and that's inadequate supervision.

And these officers, five years, five years, four years, the sergeant, 20 years.

And Alan asked to see a supervisor.

And when the supervisor got there, the officers, officer one asked him for guidance, and his guidance was to send them to the jail and expedite go lights and sirens.

Seeing his condition, seeing that Alan was seeing hallucinating, he was obviously in some sort of a crisis, whether it was intoxication, I believe based on what we saw, it was more than that.

Um, so I really do think that this represents a failure supervision.

Supervisors are held to a higher standard and are there to ensure that employees under their command are making decisions in the best interest of the people they serve, the city and the police department.

And this did not happen in this case, as we have heard this evening.

Um, I think a couple of points for Amoretto to reconsider is did you consider the sergeant's performance to be appropriate and acceptable?

Um we do have in the report that there was a detox center.

The sergeant's supposed to know these policies, supposed to know about disinformation.

There was never any recommendation to send him to that detox center.

Um, and then sent them to the jail lights and sirens, broke broke off and didn't follow them there and never followed up for 45 to 50 minutes on how's it going over there?

You know, I mean, I think there's some leadership strong leadership gaps here.

So I would um opine that divide there's a violation of general conduct and performance standards, and also that um from Alexandria's own policies that supervisors must be accountable for all employees under their immediate control according to Directive 2.206.

So I guess more comments than questions, M Redo and I would request that more information be given on the sergeant's performance because I think it was lacking.

Thank you.

Who would like to go next and asking questions or making comments on the presentation as well as public comment?

Yes.

Would like to recognize Secretary Suzanne.

Um first, I would like to um thank everyone for their comments.

It was very hard to hear, and I thank your strength in sharing that in terms of the emotional impact, the your desire to see things improve for others.

Um it was moving.

Your counsel, your ability to walk with the family and with us throughout this process and your patients as we have asked questions, um, and you have provided answers.

I think one thing I would like to follow up on, and it's to the point of making sure this doesn't happen again and making sure that policies are followed.

Um I made a note of it uh to say I believe it's Ms.

Alexander who said policies are only meaningful when they are followed.

Can you you cited a number of policies in your report?

Um one of which, and I don't want to miss state here, but one of which was when medical uh attention is requested, the officer is to take them to the hospital.

That is very clear.

I mean, it does not say urgent care, it does not say medical screening, it says to the hospital.

Can you speak to how officers are trained in these policies?

Or you say, you know, member of Tool noted that the sergeant is supposed to be aware of them and it's supposed to be able to communicate, but there are a number of policies.

I have looked at them online.

The police directives are listed, and I would like to say to me that is in the spirit of transparency and accountability, if they're correct.

But in looking at them online, I noticed there was a policy on the Alexandria detoxification detox detoxification center, um, which it does not sound like it's applicable anymore.

And so how are officers?

Do you have a sense?

You've recommended refresher training, but do you have a sense of what training they get now, how frequently are there compliance checks?

For example, the body won cameras, um, or is it when an event happens?

So that's my first question.

Multi-part apologies.

All good.

Um so I know that officers that are on APD are expected to not just know the policies but adhere to them, right?

And that is all policies.

Uh, and I also know that all officers receive CIT training, crisis intervention training, where they address how to um respond to individuals experiencing mental health or medical health emergencies.

Um as for the detoxification center mention in the policy, that is something that I raised um during the course of my investigation to the police department asking why that diversion didn't happen.

That is when I did learn that the um the talk the detox center has closed in Alexandria during COVID, but there is a memorandum of understanding with Arlington.

Um I can say that in my review, I did uh one of my recommendations is a full revision of the policy, review and then training plan to make sure that um officers not only know of the current um diversion policy, but also how to med how to assess or make medical judgments, and so that is one of my systemic um or one of my organizational uh recommendations is for APD not only uh to revise the policy, but to either provide training in a standalone training or to integrate it with the CIT training that all officers already receive.

Is a follow-up, are you aware of compliance testing by the police officers again the body worn camera?

So we found out that this was not followed because of the because there was an investigation, but in other cases we're not clear on how often officers are actually following the policy.

So are you aware of how often spot checks or compliance is tested?

I I am actually not aware.

I do know that in some jurisdictions they do what they call uh random audits of of body worn camera, and so they learn a violations that way.

Um, the reason why I uh recommended a full uh sort of a full training for all officers involved uh at APD for the are sorry, employed by APD for the uh body worn camera policy is because all three officers in this uh uh case muted their body worn camera uh when they were unauthorized to do so, and they also did not articulate any justification as to doing so.

So, being that all three officers that were involved muted their body worn camera, regardless of their uh amount of years of service on uh the force it being four to five, it's important that they know the requirements, and so that's why I made that that recommendation.

I may have some other questions later, but I will turn to others.

You still have time with your 10 minutes if you'd like to.

I appreciate I might come back if that's okay.

That's fine.

I'm gonna look down this end of the table.

Anyone over here have any questions, comments?

Time again.

Thank you.

I would like to take a moment to acknowledge both the Turkish family and Ratu.

To the Turkey family, uh, want to thank you for your courage, patience, and willingness to continue participating in toward this difficult process.

I recognize that no report, recommendation, or board action can replace your loved one or erase your pain.

Your testimony has reminding all of us that behind every policy, every investigation, and every recommendation is a human life and a family that continue to live with the consequences of that loss.

Thank you for the significant work and professionalism that went into this investigation.

I appreciate the time you spend meeting with me and answering my question.

It is clear that this report will present a substantial effort to examine the fact, the applicable policy and the broader sequence surrounding this incident.

As a board member, I view our responsibility as larger that determine what happened in one case.

This case reveal opportunity to strengthen about policy, improve operational practices, enhance accountability, and rebuild public trust.

We owe that not only the Turkish family, but to every member of our community, and to the officer who serve our city.

Thank you to everyone who has participated in this process and share the perspective.

Your voice are an important part of our work.

And that we continue to inform our deliberation.

Just two questions.

The first one is Amoratu.

If you had the authority to implement only one reform tomorrow, which reform would have the highest probability of preventing a similar death.

The second one is five years from now, if Alexandria experienced another in custody death with seeming effect.

Thank you.

Jules, I appreciate those questions.

And I'll start with the first one.

Can you can you repeat the first question though?

And I'll take them one at a time.

Sure.

The first one is if you have the authority to implement only one reform tomorrow, which reform will have the highest probability of preventing a similar death.

Thank you.

First, uh I would stick to my recommendation about the full revision and training plan on the medical transport, I mean on the medical care for arrestees and prisoner transport policy.

Um in my opinion, you could take the off you could switch the officers out, and we would still see a failure here because of because of the uh uh violation of that policy.

Um the reason why I think it's important for APD um to support officers with that medical judgment decision is because they are not trained medical professionals, and therefore making it clear to them that if someone makes a um request for medical assistance, that must be strict strictly followed, and you must take them to the hospital as your policy states.

Uh, second um in that revision and training, it officers should be aware of all diversion options, um, whether it's a detoxification center, whether it's um APD exploring a partnership with fire and EMS to call them out to perform medical screening.

Uh, my point is, and as I stated during my uh presentation, uh we need to have less reliance on just officers' uh assessment of the medical need and give them support for when they need to use that discretion.

And so if I were to recommend one thing that could be that could be uh recommended and changed tomorrow, it would be the full revision and training plan on the medical transport policy to ensure that this doesn't happen again.

Um, five years from now, I do hope that the city reconsiders either re-establishing or uh reopening the detoxification center as a diversion option, because jail is not uh the appropriate place for someone to go if they are experiencing a medical emergency.

It needs to be a hospital or somewhere where people are trained uh to screen that person and ensure that they're they're not going to uh experience harm in any way and then provide them with treatment.

Um, and also as a city, I do believe that we, you know, believe in treating people as human beings and that detoxification center goes towards that very end.

That's probably why we had it in the first place.

Now I understand its usage going down during COVID.

You know, less people are out, less people are probably uh, you know, getting less people are out, there's less of a need for it.

Um but now that we are through COVID, we are on the other side of COVID, and people are going back out, people are enjoying their time with their friends.

We need to make sure that if they are in encounters with uh Alexandria police department officers uh that they receive the medical care or the detoxification services that they need in order to make sure that they're safe before we even take them to the jail.

Thank you.

Any other board members with questions, comments?

Chair recognizes member Lewis.

Thank you.

I can go next.

Um first let me just add my own personal addition uh of expression of condolences to the family.

Uh as the auditor said, this process for us, uh what we're empowered to do is about accountability and transparency and prevention.

But your testimony uh from the community today uh emphasized why we are here about accountability transparency prevention, that's because of the humanity of the people involved in the incident, whether it's Alan or folks who are in the same situation in the future.

So thank you for your public comments today.

Um just run through um because I think the auditor did an excellent job with the report.

Um there's some great recommendations in there.

Um just reacting to both the public hearing uh and the report combined.

Uh I I will just say I have I have great comfort with the um uh with the level of involvement and recommendations around the sheriff's office and the report.

Um I don't think uh any lines were crossed here, a call for um independent investigation.

There's already an investigation inside the the agency, although we haven't seen it.

Um interagency coordination, I think is appropriate when we're dealing with an incident that uh involves actual the actual point of interagency coordination, a handoff of custody.

So um, so I'm comfortable with with that.

Um the uh I also want to say thank you, um Ronchi, for the recommendation on uh on us as a oversight system, your your office, us uh as a board on um this our first incident and reviewing um timelines, processes your final recommendation was about our own processes.

I think that's important for transparency.

We heard comments around um concerns of the length of time that this took from from death to now.

And um, and I think this is a good chance with our first incident here that we've reviewed to look at uh how we can um for a matter of transparency, be very clear about the timelines.

And I think you know, we saw with our own meetings questions as we've been going through for the first time.

So I think that'll be a good review for us going forward, and hopefully that will engender greater trust from the community around expectations on how long this should take, whether this one took too long, or whether this was appropriate, and and we can kind of dig into that process-wise after this one's done.

Uh there was a point about transparency that was also made in uh public comment around the history of misconduct, uh, this being a repeat incident.

Um with the um uh with the body cameras uh for one of the officers.

Um did you look at Amirtu uh and consider um uh that there are policies we should be looking at around transparency with um not just this incident but the track record of officers um or is there a reason why you didn't go there with your your recommendations.

Are you asking um just to make sure I have an understanding of your question, why I didn't recommend um also I guess uh bringing into light the the officers' internal histories?

Not this particular officer, not the specifics of officers, but is there greater transparency that we should be looking at around officers' uh track records generally, not these officers.

But it's been brought up that uh in in the public hearing that there uh is a need to track or or uh report on uh is that something we can do?

Is it something you thought about?

Uh yeah.

I wasn't looking to get into a specific officer's that's okay.

Yeah, um, I I mean I can say that um ABD mantains an internal file on all officers um uh in every investigation of miscon or of into misconduct.

Um as for what our office will do, um, we will also have public facing dashboards on complaint data.

So type of complaints that we receive or investigations that we've completed um and then track the data that way um to say, you know, under this, under this uh incident, we saw violations of the medical uh care for arrestees policy or the or the uh prisoner transport policy.

I think we will keep it at a systemic level, sort of tracking whether that poll whether our recommendations are implemented.

I mean, I can recommend discipline, right?

I can review the officers' internal histories and consider them when I recommend discipline.

However, that final authority stays still with Chief Chief McGuire.

So yeah.

Well, I just might suggest that if we were to if the board uh looks for other action, whether it's uh a revision of the report or or our own review of policies, this might be a policy that we could review of the APD, uh, again in the spirit of transparency around how are they tracking internally?

Is this something is there a version of that that could be shared with the board uh regularly?

They've shown us other statistics on um incidents year to year without sharing identities of officers.

So it that's the sort of thing I had in mind.

Um sorry, I'll try to move quickly.

I know I have limited time.

Um Rachel, can you talk to the limitation of the report uh to the scope of the four sections that you described, you know, from uh the call to the call of response to the to the uh premises all the way through to the last the fourth section being the um the medical emergency.

We've heard public hearing today about concerns about officer conduct during the investigation of this incident, uh most notably the return of cufflinks uh cuffling uh cut uh handcuffs and seatbelts, and uh is a reason why that is not a part of that part of the timeline is not a part of the fuller investigation.

Yes.

Um so the returning of the property, I believe was uh attributed to detective, uh a detective named trainer.

Um detective trainer is actually not a member of the Alexandria police department.

That is a detect he's a detective for for the cert team.

He he was the lead investigator for the cert team.

And so that is why his conduct is not analyzed in my report because it is limited to officers of the Alexandria police department.

Um that's why.

I think that's an important distinction.

Yes.

Um who has oversight over out of jurisdiction cert officials?

I'm if we don't, who does.

So you you can make a complaint, and I can say the the the cert's findings and their investigation are ultimately turned over to the state commonwealth attorney's office.

And so that is where I would direct anyone who uh would like to file a complaint, including the family, uh uh regarding any member of the cert team.

Right.

Conduct professionals and what have you.

Yes.

Last point, I think I still have time.

Uh last point.

Um, I appreciate uh Jean's uh not only uh years of experiences as a law enforcement officer, but her her thoughts on um uh supervision and I'll note your report uh kind of gave an option to the board uh when it comes to the sergeant uh for further review.

Um I'm not I I struggled with how to take that option uh since we don't have investigatory authority as a board, your office does.

Um I don't know if you can elaborate on what further review by the board would look like.

Um, but I appreciate you know Jean's point about uh the choices made by the sergeant as the supervisor in his assessment of uh seeking or not seeking medical care.

Um but uh but how does that work with your recommendation?

Is uh would that just not be a a decision by the board to say you that the report is incomplete, which I know is one of our options.

Uh yeah, I mean the the option actually it comes it comes from the ordinance, right?

Um it's it's not my my recommendation or option that I I left open to the board.

It's to say that in my initial review, I looked at the sergeant's involvement as uh limited to he was requested to the scene and he then responded.

If let's say he did not respond to the scene, that's a violation because you are required as a supervisor to come to the scene.

And so that was my, I guess, very narrow tunnel view of it or uh tunnel assessment of the um the sergeant's involvement initially.

Um but again, I think it it does stand out, right?

When three officers who were following the direction of that uh uh sergeant uh have sustained findings, yet the my initial assessment did not find any policy about policy violations for the sergeant.

Um it actually uh wasn't until my conversation with Jean, uh, who has extensive experience um in law enforcement, um, which I which I respect, and honestly, the skill sets of all of you that make up this board, I think are important to acknowledge in this process.

And so after speaking with Gene and sort of speaking about the responsibilities of a of a supervisor and how it could have affected this uh incident, I encouraged her um to not only raise it during the public hearing, but as a board action, um, one of them being that you can uh uh say that the investigation is incomplete and recommend further review that being the board action on that on that item.

Got it.

Thank you.

So I'd like to recognize Vice Chair Stackhouse.

Me in particular, see you and hear you.

And at times it may not have appeared to be that way, but now is the time for me to be able to say we see you and we hear you.

And my job, indeed, the entire board's job sometimes is to sit and be silent and get ready to ask those questions that you want answers to, but that you don't even know you don't have the answers to.

And so I'm gonna turn to the auditor who's done a fine job with her report as far as her report goes.

But there are some things that are not in the report.

And when Ms.

Jones came to us initially many, many months ago, the first thing she asked for was a change in policy and training.

And she may not remember, but the second thing she asked for was officer accountability.

And I heard you.

So having that in mind and and not being adversarial at all.

Don't want to do that.

Um, I want to turn.

First, I want to say our job is to look at outcomes, protect communities.

Again, it tells us section two-4-221, which is which is our ordinance.

It tells us again, look at outcomes, provide reasonable recommendations.

Then it tells us to go look at your report.

It says for us to review the report, look again at outcomes, uh, behaviors.

Then when we look at your actual report itself, you say in there, this board is gonna look at these outcomes.

We're gonna be thorough, we're gonna be fair, we're gonna be unbiased, and these things are supposed to be transparent.

Now, you did a great job on what's in the report, but what I'm seeing that's not in the report.

Let's turn our attention to page four.

Um, with regard to findings.

Actually, the title of it says uh findings and recommendations.

I'm sorry, it should be page 10.

10.

And I look, it says officer one.

There's findings, there's four of them.

There's no recommendation.

Officer two, there's findings, there's one of them, there's no recommendation.

Officer three, there's findings, there's two of them, there's no recommendation.

So I was kind of thinking it was a misnomer about the about the recommendations, but I'm gonna turn to you and ask you.

Um as of today, right now, the 29th of June, what's the status of those officers?

Officers one, two, and three.

When I say status, I mean with regard to the police department.

So I want to begin um and just first address uh to say there are findings, but no recommendations.

And it's no, and then again, it's not to be adversarial.

Uh it's to say that the recommendation is a sustained finding against the officers uh for AR 620 uh under body one camera and then the the other uh policies that I uh uh identified.

Uh as for the current status of the officers, I noted in my report um that they returned to active duty with full patrol powers once the OPR investigation was completed and the chief completed his review.

So did you make any recommendations about that, about them returning to duty to the police chief?

I did make separate um uh disciplinary recommendations to the police chief.

Um they are not contained in this report, though, because uh my disciplinary recommendations under state FOIA laws are considered um personnel records.

So you made recommendations with regard to correcting bad behavior and enforcing compliance with these rules, but the public doesn't get to know what those are.

Yes, but that is not um a discretionary decision by our office, that is a requirement by state law.

So long story short, we don't know what you recommended.

Um that so when I released the investigative files and materials to the board on May 13th, I also offered to meet with every board member uh to discuss what my investigation would be.

And in those meetings, I did take the liberty of um sharing with the board what my disciplinary recommendations to Chief McGuire are, recognizing that I can't make them public in my report, recognizing that I can't um sort of announce them at a public hearing, but also recognizing that you all need to have that knowledge in order uh to do what your job requires you to do.

I'm tracking that, and I'm I have no issue with what you said.

You're absolutely correct.

That's the that's the information that you had.

And what I'm saying is in a public setting, this family and these folks have no way of knowing what it is that's been recommended to the police chief with regard to correcting bad behavior and enforcing compliance with the rules as you've listed in this report.

There's no public indication of what that is.

Right.

Yeah, uh yes, there's no public indication.

As a board, if there's no public indication of what that is, and we are charged with looking at outcomes, protecting the public, transparency, thoroughness, uh finding out if there's bias, ensuring that police accountability, how are we supposed to do our job if we can't in a public setting have that information?

I appreciate the question, especially as towards um thoroughness.

Uh what I'll say for that is personnel findings are only one part of my investigation.

Um with as as it as it uh applies to thoroughness, everything that um was available to me uh in my investigative file uh was turned over to the board.

And my findings and recommendations address issues at the individual personnel level um at the organizational level, and then at the at the systemic level with the individual level with regard to to what you recommended.

Have your have your recommendations been implemented?

Vice Chair, let me just say too that it is our understanding that we have no role with respect to the handling of personnel matters.

Absolutely.

I I understand we have no, but I agree with you, but that doesn't mean I can't ask her.

That is true.

But it is our understanding that we have no role, yes, ma'am, as it pertains to personnel matters.

And we're it and so that goes to what I was saying, Amaratu.

We're not asking for a role in doing something.

We're only asking, can we know in a public setting what you recommended so we can advise, which is what the which is what the ordinance says for us to do.

So it seems like it's not your fault, but there may be what we call the military, some scenes and gaps and some shortcomings either in our ordinance, because it's been revised, or in what our authority is, maybe that needs to be cleaned up or sharpened or or given some additional uh look at.

What's your thought on that with as with regard to that in this report?

I'll say that is exact that's one of the reasons why I do uh recommend a full review of the MOU in my report is because while we do have certain agreements in the MOU at the local level, and we do have city ordinances, they don't supersede uh the confidentiality requirements under state law.

And so again, this not to not including the uh disciplinary recommendations is not an office decision.

It's it's truly uh governed by state law, and it's making sure that we are compliant uh at all times.

So this is our first case, and I think that as a board, again, we're seeing some of the limits about what it is we can and cannot do, what it is the public can and cannot see, and and your report makes it clear that there is something that we may need some revision on in our MOU and or perhaps in our ordinance.

So either provide more clarity or give more authority, or at least provide guidance on what our authority is, so that we're seeing how this works so that this family can have answers to where are these officers now, what are these officers doing now?

It is what the auditor recommended, has that been implemented?

If we can't do that, then perhaps we have an incomplete investigation, or maybe we need to send back and ask for more.

I'm not sure the board will take a look at that.

But I I appreciate how you've worked on it, and I appreciate how you've taken a lot of what we said in consideration in your report.

Uh, the last thing that I will comment on is um or ask you a question about, because I'm a little confused myself.

Um, I too got the the press release or whatever was released by the sheriff's office today.

And did you have any clarity on that?

In other words, I'm asking it it says in there that there was this a cert, and then let me read it so I don't get hit with some kind of lawsuit or something.

Um it says on here critical incident response team investigation into Mr.

Tucker's death.

Um the investigation found no criminal wrongdoing on the part of the Alexandria police department or Alexandria Sheriff's Office personnel.

Then when I come back to your report, you say that you looked or or you did look at the cert report.

Did you see any mention in the cert report to your recollection of any cooperation or anything with the sheriff's office?

The only thing that I am aware of um between the cert team and you know, the the sheriff's department is that the sheriff's office did turn over a video um of the Sally Port area, which which they released in their uh uh press statement is I mean press release today as well.

Um, as it uh in terms of whether the cert findings also exonerate uh the the sheriff's deputies, that is something that I did not see in the cert report from to my understanding, the cert team um um found no criminal liability for the APD officers involved.

Um, and that was the limit of what they of their jurisdiction, to my knowledge.

Thank you so much.

Thanks for uh a very good report and thanks.

Uh we probably would would request your help, being that this is our first case, and we're able to see what our limitations are, or we're running up against some in terms of getting some information in a public sphere uh that we may have to take a look at and have city council look at again, not only for us but for clarity for the family and the public.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Um I'd like to bring this back around to member Suzanne Berkeley.

Did you have follow-up questions you wanted to ask?

Thank you.

I did want to just kind of follow up on the point of what's not included in the report, and I do appreciate you saying we need to relook at the MOU because I do think it speaks to our role.

Um, I guess per um member stockhouse's comments, I do think it would be appropriate or perhaps the board could re-look at the language in the ordinance with others as well, because it does speak to, and I'm just gonna read it here, evaluate policing practices, policies, procedures, and outcomes.

Now, Sandria issue findings to the public and provide actionable recommendations to the city council, city manager, Alexandria independent policing auditor, the school board's school superintendent, APD, and other public agencies.

And to that point, I do think it speaks to interagency coordination, and so it falls within scope.

But then it says regarding appropriate discipline, policing practices, policies, and procedures in Alexandria.

So that is within the ordinance and not just the MOU.

So I take member Staff House's point um in looking at this further.

Um I I did want to follow up on a couple of other smaller points if we have a moment.

And one within the public comments, I heard concern about the police officers looking at their phones.

I will say when I have done a ride-along, I saw a police officer looking at their phone, but I saw it more in terms of their job responsibilities.

Did you look at, or was there any look at what they were looking at?

Were they trying to continue to do their police work during that time?

Or was it or was that just we're not sure?

We're not sure.

Um, and we can't see the off, we don't have a view of the officers' phones from the body worn camera.

So we're not sure what why they were on their phones or what they were doing at the time.

Okay.

I just wanted to address that since I did hear that within the public comment.

Um I also wanted to ask.

So the term disorderly conduct or um was used and running code.

And I think it would be helpful for everybody to understand is that typically used, does that give priority?

What should that mean?

So uh disorderly clock conduct is is some of the things I mentioned earlier, screaming, yelling, um, kicking.

Um, and the reason why that was communicated to the sheriff's department is was to ensure that they have support readily available as soon as the officers uh uh arrive to the jail.

Uh it's my understanding, and during the course of my investigation, I learned that it is an expectation uh once the police department communicates that they have a disorderly individual and they are en route to the Sally Porton and Adult Detention Center that they will be met with full support from the uh sheriff's deputies because you as you can imagine, someone who's disorderly, you may need some extra people to help get them inside the jail.

And so in signaling to that to the jail, um my uh understanding is that they expected to be met uh with a prompt response from from sheriff's deputies when they arrived though, that was not the case.

As you know, they were met with a shift change um that lasted about 45 minutes.

But is there a separate terminology or separate directive to indicate medical concern?

I you you referenced the sheriff's um guidance, it wasn't official policy, I don't think about intake and and whatnot is there is there separate terminology or is there generally communication if there is a concern?

So I I can't speak to why Mr.

Tucker was arrested for public intoxication.

Umication that went out to the to the sheriff's department that was a decision made um by the officer, um, and and then also on the advice of the supervisor to run code um and and let them know that they have a disorderly individual.

I think just based on established practice and the understanding that when you have a disorderly individual going to the jail, they'll be met with a prompt response.

I think that is what prompted the notification in that way.

But um, what I to my understanding, no, they did not communicate uh a medical emergency uh to the jail.

Do you think that, and I know this is a subjective question, but do you think that could be useful in terms of a change in terminology or code or um to say disorderly possible cause of to help one facilitate whether they are accepted into intake, whether they are met with this with additional support.

Um I mean, I'm I'm hesitant to speculate, right?

On on what would help and what won't.

What I do, what I am very um um confident about is my again recommendation to support the officers with their decision making by either retraining them under the med medical um care for arrestees policy and the prisoner transport policy, but also make uh making sure that they have an available option through the Alexandria fire department to do that assessment for them if they are unsure whether someone's going to be experiencing medical distress.

Thank you.

Chair recognizes member Tomigay.

Thank you.

Um we are working on updating the MOU, and I do have some question on that.

Um Ratu.

Wait, any limitation during your investigation that reduce your ability to fully evaluate this case?

Um I I can say no.

I mean, I have full access to APD systems records, evidence.

I have full access to their personnel.

And so at no point did I feel um like I didn't have enough evidence before me to reach the the conclusions that I did.

Um that includes access to the full cert file, um, that includes access to the the piece of evidence that the the sheriff's office submitted uh regarding the the video of the Sally port, which is why I was able to also identify a gap, right?

In access, because we don't have any access to the reports or the internal investigations that occurred there, and to address that uh the concern uh that was raised earlier that that could be a slippery slope.

Um, you know, my recommendations towards the sheriff's office.

I I want to remind everyone that public safety, everyone is a stakeholder in it.

It's not just police, it's the community and it's the partners that work with police as well, and that includes the sheriff's department.

Um that's what I'll say.

Thank you.

Um my next question is Did you receive timely access to all the information necessary to conduct a complete investigation?

So as soon as the cert investigation uh was completed, both APD and I had um access to uh the cert the cert evidence in the cert file.

Um as APD completed its investigation as well, I had access to those records.

Umce they were once it was complete, there was a miscommunication as to when their internal investigation um was final versus uh you know a draft report.

Um I do now understand that the process is that OPR um does an internal investigation and recommends findings and and recommendations, but those findings and recommendations are not final until they are reviewed by Chief McGuire and approved by Chief McGuire.

Um and so once that process was completed, I was they turned over the full investigative file, including the CERT um investigation and the OPR um internal internal files as well to me for my assessment.

Promise is my last question.

Okay.

And in regard to talking about a recommendation the findings, um since it is our first case.

I can repeat a question.

Okay.

You talked about a recommendation and defining that you did, and you made to the city and the chief of police.

If those new policies or training are implemented, what metrics should the city use to gauge whether those changes are actually improving the outcome?

I think it would take uh it would take uh a deeper look into uh the amount of people who do request uh uh medical care or treatment on on their way to the jail or um looking at uh the medical the amount of medical assessments uh that are given to people who are arrested for public intoxication.

Um so I I think by I think the metrics of maybe measuring um how many people request medical care on their way to the jail and and how many of those requests are actually uh honored, um, how many requests to go to the jail, uh I mean, sorry, how many requests to go to the hospital are um sort of deferred or um uh replaced for a preference of going to the jail, having the medical screening, getting the rejection, and then using that as the direction to go back to the hospital.

I mean, I think there's a number of metrics, but I think uh ultimately it's uh it's that is is measuring the amount of people who are in medical need um after being arrested and how APD responds to that.

And for the record, you understand that the reason why I'm asking this because we need to find ways to measure success from this first case.

Absolutely, and then and I just want to say, you know, the ordinance does say that this board uh and the auditor analyzes patterns and practices, right?

That shouldn't though be limited to complaint complaint data.

It should stretch um to data that does tell the full story.

And so in the spirit of your question, right, um, looking at metrics uh uh for those in medical need and and seeing if they are actually taken to the hospital, seeing how effective it is to take them to the jail and rely on the medical screening if it is if it is a reliable um process, but also but we won't know that until we actually um intentionally measure it.

I grant you this.

And you remember when we sat down and we asked this question and asked specifically for this data.

There's none at this moment.

Is that correct?

You can just for the cricket.

Right.

Uh so uh the APD does not currently collect that data um and and that that data is not currently available for for uh publication or you know, released to the public.

And that's that's what I'll say on that.

I did ask on on your behalf, Gio Jules, and that was the uh answer I was given.

Is there any way that in the future we can have those access to those data?

I think that's something that we would uh more appropriately discuss during the MOU discussion, right?

What our office has access to, what the board has access to, and our further defined rules.

Um, but as for uh well, yeah, that's what I'll say.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um I would just like to ask the auditor just a couple of questions.

Uh, did you notice if there is a policy or even a recommendation from you for what a defined interval check would look like, right?

For APD, if someone is in custody of APD and they're in custody with for a certain amount of time.

Is there a policy that there should be regular checks to see if they're okay?

And if there isn't, did you make a recommendation for such?

I think that falls all under the sort of the large catch-all of AR-620 um that app that applies to all uh city employees, but in the officers in this case, it measures their performance uh and duty.

And part of that is a duty of care to the and uh to the individuals that they have in that in their custody.

Um I forget the second half of your question, I'm sorry.

Pardon?

What was the second part of the question?

No, that was the question.

Okay, yeah.

But well, I guess the other part was is there a recommendation then from you?

I think it's hard um to set a standard for how often officers should check on someone because each situation will be different.

Um, you might have someone who displays different signs of of medical distress.

Um, so it could be looking at data again, right?

And seeing how often people need to be checked on that way, but it's hard to sort of opine on that right now because each situation will be different.

Understood.

Last question from me would be we've talked about patterns, right?

And looking at behavior.

There was a moment on the body worn camera where it seemed as if all of the officers in unison went on mute.

Is have you seen in your investigation the muting of body worn camera?

Is that a pattern at the Alexandria Police Department?

I can say that um I have I do regularly meet with the uh uh Office of Professional Responsibility.

And so I I do get a full view, right, of the active investigations going on.

And so I don't want to speak to any active investigations, but it is a trend that I identified um uh at least especially in this case with the alarming uh muting of of all of them in unison.

Um so instead of sort of waiting for the next complaint or waiting for the next uh uh critical incident, it's important to address that issue now, meaning I found a violation for all of the officers involved here.

Uh, and so here is how we can improve um uh training on this policy to make sure that officers are well informed on body worn camera usage because at the end of the day, it's a tool for transparency.

It not only protects, I mean the officers to figure out what happened, you know, what what's involved, but it tells the true story uh for people who are arrested or are in encounters with officers when it comes time to either file a complaint or um if there's any criminal investigation or anything like that.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Okay, I I failed to introduce this is uh Cynthia Hudson, uh, who is independent counsel for the board.

She is supporting us in this process specifically tonight.

So you may see me leaning over and and offering and asking questions of her.

Um I think we are at the moment, it is 853.

And we're at the moment where as a board, we need to decide if we are prepared to make a decision and to vote regarding the auditor's investigative report.

It seems as though there's been discussion around additional investigation being asked for.

So I guess I would ask for a motion and then we can discuss where we are right now.

But there seems to have been discussion around additional investigations around leadership specifically.

So I would entertain a motion for the board to make a decision about additional investigations regarding the auditor's investigative report.

Or neither.

Or any of the other right.

We have four options before us to concur and to advise that the information is not supported and further review or action is needed.

Additional investigation is needed.

Our fourth option is referral, recommending referral of the complaint or investigation to the Commonwealth's attorney's office.

So those being our four options, which were in the slides, page 16 and the ordinance and the MOU.

But we would entertain, I would like to entertain a motion.

Madam Chair, prior to entertaining your mind, your the motion that you're asking about, I'm just going to take a moment of privilege as a vice chair, and I'm going to just look at the board and say, do we have enough information?

I mean, that's what you guys are.

You guys, that's inappropriate.

That's what we would all be considering if we have enough information.

Is there something else?

Is that correct, ma'am?

Are we going to be asking Emirati to do something else or go get some more information?

Or so that's what the question is.

Yes, because one of the four options would ask for additional investigation.

So that would be asking the auditor to go back and to provide more information, investigation on the things that were mentioned and brought up this evening.

Do we feel we're prepared for a vote?

I would entertain discussion around that.

Do we feel like we're ready?

Are we prepared to vote?

If it's pleased to the chair as the vice.

I'm I'm I'm I for me am inclined to say no, because I there's some unanswered questions, not only for me, but I would imagine unanswered questions.

And we may not get answers to them, but there's no reason that we can't ask them.

But I would also imagine for the for the public and for the family, there's still some unanswered.

Here is another the other option that we have because we are close to close time.

It's 8 56.

Uh, the timing for this meeting is to end at nine o'clock.

So without uh time to even further discuss uh and take action on the auditor's report.

I will entertain a motion to continue this meeting to our next regularly scheduled meeting, which is on Wednesday, which is July 1st, where we will conclude board discussion of the report and then take action to reach a decision for the report, which means this meeting would go in recess, it would not adjourn.

Uh, and the rest of the discussion would happen.

That meeting is virtual, so everyone can participate and join without having to show up again.

You could actually just log in because the meeting itself will be virtual, but that would be another option.

It pleases the chair motion to recess the meeting for one July.

Motion has been made by vice chair.

Is there a second?

Is there a second?

I second it.

Motion seconded by member Tommy Gay.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

So we have majority vote to recess this meeting, and we will continue uh Wednesday, July 1st.

That meeting start time is 6 p.m.

6 p.m.

virtually.

Yes, and if for anyone who needs to uh find more information on that meeting, it is on the city calendar uh and city website.

Thank you all for attending.

Yeah.