DENVER | A day after a former Minneapolis police officer was convicted in the killing of George Floyd, Colorado lawmakers advanced legislation Wednesday to tighten standards set by a sweeping police accountability law adopted last year following protests over Floyd’s murder.
The bill, sponsored by Democratic Reps. Leslie Herod and Serena Gonzales-Gutierrez, seeks to encourage officers to use their body cameras; strengthen investigations of use of force incidents; and promote “de-escalation techniques” in police encounters with citizens.
The measure aims to deter and avoid police shootings and other deadly uses of force by increasing accountability and sanctions required of officers and their departments.
Such incidents have taken a disproportionate number of Black lives across the country.
“If yesterday’s verdict suggests complacency, I’m here to tell you my drive is opposite,” Gonzales-Gutierrez told the House Judiciary Committee about the need for continued accountability work.
The panel referred the bill to the House Appropriations Committee by a 7-4 party-line vote.
Last year’s law “was a direct answer to the community’s cries for accountability” — a long and ongoing process, Herod said. She pledged to keep working with law enforcement agencies on their concerns but objected to testimony that insinuated she and Gonzales-Gutierrez hadn’t done so relentlessly.
“A just system would be George Floyd still alive. A just system would be Elijah McClain with his mother,” Herod said. “We must continue to work to make this system better because people are dying.”
As protests over Floyd’s killing engulfed downtown Denver last June, the Legislature overwhelmingly passed a bill co-sponsored by both lawmakers that, among other things, required all officers to use body cameras by July 2023, banned chokeholds, limited potentially lethal uses of force and removed qualified immunity from police, potentially exposing officers to lawsuits for their actions in use of force cases.
The 2020 law also barred police from using deadly force against suspects they believe are armed unless there is an imminent threat of a weapon being used. It required officers to intervene when seeing use of excessive force by colleagues and to report such cases to superiors.
It also required the public release of unedited footage from body cameras within 21 days of the filing of misconduct complaints. Grand juries under the law are required to release reports when they decide against charging officers accused in deaths.
Herod and Gonzales-Gutierrez want to strengthen the law by removing qualified immunity from Colorado State Patrol officers, who frequently work with local law enforcement. They want checks on police applicants, and those with histories of misconduct would be posted to a state misconduct database. They want multiagency investigations of some use of force cases and to grant the attorney general’s office subpoena power to initiate its own probes — or appoint administrative law judges to investigate such cases.
The bill would immediately require use of body and dash cams in as many circumstances as possible, including during welfare checks that, witnesses testified, often involve mental health crises and can turn violent.
With certain exceptions, “You should have that body cam on, all the time,” Herod said.
Most visibly, the bill would require the use of “de-escalation techniques” such as verbal persuasion, waiting out rather than pursuing a suspect, and calling in backup or social workers in certain encounters when an officer’s life isn’t immediately threatened.
Proponents say such techniques could have prevented numerous deaths, including that of McClain, a 24-year-old Black man who died in 2018 after being confronted by police in suburban Aurora responding to a citizen’s call about a “suspicious” person in their neighborhood.
A handful of skeptics objected to the bill’s mandate that officers consider de-escalation options before turning to proportionate force, if necessary, in situations that quickly can, and frequently do, change for the worse.
Ronald Sloan, representing the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, said the bill risks creating a mindset among officers of “I can’t use force. I have to do everything in my power not to use force. And that is a deadly formula for officers.” Herod insisted the bill’s definitions on use of force were crafted largely in response to demands for clarity from law enforcement.
Rebecca Wallace, senior staff attorney for the ACLU of Colorado, called the bill a balanced measure that provides due process for officers accused of excessive use of force — and allows those exonerated of such charges to keep their police certifications.
The state patrol supports the removal of qualified immunity for its officers, Mike Honn, the agency’s legislative liaison, told the committee, saying it will place CSP officers on equal footing with local law enforcement.
Unfortunately, the bill already passed paralyzed the police with vague use of force guidelines and potential punishments in a situation where the bill just muddied the water. The bill did not clarify anything. There were already clear guidelines in place established by the Supreme Court. Those guidelines were used against Chauvin with the testimony of other officers to convict him. The vague terminology, invented by Leslie Herod and others who are ignorant of both the legal system and the realities of policing, leave Colorado police officers with no choice but to step back from their jobs. I would love to debate them in a public forum and show you how little they know about their own bill and its effects. Right now, only the cop haters’ narrative is allowed. I am limited to this little platform. Police chiefs are politicians who will not stand up and explain what the legislature has done to the police. In the end, you the public will be the victims. Civilian oversight is fine. Everything should be open to the public eye. But, having people who know nothing and hate the police decide discipline is disastrous. The whole argument is based upon the lie that the whole police system is racist. The legislature has destroyed the chance for real community policing. The public, like the legislature does not understand what is involved in real community policing. The radicals are keeping police officers or former police officers out of any groups that discuss policing. How can you say you want transparency when you are afraid of the other side of the argument. A big lie that they keep from being exposed by screaming racism.
The 2020 law which Leslie Herod sponsored wasn’t just about increasing accountability, it was also about making it legally questionable for a police officer to use reasonable levels of force in self defense. She dishonestly claims to be working with law enforcement.
You can support reform while demanding that reform be fair. Leslie Herod is not interested in being fair.
I have to agree that any rational person, law enforcement or not would hold improvements are desirable. The problem as I see it is that the woke left thinks that you can control violent situations without any deterrents. They say you cant use rubber bullets, chemical restraints, tasers, batons, night sticks – you can’t be in pursuit. So when someone calls the police… for child abuse, rape, violent crimes, gang and all the problems that prompt a 911 call- a cop or better several show up. Now what? Lets talk them down? I think every politico should put on a uniform and go to the peaceful “riot” and then say you can come in and cum ba ya them into going to the pot store for brownies. Get the squad to roll up their sleeves and get on the front lines for more than a photo op… work all day to feed, clothe and see what the “laws ” they propose actually cause. Let the kids fight to the death? Let multi crime criminals drive away- or take a officer’s gun, get shot and let them go? We don’t need police we need a return to the old west… every one shoot it out. Oh I forgot only criminals will still have weapons. Otherwise you need to change the criminal attitude that they can get out of jail free and can fight and kill a policeman because it is their “right”.. Or you support the FACT that the bad person DOES NOT want to be taken in and WILL resist to the danger of anyone that wants to take them in… and unfortunately sometimes they gets shot resisting. Look at almost every incident…RESISTING arrest. And they are victims? What about the people affected by the crimes they commit? Justice is equal… but the person we hire to get it for us and protect us is forced not to be able to do the job.. so yes lets get rid of all the cops OR Let them do their job AND SUPPORT THEM!