The Civilian Office of Police Accountability (COPA), the Police Department, and the Police Board have different roles. The responsibility to receive complaints of alleged misconduct by Chicago police officers rests with COPA. Depending on the nature of the allegations, either COPA or the Police Department's Bureau of Internal Affairs will investigate the complaint. The Board’s role is to decide those disciplinary matters that are filed with the Board.
The Police Board decides disciplinary matters involving allegations of serious misconduct made against members of the Chicago Police Department. The Board has the responsibility to:
See Allegations of Police Misconduct: A Guide to the Complaint and Disciplinary Process and other Police Board publications for detailed information.
Section 2-84-030 of the Municipal Code of Chicago requires the Police Board to post on this website its Findings and Decisions in disciplinary cases. Below are the Findings and Decisions decided in:
Go to the Archives for the Findings and Decisions of cases decided in previous years.
Currently before the Police Board are the following cases in which the Superintendent of Police has filed charges against a member of the Chicago Police Department (unless otherwise noted below, the Superintendent recommended that the member be discharged from the Chicago Police Department). A copy of the charges filed in a particular case is available by clicking on the case number below. (The public is reminded that the filing of charges is not evidence of guilt. The accused officer is presumed innocent and is entitled to a fair hearing at which the Superintendent has the burden of proving guilt by a preponderance of the evidence.)
The hearings are open to the public. An evidentiary hearing resembles a trial in court, although not as formal; the typical case includes opening statements, witness testimony, and closing arguments. Status hearings typically include the attorneys and the hearing officer addressing various issues in preparation for the evidentiary hearing. TUA = Taken under advisement (the evidentiary hearing is complete and a decision will be forthcoming).
Unless otherwise indicated, hearings are scheduled to begin at 10:00 a.m. and take place in the Board's hearing room in Suite 1220 at 30 North LaSalle Street.
Case Number: Description of Alleged Misconduct--Next Hearing Date
No. 16 PB 2901: Charges related to the Koschman homicide investigation (Supt recommends a one-year suspension)--August 22, 23, & 26 (evidentiary hearing)
No. 16 PB 2908: Charges related to the Laquan McDonald shooting--Date of next status hearing to be determined.
No. 16 PB 2909: Charges related to the Laquan McDonald shooting--TUA
No. 16 PB 2910: Charges related to the Laquan McDonald shooting--TUA
No. 16 PB 2911: Charges related to the Laquan McDonald shooting--TUA
No. 16 PB 2912: Charges related to the Laquan McDonald shooting--TUA
No. 17 PB 2938: Did not transport to the hospital an arrestee in need of treatment (Supt recommends a 120-day suspension)--August 15-16 (evidentiary hearing)
No. 18 PB 2947: Unjustified altercations while off duty and refused to cooperate with investigation--TUA
No. 18 PB 2949: Used deadly force without justification (charges against two officers)--August 8-9 (evidentiary hearing).
No. 18 PB 2950: Charges related to the shooting of Quintonio LeGrier and Bettie Jones--July 8-10 (evidentiary hearing).
No. 18 PB 2951: De-certified as a law enforcement officer due to felony conviction--Superintendent's motion to w/d charges TUA (Respondent resigned from the CPD)
No. 19 PB 2952: Domestic incidents and made false statements (charges against two officers)--June 18-20 (evidentiary hearing)
No. 19 PB 2953: Made false reports--September 12-13 (evidentiary hearing)
No. 19 PB 2954: Made false reports--July 11 (status hearing)
No. 19 PB 2955: De-certified as a law enforcement officer due to felony conviction--August 22 (status hearing)
When the Chief Administrator and the Superintendent of Police do not agree regarding discipline of a Department member, the Chief Administrator shall refer the matter to a member of the Police Board.
The reviewing member shall then resolve the disagreement between the Chief Administrator and the Superintendent, as follows:
The reviewing member must recuse her/himself from any future involvement with such case by the full Police Board.
The decisions of reviewing members are posted below, as required by the COPA ordinance.