S.F. youth groups want more juvenile protections from police

[ad_1] Youth advocates and community groups sent a joint letter to the San Francisco Police Commission on Wednesday requesting that a potential new policy on how police interact with juveniles further limit the use of handcuffs. It also asked that officers default to the least restrictive response possible when dealing with youths.  At present, the…

Photographer

[ad_1]

Youth advocates and community groups sent a joint letter to the San Francisco Police Commission on Wednesday requesting that a potential new policy on how police interact with juveniles further limit the use of handcuffs. It also asked that officers default to the least restrictive response possible when dealing with youths. 

At present, the draft policy gives officers discretion on whether to handcuff youths being taken to non-jail facilities. It allows youths to be handcuffed until a search can be conducted by their preferred gender of officer. Juveniles may also be handcuffed to a stationary object for a maximum of 30 minutes, with room for extensions. There is no other mention of when to use handcuffs.  

The policy has long been planned in group meetings that have included police commissioners and other stakeholders, including the nine groups that signed onto today’s letter

The new version of the policy, which would replace one approved in 2008, takes a more trauma-informed approach than the prior one, but the groups that signed the letter said it does not go far enough.

“We believe that revisions … are long overdue and commend the San Francisco Police Department on its efforts to update this policy,” read the letter, signed by youth groups like Huckleberry Youth Programs, Legal Services for Children, Instituto Familiar de la Raza, and the Public Defender’s Office. 

“However, further revisions are needed, as portions of the current proposed version are out of compliance with the law and out of step with best practices in the field.” 

The groups’ recommendations note the harms of handcuffing youths.

“The [policy’s] procedures for criminal offenses for youth 12 years or older have improved,” the letter reads, but adds that any new policy  “must go further to guide members in pursuing alternatives that are less restrictive than arrest and incarceration.”

At present, the new revisions do include an introductory statement that officers should “strive to take the alternative that is least restrictive to a youth’s freedom of movement,” as long as that is in the youth’s and the community’s best interest. 

[ad_2]

Source: missionlocal.org