The leader of the District police union is chafing at a D.C. Council bill that would require police officers to be served with subpoenas at their homes.
“The disclosure of police officers’ home addresses endangers not only the officers but their families,” said Fraternal Order of Police Chairman Kristopher K. Baumann.
The bill, scheduled to go before the council’s Judiciary Committee next week, would require the attorney general to serve officers with subpoenas at their homes. It says the attorney general must try to serve the officers at police stations three times before turning to a judge and getting the officers’ addresses.
Officers are routinely subpoenaed to testify in criminal cases, civil suits and misconduct investigations. A 2003 report by the Council for Court Excellence found that up to 600 officers per day were appearing in D.C. courtrooms.
Council Member Phil Mendelson, D-at large, is sponsoring the legislation. He says officers are “ducking” subpoenas, especially in misconduct investigations.
“I’m not interested in publishing their home addresses, and if that’s what the union is saying, they would just be confusing the debate,” Mendelson said. “They shouldn’t be about protecting officers from a legitimate fact-finding process.”
Baumann says it has been a bad couple of weeks for the D.C. Council. Another crime bill was stripped of mandatory minimum sentences for possessing armor-piercing bullets, often called “cop killers,” he said.
The two bills are a collective insult to police officers, Baumann said. “Who’s served by this legislation?”
Mendelson says Baumann and the union are “rushing to judgment.”
“The whole point of the legislative process is that we have a hearing and explore the pros and cons,” Mendelson said. “I’m anxious to see the bills get through the council, but … there should be a careful vetting.”
