Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Police Commission issues mixed findings in Lt. Langford disciplinary hearings; some specifications sustained, others not
Summary
After hearing extensive oral and written evidence and wide public comment, the Police Commission sustained some misconduct specifications against Lieutenant Langford (files C04113 and C04126) and did not sustain others (parts of C04105 and C04113); formal findings will be drafted and discipline considered at upcoming meetings.
San Francisco — The San Francisco Police Commission on Tuesday heard contested disciplinary cases against Lieutenant Langford (files C04105, C04113 and C04126), received extensive public testimony in his defense, and issued mixed findings after deliberation.
During a multi-hour hearing, defense counsel argued that investigators failed to corroborate key allegations in the so-called "Tenderloin incident," that photo-lineup evidence excluded Lieutenant Langford, and that investigators resorted to improper investigatory measures (attempts to obtain private phone records and a credit check). Department counsel countered that multiple officers placed a vehicle and description matching Langford's Escalade in the Tenderloin area shortly after the reported kidnapping of Christina Gomez and that other evidence (a subsequent civil complaint and other witness testimony) supported the department's allegations.
The commission then took roll-call votes on the specifications. For OCC file C04105 (the Tenderloin/kidnapping matter and related specifications), the commission voted to not sustain specification 1 (conduct subverting department order) and to not sustain specification 2 (failure to answer truthfully) after a roll-call vote and clarification of votes. For file C04113, the commission sustained specification 1 (finding of conduct subverting good order) but did not sustain specification 2. For file C04126, both specification 1 and specification 2 were sustained; the second specification carried on a 5-to-2 roll-call vote. The commission said it will prepare formal written findings reflecting the evidence and closed-session deliberations and will consider discipline at a subsequent meeting (the commission set an anticipated calendar to consider findings Oct. 25 and discipline on Nov. 1, with possible small adjustments).
The hearing drew dozens of public speakers, many of whom testified in support of Lieutenant Langford, including family members, community leaders and professional colleagues who described his community work and character. Lieutenant Langford spoke publicly to deny the allegations and to assert that Management Control Division (MCD) investigators had pursued him for retaliatory reasons; he asked the commission to find the charges not true.
Commissioners also addressed agenda item 7, a related policy matter, and voted to adopt a policy direction that the commission will not consider stipulated settlements in closed session and asked the City Attorney to draft a resolution formalizing that policy — with some commissioners noting constraints imposed by the Copley decision.
The commission did not impose discipline at the meeting. It said it will prepare formal findings consistent with the roll-call decisions and discuss discipline at the scheduled follow-up meetings.
