How can they come to this conclusion if they are left uninvestigated ?
And how do you gather evidence if you dont investigate?
You couldn't. I think the article is either slanted or poorly written. Here is how it typically works
A complaint comes in. Each complaint is initially reviewed by an investigator. In our dept they are also reviewed by a Civilian Police Monitor and our investigators are the rank of Sergeant. Those that are obviously bogus, for example, Officer J. Smith shot me in the leg and you find 1. The complainant has no injury and Officer Smith was on vacation in Hawaii, you don't continue with the investigation, but that isn't to say it wasn't reviewed.
If there is a possibility the complaint is true, then it is cataloged and placed in the system. If it is of a nature where the officer, if found to have committed the allegation would be fired, then it is investigated as a Class A, and done by Internal Affairs in conjuction with the police monitor designee. If it is of a lesser nature, then the supervisor of the officer is assigned and works along with an I.A. Laison Sergeant. The results are reviewed up the chain of command to the Asst Chief
The results can be ..No, the alleged action did not take place which is unfounded. Or the alleged conduct did take place but was within policy and state lawwhich is exhonerated or there is not enough evidence either way to either determine it did or didnt happen which is inconclusive. Or it did happen and it would be sustained.
All complaints are reveiwed at this department and taken seriously. To say 99% of all abuse complaints are not investigated is just poor journalism to say the least.