Consent Decree
The Database
About Arrests
Officer Info
Arrest Stats
Traffic Stats
Public Comments and Feedback

The feedback forum is provided as a public service. Please do not abuse it. You may post anonymously by simply leaving your name BLANK (user name "Anonymous" will be displayed instead). All fields are optional, except, of course, the comment body. You do not have to enter your name or email address, or a URL - these are all completely optional; enter them if you wish.

Please note that your comment will be public. If you wish to contact us privately, please use the email address on the "About" page.

The comments are arranged in reverse chronological order. The most recent comments are at the top of the list, now, instead of the bottom.

Note: By placing comments here, you are not communicating with the Tulsa Police Department. This is simply a public forum. If you wish to contact or email the Tulsa Police Department, please go to

3/17/2007 1:08:09 AM (71)
Sorry for the delay. Been a terrbly busy week, and the server has had to be moved several times resulting in downtime.

The stats include everything published from the time the first data was published by the TPD (May, 2004) through November, 2005. The data that is actually in the database may be earlier or later than that. I just know that it was published first (I'm pretty sure), in December of 2004, going back to May 2004.

As of now, the data for Dec06 through current has not yet been released, and I am not really sure if I am all that interested in updating it.

But there have been a number of complaints about the quality of the data, which was answered with instructions (from someone in the TPD) on how officers may submit additional data to be included.

So, if that has been happening, I suspect there may be a bunch of new promotions and accomodations data forthcoming, which, in all fairness, I should take the time to import.

So, I will probably import the next one or two data releases. After that, I may just take a "'nuff said" approach, and let it stand as it is.


3/14/2007 8:21:12 AM (70)
What time frame were you listed stats taken from


Steven A. Johnson
3/5/2007 2:34:34 PM (69)
I retired from the Tulsa Police Department on April 1, 2004. I strongly object to being part of this data base. I want someone from your organization to contact me at my work, Oklahoma Attorney General Office nnn-nnn-nnnn [tpdd edit].


email:  steven

2/20/2007 1:17:06 PM (68)
That hardly seems fair...


2/19/2007 5:12:08 PM (67)
*** FYI - Ref: Listing Officer commendations ***

"TAGS was designed to help the department comply with the Consent Decree sometime in late 2004. In early 2005, the Chief's Office began entering new commendations into the system. Any Commendations that were awarded prior to the development of TAGS are not input into the database.

Commendations are kept in Division files as well as Personnel files if someone needs access to them."

*** In other words, officer commendations recieved prior to late 2004 would not be listed in the "officer stats" information.

Hope that helps, I know it helped me.



Concerned Caucasion
2/18/2007 4:25:04 PM (66)
I have exchanged a few emails with and feel that they only have the best of motives behind the site. I was hesitant at first to email him but after a few exchanges and some communication I found him to be a nice guy who is actually doing TPD a favor.


2/18/2007 3:02:15 PM (65)
Everyone is complaining about their commendations not being listed. For them to be listed, they must be sent down to Charla in Payroll. She places them in RIMS and the Database will pick them up on the next download. Now before someone says "That should have been done before the commendation came to me!"...I Know that.

My suggestion is to copy your commendations and send them down to Charla with a note that you need them entered into RIMS. That will solve the issue.


2/16/2007 10:51:54 AM (64)
The officers would be unlikely to comment and further validate the Consent Decree by responding at all. The basic assumption, never proven, that lead to the Decree was that officers and the organization were racially biased. The officers know that is not true and it was a slap in the face that it was settled in this fashion.


2/15/2007 4:43:10 PM (63)
My intention is only to expose the Consent Decree Database as it actually is. Not make any changes to it. I have been "toying" with the idea of making an "Officer Responds" feature where each officer themselves can address what's said on their results page. The only thing hindering this is some form of authentication. How do I know that the person wanting to say something in the name of Officer XYZ, actually is Officer XYZ.

If I could figure out a reliable way of positively authenticating people, this could be done tomorrow, with ease, and I would change the focus of the database from simple "Consent Decree Database" to "Consent Decree Database With Officer Inputs."

That would be pretty cool. But how to do that authentication bit? One obvious way would be for me to actually meet and check the credentials of each officer, but, frankly, I really have no desire or time for that, and neither do they, most likely.

I could ask for the TPD to send me some kind of form letter, on letterhead, requesting officer access and a loginID and password for them to use. But I think the chances of getting HQ to do that are slim to none.

Any suggestions? I suppose, ultimately, any officer that wants to meet with me personally (and who promises not to beat the living crap out of me ;-) could be thus verified and given a special login name and password that would make it possible for them to directly comment on their results page.

Is there any intrest in such a thing? I should think that HQ might have something to say about that, though. I'm not sure what they might think of officers addressing the public directly.


2/15/2007 3:24:39 PM (62)
Commendations are still not listed correctly for all officers.

In my opinion this paints an unfair portrait of those officers who were left out or who might be perceived by the public as "bad officers."

Especially when it's obvious the decrees intention is to single out officers for arrests based on race.

One could speculate that by not listing accommodations (i.e., pros in the officer’s favor); the argument and public perception is strengthened that an officer is "bad."

I know you are only listing the information that is given to you, but in my opinion you hold a certain degree of responsibility for listing information that you know is incomplete.



 [Prev]  1  2  3  4  5   6  7  8  9  10  11  12   [Next] 

   Add your comment or reply:

 Name: (Optional)
 EMail: (Optional)
 Url: (Optional)
  Enter the word you see here in the validation field. If you make a mistake,
just press your back button to retry.


No affiliation with the Tulsa Police Department or the City of Tulsa is expressed or implied - Copyright © 2006-2011 - TPDD.ORG - All Rights Reserved.