Share This Page

Pittsburgh mayor wants to review police policy on domestic calls

| Thursday, Jan. 17, 2013, 7:04 p.m.

Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl on Thursday proposed creating a “working group” to review the police bureau's policy on domestic violence calls and come up with ideas to improve it.

In a letter to City Council, Ravenstahl suggested that the group, which would include members of council and his office with input from community members, research best practices from around the country and consider them and other ideas to reduce domestic disturbances and improve the relationship between police and the public.

This week Councilman Ricky Burgess introduced legislation that would require officers to undergo training to help them better assess domestic violence situations. Burgess said the bill was prompted by the murder of Ka'Sandra Wade, 33, of Larimer. Police went to Wade's home New Year's Eve on a call of “unknown trouble” but left after speaking with a boyfriend, who said nothing was amiss. Police found Wade's body in the house the next day. Police said boyfriend Anthony L. Brown, 51, of Point Breeze killed Wade then killed himself Jan. 2 during a standoff with officers at his home.

Ravenstahl pledged the resources of his office to improving the bill and suggested involving community members in the reviews. He said he hoped the group would begin meeting within days.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.