IAM LLP Report on Barmore OIS Released
Following the August 24, 2009 death of Mark Anthony Barmore, the city of Rockford hired an outside firm to review administrative issues, police department policies and finally, if the actions of Officer North and Officer Poole were consistent with Rockford Police Department policies. The firm hired is California based, Independent Assessment and Monitoring, LLP (IMT).

At a 3:30 pm on June 15, 2010 Rockford city leaders released the IMT report that has significant implications for our community.

To download the report in its entirety, please click below:
Download the IAM LLP Report on Barmore OIS April 20th

To read a Review of Recommendations Made,
please click here: Recommendations Summary

If you'd like to read significant findings without downloading the report,
please read below:

Significant Findings include:
  • • “This threat (Mark Barmore) was needlessly escalated by the officer’s decision to immediately extract Barmore from the boiler room.” Officers North and Poole’s actions presented unnecessary risks to the safety of others because they did not act in accord with their training and with RPD policy. According to RPD policies in the situations like the Barmore shooting “officers may want to avoid confrontation with people or hazardous situations in favor of isolation and containment until supervisor, trained tactical or special response and units arrive.”

  • • Officer Supervision - RPD’s supervisory and shift structure makes it difficult to provide consistent supervision…during a typical week, officers may be supervised by a different supervisor each work day and thus may have as many as five different supervisors in a week. This makes it difficult to establish a close supervisory relationship and would seem to make consistency in supervision and performance evaluation virtually impossible. The review evidence reveals a lack of supervision of Officers North and Poole during the incident.

  • • RPD had in place no policy or protocol that provided guidance following the incident on how to ensure a comprehensive, objective investigation, or requirements for how to carry out individual investigative responsibilities. Officers’ written statements regarding the incident were not provided to RPD until days after the shooting, and neither officer was interviewed until months after the incident, and then only briefly. RPD did not audiotape or videotape any of the witness interviews it conducted. Professional policing standards require that all statements in officer-involved shooting cases be recorded.