PROBABLY NO ONE can know which of the 85 rounds police fired on Sunday was the one that finally made everything go black for Steve Miller.
Miller was shot and killed by police after refusing to drop the semiautomatic handgun he had been waving around and pointing at police; his gun was not fired.
But it took only the first bullet fired by police for blackness to descend on the citizens of the city, obscuring any information, explanation or conclusions that can be drawn by yet another police shooting.
Does the fact that seven police officers fired at least 85 rounds into an armed citizen constitute undue force? Or is it an acceptable response to the situation? Did the officers follow procedure? What are the standards for that procedure? Should we be concerned about the recent number of police shootings?
The most disturbing question is: How will we ever know the answers to any of these questions?
Police shootings - indeed, almost everything having to do with police procedures, policies, and investigations into their possible abuse - routinely enter a black hole, with little information released to the public.
Obviously, much of what the police do, including their investigations, should remain on their side of the blue line.
But it's a serious thing when a police officer discharges his weapon, especially when it leads to death, whatever the circumstances. The department says that even when its own reports on shootings are done, the reports are not accessible to the public.
The public should have much better access to unbiased, independent analyses of police actions, especially when, like Sunday's, they are fatal or potentially put innocent people in harm's way.
Until 2004, the city's Integrity and Accountability Office provided comprehensive, independent audits of the Police Department, including the use of force and discipline of officers. But that office lost its teeth - and its director - after a highly critical and controversial report was released.
The Police Advisory Commission, created by executive order to be a civilian oversight board, has a staff of six and a budget of $350,000 for oversight of a 6,600-officer department. Comparing this to other major cities, it doesn't take long to see how toothless this is, too: Pittsburgh has eight staff members overseeing 1,000 officers; San Francisco has a budget of $2.5 million and 30 staff members for a 2,200-officer force.
These cities are clear in their priorities of an accountable police force. It took our mayor nearly two years to fill seven vacancies on the Philadelphia board. And it's hardly independent: Both the PAC and the Police Department fall under the oversight of the managing director's office.
Taxpayers and citizens have a right to a Police Department with some independent oversight. No law- enforcement agency should be immune from monitoring or audits. No law-enforcement agency can exempt itself from accountability for its policies and practices and expect to win the trust of those they must protect.
Just ask Alberto Gonzales.
There is hope for change in the near future. Presumed-mayor Michael Nutter, who pushed for the creation of the Police Advisory Commission, says he supports a department like the Accountability and Integrity Office. We hope that among his many priorities, he moves this one close to the top of the list.
Was the first bullet police fired at Miller on Sunday a cause for concern? The 40th? The 60th? The 83rd?
We should not be in the dark on this. *