What internal Minneapolis Police Department after‑action reports or use‑of‑force files exist for May–June 2020 and how can they be accessed?
Executive summary
A formal city-commissioned after-action report covering the May 25–June 3, 2020 civil unrest — commonly called the 2020 Civil Unrest After-Action Review (Hillard Heintze) — exists and is publicly downloadable from the City of Minneapolis records site [1]. Multiple formal investigations and reports that analyze MPD tactics and use-of-force during the same period — notably the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR) investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) civil findings — also document use-of-force issues from May–June 2020 and are publicly available through their respective portals (p1_s3; [6]/[1]0).
1. The city’s commissioned after‑action review: what it is and where to get it
The City of Minneapolis commissioned an after‑action review covering response actions from May 25 through June 3, 2020; that report (titled 2020 Civil Unrest After‑Action Review Report) is published on the City’s legislative information management system and can be downloaded directly from the Minneapolis records site [1]. The Hillard Heintze report states explicitly that its BWC (body‑worn camera) review focused on events from May 25 through June 3, 2020 and that it used CAD, EOC situation reports and timelines provided by the City to frame findings and recommendations [1].
2. Use‑of‑force files, disciplinary findings, and officer‑level documents
Individual use‑of‑force and disciplinary reports related to actions during the unrest have been released in redacted form via the City’s disciplinary decisions dashboard and in news reporting; CBS Minnesota reviewed and reported on unsealed disciplinary documents showing suspensions, firings and other sanctions tied to May 2020 incidents, including the May 30, 2020 assault on Jaleel Stallings [2]. The public disciplinary dashboard is maintained by the City and is the primary portal for viewing finalized disciplinary decisions; for other incident‑level police reports and records the City’s Police Reports & Data Requests page explains how to request public records [3] [2].
3. State and federal investigations that include use‑of‑force findings
The Minnesota Department of Human Rights conducted a civil‑rights investigation that produced findings about MPD practices before and through May 24, 2020 and issued recommendations and a determination of probable cause in 2022; its investigative report and timeline are available through MDHR and via the City’s MDHR information page [4] [5]. The U.S. Department of Justice followed with a civil pattern‑or‑practice investigation and a public findings report that documents excessive force and discriminatory practices and informs a path toward federal oversight; that DOJ findings report and the DOJ press materials are publicly posted [6] [7].
4. External reviews and contextual after‑action assessments
Beyond the Hillard Heintze city report, state‑commissioned external reviews — including Wilder Research’s external review of the state’s response and a Department of Public Safety–commissioned assessment — examine coordination, crowd management and breakdowns in communication across agencies during May–June 2020; those reports are published and cited in media coverage [8] [9] [10]. These external assessments differ in scope from MPD internal files because they evaluate multi‑agency coordination and systemic response rather than officer‑level use‑of‑force files [8] [10].
5. How to access after‑action documents and use‑of‑force records
The central public entry points are the City’s document and police records pages: the specific Hillard Heintze after‑action PDF is available on the Minneapolis legislative downloads portal [1] and the Police Reports & Data Requests page explains procedures to obtain offense reports, arrest records, and to file public records requests for additional MPD files [3]. For MDHR and DOJ materials, the MDHR investigation page and the DOJ website host their reports and press releases, which include summaries and full findings relevant to use‑of‑force issues from the 2020 unrest (p1_s9; [6]/[1]0). Finalized disciplinary decisions related to 2020 unrest have been posted in redacted form and summarized in reporting such as CBS Minnesota [2].
6. Limits, competing narratives and practical caveats
Contention exists about scope and bias: critics say the Hillard Heintze review analyzed only a small fraction of available BWC footage and framed recommendations through a public‑safety lens that some community groups view as pro‑police [11], while federal and state investigations concluded systemic problems requiring oversight and policy changes [6] [4]. Practical limitations persist for researchers: active investigative materials, non‑final internal use‑of‑force files, or files subject to personnel privacy and ongoing legal proceedings may be withheld or heavily redacted and therefore require formal public records requests or legal process as outlined on the City’s police records page [3].