98 _Renton Police Department Public Records

7/28/2019 98 _Renton Police Department Public Records

1/60

8 @!;! ~ ~ C a b i n e t

:Jim c.lendart3 Chedtl:atijillCOf\tacts

Deleted te:ms {10)0 1 J n r ~ mr?if E;a!!...-atiar.s:~ F r ~ t C o r . ~ c ' " . s~ l n b o x ( $ )

J ; ; , r . k E - m ~&lNol:es(iJl Oox

Seolltems! ; l ~ T a s ! r . s

it! Search Foldes

?!IT's

F'ET

?ETPET

- ~ : . ~ ~ 7 : : - ~ P - ~ ~ ! 7 : . ~ ? . ~ ~ - 1 ~ - ~ - - - - - - .~ " ' V : Your r ~ = ~ ? : - - ~ o m W ~ ~ ~ : s h e i : ! , InC". ~ : l " ' . a n d l e ~ ~ r ::overs_

- ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ - ~ : ~ ~ - ~ - : . ! ! : ~ - ~ ~ : . ~ . ? . ~ ~ : .. ! : . ? . ' f . i ~ - ~ - ~ ~ . : . : . ~ ! X . ~ - ~ ~ ! : ~ ? ~ : ....- - ~ ~ ~ ~ - - y - ~ ~ ~ ! : ' : ~ ~ ! . l : o : : - - ~ - ~ - ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ r _ ~ : - ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 : ~ ~ r c o v ~ r ~. .. ~ Y ~ : : : . ~ . ? . ~ 1 x ....

r ~ 1 a m : N e e d ~ d

..... : ~ ~ : . ~ . ~ ~ : ~ : . ~ : ~ ? . ~ ~ ~ ? . . : ~ ~ ! : . P . . I ! : ~ ~ . . . .FW: lOth Ar:r.u,;.\ Renter, Po ceJFF.e r


2/60

W:1 C : h e O O ~iiiEl Contad>Deletedltems (m)

tl!!Draft:sUBI E-;alt.-atie>ru>~ - F r ~ - u e n l : : C : : I r ; ~ c t suxa lnhox

t f ' 0 : J t ; ; n k . ~ ~!iJl.liotes

~ O w t t m :U ~ $ o n l L .ms

~ T . M i l : stB ~ S e a r c h Foiders - - ~ : ~ . ? . : . ~ . ~ : ~ ......

s ~ r _ _

.. ............. .. .... ..... ........... ............. ......... .. .................... ! . ~ : ; : ~ : : : : ~ . . . . . . .. .. . : : : : . : . :o:l

'OF ?RESCP.!FTION

......... .. .:! . :.;.:""" ......................... - - : ... ..1

.............

,. .......... . ' , _, . - ~ - ~ , - ;, - ~ " " ' ' '""'"''' ..


3/60


4/60

Renton Police Department General Orders Manual

Length of Commitment Trustee StatusPopulation

1-5 days 1 day6-8 days 3 days9-11 days 4 days12-14 days 5 days15-17 days 6 days18-20 days 7 days21-23 days 8 days24-26 days 9 days27-29 days 10 days30 days 11 days

General

No good time2 days3 days4 days5 days6 days7 days8 days9 days10 day

2Effective Date: 07/01/2000


5/60

Renton Police Department General Orders Manual

AUX-022

GOOD TIME, FINES AND PAYMENT OF BAIL

Reference:I. Good Time, Fines and Payment ofBail

2Effective Date: 07/01/2000


6/60

DATE:TO:FROM:

CITY OF LNTON POLICE DEP ~ ' f M E N TMEMORANDUM

7 April, 2009Clark Wilcox/Jail & Staff Svcs Commander

/EHD CoordinatorSUBJECT:

DOB , was booked into Renton City Jail on 30 September, 2008, ontwo counts ofTheft 3 and one count ofCriminal Trespass. He was sentenced to 300 days in jail forthese crimes and selected to be a trustee in Renton Jail. Mr. has been booked into RentonJail many times before and worked effectively as jail trustee previously.On March 31, 2009, Mr. asked Sergeant if he could talk to the Jail Commander.If this could be arranged, he requested a witness be present during the conversation. He stated hetrusted Evidence Technician or EHD/Jailer to witness this discussion. Commander Wilcoxagreed to talk with Mr. and EHD/Jailer agreed to witness the event. At approximately1630 hours, Commander Wilcox and EHD met with Mr. in the jail courtroom to hearwhat he had to say.Mr. appeared to be troubled and uneasy talking about the information he was providing toCommander Wilcox. He said he was due to be released from jail the next day on April1, 2009, andhad nothing to gain by saying what he had to say to Commander Wilcox. He could have easily beenreleased and no one would have known anything more but felt what he had to say was very importantand what he observed in the jail was just not right.He stated he had been trustee in the jai l for about six months. During this time he had observedmany things including the staff getting very comfortable with him around and sharing information hefelt should never be shared with someone in his position. He stated he should not know details ofhow the jail is run and other important information that only the hierarchy should know. Whenasked by Commander Wilcox what he was referring to, Mr. said he knew the combinationto the key lock box. When asked what i t was, he nervously said he could not remember right now.He said if he wanted to escape, which he would never do, he would have had many opportunities todo so, while working as trustee.Mr. said he was especially troubled recently when he asked what his actual release datewould be from Renton Jail. He is currently homeless and wanted to know so he could makearrangements to have somewhere to go when he left Renton Jail. With normal good time, he wasdue to be released fromjaill3 April, 2009. Since he was trustee, it was customary for the trustee to

Page 1 of2


7/60

( (CITY O:F RENTON POLICE DEPARTMENTMEMORANDUM

(Cont.)Memo Page 2

be, "Gifted" more good time and released at an earlier date. He asked Sergeant what hrelease date would be. Sergeant did not establish a new release date for Mr.prior to starting his days off. Frustrated, Mr. asked Sergeant who was now onduty, to do the same. Sergeant said he would give him a release date if Mr. wouwrite a letter stating Sergeant is incompetent and an indecisive sergeant. After sayingthat, Sergeant wrote a release date of 1April, 2009, next to Mr. name on the japopulation board. He stated another jailer came into the kitchen later and told him to not seal theletter, as they would like to read it. Commander Wilcox asked who the other jailer was and Mr.

stated, ''Officer ."During the six months Mr. has been trustee, he said it has been pretty obvious that Sergea

jailers, who work for him, are his friends and have no respect for SergeantMr. again said he knows things he shouldn't know about what goes on in the jail like howSergeant has had three incidents and no longer can go out on the floor. He saidapproximately two weeks ago he heard Sergeant use force on someone in the cell next toand he was pretty sure the use of force was never documented or written up. He said he believesthings like that are just wrong. He said he hates to see what they are trying to do to Sergeant

because, in his opinion, Sergeant is the better sergeant of the two.Mr. nervously continued the conversation trying his best to answer Commander Wilcox'squestions. Mr. said he was very concerned about what would happen to him if he ever hadto come back to Renton Jail. He stated if everyone knew he was telling Commander Wilcox thisinformation, he would not be made trustee again and would be concerned for his safety.Commander Wilcox told Mr. he was welcome to write the letter he was asked to write, seait, and give it to Commander Wilcox the next morning. Commander Wilcox said he was notordering Mr. to write the letter but would appreciate him writing in his words whathappened. Mr. said he would write the letter and give it to Commander Wilcox before

being released from Renton Jail.I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State ofWashington that the foregoing is truand correct as I remember from the conversation conducted with Mr. 31 March, 2009.

EHD CoordinatorRenton Police DepartmentAuxiliary Services Division425.430.7610

Page 2 of2


8/60

On Saturday March 28, 2009; I returned a phone message left on my homephone by His message was not work related and was aboutpossible construction work behind our houses. I returned his call and we talkedabout the construction. At the conclusion of our discussion about theconstruction, asked me if he could bounce some information off of me andask my opinion about an incident at work from the day before. I told him hecould.These are the main points that I remember from the conversation I had with5 days ago:

He was told by Jailer Gannon the previous day (Friday March 2ih) thatinmate trustee was acting weird. went to talk to and told him that he should watchhis back. said that he thought that he was talking about inmates, andtold him no, that it's the other Jail staff, supervised by the other JailSergeant. told that they, a few members of the other Sergeants Jailstaff and the Sergeant, had come to him asking for him ( to writea letter to the Jail Administration, concerning inability to make adecision. told that he was told he may get more good time off hissentence if he wrote this letter. I told to contact Cmdr. Wilcox. was concerned that somemay believe that he was jumping to conclusions. I recommended thatmay want to discuss this issue with RPOG President Coleman, andget a 2nd opinion.

After my conversation with I notified RPOG President Mark Coleman ofthis situation and that I had recommended to that he needed to pass thisinformation on to Cmdr. Wilcox, and that he may possibly call Mark for a 2ndopinion.On the afternoon of Tuesday March 31st, I received a phone call while at home,from He asked if I would be willing to sit in with when he spoketo Cmdr. Wilcox, on the morning of Wednesday April 1st. He said thatwanted someone that he felt comfortable with in the meeting with Cmdr. Wilcox.did not think that he should sit in with them and asked if he wouldlike to have me in the meeting with Cmdr. Wilcox. said that he would likeme in with him. I told that I would sit in with them.A short time later, I received another phone call from stating that he hadtalked to Cmdr. Wilcox and that was sitting in with andCmdr. Wilcox now, and I was not needed on Wednesday morning.On Wednesday April 1st I was ordered by Cmdr. Wilcox to not talk about thisiW:t ~ 6


9/60

On 3-27-2009 I had a conversation with inmate about the stress ofgetting out and his obligations to DOC, and mental health. At the beginning of theconversation was very defensive and stressed. We discussed the burdens ofDOC, mental health, finding a job and place to stay as well as him missing his father whopassed away while he was in jail, and not being able to travel to Moses Lake to visit hismother due to probation restrictions. After a while of talking asked ifhe haddone something wrong because I was treating him differently than past times. I told himI've been focused on work and other things, and that I was sorry he felt that way.said I wasn 't being "real" like I have in the past. We talked for a bit more and as. we were concluding our conversation said for me to watch my back. I askedwhat he meant by that. said not from me or other inmates, from people whowork here. I told him I have had a hunch about things going on around here, maybe that'swhy I seem different. at first was trying to be discrete because he didn't want toget in trouble from the people who have approached him. He s a ~ d they want me to write aletter saying you are indecisive as sergeant. I wanted to seem like was objective about thesubject the topic and told to write the letter if that's what he feels is the rightthing to do and turned the conversation in a different direction. We began to conclude theconversation again and said he didn't want to write the letter and he as an inmateshould have never been put into that situation. I agreed, and wanted more information Itold in a vague there are 4 people I can think ofthat approached you, there areothers who may have but not likely, and a few I would not think of them asking you to dosomething like that. began talldng more about it and describing the people whoare behind it. He said one of them is not working here now. I asked you mean he's on hisdays off? No he's our training. In an attempt not to name names also mentionedanother is the one who wears things on his sleeve like you. He also said you can prettymuch be assured the people who are out to get you are the people who are around theother sergeant. I told I appreciate his being candid and gave him another option.I told he can write the letter ifhe see fit, or do nothing at all, or ifhe seemsnecessary he can go to the commander of the jail or maybe the chief ofpolice. But whatever his choice he can't carry yet another burden on his back. We talked a bi t more abouthis father said he was buried in Wenatchee. We talked about how muchWenatchee has changed in the last few years, and all the new houses. At the conclusionof our talk looked at me and said now you're being "real" like you were in thepast.


10/60

Talked with again today 5.31.2009. approached me while I waswalking from the nurse's office to the control room.He began talking about his DOC obligations and the nurse gave him some resources formental health. Again he talked about the being asked to write a letter about my inabilityto be a supervisor. Again said he wanted to talk to the jail commander tomorrowwhen he left jail. I told him I don't think it is right for me to be involved in theconversation with the commander, but we could send someone he felt comfortable withand trust.eq. My first thoughts were Evidence Tech agreed, he knowsfrom when-he was in jail in the past and trusts him.

said he was nervous about the situation because the other sergeant implied hisearly release depended on the letter. also said he knows how the other sergeantdeals with force and has seen him taser an irimate over and over. went on tomention he remembers that night because he heard talking about having 3 forcesituations and need to stay in the control room so he doesn 't go over. I believebecause I have witnessed speaking on like this in years past.In addition to the threat to his release date, said approached him andtold him what to put in the letter. And in the past the guy at the training center, ascalls him approached him too.

said it's not right that he gets put in this situation, and he wants to do the rightthing.I talked to Commander Wilcox about what had told me and the plan was for

to talk to him when he leaves jail Wednesday with as a witness. CmdrWilcox's morning was already full. I returned to the jail and spoke to I asked ifhe would be okay with sitting in on the conversation. said yes.In my conversations with I could tell the subject weighed heavily on him. Helmows the people who approached him were wrong and he wants to tell the properpeople, but he has concern about what could happen to him if he ever came back to jail.


11/60


12/60

(e.. l}-r L om vY\vur, Jt v-- {A} tL t-oX /V7 y ;v'tf!

tS: l%Vld arM G u v - ~~ m ~ - - k - 0c--+ '--r-:cJ Lf ov- yo vvr 1v\J\o v- rY\ cdr 0l ' \ . I f1 Oc\J IL Y) of,)-. 1

1D j ~ A I \ 1 ' \ t>'rom +""-d' L e . - - / f ~ r o r -fhL -I h-f6 r-Mct+J Dl) L+ C-on --j-ow 11f ' I 'A-Y'IJ fOvV

C V : 4 ~ ~ ' ' j ~ 1 , e - e...vtv- JaY)t__ 1 fhtJ'1{ f r robG


13/60


14/60

+old fVJL 1 , h ~ + UJOttJ\d ~ ~mlL Wtwv+ +o r ~ ~ l M -4h L-- edfv'I. h-of


15/60

III! .

\


16/60

.:5/Z ((/$; %-//lG!c- 5/C-?,?83

Zo, - 5z 6 ._ ? (" .:c;


17/60

DATE:TO:FROM:SUBJECT:

POLICE DEPARTMENTMEMORANDUM

April 5, 2009Commander C.Wilcox

I am writing this memo at your request for inclusion in the investigation of circumstancessurrounding Jail Sgt. He and I have a friendship that extends past the RentonPolice Department and we frequently discuss many things, one of them being work. Inthe past he has confided in me and asked my advice on how to handle situations thatarise. Although not official, to some degree I mentor him and try to give him advice.On March 28, 2009 he confided in me during a conversation that he was really stressedout, upset and losing sleep over an incident that occurred in the Jail. He advised me thathe noticed that a trustee was not acting like himself and he was concerned for him. Heasked the trustee what was going on, and if ( could help him. The trustee confidedthat he was upset because he is due to be released soon and that he was struggling with adecision he didn't want to make. The trustee then told that he had better watch hisback. Sgt. asked him ifthere was a resistance from the inmates and the trusteestated "no, it's the people you work with". He went on to say that two other jailers, onedescribed as the guy who recently left, and the other as the guy with the stripes on hisarms are mounting a campaign to get you fired. The trustee stated he was told to write aletter stating that Sgt. is ineffective at his job, that he cannot make a decision,that nobody likes working for him, that no one has any faith in him. stated that hetold the trustee to write the letter if he wanted and that wouldn 't hold it againsthim. The trustee stated he was upset because he didn't want to write a disparaging letterthat was untrue, but he didn 't want to deal with the trouble he would be in ifhe didn't.I advised Sgt. that he needed to report this to Commander Wilcox and Iadvised him that I would also be following up with Commander Wilcox with an in personmeeting. related to me that he feels like he is being treated unfairly, harassed andsystematically targeted with his termination as the end goal.Prior to my meeting with Commander Wilcox on March 30, 2009 I was speaking withDeputy ChiefMarsalisi about a different matter and asked for some general advice. Iconfided that I was worried about Sgt. and that an incident occurred whichcaused him to distrust other Jail staff. He agreed that I needed to follow up personallywith Commander Wilcox and apprise him of the situation.


18/60

(

Commander WilcoxPage 2 of2April 5, 2009

(

In between meetings in the late morning, I was able to speak with Commander Wilcoxand express my concerns over the allegations of inmate coercion and a possible campaignby fellow employees to tarnish Sgt. reputation and employment.At the conclusion of our meeting, I called and re-iterated that he needed to reportthe incident to Commander Wilcox. Since that call, I have had no further involvement.R


19/60


20/60


21/60


22/60

Summaryco -03-09Allegation #1 Violation of City Harassment Policy 300-3

(

City of Renton Harassment policy states in part, "Work place harassment is defined as conductthat unreasonably interferes with the affected persons work performance or creates anintimidating, hostile or offensive work environment."Finding: SustainedThe investigation revealed that:

o Sgt has participated in and allowed work place harassment by his directsubordinates.

o Sgt knows the contents of the City of Renton's Harassment polfcy and requireshis employees to initial that the City of Renton's Harassment policy has been explainedto them during their annual evaluation.

o Sgt said that he was just venting when he talked negatively about Sgtto his subordinates and Manager Bartley.

Allegation #2 Violation of General Order 26.1.16 Unbecoming ConductUnbecoming Conduct- Members of the Police Department shall conduct t hemselves at all times,both on and off duty, in such a manner as to reflect most favorably on the Department.Unbecoming conduct shall include that which brings the Department into disrepute or reflectsdiscredit upon the individual as amember of the Police Department, or that which impairs theoperation or efficiency of the Department or the individual.Finding: Sustained

o Sgt demonstrated unbecoming conduct as a supervisor who created and/orallowed work place harassment. Sgt was asked in his first interview, "Have youractions or words ever worked in a manner to discredit Sgt with any other Cityemployee?" He answered, "Yes."

o Sgt said he has vented to his supervisor at that time, Manager Bartley, about Sgtwhich is acceptable as she was a direct supervisor to both of them. What is

not acceptable conduct is for a supervisor to have conversations with other subordinateCity employees regarding Sgt performance.

o Sgt was asked if he had any specific recollections of any such conversations inwhich he talked to subordinates about Sgt abilities. Sgt referred toan incident over small plastic contraband baggies that were found in an inmate'sproperty when the inmate was being transferred to another facility. The contrabandbaggies were not found during the intake property search by members of Sgt

squad. Jailer found the contraband baggies and advised Sgtabout finding contraband in the inmate's property. Jailer requested that

he be able to keep the contraband baggies to show the other squad (Sgt


23/60

(,

squad) of the find. Sgt told Jailer to put them in his jail locker and whenthey came back to work, he could address his concerns and findings. Sgt wastold by other jail staff that Jailer put the contraband baggies in his jail locker. Sgt

retrieved them and notified Manager Bartley. Sgt then placed thecontraband baggies into evidence and completed a case report. According to Sgt

there was nothing in the contraband baggies. He felt Sgt was makingaccusations that Jailer was storing dope in his locker, it was not properlycategorized, it should have been placed into evidence, and that Sgt wantedformal charges brought against Jailer for this violation. Sgt said it, "Pissedme off!" In his opinion, Sgt was going to try to make him and his crew lookbad so his (Sgt crew didn't look as bad. Sgt had conversations withhis jail staff stating this was "Bullshit." Sgt categorized his comments as"venting."

o Sgt conduct of "venting" with subordinates regarding Sgtsupervisory performance is unbecoming conduct as a member/supervisor of the RentonPolice Department.

o Sgt has brought discredit to the Renton Police Department by "venting" tosubordinate employees which brought discredit to Sgt

o Bringing discredit upon Sgt impaired the operation and efficiency oftheRenton Jail.

Allegation #3 Violation of General Order 26.1.1 YY EthicsMembers of the Police Department shall not conspire or knowingly engage in any activity whichdeprives any person of their civil rights, due process, equal opportunity for employment,advancement, job opportunities, or any constitutionally or statutory guaranteed right. Nomember of the Police Department shall disseminate confidential police-related information toany unauthorized person for any purpose.Finding: Sustained

o Sgt has conspired by his words and/or actions and engaged in activities whichhave affected the conduct of subordinates in the Renton Jail.

o Sgt takes every opportunity to find fault with Sgt and tells ManagerBartley in person, by telephone or email, or tells anyone who wi ll listen to him.

o Sgt said in his interviews that his words or actions have created discredit to Sgtcharacter.

Allegation #4 Violation Auxiliary Services Standard Operating Procedure 038employee/Inmate Fraternization.Jailers will not accept nor solicit any items, money, service or consideration from any inmate,inmate's family, friends of an inmate, or solicit a reward from any bondsman or agency.Additionally, jailers will not recommend or direct an inmate toward any specific bondsman,attorney or other inmate agency.


24/60

(

Finding: Sustainedo Sgt said he had talked with inmate regarding Sgt

performance.o Sgt did tell inmate to write a letter to the Jail Commander regarding

Sgto Sgt told inmate if he had a problem to put it on paper.o Sgt denied in his first interview that he said Sgt could not make a

decision or was indecisive. He may have said, "Well if he can't make a decision, I'm justgoing to give you April 1s t for a release date." Sgt said inmate waspissed at Sgt and he told inmate "Hey if you want to file a beef, file abeef. The same as we tell inmates when they come in that want to complain about anofficer."

o Sgt said he did not have any discussion.s with any other jail staff, nor did hedirect any other member of the jail staff, to make sure inmate wrote the letter.

o Jailer said in his interview that he had a conversation with inmate andsaid, "I f you have a grievance or whatever with the other sergeant go ahead and write itand we'll go ahead and make sure it gets to the Jail Commander. Sgt said writea letter."

o When Jailer was asked if he has ever heard any member of the jail staff ask orsolicit any person or inmate to write a letter about the performance of any member ofthe jail staff he replied, "Yes, it was about Sgt

o Jailer was asked, "Were you directed by any member of the jail staff to talk toinmate regarding a letter to the Jail Commander?" Jailer said, "Sgt

told if he wants to write a letter, go ahead and write CommanderWilcox a letter reporting what happened during the conversation between him( and Sgt referencing the release dates."

o Sgt told Jailer to tell inmate to write a letter as Sgtcan't do anything about the release dates given to him by Sgt Inmate

needs to write a letter.o Jailer said to inmate "I f you write a letter, we would make sure it gets

up to Commander Wilcox."o Jailer said he did not know, nor was he told, what inmate was to put

into the letter, as he was not part of the original conversation. He knew inmatewas supposed to write a letter but did not know if he did or not.o During Sgt second interview, he was asked if he had a conversation with

inmate regarding Sgt performance as a supervisor. Sgtsaid, "Yeah, but it was one-sided. He was upset with Sgt he had many nicethings to say about sarcastically."

o Sgt told inmate if he's got a beef to file with Sgt how to filea complaint.


25/60

( o I asked "Did you specifically say anything about Sgt performance toSgt said, "No. I {Sgt said, 'he ( said he's (Sgtan idiot, he's (Sgt incompetent and somebody should be told

about him (Sgt I (Sgt said if you want to say he's (Sgt anidiot and he's incompetent and he doesn't know what he's doing, put it on a letter." Iasked if he (Sgt ever used the words Sgt is incompetent, cannotmake a decision, or is indecisive to inmate and he replied, "No."

o Sgt was asked if he had ever used the words that Sgt is incompetent,cannot make a decision, or was indecisive to members of the jail staff who aresubordinate to Sgt and he replied, "Yeah, probably."

o Sgt was asked when he talked to inmate about his frustration gettinghis release date, did he use the words that Sgt cannot make a decision and hereplied, "No. Well, I might have. He (Sgt gave him ( four differentdates. I might have said, 'Well, if Sgt not going to make a decision, I'll makeit.' I gave him April1 51 as a release date."

o Sgt did say that inmate had asked him for a release date prior and hedid not give him a release date at that time. He told him to wait until it got closer to theend of his commitment.

Allegation #5 General Order 1.3 Use of Force AuthorizationUse of Force- Members shall use a reasonable amount of orce necessary to accomplish thearrest, overcome perceived resistance to arrest, defend themselves or others from harm or tocontrol a situation. Members shall use a reasonable amount of orce necessary to accomplish thearrest, overcome perceived resistance to arrest, defend themselves or others from harm or tocontrol a situation. The degree afforce used should be in direct relationship to the amount ofresistance perceived by the member, or the imminent threat the person poses to the member orothers. Members will use only the force necessary to accomplish lawful objectives.Finding: SustainedBAC room video 12-29-08 Use of Force Report 08-14627DUI suspect handcuffed and sitting on DUI suspect sitting on bench non-bench not causing problems. threatening.Sgt enters BAC room, walks out Nothing noted on first pass throughto P-2, reenters and goes into the jailarea.Sgt reenters the BAC room and Sgt said he entered the BAC roomsays something to Officer Ashbaugh. and asked Officer Ashbaugh if she wasgoing to book the suspect.Sgt starts talking to the suspect. Sgt said that the suspect mumbledsomething to him. He asked him what hesaid and the suspect stated he had AIDS.


26/60

Sgt with his hands in his pockets, Sgt said the suspect was notwalks over and sits next to the suspect on presenting a threat so he sat next to him onthe bench and starts talking to the suspect. the.bench to speak to him.Suspect leans forward and appears to be Sgt said the suspect began to slideagitated with his conversation and body towards him and he told the suspect not tomovements. touch him.Sgt leans away from the suspect.Suspect leans back and to his left and withhis free right hand places a finger in hismouth.Suspect removes his finger from his mouthand extends his right arm/hand towards SgtSgt took hold of the suspect's Sgt took hold of the suspect'sright index finger and performed a counter right index finger and performed a counterjoint bending the finger back towards his joint bending the finger back towards hisarm. arm.Officer Ashbaugh sees the incident Sgt does not mention Officeroccurring and walks to the left side ofthe Ashbaugh actions.suspect as Sgt is applying force.Sgt is applying pressure to the Sgt said that as he was applyingsuspects finger/hand/arm and is talking to force he was telling the suspect histhe suspect at the same time. behavior was unacceptable and that he

needed to stop and calm down.Sgt releases the suspects hand/arm Officer Ashbaugh notified the jai l staff thatand exits the BAC room. the suspect was ready to be booked.

The suspect was booked without furtherincident.

S-1 Cell video 12-30-08 Use of Force Report 08-14688Jailer Hoopii enters S-1 cell escorting a Sgt received a call over the jailmale inmate un-restrained and non- radio that a fight had occurred in cell B-6.threatening. He responds to the jail from the jailsergeant's office.Jailer Hoopii seats the inmate on the floor Sgt enters S-1 putting on latexwith his back against the walL Jailer Hoopii gloves stating that the inmate was yellingis talking to the inmate. Inmate appears to at Jailer Hoopii about a towel.be non-threatening sitting on the floor.Sgt quickly/aggressively walks Sgt entered the cell and told thetowards the seated inmate extending his inmate to stop yelling and to shut up, thatright arm towards the inmate and is saying they needed to figure out what hadsomething to him. happened and he needed to calm down.Sgt is bent over at the waist and Sgt said he was in front of thehas his right arm extended with pointed inmate asking him if he understood. Whenfingers within inches of the inmates face the inmate told him "No" he told the


27/60

( and is saying something to the inmate. inmate to shut up and listen to what he wastelling him.Jailer Dement enters the cell and is standingback along with Jailer Hoopii.Sgt places his hand closer to theinmates face and the inmate's moves hishead back away from Sgt hand.The inmate spit blood from his cut lip Sgt said as he was explaining tostriking Sgt in the face. the inmate that they would review what

happened when the inmate spit blood fromhis cut lip striking Sgt in the face.Sgt grabs the inmates head and Sgt said after the inmate spit atbody and forces him to the left onto the jai l him he immediately turned the inmatesfloor. face away from him and forced him to lieflat on his stomach.Sgt is on the inmates back, Jailer Sgt said Jailers Hoopii andHoopii is attempting to pull the inmates Dement assisted in controlling theright arm from under his body, and Jailer inmate's body.Dement is controlling the inmates feet.Sgt is on the inmates back with his Sgt said he applied pressure usinghands near the inmates head. his knuckle to get the inmate to stopresisting and trying to spit on him.Inmate is handcuffed and still lying on his Inmate complied with Sgtstomach. commands and was handcuffed.Sgt exits S-1 and returns with the Inmate was placed into the "WRAP" with"WRAP" and spit shield. a spit shield over his face.Sgt leaves the cell to wash the Jailer Hoopii stated Sgt had bloodblood off his face. on his face. Sgt leaves the cell towash the blood off his face.RFD Aid unit enters S-1 cell to treat the RFD Aid said the inmate needs to beinmate for the bloody lip he received from transported to VMC for stitches.the altercation with another inmate in B-6cell.Inmate did not cause any problems when hewas being treated by RFD. Jailer Hoopiiwas standing in the cell at the time. Inmatewas still in the "WRAP" with the spit shieldremoved.Sgt enters the cell and says Sgt said he entered the cell andsomething to the inmate. Also in the cell is asked the inmate if he intentionally spitOfficer Bruner. into his face.Inmate was removed from the "WRAP" byJailer Hoopii.Inmate was escorted out of the cell by The inmate was transported to VMC forOfficer Bruner. medical treatment for the laceration to hislip. Sgt was treated at VMC for


28/60

I blood exposure.o Both Use of Force incidents show the inmates were compliant, with no aggressive

actions toward any member of the jail staff, until Sgt entered the area. Sgtappears to have instigated both applications of forces by his words and/or

conduct.o Use of Force incident 08-14688 is unwarranted. Jailer Hoopii escorted an inmate, who

had just been in a physical fight, without any restraints and was non-aggressive towardsany jail staff member.

o Sgt aggressive actions initiated the inmate to respond. This Use of Forceincident should not have happened.

o Sgt Use of Force report was not documented as it was recorded in the jailvideo.

o Use of Force incident 08-14627. The Jail staff was aware that a DUI suspect was beingbrought to the jail for processing and that he had resisted arrest on the street. Whenthe DUI suspect entered the BAC room he was calm and non-aggressive. Sgt satnext to the DUI suspect and started talking to him. The DUI suspect reacted to what Sgt

said to him. Sgt had to use force to control the DUI suspect's free handfrom touching him.

Allegation #6 General Order 26.1.1 TT Code of Conduct and Appearance, Truthfulness.Upon the order of the Chief of Police, the Chief's designate, or a superior officer, members of thePolice Department shall fully and truthfully answer all questions specifically directed, andnarrowly relating to the performance of official duties, or fitness for office, which may be askedof them.Questions asked during the two official interviews were narrowly focused fo r specific answers.During both interviews Sgt gave half-truths to the questions asked. When Sgtwas asked if he ever asked or solicited a let ter from inmate he replied, "I told ifhe had a complaint he needed to put it in writing." When asked what the complaint was hereplied, " not getting a solid release date from Sgt Sgt was asked,"Was that his ( only complaint? Were there other work performance relatedcomplaints that he ( had?" Sgt replied, "No, pretty much with it wasjust his release date thing. That's the only complainthe voiced to me." I asked if Sgt hadtalked to any other jail sta ff regarding the letter and he replied, "No, I didn't direct anybody tomake sure he did it, and like I said, I didn't know he actually did it."During an interview with Jailer the question was asked, "Were you directed by anymember of the jail staff to talk to inmate regarding a letter to the Jail Commander?"Jailer said, "Well Sgt asked, well told me to go ahead and tell if hewants to write a letter go ahead and write you (Commander Wilcox) a letter what happenedabout the conversation between him and Sgt about the release dates." Jailersaid he never went in and asked or told inmate to write a letter. He said "Sgt


29/60

told he {Sgt could not do anything about it so needs to write a letterand we'll make sure it gets to Commander Wilcox." Jailer also said the he knew thatinmate was supposed to write a letter but he was unaware if a letter was written ornot. When he was asked if there were any other members of the jail staff aware of this incidenthe replied, "I can't say. It was just me and Sgt that's what I know."Allegation #7 General Order 26.1.1Q InsubordinationMembers of the Police Department shall promptly obey any lawful orders of a superior officer.This will include orders relayed from a superior officer by an officer of the same or lesser rank.Findings: Sustained

o Sgt knowingly and will fully disobeyed a direct order given by CommanderKarlewicz not to discuss this internal investigation with any person in the policedepartment except for his RPOG representative.

o Sgt talked in-depth with Commander after his first interview.o Sgt talked about this internal investigation to his subordinate jail staff members,

Jailers ando Sgt attempted to talk with Manager Bartley and Sgt , but they declined to

discuss the investigation.o Sgt said he understood the order given by Commander Karlewicz not to discuss

the internal investigation with any member of the department except his RPOGrepresentative.


30/60

i\

POLICE DEPARTMENT

M E M 0 R A N D U M

DATE: July 15, 2009TO: Kevin Milosevich, Chief of PoliceFROM: Clark Wilcox, Commander Auxiliary Servic.es Div ision

Discipline Recommendation- CO 03-09UBJECT:

Sgt has violated the trust given to him as a supervisor. Sgt made poorchoices by his words and actions. Sgt has not set the example as required bydepartment policy as a supervisor and Field Training Sergeant. Upon completion of thisinvestigation the facts have revealed that Sgt is not performing his dutiesas a supervisor to th e standards of th e Renton Police Department.

Discipline Recommendation:

1. Reduced in rank from Jail Sergeant to Jailer.

Sgt advised me on, or about, March 31, 2009 that he is a victim ofharassment in the work place by Sgt

Sgt said he was approached by inmate trustee who toldSgt he should watch his back from the other sergeant (Sgt andthe officers who work for Sgt

Sgt told inmate that Sgt was indecisive, could not makedecisions and was a poor supervisor.

Sgt said he does not have problems with subordinate jail staff membersunder his direct supervision.

The harassment is coming from subordinates who are direct reports to Sgt Sgt said he has not brought up the issue of harassment in the work place

prior, as he did not want to cause problems. Sgt has been trained in the City of Renton's Harassment policy and advises

his subordinates of the Harassment policy when he completes annual evaluations. Sgt said in his first interview that he knew the harassment policy anddescribed its content as, "any uncomfortable workplace condition created by either

unwanted comments, touching, or performance." Sgt said in his second interview, "Harassment is defined in the workplace as

creating an uncomfortable environment, negative unwanted talking, touching andcreating a hostile work environment."


31/60

(

(Kevin Milosevich, Chief of t vlicePage 2 of2July 15, 2009 EHD Officer was interviewed as a witness. During his interview, EHD

Officer said he knowledge regarding harassment in the work placeinstigated by Sgt and his squad.

EHD Officer said he believes he has been a victim of harassment in the workplace also.

EHD Officer believes the retaliat ion comes from Jailer andSgt working together. EHD Officer feels that does not go the way Jailer or Sgt

wants it to go, then they tend to work together and retaliate. EHD Officer felt he was retaliated against fo r requesting that the

Transport Officer position be posted for jail staff members to apply for. EHD Officer said if you cross or disagree with Sgt he will retaliate

in one way or another or just talk down about you. Sgt was appointed as a supervisor on February 16, 2001. He has had the

training to be an effective supervisor in the jail. Sgt has knowledge of department rules/regulations and City policies. Sgt

is the FTO Jail Sergeant. Sgt is charged with setting an example for subordinates to follow and

adhere to department rules/regulations and City polices. This investigation has shown Sgt is not performing the duties as a

supervisor, as all of the alleged allegations are SUSTAINED.

f: \7-13-09 recommendation memo co 03-09 .doc


32/60

(

POLICE DEPARTMENT

M E M 0 R A N D U M

DATE: September 14, 2009TO: Kevin Milosevich, Chief of PoliceFROM: Tim Troxel, Deputy Police ChiefSUBJEC Discipline Recommendation I C0-0309

Jail Sergeant

On Wednesday August 12, at 1300 hours I spoke in-person with Sergeantin police conference room B. With him as a guild representative was Officer Jim

Gould. Sergeant came prepared with a six-page narrative of talkingpoints/mit igating circumstances regarding this investigation. That document is attached.I wil l include parts of this information under each allegation. Sergeantinformation will be italicized. I will provide rebuttal information that will be underlined.

ALLEGATION #1Renton Municipal Policy 300-03. Harassment- It is the policy of the City of Renton tomaintain a work environment which is free of harassment based upon race, color, age,religion, sex, or national origin. This policy is not limited in application to harassmentbetween supervisors and subordinates, but also includes harassment between coworkers.

The investigation revealed that Sergeant participated in and allowedderogatory and negative conversations to take place regarding Sergeantsupervisory style and/or work performance. admitted to as much. Thespecific event that was documented in this investigation had to do with an incidentwhere recovered some plastic baggies from Jailer locker that hadbeen in the property of an inmate and may have contained illegal narcotics. Jailer

from crew, had removed them from the inmate's property after theywere placed there by a jailer on crew. wrote up the incidentas if had taken improper action and was storing baggies containing narcotics inhis locker.Sergeant became upset at this chain of events and felt that whatdid was "bullshit". It was out of this incident that "vented" generally about

work performance.


33/60

\Chief of Police Kevin MilosevicnPage 2 of8September 14, 2009

In my meeting with Sergeant he said that there was only one specificincident confirmed during this investigation related to his "venting". It was in regardsto the incident listed above where Sergeant recovered some inmateproperty I baggies which may have contained narcotics. had vented tosubordinates in the jail that handling of the incident was "bullshit".Information uncovered during the investigation convinces me that wasinvolved in on-going venting to subordinates regarding performance andsupervisory style. Sgt point is well-taken that just one specific incident wasconfirmed by the investigation. Although just one specific event was documented,negative conversations took place in which was involved and encouraged.For a sustained finding on this Harassment allegation, the victim ( has tobe a member of a protected class. is not a member of a protected classand thus is the subject and focus of derogatory remarks, not harassment.

Finding: Unfounded

ALLEGATION #2General Order 26.1.1.11.8. Unbecoming Conduct- Members of the Police Departmentshall conduct themselves at all times, both on and off duty, in such a manner as toreflect most favorably on the Department. Unbecoming conduct shall include thatwhich brings the Department into disrepute or reflects discredit upon the individual asa member of the Police Department, or that which impairs the operation or efficiencyof the Department or the individual.

The investigation revealed that Sergeant participated and allowedderogatory and negative conversations directed towards Sgt. Duringan interview with Commander Wilcox, Sgt. was asked, "Have youractions or words ever worked in a manner to discredit Sgt. with anyother city employee?" answered, "Yes". He also admits to venting to

subordinate jail staff about the "baggie" incident noted above.again pointed ou t as in Allegation #1 that just one specific incident or

event was confirmed during this investigation. had vented tosubordinates in the jail that handling of the incident was "bullshit".


34/60

Chief of Police Kevin MilosevichPage 3 of8September 14, 2009

(

Information uncovered during the investigation convinces me that wasinvolved in on-going venting to subordinates regarding Sgt.performance and supervisory style. This brought discredit upon basedupon what was said about him, and undermined his authority and reputation.This activity brought discredit upon for venting to subordinates.

Finding: Sustained

ALLEGATION #3General Order 26.1.1.11.YY. Ethics - Members of the Police Department shall notconspire or knowingly engage in any activity which deprives any person of their civilrights, due process, equal opportunity for employment, advancement, jobopportunities, or any constitutionally or statutorily guaranteed right. No member ofth':! police department shall disseminate confidential police-related information to anyunauthorized person for any purpose.

The investigation revealed that Sgt. conspired by his words or actionsand engaged in activities which have affected the opinions and conduct ofsubordinates in the Renton Jail. Sgt. took many opportunities to findfault with Sgt and talked about those faults with subordinate jail staff.

told me, that he vented to subordinate personnel about Hedid not believe his actions or words to subordinate officers brought discredit uponSgt.I am convinced that vented to subordinate jail staff aboutperformance and his alleged inability to make a decision. admits ininterview #1 that he had conversations with other city employees regarding hisdispleasure with Sgt (Interview #1, page 25). On page 26 of the sameinterview answered that, "Now I talked to his staff about him becausethey voiced their displeasure." He adds that he believed that was anineffective supervisor, "because he won't make a decision."

Finding: Sustained


35/60

(Chief of Police Kevin MilosevicnPage 4 of 8September 14, 2009

ALLEGATION #4

(

Auxiliary Services Division Standard Operating Procedure #038. Employee/ InmateFraternization- Jailers will not accept nor solicit any items, money, service orconsideration from any inmate, inmate's family, friends of an inmate, or solicit areward from any bondsman or agency. Additionally, jailers will not recommend ordirect and inmate toward any specific bondsman, attorney or other inmate agency.

The investigation revealed that Sergeant had conversations with Trusteeabout performance. The c o ~ v e r s a t i o n s began when Trusteewas apparently frustrated with in not giving a hard

release date. and spoke in the jail kitchen area. Aftergave a hard-release date to he advised that if he { hada complaint against he needed to put it in writing. The hard date thatgave to included extra gifted time (more than 7 days), notusually given without approval of the Jail Commander. said that"typically, yeah" he would have gotten prior approval. In this case, he did not getapproval. When asked, said, "There's no reason, I just didn't . I didn'tthink anything of it."Sometime after and had their conversation in the jail kitchen,

mentioned to Jailer that needed to write a letter if hehad a complaint against Shortly after, made contact with

and advised the same; if he had a complaint he needed to put it inwriting. "I f you write a letter, we will make sure it gets up to CommanderWilcox."

claimed that he did not solicit a let ter from Trustee referenceperformance. points out that during theinterview with Jailer

he appears to be confused about the letter was potentiallygoing to write. Later in the interview then clears up any confusion bysaying no one asked him to solicit a letter fromI believe had a conversation with regardingperformance. The performance complaints may have been brought up by

but cultivated the conversations and encouraged towrite a letter. After that conversation, spoke with who at somepoint went and made contact with again tel ling him that if he wrote aletter, "they" would make sure it got to Commander Wilcox. I believe thisreference to "they" meant or


36/60

(Chief of Police Kevin MilosevichPage 5 of 8September 14, 2009

These conversations along with the additional, unapproved gifted time given toby convinces me that the additional gifted time would be

granted, if wrote a letter about . This is a quid pro quo or,something for something agreement. This violates the above written AuxiliaryServices S.O.P.

Finding: Sustained

ALLEGATION #5General Order 1.3.1. Use of Force Authorization- Members shall use a reasonableamount of force necessary to accomplish the arrest, overcome perceived resistance toarrest, defend themselves or others from harm or to control a situation. The degree offorce used shall be in direct relationship to amount of resistance perceived by themember, or the imminent threat the person poses to the member or others. Memberswill use only the force necessary to accomplish lawful objectives.

The investigation focused on two {2) uses of force in the jail where Sgt.became involved. Both incidents are documented with Use of Force reports andvideo (no audio) from the jail system. In the fi rst instance on December 29,2008, Officer Ashbaugh was processing a DUI arrestee in the BAC room. Onvideo, enters the BAC room and speaks with Ashbaugh, then ends upsitting next to the arrestee on the BAC bench. Within seconds, the suspect putshis fingers in his own mouth then attempts to place those wet fingers on somepart of . controls the subject's hand I arm with soft-empty handtechniques.In the second use of force on December 30, 2008, Jailer Hoopii is dealing with aninmate who had allegedly been assaulted by another inmate. As the subjectinmate is seated on the floor in the padded cell, Jailer Hoopii is talking with theinmate. briskly enters the room and immediately bends over and gets inthe personal space of the inmate, pointing his finger within inches of theinmate's face. Within a few seconds the inmate spits at . , Hoopiiand Jailer Dement push over the subject and restrain him, eventually placing himin The Wrap.

claims that in both instances he used the appropriate amount of orce,completed accurate Use of Force reports that were then approved up the chain ofcommand. In event #2, he admits to getting in the face of the inmate in the


37/60


padded cell. The inmate spits at which allegedly included blood in thesaliva. comment during our discussion was, "did I get too close (to theinmate)? Lesson learned. Did Iplace myself in harm? Maybe, but he wasn't athreat."I agree that the Use of Force reports are accurate. However, I believeinstigated this second use of force by getting too close to the seated inmate. Itappears the inmate reacted to invading his personal space and getting inhis face. admits the same; "lesson learned". This action of instigating areaction by the inmate does not violate the letter of the policy as written above.However, it does fall under our Unbecoming Conduct policy.

Finding: Not-Sustained on Use of Force, Sustained on Unbecoming Conduct

ALLEGATION #6

General Order 26.1.1.11.TT. Truthfulness- Upon the order of the Chief of Police, theChief's designate, or a superior officer, members of the Police Department shall fullyand truthfully answer all questions specifically directed, and narrowly relating to theperformance of official duties, or fitness for office, which may be asked of them.

The investigation revealed that Sergeant had a conversation with inmateI trustee in the jail kitchen area. They discussed frustrationwith Sergeant not giving a specific release date. Theyinformally discussed performance and as said in hisinterviews, he did not say words to describe performance; he justused the words that had used. told that if he had acomplaint about he needed to put it in writing. During theirdiscussion, gave a release date to one that included moregifted time than normal and that which would normally trigger notification toand approval by the jail commander. This was not done and did not havea reason for not following his previous practice. Sometime after the I

conversation, spoke to and told him h.ow to file acolT)plaint.

In letter of complaint, he writes that ( would give hima release date of Aprill, lf he wrote a letter to you (Commander Wilcox) telling,


38/60

Chief of Police Kevin MilosevichPage 7 of8September 14, 2009

"that Sergeant was incompitant (sp) and indecisive .." claimsthat another officer ( was in the kitchen area at the time and told himwhat he { "was to put in the letter and not to seal it so they could readit". Additionally, shortly after and spoke, and Jailerspoke and then made contact with

Sgt admits to telling several times the process to file acomplaint. main issues had to do with not giving asolid answer on a release date. He denies that he ordered or directed asubordinate ( to talk to trustee to write a letter of complaintagainst

This order of conversations and requests I encouragement for to write aletter is suspicious. The fact that was given more than the normal rangeof gifted time, no t approved by command also raises concerns. I believe a letterwas solicited by a follow-up request and visit was accomplished by

and the additional gifted time was in anticipation of a letter beingwritten by I believe was not truthful during the interviews withCommanders Karlewicz and Wilcox.

Finding: Sustained

ALLEGATION #7

General Order 26.1.1.11.TT. Insubordination - Members of the Police Department shallpromptly obey any lawful orders of a superior officer. This will include orders relayedfrom a superior officer by an officer of the same or lesser rank.

The investigation revealed that Sgt knowingly disobeyed a direct ordergiven by Commander Karlewicz to not discuss this investigation with any personin the police department except his guild representative. admitted totalking with numerous department members about the investigation afterKarlewicz had given him a gag order.Sergeant had no rebuttal for this allegation. He knew the gag order wasin place and still violated the order. He added that he had no excuse for his


39/60


(

actions and takes full responsibility. He was upset following the initial interviewwith Karlewicz and that was his reason for talking with others about theinvestigation.Commander Karlewicz gave Sergeant a gag order during interview #1 onApril 23, 2009. After the interv iew Sergeant spoke with numerousdepartment members about the allegations and the investigation in directviolation of the gag order.

Finding: Sustained

Discipline Recommendation: Six (6} month reduction in rank from Sergeant to JailerThis investigation showed a very troubling pattern of behavior by SergeantSustained allegations of Unbecoming Conduct, Ethics, Violation of ASD SOP,Truthfulness and Insubordination are very concerning, especially when considering theyinvolve a Jail Sergeant.Sergeant in his Pre-Loudermill hearing with me attempted to downplay hisactions at every turn.

Unbecoming Conduct- just one confirmed event. Ethics- words and actions did not rise to the level of an ethics violation. ASD S.O.P. -Employee I Inmate Fraternization- did not solicit letter, even though

there was more gifted time promised than usual and without commandnotification and approval. A quid pro quo situation.

Truthfulness- denies that he ordered or directed Jailer to talk to Inmateabout writing a letter about performance.

Insubordination- for this allegation he accepted responsibility.I am of the opinion that department members put in leadership positions havedemonstrated an ability to know what to do at every turn. I believe knows theright course of action but has chosen not to take that course. actions led tothe above sustained violations of city policy, standard operating procedure and generalorders. The discipline recommendation is supported by these violations.


40/60

Date: August 2, 2009To: DeputyChiefTroxefFrom: SergeantSubject: Rebuttal to allegations and findings of 0 - 0 3 ~ 0 9

This is tcirespondto the internalinvestigationlwas given onJuJy 27,2009, concerning allegations of:Harassment, Unpecoming Conduct, Ethics; E m p l o y ~ e / l n m a t e Fraternization, Use of Force, Code of .Conduct and Appearance, Truthfulness, and .Insubordination.Tq add reS> t ~ e S ~ . a l e g a t i o ~ s r Wll r .,ply. to one ; ~ d ; ~ n J U a l l y .HO;ssment: was s u,tai ned that auqw . w o r ~ p l a e h a r a s s m e ~ t b y nlydJ s u b o r ~ i n a t e s aridthat l just venting when I talked negatively about Sgt. to ~ ~ $ ~ b c J r d i n a t e s ManagerBartley.

, .None of my actions were shown to affectSgt. work performanceor create an intimidating,hostile or offensive environment. When answering questions that.Commander V\lilcoxwasasking,.Sgt. stated that he and r do have p e r ~ o n a l i t y clashes; hcmever prior to .the conversation with. . . - . ' . . ; : .:Trustee had never voiced a concern. He stated "I think it all came to a head back inNovember with t h C ~ t ; that evidence and baggie incident. I b e l i e V ~ t h ~ t ' s w h e n it al l cal11e to prettymuch slap me in the face and otherthings you know; looking, looking. back and Ican'treally think ofan incident in particular but you know theres beefllikepossiblepeaks and and uh glances but the big. '. . . . . .. . . . -. .one came in November when I, when! did what Uelt was th.e rightthing to do." ldidvclice my

' ' - - ' ' j. ,_, ' .

displeasure for this one (1) i.nciclentto Manager Bartley and Officer the parties involved at thetime. Once the ncident was handled by the a d m i n i s t ~ a t i o n i t w a s ~ d l o n g e r anissue and notdiscussed again. This is. only i n c i d e n t - t h a ~ Sgt. u s e d to verify this allegation. The bnlyreason Sgt. . felt harassed in the workplace v y ~ s due to a c o n ~ e r s a t i o n t h ~ t he ~ i t hTrustee When Commimder Wilc;ox a s b ~ c : J ho\tv do you ~ e l , what cio you. f ~ e i w o u l d make your. ' ', . . . ' ... . .work environment betterat this time? Sgt. answered by s t a t i ~ g that we will always have an

' . . . '' .-.. .. ."A" and "B" side, thatwe should get along bet ter and some procecjural issues. When CommanderWilcox said I'm talking about your working relations with other staffmernber$ in the jaiL Sgt.. ' . . ' __ ' . - ': . ' ' , . . -stated, "Oh. I don 't know, I've neverreally thought about it in particular I g u e s s . ~ ' Againshowing that the only reasonthat Sgt: f feels this way is C!Je to w h a ~ T r u s t e e told. - . - . : ' ' ' ' ,' - ., -.. ': - . ' - , .. - . -. . . " . ' . . -_ : ~ " : " . 'him. My actions had no affect on Sgt. in regards to creating a h o s t i l e f , o f f e n s i v ~ workenvironment. In regards to speaking to Manager Bartley, C o m i T l ~ l l d e r W i l ~ o x stated in ~ ~ ~ e g a t i o n #2 ;that these a c t i o ~ s are acceptable as she was the d'irect supervisorto both of them.


41/60

(

Unbecoming collduct: .Cit was s ~ s t a i n e d t h a t I brought discredit to Sgt; and impaired the'-_::- . .'. -. . .operation and efficiency .of the Renton Jail.. . . . . . ...

When asked have. your actions or words ~ v e r worked in a manner to discredit Sgt . with anyother City employee? I answered "Yes." I also stated that it was with Manager Bartley, my boss.In regards to the plastic baggie incident that were found in an inmate,s property. They contained nocontraband,theywere simply sm'all. clear baggies that might at onetime contained contraband,.

. ' I ' . '- ' . ,. . . . .however did not at the time ofdiscovery. I toJd Officer to place the baggies in his locker and toshow the officers involved 1,11hen they came back to work; At t imeOfficer and weresupposedto go back in and work withthegraveyardcrewon';JB1 to a d d r ~ s s t r a i ~ i n g issues thatwereidentified on a memo sehtto.Manager Bartley on N o v ~ ~ b e r 18, 2008, Sgt was told thatthe., ,_ . ... ', ' ... , , - . - - ' . . . .baggies were in Officers lc)cker and he recovered them. He then called Manager Bartley whotold him to hold onto them until she could loqk at them. He instead pulled a case andentered theminto evidence. M < m a g e r B a r t l e y r e c o ~ e r e d th e a g g i ~ s ' f r o m evidence and presented them to Chief ..Milosevich. Upon the Chiefs recommendation the case Wi35 removed from. the system and no furtheraction was required, because no c o n t ~ a b a n d . was in the baggies. J view ed this as a blatant slight toOfficer and myself to show that we made amistake in light ofthe memo, especially since he VIlastold by Manager. Bartley that she wanted. to look at the baggies before 'he did anything. When I wasasked "So whatwas th e gist of the c o n v e r s a t i o n ~ you had with other Jailers regarding that andregarding your displeasure with attempting to do thatr I stated "That it was bullshit. 11 Thisstatement was the "Gist" of conversations, that the allegations were Bullshit.

My "Venting" was notregardingSgt. sperformance to my subordinates. The statement thatit was Bullshit was in reference to the allegations that he had hlade and was the "Gist" of theconversations.I stated that I would discuss Sgt. s performancewith Manager Bartley. CommanderWilcoxstated that these actions are acceptable as she was the direct supervisor to both. of them.

I do not feel that by stating_ I felt-that accusations brought against one of my subordinates .andI bySgt. to be ' ~ B u l l s h i t ~ , have brought discredit th e ~ n t o n Police D e p a r t ~ e n t ; .. . ,' . . . - --- ... ' ' 'I do not feel that my actions or words.to subordinate officers have brought discredit to Sgt.

. . . . - . .Ethics: I do not feel that I have conspired 6ymy words and/or actions in activities that have affectedthe conduct ofsubordinates in theRentonJail. I contend that Sgt. s actions .are what thejail staff forms their opinion of him byr as was stated by his subordinates.


42/60

Officer was asked during his interview by Commander. Wilcox, "Do you believe that Sgt.is an ineffectivesupervisor?uHis replywas, ' ' !think there's room for. improvement. I don't thinkanybody h e r e ~ I have very high s t a h c f ~ r d s and my idea of supervision is different than, thanwhat I ' v ~seen here because I come from the private.sector and. was tau'ght how to be a supervisor; I think Sgt.

is very sincere. I think he wor;ks hard. I think he needs some attention thqugh to makesure that he meets deadlines and, and he could bemore effective." This statement was made basedon Officers pi Iat's own opinion of Officer reportsto Sgt.When Officer was asked by C o m m a h d ~ r Wilcox ;,Do you believethat Sgt. is anineffective. supervisor?" His reply was ~ ' I n s o ~ ~ r e s p e c t s , yes, sir. Urn, I care a loiaboutSgt.

but I, there's some things that he and I dont see eye to eye about. Um, I just, I feel thatUm," Commander Wilcox interrupted and asked "Is it a difference of opinion, d i f f e r ~ n c e of direction,difference of enforcing policies, or just not enforcihg policies?". Officer r e s p o n ~ e d with "No. Ifeel that uh, J feel that there's certain things that you know, that should be dealtwithon a moreregular basis down there that aren't, Uh, you know when, you know when we get into the, he and I

. . ' . I

get in arguments when we get into differences, or you know making sure thing{are ordered and, youknow, yes, his ideas of priorities is what is to take care, you taking care. of and when i fs to be taken. ' ' . I' . 'care and when you work three days on and you're three days off, it may slip through the cracks, thenconsequently we end up not getting it. U m , . - ~ ' Officer goes on to describe different situationsthat caused him to form his opinion, however he formed his opinion based on [lis own interactionswith Sgt. and no t based on anything fdid or said. Officer also ~ p o r t s t o Sgt.

When Officer was asked by Commander Wilcox "Do yoU believe that Sgt. is anineffective supervisor?" Officer replied; "He's effective ih. what.he's .doing right now. In whathe's doing right now." Officer reports to me. His comments reflect that! do not affectin anyway how my subordinates viewSgt and that based on the other two (2) officers interviewedthat the jail staff baie their opinions on personal interactions vvith Sgt .

The opinion that Commander Wilcox statedi that ! take every opportunity to find fault with Sgt.and tell Manager Bartley in person, by telephone or email, or that I tell anyone who will

listen, is completely without merit. I did state that I would talk to Manager Bartley about Sgt.however not at every opportunity. The email correspondence that were submitted with this. '. - . .

investigation show that in. the case of the November is, 2008 incident, that I identified a problem as atraining. issue and because I was responsible fortraining wanted to fix the. issue. ! took fullresponsibility for thetraining,issues with a n a g e r B a r t l e Y a ~ d stated on that memo thatitwas atraining issue.. I donot know howthe other c o r r ~ ~ p o n d e n c e included iQ the i n v e s t i g a t i c i ~ have anyrelevance to any ofthe allegations that I was charged ,with, h o v . ; ~ v e r t h e y do JJcit show ahy negative

', :: ,_-- .L.- :\'< . :_._, " ,.. '' - '' -r, , 'comments by myself or:. Manager Be1rtley about Sgt.


43/60

I t was stated "Sgt . said in t-1is i ~ t ~ r v i e w s that hiswords or actions have created d.iscredit toSgt. character." In no way did I make this statement. The q u ~ s t k > n was "Okay. Do you.believe your words, actions, or conduct as a supervisor can sway subofdinates'thoughts or conducttowards other members of the department?'; My reply was "Thoughts? Yes.;; Then) was ~ s k e d "Doyou believe that your actions or conduct also swaytho!:;e?" My reply was "Yes;" I do. believe that' . ' - ' .- .my actions and conduct could sway subordinates thoughts towards other department members,however as pointed out n the statements given by other jail stafftheir opinion was not that of mine.They gave totally different reasons for their opinion of Sgt. than I diclthey based their owndealings with him. I stated that i feel Sgt. is ineffective because. he will not makeadecision.

I did not solicit Trustee to write. a let ter in .regacdstoSgt, performance, What I' -did was in compliancewith department policy in regardsto complaints. ' . -. . . : . . '

I did speak with Trustee regarding Sgt: and good time.. - . ' . . _::. . .- .: .: ' . : -

I did explain to Trustee that Jf.he had a complalnt about Sgt. that he could write .a.letter and voice,his complaint on that letter addressed to Commander Wilcox.

That Officer in n : ~ g a r d s to the n conversation stated that if Trustee had a complaint to.write a letter. knew what complaint was because prior to speakingwith me he had spoken to Officer who referred him to me.When asked "Have you ever requested or solicited a letter frorn any person or inmate regardinganother member of the jail staff, or jail member's performance?" Officer answered "Yeah,Sgt. CommanderWilcoxthen asked "Have you ev.ersolicited a letter from any person orinmate regarding another jail. member 's performance?" Officer replied "No. T,he only thing I

- ' , I ' - -don't understand ._ - - . . - - ' - - c . - - - I said go ahead and write your letter and we'll make sure i t gets up to Commander Wilcox?" C o ~ m a n d e r W i l c o x t h e ~ asked''Okay, so you did not solicit aletter .. ?" O f f i c e Replied \\Solicit? Uh" Commander Wilcox then explained "Go upto him and .say, I need you to writea this letter," Officer No, no, no, no, no, no." So.CommanderWilcox s k ~ d the question again that ''Do you have knowledge,of any member of theRenton Jail staff sol.idting a letterJromany inmate regarding the performance of any member of the


44/60

When asked by Commander. Wilcox "Have you everbeen directed by a supervisor or any other jail ... . -. .. . ;staff member to solicit from. any nmate ariywritten documentation regarding any departmentmember's performance?" O fficer said "No."

Use of Force: In regards to the use offorce allegations, I feelthat I operated within the departmentpolicy for use of orce applications and process fo r repoFting thesame. My Use. bfforce reports thatwere criticized in this investigation werereviewed prior.tothis n v e ~ t i g a t i o n and deemed appropriateby Manager Bartley, Deputy Chief Troxel,. ChiefMIIoseVich. I completed the proper p a p e ~ w o r k ,submitted the Vi cleo's that were reviewed a.nd aid nothing inappropri9te.

In the findings it is stated thatthe subject's.were complianVwith noaggressive actions to.ward anymember of the jail staff, until Sgt. enteredthe area. Sgt. appears to h a ~ e i n s t i g a t e dboth applications of force by his words and/or conduct. This statement is completely i n c o r r e c t ~ Thatin fact with regard to he intnateWho ~ p i t in my ~ c e : . He had been involved in an altercation in hiscell with a n o t h ~ r inmate. When I arrived from nly office to ceii.''S1'' the inmate. was yelling at Officer. .Hoopii about a .towel as indicated on my use offorce report: The inmate was at no time compliant toverbal commands to stop yelling, _however vias seated and not a threat. I was trying to explain t h ; . - e a ~ t _ ___,we needed to figure out what had h ~ p p e n e d and he needed to carm down and shut up. During thistime the inmate spit in my face and force was applied; In reviewing the video afterwards I believe i tto show the officers I was with responded 'before I did to theassault, as they had seen him spit onme. The inmate was ~ q n t r o l l e d using the le;st amount offorce necessary to gain compliance awas placed in "The Wrap." Following this event Ivvent i.ntothe cell along with Officer Brunner andasked the i n ~ a t e if he had i n t e n t i o n ~ l l y ' s p i f i n my face had itbeen a mistake as .he was yelling. .Hereplied "I p l e a d t h ~ st11 .' ; Thisstatement indicates to methat he had l n t e n t i o n ~ l l y spaton me,

1 ,. '

On the second use of force being questioned involving an intoxicated subject in the.BA.C room: At no.. "time was this gentle.man upset while I was in the room. That we engaged in conversation af)d that he

thought I was cute and attempted to l ~ c e hisJinger in my earwhHe stating thathe hacl Arbs. This. : ' ,: ' __ ' ': . . . . . . . .event was also documented properly and reviewed. I also s u b m i t t ~ d thi.s video along with my reports.- . , ' . : . , :. - ;' ': . . .. ..:- . :, . . ', - .

In both use of force allegations .neither the subjects that orc;e was used on .complained that 1 actedinappropriately and all the other officers present agreed th('lti acted appropriately .

. . . . " _--. . ', . .,~ = - - = ~ ~ ~ ~ . E . ! . ! ~ ~ ~ ~ : ! ! . ! ! ~ . . ; . ! . . . ! . ~ ~ ~ ~ = r e g ~ r d , s . t o t h e s ~ aljegati9nsl feel that I.havebeen completely honest during t i ' i ~ i n v e s b g ~ t i o n ~ 6 d b o t h ' i ~ t e r v i e w s . $ h o w . t h i ~ , ~ ' '


45/60

I stated several t imes during intervievv .that I did tell he cquidfjle a complaintand how to do i t . Thathe coUidput on paper ! l l t h ~ tbingshe v v a s . c o ~ p l ~ i n i n g abc)uLtorne and sendi t up. In previous questions I had already ansvvered. issues were with Sgt.

and that I felt that the biggest issue to him was his release date and the fact that he feltSgt. would not .givehim a solid.ahswer h i s r ~ q u e s t . !.at no time ~ r d e t e d o r directedasubordinate to taU< to Trustee aboutfilinga complaint, that! may have mentioned that hewanted to file a complaint.

I would also like to take this time to point out that this event occurred on March 16th, 2009 aroundlunch time. I spoke with Trustee for.Appcoxim(ltely t(lree (3) minutes regarding this issue. Ithen worked thatfull three.(3) day rotation and th e following three (3 ) day rotation and. neither I norany of my subordinates made mention of a lettertQ anyone i ~ c l u d i l l g Trustee. dDring thistime; I wenton vacation on the. 25th ()fMafch and w h e ~ I r e t ~ r n e d w a s under investigation:

' ' '.. . . . ' . '.

In regards to Officer statements I believe that i covered this issue ~ n a previous accusation... . . . ' - - , ' . ' . -._

Insubordination: I have no rebuttal to this allegatiC>o. Iknewthat a ''Gag" orderwas in place andhaving known this I still v i o l ~ t e d the ;rder; I have no x c u ~ ~ for my actions andtake fullresponsibility. I was upset following the interview and although this does not excuse my behavior forthis action, I hope that i t explains my reasoning at the. time .. .

r have given you two c ~ p i e s o f t h i s r e b u t t a i . P i ~ a S ~ initial one copy, c k ~ o w l e d g i n ~ tht this is being .placed in my personnel file along with the inve'stigation..

[Your Name]

Date


46/60

( POliCE DEPARTMENT

M E M 0 R A N D U M

DATE: September 21, 2009Sgt.O:

FROM: Kevin Milosevich, Chief of PoliceIntent to Discipline I C0-0309UBJECT:

I have received and reviewed the investigation that was conducted by Commander ClarkWilcox. I have also reviewed the findings and discipline recommendations submit ted byboth Commander Wilcox and Deputy Chief Tim Troxel.ALLEGATION #1General Order 26.1.1.11.8. Unbecoming Conduct - Members of the Police Departmentshall conduct themselves at all times, both on and of f duty, in such a manner as toreflect most favorably on the Department. Unbecoming conduct shall include thatwhich brings the Department into disrepute or reflects discredit upon the individual as.a member of the Police Department, or that which impairs the operation or efficiencyof the Department or the individual.This investigation documents numerous opportunities where you have failed as aleader. This failed leadership impacted Sgt the Jait and the Department.According to your own statement:

You believe it is your responsibility as a supervisor to set the example fo r yoursubordinates to follow.

You believe it is your responsibility to ensure a cohesive working relationship inthe Jail.

You are responsible fo r the health and welfare on inmates who are in custody inour Jail. You admitted to having conversations with members of the Jail staff regardingyour displeasure with Sgt

You stated that you "vented" with your crew as a reaction of Sgtcrew finding the dope baggies on an inmate. (Result of a l


47/60

( You stated that you described Sgt as incompetent and indecisive toother members of the Jail staff. That this is a result of complaints by staffassociated with Sgt

You stated in interview #2 that you might have told "If Sgtcan't make a decision, I'll make it." (Referring to a release date)

When subordinates have expressed concerns regarding Sgt youstated that you usually ignore it because it's been told so many times. And thatyou initially notified Manager Bartley of the concerns, but not in the past twoyears.

That you were notified by Manager Bartley that Sgt received a poorevaluation and you shared this information with JailerFinding: SustainedALLEGATION #2Auxiliary Services Division Standard Operating ~ r o c e d u r e #038. Employee /InmateFraternization-Jailers will not accept nor solicit any items, money, service orconsideration from any inmate, inmate's family, friends of an inmate, or solicit areward from any bondsman or agency. Additionally, jailers will not recommend ordirect and inmate toward any specific bondsman, attorney or other inmate agency.The origination of the complaint is troublil"!g. Inmate was performing thefunctions of a Trustee in the jail. Trustee's have access to many areas within the jail,including to overhearing conversations in the Control room.According to Inmate

He requested a release date from Sgt Sgt was getting offshift and told he could discuss it next week or he could talk to Sgt

the following day. spoke with Sgt the next day. Sgt stated he would give

him a release date in exchange for a letter to the Jail Commander stating that Sgtwas incompetent, indecisive and a poor sergeant.

brought this information to Sgt attention.

According to your statements: You had a discussion with was complaining about the lack of receiving a release date. was complaining about Sgt You advised to write down his complaint and that you would send it to

the Jail Commander.


48/60

~ h release date that you gave included gifted time (more than 7 days-lf 14 ays in this case), not usually given without the approval of the Jail

'o mander. That you did not receive prior approval from the Jail Commander to award the

"gifted time".I do no t believe there is enough information to sustain the allegation. However, thesequence of events associated with this allegation is suspicious. Both and youhave a motive from such a letter if it was written. wants ou t of th e Jail, and youclearly have an on-going frustration with Sgt .Finding: Not SustainedALLEGATION #3General Order 1.3.1. Wse of Force Authorization- Members shall use a reasonableamount of force necessary to accomplish the arrest, overcome perceived resistance toarrest, defend themselves or others from harm or to control a situation. The degree offorce used shall be in direct relationship to amount of resistance perceived by themember, or the imminent threat the person poses to th e member or others. Memberswill use only the force necessary to accomplish lawful objectives.The investigation focused on two (2) uses of force in th e jail where you becameinvolved. Both incidents are documented with Use of Force reports and video (noaudio) from the jail system. In th e first instance on December 29, 2008, OfficerAshbaugh was processing a DUI arrestee in the BAC room. On video, you entered theBAC room and spoke with Officer Ashbaugh; you sa t next to the arrestee on th e BACbench. Within seconds, the suspect puts his fingers in his own mouth then attempts toplace those wet fingers on you. The suspect's action resulted in your control ofthesubject's hand/ arm with soft-empty hand techniques.In the second use afforce on December 30, 2008, Jailer Hoopii is dealing with an inmatewho had allegedly been assaulted by another inmate. As the subject inmate is seatedon th e floor in the padded cell, Jailer Hoopii is talking with the inmate. You brisklyentered th e room and immediately entered the personal space of the inmate, pointingyour finger within inches of the inmate's face. Within a few seconds the inmate spits atyou. As a result Jailer Hoopii, Jailer Dement, and you push the subject and restrainedhim, eventua lly placing him in The Wrap.The Use of Force reports are accurate. However, I believe you instigated this second useof force by getting too close to th e seated inmate. It appears the inmate reacted to youinvading his personal space. This action of instigating a reaction by the inmate does notviolate th e letter of th e policy as written above. However, it does fall under ourUnbecoming Conduct policy.


49/60

(

Finding: Not-Sustained on Use of Force, Sustained on Unbecoming ConductALLEGATION #4General Order 26.1.1.11.TT. Insubordination- Members of the Police Department shallpromptly obey any lawful orders of a superior officer. This will include orders relayedfrom a superior officer by an of ficer of the same or lesser rank.The investigation revealed that you knowingly disobeyed a direct order given byCommander Karlewicz to not discuss this investigation with any person in the policedepartment except your guild representative. The investigation revealed that you spokewith numerous Department members.Finding: SustainedDiscipline Recommendation:

Eighty (80) hour suspension without pay.o Successful completion of a performance action plan as developed by your

supervisor.The Department's General Orders outlines your appeal rights. Please notify SherrySmith within 5 days of receiving this memo if you wish to discuss this disciplinerecommendation or request to exercise your appeal options.After notification, I will schedule the appropriate meeting or review board. I will thennotify you of my final decision.I have received a copy of the intent to discipline memorandum.

~ < ; _ l ~ [ 6'\Date


50/60

(

POLICE DEPARTMENT

M E M 0 R A N D U M

DATE: October 8, 2009Sgt.O:

FROM: Kevin Milosevich, Chief of Police V\Discipline C0-0309UBJECT:

I have received and reviewed the investigation that was conducted by Commander ClarkWilcox. I have also reviewed the findings and discipline recommendations submitted byboth Commander Wilcox and Deputy Chfef Tim Troxel.On October ih, a Loudermill hearing was held in my office. At this meeting, you wererepresented by Sgt. Skelton. We discussed the circumstances regarding the "gifting" ofgood time for Inmate the use of force incident in the holding facility; and youopenly admitted to the allegation of insubordination.ALLEGATION #1Auxiliary Services Division Standard Operating Procedure #038. Employee I InmateFraternization -Jailers will not accept nor solicit any items1 money1 service orconsideration from any inmate1 inmate1s family1 friends of an inmate1 or solicit areward from any bondsman or agency. Additionally1 jailers will not recommend ordirect and inmate toward any specific bondsman1 attorney or other inmate agency.The origination of the complaint is troubling. Inmate was performing thefunctions of a Trustee in the jail. Trustee's have access to many areas within the jail,including to overhearing conversations in the Control room.According to Inmate

He requested a release date from Sgt Sgt was getting of fshift and told he could discuss it next week or he could talk to Sgtthe following day.

spoke with Sgt the next day. Sgt stated he would givehim a release date in exchange for a letter to the Jail Commander stating that Sgt

was incompetent, indecisive and a poor sergeant. brought this information to Sgt attention.


51/60

( (

According to your statements: You had a discussion with . was complaining about the lack of receiving a release date. was complaining about Sgto You advised to write down his complaint and that you would send it to

the Jail Commander. You provided a release date that included good time for his status as a Trustee.

I do not believe there is enough information to sustain the allegation.Finding: Not SustainedALLEGATION #2General Order 1.3.1. Use of Force Authorization- Members shall use a reasonableamount of force necessary to accomplish the arrest, overcome perceived resistance toarrest, defend themselves or others from harm or to control a situation. The degree offorce used shall be in direct relationship to amount of resistance perceived by themember, or the imminent threat the person poses to the member or others. Memberswill use only the force necessary to accomplish lawful objectives.The investigation focused on two (2) uses of force in the jail where you becameinvolved. Both incidents are documented with Use of Force reports and video (noaudio) from the jail system. In the first instance on December 29, 2008, OfficerAshbaugh was processing a DUI arrestee in the BAC room. On video, you entered theBAC room and spoke with Officer Ashbaugh; you sat next to the arrestee on the BACbench. Within seconds, the suspect puts his fingers in his own mouth then attempts toplace those wet fingers on you. The suspect's action resulted in your control of thesubject's hand I arm with soft-empty hand techniques.In the second use of force on December 30, 2008, Jailer Hoopii is dealing with an inmatewho had allegedly been assaulted by another inmate. As the subject inmate is seatedon the floor in the padded cell, Jailer Hoopii is talking with the inmate. You brisklyentered the room and immediately entered the personal space of the inmate, pointingyour finger within inches of the inmate's face. With in a few seconds the inmate spits atyou. As a result Jailer Hoopii, Jailer Dement, and you push the subject and restrainedhim, eventually placing him in The Wrap.The Use of Force reports are accurate. However, I believe you instigated this second useof force by getting too close to the seated inmate. It appears the inmate reacted to youinvading his personal space. This action of instigating a reaction by the inmate does notviolate the letter of the policy as written above. However, it does call into question thetactic that was used to gain compliance. While "invading" an inmate's personal space


52/60

does not legally permit the inmate to make an aggressive response, I consider thisincident as a training issue rather than a discipline issue.Finding: Not-Sustained with a recommendation of additional training of optionsavailable under similar circumstances.ALLEGATION #3General Order 26.1.1.11.TT. Insubordination- Members of the Police Department shallpromptly obey any lawful orders of a superior officer. This will include orders relayedfrom a superior officer by an officer of the same or lesser rank.The investigation revealed that you knowingly disobeyed a direct order given byCommander Karlewicz t

98 _Renton Police Department Public Records

Documents

Transcript of 98 _Renton Police Department Public Records