MORE ABOUT MISSING CMPD RECORDS

TIP OF THE ICEBERG AT CMPD ACADEMY?

Following extensive research and inquiry, citynewswatch discovered that the initial report of hundreds of Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department Officer records was just the beginning.  It turns out the first 499 out of 501 Officers’ records on the AUDIT list which indicated a problem were merely out of the first 501 checked…   it seemed CMPD and the NCDOJ Criminal Justice Standards Division were happy to leave the impression after many questions about a full audit of CMPD that those were all the problems found.  This would have been bad enough, but was only the first < 1/3 they checked out of 1782 officers’ files.

For details and copies of memos sent a year ago from Deputy Chief Katrina Graue ordering officers to come in and have fingerprints re-done and obviously admitting the missing records, see these previous citynewswatch posts here and here.

WHAT IS THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY DOING?

The NCDOJ CJSD has said they have no answer from Chief Monroe or any surrogate for him on what the heck happened in the first place, even for multiple officers who had to be pulled from duty by the State because they were working without certification standards—some for years.  Recent NCDOJ CJSD Director Wayne Woodard and current Deputy Director Pam Pope had issued letters to CMPD demanding immediate removal from active duty of the officers and a list of requirements for those officers (names blacked out here) before they could be reinstated.  However, the same agency says they don’t have any such letter from Monroe—but have reinstated the officers.   Hmm.  

One of the requirements was clearly to explain what the heck is going on in CMPD and the management issues.  You can read for yourself in some of the letters found below, including that multiple officers were working uncertified, that Chief Monroe was required to issue letters explaining the lack of management control was missed in his agency, and a recommendation in July, 2011 that CMPD should contact the District Attorney's Office, advise of the separations involving these officers and then “it is up to them whether they believe any action may be warranted.”  These are exactly the type of issues raised by citynewswatch a year ago, but there’s still no answer what action, if any, has been taken.

FULL AUDIT RESULTS VERY CONCERNING

When the full audit was complete, results show in a letter in September, 2012, that:

·        41 officers are deficient in some manner with mandated in-service training required in previous years; and

·        47 officers are deficient with Certification requirements of the Commission

The completion and report of audit findings does not preclude further Commission action as deemed appropriate.

When asked if this statement on his letterhead by Deputy Director Pope meant that 47 CMPD officers were now considered out of Certification and would be removed from active duty status, current Interim Director of the NCDOJ Criminal Justice Standards Division, Robert Yow, has said “the issues included in the final audit report (for all 1792 files) have been referred for further inquiry, and I cannot comment upon them.”

CONCERNED DIRECTOR FROM NCDOJ

Former NCDOJ CJSD Director Wayne Woodard expressed his concerns before the final audit was complete:

From: Woodard, Wayne

Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 4:50 PM

To: kgraue@cmpd.org

Cc: Pope, Pam

Subject: CMPD Issues

Deputy Chief Graue,

I would like to talk with you in regards to several issues involving your agency. First, there is a need to follow-up with you concerning the audit of officer certification files that our staff recently conducted at your agency. Secondly, there are several other issues that have come up, both before and since the audit which merit our discussion. I will tell you I am very concerned about these other issues and concerned about the actions of some members of your agency regarding these issues.

Please let me know if you are available anytime within the next several days for a phone conversation. If so, what is a good time and at what number may I reach you. I do plan to ask my Deputy director, Pam Pope, to join us since she was involved in the audit process and has relevant information to share.

Thank you,

Wayne Woodard, Director

Criminal Justice Standards Division

North Carolina Department of Justice

919-661-5980

SUMMARY OF FIRST OFFICER RECORDS AUDITED

To get an idea the extent of the problem, here is a summary of the issues with the first 501 records reviewed:

From: Marrella, Teresa

Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 3:41 PM

To: Pope, Pam

Subject: CMPD Audit Stats

Pam,

Below are the stats of files which were missing items or the wrong form was used.

I have attached the spreadsheet.

Proof of Minimum Age of 20

13 Missing

Proof of Education

27 Missing

Proof of Citizenship

15 Missing

Results of FP Record Check

111 Missing

Medical History F-1

397 Missing

Medical Exam Report F-2

417 Missing

Personal History Statement F-3

13 Missing

Qualifications Appraisal

22 Missing

Mandated Background Investigation F-8

16 Missing

191 CMPD form

Firearms Qualification

379 Missing

---

Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 4:23 PM

To: Pearsall, Sherie

Cc: Little, Jenny; Sauber, Jason; jcfields@cmpd.org

Subject:

Major Pearsall,

Per our earlier telephone conversation, we are requesting the following documents to straighten out the information and correct status on the above persons with your agency/formerly with your agency:

XXXXXX

• need an amended Form F-5B with corrected identifying information (DOB, SSN, Oath of Office)

• Letter from Chief Monroe that has not separated from your agency and that has been working full time since XXXXXX date of hire on whatever specific date.

• Copies of all certification paperwork ("F" forms from our office)

• Letter from Chief Monroe stating status of employment with CMPD including rank, current assignment, etc. Also, please include how this was missed on your agency profile since 1998.

• Date of drug test for employment or copy of same

• Training for in-service has been received by email and we will notify you if we need additional information

• Copies of all certification paperwork ("F" forms from our office)

• Letter from Chief Monroe stating status of employment with CMPD including rank, current assignment, etc. Also, please include how this was missed on your agency profile since 1998.

• Date of drug test for employment or copy of same

• Training for in-service has been received by email and we will notify you if we need additional information

Again, these officers are not to work until properly certified through our Division. Additionally, as I mentioned, CJ Standards recommended that CMPD contact your District Attorney's Office and advise of the separations involving these officers and then it is up to them whether they believe any action may be warranted.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me at 919-779-8204.

Pam

Pam Pope

Deputy Director

Criminal Justice Standards Division

ppope@ncdoj.gov

919-661-5980

---

From: Pearsall, Sherie [mailto:spearsall©cmpd.org]

Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 8:26 AM

To: Pope, Pam

Cc: Kukowski, Rebecca L. (Becky); Graue, Katrina; Monroe, Rodney

Subject: RE: XXXXXX and XXXXXX

Importance: High

Sensitivity: Confidential

Deputy Director Pope, first thank you once again for your prompt attention to this matter.

All items have been pulled and copies are on their way to you this morning. In addition a member of our H/R staff, Thyssen Brawley will be accompanying Sgt. Ray Williams this morning with each employee's complete file for your review and extraction of any additional data that you may require in order to expedite this process.

• We are currently attempting to locate the original drug screen form with date for XXXXXX and as soon as we have it in hand it will be delivered to you.

• I am unable to provide a comprehensive explanation about how XXXXXX and XXXXXX were missed on our agency profile at this time. This issue is currently being researched by one of our current H/R supervisors. There appears to be some discrepancies regarding actual receipt of the profiles by our agency.

Rebecca Kukowski will be contacting Jenny Little today regarding same so that we may better coordinate our efforts moving forward.

Please feel free to contact me once you have these items in hand should we need to coordinate any additional efforts throughout the day. I can be reached at 704.619.2995.

Major Sherie E. Pearsall

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT

TRAINING AND RECRUITMENT

1770 SHOPTON ROAD

CHARLOTTE. N.C. 28217

704.432.1641

SPEARSALL@CMPD.ORG

"...PEOPLE WILL FORGE I WHAT YOU SAID, PEOPLE WILL FORGET WHAT YOU DID, BUT PEOPLE WILL NEVER FORGET HOW YOU MADE THEM FEEL."

AUTHOR." MAYA ANGELOU

---

From: Pope, Pam

Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 1:03 PM

To: mhannan@cmPd.org

Cc: Woodard, Wayne

Subject: FW: Audit results needing important follow up response

Importance: High

Miriam,

As I mentioned to you on the telephone the other day, we felt that it was important to send you information in writing on three of your officers where there were serious issues found during our audit of your certification files.

XXXXXX:

XXXXXX failed to complete his 2007 mandated in-service training as reported by your agency as deficient on the Form F-9 was suspended as of April 10, 2008 and a certified letter was mailed to him.  XXXXXX signed for this letter on April 18, 2008. At that point in time, XXXXXX should have ceased performing any law enforcement actions. My understanding is that this had not happened as of September 28, 2011. Per my conversation with Captain Bannerman, must immediately cease performing law enforcement actions until ill has complied with the following and has received a letter from this office rescinding. XXXXXX 's suspension:

• XXXXXX.  needs to write a statement to address why XXXXXX continued to work as a law enforcement officer after receiving a letter of suspension. Also, this statement needs to address whether, XXXXXX discussed XXXXXX s suspension with any member of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department including who XXXXXX spoke with, when XXXXXX spoke with them and what was XXXXXX told.

• XXXXXX must complete the 2007 mandated in-service training which XXXXXX failed to complete (everything but firearms) or provide verification in the form of a certificate of completion with date, title, and hours of the course or a roster with the same information.

• XXXXXX must also provide documentation that XXXXXX has completed all of the 2008, 2009 and 2010 mandated in-service training. The same documentation noted in the second bullet must be provided.

XXXXXX

XXXXXX was separated by an F-5B (Report of Separation) which was filed by your agency on May 15, 2008. We did not receive any additional information from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department requesting XXXXXX be moved to a reserve status instead of separated. Therefore, XXXXXX has not been certified since May 2008 and should not have been working in a law enforcement capacity. My understanding is that did not happen and IMO XXXXXX has been working actively as a reserve officer. Per my conversation with Captain Bannerman, XXXXXX must immediately cease performing law enforcement actions until XXXXXX has complied with the following and has received a letter from this office rescinding XXXXXX separation and reissuing le certification:

• A letter from Chief Monroe to Criminal Justice Standards Director Wayne Woodard addressing the request to rescind the separation of XXXXXX which would restore his certification. Additionally, include in the letter how did the error of separation happen.

• XXXXXX must provide documentation that'll-las completed all of the 2008, 2009 and 2010 mandated in-service training. XXXXXX must provide verification of completion of this training in the form of a certificate of completion with date, title, and hours of the course or a roster with the same information.

XXXXXX

XXXXXX was separated by an F-5B (Report of Separation) which was filed by your agency on September 5, 2008. We did not receive any information from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department requesting XXXXXX be moved to a reserve status instead of separated. Therefore, has not been certified since May 2008 and should not have been working in a law enforcement capacity. My understanding is that did not happen and XXXXXX has been working actively as a reserve officer. Per my conversation with Captain Bannerman, XXXXXX must immediately cease performing law enforcement actions until has complied with the following and has received a letter from this office rescinding XXXXXX ',separation and reissuing XXXXXX certification:

• A letter from Chief Monroe to Criminal Justice Standards Director Wayne Woodard addressing the request to rescind the separation of XXXXXX which would restore her certification. Additionally, include in the letter how did the error of separation happen.

• XXXXXX must provide documentation that XXXXXX has completed all of the 2008, 2009 and 2010 mandated in-service training. XXXXXX must provide verification of completion of this training in the form of a certificate of completion with date, title, and hours of the course or a roster with the same information.

If you should have any questions about this issue, please feel free to contact me.

Pam Pope

Pam Pope

Deputy Director

Criminal Justice Standards Division

ppope@ncdoj.gov

919-661-5980

---

From: Pope, Pam [mailto:ppope@ncdoj.gov]

Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 2:11 PM

To: Hannan, Miriam

Cc: Woodard, Wayne

Subject: RE: Audit results needing important follow up response

Importance: High

Miriam,

I hope that you are doing well this Monday afternoon. I am following up on the below email which was sent to you last Wednesday reference CMPD officers who were to be pulled from active law enforcement duties.

My Director, Wayne Woodard, has requested confirmation that Officers  XXXX, XXXX and  XXXX   have been reassigned to duties which do not require law enforcement action to be taken. Would you please advise ASAP when these officers were reassigned and by whom in the Command Staff was this action taken by?

Additionally, who will be responsible for forwarding the requested information to me?

I appreciate your time in advance as I know how busy that you are.

Pam

Pam Pope

Deputy Director

Criminal Justice Standards Division

ppope@ncdoj.gov

919-661-5980

---

As of June, 2012, Major Sheri Pearsall of the Administrative Services Group is paid $98,642/yr.  Deputy Chief Katrina Graue of the Administrative Services Group is paid $112,785/yr.  Chief Rodney Monroe is paid $190,550/yr.  These amounts are according to the Charlotte Observer and DO NOT include free cars and plenty of other benefits and perks.  An interesting point is that Monroe promoted both Pearsall and Graue on August 2, 2011—after the problems of officers working without being certified were reported on their watch (and Monroe’s).  Correction noted Oct. 4: Graue was actually promoted to the position in Administrative Services Group May 12, 2010, different from most recent pay increase.

Costs to City of Charlotte tax payers for lawsuits generated by Monroe have been tremendous.  Spending has exploded.  Maybe he could at least keep track of which police officers are certified to do the job.

Maybe they could find those 50 missing new police cars, too.

First Phase Over, but WHY Demote Sergeant Hatley?

It took $111K in her attorney’s fees, another amount yet undetermined from the extremely expensive outside firm of Robinson, Hinson, & Bradshaw hired by the City of Charlotte to defend the suit (unsuccessfully) filed by former Response Area Command Sergeant Tammy Hatley regarding a lack of due process when she was unfairly demoted after 28 of her 30 years of service as a dedicated CMPD officer.

In addition, there were many hours of internal billing for attorneys that work for the City & CMPD, and countless other hours of CMPD & HR personnel time to have a judge explain to Police Chief Rodney Monroe that he must follow due process dealing with his employees.

While the monetary award directly to Sgt. Hatley was only $12,000 of back pay after all of this expense and time, it is a proper victory to be sure but a difficult to understand fight against her own department.  That’s because even now, no one from her Chief Rodney Monroe to City Manager Curt Walton or any other representative has given any explanation as to why this happened to a 30-year veteran officer who received nothing but glowing and excellent PRD's (Performance Review and Development) her entire service and earned the respect of many officers she trained and worked with.  The only issue that developed was a sudden and seemingly artificial complaint from command in the midst of great crackdown on crime in one of the high-crime neighborhoods in her Response Area which Hatley credited to the hard work of her team, as always.

Strange, Sudden Orders to Change PRD's?

See below the summary of events submitted, and it defies any rational explanation.  RAC Sgt. Hatley had the #1 Crime Statistics out of the 39 RAC’s in the City, but was reamed out at a Compstat meeting for two things:  1) She and her team had merely arrested 7 armed robbery suspects since the last Compstat meeting (and the crime statistics had stayed the same in burglary in the neighborhood of Enderly Park, rather than dropping—but did not increase) and   2) The Deputy Chief also berated her because she was not familiar with a Crime Bulletin that was emailed.  The problem is, that Bulletin had been sent to a completely different RAC who was sitting next to her but remained silent at the meeting with the DC.  It was identified later, but damage done.

These hardly seem reasons to change someone’s performance rating after 28 years from “exceptional” to “marginal” to “unacceptable performance” then force them out of their job, move them to a third shift position, and demote them to a different rank.  All of these things happened to Sgt. Hatley.  Also, she did not receive incentive pay and longevity pay she should have been eligible for 2010, which will affect her retirement.

Here is a summary of events submitted regarding Tammy Hatley:

Timeline of Issues Regarding Performance Probation and Demotion

9/17/08:    Signed yearly PRD for the performance period 7/7/07 through 7/5/2008.  Rated as Exceptional Performance.    The next review date was scheduled for 7/4/2009.

9/18/08:    Promoted to the rank of RAC with no change in PRD rating period.

7/4/09:     Captain Bellamy did not complete a PRD during 2009.

3/10/10:    Captain Bellamy came to my office and gave me a PRD for the rating period of 7/5/08 through 7/3/09.  He rated me as Performance Exceeds Expectations and had no conversation with me regarding concerns for my job performance.

3/19/10:    I was called to Major Graue’s office and told that Capt. Bellamy and she had generated a PRD rating me as marginal and placing me on performance probation for the next 90 days.  I was given a list of expectation and told I would receive feedback from Capt. Bellamy every two weeks regarding my progress.

4/12/10:    Capt. Bellamy came to my office and gave me the back page of a PRD and told me sign it stating that he was told to change my evaluation from “marginal” to “unacceptable performance” to have me placed on performance probation.  I was not given a copy of the entire evaluation or the page I signed.  I later obtained a copy of this evaluation from Human Resources and found that no performance dimension in this PRD was rated at unacceptable.  Only the back, and I assume the front, pages had been changed.

During this time I sought medical attention for the extreme stress I was suddenly being put under with no notice.  My physician completed the appropriate paperwork for me to take 2 weeks of sick leave.   I received a copy of the FMLA Eligibility and Designation Notification to the Employee approving my time to be recorded as FMLA.  This form was dated 5/4/10.

4/23/10:    Major Graue met with me to discuss my progress.  The document stated “Sgt. Hatley has shown significant improvement in the areas that Major Graue and I (Capt. Bellamy) asked her to focus on.”  The document listed five positive behaviors and no negative one.  It further stated “I (Capt. Bellamy) would like to commend Sgt. Hatley for seizing the opportunity to improve while demonstrating a positive attitude.

No further communication took place with Major Graue (who had been promoted to DC) or Capt. Bellamy until sometime after the June 10^th Compstat.  The document is not dated but states “This is the second review with RAC Hatley for her Performance Probation.  Sgt. Hatley has continued to show improvement in the areas that Major Graue and I asked her to focus on.”  Four positive behaviors were listed.  One negative comment was made as the result of the Compstat.  The final comment is “I would like to comment Sgt. Hatley for seizing the opportunity to improve while demonstrating a positive attitude but encourage her to continue to seek new ways to address ongoing issues in the Enderly Park Community.

6/16/10:    Chief Monroe approved the request from DC Putney to have me relieved of my assigned.  His memorandum to the Chief is dated 6/8/10.

For the year to date crime reduction ratings among the 39 City response areas, 

RAC Sgt. Tammy Hatley’s area was ranked #1

with a 28% reduction in part one crimes for the period of 1/1/10 to 6/13/10.

Three days later, Chief Monroe approved her removal from assignment and demotion.

Grievances, Policies & Procedures

Sergeant Hatley had tried to file a grievance with the City of Charlotte HR department before filing a lawsuit, but was instructed to wait until the end of the 90 day performance probation period.  She has filed a grievance now, but he City continues to drag their feet in responding.  Maybe a several hundred thousand dollars in expenses and the loss of an excellent officer and trainer aren’t sufficient yet to cause a review of Monroe’s policies and procedures.

Several officers have complained off record of the “new” policies from CMPD management that “PUSH AND DIRECT” management are leading to some bad decisions within CMPD, and bad outcomes.  Threats, transfers, and demotions are not a good way to way to run any organization, especially one so critically dependent on teamwork and communication for survival—literally.

Thirty Years of Service Deemed Exceptional (until someone ordered otherwise)

Tammy Hatley was a SWAT Negotiator for 22 years.  Since she was promoted to Sergeant in 1998, she worked one of the most challenging areas of Charlotte as Patrol Sergeant, then Administrative Sergeant, working her way to a 24 hour/day RAC Sergeant position that Monroe credited with bringing down crime across the City.  He later claimed the positions weren’t real positions, but that has been proven wrong by Hatley’s lawsuit—a precedent now set for other RAC Sergeants. 

Hatley worked for many different supervisors and always received excellent reviews.  As a supervisor, she has earned respect of those she trained, helped them achieve status as #1 crime reduction in some of the toughest areas of town, and helped many go on to be selected for specialized positions.          

Maybe an Internal Affairs complaint would be the best way to discover possible lack of truthfulness and/or failure to follow Policy and Procedure issues with Captain Bellamy, Major Graue, and Deputy Chief Putney, regarding letters requesting a demotion and related items.  The IA process would instigate an investigation into the promotion/demotion/transfer processes used and determine what prompted Hatley’s apparent targeting.  

Sgt. Hatley reflects now, “I would just have liked to have retired as an employee who did a good job for thirty years.  If nothing else, I hope those officers that I worked with and supervised over the years learned something from me.”

Sgt. Hatley deserved respect for the way she conducted herself on the job.  She deserved a paycheck, fair treatment, and answers to what was behind the decision to change her stellar performance reviews from “Exceptional” to “Unacceptable” after 28 years--at someone’s instruction.  

Why?