news-record.com

PUBLICSAFETY

City making probe 'impossible'

Wednesday, May 6, 2009
(Updated 3:37 pm)

Justice Department officials say Greensboro is not cooperating with an investigation of black police officers’ discrimination complaints, according to a letter released by the city attorney Tuesday.

Nearly 40 police officers filed U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaints against the city in 2006.

In February, U.S. Department of Justice officials sought more information from Greensboro as they began to investigate the complaints, according to records.

Last Friday, the Justice Department officials said the city’s interpretation of the North Carolina personnel privacy law was making their investigation “impossible.”

“We will continue our efforts to gather relevant information from other sources, and may be forced to construe the City’s refusal to permit relevant interviews of witnesses as an indication that the information those witnesses would have provided would be favorable to the charging parties (the police officers),” reads a letter from John Gadzichowski and Toni Michelle Jackson of the Justice Department employment litigation section.

City Attorney Terry Wood said the city has provided investigators with three boxes of personnel documents from employees who signed release forms.

He said if the investigators want other information, they can either get releases or an administrative warrant.

“We’re trying to cooperate any way we can,” Wood said.

Jason Knight, an attorney who represents the police officers, declined to comment on the Justice Department inquiry.

The discrimination complaints stem from 2005 allegations that the police department was targeting its black officers for investigations.

Then-City Manager Mitchell Johnson hired Raleigh-based Risk Management Associates to review procedures in the department.

The report described the efforts of the department’s special intelligence unit to review the conduct of a black officer.

In 2006, about 40 black officers filed discrimination complaints against the city.

Last year, the City Council attempted to settle the complaints with the officers. After those discussions broke down, the issue went to the Justice Department, which could take the city to court on behalf of the officers.

Starting in February this year, Justice Department officials began requesting information from the city, including the Risk Management Associates report, personnel documents and other records from the police department.

Wood told City Council members in early March that the city was cooperating. But Justice officials said that cooperation broke down last week.

Justice Department officials came to Greensboro last week to meet with city employees and RMA investigators, according to the letters from the Justice Department.

But an investigator left before completing her work after city attorneys prevented an RMA investigator from discussing employees by name for fear it would violate the state’s employee personnel privacy law, according to a letter sent to the city last Friday.

The state’s personnel law prevents anyone from revealing information about city employees, except for the most basic information such as job title and pay, under most circumstances.

The city attorneys would not allow the RMA investigators or anyone else to speak about any city employee who had not signed a release under the privacy act, according to a letter from Gadzichowski and Jackson dated May 1.

The city’s interpretation of the state law made the Justice investigation impossible, Gadzichowski and Jackson wrote. They concluded the interpretation was “unreasonable and incorrect.”

“It was clear that no productive interviewing regarding relevant information could occur,” the letter said.

Julie Theall, a private attorney who is working with the city on the discrimination complaints with attorney Alan Duncan, wrote the Justice Department officials that the city was trying to respond to requests promptly and in good faith.

She wrote that there was concern about whether the investigation would really be an unbiased assessment of the situation.

“If, on the other hand, it is your intention to work in good faith to assess the merits of this matter, the city stands ready to work cooperatively with you to the extent it is able consistent with its other legal obligations,” Theall and Duncan wrote.

 

Contact Amanda Lehmert at 373-7075 or amanda.lehmert@news-record.com

Accompanying Photos

File photo (News & Record)

Photo Caption: Greensboro Police Department headquarters.

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

demarisinyamouth

May 6, 2009 - 9:32 am EDT

It's funny how I've been hearing people say the officers don't have a case, yet why is the city trying to cover up something? Sounds like the officers have a better case than most would like to admit.

gboro84

May 6, 2009 - 10:55 am EDT

If they do have a legitimate case, then why are "more than a handful" of officers telling council members they want to drop the case and "move on with their lives". The case hasn't even been heard before a court. It's funny to, as soon as the Department of Justice starts nosing around these officers business and the past starts to come out, they all of a sudden want out. Maybe these officers are afraid of the feds finding out about all of the alleged drug dealing, mishandling of cases and evidence, and the fact that convicted batterer AJ Blake is still employed and still suing the city.

Panacea

May 6, 2009 - 11:05 am EDT

"More than a handful telling council members they want to drop the case." A statement that comes from a City Council member and is completely self serving.

If these officers really wanted to drop the case, they would. If they were really being pressured by other plaintiffs, evidence to that effect would torpedo the case, and lead to the firing of officers doing the pressure.

I don't believe anyone is being pressured.

bettejayne

May 6, 2009 - 11:00 am EDT

I see the city's actions as self preservation. If the files cannot be obtained to defend the city, the suit will go thru. This will make Mitch seen much more valuable. Oviously there are many who still side with Mitch.This was evident in the remarks during and after this reneward. Besides the council doesn't have to pay any of their money anyway, its just taxpayers money.

gboro84

May 6, 2009 - 11:49 am EDT

"If they were really being pressured by other plaintiffs, evidence to that effect would torpedo the case, and lead to the firing of officers doing the pressure."

--They just come forward with this in the past week. Time will tell. The fact is, many of these officers were investigated for being involved with federal drug targets. The feds have paper on these guys that even Scott Sanders doesn't know about. Now they want out before the feds dig to deep. The suit mentions the surveillance issue which the city is still dancing around. Wonder if the Department of Justice will investigate that? Eric Holder was right, we are a nation of cowards when it comes to racial relations. Everyone is to cowardly to admit that every claim of racism is simply not true.

Dogwood

May 6, 2009 - 12:59 pm EDT

The arrogance the Federal Justice Department investigator displayed is unbelievable. What is wrong with respecting NC state personnel law and just get a warrant? Her, I want it now and I want it at my convenience is childish behavior. She has to follow the laws of 50 states, not just her high and mighty opinions.

tledford

May 11, 2009 - 11:01 am EDT

Why not just issue warrants?

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Social Networking
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search