Post by MIA on Jan 21, 2006 14:03:07 GMT -5
Jan. 21, 2006-A Bryan Texas police officer has appealed the department's decision to place him on indefinite suspension after supervisors determined he used excessive force when he drew his gun on a motorist.
Officer Shane Spry had worked for the department less than two years at the time of the incident. He reportedly pointed his gun at Nara Shae Lockett to prevent her from driving through a crime scene in January 2005, according to the notice of indefinite suspension issued by Chief Mike Strope.
The chief wrote that Spry used excessive force, a violation of police department policy. The officer also was found to have been insubordinate and untruthful - also policy violations - throughout the internal investigation that followed.
Spry was suspended indefinitely last April, about three months after Lockett filed a formal complaint against him. He appealed the suspension this week to an independent arbitrator, who now is reviewing the case. A ruling is expected in the summer.
"We strongly dispute the conclusions reached by the chief," John Cullar, the Waco-based attorney representing Spry, said Friday. "We believe that the evidence as it was presented [during the two-day arbitration hearing] suggests that there is reason to dispute what the chief said in the letter."
Lockett was trying to follow an ambulance carrying her brother Harvey Allen - who had been fatally shot - when Spry approached the front of her car with his gun drawn, according to the suspension notice. No other officers at the scene drew their service weapons, the notice states.
Spry contends that he did not point his weapon at Lockett; rather, he pointed it at the hood of her car, his attorney said Friday. He is asking the arbitrator to reinstate him with full back pay and benefits.
According to the suspension notice, Spry first told his supervisors that he drew his weapon because he was in fear of being run over. Police administrators said he later told them he planned to move out of the vehicle's path and never intended to fire his weapon.
The notice states that Spry also failed to file a "use of force" report, a form the department's officers are required to complete if they pull their weapon and aim it at someone. Spry did not file such a report, saying he had been told by training officers that he only needed to do so if he pointed his weapon directly at a person.
The suspension notice also states that Spry did not follow supervisors' orders throughout the investigation and failed a related polygraph test.
Strope said he considered all three policy violations - excessive use of force, untruthfulness and insubordination - when determining Spry's punishment.
The chief said he thought a "lengthy suspension" likely would be the most appropriate way to deal with the excessive force and insubordination violations. But that same punishment could not apply to the truthfulness violation, he said.
"Knowingly making a false statement reflects a character and integrity flaw in former Officer Spry's performance. We, as a department and organization that relies upon trust of the community, cannot allow an employee to continue that cannot be trusted - even by his own department," Strope said. "Indefinite suspension was the only option that I had."
The indefinite suspension sends a message to both the police department and the community that integrity violations won't be tolerated, the chief said.
But Cullar and Spry dispute the chief's conclusions. Multiple eyewitnesses recalled the night in question differently, Cullar said Friday, referring to testimony given during the two-day hearing.
One of the officers who insisted that Spry was pointing the gun directly at Lockett was standing farthest from the car, Cullar said. And Lockett testified that it was an officer standing to her left who pointed a gun toward her, not Spry, who was standing in front of the car, Cullar said.
Lockett also testified that she thought Spry had raised a flashlight and not a gun, he said.
"This is a situation where I don't doubt that any of those people truly believe what they are saying - it's just what they saw and what really happened are two different things. Their perception is truth to them," Cullar said. "[Spry] showed the weapon in order to require her to comply with the demand to stop the car. He never intended to fire the weapon. It was not going to be fired. It was simply displayed in order to intimidate her into stopping the car."
Officer Shane Spry had worked for the department less than two years at the time of the incident. He reportedly pointed his gun at Nara Shae Lockett to prevent her from driving through a crime scene in January 2005, according to the notice of indefinite suspension issued by Chief Mike Strope.
The chief wrote that Spry used excessive force, a violation of police department policy. The officer also was found to have been insubordinate and untruthful - also policy violations - throughout the internal investigation that followed.
Spry was suspended indefinitely last April, about three months after Lockett filed a formal complaint against him. He appealed the suspension this week to an independent arbitrator, who now is reviewing the case. A ruling is expected in the summer.
"We strongly dispute the conclusions reached by the chief," John Cullar, the Waco-based attorney representing Spry, said Friday. "We believe that the evidence as it was presented [during the two-day arbitration hearing] suggests that there is reason to dispute what the chief said in the letter."
Lockett was trying to follow an ambulance carrying her brother Harvey Allen - who had been fatally shot - when Spry approached the front of her car with his gun drawn, according to the suspension notice. No other officers at the scene drew their service weapons, the notice states.
Spry contends that he did not point his weapon at Lockett; rather, he pointed it at the hood of her car, his attorney said Friday. He is asking the arbitrator to reinstate him with full back pay and benefits.
According to the suspension notice, Spry first told his supervisors that he drew his weapon because he was in fear of being run over. Police administrators said he later told them he planned to move out of the vehicle's path and never intended to fire his weapon.
The notice states that Spry also failed to file a "use of force" report, a form the department's officers are required to complete if they pull their weapon and aim it at someone. Spry did not file such a report, saying he had been told by training officers that he only needed to do so if he pointed his weapon directly at a person.
The suspension notice also states that Spry did not follow supervisors' orders throughout the investigation and failed a related polygraph test.
Strope said he considered all three policy violations - excessive use of force, untruthfulness and insubordination - when determining Spry's punishment.
The chief said he thought a "lengthy suspension" likely would be the most appropriate way to deal with the excessive force and insubordination violations. But that same punishment could not apply to the truthfulness violation, he said.
"Knowingly making a false statement reflects a character and integrity flaw in former Officer Spry's performance. We, as a department and organization that relies upon trust of the community, cannot allow an employee to continue that cannot be trusted - even by his own department," Strope said. "Indefinite suspension was the only option that I had."
The indefinite suspension sends a message to both the police department and the community that integrity violations won't be tolerated, the chief said.
But Cullar and Spry dispute the chief's conclusions. Multiple eyewitnesses recalled the night in question differently, Cullar said Friday, referring to testimony given during the two-day hearing.
One of the officers who insisted that Spry was pointing the gun directly at Lockett was standing farthest from the car, Cullar said. And Lockett testified that it was an officer standing to her left who pointed a gun toward her, not Spry, who was standing in front of the car, Cullar said.
Lockett also testified that she thought Spry had raised a flashlight and not a gun, he said.
"This is a situation where I don't doubt that any of those people truly believe what they are saying - it's just what they saw and what really happened are two different things. Their perception is truth to them," Cullar said. "[Spry] showed the weapon in order to require her to comply with the demand to stop the car. He never intended to fire the weapon. It was not going to be fired. It was simply displayed in order to intimidate her into stopping the car."