Case Number: 14-12-0145 Agency Name: Mt Murris Police Depamnent Name of Person: Certified Officer Chief Keirn Becker has conducted an investigation and determined an officer who is employed by his agency and another agency has used LEIN in at least seven instances for personal reasons, The officer's reasons were to obtain home address information for women he found attractive. The demonstrated in at least one instance the officer made a traffic stop tor no other reason but to meet the driver. Chief Becker has terminated the officerand is seeking advice on how to complete his obligations. A letter was sentto Chiet Keith Becker, Mount Morris Police Department on December 16' 2014' requesting an investigat' and a response to the Copies ortrie Sanctions Policy the Roles Responsib ties of the agency and cso, MCL 23,214 and the summary sheet on the Driver Privacy Frntectlon Act were included Chief Becker sent a report on December 11' 2014' advising Genesee County records show the officer accessed in two instances on a subiecl wno was involved in an altercation with a female acquaintance of his He also queried another woman four times on March 4, 2014' and his daily log shows no Contact her arid rin Complaint involving her was filed with the agency, The afticer queried a wartress five times on April 5, 2013 She later filed a complaint regarding his unwanted attentions The officer has been terminated irom Mount Moms Police Department tor personal use of LEIN and other issues and he has been suspended lrorn Flushing Police Department errective December 4' 2014 Memorandum Date: April 2, 2015 To: Richard Amion, Major .- - Professional Compliance Bureau From: pat?Saima Plasencia, Major . .. . . l9 a" lntracoastal Distr' MAY 1'9 2015 Subject: Disposition of LA. 2014-0 FRUFEBSIBNAL Complaint of Mr. Jeffrey Weinsier EDMPLIANDE BUREAU I The Command Staff and supervisors of the Intracoastal District have reviewed the above subject case and concur with the findings of the Disposition Panel. Based upon the findings of the Panel, 3 Disciplinary Action Report has been prepared to address the sustained allegations against Officer Paul Terry. SP/emr 0: JD. Patterson Director Delma K. Noel?Pratt, Chief North Operations Division PHAPMDADE Memorandum tearing it? .. MM 13 2015 BUREAU Date: March 23, 2015 To: Delma Noel?Pratt, Chief North Operations Division From: 6% Saima Plasencia, Major metal; Intracoastal District Subiect: Review of Disciplinary Action Paul Terry Control 2015-9827-13159 Attached for your consideration are the Disciplinary Action Report and Disciplinary Action Noti?cation regarding Paul Terry. The recommended action is Written Reprimand. SP/dag Attachments DATE NONCONCURRENCE W3 Delmm?ra?fcmef Delma Noel-Pratt, Chief North Operations Division North Operations Division te: osnn Cord??hatz?idajor Personnel Management Bureau Departmental Discipline Coordinator WNW LtltOiLY" Jane II ?H'wll( . Patterson Director COUNTY Contrast 2015?9827?13159 DISCIPLINARY ACTION REPORT Employee Name TERRY, PAUL Date January 22, 2015 Classi?cation POLICE OFFICER Date of Hire 03/29/1993 Emp 00038483 NORTH OPERATIONS DIVISION INTRACOASTAL DISTRICT Employee Status: Division Area Permanent 1: Probationai Other You are hereby charged with violating the County?s Personnel Rules, Chapter Section 7: Paragraph: SEE ATTACHED (Attach additional sheets as necessary) FACTS: (Description of speci?c actions, statements made by empioye'e; attach statements of witness, if any and attach copies of other documents if appropriate. Also state reasons for recommendations.) SEE ATTACHED a .. BUCHANAN THOMAS POLICE SERGEANT Supervisor's SignatureiDate'"? (Attach additional sheets as necessary) In signing this Report, acknowledge only that it has been discussed with me and that have received a cepy. I understand that I may res ond orally or in writing and that each response will be made a part Of this Report and taken into consideration prior to a final determination bein . "?lmm?y. ?13.51,? i 3 ?Employee's Sign?EtureIDate TERRY, PAUL POLICE OFFICER RECOMMENDED ACTION: El Written Reprimaod Demotion Dismissal Effective Date(s) .., - Written Reprimand APPROVAL: 1% - Signature I ?Date DISTRIBUTJON: White cepy to Employee - Green to Personnei Division: Yellow to Division File. - I \K?m 152.05-2 Rev. 12133 Title MIAMI-BABE COUNTY I Contmh?E 2015-9827-l3159 DISCIPLINARY ACTION REPORT PAUL TERRY, POLICE OFFICER NORTH OPERATIONS DIVISION INTRACOASTAL DISTRICT January 22, 2015 Page 2 PERSONNEL RULES VIOLATED That the employee has violated the provisions of departmental rules. DEPARTMENTAL MANUAL VIOLATIONS MDPD Manual v.120412 CHAPTER 2 PART 3 AUTOMATED SYSTEMS Section 4 A MOBILE COMPUTING UNIT SYSTEM 41.3.7] - USE OF MOBILE computing units: C. Personal Uses: 1. Under no circumstances will personal use of the Departmental MCUs be permitted. MDPD Manual v.120412 CHAPTER 12 PART 1 GENERAL CONDUCT SECTION 1 OBJECTIVES AND RULES: D. Rules: 26.1.1] 1. Knowledge of laws and rules: All employees must acquire and maintain a working knowledge of laws of the State of Florida; ordinances of Miami?Dede County; and the orders, rules, procedures, and policies of the Department. MDPD Manual v.120412 CHAPTER 12 PART I GENERAL CONDUCT SECTION 1 OBJECTIVES AND RULES: n. Rules: 26.1.1] 23. Motor vehicle registration information: Information from the motor vehicle registration records of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles will be obtained and utilized only for official departmental business. ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS VIOLATED None STATE STATUTES VIOLATED None FACTS Pursuant to a Professional Compliance Bureau Investigation, IA, 2014-0105, a Disposition Panel sustained an allegation against you. The complainant Mr. Jeffrey Weinsier; a local investigative television reporter, who reported a story that questioned the value of the Department's Personalized Patrol Veniole, Take Home Vehicle Program. This report was aired on a local television station On October 17, 2011. On Wednesday, October 19, 2011, a computer with your assigned logein password conducted a driver's license check of Mr. Weinsier via the Florida Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, DAVID application, which is provided for law enforcement purposes. You were working on this date and stated that no one MIAMI-BABE COUNTY Control# 2015-9827?13159 DISCIPLINARY ACTION REPORT PAUL TERRY, POLICE OFFICER NORTH OPERATIONS DIVISION INTRACOASTAL DISTRICT January 22, 2015 Page 3 else would have had your password to access your computer to run this check. It is your sole responsibility to ensure the integrity that all law enforcement password applications are protected to prevent any unauthorized access. You were not able to provide a reason for this record check and or provide an official document that would account for the records check. The check of Mr. Weinsier?s driver's license on your computer for no valid law enforcement purpose is not acceptable. A review of your Personnel Record Summary revealed no previous incidents of a similar? nature. You are reminded. that. you. must have a law enforcement. purpose when running a driver's license. Additionally, it is your responsibility to ensure compliance with all departmental rules and regulations. You are advised to review the Departmental Manual, Chapter 2 A Part 3 and Chapter 12 7 Part 1., and become familiarized yourself with its contents. In view of the foregoing, disciplinary action is being considered. You may respond orally or in writing within three business days. Your response will be made part of this Disciplinary Action Report and will be taken into consideration along with your past performance, personnel record summary, and personnel file in determining any disciplinary action to be taken. If disciplinary action is taken, it will become a part of your personnel file. You are cautioned. that any further 'violations of this nature inay result in a Inore aggressive disciplinary action. Employee Name TERRY, PAUL DISCIPLINARY ACTION SESSION Controlii 2015?9827?13159 03/10/2015 03/11/2015 At approximately 10:30 Lieutenant Eric Rossman and Sergeant Thomas Buchanan advised Officer Paul Terry that a Disciplinary Action Session would be conducted on Wednesday, March 11, 2015, in order to present him with a Disciplinary Action Report (DAR). Officer Terry was advised that he could bring a representative of his choosing to the session. Officer Terry waived his right to representation. At 10:30 a.m the DAB was conducted in the Neighborhood Resource Lieutenant's office at the Intracoastal Station. Present at the session were Lieutenant Rossman, Sergeant Buchanan, and Officer Terry. Officer Terry was presented with the DAR and the previously signed Notice of Intent to Discipline and Proposal of Action Sought (NIDPAS) memorandum, and was afforded the opportunity to read the report. Lieutenant Rossman advisad Officer Terry that he could respond orally or in writing, and any response would be included as part of the DAR. Officer Terry signed the DAR and was given two machine copies. The original NIDPAS memorandum was given to him on February 5, 2015. Officer Terry was advised that he had three business days to present his response. Officer Terry provided a written response and the DAR was submitted for final processing. Confirmation was received from_the Departmental Discipline Coordinator that the recommended action falls DAROOZU within departmental guidelines. MEMORANDUM T0: Sgt. Thomas Buchanan DATE: March 11, 2015 Via Chain of Command FROM: Paul Terry RE: Response to Disciplinary Police O?icer Action Report 2015-9827-13159 After having had the opportunity to review the Disciplinary Action Report (DAR) 2015?9827? 13159, dated January 22, 2015, and received by this of?cer on March 11, 2015, the following response is offered. This is to advise that I do have an explanation of, and justi?cation for, my actions in the matter set forth on the Disciplinary Action Report. At no time did I intentionally violate any Departmental Rules or Regulations. I stand by the subject of?cer statement I provided on August 21, 2014. I will provide additional information at the appropriate time in the appeal hearing process. By way of this rebuttal, under Florida Statute Section I am requesting a copy of the investigative report and supporting documentation for DAR 2015-9827-13 159 be provided to my attorney, Caroline Gallina Saiz. Respectftu submitted Paul Terry Police Of?cer cc: Caroline Gallina Saiz Staff Counsel Memorandum Date: February 4, 2015 To: Paul L. Terry, Of?cer lutracoastal District From: Thomas B. Buchanan, Police Sergeant ff lntracoasta'l District Subiect: Notice of Intent to Discipline and Proposal of Action Sought It is the intent of the Miami?Dade Police Departrnent to proceed with disciplinary action against you based upon the violations outlined in DAR #2015?9827-13159. You will find below the proposal of the action sought. This proposal may change after'?n?ther review and/or consideration of any additional facts. El Written Reprirnand Suspension Demotion Dismissal (In case of dismissal, please etc the section below) Employee signature: Date: 52 .05: I) RECORD OF EWLOYEE RIGHT TO RESPOND TO DEPARTMENTAL OFFICIAL AUTHORIZED TO TAKE DISMISSAL ACTION I hereby Wish to exercise my right to respond to the dismissal charges pending against me with the of?cial authorized to take ?nal dismissal action. I understand that I have the right to have a labor organization or other representative of my choice present for this discussion. Employee Signature: . . Date: Representative (if any): Representative?s telephone number: I do not Wish to excercise my right to respond to the dismissal charges pending against me with the of?cial authorized to take ?nal dismissal action. Employee Signature: Date: Miami-Dada Police Department lntracoastal District ?15665 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33160 305?940-9980 Respect miamidade.gov . 'FaxrnESS Of?cer Paul Terry may, 14 days from receipt of this Written Reprirnand (2015- appeal the action by written request to the Departmental Discipline Coordinator. 1 certify that I have read this cation and acknowledge receipt of the copy. I r1? 5 Of?cer Pa??Ten'y Date Intracoastal District 0: Delma Noel-Pratt, Chief North Operations Division Saima Plasencia, Maj or Intracoastal District Richard Arnion, Major Profe?sional Compliance Bureau Rosanna-Cordero- Stutz, Major Personnel Management Bureau Departmental Discipline Coordinator Date: To: (a From: Subject: a MIAMHJADE Memorandum March 12, 2015 Richard Amion, Major Professional Compliance Bureau Thomas P. Hanlon, Major Special Patrol Bureau IA 2014?0105 Complaint of Mr. Jeffrey Weinsier a tr Iii-59': 2012-; BUMPLIANBE The attached subject case file has been reviewed by the appropriate Special Patrol Bureau Supervisors, who concur with the Disposition Panel?s findings, as it pertains to Sergeant Monica Martinez. The recommended action for Sergeant Martinez is a Written Reprimand. 0: JD. Patterson Director Delma K. Noel?Pratt, Chief North Operations Division Data To: From: Subject: . MIAMI-BABE Memoral lum March 6, 2015 Dehna Noel-Pratt, Chief North Operations Division Thomas Hanlon, Major ., I 3 ecial Patrol Bureau I 5 a a a1 a 2315 Review of Disciplinary Action Monica Martinez Control 2015-9807?13138 PanrtaaloNAL BUREAU Attached for your consideration are the Disciplinary Action Report and Disciplinary Action Noti?cation regarding Monica Martinez. The recommended action is Written Reprimand. TH/dag Attachments CO NCE DATE NONCONCURRENCE 77/3/11?? Dehnfmetpraa, Chief Delma Noel?Pratt, Chief North Operations Division North Operations Division Re i ed (KQL Date\: vii/U297 a Hail; Relianna Cordero- 8mm Fl" Personnel Management Bureau Departmental Discgme Coordinator - I Inlet Lewis, {a Police on . uder I. :7 ?5 Director Patterson MIAMI-BABE COUNTY Controi# 2015-9807?13138 DISCIPLINARY ACTION REPORT Employee Name MARTIHEZ, MONICA Date January 13, 2015 Ctassi?oation POLICE SERGEANT Date of Hire 07/15/1996 EmpiD# 00038228 NORTH OPERATIONS DIVISION SPECIAL PATROL BUREAU Employee Status; Division Area Permanent Probationat El Other are hereby charged with violating the County?s Personnel Rules. Chapter Section Paragraph: i i see ATTACHED (Attach additional sheets as necessary) WM FACTS: (Description of speci?c actions. statements made by employee; attach statements of witness. if any and attach copies of other decuments it appropriate. Also state reasons for recommendations.) SEE ATTACHED 3 I r/ ff ".47 re"! X??lf j??b?t?ik ?ll/J {Er} w'Su? [visors Si natur a no meme, xenon pa 9 19m la NLICE LIEUTENANT f? It In signing this Report, i ecknowtedge onty that it has been discussed with me and that have received a - - tend that i may respond oraity or in writing and that such response wiit be made a part of this Report and taken Into consideration prior to a tin: 1 or i tion being made. Jew MARTINEZ MONICA POLICE RECOMMENDED ACTION: Written Repiimand [j ?v Demotion Ci Dismissal Effective Date(s) Written Reprimand I FINAL FINAL APPROVAL: 1mm Signature ts DISTRIBUTION: White copy to Employee - Green to Personnel Division: Yeitow to Division Fite. 540470 15205-2 Rev. was Title Control# 2015~9807?13138 MIAMI-BABE COUNTY DISCIPLINARY ACTION REPORT MONICA MARTINEZ, POLICE seesaw NORTH OPERATIONS DIVISION SPECIAL PATROL BUREAU January 13, 2015 Page 2 RULES That the employee has violated the provisions of departmental rules. HANUAL VIOLATIONS MDPD Manual v.120412 CHAPTER 2 PART 3 - AUTOMATED SYSTEMS Section 4 MOBILE COMPUTING UNIT SYSTEM 41.3.7] USE OF MOBILE computing units: C. Personal Uses: 1. Under no circumstances will personal use of the Departmental MCUs be permitted. HDPD Manual v.120412 CHAPTER 2 PART 3 AUTOMATED SYSTEMS Section 4 - MOBILE COMPUTING UNIT SYSTEM 41.3.7] - USE OF MOBILE computing units: C. Personal Uses: 9. Information can only be obtained through Department access programs for criminal justice purposes only. Under no circumstances may the following information systems be accessed for personal use: 1 MDPD Manual v.120412 CHAPTER 2 PART 3 AUTOMATED SYSTEMS Section 4 - MOBILE COMPUTING UNIT SYSTEM 41.3.7] USE OF MOBILE computing units: C. - Personal Uses: 9 . c. Department Network and related systems MDPD Manual v.120412 CHAPTER 12 PART 1 GENERAL CONDUCT SECTION 1 OBJECTIVES AND RULES: 1). Rules: 26.1.1] 4. Obedience to laws and rules: Employees shall comply with federal and state laws; county ordinances, rules, and procedures; and departmental policies, rules, orders, and procedures. MDPD Manual v.120412 CHAPTER 12 PART 1 - GENERAL CONDUCT SECTION 1 - OBJECTIVES AND RULES: D. 7 Rules: 26.1.1] 23. Motor vehicle registration information: Information from the motor vehicle registration records of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor vehicles will be obtained and utilized only for official departmental business. COUNTY Contrast 2015~9807~13138 DISCIPLINARY ACTION REPORT MONICA MARTINEZ, POLICE SERGEANT NORTH OPERATIONS DIVISION SPECIAL PATROL BUREAU January 13, 2015 Page 3 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS VIOLATBD None STATE STATUTES VIOLATBD None FACTS Pursuant to a Professional Compliance Bureau (PCB) investigation (Case 2014~0105), a disposition panel sustained allegations made against you for improper procedure. Your actions that led to this are as follows: On Friday, August 12, 2011, Mr. Jeffrey Weinsier, a we11~known reporter with WPLG, Local 10 news, ran the following story: Take?Home VEhicles Cost Miami?Dado Millions. On Saturday, August 13, 2011, you conducted an unauthorized search, via the Driver And Vehicle Information Database (DAVID), for Mr. Weinsier, to include a CJIS check. It has been determined that you came to know of Mr. Heinsier from his investigative reporting. Additionally, the CJIS search was conducted two days following the airing of the news story and you did not provide any reason of why you conducted the search. Although you advised that you did not disseminate the information to anyone outside law enforcement, the security banner that is posted on DAVID and that the user must accept before being allowed access, clearly states, "Unauthorized use includes, but is not limited to, queries not related to a legitimate business purpose." Mr. Heinsier further stated that no officer has ever conducted a traffic stop on him, so it is clear that you did not have a legitimate law enforcement reason to conduct the search. Based on the foregoing, the aforementioned allegations brought against you have been sustained. You are hereby advised that this type of conduct is not acceptable. In View of the foregoing, disciplinary action is being considered. You may respond orally or in writing within three business days.Your response will be made part of this Disciplinary Action Report, and taken into consideration along with your past performance, Personnel Record Summary, and personnel file in determining any disciplinary action to be taken. If disciplinary action is taken, it will become part of your personnel file. Memorandum Date: January 13,2015 To: Monica T. Martinez, Sergeant Special Patrol Bureau From: Karen D. Mo Kenzie, Police Lieutenant Special Patrol Bureau Subiect: "Notice of Intent to Discipline and Proposal of Action Sought It is the intent of the Miami-Dade Police Department to proceed with disciplinary action against you based upon the violations outlined in DAR #2015?9807-13138. You will ?nd below the proposal of the action sought. This proposal may change after further review and/or consideration of any additional facts. Written Reprimand Ll. Suspension El Demotion Dismissal (in case of dismissal Bits se?re mplete the section below) Date: Employee signature: r, a I 1/ 1mm..- Hun" RECORD OF EMPLOYEE RIGHT TO RESPOND TO DEPARTMENTAL OFFICIAL AUTHORIZED TO TAKE DISMISSAL ACTION I hereby wish to exercise my right to respond to the dismissal charges pending against me with the official authorized to take ?nal dismissal action I understand that I have the right to have a labor organization or other representative of my choice present for this discussion. Employee Signature: Date: Representative (if any): Representative?s telephone number: I do not wish to excercise my right to respond to the dismissal charges pending against me with the of?cial authorized to take final dismissal action. Employee Signature: Date: . COUNTY, FLORIDA MIAMI-BABE COUNTY MIAMI-BABE POLICE DEPARTMENT SPECIAL PATROL BUREAU 1567 NW. 79TH AVENUE MIAMI, FLORIDA 33126 You niay, within 14 days from receipt of this Written Rep?mand (2015-9807- 13138), appeal the action by written request to the Departmental Discipline Coordinator. I certify the ave read this noti?cation and acknowledge of the original copy. Sergeant MoNLmar?nez Special Patrol Bureau 0: Delma Noel-Pratt, Chief North Operations Division Thomas Hanlon, Major Special Patrol Bureau Richard Amion, Maj or Professional Compliance Bureau Rosanna Cordero- Stutz, Major Personnel Management Bureau Departmental Discipline Coordinator ill/1.5% Conoucr REWEW DENVER Ponce DEPARTMENT Case Number: P20150160 Subject Of?cer: Officer Ramona Young. P13024 Assignment: District 2 Somme of Eviden' On May 2015. Officer Ramona Young responded to Rose Medical Center on a reported sexual assault where he contacted the complainant. Ms. . The complaint asserts two separate allegations. First. the complaint asserts Officer Young violated RR 105. Conduct Prejudicial. when he called Ms. and left a message alter obtaining her phone number from the system. Second, the complaint asserts Of?cer Young violated OMS 102.08, Use of and when he allegedly ran Ms. 3 information through the system even though she was not involved in any criminal investigation. Sergeant Gary Ayers of the Internal Affairs Bureau investigated the incident. The investigation was thorough and complete. included in the case file are statements from the complainant and the subject of?cer, as well as various documents and recordings related to the case. Statement of Fagt On May 2015. Officer Young responded to Rose Medical Center on a reported sexual assault where he contacted Ms. Ms. was not involved in the call or a part of any criminal investigation. and Officer Young admitted she was not involved in the criminal investigation. Rather. Ms. is a custodian at Rose Medical Center and was working when Officer Young contacted he . Me. and Of?cer Young related joking around with one another nd talking about their children. During the course of the conversation. Ms. provided Of?cer Young with her date of birth. Officer Young admitted he returned to his police vehicle after his conversation with Ms. ran her name and date of birth using NCICICCIC. obtined her phone number, called her, and left her a voice mail. According to Of?cer Young, "l later looked her up on-the computer and called her. I said i hope she wasn't offended and to take care. That was the extent of the message i left.? Ms. related, ?The only thing that made it bed was that he did contact me after this." Ms. indicated she did not wish to file a formal complaint; she only wanted Of?cer Young not to contact her again. Analysis and anclusiong Speci?cation No. 1: Conduct Prejudicial Officers shall not engage in conduct prejudlclai to the good order and police discipline of the Department or conduct unbecoming an officer which: May or may not speci?cally be set forth in Department rules and regulations or the Operations Manual. This document and its content: mn?dentiliand proton-tad from public dist:th pursuant to the 'dl?barativa prom privilege" and must he maintained in accordion with math department procedures. DUCTR DENVER Li PAR Case Number: 920159150 Re: Officer Ramona Young, P130114 Rationale for Finding The complaint asserts Officer Young violated RR 105. Conduct Prejudtciel. when he called Me; and left a message after obtaining her phone number item the system. in this case. Of?cer Young ?engageidj unbecoming an of?cer or may not speci?cally be set forth in Department rules and regulations or the Operations Manual.? Speci?cally, Of?cer Young contacted a citizen by using of?cial Department resources to locate her phone number. Of?cer Young admits he not only used the NCICICCIC system to look up Ms. 5 phone number. but used the information he received from the system to contact Ms. i . Ms. expressed concern and Wes upset about Officer Young using police resources to access her information for personal reasons. and this places the Department in a poor light. Additionally, Ms. - stated Oliicer Young made her uncomfortable by looking for her using Department resources, ?nding her information. and contacting her. Of?cer Young did not engage in repeated misconduct He placed one call to Ms. 3's number. Therefore. Officer Young calling Ms. distinct from his abuse of the system, constitutes "conduct unbecoming an of?cer.? As such. there is a preponderance of the evidence indicating Of?cer Young engaged in conduct unbecoming an officer: therefore a violation of this speci?cation is sustained. Finding Sustained Matrix Analysis Conduct Category - 0 Conduct Category Determination - By the Reviewer Preliminary Discipline Level - 3 - Rationale: By using the system to locate a citizen's phone number. calling the phone number one time for personal reasons causing the citizen to be upset and feel uncomfortable, Of?cer Young's conduct 'he[d] a pronounced negative impact on image of the on public." Prior Discipline Date of current incident: May 153?, 2015 Time Frame for considering prior sustained misconduct: 5 years Number of prior relevant sustained cases within the time frame: None Revised Discipline Level Based on Prior Discipline: 2 Mitigating or Aggravaan Circumstances There are no signi?cant mitigating or aggravating circumstances In this case. As such, a penalty in the presumptive range is warranted. Page 2 of 4 This doorman: and to contents or: mn?denliat and promo from pursuant In the ?de?nitive process privilege" one mun he in assertions: with established comm-rant procedures. no or Om Dams 5059mm Case Number: {32015-0180 Ra: Officer Ramona Young. P13024 Final Recommendation for This Speci?cation Conduct Category Discipline Level 3 Penalty 2 Fined Days Penalty Range Presumptive Speci?cation No. 2: Duty to Obey Departmental Rules and Mayoral Executive Orders Officers shall obey all Departmental rules, duties, procedures, instructions. directives, and orders: the provisions of the Operations Manual; and Mayoral Executive Orders. As it pertains to . . . OMS 102.05 Use of NCIC and CCIC (7) The security of information obtained from is vital. Personnel must ensure that unauthorized individuals do not have access to information on the system. d. Any information available via the system will be limited to criminal justice purposes only. Personnel will not use criminal Justice information for personal reasons. Rationale for Finding The complaint asserts Officer Young violated OMS 102.08, Use of NCIC and 0010. when he allegedly ran Ms. 5 information through the system even though she was not involved in any criminal investigation. In this case, Of?cer Young used the system to obtain information for personal use unrelated to criminal justice purposes. According to OMS 102.08. Use of NCIC and "Any information available via the system will be limited to criminal justice purposes only. Personnel not use criminal justice information for personal reasons, including curiosity inquiries or non-criminal iustice investigations.? The facts in this case are not in dispute. Of?cer Young admits M5. was not involved in a criminal investigation, and he ran her name and date of birth through the system to obtain her phone number. As such, there is a preponderance of the evidence indicating Of?cer Young violated OMS 102.08, Use of and therefore. a violation of this speci?cation is sustained. Finding Sustained Matrix Analysis Conduct Category - Page 3 of 4 This document and its contents are mandonttatand protected from public disclosure pursuant to the 'tlaiimtive process and mun he maintained in occur-dons: with established damn: procedures. 0ND NV 1 Case Number: P20150180 Rs: Officer Ramona Young. P13024 Conduct Category Determination - By the Reviewer Preliminary Discipline Level - 2 Rationale: By using the system for personal reasons unretated to a tegitimate criminal justice purpose, speci?cally looking up an individual?s personal information that was not the subject of a criminal investigation on a single occasion, Of?cer Young?s conduct 'ha[d] more than a minimal negative impact on image of the negatively impacts relationships public.? Prior Discipline Date of current incident: May 15", 2015 Time Frame for considering prior sustained misconduct 4 years Number of prior relev?ant sustained cases within the time frame: Nona Revised Discipline Level Based on Prior Discipline: 2 Mitigating or Aggravating Circumstances There are no signi?cant mitigating or aggravating circumstances in this case. As such. a penaity lo the presumptive range iswwerranted. Final Recommendation for This Speci?cation Conduct Category Discipline Level 2 Penalty Written Reprimand Penalty Range Presumptive Commander Recommeggations more .. from Lee Ran 3:43?: I .e Speo#2 102.1 102.08 Sustained 2 Presumptive Rep?mand ?lm! maze Robert C. White. Chief of Police By: Commander Mtchaat Battista Page 4 of 4 This doorman: an? its content: are ccntidentici cud protected from molt: disclosure pursuant to the 'deiihcrattve pm privilege? and must he maintained in accordance with established dealt-tartan: procldu?s. no Putt about PO ?agenda: Office I 1331 Cherokee Street. Room 514 De . CD DENVER SAFETY Fax: 720.913.7010 TO: Of?cer Ramona Young, P13024 THRU: Commander Mike Calo. District 2 FROM: Commander Michael Battisla. Conduct Review Office SUBJECT: WRITTEN REPRIMAND Case Number: P20150160 By authority of the Chief of Police. I am issuing the following Written Reprirnand: This letter is to serve as a Written Reprimand for the violation of Rules and Regulations Section RR-102.1, Duty to Obey Departmental Rules and Mayoral Executive Orders as it pertains to OMS 102.08 Use of NCIC and CCIC, which reads: RR-102.1 Duty to Obey Departmental Rules and Mayoral Executive Orders Of?cers shall obey all Departmental rules. duties. procedures. instructions. directives, and orders; the provisions of the Operations Manual; and Mayoral Executive Orders. As it pertains to . . . OMS 162.08 Use of NCIC and CCIC (7) The security of information obtained from is vital. Personnel must ensure that unauthorized individuals do not have access to information on the NCICICCIC system. d. Any Information available via the NCICICCIC system will be limited to criminal justice purposes only. Personnel will not use criminal justice information for personal reasons. This Written Reprimand is the result of your actions on May 15, 2015. Let this reprimand serve as encouragement to insure your future adherence to the Rules and Regulations of the Denver Police Department. 6M 74% Michael Battieta. Commander, Conduct Review Of?ce CC: Deputy Chief David Quinones Human Resource Management Bureau internal Affairs Division COMPARABLE DISCIPLINE REPORT Page 33 of 65 February 9, 2015 On 9/26/13 employee violated Ope Ions Order 3.18 Addendum A, when he failed to complete a departmental repo 13-0043 Discipline served: Written primand 1/9/2014 On 9/26/13 employee violated Operati and Departmental Report. SI 13-0 Discipline served: Written Re Order when he failed to complete On 9/4/13 and 11/5/13 wmployee violated Operations when he failed to attend City court for two separate cases. He si for and received several "weekly" subpoeanas acknowleging receipt of the oenans, but still failed to attend court for either case. SI 13- 0051. Discipline served: Written Repri nd 1/9/2014 On 7/5/13 employee vi ated Operations Order 3.1 . . (5) and when he drove his personal vehicle 120 in a 65 one. He was stopped by a DPS officer, employee did not advise his supervisor event. PSB13 ?0057 Discipline served: Written Repriman 10/2014 Violation of Personnel Rules 21b3, 21b7, 21b12, 21b18, Ops Orders 3.13.2.D, AR 2.30 PSB 13-0043) in early 2012, she became involved in a dispute with her neighbor when she served each other with injunctions prohibiting harassment. She both disputed her injunctions and court hearings were eventually held quashing the orders. Prior to attending the court hearing she conducted multiple queries on her neighbor by utilizing police computer systems (PACE). She also obtained a printed copy of the Phoenix Police Field interrogation (Fl) card that was completed when offices had contacted her neighbor due to a call for service she initiated. When asked by her immediate supervisor (prior to being served with a NOI) if she had conducted any queries on herself by accessing police computers systems official use only tools), she denied conducting any records searches on herself. With the assistance of the information Technology Bureau (ITB). PSB investigators confirmed that she accessed police computer records by conducing criminal history search, in PACE, on her neighbor. By conducting the search, she obtained and eventually printed the FI card where she was named as an involved party. During her Profession Standards Bureau (PSB) interview, she acknowledged the computer queries she conducted were against police policy. On April 10, 2013, she reported to the Maricopa County Dreamy Draw Justice Court for a scheduled hearing at 9:15 am, to dispute the injunction she had been served. PSB investigator reviewed her time sheet and records and discovered upon her return to work. she submitted a leave slip to her supervisor for eight hours of sick leave, citing Family Medical Leave Act for the reason that day. Discipline served: 3 Day Suspension 1/13/2014 On 1/11/13 employee violated Operations Order 3.13.2.D and 3.13.2.A when he received an overall "Not Met" on his scheduled 90 days PMG for the rating period 8/3/13 to 11/1/13. Si 13 ?0045 Discipline served: Written Reprimand 1/14/2014 COMPARABLE DISCIPLINE REPORT Page 44 of 65 February 9. 2015 "Violation of Personnel Rules 21b3, 21b7, 21b18, Ops Orders 1.1.2, 3.13.2.D., Ethics Policy. (PSB 13?0041) From March 2013 through May 2013, he displayed unprofessional conduct when he performed queries on license plates to determine if vehicles were listed as stolen. He obtained this information from record management systems and public safety databases including: MDC, CAD. NCIC, ACIC, and disseminated it to a personal friend in exchange for arranging a sexual encounter. On March 14, 2013, a female suspect who was involved in an undercover investigation of trafficking stolen vehicles, drugs, and firearms informed undercover investigators that she had a "source" within the Police Department. She disclosed him as her source and stated that he queried information and provided her with the results. Unaware that she was speaking with an undercover detective, the suspect told the detective that she could get any information on anybody from her source and would charge the detective $100 for any information. When asked if he requested any favors in return, the suspect told investigators that he asked her to assist with a sexual fantasy of his by finding two females for him to have sexual intercourse with at the same time. The suspect stated he was persistent for a day or two. However, she did not know anyone and put it off. Search warrants conducted on both the suspect and his cellular phone located proof of his communications including him requesting sexual favors from the suspect during text messages exchanges about license plate information as well as several phone calls between him and the suspect. The Special investigations Detail submitted their investigation to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office for felony charges. According to the Maricopa County Attorney's Of?ce he accepted a pretrial plea agreement to Unauthorized Access to Criminal History, a class 1 misdemeanor. Discipline served :30 Day Suspension 3/3/2014 :Dismissal 3/3/2014 :Settlement Agreement 5/5/2014 In 2012, April 16, 2013, and August 27, 2013, violated Operations Order 3.13.2.D, Operations Order 3.27.8.D, Opera' 8 Order Operations Order 8.1.4.D, Laboratory Services Bureau Ma 903.1.A, and Laboratory Services Bureau Manual when he used rsonal equipment, police evidence, and police facilities to create personal video and posted two of them on a social media website. Discipline served: Written Re Imand 5/6/2014 Violation of Personnel" ules 21b1, 21b3, 21b18, Ops Orders 1.1, 3.13.2.A, 3.13.2.D. On January 30, 2014, he received an overall ?not met" on his cheduled 90-day Performance Management Guide (PMG) for the rating period ovember 2, 2013, to January 30, 2014. During the previous 90?day scheduled period of August 3, 2013 to November 1, 2013, he received an over "not . Prior to this, in his annual scheduled PMG period of August 3, 2012, to Aug 2013, he also received on overall "not met". On his current PMG dated Januar 2014. he received a (gnot meta, for 12 of his 13 duties/ goals and a gnot met' hour of the six Core City Values. Despite continued conversations, his perfor nce has not improved. The due date for his current PMG goals was extends cm 45 days to 90 days to give him an opportunity to succeed and complete those als, which have been on his PMG for longer than a year. During the 90 days, he provided supervisory notes and discussions of how he was missing deadlines an eliverables on his duties and goals. He has previous discipline that consists of a ten Reprimand. Discipline serv . 1 Day Suspension 5/7/2014 MIAMI-BABE Memorandum Date: June 19, 2012 To: Arturo Loynaz, Major Airport District . Via. Randy Heller, Chief North Operations Divis El I .. From: Disposition Panel 2013 Subject: Disposition of IA i BUREAU Complaint of Miami-Dade Police Department "ex-r" gig ?Ti-"r if?1??Disposition Panel comprised of the members listed below convened for the purpose of determining disposition of allegations made against personnel of your command. The following represents the findings of the panel: I. SUMMARY A. Allegations: Investigative Allegation: 1. From Thursday, April 14, 2011, through Thursday, March 22, 2012, Sergeant Waell Farraj conducted several unauthorized queries utilizing the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, Driver and Vehicle Information Database. (Allegation Classification: Departmental Misconduct Procedure) Reference Violation: Miami-Dede Police Departmental Manual,- Chapter 2 - Part 3 AUTOMATED SYSTEMS, Section 3 PROCEDURES, I. RULES OF 1. As detailed therein. Miami-Dada Police Departmental Manual, Chapter 12 - Part 1 - GENERAL OBJECTIVES AND D. Rules: 26.1.1], 4. Obedience to laws and rules: As detailed therein. Miami-Dede Police Departmental Manual, Chapter 12 - Part 1 GENERAL CONDUCT, OBJECTIVES AND D. Rules: 26.1.1], 23. Motor vehicle registration information: As detailed therein. '4 Arturo Loynaz, Major June 19, 2012 Page 2 B. Disposition: Allegation 1 Sustained As the result of concerns from Homeland Security Bureau?s Major Glenn Sto-lzenberg regarding Sergeant Waell Farraj?s activities utilizing the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, Driver and Vehicle information Database (DAVID), an investigation was conducted. The Professional Compliance Bureau's (PCB) investigation revealed that from Thursday, April 14, 2011, through Thursday, March 22, 2012, Sergeant Farraj conducted unauthorized DAVID queries on several Miami-Dede Police Department (MDPD) employees, celebrities, high-profile individuals, and others as shown below. MDPD Employees: - 0 Vernon Sullivan April 16, 2011 0 Jeff Lugo June 4, 2011 - Chad Batchelor June 6, 2011 - 0' Osvaldo Hernandez June 7, 2011 0 Candy Loftus June 14,2011 a James Loftus June 14,2011 0 Robert Irizarry July 15, 2011 0 Yamarys Irizarry July 15, 2011 a - Roberto Lageyre September 29, 2011 Celebrities: 0 Brandon Marshall April 23, 2011 0- Michi Marshall April 23, 2011 Dwayne Johnson May 28, 2011 Chris Bosh June 3,2011 - - Labron James June 3, 2011 -o Mario Chalmers June 3, 2011 - Udonis Haslem June 3, 2011 - Mike Miller June 3, 2011 Dwayne Wade June 3, 2011 - Alonzo Mourning July 23, 2011 Labron James July 23, 2011 Arturo Loynaz, Major June 19, 2012 Page 3 ?gh Profile Individuals: Casey Anthony Richard Sharpstein Karen Gilbert Nick Navarro Johanna Gomez Laurie Jennings Alexis Rivera Others: On Thursday, Nidaa Yousef Esam Mohmoud Iman Masoud Basel Mahmoud Hamed Farraj Sami Farraj Amjad Farraj Alsheed Mohammad Nasif Ahmad Nasif Waddah Twam Eman Sulaiman May 27, 2011 May 27, 2011 August 29, 2011 September 29, 2011 October 13, 2011 October 13, 2011 October 13, 2011 May 22,2011, July 23, 2011, and January 14, 2012 April 24, 2011 . April 24, 2011 April 24, 2011 May 28, 2011 May 28, 2011 June 4, 2011 January 12, 2012 January 13, 2012 January 13, 2012 January 14, 2012 March 2012 May 31, 2012, Sergeant Farraj provided a formal statement to PCB investigators. Sergeant Farraj was asked about each of the individuals listed above and he stated that he had, 'in fact, queried those individuals. Sergeant Farraj further stated that he used bad judgment and did not mean anything malicious by conducting queries of the aforementioned persons. Sergeant Farraj stated that he did not copy, disseminate, or share, any information obtained from DAVID with any unauthorized users and said that all the queries he conducted were unrelated to his job assignment. Based on the above facts, the panel ?nds this allegation sustained. II. OTHER FINDINGS: None POLICY OR PROCEDURAL CHANGES: None Arturo Loynaz, Major June 19, 2012 Page 4 Angus H. BUW Rey Valdes??, Major Criminal Investiga Ions Division Homicide Bureau Panel Member Panel Mernber Raul M. Ubieta, Major Robbery Bureau Panel Chairperson RMU/mbo 0: Gary Shimminger, Major Professional Compliance Bureau RevieWed by: MAAM Police Legal Bureau INVEI AND CASE DISPOS. EON PCB Internal Affairs Case LA. 2012-0061 Complaint of: Complaint of Miam"-Dade Police Department Chain of Command Review Action'l?aken (listfor each employee) Ail-?Port Sergeant Nae-ll Farraj 5?Day Suspension. (See Attached Memo of Understanding). A (1 Date Disagproved Division Chief "the Assis . I Diecto Assistant Director Final Approval Approved Date Disapproved i 3?5 Director Director Revised 11/21Xoo