>> YOU, READY? LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. [1. Roll Call] [00:00:09] WELCOME TO THE MUNICIPAL FIRE POLICE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD MEETING FOR SEPTEMBER 22, 2025. MS. SHIWONDA, TAKE A ROLL CALL? >> YES. MR. MICHAEL LEMING? >> PRESENT. >> MR. EDWIN BERAUD? >> PRESENT. >> MR. BRADLEY RICKS? >> PRESENT. >> ATTORNEY JOSHUA NEWVILLE. >> PRESENT. >> YOU HAVE A QUORUM. >> THANK YOU, SHIWONDA. AT THIS TIME, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THINGS UP FOR OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. ANYONE HAS ANY COMMENT? >> I'M SORRY. MR. TODD STERLING. >> THERE WE GO. PUBLIC COMMENTS. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE WE GET STARTED? [2. Consider Motion to Approve Agenda.] PRESS ROBINSON. DR. ROBINSON IS ACTUALLY TAKEN OFF FROM THE BOARD. THE PERSON THAT IS GOING TO REPLACE HIM IS NOT HERE. AT THIS TIME, HE'S NOT BEEN ADOPTED INTO THE BOARD YET. AT THIS TIME, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGENDA. I HAVE A COUPLE OF AMENDMENTS TO ADD TO THE AGENDA. >> YES. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE AGENDA TO ELECT A NEW BOARD CHAIRMAN. WE WANT TO DO THE OTHER ONE. I'M GOING TO ADD IT? >> YEAH. I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER AMENDMENT TO THE AGENDA TO CALL FOR [OVERLAPPING]. >> KEEP THAT MOTION SEPARATE. KEEP IT SEPARATE. >> THAT'S FINE. >> YOU NEED A SECOND ON THE [OVERLAPPING]. >> I'LL SECOND MR. LEMING'S MOTION. >> SHOULD WE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON ELECTING A NEW CHAIR PERSON? >> I WOULD ASK FIRST IF THERE'S ANY DISCUSSION, AND THEN I WOULD RECOMMEND A ROLL CALL VOTE, YES. >> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON? >> I DO. I HAVE A DISCUSSION. I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO TELL DR. ROBINSON, THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING HE'S DONE FOR THIS BOARD. HE'S BEEN ON THIS BOARD FOR 12 YEARS, AND IT'S JUST TIME FOR HIM TO BASICALLY RETIRE. HE HAS BEEN SUCH A GREAT LEADER FOR SOMEBODY FOR ME TO WATCH TO LEARN ON THIS BOARD. HE'S TAUGHT ME TREMENDOUSLY A LOT OF THINGS THAT I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THIS BOARD DID, AND I JUST WANTED TO PUBLICLY THANK DR. ROBINSON FOR HIS TIME AND SERVICE, AND THEN HE WAS ALWAYS VERY POLITE AND VERY GOOD TO THE PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD. THANK YOU. IF YOU'RE WATCHING, DR. ROBINSON, THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? >> SHIWONDA WILL TAKE A ROLL. I GUESS WE HAVE TO NOMINATE A NEW CHAIR PERSON, CORRECT? >> FIRST WE WOULD DO THE ROLL CALL TO AMEND THE AGENDA. I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU GUYS PUT IT ACTUALLY IS THE NEXT ITEM. I DO THAT. THEN WE JUST FLOW INTO THAT. >> MR. MICHAEL LEMING? >> YES. >> MR. EDWIN BERAUD? >> YES. >> MR. BRADLEY RICKS? >> YES. >> ATTORNEY JOSHUA NEWVILLE? >> YES. >> THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. NOW, ANYONE HAVE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR THE NEW CHAIR? >> I HAVE A NOMINATION IF I'M ABLE TO DO THAT. >> WE'RE A SMALL BOARD. AS THE CHAIR YOU CAN NOMINATE [OVERLAPPING] >> I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE JOSHUA NEWVILLE AS THE NEW CHAIR. >> THOUGHT YOU'RE GOING TO SAY JOSH THERE. [LAUGHTER] >> I CAN REMAIN AT THIS TIME AS THE CO-CHAIR. >> MUCH TO MY SUGAR AND I'LL SECOND. >> SHIWONDA, I THINK WE NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE. >> WE ALL ARE JUST NOMINATING NOW SO THE QUESTION WOULD BE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? >> YEAH. >> ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? >> NO. >> NO. >> I CLOSE THE FLOOR FOR NOMINATIONS, AND THEN I WOULD TAKE A VOTE OR I'D MAKE A MOTION TO MAKE THIS UNWITTING SOUL, THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD. >> NOMINATIONS ARE CLOSED. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO NOMINATE [00:05:01] JOSHUA NEWVILLE AS THE NEW CHAIR OF THE MUNICIPAL FIRE POLICE SERVICE BOARD. >> SECOND. >> SHIWONDA, THE ROLL CALL VOTE. >> MR. MICHAEL LEMING? >> YES. >> MR. EDWIN BERAUD? >> YES. >> MR. BRADLEY RICKS? >> YES. >> MR. JOSHUA NEWVILLE? >> YES. >> YOU SURE ABOUT THAT? >> I THOUGHT ABOUT ABSTAINING, BUT I FIGURED IT WOULD COMPLICATE THINGS. >> WHO DID THE SECOND. >> WELCOME ABOARD, MR. CHAIR. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO COME OVER HERE. WELCOME ABOARD. >> FOR THE SAKE OF EASE, I SUPPOSE. >> THEN YOU ALL HAD A SECOND AMENDMENT. >> YEAH. >> YES. >> ON THE MATTER OF THE AGENDA, ARE THERE ANY OTHER MOTIONS TO AMEND THE AGENDA? >> YES. I NEED TO AMEND THE AGENDA TO CALL FOR AN EXAMINATION FOR THE BATON ROUGE FIRE DEPARTMENT. CHIEF FIRE SAFETY OFFICER. SECOND. >> I'M GIVING MS. HARRIS A SECOND. I CAN MAKE SURE THAT SHE GETS IT DOWN. >> I GOT IT. >> YOU HAVE IT? >> UH-HUH. >> THEN WE HAVE A SECOND? >> A SECOND. YES. >> ANY OPPOSE? HEARING NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THAT MOTION NUMBER. >> WHERE DO YOU ALL WANT TO PUT IT AT? >> FIVE. >> I GET ON TO THAT? >> FIVE. >> YEAH. >> THAT WILL BE ADDED TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5. ANY OTHER MOTIONS TO AMEND THE AGENDA? >> NO. >> HEARING NONE, IF WE COULD HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. >> I SAY MOVE. >> I'LL SECOND. >> ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THE MOTION CARRIES. THE AGENDA IS APPROVED. THAT MOVES US TO THE MINUTES. [3. Consider Motion to Approve Minutes from: August 25, 2025] HAS EVERYONE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MINUTES? >> YES. >> YEAH. >> MS. HARRIS, HAD ANYONE PREVIOUSLY VOICED ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THE MINUTES? >> NO. NO ONE. >> THEN DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, AUGUST 25TH, 2025 MINUTES? >> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR AUGUST 25, 2025. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> ANY OPPOSE? HEARING NONE. IT WAS SECOND BY RICKS? >> YEAH. >> SECOND BY RICKS. HEARING NO OPPOSITION, THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THAT MOVES US TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 4. [4. Consider Motion to Approve or Reject Personnel Action Forms in the Baton Rouge Fire and Police Departments] CONSIDER MOTION TO APPROVE OR REJECT PERSONNEL ACTION FORMS IN THE BAT ROUGE FIRE AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS. MS. HARRIS, DO WE HAVE THOSE OR GENTLEMEN, DO WE HAVE THOSE? HAVE WE REVIEWED THEM? YES. YES. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PERSONNEL ACTION FORMS FOR THE BATON ROUGE FIRE AND POLICE DEPARTMENT. >> I'LL SECOND. >> ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5. [5. Consider Motion to Call for Examinations in the Baton Rouge Fire Department for: Public Information Officer] CONSIDER MOTION TO CALL FOR EXAMINATIONS IN THE BATON ROUGE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER AND MS. HARRIS. WHAT WAS THAT SECOND ITEM? >> CHIEF FIRE SAFETY OFFICER. THAT'S RIGHT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO CALL FOR EXAMINATIONS IN THE BATON ROUGE FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER AND CHIEF FIRE SAFETY OFFICER. >> DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> ANY OPPOSITION? HEARING NONE, THE MOTION CARRIES. THIS DOES NOT LOOK LIKE AN ACTION ITEM. IT'S A NOTIFICATION. [6. Notification from Baton Rouge Fire Department: Assistant Fire Public Information Officer Justin Hill has been placed into a Provisional Appointment to Fire Public Information Officer Effective September 6,2025, while BRFD Waits for a Test to be Scheduled and Results] NOTIFICATION FROM BATON ROUGE FIRE DEPARTMENT, ASSISTANT FIRE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER JUSTIN HILL HAS BEEN PLACED INTO A PROVISIONAL APPOINTMENT TO FIRE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2025, WHILE BATON ROUGE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAITS FOR A TEST TO BE SCHEDULED AND THE RESULTS. MS. HARRIS, IS THERE ANYTHING WE NEED TO DO ON THAT? >> CHIEF, DO YOU NEED US TO ACTUALLY APPROVE THE PROVISIONAL APPOINTMENT? >> JUST FOLLOW ON WHAT THE LAW STATES, [00:10:01] ANYTIME WE'RE DOING A PROVISIONAL OR SUBSTITUTE APPOINTMENT TO NOTIFY YOU GUYS IN WRITING, IS ALL THAT WAS, SIR. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, CHIEF. >> OR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 7 IS SIMILAR TO A NOTIFICATION. [7. Notification from Baton Rouge Fire Department: Firefighter Billy Zachary has been placed into a Substitute Appointment to Assistant Fire Public Information Officer Effective September 6,2025 Due to the Provisional Appointment of Justin Hill to Fire Public Information Officer.] NOTIFICATION FROM BATON ROUGE FIRE DEPARTMENT. FIREFIGHTER BILLY ZACHARY HAS BEEN PLACED INTO A SUBSTITUTE APPOINTMENT TO ASSISTANT FIRE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 6, 2025, DUE TO THE PROVISIONAL APPOINTMENT OF JUSTIN HILL TO FIRE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER. AGAIN, CHIEF, THAT'S JUST OUR WRITTEN NOTICE. >> UH-HUH. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 8. [Items 8 & 9] CONSIDER A PETITION ON APPEAL. DO WE WANT TO TAKE THAT UP NOW OR IS THERE AN ORDER OF OPERATIONS, WE WANT TO DO THIS? >> YEAH. I CAN ACTUALLY HELP HERE. >> TO CALL THE AGENDA ITEM, CONSIDER A PETITION OF APPEAL ON BEHALF OF OFFICER ERIC RANKE IA FILE NUMBER 015-25. >> MR. CHAD ACTUALLY SUGGEST THAT WE DO EIGHT AND NINE AT THE SAME TIME, SAME PERSON. >> THEN IF COUNSEL HAS NO OBJECTION AND THE BOARD DOES NOT HAVE AN OBJECTION. I ALSO CALL AGENDA ITEM 9, CONSIDER A PETITION OF APPEAL ON BEHALF OF OFFICER ERIC RANKE IA FILE NUMBER 021-25. COUNSEL, IF YOU PLEASE. >> MORNING, BOARD. THOMAS [INAUDIBLE] IN BEHALF OF ERIC RANKE. HAS SPOKEN WITH MR. RAINES, WHO IS COUNSEL FOR THE CHIEF, TENTATIVELY, IF THE BOARD APPROVES, WE'D LIKE TO SET THE FIRST HEARING, WHICH I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GO CHRONOLOGICALLY IS THE 015-25 HEARING, CHECKING WITH OUR SCHEDULES, LOOK LIKE NOVEMBER 24TH WOULD BE A GOOD DAY FOR THAT HEARING. CONSIDERING CONSOLIDATING, WE'RE AFRAID THAT WOULD RUN EXCESSIVELY LONG IF WE WOULD DO THAT. THEN THE OTHER ONE, BASED ON THE HOLIDAYS, WE THOUGHT JANUARY WOULD BE A GOOD DATE, BUT THERE WAS NOT A JANUARY DATE AVAILABLE. WE CAN COORDINATE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONFLICTS FOR THE SECOND HEARING ON THE 15-25, I BELIEVE IT IS. I MEAN, 21-25. >> ON THE SUBJECT OF NOT CONSOLIDATING, I'VE ONLY REVIEWED IT BRIEFLY, BUT IT LOOKED LIKE THESE TWO ALLEGATIONS KIND OF HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH ONE ANOTHER [OVERLAPPING]. >> THEY'RE COMPLETELY SEPARATE, BUT THEY CAN BUILD ON EACH OTHER FOR THE FINAL RESOLUTION, WHICH WAS THE TERMINATION OF OFFICER RANKE. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> THEN, COUNSEL, MR. DARROW, WOULD THE PREFERENCE BE FOR US TO TAKE ACTION ON SETTING DATES OR SIMPLY MAYBE TAKE ACTION ALLOWING YOU GUYS TO COORDINATE AND SET THOSE DATES? >> I WOULD GO AHEAD AND SET IT FOR NOVEMBER 24TH. THAT'S OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING. THAT WAY THEY HAVE SOMETHING CONCRETE THAT THEY CAN TELL THEIR WITNESSES. THE JANUARY DATE LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD TENTATIVELY BE THE 26TH. IT'S THE FOURTH MONDAY IN JANUARY. >> THEY HAVEN'T CHECKED THEIR SCHEDULES YET. >> I KNOW. REGARDLESS OF THEIR SCHEDULES, THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD MEET. >> TENTATIVELY, JANUARY 26TH DATE WOULD BE GOOD FOR ME. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT MR. RAINES. >> OF COURSE, WE ALWAYS BE LIKE MR. RAINES SAID, SUBJECT TO BEING ABLE TO GET ALL OUR WITNESSES AVAILABLE FOR THOSE DATES. >> RIGHT NOW, IT LOOKS OKAY TO ME. >> NO EXPECTATION OF COMING OUT OF THE HOLIDAYS. I KNOW SOMETIMES HEARINGS THAT GET SET IN THE NEW YEAR AND SOMETIMES THAT CAN CAUSE PROBLEMS. BUT WE'LL OBVIOUSLY ACCOMMODATE YOU GUYS AS BEST WE CAN. >> SOMETIMES JUDGES BLESS US WITH HEARING DATES THAT ARE NOT ALREADY ON OUR CALENDAR. >> I LIVE THAT LIFE HARRIS. >> I KNOW YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH IT, MR. [INAUDIBLE]. [LAUGHTER] JUST SO I HAVE IT STRAIGHT, AND I'M NOT MAKING ANY MOTION, BUT THAT WAS 015 25 FOR NOVEMBER 24TH AND 021-25 FOR JANUARY 26TH. THEN IF ANYONE IS INCLINED TO MAKE A MOTION REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS 8 AND 9? >> IF NOT, I CAN. >> AGAIN, WE'RE A SMALL BOARD. >> ROBERT, RULES WOULD THE CHAIR TO MAKE MOTIONS AND SO EVEN AS THE CHAIR, I MOVE IN THE MATTER OF ERIC RANKE IA FILE NUMBER 015-25 TO SET THAT ON OUR AGENDA FOR NOVEMBER 24 FOR THE APPEALS HEARING, AND IN THE MATTER OF ERIC RANKE IA FILE NUMBER 021-25, TO SET THAT ON OUR JANUARY 26TH AGENDA FOR AN APPEALS HEARING. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> ANY OPPOSITION? HEARING NONE. THE MATTER CARRIES. >> THANK YOU ALL. HAVE A GOOD DAY. >> VERY WELCOME. BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE'VE HANDLED ALL ADDED AGENDA ITEMS. >> THAT IS CORRECT. [00:15:02] >> THAT BRINGS US TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10. [10. Conduct an Appeal Hearing on Behalf of Joane II Robinson-Woodard, BRPD] CONDUCT AN APPEAL HEARING ON BEHALF OF JOEL ROBINSON WOODARD, BRPD. I'LL JUST NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT AT THE CLOSE OF EVIDENCE, WE MAY ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO THE LISTED STATUTORY LAW, BUT WE'LL REVISIT THAT AT THE END OF THE HEARING. >> YES. THE PARTIES. THE APPELLANT FILED A MOTION FOR SUMMARY DISPOSITION ON THIS. I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST MATTER THAT GETS TAKEN UP. AFTER THAT, I WILL MENTION IF WE GET PAST THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY DISPOSITION, THERE WERE SOME OBJECTIONS FILED, AND WE'VE JUST KIND OF DEFERRED THAT TO THE BOARD. I'LL SPEAK ON THAT MORE LATER. >> CLIFTON AND I, ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT JUDGE JENNA WARDER. LOOKING AT WHAT I FILED, THE RESPONSE FROM THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY, AND IN MY REPLY MEMO, I THINK IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME THING THAT WAS ARGUED ALMOST VERBATIM; IT JUST CHANGED THE NAMES FROM LAST MONTH. IF COUNSEL WILL JOIN ME, I'M GOING TO WAIVE ORAL ARGUMENT, I'M GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING I DID 50 DAYS AGO. >> MY QUESTION WAS GOING TO BE BECAUSE I REVIEWED THE BRIEFS THAT I BELIEVE THEY LOOKED THE SAME, BUT YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN SOME SMALL FACT. >> I DON'T THINK THERE WAS. >> THERE'S ONLY ONE THING THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM THIS CASE TO THE LAST ONE, AND THAT'S THE NOTICE LETTER. THE PREVIOUS NOTICE LETTER SAID UP TO AND INCLUDING TERMINATION, THAT LANGUAGE WAS IN THERE AND IT WAS NOT IN THE HILL LETTER. HILL WAS MAYBE BACK IN 2022. THIS ONE WAS IN 2024, AND THAT LANGUAGE HAD BEEN ADDED SINCE THAT TIME, SO IT WAS ON THE LAST PAGE OF THE PREVIOUS NOTICE, IT NOTIFIED THAT SHE COULD BE DISCIPLINED ALL THE WAY THROUGH TERMINATION. THAT'S THE ONLY DIFFERENCE.. >> WOULD YOU CONCEDE THAT POINT? >> YES. BUT IT SAYS WHAT IT SAYS? >> CERTAINLY. WAS THERE POTENTIALLY ONE OTHER CHANGE? I THINK IN OUR LAST MATTER, YOU HAD TWO SEPARATE LEGAL ARGUMENTS AND IN THIS ONE? >> IT WAS JUST THE ONE. >> JUST THE ONE? >> YES. >> I WOULD JUST DEFER RULING ON THAT TO THE END AND GET STRAIGHT INTO THE APPEAL. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY DOES COUNSEL HAVE ANY PREFERENCES ON WHETHER WE RULE ON THAT NOW OR HOLD THAT UNTIL AFTER THE APPEAL? >> I DON'T. >> THAT'S FINE AND I'M READY TO GO. >> UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO RULE IN MY FAVOR AND THAT MAKES THE HEARING , FEEL FREE TO DO THAT. >> THEN DO ANY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HAVE ANY THOUGHTS OR PREFERENCES? HEARING EITHER NONE OR PREFERENCE TOWARD DEFERRAL, WE'LL DEFER TO COUNSEL AND WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE APPEAL PROPER, UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S SOME EVIDENTIARY ISSUES THAT WE MAY NEED TO WORK FOR. >> OPENINGS THERE OR WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO WITH THAT? >> SAY IT AGAIN. >> OPENING STATEMENT, DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT? >> FIRST. YES. WE ARE GOING TO DO OPENING STATEMENTS, BUT FIRST WHO ALL IS TESTIFYING IN THIS MATTER? I'M ASSUMING ALL THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE SITTING OVER HERE? >> NO. I'LL ARGUE THE FIRST, SO. >> WHO WAS A POTENTIAL WITNESS IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. I'M GOING TO PUT THEM UNDER THE RULE. >> BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO MOVE ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD, UNLESS COUNSEL OBJECTED TO MOVE TO SEQUESTER ALL WITNESSES, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE NEEDED TO ADDRESS ANY PRE HEARING MATTERS BEFORE THEN? >> NOT AT THIS POINT. I'VE GOT CHIEF AND SERGEANT DOUGLAS. OF COURSE, THE OFFICER INVOLVED IN THE CASE, AND THEN CLIFF AS HIS WITNESSES. >> THE ONLY WITNESS PRESENT THAT I DO NOT INTEND TO CALL WOULD BE OFFICER CHRISTIAN CAMERON. HE WAS SUBPOENAED, I'VE ASKED THAT AT THIS TIME HE IS RELIEVED. OTHER THAN THAT, CAPTAIN TODD BERGIN, OBVIOUSLY, THE APPELLANT, [INAUDIBLE] >> MR. HAGGLE, WHAT WAS THE WITNESS'S NAME THAT YOU DON'T PLAN TO CALL? >> CHRISTIAN CAMERON. HE IS PRESENT. >> COUNSEL, DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO HIM BEING RELEASED AS A WITNESS? >> NO. NOT AT ALL. >> ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY OBJECTION? PERFECT. THEN HE IS RELEASED FROM SUBPOENA OR THEY ARE RELEASED FROM SUBPOENA AND FROM THE RULE OF SEQUESTRATION. >> IF YOU'VE BEEN NAMED AS A WITNESS, COULD YOU STAND AND COME TO THE FRONT ROOM, WHERE ARE YOU GUYS IN? YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO ALL THE WAY AROUND. EVERYBODY RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. [00:20:02] DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? >> I DO. >> WHAT I'M GOING TO DO, EXCEPT FOR THE REPRESENTATIVES OF EACH PARTY, WE'RE GOING TO PUT YOU UNDER THE RULE OF SEQUESTRATION, WHICH SIMPLY MEANS THAT YOU WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE PRESENT IN THIS ROOM AND HEAR ANY OF THE TESTIMONY THAT GOES FORWARD. YOU'RE NOT TO DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH ANYBODY OUTSIDE OF THIS ROOM EXCEPT FOR THE LAWYERS INVOLVED IN THE CASE, AND HOPEFULLY WE WON'T BE TOO LONG WE WILL BE IN TOUCH. UNLESS YOU'RE ONE OF THE PARTY WITNESSES, I NEED YOU TO STEP OUT. >> JENNA. PASS OUT MY EXHIBIT BOOKS. JIM IT'S NUMBERED JUST LIKE YOURS SO MY REFERENCE IS BECAUSE I'M ONLY USING THE IO REPORT. >> MR. HARVEY, PLEASE, SO THAT WAY BECAUSE EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE THEY GET PULLED BACK AND FORTH, HAVING EXTRA COPIES IS NEVER A BAD THING. >> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. >> I WOULD REFER TO A WAVE OPENING. >> MR. ANTHONY, ANY OBJECTION TO LUPERT? ANY OBJECTION? >> YOU SHOULD HAVE OBJECTED. YOU EVERY STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE. >> I WILL MOVE THE BOARD INTO A BRIEF, MR. HARVEY DO YOU NEED MORE THAN FIVE 10 MINUTES? I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED TO CONSULT WITH ANYONE. A BRIEF FIVE MINUTE. >> THIS IS I'M BEING HONEST. >> EVERYONE A WHILE. LET'S SEE EUPHEMISM. >> I DON'T NEED TO LAST MINUTE FOR. >> THEN I MOVE TO RECESS THIS BOARD MEETING FOR 5 MINUTES. DO I HAVE A SECOND? ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE. WE ARE RECESSED UNTIL LET'S CALL IT 11:15. >> I DO. >> YOU WERE AN EXCELLENT CHAIR. >> I HAPPY TO LET YOU HEAR SECOND. [INAUDIBLE] >> YOU FILLED IN VERY WELL. I WAS ADMIRABLE. WELL. [NOISE] [INAUDIBLE] >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU CUED UP YOUR VIDEO? >> IT'S IT'S CUED UP, BUT THEY I'M TO HAVE TO GET THEM TO PUT IT ON THE TVS. >> WANT TO MAKE SURE I CAN'T TELL ON. IS IT A 37 MINUTE BODY CAMERA VIDEO IT LOOKS SHORT, IS IT JANEL BODY? >> I DON'T THINK IT'S SHORTER. I DIDN'T LIKE I DIDN'T HAVE ANYBODY SPLICE IT OR ANYTHING. NOW, I'M NOT PLAYING THE WHOLE THING. BUT I MEAN, IF YOU NEED TO DO IT TO DIFFERENT TIME FRAMES OR SOMETHING, YOU CAN DO THAT. [00:25:04] >> BECAUSE I'VE GOT IT, THERE'S A WE'RE PLUGGING [INAUDIBLE] OVER HERE. >> LIKE ON YOURS, IF YOU WANT TO IF WE NEED TO REMOVE IT AND PUT THAT ONE IN OR WHATEVER. I THINK IT'S GOT EVERYTHING IN THERE, THOUGH. I THINK IT'S THE FULL VIDEO SHOULD BE. >> OLDER YOU GET [INAUDIBLE] I'M OLD? ISN'T. >> COUNSEL, MISS SHAWANA JUST STEP OUT, SO I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO CALL US BACK TO ORDER YET, BUT I JUST WANTED TO CHECK WITH YOU GUYS WHENEVER SHE'S BACK, MR. DAR. JUST WANTED TO SEE IF YOU GUYS NEEDED MORE TIME OR WHETHER YOU WERE GOOD TO GO ONCE EVERYONE'S BACK. >> GOOD. [NOISE] , YOU GOT TO WIT. >> MR. NEWBY, ARE WE ON THE RECORD? >> I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS RECORDING CONTINUOUSLY. I ASSUME THAT THIS IS ALL BEING RECORDED IF THAT'S WHAT YOU MEAN BY BEING ON THE RECORD? >> YES. THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD AND I KNOW IT WAS PART OF THE PRETRIAL ORDER. ONE OF THE THINGS IT LOOKED LIKE BARRING AN OBJECTION, AND I KNOW WE DID NOT OBJECT THAT THE VIDEOS WOULD BE THE BOARD WOULD BE ALLOWED TO WATCH THE VIDEO EVIDENCE PRIOR TO THIS HEARING, AND I'M JUST WONDERING IF THAT HAPPENED. BECAUSE IF NOT, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE ENTIRE BEFORE DECISIONS MADE, THAT HOPEFULLY THE BOARD WILL WATCH IT. >> I WILL SAY AND IF WE WERE SUPPOSED TO STAY ON ME, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE HAS. I HAVE CERTAINLY NOT SEEN ANY OF THE VIDEO. I REMEMBER SEEING THAT MAYBE IT NEEDED TO FOLLOW THERE WAS SOME ISSUE WITH UPLOAD, I NEEDED TO FOLLOW LATER, IF IT EVER DID GET SENT I NEVER SAW. >> WE SENT A WELL, WE SAID THE LINK, I THINK OVER TO CLIFF, BUT WE'VE GOT THE VIDEO.. HERE. I GUESS TO THAT POINT, I'M NOT INTENDING ON OUR CASE IN CHIEF TO PLAY FULL I THINK HERS IS LIKE 37 MINUTES LONG. I'M NOT INTENDING TO PLAY FULL 37 MINUTES BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A FEW DIFFERENT INTERACTIONS WITH PEOPLE THAT TOTAL LESS THAN 10 MINUTES.. >> BECAUSE TECHNICALLY, SO I'LL CALL THIS BOARD MEETING BACK TO ORDER. I BELIEVE WE NEED A ROLLCALL VOTE. NOW THAT WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE INTO THE INTO THE WE THAT'S FINE. I DON'T WANT TO GO TOO FAR. >> A ROLLCALL TO COME BACK. >> YOU WOULD NEED A ROLL CALL TO COME BACK? >> I DIDN'T GO. THERE YOU GO. >> THEN AS CHAIR, WE'LL CALL US BACK TO ORDER AND THEN PLEASE, MR. RAINES. >> ON THE CASE IN CHIEF, I JUST INTEND TO PLAY JUST THE INCIDENTS FOR WHICH SHE WAS DISCIPLINED, BUT NOT A IS NOT RELATED TO THOSE INCIDENTS. I BELIEVE, SO THERE'S ALMOST 40 MINUTES WORTH OF TIME THAT I DON'T THINK NECESSARIBUNCH OF EXTRANEOUS VIDEO OF THE BODY CAM FOOTAGE THATLY YOU ALL I MEAN, YOU WILL HAVE A COPY OF THE VIDEO IF YOU WANT TO WATCH IT BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT, BUT I DID NOT INTEND TO PLAY IT BEFORE. >> MR. HARVEY, DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS, STIPULATIONS, OR OBJECTIONS EITHER WAY? >> I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO TELL HIM HOW HE PUTS ON HIS CASE I INTEND FOR THE BOARD TO WATCH THE ENTIRETY OF IT. >> DO YOU HAVE ANY ISSUE WHENEVER HE'S PRESENTING HIS CASE OF HIM SHOWING THE PORTIONS? I'M ASKING, DO YOU HAVE ANY RULE OF COMPLE RULE OF COMPLETENESS TYPE OBJECTION TO HIM SHOWING HIS PORTIONS? WELL OBVIOUSLY ALLOW YOU TO PLAY WHATEVER IT IS YOU BELIEVE IS IMPORTANT? >> I JUST THINKING LIKE FOR TIME MANAGEMENT PURPOSES. IF THE BOARD WANTS TO WATCH IT BEFORE WE START TAKING TESTIMONY IN ITS ENTIRETY. >> I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT. I WAS GOING TO SAY, WHILE I WOULD DEFER TO MY COLLEAGUES, I WOULD PERSONALLY BE DISINCLINED TO GO THAT ROUTE. NOW, WITH THAT SAID, [00:30:02] THE VIDEO THAT MR. RAINES IS GOING TO BE HAVING US WATCH. MR. RAINES, HOW MUCH DID YOU SAY ABOUT 10 MINUTES YOU WERE PLANNING TO PLAY? OR DID I MAKE THAT UP? >> IT'S PROBABLY ROUGHLY ABOUT 10 MINUTES. IT'S A FEW DISCRETE INCIDENTS THAT MAYBE TOTAL ABOUT 10 MINUTES OR SO? >> MR. HARVEY, I ASSUME THAT THAT VIDEO IS ONE OF THE VIDEOS YOU WILL WANT US TO WATCH IN ITS ENTIRETY? >> IF IT'S JONEL'S BODY CAMERA, IT'S THE ONLY VIDEO ON 100 WATCH. >> I ASSUME THAT'S THE VIDEO WE'RE REFERENCING? >> IT IS, YES. >> FOR THE SAKE OF US NOT HAVING TO RE-WATCH THE 10 MINUTES, WOULD YOU HAVE AN OBJECTION TO WHENEVER WE GET TO THAT POINT, WATCHING THE ENTIRE VIDEO OR FOR THE SAKE OF YOUR PRESENTATION, WOULD YOU PREFER TREAT IT AS MORE INDIVIDUAL AND DISCRETE COMPONENTS? >> I'D RATHER DO IT THAT WAY BECAUSE I INTENDED TO DO IT WHILE QUESTIONING A WITNESS. I WANT TO SHOW PORTIONS AND THEN ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT IT INSTEAD OF PLAYING THE WHOLE THING AND THEN ASKING QUESTIONS AFTER. I THINK IT'S MORE EFFICIENT. >> I FIGURED THAT THAT WAS LIKELY GOING TO BE YOUR PREFERENCE, AND IN THAT CASE, 10 MINUTES IS NOT THE END OF THE WORLD UNLESS ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE AN OBJECTION. MR. RAINES DO YOUR PRESENTATION AS YOU SEE FIT, AND THEN MR. HARVEY CAN DO HIS HIS PRESENTATION AS HE SEES FIT, IF ANYTHING BECOMES OVERLY CUMULATIVE, WE'LL DEAL WITH THAT. DOES THAT SOUND SURVIVING? >> YES, SIR. >> I WOULD LIKE TO DO AN OPENING JUST TO GIVE LAY A LITTLE CONTEXT TO THIS CASE IF THAT WORKS. >> OF COURSE. >> DO YOU WANT ME TO DO THAT FROM HERE OR THERE? >> WHAT'S YOUR PREFERENCE? >> I'M HAPPY TO GO UP THERE. >> THAT'S FINE. >> I THINK CLIFF NOT TO PUT YOU ON IT, BUT I JUST HATE FOR HIM TO GIVE A OPENING AND YOU NOT HAVE THE SAME OPPORTUNITY. >> AS LONG AS I'M ALLOWED TO CLOSE. >> SOME LAWYERS I WOULD BE CONCERNED IF MR. HARVEY BELIEVES THAT HE CAN WAIVE, I'M VERY COMFORTABLE DEFERRING TO MR. HARVEY TRIAL STRATEGY. >> I WOULD PREFER IF HE GETS OPENING, HE DOESN'T GET A CLOSED. [LAUGHTER] >> I DON'T AGREE TO THAT. >> I THINK MR. RAINES MIGHT HAVE AN OBJECTION TO THAT. >> YES. >> MR. RAINES AT YOUR LEISURE. >> THANK YOU. SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE SEEN THIS INCIDENT ON THE NEWS LAST YEAR. THIS RELATES TO THE MAYOR BROOMS SUMMER OF HOPE INCIDENT FROM MAY 26 OF 2024 AT LIBERTY LAGOON. IT ENDED UP HAVING A COUPLE OF THOUSAND KIDS IN IT AND THE SCENE TURNED SOMEWHAT CHAOTIC. THERE WERE SOME FIGHTING, WAY MORE KIDS THAN THE FACILITY COULD ACCOMMODATE. CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD WAS AT EXTRA DUTY AT ROWE'S NEARBY. SHE SAW SOME SQUAD CARS RUNNING CODE HEADING TOWARDS THAT DIRECTION. I THINK SHE CALLED HEADQUARTERS TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON. THEY SAID WE NEED PEOPLE OVER THERE. SHE ALSO RECEIVED A CALL FROM HER SON WHO WAS, I THINK, NEAR THE ENTRANCE OF THE FACILITY, TRYING TO GET OUT OF THERE, AND SO SHE HEADED THAT DIRECTION. SHE GETS THERE AND THERE'S KIDS EVERYWHERE. YOU'LL SEE IT IN THE VIDEO, THERE'S A BIG POLICE PRESENCE. THERE ARE LOTS AND LOTS OF CARS. THEY'RE TRYING TO MOVE KIDS TOWARD FLORIDA BOULEVARD AND GETTING THEM AWAY FROM LIBERTY LAGOON, IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE FACILITY. SOME KIDS ARE COMPLIANT. THESE ARE MOSTLY TEENAGERS, MOST OF THEM BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T DRIVE THERE, THEY'RE HAVING TO GET RIDES, THE POLICE PRESENCE IS TRYING TO MOVE THEM TOWARDS FLORIDA BOULEVARD SO THAT PEOPLE CAN PICK THEM UP, GET THEIR RIDES TO GO PICK THEM UP THERE. MOST KIDS ARE COMPLIANT, BUT THERE ARE SOME KIDS THAT ARE NOT COMPLIANT, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE KIDS, A FEW OF THEM GETTING ARRESTED AT THE SCENE. SHE IS THERE TRYING TO ASSIST WITH MOVING CHILDREN TOWARDS FLORIDA BOULEVARD. THERE'S GOING TO BE THREE DIFFERENT INCIDENTS THAT WE WATCH. THE FIRST OF WHICH IS, I BELIEVE IT IS MISS BELL WALKS BY HER AND MOUTHS OFF TO HER, AND YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR SOME LANGUAGE FROM CORPORAL WOODARD. YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR SOME SALTY LANGUAGE TODAY, AND I'LL JUST SAY F FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS. GIRL DON'T F AND PLAY WITH ME OUT HERE. I'LL BEAT THE BRAKES OFF YOUR MOTHER F AND ASS, WHAT THE F WRONG WITH YOU. THAT'S AS THE GIRL IS WALKING AWAY FROM HER. THEN A FEW MINUTES LATER, SHE CONTINUES ON, SHE'S MOVING KIDS, MOVING KIDS, AND THE SAME PERSON IS NOW IN A GROUP OF KIDS AS SHE WALKS UP, SHE'S TELLING THEM TO MOVE ON. THEY'RE NOT BEING COMPLIANT. THE SAME GIRL IS MOUTHING OFF TO HER. SHE ASKED HER WHAT THE PROBLEM IS. [00:35:01] THE GIRL SAYS SHE DOESN'T HAVE A PROBLEM AND SHE SAYS, WHO ARE YOU TALKING TO SWING. WELL, WHERE I'M FROM, IF YOU TELL SOMEBODY TO SWING, THAT MEANS SWING AT ME, LIKE SWING A FIST. GENERALLY, POLICE PRESENCE IS THERE TO DE-ESCALATE SITUATIONS. TELLING A PERSON TO SWING AT YOU IS AN ESCALATION IN TACTICS AND NOT WHAT YOU WANT. THAT INTERACTION OCCURS. YOU'LL SEE THAT. THEN A FEW MINUTES LATER, THAT PERSON GETS PULLED AWAY FROM HER AS SHE ACTUALLY TRIED TO GRAB HER AND ARREST HER, THAT GIRL GETS PULLED AWAY FROM HER BY HER FRIENDS, THEY MOVE ON SAME GIRL, THEN GET SHE'S BEING PUT IN HANDCUFFS BY A DIFFERENT OFFICER. SO SHE GOES UP THERE. YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A GIRL THAT'S WITH HER IN A GOLD BIKINI, YOU HAVE TO WATCH THAT GIRL. SHE IS GOING TO BE INTERFERING WITH THEM TRYING TO PUT HANDCUFFS ON THE OTHER GIRL. SHE'S INTERFERING AND I THINK SHE GETS PEPPER SPRAYED, IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. THAT GIRL TAKES OFF RUNNING INTO A GRASSY AREA, AND THAT'S THE THIRD INTERACTION YOU'RE GOING TO SEE WHEN CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD THEN INTERFACES WITH HER. SHE HAS HER TASER ON HER AND IT'S PULLED AND IT IS POINTING TOWARDS HER GOT THE LIGHTS ON HER. THE GIRLS TAUNTING HER, BAITING HER IN. GO AHEAD. SHOOT. I WISH YOU WOULD, THAT KIND OF STUFF. THEY START CALLING EACH OTHER NAMES, AND YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR CORPORAL SAY, BITCH, I'M ABOUT THAT LIFE. DON'T LET THIS SHIT FOOL YOU A BITCH, I'M FROM THE STREETS. THEN SHE SAYS, GET THE F BEFORE I BEAT THE F OUT OF YOU. THAT'S THE LANGUAGE AND THE DISCUSSION THAT SHE'S HAVING WITH THIS PERSON. THEY GO BACK AND FORTH BACK AND FORTH AND THEN THE GIRL LEAVES. THEN THE IA INVESTIGATION GOES ON. SHE ULTIMATELY GETS DISCIPLINED, A COMMAND OF TEMPER, CONDUCT UNBECOMING. THEN THERE WAS A FAILURE TO SUBMIT A FORM BASED ON HER USE OF FORCE WITH THAT ONE INDIVIDUAL THAT ENDED UP GETTING ARRESTED, WHICH YOU'LL SEE IT ON CAMERA AS FAR AS THE INTERACTION. I THINK THE USE OF FORCE FORM IS PRETTY EASY. THE OTHER TWO, ALSO, DID CONTROL HER TEMPER. I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO EASILY SEE THAT SHE DID NOT MAINTAIN HER TEMPER WHEN DEALING WITH THESE KIDS. SHE THREATENED TWO OF THEM TO BEAT THEM UP WITHIN ABOUT 10 MINUTES. THESE WERE NOT DIRECTIONS BEING GIVEN TO SOMEBODY. IT'S ONE THING IF YOU SAY, MOVE ON AND THEY'RE NOT MOVING ON AND THEN YOU USE SOME CURSE WORD TO TRY TO GET THEIR ATTENTION. THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS WAS. THIS WAS BACK AND FORTH EXCHANGE OF INSULTS, AND THAT IS WHAT COMMAND OF TEMPER AND CONDUCT UNBECOMING ARE ABOUT. CONDUCT UNBECOMING. IS THIS THE EXAMPLE THAT YOU WANT OTHERS TO FOLLOW? IS SHE SETTING A GOOD EXAMPLE FOR OTHER OFFICERS? THE ANSWER TO THAT IS NO. WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE MATRIX, THE DISCIPLINE MATRIX BEFORE, WHEN YOU HAVE A CATEGORY 2, WHICH IS WHAT THESE WERE, FIRST TIME OFFENSE, YOU CAN DO A LETTER UP TO A THREE DAY SUSPENSION. SHE HAD TWO OF THEM SUSTAINED, AND SO SHE ENDED UP GETTING FIVE DAYS. SHE COULD HAVE GOTTEN SIX DAY SUSPENSION, CHIEF GAVE HER FIVE DAYS. SHE HAS APPEALED THAT. BUT I THINK THE EVIDENCE WILL BE CLEAR, CERTAINLY WHEN YOU SEE THE VIDEO, THAT THIS CONDUCT IS UNACCEPTABLE FOR THE DEPARTMENT, YOU DO NOT WANT YOUR OFFICERS ACTING IN THIS MANNER, AND WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU SAY SUSTAIN THE DISCIPLINE RENDERED BY CHIEF MORSE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. RAINES. >> JUST FOR THE RECORD, AGAIN, MR. IVY IS WAVING OPEN. >> JUST CONFIRMING. >> YES, SIR. >> THEN, WE CAN CALL OUR FIRST WITNESS AT COUNCIL LISA. >> [NOISE] I'LL CALL CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD TO THE STAND. NOW I DON'T KNOW IF THEY CAN HEAR ME UP IN THE BOOTH, BUT WE'RE GOING TO RUN VIDEO HERE IN A MINUTE. IF WE COULD GET THE ABILITY TO RUN THAT COMPUTER THROUGH THE MONITORS HERE IN THE ROOM, THAT WOULD BE GOOD. >> WHILE THEY'RE SETTING THAT UP, AND AS YOU SAID, I KNOW THAT BOTH SIDES KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME WHAT HAS BEEN REFERRED TO AS SALTY LANGUAGE. FOR ARGUMENT, IF YOU WANT TO SELF CENSOR, THE BOARD WILL DEFER TO YOU, BUT DURING WITNESS TESTIMONY, WHILE IT IS A BIT SALTY, FOR THE SAKE OF THE RECORD. IF WE COULD USE THE ACTUAL WORDS USED, I THINK THAT WOULD KEEP THE RECORD A BIT CLEANER. BUT AGAIN, FOR ARGUMENT, DO AS YOU WILL, BUT FOR TESTIMONY IF WE COULD KEEP IT DIRECT. >> SURE. >> AT ONE POINT, I ASKED ABOUT I WOULD PREFER JUST TO CALL MY OWN CLIENT IN MY CASE RATHER THAN QUEST EXAMINE HER. DOES THE BOARD HAVE A ISSUE WITH THAT, MR. RAINES, OBJECTION. [00:40:02] >> AS THE CHAIR, I DO NOT, MR. RAINES THE BOARD HAVE ANY OBJECTION. THEN, MR. IVY, YOU'RE WAIVING CROSS OF YOUR OWN WITNESS WILL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS WAIVING THE ABILITY TO RECALL THAT WITNESS. >> THANK YOU. >> IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> CORPORAL JANELLE ROBINSON, 2265 HOLLAND ROAD, WHICH IS SECOND DISTRICT. I'M A CORPORAL. >> YOUR ASSIGNMENT, YOU SAID, IS IT SECOND DISTRICT? >> YES. UNIFORM PATROL. >> THANK YOU. THERE'S AN EVIDENCE BINDER IN FRONT OF YOU. YEAH, THAT'S IT, THE LITTLE BINDER. IF YOU WOULD TURN TO EXHIBIT 5 FOR ME. THIS IS A COPY OF THE PRE DISCIPLINARY HEARING NOTICE FOR CASE 41-24, AND THAT'S ADDRESSED TO YOU, IS THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> THAT'S DATED AUGUST 8 OF 2024? >> YES. >> THE NOTICE LETTER OUTLINES THE FACTS REGARDING THE INCIDENTS THAT RESULTED IN THE INVESTIGATION INVOLVING YOU AND ALSO THOSE POTENTIAL POLICY VIOLATIONS, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES. >> IF YOU TURN TO THE LAST PAGE, IS THAT YOUR SIGNATURE ON WHAT IS LABELED AS PAGE 71, BUT IT'S THE LAST PAGE OF EXHIBIT 5? >> YES. >> WE'LL OFFER AND INTRODUCE EXHIBIT 5. >> ANY OBJECTION. ADMITTED. >> THANK YOU. NOW, ULTIMATELY, ON OCTOBER 3RD OF LAST YEAR, 2024, YOU PARTICIPATED IN A PRE DISCIPLINARY HEARING REGARDING THIS CASE, IS THAT CORRECT? IF YOU TURN TO TAB 6, THERE'S A RULING LETTER. >> IT'S EMPTY. >> TAB 6 IS TOWARDS THE BACK IS EMPTY? >> YES. IT GOES TO SIX, AND THEN IT GOES TO SEVEN THIS CORRESPONDENT IS DATED OCTOBER 9TH, 2024. >> YOU HAVE ONE OCTOBER 9TH? THAT'S THE NOTICE RULING LETTER. THAT'S IT. THAT'S A COPY OF THE LETTER, THE NOTICE OF RULING LETTER FROM THE CHIEF, RIGHT? >> YES. >> YOU LOOK AT THAT FIRST PARAGRAPH, IT SAYS, THIS LETTER WILL SERVE AS NOTICE OF RULING WITH REGARD TO PREVIOUS HEARING HELD ON OCTOBER 3RD OF 2024, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES. THAT'S WHAT THE LETTER SAYS. THEN IF YOU WOULD TURN TO THE LAST PAGE OF THAT LETTER. IT'S PAGE 81 IN THE BOOK. IS THAT YOUR SIGNATURE ON THAT PAGE? >> YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU. ALL OF FOR THAT AS OUR EXHIBIT 6. ANY OBJECTION. >> SO ADMITTED. >> HAVE YOU REVIEWED THE NOTICE RULING? ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH IT? >> THIS IS MY FIRST TIME. >> THE ONE THAT YOU SIGNED? >> OH, ARE YOU ASKING ME, HAVE I REVIEWED THE ONE THAT I SIGNED? >> YES, MA'AM. >> YES. WHEN I RECEIVED. YES, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT. PERFECT. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE NOTICE RULING IS RELATED TO THE EVENTS THAT WERE ADDRESSED IN THAT NOTICE LETTER, THE FIRST NOTICE LETTER THAT YOU RECEIVED? >> YES. >> THE DISCIPLINE ONLY RELATES TO THOSE EVENTS, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. >> NOW, THE INCIDENT FOR WHICH YOU WERE DISCIPLINED WAS THE INCIDENT AT LIBERTY LAGOON ON MAY 26 OF LAST YEAR, IS THAT RIGHT? 2024? >> YES. >> NOW, BEFORE YOU WENT THERE, IS IT CORRECT THAT YOU WERE WORKING EXTRA DUTY? >> CORRECT. >> THAT WAS RUSH'S JUST DOWN THE ROAD? >> YES. >> NOW, IS IT CORRECT THAT YOU SAW SEVERAL SQUAD CARS WITH THEIR LIGHTS ON AND SO YOU CONTACTED HEADQUARTERS TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON? >> YES. >> YOU WERE TOLD THAT THEY NEEDED MORE OFFICERS ON THE SCENE? >> YES. >> WERE YOU AWARE THAT THIS WAS THE MAYOR BROOM SUMMER OF HOPE EVENT AT LIBERTY LAGOON AT THAT TIME? >> NO. >> IS IT CORRECT THAT YOUR SON WAS PRESENT THERE? >> YES, HE WAS. >> YOU WERE AWARE THAT THERE WERE KIDS PRESENT THERE, YOU WEREN'T SURE WHAT THE EVENT WAS, IS THAT FAIR TO SAY? >> YES. >> DID HE TELL YOU THAT HE WAS LIKE AT THE GATE OF LIBERTY LAGOON TRYING TO GET OUT? >> YES. >> WERE YOU AWARE AT THE TIME THAT THE REASON FOR THE INCREASED PRESENCE WAS DUE TO, AND WHEN I SAY PRESENCE, INCREASED POLICE PRESENCE, WAS DUE TO SOME FIGHTING THAT WAS GOING ON AT LIBERTY LAGOON? >> YES. >> THE PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE, [00:45:02] THOSE WERE PREDOMINANTLY CHILDREN, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES. >> NOW, DID YOU HAVE YOUR BODY CAMERA ROLLING WHILE YOU WERE PRESENT AT LIBERTY LAGOON THAT EVENING? >> YES, I DID. >> HAVE YOU REVIEWED THE FOOTAGE? >> I REVIEWED THE FOOTAGE ONCE I SAW THE CHIEF, AND THEN I REVIEWED THE FOOTAGE DURING MY DISCIPLINE HEARING. >> NOW, THIS SCENE WAS FAIRLY CHAOTIC. IS THAT A GOOD WAY TO DESCRIBE IT? >> YES. >> WHEN YOU GOT THERE WAS THE GOAL TO GET THE KIDS AWAY FROM LIBERTY LAGOON AND MOVE THEM DOWN THE STREET FLORIDA AND LOBDELL, TOWARD THAT INTERSECTION? >> WELL, THE GOAL WAS TO DE-ESCALATE BECAUSE THERE WERE KIDS EVERYWHERE, AND YES, TO MOVE THEM OUT OF THE WAY. >> BUT MOVE THEM AWAY FROM LIBERTY LAGOON, RIGHT? >> YES. >> THAT'S BECAUSE PEOPLE HAD TO PICK UP THE KIDS SO THEY HAD RIDES AND THEY NEEDED TO GET PICKED UP DOWN BY FLORIDA BOULEVARD, IS THAT FAIR? >> YES. >> SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY, AS WE WATCHED THE VIDEO, YOUR TASK WHILE YOU WERE ON THE SCENE, WAS TRYING TO MOVE KIDS AWAY FROM LIBERTY LAGOON AND DOWN THE STREET? >> YES. THAT'S THE TASK I MADE, YES. >> NOW, YOU HAD WHAT ENDED UP BEING A FEW INCIDENTS FOR WHICH YOU WERE DISCIPLINED WITH A COUPLE OF FEMALES THAT CAME OUT OF LIBERTY LAGOON, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES. >> AS WE WATCHED THE VIDEO, THE FIRST ONE THAT YOU INTERACTED WITH WAS MISS BELL, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. I CAN'T REMEMBER HER NAME. >> THERE'S A LADY THAT'S IN BLACK CLOTHES, AND THEN THERE'S A LADY WITH A GOLD BIKINI. >> I REMEMBER THE LADY WITH A GOLD BIKINI. I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT MISS BELL HAD ON. >> I'M GOING TO PLAY PORTIONS OF THE VIDEO, AND THEN I'LL ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT IT, OKAY? >> YES. [BACKGROUND] >> GOT THIS WAY. GOT IT WAY. GET OUT OF HERE. LET'S GO. GO THIS WAY. GET OUT OF HERE. LET'S GO. WELL, YOU CAN'T GO BACK. GOT A FUCKING PLAY [INAUDIBLE]. BIT THE PRESS THE FUCKING. FUCK ROUND 2. >> FIRST, THAT VIDEO THAT WE JUST WATCHED THAT BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE. WAS THAT FROM YOUR BODY CAMERA THAT EVENING? >> YES. >> WE'LL OFFER THIS. I DIDN'T SAY IT EARLIER, BUT THAT'LL BE OUR EXHIBIT 1 IS THE BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE. I WANT TO GO TO EXHIBIT 5, THE FIRST PAGE, WHICH IS PAGE 63. I'M GOING TO GO TO THE WHERE IT SAYS 541 MARK. A FEMALE WALKS TOWARDS YOU AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE WATER PARK, YOU STATE YOU CAN'T GO BACK. THE FEMALE'S RESPONSE IS NOT AUDIBLE, BUT SHE TURNS AND WALKS AWAY. YOU YELL. GIRL, DON'T FUCK AND PLAY WITH ME OUT HERE. I'LL BEAT THE BRAKES OFF YOUR MOTHER FUCKING ASS, THE FUCK WRONG WITH YOU. IS THAT LANGUAGE, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THAT ACCURATELY PORTRAYS WHAT WE JUST HEARD ON THE VIDEO? >> YES. >> NOW, YOU GAVE HER INSTRUCTIONS ABOUT WHERE SHE NEEDED TO GO, RIGHT? [00:50:04] YES. AWAY. >> AWAY. SHE SAID SOMETHING TO YOU AND SHE KEPT WALKING, IS THAT CORRECT? >> SHE SAID SOMETHING TO ME AND KEPT WALKING, NO. >> IN THE VIDEO, WAS SHE NOT MOVING ON WHEN YOU SAID. >> WHEN SHE STATED WAS SHE STATED AND THE REACTION THAT I GAVE HER, SHE STAYED THERE. THEN ONCE WHEN I TURNED AROUND AND SHE SAW THE SERIOUSNESS IN MY FACE, THAT'S WHEN SHE WALKED OFF. >> NOW, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT WHAT YOU SAID TO HER, I THINK WE JUST READ IT WAS THAT YOU WOULD BEAT THE BRAKES OFF OF HER, CORRECT? >> YES. >> BEAT THE BRAKES OFF SOMEBODY WHERE I'M FROM, THAT MEANS YOU'RE GOING TO BEAT HIM UP, IS THAT FAIR? YES. >> DO YOU THINK THAT YOU MAINTAINED YOUR COMPOSURE WHILE SPEAKING WITH THIS INDIVIDUAL? >> DID I MAINTAIN MY COMPOSURE WHILE SPEAKING WITH THIS THAT INDIVIDUAL? NO. BUT THAT'S THE ONLY THING SHE UNDERSTOOD. >> NOW, BEFORE YOU USED THAT LANGUAGE WITH HER, YOU WERE SPEAKING GENERALLY TO PEOPLE TELLING THEM TO MOVE ON, CORRECT? >> YES. >> IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT THERE WAS ANY KIND OF SUSTAINED ATTEMPT TO GET HER TO MOVE ALONG WITH ANY OTHER LANGUAGE. WOULD THAT BE FAIR? >> I'M SORRY, REPEAT THAT. >> WE HEARD YOU TALKING GENERALLY TO EVERYBODY, TELLING THEM TO MOVE ON. SHE SAID WHATEVER SHE SAID. YOU DIDN'T HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH HER AT THAT POINT. YOU IMMEDIATELY ESCALATED TO GET YOUR MOTHER F AND ASK ON, ALL OF THAT LANGUAGE. THERE WASN'T A CONVERSATION WHERE YOU TRIED TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE. >> [INAUDIBLE] WELL, THE VIDEO DOES SPEAK FOR ITSELF. I MEAN, WE COULD JUST SUBMIT THE VIDEO AND NOT HAVE A HEARING, BUT I THINK WE'RE ALLOWED TO MAKE POINTS ABOUT THE VIDEO BASED UPON WHAT SHE JUST SAID AND WHAT SHE JUST TESTIFIED. >> MR. IVY, I AGREE. TRY NOT TO BELABOR IT TOO LONG, MR. RAINES, BUT OVERRULED FOR NOW. >> ON THE VIDEO. THIS WAS POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE A MINUTE AGO. DID YOU SEE THAT IT APPEARS THAT WHAT YOU WERE SAYING TO HER BACK? I MEAN, IT APPEARED THAT YOU WERE SAYING IT WHILE SHE WAS FACING THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION FROM YOU? >> SHE WAS NOT FACING THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. >> YOU DIDN'T SEE THAT IN THE IN THE VIDEO THEN. I'M GOING TO PLAY ANOTHER SECTION. >> MR. RAINES, I KNOW WE DIDN'T DO IT FOR THE FIRST ONE, BUT JUST FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE RECORD, IF YOU WOULD JUST STATE WHAT TIME STAMP YOU'RE STARTING AT, WHENEVER YOU START THE VIDEO. >> THE FIRST ONE WAS AROUND FIVE MINUTE MARK IN THE VIDEO, AND THIS ONE IS AT 13:48. >> THEN I APOLOGIZE. MR. RAINES, I BELIEVE YOU SAID THE FIRST ONE WAS AROUND THE FIVE MINUTE MARK, IS THAT ACCURATE? THEN WHAT WAS THE SECOND ONE? >> 13: 48. >> 13:48 ON THE SECOND VIDEO. >> COME ON, EVERYBODY TO START A COME ON DOWN. YOU SEE ME PUT MY HANDS ON? APPRECIATE YOU. IF YOU WAIT ON THE RIDE THEN I WAS ABLE TO COME OUT HERE TELL WHAT? WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? [00:55:02] >> AIN'T NO PROBLEM? >> IT'S PROBLEM, RIGHT? >> WHO ARE YOU TALKING TO?. >> [INAUDIBLE] GO AWAY. >> THIS IS FOR THE RECORD, WE STOPPED AT 14:52, I BELIEVE. BUT THIS IS THE SAME INDIVIDUAL THAT YOU INTERACTED WITH EARLIER, IS THAT CORRECT? >> FROM BY THE DOOR? >> THE ONE THAT WE JUST WATCHED THE VIDEO OF THE FIRST ONE? >> THE FIRST VIDEO. >> IS A DIFFERENT PERSON? >> THAT'S A DIFFERENT PERSON. >> WE JUST SAW THAT THAT VIDEO, I THINK MAYBE THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S MISS BELL. YOU TOLD HER TO SWING. YOU WERE TELLING HER TO THROW A PUNCH AT YOU, RIGHT? >> YES. >> YOU'RE TRAINED AS AN OFFICER TO DEAL WITH CHAOTIC SITUATIONS, CORRECT? >> YES. >> YOU'RE EXPECTED TO CONTROL YOUR EMOTIONS IN TOUGH SITUATIONS? >> YES. >> AND HERE, YOU'VE GOT A TEENAGER MOUTHING OFF TO YOU. I GET THAT. BUT SHE'S NOT DOING EXACTLY WHAT YOU TOLD HER, RIGHT? >> FIRST, SHE SAID, I HAD A TEENAGER MOLD OFF. IF YOU LISTEN TO THE VIDEO AND YOU HEARD THE VIDEO, SHE STATED, YOU THINK I'M A KID. I'M NOT A KID. APPARENTLY, SHE WAS TELLING ME RIGHT THERE THAT SHE WASN'T A KID. SHE WASN'T A TEENAGER. SHE WAS AN ADULT, BUT SHE APPEARED TO BE A KID FROM WHEN I SAW HER. THAT'S WHY I SAID, MOVE ALONG. >> BUT SHE WASN'T DOING WHAT YOU TOLD HER? >> YES. >> NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE TAUGHT TO DO AS AN OFFICER IS DE-ESCALATE A SITUATION, FAIR? >> YES. >> THAT MEANS YOU BRING CALMNESS TO A SITUATION OR ATTEMPT TO? >> ATTEMPT TO. YES. >> WOULD YOU AGREE THAT TELLING SOMEONE TO SWING AT A POLICE OFFICER IS NOT AN EXAMPLE OF THEE ESCALATION? >> NO. >> YOU WOULD NOT AGREE OR WOULD YOU WOULD AGREE? >> I SAID NO. >> IT'S NOT THE ESCALATION. >> IT'S NOT THE ESCALATION. >> YOU PHYSICALLY ENGAGED WITH HER. YOUR INTENT AT THAT POINT WAS TO TAKE HER INTO CUSTODY, IS THAT FAIR? >> YES. >> YOU INTENDED TO DO A SUMMONS FOR, I THINK IT WAS DISTURBING THE PEACE AND REMAINING AFTER BEING FORBIDDEN? >> YES. >> SHE WAS FAILING TO COMPLY WITH WHAT YOU BELIEVE WAS A LAWFUL ORDER, RIGHT? >> CORRECT. >> NOW, THEN HER FRIENDS GRABBED HER. SHE GOT AWAY FROM FROM YOU, AND YOU YOU LET HER GO AT THAT POINT, IS THAT RIGHT? >> HER FRIENDS GRABBED HER, AND SOMEONE GRABBED ME BY MY HAIR. >> NOW, IF SHE WOULD HAVE DONE WHAT YOU TOLD HER TO DO, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH A MUCH BIGGER LEGAL ISSUE FOR HER? BATTERY ON A POLICE OFFICER IS MUCH MORE EXTREME OF A CHARGE. IT'S A FELONY VERSUS THE OTHER CHARGES THAT SHE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES. >> DO YOU THINK THAT YOUR LANGUAGE THAT WE'VE WATCHED WITH THE FIRST ONE AND THIS ONE? DO YOU THINK THAT IS HOW OFFICERS SHOULD CONDUCT THEMSELVES IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS? >> NO. >> WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO WATCH ANOTHER VIDEO. LET'S START 15:01. >> FOR THE RECORD, THE VIDEO WILL BE STARTING AT 15:01. >> COME ON. [01:00:08] LET'S GO TO SEE DOCTOR. 'CAUSE I CAN'T GET OUT. >> I'M SORRY MOM. >> HEY. I NEED EVERYBODY TO COME THIS WAY. COME ON. THIS WAY. HEY, IF YOU'RE WAITING ON A ARRIVE, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO COME DOWN HERE. YOU ALL HAVE TO GO DOWN TO THE GAS STATION. ARE YOUR PARENTS? >> YEAH. >> PUSHING EVERYBODY OUT FOR THE NIGHT. COME ON, BABY. NOBODY'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET DOWN THE STREET. WITH THE GUN. WHAT THE FUCKING. THAT'S THAT SHIT TO LIGHT COP. THAT'S THAT SITAR LIGHT. ASK FOR BACK UP. DON'T RIGHT ABOUT IT. GO. GET THE FUCK. GO. LET'S FUCK AND GO. I'M A GOOD PITCH. I PROMISE YOU. LET'S FUCK AND GO. >> BITCH WHAT THAT PITCH. DO IT. >> YOU ARE REAL. I'M TELLING YOU. THAT GO OUT BIT COME OUT. I WORRY. COME OUT. I WORRY. DON'T LET THIS SHIT FOOL YOU. THIS UP DOWN THE STREETS. >> PUT THAT GUN DOWN. >> GIRL, GET THE FUCK. BEAT THE FUCK AT YOU OUT. >> DOWN THERE BITCH. YOU'RE BULLSHIT. YOU'RE GROWN FOR [INAUDIBLE]. >> YOU'RE RIGHT, AND YOU'RE FUCKING KID. >> BITCH PUT THE GUN DOWN. >> MOVE. >> THERE YOU STOP. >> MOVE. >> PUT OUT EVERY DOWN. >> MOVE. YOU STARTED RUNNING OUT OF YOUR MOUTH. >> BITCH I'M READY. >> YOU HAVE APOLOGIZE. >> LET'S GO TO TAB 5, PAGE 65. THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE A TRANSCRIPTION OF YOUR CONVERSATION WITH THE LADY IN THE GOLD BIKINI. SHE TELLS YOU AND I'M GOING TO GO DOWN A FEW LINES. COME CLOSE, BITCH, BITCH, I DON'T LIKE COPS. BITCH, COME HERE. AND YOU SAY, I AIN'T WORRIED, I AIN'T WORRIED, AND Y'ALL GO THROUGH THAT. AND THEN SHE SAYS, THE BADGE AIN'T SAVING YOUR ASS AND YOU SAY, BITCH, I'M ABOUT THAT LIFE. DON'T LET THIS SHIT FOOL YOU A BITCH. I'M FROM THE STREETS. SHE TELLS YOU TO PUT THE GUN DOWN. YOU SAY, GIRL, GET THE FUCK. SHE AGAIN TELLS YOU TO PUT THE GUN DOWN, AND YOU SAY, GET THE FUCK BEFORE I BEAT THE FUCK OUT OF YOU OR OUT YOU. SHE SAYS, PUT THE GUN DOWN BIT, YOU BULLSHIT, YOU GROWN FOR NOTHING, DOG ASS. YOU SAY, YOU YOU WRITE IN A FUCKING KID. SHE'S TELLING YOU AT THE, YOU KNOW, SHE GOES ON AND SAYS, SHE'S GOING TO KEEP RUNNING HER MOUTH, AND THEN SOMEBODY APOLOGIZES TO YOU. IT SOUNDS LIKE AT THE END FOR DEALING WITH HER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YOU SAY, YOU DON'T HAVE TO APOLOGIZE FOR THESE DUMB ASS HOSES, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES. >> YOU WOULD AGREE THAT WAS THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS USED THERE IN THAT CONVERSATION WITH HER? >> YES. >> SHE LOOKED LIKE SHE HAD BEEN PEPPER SPRAYED, SHE RUNS OVER THAT GRASSY AREA AND YOU GO OVER TOWARDS HER AND YOU'RE SAYING, "YEAH, [01:05:02] YEAH, WITH THE F AND YEAH," THAT LANGUAGE, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT PART THAT WAS NOT GIVING HER A DIRECTIVE TO DO ANYTHING, IS THAT CORRECT? >> NO. I DIDN'T GIVE A DIRECTIVE. >> WHEN YOU SAID, "BITCH, I'M ABOUT THAT LIVE, DON'T LET THE SHIT FOOL YOU, BITCH, I'M FROM THE STREETS," LIKE THAT PART, THAT'S NOT A DIRECTIVE TO DO ANYTHING, CORRECT? ALL OF THE CONVERSATION ABOUT Y'ALL GOING BACK AND FORTH SAYING, BITCH, YOU TELL HER YOU'LL BEAT THE FUCK OUT OF HER. NONE OF THAT IS A DIRECTIVE TO DO SOMETHING, CORRECT? >> NO. >> THIS IS ALL OCCURRING IN ABOUT 10 MINUTES OR SO, MAYBE 12 MINUTES FROM WHEN YOU FIRST INTERACTED WITH THE FIRST FEMALE. YOU AGREE THAT YOU THREATENED TO BEAT TWO OF THEM, RIGHT? >> YES. >> THEN AFTER YOUR INTERACTION WITH HER, YOU REFERRED TO HER AS A DUMB ASS, IS THAT FAIR? >> YES. >> NOW, YOU WROTE UP AN INCIDENT REPORT FOR THE EVENTS THAT WE JUST REVIEWED, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. >> THAT WAS SUBMITTED THE FOLLOWING DAY. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT? >> YES. >> TURN TO TAB 3 FOR ME. WE'LL GO TO PAGE 56. >> 56 OR 55? >> 56 IS WHERE THE NARRATIVE IS. I'M GOING TO READ FROM THAT. I'M GOING TO START IN THE SECOND SENTENCE. WHILE ASSISTING OFFICERS WITH CROWD CONTROL, I ATTEMPT TO MOVE THE LARGE CROWD NORTHBOUND OF FLORIDA AT LOBDELL. WHEN SPEAKING WITH A FEMALE WHO WAS LATER IDENTIFIED AS DIAMOND BELL, I ASKED HER TO MOVE IN WHICH SHE STATED, BITCH, I'M NOT GOING NOWHERE. I THEN TOLD HER TO MOVE AGAIN AT WHICH TIME SHE BRACED UP TOWARDS ME AND SAID SHE NOT GOING ANYWHERE. AT THIS TIME, I PROMPTED TO GAIN CONTROL OF BELL IN WHICH SHE RESISTED, ANOTHER GROUP OF FEMALES AND MALES WHO WAS PULLING ME FROM BELL IN AN ATTEMPT TO LET HER GO, THEN CROWDED ME. WAS THAT THAT SECOND INCIDENT THAT WE WATCHED THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THERE? >> YES. >> MOMENTS LATER, OFFICER JENKINS CAME OVER TO ASSIST WHERE SHE WAS LATER TAKEN INTO CUSTODY AFTER RESISTING, YOU REFER TO THAT FILE NUMBER. WHILE JENKINS GAINED CONTROL OF BELL, OTHER FEMALES RAN TOWARD JENKINS, AND ASSISTING OFFICERS ATTEMPTED TO FREE BELL FROM CUSTODY. OFFICER BATTISTE THEN PUSHED A FEMALE WHO BEGAN TO APPROACH HER AGGRESSIVELY WHEN AN UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE AGGRESSIVELY APPROACHES OFFICER BATTISTE. I THEN REMOVED MY DEPARTMENTAL ISSUE TASER AND POINT AT HER TO GAIN COMPLIANCE? THE FEMALE CONTINUES TO MOUTH OFF AT ME, CALLING ME SEVERAL VULGAR NAMES, WHICH I JUST HELD HER AT TASER POINT. SHE EVENTUALLY DECIDED TO LEAVE THE AREA AND I PLACED MY TASER BACK IN THE HOLSTER, NOTHING FURTHER TO REPORT. THAT IS THE REPORT OF THE NARRATIVE THAT YOU WROTE, CORRECT? >> YES. >> WE'LL OFFER THAT AS EXHIBIT 3. MA'AM, DO YOU THINK THAT WHAT WE JUST READ THAT NARRATIVE ACCURATELY DEPICTS WHAT WE JUST WATCHED? >> [INAUDIBLE] >> I WAS GOING TO ASK. >> THAT'S GREAT. THERE IS NO CHARGE FOR FALSIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> NO. SHE WAS NOT SUSTAINED ON THAT. WHAT I'M GETTING TO, THOUGH, IS, IT DOES RELATE TO 17, WHICH IS A FAILURE TO DO THE USE OF FORCE FORM BECAUSE THE HANDS ON INTERACTION REALLY ISN'T FULLY EXPLAINED HERE, AND SHE DID NOT DO HER USE OF FORCE FORM WHICH WAS REQUIRED, AND THAT WAS SUSTAINED. >> VERY BRIEFLY, MR. ROUGE. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> LET ME SAY OVERALL. >> I CAN ASK IT THIS WAY. MA'AM, IN THE VIDEO IN THE SECOND INCIDENT, WE SAW WHAT APPEARS TO GO HANDS ON WITH THAT INDIVIDUAL FOR A BRIEF MOMENT BEFORE YOU WERE BROKEN UP AWAY FROM HER, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES. >> YOU DID NOT DO A USE OF FORCE FORM RELATED TO THAT INCIDENT, IS THAT FAIR? [01:10:04] >> NO. I DIDN'T NEED A USE OF FORCE FORM. >> DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS SOMETHING WHEN YOU GO HANDS ON WITH SOMEBODY, THAT IS A FORM THAT YOU- >> I'VE BEEN ON A POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR 15 YEARS. WE TOUCH PEOPLE EVERY SINGLE DAY, AND WHEN WE ADVISE THEM OF THEIR RIGHTS OR ANYTHING OR DETAIN THEM, WE DON'T DO A USE OF FORCE FORM, BUT WE PUT OUR HANDS ON SOMEBODY EVERY DAY, SO THAT WAS NEW TO ME. >> IN THIS INSTANCE, YOU AGREE THAT YOU GRABBED HER AND ATTEMPT TO DETAIN HER AND PUT HER INTO CUSTODY? >> YES. >> AT ONE POINT, YOU CAN SEE A DIFFERENT VIDEO, BUT YOU ACTUALLY PUT YOUR ARM AROUND HER TOP PART OF HER CHEST, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES. > DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW THAT IT IS THE OPINION OF THE CHIEF THAT THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A FORM THAT WAS DONE? >> YES. SINCE THAT'S THE OPINION OF THE CHIEF. >> LET'S GO TO TAB 6. THERE ARE THREE CHARGES THAT YOU WERE SUSTAINED ON COMPLETION AND SUBMISSION OF REQUIRED FORMS, WHICH WE JUST DISCUSSED, COMMAND OF TEMPER AND CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER, CORRECT? >> YES. >> I'M GOING TO GO TO PAGE 79 OF THAT LETTER. IN THE MIDDLE OR THE TOP PART OF THE PAGE, IT HAS COMMAND OF TEMPER, THE POLICY WRITTEN. DO YOU SEE THAT? >> YES. 2.1. >> YES, MA'AM. ALL MEMBERS SHALL EXERCISE EMOTIONAL CONTROL WHILE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR DUTIES. NO MEMBER WHILE ON DUTY OR WHILE ACTING IN AN OFFICIAL POLICE CAPACITY, OFF DUTY, SHALL USE RUDE OR DEROGATORY LANGUAGE, RACIST TERMINOLOGY OR ATTEMPT TO DERIDE, OFFEND, OR INSULT ANYONE. DO YOU AGREE THAT'S THE LANGUAGE OF THE POLICY, RIGHT? >> YES. >> WOULD YOU AGREE THAT YOU DID NOT EXERCISE EMOTIONAL CONTROL WHEN INTERACTING WITH PARTICULARLY THE LADY IN THE GOLD BATHING SUIT? >> THE LADY IN GOLD BATHING SUIT. NO. >> YOU'RE AGREEING THAT YOU DID NOT MAINTAIN EMOTIONAL CONTROL? >> I DIDN'T. WOULD THE LADY IN BATHING SUIT? >> YEAH. DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU USED WITH HER WAS RUDE, OFFENSIVE OR INSULTING? >> NO. >> YOU DON'T FIND ANYTHING ABOUT THAT LANGUAGE RUDE? >> HER LANGUAGE WAS RUDE ALSO. >> NO. THE POLICY IS NOT ABOUT THE LANGUAGE THAT'S USED BY THE PUBLIC, RIGHT? >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE POLICY STATE. IF YOU'RE BAITING ON THE POLICY, THEN YES, THE LANGUAGE WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE POLICY. >> WELL, THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. YOU HAVE A POLICY FROM THE DEPARTMENT AND YOUR CONDUCT EITHER COMPLIES WITH OR DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE POLICY, RIGHT? >> CORRECT. >> YOU WOULD AGREE THAT YOUR LANGUAGE WITH HER DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE POLICY? >> CORRECT. >> LET'S GO TO CONDUCT ON BECOMING AN OFFICER. 211. SAME PAGE. EVERY MEMBER OF THE DEPARTMENT, WHETHER ON OR OFF DUTY IN AN UNOFFICIAL CAPACITY, MUST CONDUCT HIMSELF AT ALL TIMES IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO SET A GOOD EXAMPLE FOR ALL OTHERS WITH WHOM HE MAY COME IN CONTACT. HE SHALL IN NO WAY THROUGH ACTIONS OR NEGLECT, BRING DISHONOR OR DISGRACE UPON HIMSELF OR THE BATON ROUGE POLICE DEPARTMENT. IS THAT CORRECT? THE WAY I READ IT? >> YES. >> WOULD YOU AGREE THAT YOU DID NOT CONDUCT YOURSELF IN A MANNER TO SET A GOOD EXAMPLE FOR OTHERS ON THE FORCE THAT EVENING? >> DURING THAT INCIDENT? NO. >> DO YOU RECALL APOLOGIZING FOR YOUR CONDUCT LATER IN YOUR IA INTERVIEW? >> I DID. >> TURN TO TAB 2 FOR ME, PAGE 34 IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT HAND CORNER. [01:15:11] ARE YOU THERE? >> YES. I'M SORRY. >> THIS IS FROM THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS REPORT. IT SAYS, CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD STATED THAT SHE WANTED TO APOLOGIZE, AND BEING A 15 YEAR VETERAN, SHE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER. SHE ADVISED THAT SHE WAS STILL HUMAN AND THAT SHE WAS NOT PERFECT, STATED THAT SHE DOES NOT PRETEND TO BE PERFECT AND OWNS UP TO HER WRONGDOINGS, ADVISED THAT SHE SHOULD HAVE HANDLED THINGS DIFFERENTLY AND NOT STOOP TO HER LEVEL. DO YOU THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED THERE? YOU STOOPED TO THE LEVEL OF THAT GIRL IN THE GOLD BIKINI THAT WAS FUSSING AT YOU. THAT WAS THE PROBLEM? >> YES. I STOOPED TO HER LEVEL, BUT I DID WHAT I HAD TO DO. AT THE END OF THE DAY, NO ONE GOT HEART, NO ONE DIED. EVERYONE WENT HOME. >> YOU WOULD AGREE WITH ME THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN GIVING SOMEBODY A DIRECTION TO DO SOMETHING AND JUST GETTING IN A YELLING MATCH WITH HIM. >> YES. I GAVE DIRECTIONS TO EVERYONE THERE WHO LISTENED AND AS YOU SAID, THEY WAS COMPLYING, BUT YOU HAVE ONE OUT THE GROUP THAT DIDN'T WANT TO COMPLY. THEREFORE, THAT'S WHY IT ESCALATED. >> YOU HAD OPTIONS. YOU MENTIONED IT THERE. YOU COULD HAVE ARRESTED HER, RIGHT? >> I COULD HAVE. >> THAT ARREST MIGHT HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED BY POLICY, BUT YOU DO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CONDUCT THAT YOU ENGAGED IN DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE JIVED WITH POLICY? >> NO, I DIDN'T. >> WE'LL OFFER OUR TAB 2 AS OUR EXHIBIT 2. >> ANY OBJECTION? >> LET ME FLIP BACK AND SEE EXACTLY WHAT TAB 2 IS. >> IT'S THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS REPORT. >> ADMITTED. >> LET'S GO TO TAB 5, PAGE 71. NOW, WHEN YOU FIRST GOT YOUR PRE DIS NOTICE, THERE WERE TWO OTHER CHARGES FOR WHICH YOU WERE NOT SUSTAINED, CORRECT? USE OF FORCE AND FALSIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS. YOU WERE NOT SUSTAINED ON THOSE, CORRECT? >> YES. >> YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THOSE ARE CATEGORY 3 CHARGES, RIGHT? >> CORRECT. LET'S GO TO THAT LAST PAGE 71 LAST PARAGRAPH. IT'S TALKING ABOUT THE HEARING AND IT SAYS, YOU WOULD THEN BE NOTIFIED IN WRITING AS TO ANY DISCIPLINARY ACTION TAKEN UP TO AND INCLUDING TERMINATION, AND YOU WOULD ALSO BE AFFORDED ALL APPEAL RIGHTS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE LOUISIANA MUNICIPAL FIRE AND POLICE CIVIL SERVICE LAW. THAT'S HOW THAT LETTER READS, CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> THAT'S THE SAME PAGE THAT YOUR SIGNATURE IS ON? >> YES, SIR. >> LET'S GO TO TAB 7. GO TO THE VERY LAST PAGE OF TAB 7. THIS REALLY IS THE LAST PAGE IN THIS WHOLE BOOK? >> YES, I AGREE. >> PERFECT. YOU RECOGNIZE THAT, THE DISCIPLINARY MATRIX, THE TABLE OF PENALTIES THERE IN THAT LAST PAGE? >> YES. WITH THE CATEGORIES? >> YES, MA'AM. YOU'VE SEEN THAT BEFORE? >> YES. >> THAT'S PART OF THE POLICY ON DISCIPLINE FOR BRPD GENERAL ORDER 112, IS THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> HERE YOU HAD TWO SUSTAINED CATEGORY 2 CHARGES, CORRECT? >> YES. >> IF WE LOOK AT FIRST OFFENSE, CATEGORY 2, YOU CAN GET LETTER OF REPRIMAND UP TO THREE DAYS SUSPENSION, IS THAT RIGHT? >> PEACE OF MIND, FIRST COLUMN. YES. >> YES, MA'AM. FIRST OFFENSE CATEGORY 2, AND THAT GIVES YOU A DISCIPLINE OF UP TO THREE DAY SUSPENSION, RIGHT? >> NO. IT READS LETTER OF REPRIMAND, THREE DAYS SUSPENSION. >> DASH THREE DAY SUSPENSION. LETTER OF REPRIMAND, TWO, THREE DAY SUSPENSION. DO YOU SEE THAT? >> YES. >> YOU HAD TWO OF THOSE, SO YOU COULD HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED UP TO SIX DAYS, RIGHT? >> YES. >> THE CHIEF SUSPENDED YOU FOR FIVE DAYS FOR THE VIOLATIONS? >> YES. HE DID. >> YOU RECOGNIZED THE DISCIPLINE THAT YOU [01:20:01] RECEIVED HERE FIT WITHIN THE MATRIX OF DISCIPLINE, CORRECT? >> ACCORDING TO GENERAL ORDER 112. >> I TEND TO THE WITNESS. >> I'M RESERVING. MA'AM, IF YOU COULD HOLD FOR A MOMENT, DO ANY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> YOU MENTIONED AT SOME POINT SOMEONE GRABBED YOU BY YOUR HAIR. WHO WAS THAT PERSON? DO YOU KNOW? >> AT THE TIME, I DIDN'T KNOW BECAUSE WHEN I TRIED TO GAIN CONTROL OF MISS BELL, AS YOU SAW, IT WAS A BUNCH OF THEM THAT WAS CROWDING ME. ONCE MY HAIR WAS GRABBED, THAT'S WHEN I WAS ABLE THAT'S WHEN SHE WAS I LET HER GO. >> THANK YOU. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. >> YES, SIR. >> AT THE VIDEO AT 14:50, I THINK IT WAS THE FIRST MAYBE THE SECOND VIDEO WE WATCHED. I THINK YOU HAD WENT MAYBE TRY TO ARREST HER, AND ALL I SAW WAS AN ARM FLAMING. DID SHE PUT HER HANDS ON YOU FIRST OR DID YOU ATTEMPT TO GRAB HER FIRST? >> WHAT HAPPENED WAS IN THAT INSTANCE WHEN I ASKED HER TO MOVE AND SHE SAID, YOU THOUGHT I WAS A CHILD AND I SAID, I DON'T KNOW WHICH YOU ARE. SHE WAS LIKE, IT'S A CURSE, CAN I CURSE? >> YOU'RE FREE. IF YOU NEED. >> SHE WAS LIKE, BITCH, I'M NOT A CHILD, I'M AN ADULT OR SOMETHING TO THAT. SHE WAS LIKE, I'M NOT FUCKING GOING NOWHERE. YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE ME MOVE AND THAT'S WHEN I MADE THE COMMENT. I SAID, WELL, I'LL MAKE YOU MOVE. I SAID IF YOU DON'T MOVE, THEN WE HAVE PROBLEMS. WHEN I TRIED TO GRAB HER, THAT'S WHEN THE HAND WENT UP AND THINGS LIKE THAT, HER FRIENDS STARTED SURROUNDING, MY HAIR GOT PULL, AND THEN I JUST PUSH IF YOU SAW ON THE VIDEO, I JUST PUSHED THEM SO THEY CAN JUST GET AWAY. >> THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> THE GIRL IN A BIKINI, WHY DIDN'T YOU MOVE IN AND MAKE AN ARREST ON HER? >> BECAUSE I ALREADY WHEN I TRIED TO MAKE THE ARREST ON MISS BELL, AND I SAW HOW SHE HAD HER FRIENDS AND EVERYTHING AND THEY WERE GRABBING ME. WHILE THE OTHER OFFICERS WERE STILL DEALING WITH I THINK MISS BELL WAS THE LADY WHO WAS BEING ARRESTED BY MR. JENKINS OR BY OFFICER JENKINS. I FEARED THAT THEY WOULD HAVE CAME AND CROWDED ME AGAIN. THEN I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE GOT DISARMED OR THEY WOULD HAVE GRABBED ME AGAIN OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I JUST HELD HER, TAKE HER >> WERE YOU ON THE ISLAND BY YOURSELF, OR THE OTHER OFFICERS? >> YES. >> BECAUSE OTHER OFFICERS WAS ATTENDING TO THAT SITUATION ALONG WITH OTHER FIGHTS THAT WAS GOING ON AND THEN TRYING TO MOVE THE CROWD. AT THAT MOMENT, IT WAS MYSELF AND I, AND THEN OFFICER BAPTIST PUT HER ATTENTION BACK ASSISTING WITH THE OTHER SITUATION GOING ON. >> WHEN YOU RAN UP TO THE TWO OFFICERS THAT HAD THE INDIVIDUAL ON THE GROUND AND YOU ENDED UP PULLING YOUR TASER, YOU WERE JUST TRYING TO KEEP THEM OFF THE BAD? >> YES. I BELIEVE SHE WAS TRYING TO GET MISS BELL ALOOSE FROM THE OFFICER, BECAUSE HAD HER ON THE GROUND. THEN I BELIEVE THAT SHE WAS TAPED, I MEAN, SHE WAS SPRAYED. THEN I THINK THE EFFECT DIDN'T HIT HER DIRECTLY OR SOMETHING. SHE STILL WAS DOING SOMETHING. THEN SHE STILL WAS TRYING TO GET ON THE BACK OF THE OFFICER BACK. I PULLED MY TASER OUT TO SAY, HEY, BACK UP, LET'S GO AWAY. >> THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? >> MY LAST QUESTION HERE. AT SOME POINT YOU TOLD ONE OF THOSE WOMEN TO PUNCH YOU OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT. AM I REMEMBERING THAT CORRECTLY? WHY? I MEAN, WHAT WERE YOU TRYING TO GET THEM? WERE YOU JUST. >> NO. SHE MADE A COMMENT AND SAID SOMETHING DEROGATORY TO ME OR SHE SAID SOMETHING I DON'T FUCK WITH THE POLICE, SOMETHING TO THAT MANNER. THAT'S WHY WHATEVER I TOLD HER, IT WAS BECAUSE OF WHAT SHE TOLD ME. IT WASN'T JUST SWING, I DON'T ENGAGE AND TO TRY TO FIGHT PEOPLE. >> I GUESS, DID YOU WANT HER TO ACTUALLY HIT YOU OR WERE YOU TRYING TO MESS WITH, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT WAS. >> I DIDN'T WANT HER TO HIT ME, BUT IF SHE WAS GOING TO HIT ME, SHE WAS GOING TO UNDERSTAND THAT FURTHER CRIMINAL ACTION WAS GOING TO TAKE PLACE. >> ANYTHING ELSE FOR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? DOES COUNSEL HAVE ANY FOLLOW UP? CORPORAL, YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT. YOU'RE STILL UNDER THE ORDER OF WELL, YOU DON'T HAVE TO LEAVE, DISCUSS WITH ANYONE ELSE BECAUSE YOU WILL LIKELY BE RECALLED IN A MINUTE. >> YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU. >> CORPORAL. WHEREVER YOU LIKE. MR. RAINES, YOU MAY CALL YOU NEXT WITNESS. DO WE NEED TO ACQUIRE SOMEONE FOR YOU? >> WE NEED SERGEANT DOUGLAS. >> YOU THINK ABOUT? [01:25:02] I THINK THIS IS JUST A BRIEF HOLD, THOUGH, MS. HARRIS, WHICH WITNESS ARE WE CALLING THE? SERGEANT DOUGLAS? IF YOU WOULD GO, GET SERGEANT DOUGLAS FROM THE HALLWAY. YOU GOT IT? ERIC. COUNSEL, IS EVERYONE GOOD? DOES ANYONE NEED A SHORT BREAK? >> COULD WE MOMENTARILY. >> WELL, WHENEVER YOU GET BACK, WE'LL TAKE IT BACK. THAT'S ALL. I WAS GOING TO SAY. ARE THEY? >> I KEPT ROCKING BAG IT. THAT'S. I IT. I WAS ROCKING BECAUSE OF PROBABLE, AND THEN I'M CIVILIAN. >> ALL RIGHT. IS COUNSEL READY? THEN I'LL CALL US BACK TO. I'LL CALL US BACK TO ORDER. I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE OUR WITNESS YET, BUT PERFECT. THE MR. RAINES, I'LL DEFER TO YOU. >> SERGEANT, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> SERGEANT ERIC DOUGLAS, 9,000 AIRLINE HIGHWAY. >> SERGEANT, JUST AS THEY REMINDED YOU WERE PRIEST? >> YES, I WOULD. >> WHAT IS YOUR CURRENT ASSIGNMENT? INTERNAL AFFAIRS. >> HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN WORKING IN INTERNAL AFFAIRS? >> AT SIX YEARS. >> NOW, THE BOARD HAS ALREADY REVIEWED THE VIDEO OF THE INCIDENT OF CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD AND HEARD SOME TESTIMONY ABOUT THAT INCIDENT. IS IT CORRECT THAT YOU WERE INVESTIGATING THE CONDUCT OF ANOTHER OFFICER WHEN YOU CAME ACROSS THE BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE OF CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD? >> YES. >> DID YOU REVIEW ALL OF HER BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE FROM THE LIBERTY LAGOON INCIDENT? >> YES, I DID. >> ALL RIGHT. DID YOU OBSERVE CONDUCT THAT YOU BELIEVE VIOLATED DEPARTMENTAL POLICY? >> YES. >> NOW, THERE WERE A FEW DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT SHE [01:30:02] INTERACTED WITH AT THE SCENE, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES. >> THAT WAS ALL ADDRESSED IN THE NOTICE LETTER TO HER? >> YES. >> YOU RECALL, SO THERE WAS REALLY THREE DISTINCT INCIDENTS. THERE WAS THE ONE NOT LONG AFTER SHE MADE ABOUT FIVE MINUTES AFTER SHE GOT THERE. SHE TELLS THIS LADY TO MOVE ON. THE LADY SAYS SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN'T UNDERSTAND, AND THEN SHE SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT BEATING THE BRAKES OFF OF HER. DO YOU IS THAT FAMILIAR TO YOU? >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. DO YOU BELIEVE THAT INTERACTION, FROM WHAT YOU SAW, DID YOU THINK THAT THAT SHOWED A VIOLATION DEPARTMENT OF POLICY? >> YES, IT IS. IT DID. >> HOW SO? >> THE LANGUAGE THAT SHE USED IS RIGHT IN LINE WITH THE BATTERS POLICE DEPARTMENT. HER INTERACTION WITH THAT PERSON, THOSE STATEMENTS ALONE WAS ENOUGH FOR ME TO LOOK FURTHER INTO HER. >> NOW, DID YOU RECALL AN INCIDENT WHERE SHE APPROACHES WHAT WE KNEW TO BE MISS BELL, DIAMOND BELL, AND A FEW OTHER KIDS WITH HER AND SHE TELLS MISS BELL TO SWING. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT INCIDENT? >> I REMEMBER THE INCIDENT. I DON'T REMEMBER THE SWING FOR IT, BUT I DO REMEMBER THE INCIDENT. I HAVE. >> GO TO TAB 5 FOR ME, IF YOU WOULD. >> ALL RIGHT. >> IN PAGE 64 IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT HAND CORNER. >> THE 64? >> YES, SIR. OKAY. AND ABOUT THAT MIDDLE SECTION, YOU SEE A TRANSCRIPT OF WHAT WENT BACK AND FORTH AND YOU'LL SEE IN THE MIDDLE THERE. SHE SAID, WHO ARE YOU TALKING TO SWING, DOES THAT? REFRESH YOUR MEMORY? >> YES. I DO. >> ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU DESCRIBE IN THAT INCIDENT WHAT YOU BELIEVE TO BE A POTENTIAL VIOLATION OF POLICY DUE TO THE INCIDENT? >> WAS THE INCIDENT WAS I CAN RECALL, WITH SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT SHE USED THAT INCIDENT, THAT INTERACTION WITH MISS BELL. THEN EVERYTHING APPEARED TO BE OKAY FOR AS IN DEALING WITH HER, FOR AS TAKING HER AND TRYING TO TAKE HER INTO CUSTODY WAS FINE? SURE. BUT DURING MY WHOLE PROCESS OF LOOKING AT EVERYTHING AND VIEWING THE EVIDENCE THAT I HAVE AND REFERENCED EVERYTHING, I NOTICED THAT SHE NEVER DOCUMENTED ANYTHING FOR THAT INTERACTION WITH MISS BELL. THAT WITHIN ITSELF WAS A VIOLATION BECAUSE YOU SUPPOSED TO DOCUMENT YOUR INTERACTION, ESPECIALLY IF YOU PUT THE HANDS ON. THEN AFTER I LOOKED IN IT FURTHER MORE, I LOOKED FOR RESPONSE TO RESISTIVE BEHAVIOR FORM, TO SEE IF IT HAD BEEN COMPLETED. IT WAS NEVER COMPLETED, NEVER RECEIVED, WHICH AGAIN, THAT'S ANOTHER VIOLATION FROM THERE. THAT'S WHERE I WENT THAT'S WHERE IT ALL STARTED UNFOLDING EVEN MORE FROM THERE. >> IN YOUR PRACTICE AS A POLICE OFFICER, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT TELLING THE CITIZEN TO SWING IS EVER SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK WOULD WOULD DE-ESCALATE A SITUATION? >> NO. THAT WAS ANOTHER POSITIVE VIOLATION. WE DON'T INVITE VIOLENCE OR ANY TYPE OF INTERACTION SUCH AS THAT. TRY TO DE ESCALATE MOST OF ALL OF THAT SITUATION. >> NOW, DO YOU RECALL ENGAGE OR HER ENGAGING WITH THE LADY IN THE GOLD BIKINI? >> YES, I DO. >> CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR CONCERNS WERE ABOUT THAT INTERACTION? >> INTERACTION WAS MOSTLY ABOUT THE LANGUAGE AND ABOUT OFFICER WELL, OFFICER ROBINSON NOT REALLY TAKEN MORE ACTION FOR IT AS AND TAKEN INTO CUSTODY, BUT THEN I HAD TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE SCENE AND STUFF WAS CHAOTIC. >> I JUST DIDN'T THE LANGUAGE THE VERBS OR INTERACTION AND STUFF WAS BASED DEFINITELY THE BIGGEST THING FOR ME FOR THE POLICY VIOLATION I FOUND OUT. >> WHEN YOU REVIEWED THE FOOTAGE, DID YOU BELIEVE THAT THE LANGUAGE USED WAS NECESSARY TO GET THE INTENDED EFFECT OF THAT INDIVIDUAL LEAVING THE PREMISES? >> NO. >> THREATENING TO BEAT THE BRAKES OFF SOMEBODY OR BEAT THEM UP. IS THAT LANGUAGE THAT TYPICALLY WOULD YOU SEE AS SOMETHING TO DE ESCALATE A SITUATION? >> NO, IT DOES NOT. >> NOW, WHEN YOU DO YOUR INVESTIGATION, IS IT CORRECT THAT YOU WILL JUST LIST POLICIES THAT YOU BELIEVE MAY HAVE BEEN VIOLATED IN SITUATION? >> YES. ALL RIGHT. >> YOU LISTED SEVERAL, BUT ULTIMATELY IS THE CHIEF THAT MAKES THAT DECISION ABOUT WHETHER TO UPHOLD THOSE POLICY VIOLATIONS, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. >> YOU DID AN INTERNAL AFFAIRS INTERVIEW WITH CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD, CORRECT? DURING THAT INTERVIEW PROCESS, DID SHE APOLOGIZE FOR HER CONDUCT THAT AS SHOWN IN THE VIDEO? >> YES. SHE DID. [01:35:02] >> DO YOU ALSO AS FAR AS COMMAND OF TEMPER, DO YOU THINK THAT SHE APPROPRIATELY CONTROLLED HER TEMPER DURING HER INTERACTIONS WITH THOSE INDIVIDUALS? >> NO. SHE DID NOT. >> DO YOU THINK HER CONDUCT WAS A GOOD EXAMPLE FOR OTHER OFFICERS TO FOLLOW? >> NO. >> TENDER THE WITNESS. >> SERGEANT DOUGLAS, HOW MANY COMPLAINTS FROM THE PUBLIC DID YOU RECEIVE ABOUT THE POLICE RESPONSE TO LIBERTY LAGOON? >> DIDN'T RECEIVE THE COMPLAINT, SO I WAS TASKED TO REVIEW ALL INCIDENTS THAT HAPPENED OUT THERE THAT DAY. >> WHO TASKED YOU TO DO THAT? ADMINISTRATION DID. >> NO ONE FROM THE PUBLIC COMPLAINED? >> NO. I DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY. >> IF I CAN ASK YOU TO TURN TO I BELIEVE IT'S YOUR INTERNAL AFFAIRS REPORT, SINCE IT'S THE SAME. I BELIEVE IT'S TAB 2 PAGE 15, YOUR INVESTIGATION REVEALED WITH REGARDS TO WELL, LET ME BACK UP. HOW MANY BODY CAMS FROM DIFFERENT POLICE OFFICERS DO YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU REVIEWED? >> THERE WAS A LOT. I CAN'T GIVE YOU THE NUMBER EXACT NUMBER. >> CAN WE SAY DOZENS? >> YES. >> ONE OF THOSE THAT YOU REVIEWED WAS OFFICER JENKINS, CORRECT? >> I DIDN'T GET THE NAME. >> OFFICER JENKINS? >> YES. >> DURING YOUR REVIEW, YOU FOUND THAT HE TOLD A SUBJECT, GO FIND A CAR AND GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE AFTER PUSHING THAT JUVENILE SEVERAL TIMES, IS THAT CORRECT? >> IF I WROTE IT IN THERE, YES. >> I'LL TAKE YOU TO PAGE 15 OF YOUR INTERNAL AFFAIRS REPORT. >> IS THAT WHAT YOU WROTE? YES, IT IS. >> THEN TOLD ANOTHER ONE, GOD DAMN SO FUCKING HARD HEADED? SIR? >> YES, SIR. >> I ASKED YOU TO TURN TO PAGE 20 IF YOU NEED THE REFERENCE. WAS OFFICER MILLER, JASON MILLER WAS HIS BODY CAM ONE YOU REVIEWED ALSO? >> YES, IT WAS. >> DURING YOUR REVIEW, DID YOU NOTE THAT HE TOLD SOMEONE, "BITCH SHUT THE FUCK UP AND WALK, " AND THEN REFERRED TO THEM AS A BITCH ASS? >> YES. >> ON PAGE 21 OF YOUR REPORT, IF YOU NEED TO REVIEW WHAT YOU WROTE, DETAIL ANOTHER SUBJECT, BRUH GET THE FUCK ON? >> YES. >> DID YOU TELL ANOTHER SUBJECT OR MAYBE THE SAME SUBJECT, BRUH GET YOUR DUSTY ASS ON? >> YES. >> WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION THAT YOU CONDUCTED, SERGEANT? >> WAS TO REVIEW ALL BODY CAMERAS AND NOTE ANY POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS AND REPORTED BACK. >> WAS IT THE PURPOSE OF THE INVESTIGATION TO SHOW THAT JENKINS, JONAH ROBINSON WOODARD AND JASON MILLER VIOLATED SEVERAL DEPARTMENT POLICIES WHILE ATTEMPTING TO GAIN CONTROL AND MAINTAIN ORDER AT LIBERTY LAGOON ON MAY 26, 2024? >> SIR, I DIDN'T GET THE FIRST PART OF I HEARD ALL THE RECORD. >> WASN'T THE PURPOSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION TO SHOW THAT OFFICER JENKINS, CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD, AND JASON MILLER VIOLATED SEVERAL DEPARTMENT POLICIES WHILE ATTEMPTING TO GAIN CONTROL AND MAINTAIN ORDER AT LIBERTY LAGOON ON MAY 26, 2024? >> YES. >> YOUR INTENT WAS THEY DID SOMETHING WRONG BEFORE YOU KNEW WHAT HAPPENED? >> NO. MY INTENT WAS TO VIEW EVERYTHING, VIEW ALL THE EVIDENCE IN HAND AND REPORT IT BACK, REPORT EVERYTHING THAT I SAW THAT WAS A POLICY VIOLATION, AND THAT'S WHAT I DID. IF I SAW A POLICY VIOLATION OR A POSSIBLE POLICY VIOLATION, I DOCUMENTED AND DOCUMENTED THE POSSIBLE POSITIVE VIOLATION, AND REPORTED IT TO THE CHIEF. >> COULD YOU TURN TO PAGE 40? >> THIS IS ON PAGE 40? >> YES, SIR. UP AT THE VERY FIRST SENTENCE, COULD YOU READ THAT FIRST SENTENCE? >> THE PURPOSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION IS TO SHOW THAT OFFICER JENKINS, OFFICER JACOB JENKINS, AND CORPORAL DANIEL ROBINSON WOODWARD, AND OFFICER JASON MILLER VIOLATED SEVERAL POLICIES WHILE ATTEMPTING TO GAIN CONTROL AND MAINTAIN ORDER AT THE LIBERTY LAGOON ON MAY 26, 2024. [01:40:10] >> DID YOU HAVE A PRE DISCIPLINARY HEARING OR DID YOU ATTEND ONE FOR OFFICER JENKINS? >> YES, I DID. >> DID YOU HAVE ONE FOR OR DID YOU ATTEND A PRE DISIPLINARY HEARING FOR OFFICER JASON MILLER? >> YES, I DID. >> DO YOU RECALL WHAT THEIR PUNISHMENTS WERE? >> NO. I DO NOT. >> I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER. >> JUST A FOLLOW UP ON THAT. YOU READ SOME LANGUAGE THAT OFFICER MILLER USED, CORRECT? >> YES, I DID. >> OKAY. OFFICER MILLER, WHEN HE WAS USING THAT LANGUAGE, WAS HE DIRECTING PEOPLE TO DO THINGS LIKE MOVE YOUR DUSTY ASS ON, THAT KIND OF LANGUAGE? >> YES, HE WAS. >> ALL RIGHT. HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU SAW IN THIS CASE WITH CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD? >> IN DIFFERENCE WAS HE WAS TRYING TO GAIN CONTROL OR TRYING TO GET SOME TYPE OF ORDER. HER VERBS AND HER LANGUAGE A LITTLE DIFFERENT. IT WASN'T A GAIN ORDER, IT WAS ALMOST LIKE INCITING MORE CHAOS, INVITING MORE OF A CONFRONTATION. IT DID NOT ALIGN WITH TRYING TO GAIN CONTROL OR GIVE SOME TYPE OF DIRECTIVE. SOMETIMES YOU GIVE DIRECTIVE OR SOMETIMES DIRECTIVE IS GIVEN IN DIFFERENT WAYS. YES. >> IF HER LANGUAGE HAD ONLY BEEN USED IN THE CONTEXT OF TELLING THE LADY IN THE GOLD BIKINI TO MOVE ON, DO YOU THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENT SCENARIO THAN WHAT YOU SAW IN THE VIDEOS? >> YES, I DO. >> I'LL TENDER. >> I BELIEVE TO THE BOARD. I APOLOGIZE. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTION? MR. O. SERGEANT, I BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN STEP DOWN. >> YES. >> ANY OBJECTION, MR. ABBY? >> TO? >> RELEASING THIS WITNESS FROM SUBPOENA. >> NO, SIR. >> YOU ARE RELEASED, SIR. YOU'RE WELCOME TO STAY, BUT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> I RECALL CHIEF MORSE. >> CHIEF, I KNOW YOU KNOW, BUT JUST AS A REMINDER THAT YOU WERE PRE SWORN. >> YES, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? >> CHIEF THOMAS MORSE JR. 9,000 AIRLINE HIGHWAY BOUND RIG LOUISIANA. >> CHIEF, DID YOU TAKE PART IN THE PRE-DISCIPLINARY HEARING FOR CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD? >> YES, SIR. I DID. >> ALL RIGHT. NOW, ULTIMATELY, AS WE'VE HEARD TODAY, YOU ISSUED A RULING REGARDING HER SAYING THAT SHE VIOLATED THREE POLICIES OF THE DEPARTMENT, COMPLETION AND SUBMISSION OF FORMS, COMMAND OF TEMPER, AND CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT. YOU'VE HEARD THE TESTIMONY OF SERGEANT DOUGLAS AS TO WHY HE BELIEVED THAT SHE VIOLATED THOSE POLICIES, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> YOU'VE HEARD HER TESTIMONY TO SOME EXTENT, HER AGREEMENT THAT SHE VIOLATED THOSE POLICIES, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> NOW WE KNOW THAT THE DISCIPLINE RENDERED IS YOURS TO MAKE. WE HAD THOSE THREE VIOLATIONS. LET'S GO THROUGH THOSE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO THE BOARD WHY YOU THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO SUSTAIN THE VIOLATION OF COMPLETION AND SUBMISSION OF REQUIRED FORMS? >> WHEN IT COMES TO THE COMPLETION AND SUBMISSION OF THE REQUIRED FORMS, THE REPORTING ITSELF DID NOT ALLUDE TO THE USE OF FORCE, WHICH THEN WOULD HAVE GENERATED A SUPERVISOR WANTING TO SEE A USE OF FORCE FORM. I BELIEVE YOU KNOW, IT WAS MORE THAN JUST A SIMPLE ACT OF TRYING TO PAT SOMEBODY DOWN OR PUTTING HANDS ON SOMEBODY. I MEAN, EVEN IN THE FIRST CLIP THAT WE SAW, THE FEMALE WAS WALKING AWAY, SHE PUSHED THAT FEMALE IN THE BACK AND THEN STARTED CURSING AT HER AS SHE WAS WALKING AWAY. TO ME, OKAY, YOU'RE USING A LITTLE BIT OF FORCE TO MOVE SOMEBODY, I DON'T NEED TO SEE A USE OF FORCE ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT ON THE SECOND CLIP, WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO GRAB SOMEBODY FROM BEHIND AND DO WHAT WE WOULD CALL A SEAT BELT MANEUVER TO APPREHEND THAT PERSON OR MAYBE TAKE THEM TO THE GROUND, WE NEED SOME MORE DOCUMENTATION TO THAT AS TO WHY THAT FORCE WAS USED. >> CHIEF, FOR THOSE THAT MAY NOT BE AWARE ON THE BOARD, BEFORE YOU BECAME CHIEF, WHAT PART OF THE DEPARTMENT DID YOU WORK IN? >> THE TRAINING ACADEMY. >> DID YOU TEACH THINGS LIKE USE OF FORCE TO NEW OFFICERS? >> YES, SIR. >> OKAY. SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT A SEAT BELT MANEUVER, THIS IS SOMETHING YOU WOULD HAVE TAUGHT TO OFFICERS? >> YES, SIR. >> NOW, SO YOU BELIEVE THAT WHAT YOU SAW ON THE VIDEO WAS A USE OF FORCE, AND THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN A FORM ASSOCIATED WITH THAT FOR THAT INTERACTION, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES. >> NOW, LET'S GO TO THE POLICY ON COMMAND OF TEMPER. ALL RIGHT. WE WATCHED THREE DIFFERENT INTERACTIONS ON THE VIDEO THERE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY YOU BELIEVE THAT SHE VIOLATED COMMAND OF TEMPER? [01:45:02] >> I THINK THAT THE VIDEO SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. I REMEMBER SPEAKING WITH CORPORAL ROBINSON. SHE HAD GOTTEN A PHONE CALL FROM HER SON. SHE WAS IN THAT MODE WHEN SHE GOT THERE AND THEN HAD TO QUICKLY, LIKE A LOT OF OFFICERS DO PUT ON A DIFFERENT HAT AND TRANSITION TO OFFICER MODE. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT TRANSITION HAPPENED FULLY AND THAT SHE WAS NOT REALLY IN HOW I KNOW HER FROM HER 15 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE ON THE BATON ROUGE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT SHE HAD LOST HER COOL AND WAS ACTING OUTSIDE OF THE NORMAL THAT SHE WOULD NORMALLY ACT. IF I DIDN'T THINK THAT SHE HAD LOST HER TEMPER AND THAT'S JUST HOW SHE WOULD NORMALLY ACT, THAT WOULD BE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SITUATION. BUT I DO THINK THAT JUST IN THIS INSTANT, THINGS HAPPENED WHERE IT TRIGGERED HER AND SHE LOST HER TEMPER AND LOST HER COOL WITH THE WAY SHE HANDLED PEOPLE OUT THERE. >> OBVIOUSLY, THE VIDEO SPEAKS FOR ITSELF, BUT CAN YOU POINT OUT WHAT THINGS, EITHER LANGUAGE OR WHAT THAT YOU SAW THAT YOU THOUGHT WERE INAPPROPRIATE? >> SURE. I KNOW I HAVEN'T BEEN IN FRONT OF YOU ALL VERY MUCH, BUT WHAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE FROM ME AS CHIEF, I AM NOT GOING TO BE THE CHIEF OF POLICE THAT SAYS, NO, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CURSE. GOING BACK TO MY TIME AT THE TRAINING ACADEMY, I MEAN, CURSING IS A TYPE OF FORCE THAT WE USE TO ESCALATE THINGS SOMETIMES. IF YOU'RE TELLING SOMEBODY BACK UP, AND THEY'RE NOT LISTENING, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO SAY BACK THE FUCK UP. HEY, LET ME SEE YOUR HANDS, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO SAY, LET ME SEE YOUR FUCKING HANDS. I THINK THERE'S A FINE LINE THOUGH WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT GIVING SOMEONE ORDERS AND YOU'RE USING CURSE WORDS TO GET THEIR ATTENTION TO THEN JUST BERATING SOMEBODY AND CALLING THE NAMES AND CHALLENGING THEM TO A FIGHT. THAT IS NOT APPROPRIATE. THERE'S A LINE THERE THAT WAS DEFINITELY CROSSED FROM USING THE LANGUAGE AND USING CURSE WORDS TO GET COMPLIANCE OUT OF SOMEBODY TO JUST 100% GETTING ON THEIR LEVEL. TO THE POINT WHERE IF YOU WEREN'T WATCHING THE VIDEO, BUT JUST LISTENING, YOU WOULDN'T KNOW WHO THE SUSPECT WAS AND WHO THE OFFICER WAS BY THE BASE ON THE LANGUAGE. >> DO YOU THINK THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT SHE USED WAS NECESSARY TO GET THE INTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF IT, WHICH IS PEOPLE MOVING ON? >> NO. >> WHEN SHE WAS USING THE LANGUAGE THAT WE SAW IN THE VIDEO, DID YOU SEE IT AS A DIRECTIVE MOVE ON, MOVE THE FUCK ON, OR WAS IT MORE INTENDED DIRECTED AT THE INDIVIDUAL? >> SHE DID A GREAT JOB IN SOME PARTS OF THE VIDEO OF, HEY, PLEASE MOVE ON, COME ON, DARLING, COME ON, LOVE YOU, PLEASE MOVE ON, PLEASE MOVE ON. THAT LANGUAGE WAS 100% GOOD. BUT ON THE VICE VERSA, THE VERY FIRST INCIDENT, THAT FEMALE WAS WALKING AWAY, AND YOU CAN SEE IN THE VIDEO SHE PUSHED HER IN THE BACK AND WAS YELLING AT HER BACK, CURSING HER OUT. THEN THE THIRD VIDEO THAT YOU ALL GOT TO WATCH WITH THE FEMALE AND THE GOLD BIKINI, HER LANGUAGE IS ACTUALLY KEEPING HER THERE. SHE WAS ENTERTAINING AND GETTING ON THAT LEVEL. THERE ARE SEVERAL TIMES THAT THE FEMALE WENT TO LEAVE, BUT CORPORAL ROBINSON'S LANGUAGE JUST OF EGGING HER ABOUT, HEY, I'M ABOUT THESE STREET, I'LL BEAT THE FUCK OUT YOU AND STUFF MADE HER STAY THERE TO ENGAGE. SHE HAD BACKUP WITH HER. OFFICER BATISTE HAD GONE UP AND SHE TOLD OFFICER BATISTE TO LEAVE. SHE COULD HAVE EASILY HAVE ALSO TURNED AROUND AND WALKED OFF TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH THE OTHER OFFICERS AND LET THAT FEMALE JUST GO, KEEPING AN EYE ON HER. BUT I BELIEVE THAT SHE KIND OF KEPT HER THERE WITH THAT LANGUAGE IN THAT ARGUMENT. >> ALL RIGHT. THEN LAST CHARGE THAT SHE WAS SUSTAINED ON WAS CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER, IF YOU WOULD JUST SPEAK TO THAT? >> YES. AGAIN, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER, ANYTHING THAT WOULD BRING DISGRACE UPON THE DEPARTMENT. THIS VIDEO HAS NOT HIT THE MEDIA, BUT IF IT WOULD, I'M SURE THAT EVERYBODY WOULD BRING BIG DISGRACE ON DEPARTMENT. OFFICER ROBINSON, FTO DOES A LOT OF STUFF AT THE ACADEMY, VOLUNTEERING HER TIME. SHE DOES A GOOD JOB USUALLY IN WHAT SHE DOES. BUT IN THIS SPECIFIC CASE, HER ACTIONS ON THIS NIGHT WERE NOT OF THE BEST OF A POLICE OFFICER. >> LET'S GO TO LAST PAGE IN THE BOOK, TAB SEVEN. THIS IS GENERAL ORDER 112, CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT. LET'S LOOK AT 40, TABLE OF PENALTIES. HERE YOU HAD TWO SUSTAINED CHARGES THAT WERE CATEGORY TWO CHARGES, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> ALL RIGHT. AS YOU LOOKED AT IT, DID YOU SEE THAT YOU HAD THESE WERE FIRST DEFENSES FOR HER? >> YES. THERE WERE FIRST OFFENSES WITH OUTSIDE OF THE FIVE YEAR RANGE THAT'S ON THE MATRIX. >> ALL RIGHT. SO YOU COULD HAVE FOR EACH ONE, DONE A LETTER OF REPRIMAND UP TO A THREE DAY SUSPENSION, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> YOU CHOSE FIVE DAYS SUSPENSION. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO THE BOARD WHAT YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS WAS IN THAT? [01:50:02] >> I THOUGHT FIVE DAYS WAS SOMETHING I WAS COMFORTABLE WITH KNOWING, LIKE OFFICER ROBINSON SAID, I'VE GOT ROBINSON 15 YEARS ON THE DEPARTMENT, AND MY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF HER AND WHO SHE IS. I HAD SOME DEPUTY CHIEFS RECOMMEND GO EVEN HIGHER THAN WHAT THE TABLE SAYS, WHICH I'M ALLOWED TO DO. BUT I THOUGHT THAT FIVE YEARS WAS GIVING HER ACTIONS THAT NIGHT WAS AN ACCEPTABLE THING. THE OTHER VIOLATIONS WHEN IT CAME TO USE OF FORCE AND THE FALSIFICATION OF THE RECORDS. I'VE NOT SUSTAIN THOSE. HER FORCE, I THOUGHT WAS FINE. SHE DIDN'T DOCUMENT IT CORRECTLY, BUT SHE WAS IN A TOUGH SITUATIONS A VERY CHAOTIC NIGHT, PEOPLE ALL OVER THE PLACE. HER PULLING HER TASER, ALL THOSE THINGS THAT SHE HAD TO DO WAS FINE. IT WAS JUST THE LANGUAGE AND NOT JUST THE LANGUAGE, BUT THE WAY THAT SHE WAS JUST BERATING PEOPLE IN TWO DIFFERENT INSTANCES AND ESCALATING THE SITUATION AND INSTEAD OF TRYING TO DE ESCALATE IT. >> WE TALKED ABOUT THE USE OF THE TERM SWING EARLIER. IN THE TRAINING ACADEMY, IS THAT ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD EVER TELL AN OFFICER TO USE WHILE THEY'RE OUT THERE ON THE STREETS? >> NO. I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU WOULD TELL SOMEBODY THAT UNLESS YOU WANTED TO INVITE THEM TO FIGHT YOU. >> THAT WOULD BE A BAD IDEA FOR AN OFFICER, CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT. CHIEF, DO YOU BELIEVE YOUR DECISION WAS MADE IN GOOD FAITH? >> YES, SIR. 100%. >> BASED ON EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE LOOKED AT, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS CAUSE FOR THE DISCIPLINE THAT WAS AGAINST HER? >> YES, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT. YOU ASKING THE BOARD TO UPHOLD THAT DISCIPLINE? >> YES. I WOULD ASK THE BOARD TO UPHOLD THE DISCIPLINE OF FIVE DAY SUSPENSION. >> ALL RIGHT. LI TENDER THE WITNESS? >> MR. IVAN. >> CHIEF, WERE YOU ONE OF THE AMONG THE SEVERAL OFFICERS WHO RESPONDED TO THE SIGNAL 63 AT LIBERTY LAGOON THAT NIGHT? >> NO. I WAS NOT THERE. >> WHAT IS THE SIGNAL 63? >> 63 IS OFFICER NEEDS ASSISTANCE CALL. >> WERE YOU AWARE THAT ALL DISTRICTS SENT PERSONNEL TO LIBERTY LAGOON? >> I KNOW THAT IT WAS PUT OUT ON ALL DISPATCHES, AND SO ANY OFFICER THAT WAS AVAILABLE OR NEARBY IS EXPECTED TO RESPOND IF THEY'RE AVAILABLE. >> HOW FREQUENT IS A CITYWIDE SIGNAL 63? >> IT'S NOT COMMON. I MEAN, A COUPLE OF MONTHS MAYBE, BUT DEFINITELY NOT COMMON. >> WAS THIS A FAIRLY UNIQUE SITUATION THESE OFFICERS FACED AT LIBERTY LAGOON? >> YES, FOR SURE. >> YOU BROUGHT IT UP. YOU MENTIONED ONE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEFS ARGUED FOR A HIGHER ROLE. LET ME ASK YOU WHAT ROLE DO THE DEPUTY CHIEFS PLAY IN A PREVIOUS DECISION? >> THEY SIT IN ON THE PRE-DISCIPLINARY HEARINGS. THEY ARE ALLOWED TO ASK QUESTIONS. THEN DURING EXECUTIVE SESSION, VERY SIMILAR TO THE BOARD. WE HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION WITH JUST MYSELF AND THE DEPUTY CHIEFS, AND THEY GIVE ME THEIR OPINION ON WHAT POLICIES MAY HAVE BEEN VIOLATED AND ANY DISCIPLINE THAT MAY BE WARRANTED. >> WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE 1 AND 2 STAR DEPUTY CHIEF? >> OBJECT TO RELEVANCE SENATOR. >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DEPUTY CHIEFS, THE PEOPLE WHO GIVE HIM ADVICE. >> OH THIS MATTER. OVERRULED FOR NOW. >> YES. SO I HAVE FIVE DEPUTY CHIEFS, ONE OF WHICH IS HAS TWO STARS ON HER SHOULDERS BECAUSE SHE IS THE CHIEF OF STAFF. ON OUR ORGANIZATIONAL CHART. SHE'S MY CHIEF OF STAFF, AND THEN WE HAVE THE OTHER DEPUTY CHIEFS AS WELL. >> THAT TWO STAR DEPUTY CHIEF IS SHARON DOUGLAS? >> CORRECT. >> MARRIED TO ERIC DOUGLAS, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> OBJECTION. RELEVANCE. >> MR. IVY. >> SHE'S A TWO STAR DEPUTY CHIEF WHO GIVES HIM ADVICE ON THESE MATTERS BOTH DURING THE PRE-DIS AND DURING EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND SHE HAPPENS TO BE MARRIED TO THE WITNESS THAT JUST TESTIFIED REGARDING HIS INVESTIGATION. >> MR. IVY, BEYOND I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT THEY ARE MARRIED. ARE YOU ALLEGING ANY TYPE OF INAPPROPRIATE TAMPERING OR MISCONDUCT? >> WELL, WE ASKED AND IF I COULD CONTINUE, MY NEXT QUESTION WAS GOING TO BE THAT AT THE INCEPTION OF THE PRE-DIS WE ASKED THAT DEPUTY CHIEF SHARON DOUGLAS BE RECUSED. THAT WAS DENIED. I TAKE THAT WITH MY POINT OF ASKING SERGEANT DOUGLAS TO READ A PORTION OF HIS REPORT THAT INDICATED THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION WAS NOT TO UNCOVER THE FACTS, BUT TO SHOW THESE THREE OFFICERS COMMITTED COP POLICY VIOLATIONS. IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME BASED ON WORDS HE CHOSE TO PUT IN HERE THAT THERE WAS AN INTENT GOING INTO THIS INVESTIGATION. [01:55:03] ON THE WHOLE, YOU HAVE SOMEONE CLOSELY RELATED TO HIM, BUT AS CLOSELY RELATED AS YOU CAN GET OTHER THAN BEING SOMEBODY'S CHILD OR PARENT, SITTING ON THE BOARD THAT IS GIVING HIM ADVICE REGARDING THE DISCIPLINE OF THE OFFICERS HE'S INVESTIGATED. THE PURPOSE OF WHICH WAS TO SHOW THEY COMMITTED POLICY VIOLATION. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING IMPORTANT FOR THE BOARD TO KNOW. >> MAY I RESPOND TO THAT. >> MR. IVY, WERE YOU DONE? >> NO. I WAS NOT. >> MR. RAINS WILL ABSOLUTELY GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO RESPOND. >> LET'S NOT FORGET, ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF THIS BOARD IS TO OVERSEE THE ADMINISTRATION OF PERSONNEL OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. I THINK THERE'S A SENSE OF INHERENT UNFAIRNESS WHEN YOU ATTEND TO PRE-DIS, AND ONE OF THE PEOPLE CHARGED WITH GIVING THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY ADVICE IS MARRIED TO THE SOLE INVESTIGATOR WHO CLAIMS HIS PURPOSE WAS TO SHOW THAT THIS OFFICER COMMITTED A POLICY VIOLATION. >> MR. RAINS. >> THIS IS NOT AN INVESTIGATION INTO SHARON DOUGLAS OR ERIC DOUGLAS. THERE IS A MECHANISM FOR DOING THAT IF HE THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS WHAT WAS APPROPRIATE, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO TODAY. WE'RE JUST DEALING WITH THE DISCIPLINE RENDERED TO HER. IF HE WANTS TO ASK THE CHIEF WHETHER THERE WAS SOME UNDUE INFLUENCE ON HIM, I GUESS MAYBE HE CAN ASK THAT. BUT GETTING INTO THEIR MARRIAGE OR ANY OF THIS, THIS IS NOT THE FORM FOR THAT. >> MR. IVY, BRIEF RESPONSE. >> I'M NOT GETTING INTO ANYBODY'S MARRIAGE. I'M GETTING INTO RELATIONSHIPS, AND WHETHER THAT SHOULD HAVE CAUSED A RECUSAL. >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AS FAR AS CAUSE FOR RECUSAL, I I AGREE WITH MR. RAINS, THERE MAY BE OTHER MECHANISMS FOR THAT. I WILL SAY THIS, AND BOARD, I ALWAYS WANT TO REMIND YOU, WHILE THE CHAIR MAKES PRELIMINARY RULINGS ANYTIME ANY OF YOU DISAGREE, YOU MAKE A MOTION FOR A VOTE, AND WE DO THAT. BUT THE CHAIR JUST MAKES THINGS MOVE A LITTLE BIT QUICKER. I'M INCLINED, I THINK YOU HAVE GOTTEN AT YOUR QUESTIONS AS FAR AS THE RELATIONSHIP. >> I HAVE. >> I WAS CERTAINLY GOING TO CAUTION YOU TO NOT START DELVING INTO ARGUMENT AS PART OF THIS, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. AT LEAST IN HEARING YOUR QUESTIONS AND IN THAT LIGHT, AS FAR AS CONFIRMING THE RELATIONSHIP ALLOW THAT. [OVERLAPPING] IF IT TRIES TO GO BEYOND THAT AT THAT POINT, I'LL SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION. BUT IT'S OVER RULED FOR NOW. >> I THINK MY POINT HAS BEEN MADE. >> OKAY. >> CHIEF, IF I COULD GET YOU TO TURN TO PAGE 60 OF THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS REPORT, IT'S SAFE TO SAY THAT ON MAY 28, 2024, ROUGHLY 08:00 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, YOU WATCHED JOEL ROBINSON'S VIDEO? >> YES. >> DID YOU HAVE A MEETING WITH BOTH HER AND SEVERAL OTHER OFFICERS ON MAY 31ST. >> I REMEMBER MEETING WITH OFFICERS THAT WERE INVOLVED. WELL, SOME OF THE OFFICERS, BUT I DON'T RECALL THE DATE. I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SAY THAT IT WAS MAY 31ST. I KNOW IT WAS SOMETIME AFTER. >> AFTER WHAT? >> AFTER THE INCIDENT. >> WOULD HAVE BEEN AFTER MAY 28? >> I DON'T KNOW. >> WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING? >> THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING WAS TO, AND AGAIN, THIS IS BACK IN MAY, BUT FROM WHAT I CAN RECALL, THINGS THAT HIT THE NEWS, AND THERE WAS A LOT OF SPECULATION ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON. I JUST WANTED TO GET EVERYBODY TOGETHER AND LET THEM KNOW THAT EVERYTHING WAS BEING LOOKED INTO AS FAR AS I CAN RECALL. USUALLY WHEN OFFICERS ARE ON THE NEWS, I LIKE TO REACH OUT TO THEM AND JUST MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE MENTALLY OKAY. >> WAS JANELLE AMONGST THAT YOU MET WITH? >> I'M ASSUMING SHE WAS. I DON'T HAVE A ROLE IN FRONT OF ME OF WHO WAS THERE OR WHO WAS NOT THERE. >> YOU MADE REFERENCE TO EARLIER, IN YOUR TESTIMONY WITH MR. RAINS, THAT THE LADY IN THE GOLD BATHING SUIT, DID SHE PAINT IT WITH THE TASER? >> YES, SIR. >> YOU RECALL THAT OFFICER ROBINSON TOLD HER TO MOVE FOUR TIMES DURING THAT ENCOUNTER, AT THE SAME TIME SHE'S USING THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU OBJECT TO? >> I DON'T REMEMBER HOW MANY TIMES SHE TOLD HER TO MOVE. >> YOU WROTE A PRE-DISCIPLINARY LETTER BACK ON AUGUST 8, [02:00:02] 2024, IS THAT CORRECT? >> NO, SIR. I DON'T WRITE THOSE LETTERS. >> YOU SIGNED THEM THOUGH, DON'T YOU? >> YES. >> DID YOU READ IT BEFORE YOU SIGNED IT? >>YES. >> CAN I TAKE YOU TO PAGE 66, WHICH YOU DETAILING OR IT APPEARS IT IS DETAILING THE VERBAL INTERACTION BETWEEN CORPORAL WOODARD AND THE LADY IN THE GOLD BIKINI OR THE GOLD BATHING SUIT. HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU COUNT OFFICER ROBINSON TELLING HER TO MOVE? >> IT LOOKS LIKE SHE SAID, MOVE, MOVE, AND THEN MOVE AND THEN MOVE. >> SHE WAS GIVING HER DIRECTIONS? >> YES, SIR. >> DID YOU SEE HOW THAT PARTICULAR INTERACTION ENDED ON THE VIDEO? >> WITH THE? >> WITH THE LADY IN THE GOLD BATHING SUIT. >> YES. WITH SOME PEOPLE GRABBING HER AND TAKING HER AWAY. >> SOMEBODY ELSE IN THE CROWD OBVIOUSLY TOOK OFFICER ROBINSON SERIOUSLY AND HELPED HER MOVE ON DOWN THE ROAD, CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> IN FACT, ALL OF OFFICER WOODARD'S INTERACTIONS WITH PEOPLE GOT THEM TO MOVE OR GOT OTHER PEOPLE IN THE CROWD TO GET THEM TO MOVE, CORRECT? >> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ALL HER INTERACTIONS, BUT THE FIRST INTERACTION THAT WE SAW, SHE WAS LEAVING WHEN CORPORAL ROBINSON PUSHED HER IN THE BACK AND CURSED AT HER. THEN THE SECOND INTERACTION, OTHER OFFICERS INTERVENED TO TAKE THAT PERSON INTO CUSTODY. THE THIRD INTERACTION, THE FEMALE DID LEAVE WHEN OTHER PEOPLE PULLED HER AWAY. >> YOU WATCHED THE ENTIRE BODY CAM VIDEO FROM BEFORE TODAY OF OFFICER ROBINSON? >> I'M NOT SURE IF I WATCHED ALL 30, 40 MINUTES OF IT. >> OKAY. >> AT SOME POINT, I'M SURE I DID WITH THE PRE-DISCIPLINARY HEARING AND THINGS. >> DID YOU RECALL FROM WATCHING THE BODY CAM FOOTAGE, HER TELLING ONE OR TELLING A GROUP OF PEOPLE, YOU ALL GOT TO GO THIS WAY, LOVE? >> YES. >> DID YOU SEE HER TELL SOMEONE ELSE EXCUSE ME, BABY, AS SHE WALKED PAST THEM TO GET TO A FIGHT? >> YES, SIR. THAT WAS ALL VERY, VERY GOOD THE WAY SHE HANDLED THAT. >> DID YOU SEE HER YELL TO OTHER OFFICERS COME TO THE FRONT AS SHE AND OTHER OFFICERS RUN TOWARDS IT WHERE A FIGHT HAD BROKEN OUT? >> YEAH. I DO REMEMBER SEEING HER RUN TOWARDS THE FIGHT. >> DID YOU SEE HER CALL OUT TO, LET ME ASK YOU THIS FIRST, KORANTE HAROLD, THAT BATON'S POLICE OFFICER, IS SHE NOT? >> OFFICER HAROLD IS EMPLOYED BY THE BATON [INAUDIBLE] >> DID YOU SEE JANELLE ROBINSON CALL OUT TO KORANTE HAROLD, DON'T AS ONE OTHER BLACK FEMALE OFFICER RESTRAINED HER PHYSICALLY? >> NO. I DON'T RECALL THAT. >> DID YOU SEE JANELLE ROBINSON ASK SOMEBODY IS YOUR RIDE ON THE WAY? >> YES. >> DID YOU SEE HER DIRECT OTHER OFFICERS TO PUT SOMEONE IN A UNIT AS SHE TOLD THEM, EXCUSE ME, LET ME BACK UP. DID YOU SEE CORPORAL ROBINSON DIRECT OFFICERS TO PUT SOMEONE IN A UNIT, AS SHE TOLD THEM MEMBERS OF THE CROWD WERE TRYING TO JUMP HIM AND WERE TRYING TO PREVENT THAT? >> I DON'T REMEMBER THAT, NO, SIR. >> DID YOU LISTEN OR HEAR HER GET ON THE RADIO ASKING FOR UNITS AT FLORIDA AND LAUDERDALE TO SHUT DOWN LAUDERDALE TRAFFIC? >> YES, SIR. >> DID YOU SEE HER TELL A LARGE GROUP TO CHILL OUT AND ASK THEM, ARE YOU ALL WAITING ON A RIDE? >> YES, SIR. >> DID YOU SEE HER GET ON THE RADIO ASKING OFFICERS ON HER FREQUENCY? IS IT POSSIBLE TO PUSH THEM TOWARDS THE GAS STATION? >> YES, SIR. >> DID YOU SEE HER DIRECTING THE CROWD TO HEAD TO FLORIDA AND LAUDERDALE, IF THAT IS IF THEY WERE WAITING ON A RIDE? >> YES, SIR. >> DID YOU SEE AT ONE POINT FEMALE IN THE CROWD, APOLOGIZED TO CORPORAL ROBINSON AND THAT SHE RESPONDED, YOU DON'T HAVE TO APOLOGIZE, BABY? >> YES, SIR. THE FIRST PERSON THAT APOLOGIZED. THE SECOND PERSON THAT APOLOGIZED, SHE SAID, YOU DON'T HAVE TO APOLOGIZE FOR THESE OR SOMETHING ALONG THAT LANGUAGE? >> DID YOU HEAR CORPORAL ROBINSON DIRECTING THE CROWD THAT THEY NEEDED EVERYBODY TO COME THIS WAY, HAVE TO GO DOWN TO THE GAS STATION? >> I DO REMEMBER HER DIRECTING PEOPLE TO THE GAS STATION. YES, SIR. >> DO YOU RECALL SEEING AND LISTENING TO HER ADDRESS A PARENT EXPLAINING TO THEM WHAT THE POLICE WERE DOING? >> I REMEMBER HER INTERACTION WITH A PARENT SAYING THAT WE'RE MOVING EVERYONE, THAT YOU NEED TO GO PICK PEOPLE UP AT THE GAS STATION. THAT WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO? >> DID YOU SEE HER AND HEAR HER RESTRAIN OFFICER BATISTE BY EITHER PULLING HER SHIRT SLEEVE, OR GRABBING HER ARM, TELLING OFFICER BATISTE, DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT? [02:05:02] >> YES, SIR. >> DID YOU SEE HER AND HEAR HER TELL ANOTHER GROUP, YOU ALL GOT TO GO BACK THAT WAY, BABY, UNLESS YOU ALL DRIVE IN, AND THE CROWD BEGIN TO MOVE? >> YES, SIR. >> DID YOU SEE HER ASK ANOTHER PERSON, ARE" YOU DRIVING, SIR? IF YOU'RE WAITING ON RIDES, GO TO THE GAS STATION?" >> I DON'T REMEMBER THAT ONE EXACTLY. >> DO YOU RECALL TOWARDS THE END OF THE VIDEO, SHE AND ANOTHER OFFICER TRYING TO HELP A MOTHER FIND THEIR CHILD? >> YES, SIR. >> DO YOU RECALL HER TOWARDS THE END OF HER BODY CAM FOOTAGE, OBVIOUSLY REALIZING SOMEONE IS ABOUT TO BREAK A UNIT WINDOW AND THEN GET ON THE RADIO TELLING THE OFFICER DRIVING THAT PARTICULAR UNIT IT'S 18-32, THEY NEED TO GET TO THEIR UNIT ASAP. THE SUBJECT IN THE BACKSEAT WAS KICKING THEIR DOOR GLASS? >> NO. I DON'T RECALL THAT. >> DO YOU RECALL TOWARDS THE END OF THE VIDEO RIGHT BEFORE IT IS MUTED CORPORAL ROBINSON USED HER CELL PHONE TO CALL SOMEONE A RIDE WHO NEEDED TO GET TO BRULE? >> NO, SIR. >> IN YOUR PRE-DISCIPLINARY LETTER, I BELIEVE IT'S TABBED, IN YOUR EXHIBIT BOOK TAB 5. >> OKAY. >> WHERE DOES IT TELL YOU OR WHERE IS AN OFFICER TOLD WHEN THEY NEED TO COMPLETELY USE OF FORCE FORM? >> IT'S IN THE GENERAL ORDER. >> POINT TO IT. WHAT PAGE ON? >> IN OUR GENERAL ORDER BOOK? >> NO, IN THE PRE-DIS, IT'S IN FRONT OF YOU, TAB 5. >> OKAY. >> WHERE DOES IT TELL ME AT WHAT POINT I NEED TO COMPLETE A USE OF FORCE FORM? OR WHEN I NEED TO. >> IT DOES NOT LIST THE POLICY NUMBER IN HERE THAT I CAN SEE. I SEE ON PAGE 67 WHERE IT GOES INTO THE FORCE THAT SHE USED ON MISS BELL, AND SHE STATED SHE DID NOT COMPLETE THE USE OF FORCE FORM BECAUSE SHE WAS NOT SURE IF SHE NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE FORM. SHE ADVISED THAT SHE DID PUT HER HANDS ON MISS BELL IN A FORCEFUL WAY THAT SHE GRABBED MISS BELL FROM BEHIND ON THE UPPER PORTION OF HER BODY WITH HER RIGHT ARM. SHE STATED SHE ASKED HER SUPERVISOR ABOUT THE FORM, BUT SHE DID NOT TELL HER SUPERVISOR THAT SHE HAD GRABBED MISS BELL. THEN IT GOES INTO HER REPORT THAT SHE WROTE, AND THAT SHE STATED SHE CAN SEE HOW THE REPORT AND HER BODY CAMERA DO NOT MATCH UP. SHE ADVISED THAT MISS BELL DID NOT BRACE UP CHART HER, BUT SHE DID REFUSE TO MOVE, AND THAT THE LANGUAGE SHE USED IN THE FOOTAGE DID NOT ALIGN WITH BRPD POLICY. I DON'T SEE A POLICY NUMBER WRITTEN OUT. >> IS THERE ONE? >> IS THERE ONE FOR WHAT? >> WHEN AN OFFICER IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE A USE OF FORCE FORM, EXCUSE ME, YOU ALL CALL IT NOW RESPONSE TO RESISTIVE BEHAVIOR? >> YES. THERE IS. >> WHERE IS IT? BUT IT'S NOT IN HERE, CORRECT? YOU DON'T CITE IT IN YOUR PREVIOUS? >> I DON'T SEE IT CITED ON THAT PAGE. >> WHAT ABOUT ANY PAGE IN THE PREVIOUS? >> I BELIEVE UNDER REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, GENERAL ORDER 115 ON PAGE 68 ON COMPLETION AND SUBMISSION OF REQUIRED FORMS. IT REFERS TO GENERAL ORDER 115 AND IN GENERAL ORDER 115, REFERENCE GENERAL ORDER 276 REPORTING REQUIREMENT. >> BUT NOTHING IN HERE SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT A RESPONSE OR RESISTIVE BEHAVIOR FORM, CORRECT? >> GENERAL ORDER 276, THE ONE THAT IS REFERRING TO. >> POINT TO ME WHERE IT SAYS IN THE PRE-DIS OR IN YOUR NOTICE OF RULING, WHEN IT SAYS OR WHERE IT SAYS, A RESPONSIVE RESISTIVE BEHAVIOR FORM IS REQUIRED WHEN YOU DID THIS. >> I'M NOT SURE THAT IT SAYS THOSE EXACT WORDS. >> I HAVE NOTHING [INAUDIBLE]. ANY READER? [02:10:04] >> CHIEF, YOU'RE THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY, >> YES, SIR. >> DID YOU MAKE YOUR OWN DECISION ABOUT THE RULING IN THIS CASE? >> I 100% DID. YES, SIR. >> AND FOR THE RECORD, JUST SO THE BOARD KNOWS THERE'S A LOT OF TALK ABOUT INTERNAL AFFAIRS. I JUST WANT TO STATE THAT INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION REPORTS STRAIGHT TO ME. >> THERE WAS NO UNDUE INFLUENCE BY ANYONE REGARDING THIS RULING, IS THAT CORRECT? >> OF COURSE NOT. >> YOU SAW THE VIDEO, AND YOU WERE JUST ASKED LOTS OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THINGS THAT CORPORAL ROBSON WATER DID WRITE THAT EVENING. BUT THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT YOU SAW THAT YOU THOUGHT WERE INAPPROPRIATE. IS THAT FAIR? >> OF COURSE. SHE DID A LOT OF THINGS RIGHT. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, SHE DID DO SOME THINGS VERY WRONG, THAT IN MY OPINION, REQUIRED DISCIPLINE. >> IS IT THAT WAY WITH DISCIPLINE, A LOT OF TIMES, LIKE WHEN YOU'RE WATCHING BODY CAM FOOTAGE, THE OFFICERS NOT DOING THINGS WRONG 100% OF THE TIME, BUT IT IS CERTAIN INSTANCES DURING THAT TIME FRAME WHERE THEY MESS UP. >> MESS UP. THEY MIGHT HAVE THE RIGHT INTENTION AND DO A LOT OF THINGS BUT THEN SOME THINGS ARE DONE WRONG. >> WE TALKED ABOUT THE LANGUAGE, AND IN THE LANGUAGE IS CITED IN HERE, BUT WHEN THE GIRL GOT PEPPER-SPRAYED AND SHE WAS SHE BEING CORPORAL ROBINSON WOODARD WAS RUNNING OVER THERE TOWARD HER, AND SHE WAS SAYING, HOW DID YOU PERCEIVE THAT? >> THAT SHE WAS CELEBRATING THE FACT THAT THE GIRL WAS IN PAIN FROM BEING PEPPER-SPRAYED. SHE WAS GLOATING ABOUT IT BEFORE GIVEN ANY COMMANDS OR ANYTHING. SHE WAS JUST CELEBRATING AND SAYING, THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT. >> OBJECT FOR LACK OF FOUNDATION. MAYBE HE CAN TESTIFY TO HIS PERCEPTIONS, BUT THIS WAS COMPLETELY OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF ANYTHING SHE'S EVER BEEN ASKED, BOTH IN INTERNAL AFFAIRS AND ON DIRECT. >> MR ABBY, I BELIEVE IT'S APPROPRIATE TO ASK HIM ABOUT HIS PERCEPTIONS. HOWEVER, I WILL ALLOW YOU TO RECROSS VERY BRIEFLY ON THAT SUBJECT, IF YOU WOULD LIKE. BUT YOU MAY ANSWER THE QUESTION? >> YES. WHAT I SAID, WHEN YOU WATCHED HER FIRST INTERACTING WITH THE FEMALE WITH THE GOLDEN BAIN SUIT BEFORE ANYTHING IS SAID OR COMMANDS, SHE'S LIKE, THAT'S RIGHT. AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT YOU GET. HERE'S HOW IT RELATES TO THE CROSS-EXAMINATION IS THERE WAS QUESTIONS TO YOU ABOUT WAS SHE GIVING DIRECTION? YOU LOOKED AT THE LANGUAGE. IF YOU LOOK AT TAPE 5, YOU WERE READING FROM PAGE 66, BUT GO TO TOP 65. CORRECT. GO AHEAD WITH THE FUCKING THAT'S THE SHIT Y'ALL LIKE. AT ANY POINT IN THAT, THAT'S HER INITIAL INTERACTION WITH THE GIRL IN THE GOLD BIKINI AT THAT POINT. IS ANY OF THAT DIRECTIVE IN NATURE? >> NO. THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF EXCHANGE BEFORE WE GOT TO THOSE FOUR MOVES. A LOT OF BITS, YOU GOT THAT. ALL THAT STUFF. >> AT ANY POINT, WOULD YOU TEACH SOMEONE OF YOUR OFFICERS TO SAY, I'M ABOUT THAT LIFE. DON'T LET THIS SHIT FOOL YOU BITCH. I'M FROM THE STREETS. WHAT DOES THAT INDICATE TO SOMEONE FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE? >> AGAIN, IT'S JUST MORE OF A STOOPING TO HER LEVEL. YOU'RE THROWING INSULTS AT ME, SO I'M GOING TO THROW INSULTS RIGHT BACK AND CHALLENGE YOU TO A FIGHT. >> YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT THE LANGUAGE IN THE PREVIOUS ABOUT THE RESISTANCE FORM, TURN TO PAGE 68, IF YOU WOULD. UNDER THE VIOLATIONS OF DEPARTMENTAL POLICY IS A PARAGRAPH, CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> THIRD LINE, IT'S DISCUSSING, YOUR ACTIONS DESCRIBED ABOVE, SPECIFICALLY, YOUR CONDUCT AND USE OF INAPPROPRIATE LANGUAGE WHILE INTERACTING WITH THE PUBLIC, YOUR USE OF FORCE, AND ATTEMPTING TO DETAIN A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, YOUR FAILURE TO COMPLETE A USE OF FORCE RESPONSE TO RESISTIVE BEHAVIOR FORM. IT WAS ADDRESSED IN THE LETTER, WAS IT NOT? >> IT DOES SAY THAT RIGHT THERE, BLACK AND WHITE, I JUST MISSED IT WHEN MR. AVI WAS ASKING ME AND THEN THE CITATION TO THE ACTUAL POLICY IS THE ONE THAT YOU MENTIONED, WHICH IS 17 RIGHT BELOW THAT, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> NO. TENDER TO THE BOARD, IF THE BOARD HAS QUESTIONS. >> VERY BRIEFLY, MR I, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS? THEN DOES ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> YES. CHIEF. ON GENERAL ORDER 112, LAST PAGE OF THE DOCUMENT, IS THIS A PROGRESSIVE TYPE OF DISCIPLINE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE? THIS IS YOUR POLICY ON PROGRESSIVE DISCIPLINE? I'M LOOKING AT THE CHART PAGE 103. [02:15:02] >> YES, IT IS. IT'S A GUIDELINE. IT SAYS THAT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MODIFY RECOMMENDATION AND DISCIPLINE THE PERSONNEL AS THEY FEEL APPROPRIATE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. BUT THIS IS A GUIDELINE TO COULD GO BACK FOR AND AS FAR AS PROGRESSIVE, YOU CAN SEE THAT IS UNDER A SECOND OFFENSE WITHIN A YEAR, SECOND OFFENSE WITHIN THREE YEARS, THIRD OFFENSE WITHIN FIVE YEARS. THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE DISCIPLINE DOES GET PROGRESSIVELY WORSE. >> THE OFFENSES THAT YOU GUYS LISTED IN HER DISCIPLINARY LETTER, THERE WERE THREE SEPARATE OFFENSES. YOU COULD HAVE ACTUALLY GIVEN HER UP TO NINE DAYS ACCORDING TO THIS CHART. >> NO. BECAUSE ONE OF THEM AS ONLY A CATEGORY 1. THAT WAS ACCORDING TO THE CHART, A CONFERENCE OF LETTER OF CAUTION UP TO A LETTER OF REPRIMAND. THEN THE OTHER TWO THAT I SUSTAINED WERE CATEGORY 2S, WHICH GO UP TO THREE DAYS APIECE. >> NOW, I GUESS APPOINTING AUTHORITY OR AS THE POLICE CHIEF, DO YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO GIVE OR DISCIPLINE EMPLOYEES BEYOND THIS PROGRESSIVE? >> YES, SIR. I DO. THIS IS JUST A GUIDELINE TO KEEP EVERYTHING FAIR, BUT I CAN GO ON BELOW OR ABOVE WHAT'S SET FORWARD. >> PERFECT. THANK YOU, TOO. OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? CHIEF, WHAT DISCIPLINE DID JENKINS AND MILLER FACE? SO OFFICER JENKINS WAS I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY THE VIOLATIONS AGAINST HIM, BUT THEY WERE NOT SUSTAINED, IF I BELIEVE CORRECTLY. AND THEN MILLER GOT A LETTER OF REPRIMAND. IN THOSE CASES, AS I EXPLAINED EARLIER, LOOKING AT THOSE BODY CAM FOOTAGE, I DID NOT BELIEVE IT ESCALATED TO THE TYPE THAT CORPORAL ROBINSON DISPLAYED. THEY WERE MORE OF, YOU NEED TO GET THE FUCK ON, GO, MOVE WHERE CORPORAL ROBINSON? NO. OFFICER MILLER GOT A LETTER REPRIMAND WAS BECAUSE HE WAS SAYING SOME CURSE WORDS, RIGHT, WHICH WAS MOVE, GET ON, AND THEN HE TURNED IT PERSONAL, AND SAID, WHICH ARE STUPID FUCKING ASS OR SMELLY ASS OR WHATEVER, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. LIKE I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN. ANYTIME I'M UP HERE IN FRONT OF YOU, I'M NOT GOING TO BE THE CHIEF FOR LIKE, YOU SAID A CURSE WORD, YOU'RE IN TROUBLE. I THINK THAT WE'D RATHER NOT SEE HIM, RIGHT, BUT I THINK SOMETIMES THAT THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT SOME PEOPLE LISTEN TO. IF THAT'S THE POINT OF YOU USING IT, THEN WE CAN LIVE WITH THAT A LITTLE BIT. EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES AND A LOT OF EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES INVOLVED, BUT WE DON'T NEED TO GET TO WHERE WE'RE INSULTING SOMEBODY. I THINK THERE'S A VERY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, SAYING A CURSE WORD AND CURSING AT SOMEONE. >> CHIEF, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. AND THIS FIRST ONE YOU'VE TOUCHED ON ALREADY, BUT I JUST WANT TO FINER POINT ON IT. WHAT, IF ANY, AGGRAVATING OR MITIGATING FACTORS WENT INTO THIS DECISION BEYOND WHAT WAS ON THE VIDEO? >> A LOT OF THINGS WENT INTO THE DECISION, EVERYTHING THAT WAS GOING ON THE VIDEO, VERY CHAOTIC SCENE, OFFICERS BEING OUTNUMBERED, WHAT THEY HAD TO DEAL WITH. ALL OF THAT TOTALITY. THEN WHEN YOU LOOK MICROSCOPICALLY, A LOT OF THINGS THAT CORPORAL ROBINSON DID VERY WELL, ONCE SHE LEFT AN EXTRA DUTY, RIGHT AND WENT TO ASSIST. SHE COULD TOOK IT UPON HERSELF TO GO HELP OUT A LOT OF THINGS THAT SHE DID CORRECTLY, A LOT OF THE LANGUAGE THAT SHE DID USE WHEN INTERACTING WITH PEOPLE. WHEN WE DID A PRESS RELEASE ABOUT THE INCIDENT, SOME OF THE STUFF THAT SHE DID, WE HIGHLIGHTED. COME ON, DEARS, YOU NEED TO MOVE. COME ON, LOVE, SHOWING SOME COMPASSION. ALL OF THAT WAS WENT INTO MITIGATING THE EXPOUNDING ISSUE OF THE INAPPROPRIATE AND UNCALLED FOR LANGUAGE. >> ANY AGGRAVATING FACTORS. >> AGGRAVATING AS FAR AS WHAT SHE SAID. I THINK THAT SHE CROSSED THE LINE FROM JUST USING CURSE WORDS TO ACTUALLY INSULTING THE PEOPLE AND HYPING THE SITUATION UP INSTEAD OF CALMING IT DOWN, TRY TO SHE WASN'T DE ESCALATING IT. SHE WAS MORE ESCALATING IN CERTAIN TIMES. SOMETIMES SHE WAS DOING A GOOD JOB DEESCALATING, BUT THEN OTHER TIMES SHE WAS LETTING THEM GET THE BEST OF HER AND LOSING HER TEMPER AND GETTING TO THEIR LEVEL. >> WHEN I ASKED FOR AGGRAVATING, THE SAME WAY AS MITIGATING A LOT OF IT MIGHT BE OUTSIDE. AS AN EXAMPLE, DID YOU USE HER 15 YEARS OF SERVICE AS A MITIGATING OR AGGRAVATING FACTOR, MITIGATING OF SHE'S DONE WELL OR AGGRAVATING, SHE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER WHAT I'M GOING. >> I THINK BOTH, SHE 15 YEARS, AND I KNOW WHAT OFFICER SHE IS. I KNOW THAT SHE'S NOT TYPICALLY LIKE THIS. WENT WAS A GOOD THING, BUT BAD THING, YOU HAVE 15 YEARS, YOU'RE A FTO, YOU TRAIN PEOPLE, YOU KNOW BETTER. YOU KNOW YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO ACT THIS WAY. YOU KNOW YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO SET THIS EXAMPLE. >> THANK YOU. MY SECOND QUESTION, AND MR. RAINES, I'LL ASK FOR YOU TO STEP IN IF THIS ISN'T AN APPROPRIATE LEGAL QUESTION. [02:20:03] WHAT, IF ANY, DISTINCTION WAS DRAWN IN THE ACTIONS IN SUSTAINING THE TWO VIOLATIONS, PARTICULARLY THE COMMAND OF TEMPER AND CONDUCT UNBECOMING. LOOKING AT THEM, THERE COULD BE SOME OVERLAP, SO I DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER THERE NEEDS TO BE DISTINCTIONS, AND THAT'S WHY I'M INVITING MR. RINE TO TELL ME IF THERE DOESN'T NEED TO BE OR IF THERE DOES, HOW YOU DREW THAT DISTINCTION. >> TO ME, THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS BECAUSE YOU CAN DO ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER. YOU CAN HAVE CONDUCT WHERE YOU BRING DISGRACE UPON THE DEPARTMENT WITHOUT LOSING YOUR TEMPER IN OTHER WAYS GETTING ARRESTED FOR DWI, FOR EXAMPLE, CONDUCT UNBECOMING. YOU CAN LOSE YOUR TEMPER AND NOT NECESSARILY BE CONDUCT. IF IT'S VERY PRIVATE, THAT IT'S NOT ON BODY WORN CAMERA, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THIS BIG THING THAT'S OUT IN THE MEDIA WHERE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BRING SHAME ON THE DEPARTMENT. I THINK THAT THEY ARE SEPARATE AND DIFFERENT. YOU CAN HAVE ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER LIKE BURGLARY WITHOUT DAMAGE TO PROPERTY. Y OU CAN DO ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER. >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU CHIEF. >> YES, SIR. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? >> I HAVE ONE MORE. WOULD IT BE A UNIQUE SITUATION, A LOT OF ARRESTS MADE? DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY RESPONSE, RESISTIVE BEHAVIOR REPORTS WERE SUBMITTED FOR THIS? I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. >> WERE ANY? >>I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO TELL YOU. THERE WAS A LOT OF REPORTS WRITTEN, A LOT OF ARRESTS MADE. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY RESPONSE RESISTIVE BEHAVIOR FORMS WERE DONE. IT'S NOT SOMETHING I REALLY DOVE INTO. WE WANTED AND YOU DIDN'T REALLY ASK THIS, BUT I'LL OFFER IT JUST IN FULL TRANSPARENCY TO THE BOARD. WE WANTED TO GO BACK AND ACTUALLY MAKE SOME MORE ARRESTS, SOMETHING THAT WE LOOKED INTO DOING. BUT DOING THAT WOULD HAVE MADE US HAVE TO REALLY MAKE ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT ALL JUST SAW HERE PUBLIC AS WELL. IT WAS A BACK AND FORTH, DO WE GO AND LOOK LIKE WE'RE RAILROADING THESE PEOPLE LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO COVER OURSELVES AND PUT THESE INCITING RIOT TYPE FELONY CHARGES WITH THE BEHAVIOR THAT WE DID, ALL THAT WAS CONSIDERED. >> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING QUESTION. >> CHIEF POLICE ACTION SUFFICIENT ON THOSE, IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >> YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU. >> CHIEF, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, NOT A WHOLE LOT THOUGH. I'M GETTING GENERALLY SPEAKING THAT MISS WOODARD DID SOME GOOD THINGS. SHE DID SOME BAD THINGS. I WANT TO ISOLATE SPECIFICALLY FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, WHAT THOSE BAD THINGS WERE AND HOW THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED IN THE MOMENT. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO? >> YES. THE VERY FIRST CLIP THAT ALL SAW, IF YOU'LL GOING TO REMEMBER BACK. VERY GOOD ABOUT, LET'S JUST CLEAR TAKING CONTROL. LET'S CLEAR EVERYBODY OUT FROM. WE GOT TO GET EVERYBODY MOVING AWAY FROM THIS FRONT OF THIS GATE. LET'S MOVE EVERYBODY AND MOVE EVERYBODY AWAY. BAD THING, WAS THE PERSON WAS MOVING AWAY, HAD HER BACK TO HER, SAID SOMETHING SNY, SAID SOMETHING THAT GOT ON HER SKIN, SO SHE ACTUALLY PUSHES HER IN THE BACK AND THEN STARTS CALLING HER ALL NAMES, WHICH I SAW ON IN THE EXHIBITS. TALKING ABOUT I'LL BEAT THE FUCKING BREAKS OFF OF YOU AND THAT STUFF. UNCALLED FOR DIDN'T NEED TO HAPPEN. SECOND CLIP. SHE WAS VERY MUCH IN A BAD SITUATION WITH, TRYING TO GET THAT CROWD TO MOVE, AND, SHE BUT THEN SHE ESCALATED IT BY TELLING THE GIRL, SWING YOU KNOW IT'S JUST YOU AND ANOTHER OFFICER. WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO ESCALATE THIS OR YOU WANT THIS CROWD TO GET INVOLVED? AND SHE WINDS UP TRYING TO GRAB THE GIRL. THE SUSPECT IS NOT ABLE TO KEEP CONTROL UNDERSTANDABLY BECAUSE THERE'S TOO MANY PEOPLE AROUND. OTHER OFFICERS CAME WERE THEN ABLE TO ARREST THAT FEMALE FOR HER. WHICH SHE HAD BACKED AWAY AND OTHER OFFICERS WENT AND ENGAGED THAT OTHER SUSPECT. THIRD INSTANCE, THAT FEMALE WAS MOVING AWAY. STILL TALKING, STILL RUBBING HER MOUTH, AND I'VE ALWAYS BEEN, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOUR MOUTH IS SAYING, AS LONG AS YOUR BODY'S DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT. SHE HAD BACKED FAR AWAY FROM WHERE THE FIGHT WAS. OFFICER BATES AND HER WENT CONTINUED. SHE DID A GOOD JOB OF TELLING OFICER PATS LET'S KNOW, LEAVE IT ALONE BECAUSE OFICER BATES SEEMED LIKE SHE WAS, LIKE I JUST SPRAYED THIS GIRL. LET ME GO DEAL WITH HER, AND NO, I GOT IT. I GOT IT. I WISH THAT SHE WOULD HAVE ALSO. DESCALATED BACK LIKE SHE TOLD OFFICER BATES TO. BUT SHE WAS MORE CELEBRATING THE FACT THAT THE GIRL GOT SPRAYED AND THEN HOLDING HER AT A TASER POINT, JUST BE LITTLE IN HER WHILE STAYING THERE HOLDING HER AT A TASER POINT. SHE COULD HAVE BACKED AWAY TO SEE IF WHAT THE GIRL WOULD HAVE DONE, BUT SHE JUST HELD HER GROUND, NOT REALLY GIVING HER ANY DIRECTION UNTIL TOWARDS THE END, BUT JUST REALLY CURSING HER OUT AND BEAT LITTLE IN HER AND EVEN TO A POINT CHALLENGING HER TO A FIGHT. >> I GUESS IT'S FAIR TO SAY THEN WHAT SHE SHOULD HAVE DONE IS JUST NOT ENGAGE WHEN THE ACTIONS WERE, I GUESS THE ACTIONS OF THE PEOPLE SHE WAS ENGAGING WITH SUGGESTED THAT THEY WERE LEAVING THE AREA, IS THAT FAIR? >> I MEAN, IT'S OKAY TO ENGAGE WITH PEOPLE, BUT IT'S A WAY TO DO IT, IT'S A WAY TO ACT PROFESSIONALLY. [02:25:02] I'VE ALWAYS SAID, YOU CAN PROFESSIONALLY BEAT THE HELL OUT OF SOMEBODY. YOU CAN DO THAT PROFESSIONALLY, BUT YOU CROSS A LINE WHEN YOU START JUST BELITTLING THEM AND CURSING AT THEM, NOT USING CURSE WORDS, BUT CURSING AT THEM AND CONTINUE TO ESCALATE IT INSTEAD OF TRYING TO DE ESCALATE IT. >> THANK YOU, CHIEF. I THOUGHT THAT ACTUALLY MADE A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE. MY THIRD QUESTION IS MAYBE NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THIS. HAS THERE BEEN A CONVERSATION WITH MISS WOODARD THE SAME WAY YOU JUST PUT IT TO US ABOUT THIS IS SPECIFICALLY WHAT SHE DID WRONG. THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD HAVE EXPECTED FROM YOU? >> IN THE DISCIPLINARY HEARING. >> I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. >> ANYTHING ELSE FOR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? CHIEF. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> THAT WAS OUR LAST WITNESS, SO WE REST. >> MIGHT BE A GOOD TIME. >> LET'S TAKE A BRIEF FIVE MINUTE BREAK, AND THEN WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK FOR THE APPELLANT'S CASE IN CHIEF. >> THEN THE BOARD WILL BRING US BACK TO ORDER. MR. IVY, I BELIEVE IT IS YOUR CASE IN CHIEF, THOUGH, I THINK NOW MAY BE A GOOD TIME. I KNOW THAT THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATIONS PRIOR TO TODAY REGARDING DUPLICATIVENESS OF WITNESSES OR THINGS LIKE THAT. DOES ANY OF THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED? NOW THAT TESTIMONY HAS COME OUT, MR. IVY, ARE YOU PLANNING ON STILL CALLING ALL OF YOUR WITNESSES? >> IN FACT, I'VE WHITTLED IT DOWN BOTH AT THE CONFERENCE BETWEEN AMONG-ST THE ATTORNEYS AND THE BOARD ATTORNEY. TODAY, I ONLY INTEND TO CALL MY CLIENT AND CAPTAIN BURGOYNE AND OFFICER MILLER. I DO INTEND TO PLAY THE ENTIRETY OF THE VIDEO FOR THE BOARD. >> I WAS GOING TO ASK WHETHER YOU STILL FELT LIKE THAT WAS NECESSARY, AND AGAIN, FOR THE MOST PART, WE DO WANT TO BE DEFERENTIAL. ARE THERE ANY POINTS IN THE VIDEO THAT YOU WERE PLANNING TO CALL THE VIDEO UP. FOR EXAMPLE, CHIEF HAS ACKNOWLEDGED IT WAS CHAOTIC, ALL OF THESE THINGS. WHAT ARE YOU USING THE VIDEO TO SHOW THAT HAS NOT ALREADY BEEN TESTIFIED TO? THAT IS BEYOND DISPUTE. >> THE IDEA THAT I MEAN, CONTEXT FOR ONE. I CAN PROBABLY TAKE A COUPLE OF POLAROID SHOTS OF EVERY BOARD MEMBER'S DAY OUT OF YOUR DAYS TODAY OR TOMORROW OR ANY DAY FOR THAT MATTER, AND EMBARRASS YOU REALLY BAD WITH IT. THIS NEEDS TO BE PUT IN CONTEXT. YOU NEED TO SEE ALL OF HER ACTIONS THAT DAY. COMMAND OF TEMPERS IS COLLOQUIALLY KNOWN. I DON'T SEE HOW SOMEBODY WHO IS NOT IN CONTROL OF THEIR TEMPER CAN DO THE THINGS THAT SHE WAS DOING. THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRETY OF THE VIDEO. THERE'S A REASON THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE IT. I MEAN, I GOT THE CHIEF TO ADMIT IT ON CROSS, BUT SAYING THE THINGS THAT SHE DID IT. LISTENING TO HER TONE OF VOICE AS OPPOSED TO HER TONE OF VOICE AND WORD CHOICE THAT SHE USED WITH PEOPLE WHO WERE NOT COMPLIANT. I THINK THAT PUTS THIS IN THE CONTEXT. AGAIN, JUST TAKING A POLAROID SNAPSHOT, HOPEFULLY, EVERYBODY ON THE BOARDS IS OLD ENOUGH TO KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS. >> I'M PLENTY OLD ENOUGH. >> TO TAKE A POLAROID OUT OF SOMEBODY'S DAY AND EMBARRASS THEM WITH IT VERSUS WHAT'S GOING ON ALL AROUND YOU AND WHAT LED UP TO THAT AND WHAT HAPPENED IMMEDIATELY AFTER. IT'S A 37 MINUTE VIDEO. >> BUT THAT WAS THE ROOT OF MY QUESTION, AND I ALSO DON'T WANT TO ARGUE ABOUT THIS SO LONG, WE COULD HAVE JUST WATCHED THE VIDEO. I WAS TRYING TO SEE A LOT OF THAT WAS TESTIFIED TO, BY ALL OF THESE WITNESSES IN HER INITIAL TESTIMONY, AS WELL AS WITH THE CHIEF, OTHER PEOPLE GOING THROUGH IT. IT SOUNDED LIKE THAT PICTURE WAS PAINTED. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT IT HASN'T, THEN I UNDERSTAND. I WOULD INVITE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD IF THEY HAVE ANY THOUGHTS OR OPINION REGARDING WHETHER THEY BELIEVE THAT THIS WOULD BE DUPLICATUS, OR WHETHER THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS VIDEO. >> I AGREE WITH MR. IVY. I THINK THE BOARD, IN MY OPINION, SHOULD HAVE THE FULL CONTEXT OF THE VIDEO INSTEAD OF THE BITS AND PIECES. I DO AGREE WITH MR. IVY. >> MR. LEMAN MISBURROW. ANY THOUGHTS? >> I THINK SEEING A FULL VIDEO GIVES US A BETTER PICTURE OF WHAT OCCURRED ON THE WHOLE NIGHT. >> THEN MR. IVY FEEL FREE TO PLAY THE ENTIRE VIDEO. >> I'LL PROBABLY ARGUE, IT'S BEST TO WATCH IT BEFORE I CALL ANY WITNESS. >> IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THAT'S MOST EFFECTIVE, THAT'S FINE. BUT I'LL DEFER TO MR. RAINES ON HOW TO PLAY IT. I CAN'T ALL AREN'T GETTING ME ON MY FIRST DAY AS CHAIR, TRYING TO RUN THE TAP. [02:32:13] I WAS GETTING OUTSIDE, MR. IVY AT YOUR LEISURE. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> I THINK WE'VE ALREADY ADMITTED THIS INTO EVIDENCE, HAVEN'T YOU? I THOUGHT SO. >> WHERE THE FUCK ARE YOU? WHERE ARE YOU? ARE YOU BY THE GATE? WHERE ARE YOU? ARE YOU INSIDE THE GATE? I GOT TO GO. >> MR. IVY. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> MS. ROBINSON, WHAT ARE YOU DESCRIBING AS THAT'S, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW IN THAT VIDEO? YES. >> ON PHONE. [INAUDIBLE]. >> IS YOUR MICROPHONE? >> BUTTON. IN THE BEGINNING OF THE VIDEO, YOU REMEMBER WHEN IT WAS STATED THAT I CALLED DISPATCH TO FIND OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON, AND THEN I RECEIVED A PHONE CALL FROM MY SON. WHEN YOU SEE ME DIALING ON MY PHONE, I WAS CALLING MY SON TO SEE WHERE HE WAS BECAUSE HE TOLD ME HE WAS BY THE GATE. BUT WHEN I CALLED WAS TRYING TO CALL HIM BACK, I WAS LIKE, WHERE ARE YOU? WHERE EXACTLY ARE YOU? BECAUSE WHEN I GOT THE CALL, HE SAID THAT THEY WERE FIGHTING AND THERE WERE SHOOTING. >> I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT I WAS HEARING, BUT I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM. THANK YOU. >> YES, SIR. >> [INAUDIBLE] I. HERE. I'M HERE. I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW. I GOT TO BACK. I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW. [02:35:03] [NOISE] [INAUDIBLE] WAY. I AM. THANK YOU. I WANT TO SPEAK. >> I'M A THE DOOR. LET ME SEE HER FACE. I'M GOING TO FILE. WHERE ARE YOU? WERE YOU STILL GOT PEOPLE FUCKING RUNNING OUT HERE. [INAUDIBLE] RUNNING. THANK YOU, [NOISE] A MINUTE. LET'S GO. LET'S GO. LET'S GO. MOVE OUT THE WAY. LET'S GO. GO. WE NEED TO GET SOMEBODY ON SO WE CAN START SHUT DOWN AND GET THE F. I'M ON BILL NOW. SOMEBODY AT THIS ENTRANCE RIGHT HERE START PULLING THESE CARS SO I CAN GET HIM OUT OF THE TRUCK OFF THIS LINE. GO. GO AND TAKE HOME, GET OUT OF HERE. [NOISE], THAT'S GOOD. GO BACK THIS WAY, MAN. GO BACK THIS. COME ON. GO BACK THIS WAY. HEY. HEY. GO BACK THIS WAY. HEY. OKAY. [INAUDIBLE] I GOT. WHOA. YOU YOU. TAKE WITH YOU. GOOD THIS WAY. GOOD THIS WAY. FUCKING THAT WAY. GET OUT OF HERE. LET'S GO. GO ON THIS WAY. COME, GET OUT OF HERE. LET'S GO. WELL, YOU CAN'T GO BACK. GO FUCKING PLAY ME, I BEAT THE PRESS' THE FUCKING THAT. FUCK TWO. [INAUDIBLE] GO. I DO. HE. EVERYBODY HEY. [02:40:04] LET'S GO. COME ON, AND THEN TRY TO MOVE. ALL RIGHT GO. HEY, GO THAT WAY. I UNDERSTAND. I DID. COME ON, GOT TO GO. GO THAT WAY. I GOTTA GO THIS WAY BRO. SOMEBODY. HEY. HEY, EVERYBODY GOT TO GO. >> OF COURSE. >> I SHOULD LET YOU GO. >> WHO? >> YOU. I WAS DOWN THE STREET. I WAS AT? >> I LOOK MY PHONE. >> I JUST STARTED STREAMING ON THE READINESS AND STARTED CALLING. HE'S STILL FIGHT, MAN. >> COME TO THE FOOT.[BACKGROUND]. >> [BACKGROUND] NO, HEY YOU TRYING TO GO. [INAUDIBLE] [NOISE]. >> COME AT. NOTHING DON'T. >> DON'T DO IT. >> LET HER GO. >> NO. OUT HERE.[BACKGROUND] I'M IN THE STREAK. HEY, WE GO. WHERE IS YOUR PHONE? GET IN. YEAH, I'M ON THE STREAK. YOU CAN GET IN. GOOD. HE DO. THEY TRYING TO JUMP. O. LET ME. LET ME START THE PARKING. DOWN THAT KEEP WALKING UP AND DOWN. YOU ON W? YOU THAT TRACK YOU CAN GO DOWN. I'M. ANYBODY PUT OFF SHOT 520 MOVIES NOT SHOT F. RIGHT ON THE CAN I GET A UN? THEY'RE TRYING TO JUMP HIM TRYING TO PREVENT THAT. COME ON. WAIT GOT S HERE. FURTHER. YOU HAVE TO WAIT. ALL GOT TO GET OUT OF WAIT YOU NEED ME TO GO CARE. S. HE I SHOT ABOUT SAY. ON D AGO GRABBED THE GUN IS A FAKAR WAS LIKE, I'M SORRY. I'M LIKE, SORRY FOR IT. I MEAN, YOU SAW HIM WITH A GUN. WE GOT A. 246S, ANY UNIT THAT'S NEAR FLORIDA AND LOBDELL. STOP ALL TRAFFIC COMING ON LOLL. SHUT THIS DOWN. DO NOT ALLOW ANY TRAFFIC. STOP AND NORTH THEY HAVE UNITS THAT ARE FLORIDA AND LOVIE. ALLOW ANYTHING. STOP NORTH OR LOVIE. [02:45:01] SHUT IT DOWN. MAKE THEM GO EAST TO WEST OF FLORIDA. IT. FOUR ON. CLEAR. NO. HEY, MAN. COME ON. W RIGHT. 15. EVERYBODY TWO. EMBODY ALL RIGHT, MR. ABBY, YOU CAN PROCEED. WAITING ON SOMEBODY POSSIBLE PUSH THEM DOWN TO THE DESK. WHO IS MY THE JUMP DATA DOWN THAT WAY. HEY. HEY, WAITING THIS WAY, CARS ARE COMING DOWN. EVERYBODY'S GOING IN TO THE GAS STATION. A COME DOWN HERE. COME ON, EVERYBODY TO START? COME ON DOWN. I LOVE. I DO ALL THE H. YOU SEE ME PUT MY HANDS ON YOU? KI, I DON'T KNOW. I JUST A YOU TO GO WITH. PRE. H. COME ON. IF YOU WAIT ON TO THE TO COME DOWN HERE. WHAT'S. WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? AIN'T NO PROBLEM. AIN'T THE BIBLE, RIGHT? TALK TO. SWAT. GOOD. LET'S GO. H. COME ON. LET'S GO TO THAT. OH, I'M SORRY. [02:50:01] CAUSE I CAN'T GET SORRY, MAN. ALL HAVE TO APOLOGIZE. I NEED EVERYBODY TO COME THIS WAY. COME ON. COME ON. THIS WAY. HEY, IF YOU'RE WAITING ON A RIDE IT WON'T BE ABLE TO COME DOWN HERE. ALL HAVE TO GO DOWN TO THE GAS STATION. ARE YA PARENTS? YEAH. I PUSHING EVERYBODY OUT THE AR ALRIGHT. OKAY. COME ON, BABY. AND NOBODY'S GONNA EVER GET DOWN THE STREET. WHAT? YEAH. D WITH A FUCKING. THAT'S THAT SHIT TAR. THAT'S THAT SHIT. AS. AS AS BACK UP. DON'T WRITE ABOUT IT. GO. GO. GET THE FUCK. GO. FUCK. LET'S FUCK AND GO. I'M A GOOD BITCH. I PROMISE YOU. LET'S FUCK AND GO. WHAT THAT BITCH. DO IT. YOU ARE REAL. I'M TELLING YOU. I'M TELLING YOU, BITCH. I'M TELLING YOU BITCH. LIKE THAT, C. BIT COME OUT. HI. COME OUT. I WORRY. I WORRY. THIS I WORRY. YOU GOT THE GAG. SAVE ME YOUR LESS. H. YEAH, IS THAT LIKE. I SIT FOR YOU. THIS THE STREETS. PUT THAT D DOWN, IX. GIRL, GET THE FUCK. PUT THAT F F. BEAT THE FUCK AT YOU NOW, THERE IX. YOU'RE BUH. YOU BROWNS. G. YOU'RE RIGHT. YOU'RE RIGHT. AND YOU ARE FUCKING KID. PUT THE BAG DOWN. PUT THE GUY DOWN. MOVE. MOVE. H. THERE YOU STOP HOW IT DOWN. MOVE. I'LL LET ME DO. THIS. YOU GOT TO RUN OF YOUR MOUTH. D. D THAT RUN YOUR MOUTH. NO. I'M READY. AND I'M READY. HIT. YOU HAVE THE B A HOLD. YOU GOT TO GO BACK THAT WAY, BABY. UNLESS ALL DRIVING. YOU'RE RUNNING NOT GONNA HAVE TO GET DOWN THE STET GOT TO GO BACK THAT WA. I CAN NEVER HAVE F. PIERCE STARTED THIS SWEETHEART. CALL THE GAS STATION. I I YA DRIVING? ARE YOU DRIVING? THERE WHAT YOU? HEY. ARE Y'ALL WAITING ALL RIGHT? YA GOT AHEAD OF THE GAS STATION. ARE YOU WAITING ALL RIGHT? YOU GOT TO WALK TO THE GAS STATION. HOW YOU COME GET YOU FROM THE GAS STATION. ARE Y'ALL WAITING ALL RIGHT? YA GOT TO WALK TO THE GAS STATION. HEY. IF Y'ALL WAIT NOT YA GOT TO GO TO THE GAS STATION. NOBODY CAN STAND, COME ON, Y'ALL GOT A BRA. YOU HAVE YOUR. YOU GOT A WARE NOT TO COME DOWN THE GA. A. HEY. HEY, HEY GOOD. YOU CAN, BABY. GOT ME CHECK THE GAS STATION. IT'S ALL BLOCKED OFF. HEY, I Y'ALL WAITING ON RIGHTS, I YOU TO WALK TO THE GATE TO COME AND GET Y FROM THE GAS STATION. COME ON. COME ON. I Y'ALL WAITING ON RIGHTS TO AT YOU FROM THE GAS STATION AT FD LA EXCUSE ME. EXCUSE ME. I Y'ALL WAITING ON RIGHTS, YOU HAVE TO GO DOWN TO THE GAS STATION. THEY CAN'T COME DOWN THE STREET. IS Y'ALL WAITING ON THE RIGHTS, THEY CAN'T COME TO THE DOWN HERE, DO YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE GAS STATION? HEY, YA WAITING ON? [02:55:12] Y'ALL WAITING RIGHT? S. OKAY. THAT'S HER DAUGHTER, FREAKING OUT SO SHE ANSWER? AND HE FRIEND THE FRIEND OR WHATEVER. ARRIVE? WE LOOK A CALLS. NO RIDE COMING FROM. YEAH. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TELLING A A GOT TO THE GA RIGHT ON THEN. CALL THIS PHONE. YOU WANT TO GO DOWN, BABY. UNFORTUNATELY I CAN'T HELP TO SIGN NOBODY. I BELIEVE THAT TODAY. I A QUESTION. COM DOWN. AT THIS POINT IN TIME. WE HAVE TO CLEAR THIS OUT. WE CANNOT HELP YOU WITH THAT. >> EXCUSE ME. [NOISE] YOU GOT THEM. OKAY. [INAUDIBLE] YOU GOT A LOT OF KIDS DOWN NOW, MAN. >> THANK YOU. >> HURT MY HAND. HURT[BACKGROUND] I THANK MY FINGERS. WHAT SHE SAID. SHE SAID SAID SEE CAN TELL YOU. SOMEBODY BEATING ON A CAR A BREAK A CAR DO HEY, WHO IS DRIVING 18 32? YOU NEED TO GET TO YOUR UNIT A STAFF. RIGHT NOW. OKAY. THAT'S FINE. IN THE BACK CAR. IT. 20. IS THAT THAT GIRL? I SELF AND I LOST MY VOICE. I FEEL LIKE I BROKE FIGHTING WITH THE GIRL. THESE ARE. BRO. WE GOT THE BE THEY WERE LIKE 63 CORD IT. THEN I HEARD AS AND I WAS LIKE. SCREAMING I DON'T HAVE PHONE. WHAT'S THAT? OKAY. I'M ON. M BROOM SO PROUD OF. I'M JUST SAYING THIS. YOU WORK. OKAY, GOOD. WHAT'S YOUR NUMBER? WHAT'S 97. THEY GO TO HAVE NUMBER? S OUT OF THE. OKAY. YOU. I TELL YOU. WE TELL HIM IN. TELL TO COME TO THE YOU CAN'T COME DOWN. [NOISE] HE DAD? HELLO. HELLO. HE'S RUNNING TO WASH YOUR BABY. ALRIGHT. HE'S RUNNING. HE'S RUNNING. [03:00:01] YEAH, HE'S COMING ALL THE WAY DOWN. HE'S RUNNING. ALL RIGHT. WATCH TEN FACE. O. NO. I KNOW. I SHOULD W [INAUDIBLE] SO I JUST TO CHECK ON MY CAGE STREET BECAUSE THEN HE WAS COMING AND OUT AND JUST BACK, I CAN'T GO TO THAT'S WHY I SAID PUSH THING OUT. THIS IS. I NEVER AGAIN. YOU NORMALLY TELL SAY NO. I KNOW. [NOISE] >> THE BOARD'S PREROGATIVE, MY INTENT WAS TO OFFER THE ENTIRE VIDEO. I MAKE SURE YOU SAW IT, BUT IF MR. RAINES JOIN IN WITH ME, I DO NOT BELIEVE HER BODY CAM COMES BACK OFF OF MUTE AT THIS POINT. SO IF THE BOARD DOESN'T FEEL THERE'S. >> ANY OBJECTION TO CUTTING IT? NO. ANY OBJECTION FOR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. DAVE I BELIEVE YOU CAN STOP THE VIDEO. >> THERE'S A BUTTON ON THE BODY CAMERA. SHE MANUALLY MUTED IT. >> THOUGH IF YOU'RE EVER WATCHING IT, THE FIRST IS IT 30 SECONDS, CHIEF HAS NO AUDIO? YEAH. BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS RECORDING ON A LOOP. BUT THE FIRST 32ND, BUT THAT SHE KILLED THAT. >> OUR NEWER CAMERAS, YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY HOLD THE BUTTON DOWN TO KEEP IT MUTED. YOU CAN HIT A BUTTON MUTE AND THEN YOU COULD FORGET THE MUTED LATER. BUT NOW, THE NEWER CAMERAS, YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY HOLD THE BUTTON THE WHOLE TIME YOU WANT TO MUTED. >> BECAUSE WE'VE HAD THESE. WE'VE HAD THESE FOR A WHILE. I WAS ACTUALLY ON THE LOCAL COMMITTEE PICKING THE CAMERAS AND THE POLICY AND ALL OF THAT. THAT WAS WHAT FEELS LIKE A VERY LONG TIME AGO. SO I ASSUME THAT IT'S ABOUT TIME TO GET NEW CAMERAS. I WOULD IMAGINE. MR. IVY. >> MR. IVY. SERGEANT HILL WENT TO GO GET THE NEXT OFFICER. >> WHO IS THAT GOING TO BE? >> MISS MILLER. >> MISS MILLER. THANK YOU. [NOISE] >> I'M NOT A PIECE. >> DON'T GET TOO. >> OFFICER AS A REMINDER, YOU'VE BEEN PRE-SWORN? >> YES. >> SIR, COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND OCCUPATION? >> YES. OFFICER JASON MILLER WITH A POLICE OFFICER WITH THE BADER CITY POLICE. >> HOW LONG YOU'VE BEEN EMPLOYED BY THE BADER POLICE DEPARTMENT? >> FIVE YEARS. >> YOU ATTENDED THE BATTERIES POLICE DEPARTMENT'S BASIC TRAINING ACADEMY? >> YES. >> DO YOU HAVE ANY PRIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT EXPERIENCE? >> NO, SIR. >> BACK ON MAY 26 OF 2024, WHAT WAS YOUR WORK ASSIGNMENT? DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT DISTRICT YOU WERE ASSIGNED TO? >> FOURTH DISTRICT EVENING. I'M CURRENTLY STILL ASSIGNED THERE. >> DO YOU REMEMBER MAY 26 OF 2024? >> YES. >> WHAT'S SO SPECIAL ABOUT THAT DAY? >> THAT WAS THE DAY OF THE LIBERTY LAGOON EVENT. >> OKAY. CAN YOU TELL US BRIEFLY ABOUT WHAT WAS YOUR CONNECTION TO LIBERTY LAGOON? >> ON THAT PARTICULAR DAY, WE WERE ASSIGNED TO WORK IN AN AFTER SCHOOL EVENT THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER BY THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. WE WERE GIVEN DETAIL ON SECURITY BASIS WHERE WE NEEDED TO BE THROUGHOUT THE PARK. >> DO YOU RECALL ABOUT HOW MANY OF YOU ALL WERE ASSIGNED? >> I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER AT THIS TIME, BUT I COULD SAY ROUGHLY MAYBE CLOSE TO TEN MAYBE IF NOT TEN I THINK IT WAS MAYBE CLOSE TO TEN ROUND THAT NUMBER. >> WERE THERE ALSO PRIVATE SECURITY GUARDS THAT WERE HIRED? >> YES. >> DO YOU RECALL ABOUT HOW MANY OF THERE WERE? >> I CAN'T RECALL HOW MANY OF THEM. I COULD SAY MAYBE I CAN'T REMEMBER THE DEFINITE NUMBER, BUT MAYBE THREE TO FOUR. BUT IT WASN'T REALLY THAT MANY OF THEM. >> ALL RIGHT. AND WHAT WHAT WAS YOUR AS WHAT WAS YOUR ASSIGNMENT? WHAT WERE YOU HIRED TO DO YOU AND THE OTHER TEN? 11 OR NINE. HOW MANY OF? [03:05:02] >> BASICALLY, WE WERE ASSIGNED TO BASICALLY PATROL, I MY ASSIGNMENT WAS BASICALLY TO PATROL IN THE PARKING LOT TO ENSURE THAT NOTHING HAPPENS AT THE PARKING LOT. >> OKAY. CAN YOU TELL US ONCE YOU GOT THERE? >> ONCE WE ARRIVED TO THE PARK, WE NOTICED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ENTRANCE THAT IT WAS A LARGE AMOUNT OF KEYS THAT WERE THERE. HEY HAD ALREADY PRETTY MUCH BE POLICE THERE PRIOR TO OUR TIME OF ARRIVAL AND I BELIEVE THEY GOT THERE MAYBE AN HOUR BEFORE THE EVENT WAS SUPPOSED TO START. >> WERE YOU EVER TOLD WHAT THE CAPACITY OF EVENT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE? >> I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE CAPACITY WAS, BUT I KNOW THAT THE PARK HAS A CAPACITY, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT SPECIFIC NUMBER WAS. >> DID IT EVER DID YOU EVER GET THE IMPRESSION THAT THE EVENT EXCEEDED THE EXPECTED CAPACITY? >> YES, I DID. ONCE ONCE WE WERE THERE WE WERE BASICALLY SEEING THAT HOW MANY KIDS WERE BEING DROPPED OFF WITHOUT ADULTS WITH THEM. WE HAD ALREADY HAD A LOT OF KIDS THERE THAT WERE THAT WERE PRETTY NOT ATTENDED BY AN ADULT. IT WAS ALREADY A LARGER AMOUNT THERE, SO THAT IS WHAT CALLED FOR MORE POLICE, MORE OFFICERS TO HAVE TO COME ON BE ASSIGNED TO THAT DETAIL. >> SO EVEN BEFORE BAD THINGS STARTED HAPPENING, THE DEPARTMENT SENT MORE PEOPLE? >> YEAH, WE HAD TO WE HAD TO CALL FOR A FEW MORE OFFICERS TO COME TO THE DETAIL BECAUSE AT THAT TIME, THE NUMBER THAT WE WERE PRESENTED WITH ONCE WE ARRIVED THERE, IT WAS MORE THAN WHAT WE EXPECTED. >> DID THE CROWD GROW OVERNIGHT AS TIME WENT ON? >> YES. THE CROWD DID GROW. WE HAD MULTIPLE PARENTS PULLING UP, DROPPING OFF MULTIPLE KIDS AT A TIME. >> WERE ANY DID YOU SEE ANY PEOPLE JUMPING THE FENCE TO GET IN? >> WE DID HAVE WE DID HAVE KIDS AT THAT TIME ATTEMPTING TO JUMP THE FENCE. >> AT SOME POINT, DID THE MAYOR SHOW UP? >> YES. THE MAYOR THE MAYOR WAS PRESENT. >> OKAY, AND BEFORE THE AND I'LL LET YOU DESCRIBE IT LATER ON, BUT BEFORE THE FIGHTING STARTED, HAD THE MAYOR LEFT? YEAH. >> YEAH. THE MAYOR SHE ALREADY HAD LEFT. >> SO TELL US WHAT HAPPENED. >> SO AT THIS TIME, ONCE KIDS WERE LIKE I SAID, WE STILL BEING DROPPED OFF AT THAT TIME. WE WERE PRETTY MUCH OUT NUMBER. WE WERE TRYING TO GET PEOPLE TO HAVE THEM TAKE THEIR KIDS BECAUSE AT THAT TIME, IT WAS FULL TO CAPACITY. THEY HAD TOLD US TO STOP ALLOWING KIDS INTO THE PARK, SO WE HAD TO TURN A LOT OF KIDS AROUND, AND AT THAT TIME, EVEN WITH KIDS WITH LEGITIMATE ADMISSION WERE THERE. THEY HAD KIDS MAKING SCREENSHOTS OF ADMISSION PASSES, WHICH MADE THE NUMBER GROW INTO A NUMBER THAT THEY WERE NOT EXPECTING. DURING THIS TIME, MOST OF THE OFFICERS THAT WERE OUTSIDE OF THE PARK, WHICH INCLUDED MYSELF, THERE WAS A PHYSICAL ALTERCATION THAT TOOK PLACE INSIDE OF THE PARK. DURING THAT TIME, THAT IS WHEN OFFICERS A FEW OFFICERS WENT INSIDE TO AT ATTEMPT TO HELP THE SECURITY WITH THAT ALTERCATION. THEN ONCE ANOTHER FIGHT BROKE OUT RIGHT AFTER THAT ONE, THEN AT THAT TIME, THAT'S WHEN THEY GAVE THE COMMAND TO GO AHEAD AND LET'S SHUT THE EVENT DOWN. >> HOW DID THE CROWD REACT WHEN YOU ATTEMPTED TO WHEN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ATTEMPTED TO SHUT THE EVENT DOWN? >> AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, I MEAN, IT BECAME VERY CHAOTIC. I MEAN, KIDS WERE GETTING VERY RISKY TOWARDS US. EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE ALREADY HAVING ENEMIES INSIDE OF THE PARK WERE FIGHTING ON ONE ANOTHER. >> HOLD ON THERE. YOU SAID SOME ABOUT ENEMIES. ARE YOU SAYING THE CROWD MEMBERS OF THE CROWD WERE FIGHTING OTHER MEMBERS OF THE CROWD? >> I'M GOING TO OBJECT TO THEIR RELEVANCE. WE WATCHED THE VIDEO OF IT. I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR WE'RE GOING TO GO DESCRIBING WHAT WE'VE ALREADY SEEN. WE TALK RELATED TO THE INCIDENTS INVOLVING THE CORPORAL, FOR WHICH SHE WAS DISCIPLINED. >> RESPONSE. >> I MEAN, HE'S TALKING ABOUT EVENTS THOUGH OR HE'S TESTIFYING TO EVENTS LEADING UP TO HER GETTING ON SCENE BEFORE THE BODY CAM STARTED. I MEAN, THIS WAS MY POINT BEING IS, THIS WAS A SITUATION NOT CREATED BY THIS PARTICULAR EMPLOYEE HERE. THERE, I GUESS I WOULD SAY HE RESPONSE WAS PERFECT. BUT IN THEIR DEFINITION, I THINK THEY'RE WANTING A PERFECT RESPONSE TO A SITUATION SHE HAD NO HAND IN SETTING UP OR CONTROLLING. >> I THINK MR. RAINES OBJECTION IS ONE, IF IT WAS OUTSIDE OF HER EARSHOT, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO HAVE AN IMPACT, BUT LARGER, IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT'S A POINT IN DISPUTE TODAY THAT THINGS WERE CHAOTIC. YOU HAD THIS ALL CALL COMING IN. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S A POINT OF DISPUTE. IF YOU THINK THAT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT OFFICER MILLER CAN PROVIDE THAT GOES BEYOND THAT, [03:10:01] I THINK THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. BUT IF IT'S SIMPLY LAYING OUT THE SCENE THAT WE ALL CONCEDE WAS CHAOTIC AND INTENSE AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS. BUT AT THAT POINT, I AGREE. I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WOULD BE RELEVANT, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A LITTLE DUPLICATUS. BUT. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN GO PAST, FEEL FREE, IF NOT, THEN I WOULD BE INCLINED TO SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION. >> AT SOME POINT, WAS THERE A REPORT OF A GUN ON THE SCENE? >> YES. >> OVERRULED FOR NOW. YOU MAY ANSWER? >> YES. THERE WAS AN OFFICER THAT ON THE RADIO BASIS THAT THEY HAD THE INDIVIDUAL AT GUNPOINT BECAUSE THEY WERE IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM. >> OKAY, AND THESE EVENTS YOU'RE DESCRIBING IN LIBERTY LAGOON, IS THAT WHAT LED TO OFFICERS ON SCENE CALLING FOR EVEN GREATER ASSISTANCE? >> YES. THAT IS CORRECT. >> IS THAT SIGNAL 63 IN YOUR GO? >> YES. THAT'S CORRECT. >> OKAY. >> DID YOU OBSERVE CROWD MEMBERS TURN ON OFFICERS OF THE [INAUDIBLE] POLICE DEPARTMENT? >> I'M SORRY. YOU REPEAT IT FOR ME. >> CROWD MEMBERS. DID THEY GET AGGRESSIVE TOWARDS MEMBERS OF THE [INAUDIBLE] POLICE DEPARTMENT? >> YES, THAT IS CORRECT. THERE WERE MANY INDIVIDUALS THAT GOT THE WAY WITH US AS WE WERE TRYING TO DISPERSE THE CROWD. >> COULD YOU TELL US WHAT THE CROWD RESPONSE WOULD BE TO INSTANCES OF WHERE YOU ALL WOULD TRY TO EFFECT AN ARREST OR TAKE SOMEONE IN CUSTODY. HOW WOULD THE CROWD RESPOND TO THAT? >> BASICALLY YOU HAD AN AGGRESSIVE CROWD. IF THERE MOST OF THE CROWD THAT WE HAD, MOST WERE IN GROUPS. IF YOU HAD SOMEONE THAT WAS AGGRESSIVE OUT OF THE GROUP AND TAKE CHARGE TO TAKE THE PERSON INTO CUSTODY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE REACTION WITH THEM, YELLING, TRYING TO GET WITHIN A CLOSE SIX FEW DISTANCE OF US. I SAID, IT WAS INTO THEIR LIKING AND THAT WE TOOK THE INDIVIDUALS THAT NEEDED TO BE TAKEN INTO CUSTODY. >> YOU EVER RESPONDED OR DEALT WITH A SCENE LIKE THIS BEFORE? >> NOT IN MY FIVE YEARS OF BEING HERE. NO, I'VE NEVER DEALT WITH ANYTHING LIKE THIS. >> DO YOU RECALL HAVING A MEETING WITH THE CHIEF AND OTHER OFFICERS THAT WERE AT LIBERTY LAGOON SHORTLY AFTER MAY 26TH 2024? >> DID I HAVE A MEETING? >> YES. >> NO. I DIDN'T I DIDN'T HAVE A MEETING. >> I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER. THANK YOU. >> MR. RINES. >> OFFICER MILLER, YOU DID NOT REVIEW THE VIDEO BODY CAM FOOTAGE RELATED TO CORPORAL ROBSON WATER, CORRECT? >> NO, SIR. >> YOU CAN PROVIDE NO TESTIMONY REGARDING HER CONDUCT ON THAT EVENING, CORRECT? >> IT IS CORRECT. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY REDIRECT? >> NO. >> YOU MAY STEP DOWN, OFFICER. WOULD YOU LIKE HIM RELEASED OR HELD. >> YES, YOU CAN LEAVE. THANKS. >> IS HE GO TO BE RELEASED OR DOES HE NEED TO BE HELD? >> FINE WITH ME. >> YOU'RE RELEASED FROM YOUR SUBPOENA AND YOUR ORDER OF SEQUESTRATION, BUT YOU'RE WELCOME TO STAY IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT YOU'RE FREE TO GO. >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD. THANK YOU. >> MR. [INAUDIBLE]. >> CAPTAIN TODD BURGOYNE. >> CAPTAIN AS I REMIND YOU YOU'VE BEEN PRE-SWORN. >> YES,. >> MR. IVY, YOU MAY PROCEED. >> CAPTAIN BURGOYNE. ODD FOR ME TO CALL HIM THAT, BUT I'VE KNOWN HIM FOR A WHILE. CAPTAIN BURGOYNE. DID YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND OCCUPATION FOR THE RECORD? >> CAPTAIN TODD BURGOYNE BATON POLICE DEPARTMENT OF TRAFFIC COMMANDER. >> WHAT WAS YOUR ASSIGNMENT BACK ON MAY 26TH, 2024? WERE YOU A TRAFFIC COMMANDER? >> YES, SIR. >> HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A BATTERY POLICE OFFICER? >> A LITTLE OVER 32 YEARS. >> HOW DID YOU END UP COMING TO RESPOND TO LIBERTY LAGOON? >> WE WE WORK IN OUR GVR PROGRAM, THE GUN VIOLENCE REDUCTION PROGRAM THAT WE WORKED. WE GOT A CALL FROM BRANDON JOHNSON WHO WAS IN THE OFFICE WHO MONITORS ALL THE DISPATCH CHANNELS. [03:15:02] HE ALERTED US THAT THEY WERE CALLING FOR SOME HELP OVER AT THE LIBERTY LAGOON, A BIG DISTURBANCE OVER THERE. >> YOU RESPONDED TO THAT CALL? >> YES, SIR. >> TELL US WHAT YOU SAW WHEN YOU GOT ON SCENE? >> IT WAS A BIG CROWD, A HUGE CROWD. WE LATER LEARNED THAT I BELIEVE THAT THERE WERE ONLY CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TICKETS SOLD TO KEEP THE EVENT SMALL OR MANAGEABLE. HOWEVER, PEOPLE WERE JUMPING THE FENCES AND JUST JUST OVERRIDING THE PLACE. THE DECISION WAS MADE BY THE ADMINISTRATION AT BRECK OR THE EXTRA DUTY OFFICERS OR WHOEVER TO JUST SHUT THE EVENT DOWN AND CLEAR EVERYONE OUT. BUT THEY WERE COMING IN FROM ALL DIRECTIONS, JUMPING THE FENCES, AND FILLING THE PLACE UP AS WE WERE TRYING TO EMPTY SOME OF THEM OUT. >> AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, WERE YOU THE SENIOR OFFICER ON SCENE? >> YES, SIR. >> WHAT ENDED UP BECOMING THE PLAN TO GET THAT SITUATION RESOLVED? >> JUST TO GET EVERYBODY OUT. IT WAS IT WAS TERRIBLY PACKED. THERE WAS FIGHTS EVERYWHERE, PROBABLY AT LEAST TEN FIGHTS GOING ON AT ANY GIVEN TIME, SCREAMING AND HOLLERING. IT WAS REALLY DIFFICULT FOR US TO COMMUNICATE AMONG EACH OTHER, BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T HARDLY HEAR THE RADIO AND THIS TYPE OF STUFF. >> WERE OFFICERS OUTNUMBERED BY THE CROWD? >> BY LEAVES AND BALANCES, YES. >> TALTON, WOULD YOU SAY YOU'VE RESPONDED TO A SITUATION SUCH AS LIBERTY OF THE LAGOON? >> I'VE BEEN ON SEVERAL CHAOTIC SCENES, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE BEEN ON ONE THAT LASTED THAT LONG. IT WAS WELL INTO AN HOUR, HOUR AND A HALF, WHERE IT WAS JUST TOTALLY UNRULY CROWD FOR THAT AMOUNT OF TIME. >> WHAT IS COMMAND LANGUAGE? >> AS I WAS TAUGHT IN THE ACADEMY, SOMETIMES WHEN BEING POLITE AND BEING RESPECTFUL DOESN'T QUITE WORK. SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO STEP UP TO THE LEVEL OF THE PERSON WHO YOU'RE DEALING WITH, THE WAY THEY'RE DEALING WITH YOU IN ORDER TO GET THEM TO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE SERIOUS AND THINGS. SO SOMETIMES YOU MAY USE LANGUAGE THAT YOU OTHERWISE WOULDN'T WOULDN'T BE ACCEPTABLE. >> IS THE INTENTION TO GET THEM TO DE- ESCALATE? >> YES. WE COULD HAVE ARRESTED EVERYBODY THERE, BUT WE JUST WAS NOT PRACTICAL. NOT EVERYBODY THERE, BUT A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THERE, BUT THAT WASN'T PRACTICAL. THE WHOLE IDEA WAS JUST TO GET THE M TO THE ROADWAY SO THAT THEIR RIDES CAN PICK THEM UP. MOST OF THEM WERE JUVENILES, AND HADN'T DRIVEN THERE, SO THEY WERE DROPPED OFF BY THEIR PARENTS. SO WE HAD A CHAOTIC SCENE AND WERE VERY DANGEROUS, BUT WE COULDN'T SEND EVERYONE TO THEIR VEHICLE TO LEAVE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF THEM HAD RIDES THAT HAD TO COME PICK THEM UP. >> AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, WAS THAT INCIDENT CLEARED WITHOUT ANYONE BEING INJURED? >> NO INJURIES, I KNOW OF. NO. >> THANK YOU. I TENDER. MR. RINS. >> CAPTAIN, YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT COMMAND LANGUAGE? >> YES. >> THERE ARE TIMES WHEN YOU MAY USE COMMAND LANGUAGE, TYPICALLY TO GIVE SOMEBODY A DIRECTIVE TO DO SOMETHING, RIGHT? >> YES. >> DO YOU USE THAT SAME COMMAND LANGUAGE TO INSULT SOMEONE? >> NO, SIR. >> LET'S LOOK AT PAGE 63. IT'S AT FIVE FOR ME. >> GO. >> I'M GOING TO INSTEAD OF SHOWING THE VIDEO AGAIN, THERE'S SOME BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE, BUT I'M GOING TO READ A SECTION OF YOU AND JUST ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS. YOU SEE AT THE 541 MARK, A FEMALE WALKS TOWARDS YOU AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE WATER PARK. YOU STATE YOU CAN'T GO BACK. THE FEMALES RESPONSE IS NOT AUDIBLE, BUT SHE TURNS AND WALKS AWAY. YOU YELL. GIRL, DON'T FUCKING PLAY WITH ME OUT HERE. I'LL BEAT THE BREAKS OFF YOUR MOTHER FUCKING ASS, THE FUCKING WRONG WITH YOU. SHE WALKS WALKS OFF AND YOU GO TO DIRECTING THE CROWD AS IF NOTHING HAPPENED. DO YOU THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR YOUR PEOPLE UNDER YOUR COMMAND TO THREATEN SOMEONE TO BEAT THEIR FUCKING ASS? >> GENERALLY SPEAKING, I WOULD SAY NO, BUT I DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE CONTEXT OF WHAT WENT ON. I'M READING SOMETHING HERE AND NOT WITNESSING WHAT HAPPENED THERE, SO WE COULD ARGUE THAT ALL DAY. >> WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DE-ESCALATION VERSUS ESCALATION, YOU BROUGHT THAT UP A MINUTE AGO? >> YES, SIR. >> IF YOU TELL A CITIZEN TO SWING AT YOU, IS THAT A METHOD OF DE- ESCALATING A SITUATION? >> NO, SIR. >> IF YOU TELL SOMEBODY GET THE FUCK BEFORE I BEAT THE FUCK OUT YOU. [03:20:07] DO YOU THINK THAT IS A DE-ESCALATION METHOD? >> I BELIEVE THAT'S ARGUABLE, TOO. IF MY INTENTION IS TO GET THEM AWAY FROM ME BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT TO THEM. I'M HOPING THAT THEY HEED THAT AND GO. >> WHAT ABOUT BITCH, I'M ABOUT THAT LIFE. DON'T LET THIS SHIT FOOL YOU, BITCH. I'M FROM THE STREETS. >> I'M OUT ON THAT ONE. >> WHEN YOU SAY YOU'RE OUT ON THAT ONE, YOU DON'T THINK THAT THAT AS DE- ESCALATING ANYTHING, DO YOU? >> MAYBE NOT. >> IF SOMEBODY'S JUST GOTTEN PEPPER SPRAYED AND YOU SAY, GO AHEAD, GO AHEAD. YES, WITH THE FUCKING YES, THAT'S THE SHIT Y'ALL LIKE? THAT'S THE SHIT Y'ALL LIKE. IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THAT THAT IS A COMMAND OR A DIRECTIVE? >> I HAVE TO ANSWER YES OR NO, I'LL HAVE TO SAY NO, BUT GIVEN ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHAT WAS GOING ON OVER THERE, I DON'T KNOW. >> BUT HEARING THE LANGUAGE, YOU SAID THAT IS NOT A METHOD. >> GENERALLY SPEAKING YOU'RE RIGHT. >> THIS WASN'T CASUAL CONVERSATION GOING ON OVER HERE, THOUGH. GENERALLY SPEAKING, YOU'RE RIGHT. >> THAT IS ALL THE QUESTION I HAVE. >> ANY REDIRECT? >> NO, SIR. >> YOU MAY STEP DOWN. ANY NEED TO KEEP HIM ON HIS SUBPOENA OR SEQUESTRATION? >> NO, SIR. >> THE YOU'RE RELEASED, YOU'RE WELCOME TO STAY, BUT YOU'RE FREE TO GO. >> CALL OUR LAST WITNESS. CORPORAL ROBINSON. >> CORPORAL, YOU'VE BEEN HERE THE WHOLE TIME, BUT YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH? >> WHAT'S YOUR NAME AND RANK? >> I AM CORPORAL JANELLE ROBINSON WITH SECOND DISTRICT. >> BATTERS POLICE DEPARTMENT. >> BATTERS POLICE DEPARTMENT. >> HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED? >> NOW, 16 YEARS. >> YOUR WORK ASSIGNMENT BACK ON MAY 26, 2024, WAS THAT YOU STILL ASSIGNED A SECOND? >> YES. >> IF I CAN TAKE YOU BACK TO MAY 26 OF 2024. PRIOR TO YOUR RESPONSE TO LIBERTY LAGOON, WHAT WERE YOU DOING? >> I WAS AT ACTUAL DUTY AT ROSS SUPERMARKET FLORIDA BOULEVARD. >> WHAT WAS YOUR ROLE THERE? >> I WAS PROVIDING SECURITY FOR THE STORE. >> WHAT CAUSED YOU TO RESPOND TO LIBERTY LAGOON PARK? >> I SAW UNITS DRIVING EASTBOUND ON FLORIDA RUNNING CODE, WHICH IS FOR LIGHTS AND SIRENS AND ALSO MY SON HAD CALLED ME TO HIM THAT HE WAS THERE AND COULDN'T GET OUT. >> WHAT DID YOU DO? >> I CALLED HEADQUARTERS TO SEE AND THAT'S WHEN HEADQUARTERS DID SAY THAT THEY PUT OUT A 63 AND THAT THEY NEEDED UNITS TO RESPOND. I TOLD THE MANAGER AT ROSS'S THAT I NEED TO GO TO HELP THE OFFICERS AND I RESPONDED TO LIBERTY LAGOON. >> NO, YOU WATCHED THE VIDEO WITH US FOR THE FIRST FEW MINUTES OF VIDEO. WHAT WAS YOUR PRIORITY THERE? >> TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST. I AM A POLICE OFFICER, BUT I'M MOTHER FIRST. MY PRIORITY WAS TO MAKE SURE MY SON WAS SAFE AND GET OUT OF THERE. >> AT SOME POINT, DID YOU BECOME SATISFIED YOUR SON WAS SAFE? >> YES. I DID. >> WALK US THEN THROUGH WHAT YOU SAW HEARD. >> WHEN I ARRIVED? >> YES. >> OF COURSE WHEN I ARRIVED, I COULDN'T GET TO THE PARK BECAUSE THEY HAD UNITS ALL OVER THE STREET ON LOBDELL. I RAN UP. KIDS WERE EVERYWHERE. THEY WERE WHOOPING AND HOLING, SCREAMING, YELLING, FIGHTS WERE BREAKING OUT. WHAT I THINK THEY WERE THINKING SHOTS WERE FIRED WAS KIDS WERE TAKING THE LITTLE THINGS AND KEPT SLAMMING IT ON THE GROUND, MAKING THAT LOUD NOISE, OR WHATEVER. THAT'S WHERE MAYBE THE SHOTS WERE FIRED. OF COURSE AS I STATED WHEN I ARRIVED, I WENT THERE LOOKING FOR THE PRIORITY TO MAKE SURE MY SON WAS SAFE BACK TO THE CAR. [03:25:02] THEN AS YOU SAW, IT JUST WAS CHAOTIC. >> DID YOU SEE OFFICERS ATTEMPT TO TAKE PEOPLE INTO CUSTODY? >> YES. >> WHAT WAS THE CROWD REACTION THAT YOU SAW WHEN THAT WOULD HAPPEN? >> WHEN SOME KIDS WERE TAKEN INTO CUSTODY, AS YOU SAID, THEY WERE IN LARGE CROWDS. YOU HAD SOME OF THEIR FRIENDS TRYING TO STOP THE POLICE OR NO, WE GO WE GOT IT. WE'LL TAKE THAT PERSON AWAY. IT JUST CHAOS. IT WAS POLICE EVERYWHERE, TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE SCENE. >> WHEN YOU ATTEMPTED TO TAKE ONE PERSON INTO CUSTODY AT ONE POINT, DID YOU? >> YES. >> WHAT WAS THAT WHEN YOUR HAIR YOU TESTIFIED EARLIER. WAS THAT WHEN YOUR HAIR WAS PULLED? >> YES. >> DID MEMBERS OF THE CROWD PULL THE POTENTIAL ARRESTEE AWAY FROM YOU? >> YES. >> WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF USING THE PROFANITY THAT YOU DID? >> LET ME SAY THIS. THE PROFANITY, WE ARE TAUGHT THAT YOU CAN USE A AMOUNT OF PROFANITY TO TRY TO DE-ESCALATE THE SITUATION. AT THAT TIME, AS YOU SAW IN THE VIDEO, I WAS NICE. I NEVER CAME OFF AS IN JUST ON TEN AND SCREAMING AND HULLING AND TELLING KIDS TO GO. YES. I DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT VOICE. BUT WHEN I'M PUT IN THAT SITUATION, I OPEN MY MOUTH AND I TELL PEOPLE THEY NEED TO LEAVE. I ONLY MET WHAT THEY UNDERSTOOD AT THAT TIME. I CONSTANTLY KEPT TELLING KIDS TO GO. I USED MY VOICE AND I USED WHAT I DID TO TRY TO DE-ESCALATE, NOT TRY TO INCITE ANYTHING FURTHER. >> DID YOU HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO FIGHT PEOPLE THAT NIGHT? >> OF COURSE. >> HOW MANY DID YOU TAKE? >> NONE. >> HOW MANY PEOPLE DID YOU SPRAY WITH THE ASR? >> NONE. >> HOW MANY PEOPLE DID YOU TASE? >> NOBODY. >> CASE THE PANEL ISN'T. I NEED TO WALK YOU THROUGH SOME TERMINOLOGY SO EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS. I'M SURE SERGEANT BARO COULD PROBABLY EXPLAIN IT BACK INACTION. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO RELY ON SERGEANT BARO. IF I TAKE MY TASER AND ARM IT, ONE, IF NOT TWO, I THINK IN YOUR CASE, IT WAS A GREEN AND A RED LIGHT LASER GETS ADMITTED FROM IT, CORRECT? >> YES. >> ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE TERM PAINTING SOMEBODY WITH THOSE LIGHTS? >> YES. >> TELL THE BOARD WHAT THAT MEANS. >> BUT BASICALLY, IT MEANS I ACTIVATED MY MY TASER, AND I'M JUST MOVING IT UP AND DOWN, TRYING TO LET THEM KNOW THAT, HEY, IF YOU DON'T MOVE, THESE LIGHTS, THE RED AND GREEN, IT WILL STRIKE YOU. >> WHAT WAS THE POINT OF PAINTING SOMEONE WITH THE TASER? WHAT ARE YOU TRYING WORK TO SPECIFICALLY? YOU DID IT WITH THE GIRL IN THE IN THE GOLD BATHING SUIT. WHAT WAS THE POINT OF PAINTING HER WITH THE TASER? >> THE POINT OF PAINTING IT BECAUSE AS SHE WALKED SHE KEPT STATING THAT PUT PUT THE TASER DOWN, PUT THE TASER ON BITCH, THIS AND THAT. I FELT THAT I JUST KEPT THE TASER UP, KEPT KEPT IT ON HER, AND EVENTUALLY SHE'LL MOVE AWAY. IF I WOULD HAVE SHOWED WHERE I WOULD HAVE PUT MY TASER DOWN AND INTERACT, I THINK THAT WE WOULD HAVE WENT HANDS ON. IT WAS A PREVENTION OF GOING HANDS ON WITH HER AND POSSIBLY BEING OUTNUMBERED AGAIN AND HAVING HER FRIENDS TRY TO CROWD ME OR JUMP ON ME. >> NOW, YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHEN YOU'RE ENGAGING WITH THAT INDIVIDUAL, SHE'S ALREADY BEEN SPRAYED BY OFFICER BAPTISTZ? >> YES. >> SHE'S COMING BACK FOR MORE AFTER TAKING SOME ASR? >> YES. SHE WAS FURIOUS. >> YOU HAD A LOT OF TIME TO THINK ABOUT THIS INCIDENT? >> I DO. >> YOU BELIEVE YOU WENT INTO INTERNAL AFFAIRS A LITTLE TOO HUMBLE? >> VERY MUCH SO. I DID. >> BACK ON MAY 31, DID YOU HAVE A MEETING ALONG WITH SEVERAL OTHER OFFICERS IN THE CHIEF OF POLICE? >> YES.I DID. >> WHERE DID THAT MEETING TAKE PLACE? >> IT TOOK PLACE IN, I WOULDN'T CALL IT THE CHIEF CONFERENCE ROOM, BUT IT TOOK PLACE IN THE UNIFORM PATROL COMMANDER. I GUESS THAT'S THE CONFERENCE ROOM OF THE UNIFORM PATROL COMMANDER. >> DO YOU RECALL ANY OTHER PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE? >> YES. >> WHO? >> IN ORDER ACROSS FROM ME, IT WAS FORGIVE ME. I'M NOT GOOD. I CAN'T REMEMBER RANKS. CAPTAIN BELL [INAUDIBLE], AND THEN IT WAS CHIEF OF POLICE. THEN HERE IT WAS, I THINK HE'S NOW SERGEANT BRANDON BLUSH, BECAUSE HE WAS SITTING IN IN SUPPORT FOR OFFICER JACOB JENKINS. IT WAS, I BELIEVE I WAS SITTING NEXT TO JACOB JENKINS, AND THEN IT WAS OFFICER ASHLEY BAPTIZT AND THEN OFFICER CHRISTIAN CAMERON. [03:30:04] >> HOW DID YOU KNOW TO REPORT TO THE CHIEF'S OFFICE? >> ACTUALLY, I WAS OFF. I RECEIVED A CALL FROM MY SERGEANT AT THE TIME AND HE SAID THAT YOU NEED TO MEET WITH THE CHIEF AT A CERTAIN TIME. >> WHO WAS THAT SERGEANT? >> SERGEANT SETH SINCLAIR. >> WHAT WERE YOU TOLD AT THAT MEETING? >> WHEN WE GOT INTO THE MEETING, THE CHIEF BASICALLY STATED THAT I AM TAKING OVER NOW FOR ADMINISTRATION THAT HE WANTED TO START A NEW THING OF BEING TRANSPARENT WITH HIS POLICE OFFICER. HE SAID, IT'S ALWAYS TRANSPARENCY WITH THE CITIZENS WHO INVOLVED, BUT I'M GOING TO START THIS THING WITH TRANSPARENCY WITH POLICE OFFICERS. HE SAID, I'M NOT HERE TO QUESTION YOU. FIRST, I WANT TO SAY Y'ALL ALL DID A GREAT JOB AT THE EVENT. HE SAID, I'M HERE TO SHOW YOU WHAT'S GOING TO BE DISPLAYED TO THE MEDIA. HE SAID, I'M NOT ASKING ANY QUESTIONS OR WHATEVER, AND LET'S LOOK AT THE VIDEO. AND THAT'S WHEN IF I'M USING THE TERM CORRECTLY, I THINK THE VIDEO HAD TO BE REDACTED BECAUSE OF THE LANGUAGE TO BE DISPLAYED TO THE MEDIA. WE SAT THERE AND THE TV WAS FACED THIS WAY. YOU SAW WHERE THE BODY CAMERAS THAT WAS GOING TO BE PUT OUT TO THE MEDIA OF WHAT THE INCIDENT HAPPENED. >> WERE YOU SHOCKED WHEN YOU WERE SUMMONED TO EYE OVER THIS? >> I ACTUALLY WAS BECAUSE IN THE MEETING, I THOUGHT WHEN CHIEF AND IF I CAN RECALL, HE WAS LIKE, Y'ALL DONE A GREAT JOB. AT THE END OF THE DAY, NO ONE GOT HURT. NO ONE WENT TO JAIL. EVERYBODY WENT HOME SAFELY. I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS OVER WITH. I FELT LIKE THE VIDEO WAS RELEASED BECAUSE OF POLITICAL REASON. I TRULY DO. >> NOTHING FURTHER. THANK YOU, JENNA. MR. RINES? >> IS THERE SOMETHING? >> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE VIDEO THAT YOU WATCHED WHEN YOU WERE WITH THE CHIEF THAT DAY, THAT WAS THE USE OF FORCE ISSUE WITH JENKINS AND CAMERON, CORRECT? >> NO. THAT VIDEO THAT WAS RELEASED THAT I WATCHED WITH THE CHIEF THAT DAY WAS PORTIONS OF ALL OUR BODY CAMERA. IT WASN'T JUST JENKINS AND THE OTHER PERSON. IT WAS PORTIONS OF THE BODY CAMERA. IT WAS THE PEOPLE WHO WAS CALLED IN THERE. IT WAS THEIR BODY CAMERA THAT WAS DISPLAYED. >> OF THAT INCIDENT RELATED TO JENKINS AND CAMERON THOUGH? >> I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS RELATED TO JENKINS AND CAMERON. I JUST KNOW THAT WHAT WAS DISPLAYED WAS THE BODY CAMERA. LIKE I STATED, IT HAD MY BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE, JENKINS' BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE, AND THE PARTIES THAT WAS THERE. >> BUT THE VIDEO Y'ALL WATCHED THAT DAY WAS NOT THE SAME VIDEO. IT WASN'T THE INITIAL INCIDENT THAT WE JUST SHOWED THE BOARD WHEN THAT THIRD INCIDENT WITH THE GIRL IN THE GOLD BIKINI, THAT PART WAS NOT THE STUFF Y'ALL WERE WATCHING THAT DAY, RIGHT? >> I CAN'T REMEMBER. I DON'T THINK SO. BUT I'M NOT SURE. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? >> THIS MAY BE DEFERRED TO THE CHIEF AND YOU MAYBE COULD ANSWER THIS QUESTION. WHEN YOU GUYS GO THROUGH YOUR ROOKIE CLASS, YOU'RE TAUGHT, I GUESS, HANDS ON COMBATIVE STUFF WHEN YOU GET IN SITUATIONS LIKE THAT, CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> WHAT IS CONSIDERED YOUR PERSONAL SPACE? WHENEVER SOMEONE DO IS TO APPROACH YOU, WHAT IS THAT CONSIDERED? IS IT SIX FOOT, THREE FOOT? IS IT DO YOU HAVE THAT? >> EVERYONE PERSONAL SPACE COULD BE DIFFERENT. FOR MY PERSONAL SPACE, IF YOUR HERE AND THEN I SEE YOU MOVING FORWARD, BECAUSE I CAN'T CONTEST FOR EVERYBODY PERSONAL SPACE. I CAN ONLY CONTEST MY PERSONAL SPACE. >> BUT I GUESS AS A OFFICER [OVERLAPPING] [03:35:04] >> I WILL SAY ABOUT THREE FEET, SIX FEET. >> THREE FEET. WHEN THE INCIDENT CAME UP WITH MISS BELL, IT LOOKED LIKE TO ME IN THAT VIDEO SHE HAD ENTERED YOUR PERSONAL SPACE. SHE WAS WITHIN A CERTAIN LOOK LIKE TWO, THREE FEET OF YOU; IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> THANKS. >> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? MS. ROBINSON, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. >> OKAY. >> IT'S A COMBINED QUESTION. FIRST, I WANT TO SAY THAT I UNDERSTAND YOUR DUAL ROLE AS A POLICE OFFICER AND AS A MOTHER, AND I CAN HEAR THE COURT IS ALL PUMPING THROUGH YOUR VEINS AT THE BEGINNING OF THAT VIDEO, AND KNOW THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT. CERTAINLY NOT LOOKING TO HIDE THE BALL. I CAN TELL YOU THAT THERE ARE TWO PARTS OF THAT VIDEO THAT I FIND MOST PROBLEMATIC PERSONALLY, AND I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO ADDRESS THOSE, IF YOU LIKE. THAT'S WHEN BOTH MISS BELL AND THE YOUNG LADY IN THE BIKINI, YOU'VE HAD YOUR INITIAL INTERACTION. THEY TURN AROUND AND START WALKING AWAY, AND NOW THEY ARE JAWING OVER THEIR SHOULDERS BEHIND BEHIND THEM, AND YOU'RE ENGAGING BACK WITH THEM. ONE, YOU SHOVE FROM BEHIND AND YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT. I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO NECESSARILY ADDRESS THE SHOVE, BUT CONTINUING TO VERBALLY ENGAGE WITH THEM. THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU WERE USING, THE CONTINUED CHALLENGE THAT YOU WERE MAKING TOWARDS THEM. I CAN TELL YOU THAT PERSONALLY, I CAN'T SEE FOR ANYONE ELSE ON THE BOARD. THOSE ARE THE POINTS THAT I WOULD STRUGGLE WITH THE MOST THAT IF I WERE TRYING TO GIVE YOU THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT, THOSE WEREN'T COMMANDS. THEY MIGHT STILL BE WING BEHIND THEM. BUT THEY'RE CLEARLY DISENGAGING AND THAT YOU CONTINUING TO ENGAGE THEM FELT LIKE IS WHAT BROUGHT THEM BACK AND ESCALATED. IF YOU WISH, IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THOSE TWO MOMENTS OF THE VIDEO, I WOULD FIND THAT HELPFUL. >> IN THE MOMENT WHERE I ADDRESSED MISS BELL AND SHE WAS SAYING THAT YOU THINK I'M A KID IN THOSE TYPE OF INCIDENTS OR WHATEVER. THEN WHEN IT LED UP TO ME PUTTING MY HANDS ON HER, THAT'S WHEN MY HAIR WAS PULLED AND THEN I WAS PULLED AWAY. THAT WAS THE SAME GROUP. THEY WERE JAW JACKING AND SAYING WHAT THEY WERE SAYING. HOWEVER, AS YOU SAW IN THE VIDEO, I STARTED TO MOVE OF THE CROWD. ANOTHER OFFICER ENCOUNTERED WITH THEM. THE SAME GROUP THAT WAS ENCOUNTERED WITH ME WAS ENCOUNTER WITH ANOTHER OFFICER, AND THAT'S HOW I HAD TO RE ENCOUNTER WITH MISS BELL OR WHATEVER. I DIDN'T DEAL WITH MISS BELL ON THE SECOND INCIDENT BECAUSE OFFICER JENKINS DEALT WITH MISS BELL. I ENCOUNTERED THE YOUNG LADY IN THE GOLD BATHING SUIT BECAUSE AS OFFICER BELL WAS TRYING TO APPREHEND THAT YOUNG LADY, THEN SHE CAME OVER AND SHE STARTED HOVERING OVER OFFICER BELL. IN THE MIDST OF THAT, THAT'S WHEN OFFICER BAPTISTZ, I BELIEVE, SPRAYED HER. THEN THAT'S WHEN SHE WALKED AWAY, BUT THEN SHE WAS WALKING FOR HER BECAUSE I THINK SHE REALIZED AFTERWARDS SHE GOT SPRAYED OR SOMETHING. AS SHE WENT, SHE DID GO IN THE GRASSY AREA, BUT THEN SHE WAS WALKING TO WARS AND THAT'S WHEN I PULLED OFFICER BAPTISTZ. I WAS LIKE, NO, THINKING THAT IT'S A POSSIBILITY THEY MAY GO HANDS ON OR WHATEVER SITUATION. I CAN'T SPEAK FOR HER. BUT BY ME PULLING MY TASER, I'M THINKING, THAT'S A DEESCALATION, COME ON, LET'S GO. I WASN'T EXPECTING OR THINKING IT WAS GOING TO GO INTO FARTHER BECAUSE MOST KIDS, OR WHATEVER WHEN THEY SEE TASER, THEY SEE THEM THERE LIKE, NO, LIKE THEY SERIOUS. BUT HOWEVER MS. BIKINI BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HER NAME, SHE STILL WANTED TO SIT THERE AND START JERKING WITH ME OR WHATEVER I HAD HER TASER POINT. LIKE I SAID, THE LANGUAGE UNDERSTANDABLE, VERY MUCH SO. WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DO WAS GET EVERYBODY TO LEAVE. I FELT THAT I DID THAT. BY HER FRIEND COMING TO PULL HER, I FEEL THAT THEY DID THAT. HOWEVER, SHE WANTED TO GO BACK AND FORTH. THAT'S WHY WHEN THE QUESTION WAS ASKED, I FEEL LIKE I DID WHAT I NEEDED TO DO? I DID. BECAUSE IF I WOULD HAVE PUT MY TASER DOWN, SHE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THAT, I'M NOT GOING TO USE THE WORD, BUT THE PERSON PUT HER TEST DOWN SHE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE CAME FORWARD AND WE WOULD HAVE BEEN HANDS ON. I WAS TRYING TO PREVENT THAT AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHICH I DID PREVENT THAT AND EVENTUALLY SHE LEFT AND SHE WALKED AWAY. DID I HANDLE THE SITUATION? YES. I FELT I HANDLED THE SITUATION THAT WAS BEST NEEDED FOR THAT, AND THEN I CAME BACK DOWN AND ADDRESSED THE OTHER KIDS AND GOT THEM TO MOVE AWAY. [03:40:07] >> THANK YOU. BUT THERE'S ONE PARTICULAR PART OF THAT INTERACTION THAT I REALLY WANT TO HONE IN ON. IT'S THE PART OF THE INTERACTION WHEN BECAUSE SHE GETS PEPPER SPRAYED BY ASR. YOU JAW ON HER A LITTLE BIT, AND I KNOW THAT THAT WAS A POINT OF CONTENTION AS WELL. SHE'S JAWING BACK AT YOU, YOU PULL YOUR TASER, YOU GUYS JAW BACK AND FORTH FOR A MINUTE. I WANT TO MOVE JUST PAST THAT POINT. SHE TURNS AROUND, STARTS WALKING AWAY. CONTINUES JAWING AT YOU. I MAY NOT HAVE THIS PERFECT, BUT IT WAS ROUGHLY SHE STARTS WALKING AWAY BASICALLY SAYING, AT THE POINT IN THIS TRANSCRIPT, THAT BITCH AIN'T SAVING YOUR ASS, YOU REPLY BITCH ABOUT THAT LIFE, DON'T LET THIS SHIT FOOL YOU. BITCH HIM FROM THE STREETS. SHE'S WALKING AWAY, WHICH PUT THAT GUN DOWN. GET THE FUCK BEFORE I BEAT THE FUCK OUT OF YOU, PUT THE GUN DOWN, BITCH, AND I KNOW SHE WAS WALKING AWAY AT THIS POINT. PUT THE GUN DOWN THEN BITCH, YOU BULLSHIT, YOU GROWN FOR NOTHING, DOG ASS, AND YOU CONTINUE JAWING AT HER. YOU WRITE, YOU A FUCKING KID. YOU CONTINUE GOING. WHAT'S GOING THROUGH YOUR MIND WHEN SHE'S AGAIN, I'M NOT SAYING SHE'S NOT JAWING BUT OVER HE SHOULDER AT YOU, BUT SHE'S SHOWING YOU HER BACK AND SHE'S WALKING AWAY. WHY ARE YOU STILL JAWING AT THIS KID IN A WAY THAT PROMPTS HER TO TURN BACK AROUND AND RE ENGAGE YOU? >> I DON'T KNOW. I CAN'T REALLY. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I SUPPOSE IF EITHER COUNSEL HAS ANY QUESTIONS BASED ON THE BOARD'S COMMENTS. MA'AM, YOU MAY STEP DOWN. >> CLOSE. >> GENTLEMEN, HOW LONG DO YOU THINK YOU NEED FOR CLOSING? GENUINELY, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU AN ARBITRARY NUMBER, IF NEITHER OF YOU THINK YOU NEED TERRIBLY LONG, IF ONE OF YOU THINKS YOU'RE GOING REALLY LONG, PLEASE LET ME KNOW HOW LONG YOU THINK THAT WILL BE. >> WELL, MY POWER POINT IS PROBABLY ABOUT 50, 60 MINUTES. >> THAT'S HOW YOU FORFEIT YOUR CLOSE. NO. OBVIOUSLY. >> MINE'S JUST SHORTER THAN THAT. PROBABLY NO MORE THAN 45, SO WE'RE GOOD. >> CAN WE TAKE A BREAK NOW? WE HAVE FOOD. >> IT WON'T BE LONG. >> BOTH OF YOU LESS THAN 10-15 MINUTES? THEN I'M DISINCLINED TO TIME EITHER OF YOU AT WHICH POINT YOU LOSE YOUR MINDS, THEN WE'LL CROSS THAT BRIDGE WE COME TO YOU. I BELIEVE SO. IT'S A LONG WEEK. >> FIVE MINUTE. >> WE WERE ALL JUST WALKING, YOU WALK OUT THE DOOR. >> WE'LL TAKE A BRIEF RECESS NO LONGER THAN FIVE MINUTES, BUT WHEN COUNSEL'S BACK, WE'LL BE GOOD TO GO. >> I WILL CALL THIS BACK TO ORDER. MR. RAINES, PLEASE PROCEED AT YOUR LEISURE. >> THANK YOU. THERE'S A FEW THEMES THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH TODAY. ONE THAT I'VE HEARD IS THAT, I DID WHAT I DID BECAUSE IT WAS NECESSARY TO GET THE RESULT OF THEM LEAVING. THE MEANS DOESN'T ALWAYS JUSTIFY WHAT OCCURS IN THE END. YOU HAVE TO STILL COMPLY WITH POLICY WHEN YOU'RE ON THE SCENE. AS OFFICERS, YOU'RE TAUGHT TO DEAL WITH CHAOTIC SCENES, AND EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES THAT THIS WAS A PRETTY CHAOTIC SCENE THAT THEY WERE DEALING WITH. BUT IF YOU SLICE THEM OUT, THESE SPECIFIC INCIDENTS, SHE WOULD GO FROM CALM TO 100 REAL FAST. SHE WAS FINE, SHE WAS GOOD UNTIL SOMEBODY MOUTHED OFF, AND AT THAT POINT, SHE WOULD FLIP AND THE CONDUCT BECAME DIFFERENT. WHAT MR. NEWELL POINTED OUT IS A SAME THING THAT I'VE WATCHED IN THIS CASE IS THAT LET'S GO TO THE FIRST INCIDENT. THE PERSON SAID SOMETHING TO HER AND THEY KEPT WALKING AND THEY WERE A DISTANCE AWAY FROM HER, AND THEN WHAT DID SHE SAY TO THEM? "DON'T FUCK AND PLAY WITH ME OUT HERE. I'LL BEAT THE BRAKES OFF YOUR MOTHER FUCKING ASS. THE FUCK WRONG WITH YOU." IT WASN'T LIKE THEY WERE ENGAGED AND IT WASN'T LIKE SHE WAS TELLING HER TO DO SOMETHING. IF THIS WERE A CASE WHERE WE WERE JUST DEALING WITH DIRECTING [03:45:03] PEOPLE TO DO SOMETHING AND SHE USED A CURSE WORD AND DIRECTING THEM TO DO THAT, WE WOULDN'T BE HERE TODAY. THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS WAS. THE CHIEF SAW THIS AS SOMEBODY WHO WAS ENGAGING IN INSULTING BEHAVIOR AND DOING IT, WHEN PEOPLE WERE TRYING TO WALK AWAY, THEY WEREN'T EVEN ENGAGING WITH HER AT THAT POINT. WE'LL GO TO THE GIRL IN THE BIKINI. SHE HAD BEEN PEPPER SPRAYED AND SHE MOVED OVER TO THE GRASS. CORPORAL ROBINSON WENT OVER THERE TO HER, MOVED BATTISTE AWAY, AND THEN SHE ENGAGED WITH HER. SHE WASN'T ENGAGING WITH HER AT THAT POINT, BUT SHE ENGAGED WITH HER, POINTED THE TASER. AS SHE WAS RUNNING OVER THERE, SHE WAS SAYING ALL OF THE YEAH, WITH THE FUCKING YEA. THAT'S WHAT SHIT YOU-ALL LIKE. THAT'S NOT A DIRECTIVE. THAT IS HER, AS CHIEF SAID, ALMOST CELEBRATING THE FACT THAT SHE HAD BEEN PEPPER SPRAYED. THAT IS NOT LANGUAGE THAT DE ESCALATES THE SITUATION. IT ONLY ESCALATES IT AND IT GOT THE INTENDED RESULT BECAUSE THEN THE GIRL ENGAGED WITH HER AND SHE GOT AMPED UP AT THE SAME TIME THAT CORPORAL ROBINSON WAS AMPED UP. THEN YOU GET INTO THE LANGUAGE OF WHAT WAS SAID? YEAH, THEY CALL EACH OTHER NAMES. BUT THE PHRASE, "BITCH, I'M ABOUT THAT LIFE. DON'T LET THIS SHIT FOOL YOU BITCH. I'M FROM THE STREETS AND SHE'S TALKING ABOUT HER UNIFORM AND HER BADGE." WHAT DID SHE GET SUSTAINED FOR? COMMAND OF TEMPER. SHE LOST HER TEMPER CLEARLY. CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER. I HOPE YOU ALL DON'T THINK THAT OFFICERS SHOULD GO AROUND SPEAKING LIKE THAT TO THE PUBLIC. THAT IS NOT HOW OFFICERS SHOULD ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC. YOU ALL SET A PRECEDENT. WHEN WE COME IN HERE, WE'RE DEALING WITH DISCIPLINE, BUT YOU SET A PRECEDENT FOR HOW WE TREAT THINGS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT. THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE THE CHIEF CLEARLY SAW VIOLATIONS OF POLICY. IF THE COMMUNITY WERE TO SEE THAT, I THINK THEY WOULD THINK THIS IS CONDUCT THAT WE DON'T WANT OUR POLICE OFFICERS ENGAGING IN. AGAIN, IF IT WERE JUST A DIRECTIVE OF MOVED DOWN THE F AND STREET, WE WOULDN'T BE HERE. BUT IT WAS MORE THAN THAT. WHAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT AS A BOARD IS, WAS THERE CAUSE AND WAS THE CHIEF IN GOOD FAITH IN THE DECISION THAT HE MADE?? WAS IT REASONABLE? DID HE HAVE CAUSE? CERTAINLY, YOU'VE SEEN IT. WAS HE IN GOOD FAITH? ABSOLUTELY. THERE IS A MATRIX FOR DISCIPLINE. THE CHIEF DID NOT GIVE HER THE MAX. HE GAVE HER FIVE DAYS. THAT IS WITHIN THE STATED RECOMMENDED DISCIPLINE THAT'S BEEN ADOPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. IT'S WITHIN GENERAL ORDER 112, TABLE 4.0. SHE COULD HAVE BEEN SIX DAYS. SHE COULD HAVE BEEN MORE THAN THAT, AS YOU POINTED OUT, BUT HE PUT HER AT FIVE DAYS. HE THOUGHT THIS WAS SERIOUS. HE WANTED TO SEND A MESSAGE. HE WANTS OTHER OFFICERS TO KNOW THAT THEY CAN'T ENGAGE IN THIS CONDUCT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, HE RECOGNIZES, YES. WAS IT CHAOTIC? OF COURSE. IS SHE A GOOD OFFICER NORMALLY? YES. SHE HAS A LOT OF EXPERIENCE. SHE RECOGNIZES AND SHE ADMITTED ON THE ON THE STAND. I SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE WHAT I DID. IT DIDN'T COMPLY WITH POLICY. THOSE ADMISSIONS ALONE ARE ENOUGH TO UPHOLD THIS RULING. WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU MAINTAIN THE DISCIPLINE, UPHOLD THE DISCIPLINE BY THE CHIEF AND MAINTAIN IT A FIVE DAYS. THANK YOU. >> MR. [INAUDIBLE] >> I'LL TALK ABOUT POLICY FOR JUST A SECOND. ADMINISTRATORS CAN'T PREDICT EVERY THING THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE AND DEVELOP A POLICY FOR IT. IT'S VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE. I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE INSTANCES. YOU HEARD 30 PLUS YEAR VETERANS SAY, I'VE NEVER HAD SOMETHING LIKE THIS GO ON, CERTAINLY NOT THIS LAW. I REMEMBER BACK IN THE '90S WHEN I WENT THROUGH THE ACADEMY AS A VETERANS POLICEMAN. I THINK THOSE POLICIES PRETTY MUCH READ THE SAME. I THINK THERE'S A PERFECT SCENARIO. OPPOSING COUNSEL TALKED ABOUT, IN DEALING WITH THE PUBLIC. COME ON, MAN. THIS WASN'T DEALING WITH THE PUBLIC. THAT ARGUMENT, YOU WOULD THINK SHE KICKED IN THE DOOR TO THE FIFTH GRADE SUNDAY SCHOOL CLASS AND STARTED TALKING TO THESE PEOPLE THIS WAY. KIDS WERE OUT THERE HURTING OTHER KIDS. [03:50:01] THEY WERE FIGHTING THE POLICE. THEY ALL WENT HOME WITH THE SAME NUMBER OF HOLES IN THEIR BODY AND THE SAME NUMBER OF FINGERS AND TOES THAT THEY LEFT THE HOUSE WITH THAT DAY. TAKE THE WIN, BATON ROUGE POLICE. THE CHIEF SAID SOMETHING THAT WAS I DON'T KNOW, IT WAS ODD. YOU CAN PROFESSIONALLY BEAT SOMEONE. IS THAT THE ALTERNATIVE WE WANT TO DO? IS THAT WHAT WE WANT? IF I CAN TALK TO YOU AND USE CERTAIN LANGUAGE TO GET YOU TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS LAWFUL FOR ME TO ASK YOU TO DO AS A POLICE OFFICER. LET'S SAY IT DOESN'T CONVINCE YOU TO DO IT, BUT IT GETS JOSH, DARA TO GRAB YOU BY THE ARM, "COME ON, MAN, I THINK THAT PERSON IS SERIOUS. WE BETTER GO," BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED. I TELL YOU, IF SHE WAS OUT THERE LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO GET IN A FIGHT, GIRL, YOU'RE A FAILURE. YOU HAD PLENTY. YOU DIDN'T TAKE ONE. THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS, WE SAW AND HEARD ON THE VIDEO, ESPECIALLY FROM THE CROWD THAT WE GIVEN OUR AGE, PROBABLY WE CAN'T UNDERSTAND THAT ANYMORE. FOR EXAMPLE, ANYBODY ON THIS BOARD, PROBABLY ANYBODY IN THIS ROOM. NOBODY WOULD HAVE NEEDED THE COPS TO TELL US IT'S TIME TO GO BASED ON WHAT EVERYBODY WAS DOING OUT THERE. I GUESS WISDOM THAT COMES WITH A CERTAIN LEVEL OF MATURITY THAT THOSE PEOPLE JUST DID NOT HAVE, AND IT GETS WORSE WHEN YOU PUT THEM IN A CROWD BECAUSE THEY FEED OFF OF EACH OTHER. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE DOING. YOU SAW WHAT HAPPENED WHEN OFFICERS WOULD ATTEMPT TO TAKE PEOPLE INTO CUSTODY. SHE HAD TO BACK OFF FROM THE OFFICERS WHO TOOK SOMEBODY INTO CUSTODY. THAT THIRD INCIDENT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT. LADY IN THE BOW BIKINI. SHE'S BEEN SPRAYED WITH ASR. UNFORTUNATELY, THANK GOD, THAT'S ONLY HAPPENED TO ME ONE TIME. TWICE, I DID IT TO MYSELF BY ACCIDENT, BUT I DON'T TALK ABOUT THAT. THAT IS A VERY UNPLEASANT EXPERIENCE. BUT YET SHE STILL CHARGED OVER TO THOSE OFFICERS WHO HAD A LADY ON THE GROUND, I BELIEVE IT WAS MISS BELL, AND SHE HAD TO BACK HER UP. SHE WAS GIVING HER DIRECTIONS. TAB 5 ON PAGE 66. THE LETTER OF THE CHIEF SIGNED QUOTES, SIR. SHE TELLS HER TO MOVE FOUR TIMES. SHE DOESN'T MOVE UNTIL ONE OF HER FRIENDS, A FELLOW CROWD MEMBER SAYS, "COME ON." SHE TELLING HER COME ONE BECAUSE SHE'S PAINTING YOU WITH THAT TASER. WE BETTER GO. WE ALL KNOW, BASED ON OUR MATURITY AND LIFE EXPERIENCE. IT'S INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL. THE LARGER THE CROWD, YOUR INHIBITIONS START GOING DOWN. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED THAT NIGHT. FOR A WHILE, WHEN YOU WATCHING THAT VIDEO, YOU SAW THE POLICE DOING BASICALLY WHAT IS REFERENCED AS WHAC-A-MOLE. THEY'RE GOING FROM FIGHT TO FIGHT TO FIGHT. WE GET A SITUATION CALM OVER HERE. ONE STARTS OVER HERE. WE RUN OVER HERE, AND THEN ANOTHER ONE KICKS OFF RIGHT OVER THERE. THEN YOU HEAR SOMEBODY GET ON THE RADIO AND FINALLY TAKE CHARGE. RIGHT THERE. 2048 HOURS, AND I'M USING THE CLOCK TIME, NOT THE COUNTER TIME. SHE STARTS DIRECTING THE CROWD TO GO. SHE THEN SEES SPORADIC FIGHTS BEGIN TO BREAK OUT. SHE CONTINUES GIVING VERBAL DIRECTIONS TO GO. YES, SHE DOES TELL SOMEBODY SHE'S GOING TO BEAT THE BRAKES OFF OF. SHE IMMEDIATELY GOES BACK, DRESSES ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE CROWD, "YOU-ALL GOT TO GO THIS WAY, LOVE?" IF SHE PUSHED PAST SOMEBODY TO GET TO ANOTHER FIGHT, SHE TELLS SOMEBODY EXCUSE ME. THIS IS NOT SOMEBODY WHO HAS LOST COMMAND OF THEIR TEMPER. IF SHE WAS OUT OF CONTROL, SHE WOULD HAVE LOST COMMAND OF TEMPER AND TALKED TO EVERYBODY THAT WAY. WHY WAS SHE DISCRIMINATING IN TERMS OF TALKING TO THIS PERSON THIS WAY AND THIS PERSON ANOTHER WAY? IT'S BASED ON THEIR BEHAVIOR. [03:55:03] YOU KNOW WHAT? IT HAD THE INTENDED EFFECT. THE CROWD DISPERSED, AND THE POLICE MOVED THEM TO FLORIDA AND LOBDELL, WHERE THEY WERE STAGING TO GET THOSE PEOPLE PICKED UP. SHE GETS ON THE RADIO WHEN SHE SEES A FIGHT BREAK OUT TELLING TO THE OTHER OFFICERS, COME TO THE FRONT AS SHE AND OTHER OFFICERS RAN TOWARDS IT. YOU SAW AT THE 2054 MINUTES. YOU CALL OUT TO KORANTE HAROLD, WHO WAS ANOTHER OFFICER ON SCENE, "DON'T. DON'T. DON'T." SHE'S RESTRAINING A CO-WORKER VERBALLY AS ANOTHER BLACK FEMALE OFFICER RESTRAINED HER PHYSICALLY. COMMAND THE TEMPER? COME ON. IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT, SHE TURNED TO SOMEONE ELSE AND ASKED, "IS YOUR RIDE ON THE WAY?" SHE THEN AT THE 2055 MARK TELLS OTHER OFFICERS THAT SHE'S ESCORTING YOUNG MALE AWAY. THEY'RE TRYING TO JUMP HIM AND WE'RE TRYING TO PREVENT THAT. LET'S PUT HIM IN A POLICE CAR. FOR SOME REASON, I GUESS THAT YOUNG MAN WAS BEING TARGETED BY MEMBERS OF THE CROWD. IS THAT SOMEBODY OUT OF CONTROL? IS THAT CONDUCT UNBECOMING? 2056 MARK. THIS IS WHEN SHE REALLY STARTS BREAKING GLASS CEILINGS. SHE GETS ON THE RADIO, ASKING FOR A UNIT AT FLORIDA AND LOBDELL TO SHUT DOWN LOBDELL TRAFFIC. TURNS TO THE CROWD AT ONE MINUTE LATER, TELLS A GROUP TO CHILL OUT. ASK THEM, "ARE YOU-ALL WAITING ON A RIDE?" AT 2058 HOURS, YOU GET BACK ON THE RADIO. WHY ARE PEOPLE STILL CONGREGATING? IS IT POSSIBLE TO PUSH THEM TOWARDS THE GAS STATION? THE 2100 MARK, FEMALE IN THE CROWD APOLOGIZES TO HER. SHE RESPONDS, "YOU DON'T HAVE TO APOLOGIZE, BABY." SHORTLY THEREAFTER, SHE DIRECTS THE CROWD. NEED EVERYBODY TO COME THIS WAY, HAVE TO GO DOWN TO THE GAS STATION AS SHE CONTINUES MOVING THE CROWD. AT 2101 HOURS, SHE ADDRESSES A PARENT, EXPLAINS TO HER WHAT THE POLICE ARE DOING. 2101 MARK, SHE RESTRAINED OFFICER BATTISTE BY EITHER PULLING HER SHIRT SLEEVE OR GRABBING HER ARM. THIS WAS IN WHEN THEY WERE HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE LADY IN THE GOLD SWIM SUIT. SHE TOLD OFFICER BATTISTE, "DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT." SHE TELLS ANOTHER GROUP AT THE AT 2103 HOURS, "YOU-ALL GOT TO GO BACK THAT WAY, BABY, UNLESS YOU-ALL ARE DRIVING." THE CROWD MOVED. SHE TURNS AROUND TO ANOTHER PERSON, "ARE YOU DRIVING, SIR?" COMMAND THE TEMPER. IF YOU'RE WAITING ON RIDES, GO TO THE GAS STATION. YOU TELL A CROWD SHORTLY THEREAFTER, OR SHE TELLS A CROWD SHORTLY THEREAFTER, WHERE THEY NEED TO TELL THEIR RIDE TO GO IN ORDER TO PICK THEM UP. SHE'S PROBLEM SOLVING. TRUST ME, THAT WAS A BIG PROBLEM. YOU SAW THE VIDEO. TELLS ANOTHER PERSON SHORTLY THERE AFTER, "EXCUSE ME, IF YOU'RE WAITING ON A RIDE." SHE THEN TURNS AROUND AND ADDRESSES A MOTHER WHO'S TRYING TO FIND THEIR CHILD. BUT THEN AT THE VERY END, GOT A KID WHO HAS NO PHONE. SHE LETS HER USE HER PHONE TO GET THAT KID TO SAFETY. KID DIDN'T REALIZE HIS RIDE HAS ALREADY SHOWED UP. HE HANDS THE PHONE BACK. HE TAKES OFF RUNNING AND SHE SAYS, "HEY, LOOK, DON'T WORRY, HE'S RUNNING TOWARD YOU. HE KNOWS WHERE TO COME TO." >> I DON'T THINK IT'S A STRETCH TO SAY THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT IS A MALE-DOMINANT PROFESSION AND SO HISTORICALLY. THAT WAS YOUR LEADER OUT THERE. SHE GOT ON THE RADIO, CAME UP WITH A PLAN, AND IMPLEMENTED THE PLAN AGAINST A CROWD THAT LARGELY DID NOT WANT TO COMPLY. WE TALK ABOUT BREAKING GLASS CEILINGS, JUST BECAUSE SOMEBODY GOT PROMOTED. THE EFFORT RIGHT THERE, TO GET ALL THOSE KIDS HOME WITHOUT ANYBODY GETTING HURT. MAYBE SOME FEELINGS GOT HURT, BUT APPARENTLY NOT HURT ENOUGH TO WHERE MOM AND DAD CALLED DOWN TO MAKE THE COMPLAINT. I THINK THIS VIDEO IS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF, I'M GOING TO USE THIS ANALOGY. WE ALL LIKE SAUSAGE WITH BREAKFAST. NO, THAT ADAGES, BUT YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO SEE IT MADE. [04:00:04] IN THIS CASE, THE SAUSAGE IS, EVERYBODY GOING HOME, NOT HURT. I THINK THAT'S THE RESULT. I THINK EVERYBODY CAN AGREE THAT WAS THE BEST THING THAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED OUT THERE. SOMETIMES IT CAN BE PAINFUL, UNPLEASANT TO WATCH HOW THAT IS ABLE TO BE MADE TO HAPPEN. IN THIS CASE, I'LL GO BACK TO WHAT I SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE FRIDAY NIGHT. I GOT HOME FROM ANOTHER JOB. SHOULD HAVE GONE TO BED BECAUSE I HAD TO WORK SHALL GAME NEXT DAY, BUT I WAS DING DECIDED TO POUR SOME CRANBERRY JUICE INTO A GLASS. MAYBE SOMETHING ELSE WENT ADDED TO BUT TURN TV ON, WATCHING AN OLD MOVIE. NOW, MR. RICK, YOU MAY HAVE TO HELP SOME OF THESE YOUNGER PEOPLE. BUT SOME OF THESE REFERENCES I'M ABOUT TO MAKE BECAUSE THERE. BUT ANYWAY, I LANDED ON IN HARM'S WAY. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT ONE? THE DUKE, HENRY FONDA, I THINK BURGESS MERIT WAS THE OW TWO PICTURE. THIS IS WHEN PRESS PROBABLY COULD I REALLY WAS COUNTING ON PRESS BEING HERE. BUT ANYWAY, THEY ENDED TALKING ABOUT THE WAY THE NAVY TREATED THE DUKE'S CHARACTER. IT WAS WRONG THAT HAPPENED TO YOU. HENRY FONDA, WHO WAS PLAYING THE ROLE OF A COMMANDING OFFICER, THAT'S WHO WANTED TO WATCH THAT TALK. HE DID IT REAL ARTFULLY. HE SAYS, GENTLEMEN, STOP AT RIGHT NOW. NAVY'S NEVER WRONG. SOMETIMES THEY ARE WEAK ON BEING RIGHT. I THINK THAT IS A PICTURE PERFECT LINE FROM A MOVIE TO EXPLAIN HOW MS. DONELL IS BEING TREATED HERE TODAY. THANK YOU. >> MR. IVY VERY QUICKLY. IF YOU WANT TO END ON THAT, YOU CERTAINLY MAY. BUT BECAUSE IT'S TECHNICALLY TWO SEPARATE DETERMINATIONS BY THE BOARD REGARDING JUST CAUSE OR GOOD FAITH AND JUST CAUSE AS WELL AS COMMENSURATE WITH THE INFRACTION, I KNOW YOU ELICITED TESTIMONY GOING ALONG THOSE LINES. IS THERE ANY ARGUMENT THAT YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE FOR THE BOARD'S SAKE ON THE COMMENSURATE NATURE OF THE PUNISHMENT OF THE INFRACTION? >> YOU HAD SERGEANT DOUGLAS TESTIFY THAT OTHER OFFICERS OUT THERE USE SIMILAR F WORDS AND ONE, I BELIEVE HE TESTIFIED MAY HAVE NOT BEEN SUSTAINED, AND ANOTHER JASON MILLER, WHO TESTIFIED WAS GIVEN A LETTER OF REPRIMAND. EVEN IF THE BOARD DOES FIND CALLS, I DO NOT BELIEVE IT TO BE COMMENSURATE WITH THE DISCIPLINE OR THE CORRECTIVE ACTION, I THINK IS WHAT THE STATUTE CALLS IT THAT WAS IMPOSED. >> THANK YOU, MR. IVY. MR. RATES. >> FOR CLARITY'S SAKE, ARE YOU ASKING ME TO COMMENT ON THAT OR JUST CLOSE OUT? >> NOT AT ALL, HE ONLY GETS ONE CLOSE, YOU GET TWO. >> BEFORE HE WALKED AWAY, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS ADDRESSED. I FIGURED THAT YOU COULD ADDRESS EITHER OR WHATEVER IN YOUR REBUTTAL. >> SURE. IF YOU DON'T MIND. I'LL JUST STAY HERE. I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT, AND I JUST KEEP GOING BACK TO THIS IS THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT BOTHER ME ABOUT THE ARGUMENTS BEING MADE. THAT IS; IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER WHAT HAPPENS ON SCENE AS LONG AS THE END RESULT IS WHAT WE WANT. THAT IS A DANGEROUS WAY TO POLICE THE COMMUNITY. FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE TIME THAT THE OFFICER WAS OUT THERE ON SCENE, HER CONDUCT WAS ACCEPTABLE. BUT THAT IS THE WAY MOST CASES ARE. LIKE I SAID EARLIER, MOST OF THE TIME WHEN YOU HAVE A CASE AND SHE TESTIFIED TO THIS, WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH SOMEBODY WHO WAS COMPLETELY UNHINGED FOR AN HOUR. WE'RE TYPICALLY DEALING WITH A DISCRETE EVENT. IF SHE WOULD HAVE PULLED OUT HER GUN AND SHOT IT IN THE AIR, WOULD IT HAVE CLEARED THAT CROWD? PROBABLY SO. WOULD IT HAVE BEEN A VIOLATION OF POLICY? ALSO, YES. THERE ARE LIMITS ON WHAT WE DO WHEN WE'RE OUT THERE. AGAIN, IF THIS WERE JUST AN INCIDENT WHERE SHE WOULD HAVE CURSED SOMEBODY WHILE GIVING THEM DIRECTION, WE WOULDN'T BE HERE TODAY. THE CHIEF MADE THAT VERY CLEAR. THIS CASE WAS DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER ONES BECAUSE [04:05:04] THE CURSING THAT WAS USED WAS EITHER ONE OF THEM WAS, I THINK IN A DIRECTIVE MANNER, AND SO THAT PERSON, I BELIEVE WAS NOT SUSTAINED. THE OTHER ONE MADE ONE COMMENT ABOUT SOMEBODY AND SAID, GET ON WITH YOUR DUSTY ASS OR SOMETHING. HE GOT A LETTER OF REPRIMAND ON THAT. I THINK WE COULD ALL AGREE THAT THE COMMENTS HERE WERE DIFFERENT AND THERE WAS A LONGER CONVERSATION. I THINK THERE WERE MULTIPLE INCIDENTS WHEN SHE COULD HAVE EASILY STOPPED THE CONVERSATION TO SEE IF THAT INDIVIDUAL WAS GOING TO MOVE ON. I ALSO LIKE THE FIRST LADY, CLEARLY SHE WAS SHE WAS TALKING TO HER BACK WHEN SHE WAS SAYING THE STUFF ABOUT BEATING THE BRAKES OFF OF HER. THE THIRD LADY, SHE WENT OVER TO HER AND ENGAGED AND I THINK AMPED UP THE SITUATION. THERE I THINK MAYBE A COUPLE OF TIMES WHEN I THOUGHT THAT GIRL WAS GOING TO WALK AWAY IF SHE WOULD HAVE JUST NOT SAID ANYTHING ELSE. BUT SHE CONTINUED THE CONVERSATION WHICH THEN MADE THAT GIRL STAY AND CONTINUE ON WITH WHAT SHE WAS DOING. THAT'S THE CONDUCT. THAT'S THE PROBLEM. IF SHE WOULD HAVE JUST TOLD HER TO MOVE THE F ON, WE WOULDN'T BE HERE. IT WASN'T THAT. IT WAS AGITATING AND INCITING THE CONVERSATION TO TURN INTO SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IT WAS AND DIDN'T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY AND COULD HAVE BEEN A MUCH BETTER SCENARIO. AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T WANT THE COMMUNITY TO SEE OUR OFFICERS BEHAVING IN THIS WAY. AGAIN, THE DISCIPLINE WAS WITHIN THE MATRIX, IT WAS LESS THAN THE MAX IN THE MATRIX. THE CHIEF CERTAINLY HAD CALLS. IT CERTAINLY WAS IN GOOD FAITH. AGAIN, WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU UP HOLD IT. THANK YOU. >> DO ANY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ANY OF THE ATTORNEYS? THEN BELIEVE THAT CONCLUDES THE OBJECTION OF EVIDENCE AT THIS TIME. MR. TIMSON? IF WE HAVE NOT ALREADY, MR. RAINES, I ASSUME YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION. >> SAME ONE. >> THAT'S FINE. THIS IS THE SAME WHAT WE'VE GOT. IF YOU WOULD JUST AND IT DOWN, GET IT TO THIS ONE. AT THIS POINT, THE CHAIR MOVES TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOTH TO CONSIDER THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY DISPOSITION, AS WELL AS IF NECESSARY, THE ULTIMATE QUESTION ON APPEAL, PURSUANT TO LOUISIANA REVISED STATUTE 42.17 A1 AND OR LOUISIANA REVISED STATUTE 4217 A4. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> A SECOND. >> LET'S DO A ROLE CALL VOTE ON THIS ONE. >> MR. MICHAEL LEMING? >> YES. >> MR. EDWIN BERRA? >> YES. >> MR. BRADLEY RICKS? >> YES. >> MR. JOSHUA NEVIL? >> YES. BRADLEY RICKS. >> THEN THE BOARD MOVES INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE WILL RETURN AS SOON AS WE HAVE DECIDED THOSE MATTERS. THAT WAS ME BEING CARELESS WITH MY LANGUAGE. AFTER WE HAVE CONDUCTED OUR DISCUSSION PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION, WE WILL THEN COME BACK OUT WITH ANY MOTIONS AND FURTHER DEBATE AND DISCUSSION AT THAT POINT. WE WILL CALL THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER. I THINK WE NEED A ROLL CALL BEFORE WE GET STARTED, IS THAT CORRECT? MS. HARRIS, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE. >> MR. MICHAEL LEMING? >> YES. >> MR. EDWIN BERRA? >> PRESENT. >> MR. BRADLEY RICKS? >> PRESENT. >> MR. JOSHUA NEVIL. >> PRESENT. >> WE HAVE A FORM. THEN THE CHAIR MOVE. >> PRESENT. >> YES. THAT WAS A ROLL CALL ABOUT FOR US TO HAVE A QUORUM. >> NO. IT'S A ROLL CALL. IT'S A MOTION TO COME OUT OF YOU. >> I THOUGHT WE NEED A QUORUM FIRST. WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT AS WE GO ALONG. I BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS JUST A ROLL CALL FOR A QUORUM. IF THE CHAIR MOVES BEING WE HAVE OUR QUORUM, THE CHAIR MOVES TO EXIT EXECUTIVE SESSION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> MR. BERRA SECONDS. IF WE COULD HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THAT, MS. HARRIS. [04:10:02] >> MR. MICHAEL LEMING? >> YES. MR. EDWIN BERRA? >> YES. >> MR. BRADLEY RICKS? >> YES. >> MR. JOSHUA NEVIL? >> YES. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION REGARDING OUR CONSIDERATION ON THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY DISPOSITION FOR JOEL ROBINSON WOODARD? >> I MOVED TO DENY FOR SUMMARY DISPOSITION. >> MOTION BY MR. RICKS. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND. >> SECOND BY MR. LEMON. LET'S DO A ROLL CALL FOR THAT AS WELL, MS. HARRIS. >> MR. MICHAEL LEMING? >> YES. >> MR. EDWIN BERRA? >> YES. >> BRADLEY RICKS? >> YES. >> MR. JOSHUA NEVIL? >> YES. >> THE MOTION CARRIES. THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY DISPOSITION IS DENIED. AS TO THE APPELLATE HEARING, DO I HAVE A MOTION REGARDING THE DETERMINATION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY ACTED IN GOOD FAITH AND FOR JUST CAUSE? HEARING NONE, THE CHAIR WILL MOVE THAT MOVE FOR A FINDING THAT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY ACTED IN GOOD FAITH AND FOR JUST CAUSE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> SECONDED BY MR. BERRA. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? >> IT WAS MY MOTION. I HAVE THE FLOOR, BUT I WILL DEFER TO MY COLLEAGUES IF THERE IS ANY DISCUSSION. >> YES. I WOULD SAY THAT OFFICER ROBINSON'S ACTIONS, PROBABLY OVER 90%, WAS VERY GOOD POLICE WORK. BUT THERE WAS A COUPLE OF LAPSES. I WOULD DEFER TO THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY. >> ANY OTHER COMMENT FROM ANY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS? >> ON TOP OF THAT, I AGREE. I THINK MS. ROBINSON SHOWED UNDER THE EXTREME CONDITION THAT WAS PRESENTED, THAT SHE SHOWED AN ABILITY TO TAKE CHARGE THAT WAS EVIDENT IN THE IN THE IN THE VIDEO. I COMMEND YOU FOR THAT. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF OF LAPSES THAT THAT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY HAS POINTED OUT UNDER COMMAND OF TEMPER AND A COUPLE OF THE OTHER THINGS WHICH I DO AGREE WITH THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY WITH. AS A LAST STATEMENT TO ECHO THE OTHERS CORPORAL, 95% OF THAT VIDEO, I THINK COULD BE HELD UP AS A TRAINING VIDEO FOR YOUNG LAWYERS IN THE WAY THAT YOU INTERACTED WITH PEOPLE. YOU DID AN INCREDIBLE JOB FOR THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THAT VIDEO. BUT AS I SAID, I WASN'T HIDING THE BALL. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF POINTS THAT I JUST IN SPITE OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN SPITE, INCLUDING YOUR CHILD BEING THERE AND THEN THE HECTIC NATURE THAT I THOUGHT WENT A LITTLE TOO FAR TO BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT. FOR THAT REASON, THAT IS WHY I AM INCLINED TO UPHOLD AS IN GOOD FAITH AND FOR JUST CAUSE. DOES ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE BOARD HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR DEBATE? HEARING NONE. MS. HARRIS, COULD WE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE MOTION? >> MR. MICHAEL LEMING? >> YES. >> MR. EDWIN BERRA? >> YES. >> MR. BRADLEY RICKS? >> YES. >> MR. JOSHUA NEVIL? >> YES. >> MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THAT BRINGS US TO THE QUESTION OF WHETHER AND THE LANGUAGE IS A LITTLE SOFT, WHETHER THERE WOULD BE CAUSE FOR MODIFICATION AS THE PUNISHMENT IS NOT COMMENSURATE WITH THE INFRACTION. DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> I HAVE MAKE A MOTION TO MODIFY TO TWO DAYS RATHER THAN A FIVE DAY SUSPENSION WITH MR. MILLER GETTING A LETTER OF REPRIMAND FOR HIS COMMENTS. >> RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST THE MOTION, BUT WE'LL DO DEBATE IN JUST A MOMENT. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND. [04:15:01] >> THAT WAS MR. BARO ON THE MOTION, MR. RICKS, ON THE SECOND. THEN, MR. BARRETT'S YOUR MOTION, IF YOU WOULD GO AHEAD. >> I MAKE THE MOTION BECAUSE MR. MILLER HAS A LETTER OF REPRIMAND, BUT BASICALLY THE SAME LANGUAGE, MAYBE NOT EXTENDED. THE ARGUMENT OF WHETHER YOU CAN USE THAT LANGUAGE TO TELL SOMEBODY TO MOVE OR USE HIM FOR ANOTHER WAY. IT WAS STILL USED INSULTING LANGUAGE. HIS ENDED UP A LETTER REPRIMANDED MR ROBINSON GOT A FIVE-DAY SUSPENSION. I THINK THAT'S A BIG GAP. TO COVER. >> MR. RICKS, YOU SECONDED, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE? [NOISE] >> I AGREE WITH THAT AND I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY WITH WHAT THE POLICE CHIEF HAS PUT INTO PLACE. I DO THINK THAT, COMPARED TO THE OTHER OFFICERS, THAT IT WAS SLIGHTLY A BIT OVERKILL, AS FAR AS THAT GOES. DID HE MAKE UP? [OVERLAPPING] SECOND MOTION. THAT'S SO YES. HE MADE THE MOTION TO MODIFY TO TWO DAYS. YOU SECONDED. NOW WE ARE SIMPLY DEBATING THE MATTER. >> GOT IT. >> ANYTHING ELSE FROM OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? >> NO. >> I UNDERSTAND THE REASONING MADE BY MY COLLEAGUES. AGAIN, I KNOW IT WAS VERY HECTIC. BUT ULTIMATELY, I DISAGREE WITH THEM AND THAT I BELIEVE THAT THE BEHAVIOR OF THE CORPORAL. THERE WAS A LARGE GAP BETWEEN THE BEHAVIOR OF THE CORPORAL AND THE OFFICER WHO SIMPLY RECEIVED THE LETTER OF REPRIMAND. WHILE I DON'T HAVE AN ENCYCLOPEDIC KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT DISCIPLINE NORMALLY GETS HANDED OUT FOR THIS TYPE OF THING. IT'S THIS DISCIPLINE WAS WITHIN THE MATRIX, NOT EVEN AT THE TOP OF THE MATRIX, AND I TEND TO AGREE WITH THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY THAT THIS BEHAVIOR THAT WE SAW ON VIDEO, AT LEAST THOSE SEGMENTS THAT WE DISCUSSED, THAT THERE IS A PRETTY DECENT GULF BETWEEN THAT AND JUST AS A ONE OFF CALLING, REFERRING TO SOMEONE AS A DUSTY ASS OR WHATEVER THE STATEMENT WAS. I VIEWED A MUCH LONGER INTERACTIONS, MUCH MORE SIGNIFICANT PROFANITY, THOUGH THAT'S FRANKLY NOT THE POINT OF CONTENTION, BUT BEHAVIOR AND LANGUAGE THAT, AS PEOPLE WERE ATTEMPTING TO DISENGAGE FROM THE SITUATION, WERE SO I HESITATE TO USE THE WORD AGGRESSIVE, BUT WE'RE SO ABRASIVE AS TO DRAW THESE PEOPLE BACK IN. CERTAINLY, SPEAKING AS AN ATTORNEY, CLIENTS TELL ME THINGS ALL THE TIME. I AM EXPECTED TO RISE ABOVE THAT, NOT MEET THEM WHERE THEY ARE; LAW ENFORCEMENT CERTAINLY IS EXPECTED TO RISE ABOVE AND NOT MEET PEOPLE. WHERE THEY ARE. NOT ONLY WHEN THEY WERE FACE TO FACE AWING, BUT AGAIN, THOSE TWO POINTS THAT I EMPHASIZED WHEN THEY WERE WALKING AWAY, LOOKING TO DISENGAGE WHILE ADMITTEDLY JAWING OVER THEIR SHOULDERS, BUT WALKING AWAY NONETHELESS, THAT HER ENGAGING THEM IN A WAY THAT GOT THEM TO RE ENGAGE, I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE IS ENOUGH EVIDENCE PRESENT TO SAY THAT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY THAT THIS PUNISHMENT WAS NOT COMMENSURATE OR TO SAY THAT WE HAVE CAUSE TO MODIFY THE PUNISHMENT IN THIS MATTER. ANY FURTHER STATEMENTS BY ANY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? THEN, MR HARRIS, IF WE COULD PLEASE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE MOTION TO MODIFY THE PENALTY TO TWO DAYS. OR THE DISCIPLINE TO TWO DAYS RATHER? >> MR. MICHAEL LEMING? >> NO. >> MR. EDWIN BEO? >> YES. >> MR. BRADLEY RICKS? >> YES. >> MR. JOSHUA NEVILLE? >> NO. >> THAT BRINGS US TO A TIE VOTE, WHICH DOES NOT HAVE THE MAJORITY. >> UNDER CIVIL SERVICE RULES, IT TAKES THREE VOTES FOR THERE TO BE ANY ACTION, SO THAT MEANS THERE'S NO ACTION. >> GOING TO INVITE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM EITHER THE LAWYERS OR THE BOARD. [04:20:04] >> THAT'S HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE IT. >> AS MR. DAR WAS SAYING, MR. RICKS. >> PROCEDURALLY, THAT'S JUST ON THAT MOTION. IT WAS IT WAS A MOTION TO AMEND. THE MOTION TO AMEND FAILS. THEN YOU HAVE TO DETERMINE WHETHER YOU THEN APPROVE OF THE ORIGINAL DISCIPLINE BY THE CHIEF. >> NOT THAT FAR. IT JUST MEANS THAT THAT MOTION FAILED. BUT THEN THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. THEY CAN CERTAINLY DISCUSS WHATEVER THEY WANT. >> I THOUGHT YOU WERE SAYING THAT EVERYTHING FAILED. [LAUGHTER] >> NO. >> BECAUSE THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE CONSIDERATIONS. >> YES. >> THAT MOTION HAS PASSED. THAT IT'S SIMPLY A QUESTION OF IF WHETHER WE CAN COME TO A DISCUSSION. MY INCLINATION IS TO OPEN THE FLOOR TO FURTHER DEBATE TO MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND THEN TO ALLOW ATTORNEYS ON EITHER SIDE, IF THEY WISH, TO ADDRESS ANY OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE SAID AND SEE IF WE CAN TRY TO COME TO A DECISION BEFORE IT GETS TOO LATE IN THE AFTERNOON OR THE EVENING. ANY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? ANY FURTHER STATEMENTS BEYOND WHAT WE HAVE MADE UP TO THIS POINT? >> AS FAR AS THE MOTION. >> THE MOTION FAILED. WELL, I GUESS, TECHNICALLY, WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. STAIN ON ME. WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE FOLLOW ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER WHENEVER WE CAN. AS A CHAIR, I MOVE TO UPHOLD AS COMMENSURATE THE FIVE-DAY SUSPENSION, METED OUT BY THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY, AND TO NOT MODIFY IT IN ANY WAY. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> NOW I WILL OPEN TO DEBATE. AS I SAID. I'VE LAID OUT MY THOUGHTS ON THE MATTER BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE IN ATTORNEYS, CORRECT ME IF WELL, MR. RAINS I DON'T BELIEVE YOU'RE GOING TO DISAGREE WITH ME. MR. IVY, CORRECT ME IF YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE GOING TO DISAGREE WITH ME. MY PERCEPTION ON THIS IS THAT WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT THIS FROM A FOR THE LAWYERS, A DENVER PERSPECTIVE, A PURELY SQUARE ONE PERSPECTIVE. WE ARE LOOKING TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT WE'VE BEEN PRESENTED EVIDENCE THAT SHOWS THAT WE HAVE CAUSE TO MODIFY. IT'S NOT US DECIDING ON OUR OWN WHAT WE THINK WE SHOULD DO, WHAT WE WOULD HAVE DONE IN THE CHIEF'S POSITION, BUT WHETHER OR NOT IT HAS BEEN PROVEN TO US THAT THERE IS CAUSE TO MODIFY. AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE ANY PERSONAL FEELINGS ON WHAT I WOULD OR WOULD NOT HAVE DONE IF I'M THE ACCUSED PHYSICIAN BECAUSE TONS OF PEOPLE GET DISCIPLINED. I'M SURE THERE'S A LAUNDRY LIST OF PEOPLE THAT COULD BE CITED TO YOU, AND I DON'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THAT HISTORY. BUT WITH WHAT WAS PRESENTED, I KNOW, MR. IVY, YOU PRESENTED TESTIMONY REGARDING THE INDIVIDUAL WHO WAS NOT SUSTAINED. THAT WAS CONSIDERED BECAUSE THE PROFANITY AND ALL OF THAT WAS PART OF COMMAND LANGUAGE. THE INDIVIDUAL WHO WAS SUSTAINED BUT ONLY GOT THE ONE DAY. IT WAS THAT ONE STATEMENT WHERE HERE, AGAIN, I THINK I'M VIEWING A LARGER GULF THAN A COUPLE OF MY COLLEAGUES ARE, THAT I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A REALLY SIGNIFICANT GULF BETWEEN THAT ONE STATEMENT, THAT ONE DUSTY AS STATEMENT, VERSUS WHAT WE SAW. YES, THE LANGUAGE WE HAVE BEEN USING TODAY HAS BEEN DELIGHTFULLY COLORFUL. I VIEW IT AS A PRETTY LARGE GULF. AGAIN, BECAUSE I DON'T VIEW IT AS OUR ROLE TO STEP INTO THE SHOES OF THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY, BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT IS REASONABLE TO VIEW THE GULF AS LARGE, I DO NOT BELIEVE IT'S APPROPRIATE TO UPSET THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY'S DISCIPLINE. AGAIN, THAT'S NOT ME MAKING A DETERMINATION OF WHAT I THINK EXACTLY IT SHOULD BE. I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. BUT NOTHING HAS BEEN SHOWN TO ME THAT WOULD MAKE ME FEEL COMFORTABLE A SAYING IT HAS BEEN PROVEN THAT WE HAVE CAUSE TO MODIFY, AND THEREFORE, I BELIEVE THAT IF WE CAN, IF ONE BELIEVES THAT THIS GULF IS PRESENT, THEN WE SHOULD DEFER TO THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY ON THAT DISCIPLINE. THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON IT, MR. LIVING. YOU SECONDED; YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, IF YOU WISH. YOU CAN ALSO DEFER IF YOU WANT. IT'S COMPLETELY. >> I CONCUR WITH WHAT YOU SAID, NOTHING FURTHER THERE. >> MISS BARO, MR. RICKS, ANY THOUGHTS ON WHERE WE ARE? THEN I'LL OPEN IT UP TO THE ATTORNEYS TO GIVE WHAT I HOPE WOULD [04:25:02] BE VERY BRIEF SPECIFIC THOUGHTS AS OPPOSED TO, ANY TYPE OF RECITATION, BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT TWO. >> BASICALLY TWO INSTANCES IN A 40-MINUTE VIDEO WITH CORPORAL ROBINSON. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE WITH OFFICER MILLER. THE CHIEF, EVERYBODY'S CAME UP HERE HAS SAID THAT THAT TYPE OF LANGUAGE CAN BE USED IN CERTAIN INSTANCES. DID CORPORAL ROBINSON OVERUSE IN SOME INSTANCES? >> YES. >> SOMETHING WAS MADE EARLIER ABOUT IT BEING AN INSULTING LANGUAGE. CALLING SOMEONE A DUSTY ASS IS STILL INSULTING LANGUAGE, WHETHER TO USE IT ONE TIME OR MISS, I FORGET WHAT SHE TOLD THE GIRL [INAUDIBLE]. >> THERE WERE A FEW. BUT I JUST DON'T SEE WHERE THAT HUGE OF A GAP EXISTS. SHE, I KNOW THERE WAS SOME BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WHAT DO YOU USE TO GET THE DESIRED EFFECT AS FAR AS GETTING THOSE PERSONS TO LEAVE THE EVENT? SHE DID IT WITH NO USE OF FORCE. YES, SOME COLORFUL LANGUAGE, PROBABLY SOME THAT OVERSTEPPED THE BOUNDS, BUT I DON'T THINK IT WAS SO GREAT FROM A LETTER OF REPRIMAND TO FIVE DAYS. >> MR. RICK, WOULD YOU LIKE THE FLOOR? >> YES. CHIEF, TELL ME AGAIN, YOU MAY HAVE STATED EARLIER IN THE RULING, I'VE GOT I'VE GOT THREE AREAS, COMPLETION OF SUBMISSION OF REQUIRED FORMS, COMMAND OF TEMPER, CONDUCT UNBECOMING OF AN OFFICER. WHICH OF THOSE THREE DID SHE GET THE REPRIMAND FOR? >> SHE DIDN'T GET A LETTER OF REPRIMAND. >> I THOUGHT [INAUDIBLE] I'M CONFUSED. I THOUGHT EARLIER YOU SAID. >> NO. ANOTHER OFFICER GOT A LETTER OF REPRIMAND. >> WELL, I KNOW, BUT WHEN I ASKED YOU ABOUT THE CATEGORIES. >> CATEGORY 1, THAT IS THE MAXIMUM RECOMMENDATION FOR A CATEGORY 1 FIRST OFFENSE. IF ALL SHE WOULD HAVE DONE WAS FORGET TO SUBMIT A USE OF FORCE FORM, FOR EXAMPLE, OR THE RESPONSIVE RESISTANCE BEHAVIOR FORM, THEN THE MAX RECOMMENDATION WOULD HAVE BEEN A LETTER OF REPRIMAND, BECAUSE IT HAD ONLY BEEN IN CATEGORY ONE THAT SHE WOULD HAVE VIOLATED. BUT I SUSTAINED THE BOTH CATEGORY 2 WHICH THEN LED TO THAT SECOND BLOCK OF UP TO THREE DAYS SUSPENSION FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE? >> OH, FOR EACH ONE. SHE COULD HAVE ACTUALLY HAD NINE DAYS. >> SIX. >> A LETTER OF THREE FOR EACH CATEGORY 2. A TOTAL OF SIX DAYS. >> OKAY. >> BUT THE CATEGORY 1 DOESN'T CARRY SUSPENSION. HER MAXIMUM, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, CHIEF, LETTER OF REPRIMAND, SIX DAYS WOULD BE THE THEORETICAL MAXIMUM? >> YES, SIR. >> SHE COULD HAVE. I KNOW THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE DUPLICATIVE, BUT IN THEORY, THAT'S. >> THEN, IF YOU WENT BY THE MATRIX, I MEAN, YOU COULD GO OUTSIDE THE MATRIX AS WELL, YOU GO HIGHER, BUT STAY INSIDE THAT RECOMMENDED MATRIX. I WOULD HAVE BEEN SIX DAYS. >> ANYTHING ELSE, MR. RICKS? >> THAT'S IT. >> ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? ATTORNEYS, IF YOU WOULD, AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO. WE CAN JUST HAVE OUR VOTE, BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS YOU'D LIKE FOR US TO CONSIDER? >> NO. >> YOU GIVE OPPORTUNITY TO A LAWYER TO TALK, AND IT'S HARD NOT TO SAY YES. I THINK YOU MADE SOME IMPORTANT POINTS, JOSHUA, MR. NEOVLL? ABOUT THE ROLE OF THE BOARD. WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE BOARD? IT'S NOT TO YOU'RE SITTING AS AN APPELLATE BODY. YOU'RE LOOKING TO SEE, OKAY, GOOD FAITH, FOR CAUSE. WAS HE REASONABLE? WELL, HE WAS REASONABLE BY DEFAULT BECAUSE HIS DISCIPLINE WAS WITHIN THE MATRIX. IT WAS LESS THAN THE MAX OF THE MATRIX. BY DEFAULT, I MEAN, WHY DO WE HAVE THE MATRIX IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO FOLLOW IT. IT IS NOT FOR THE BOARD TO, LIKE YOU SAID, IF I WERE SITTING IN THE SHOES OF THE CHIEF. THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT YOU GUYS ARE THERE FOR. YOU TO DETERMINE JUST THOSE THINGS, CAUSE, GOOD FAITH, AND WAS IT REASONABLE, AND IT HAS TO BE REASONABLE. I DO SEE A MASSIVE GULF BETWEEN ONE STATEMENT OF CALLING SOMEBODY A DUSTY ASS AND WHAT HAPPENED HERE. I MEAN, TWO PEOPLE GOT TOLD THAT THEY WERE GOING TO GET SHE WAS GOING TO BEAT THE STUFF OUT OF THEM. SHE TOLD ANOTHER ONE TO SWING AT HER. SHE TOLD HER, I'M ABOUT THAT LIFE. DON'T LET THIS UNIFORM, THIS BADGE FOOL YOU, I'M FROM THE STREETS, LIKE THAT LANGUAGE IS NOT DIRECTIVE. SOME OF IT IS INSULTING, AND SOME OF IT IS JUST COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATE FOR A POLICE OFFICER TO SAY. AGAIN, YOU'RE NOT SUBSTITUTING YOUR OWN THOUGHTS FOR THAT OF THE CHIEF. [04:30:04] YOU'RE JUST DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS REASONABLE HERE. I THINK ANYTIME THAT THEY'RE WITHIN THE MATRIX OF WHAT IT CALLS FOR FOR DISCIPLINE, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE LESS THAN THE TOP LINE OF THE MATRIX, IT IS REASONABLE. >> MR. IVY, I KNOW YOU INITIALLY SAID NO, BUT I KNOW YOU PROBABLY CAN'T HELP YOURSELF NOW. >> WELL, SINCE WE STARTED QUOTING WITNESSES AGAIN OR OUR TESTIMONY, BUT IT JUST IN THIS MATTER, THOUGH, THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS BORNE BY THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY. IT IS A QUASI DE NOVO REVIEW, OKAY? BUT WE TALK ABOUT THE GOAL. ON OFFICER JENKINS, ACCORDING TO THE REPORT THAT I BELIEVE IS IN EVIDENCE, SHOVED A JUVENILE MULTIPLE TIMES, TELLING HIM, GO FIND A CAR, GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE. TOLD ANOTHER ONE. GOD DAMN, SO HAVE AN HARD-HEADED. OFFICER MILLER, BITCH, SHUT THE FUCK UP AND WALK. BITCH ASS, BRO, GET THE FUCK ON. BRO, GET YOUR DUSTY ASS ON. I MEAN, I QUESTIONED HOW BIG THE GOLF IS THAT YOU'RE SAYING. I MEAN, AGAIN, WITHOUT GETTING TOO MUCH BACK INTO THE WEEDS, I MEAN, THE LANGUAGE USED BY ALL THESE OFFICERS, GIVEN THE RESULT THEY OBTAINED, WAS INTENTIONAL, EFFECTIVE. THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO FIGHT THESE KIDS. I WOULD DISAGREE WITH YOU, JUDGE. MISS NOBLE. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY FURTHER THOUGHTS FROM THE BOARD BEFORE WE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE? WE HAVE A MOTION FROM THE CHAIR TO UPHOLD THE DISCIPLINE AS REASONABLE AND COMMISERATE. THE SECOND FOR MR. LIVING. MS. HARRIS, IF WE CAN HAVE A ROLL CALL. >> MR. MICHAEL LEMING? >> YES. >> MR. EDWINA ARA? >> NO. >> LET ME WRITE THAT DOWN. >> MR. BRADLEY RICKS? >> NO. >> MR. JOSHUA NEVILLE? >> YES. >> MOTION ONCE AGAIN FAILS. >> [INAUDIBLE] THERE IS [INAUDIBLE]. >> COUNCIL, WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE? MR. DARRYL HAS SUGGESTED TWO COURSES OF ACTION, THOUGH CERTAINLY WE WOULD INVITE OTHERS. THE FIRST IS FOR US TO KEEP THIS OPEN AND FOR COUNCIL TO SUBMIT POSTERIOR IN BRIEFS, PARTICULARLY ON THE ISSUE ON THE COMMISSIONED ISSUE ON THE DISCIPLINE, AS AGAIN, WE'VE ALREADY MADE THE DECISION REGARDING THE GOOD FAITH AND JUST CAUSE DETERMINATION. IF YOU WISH TO DO THAT, WE CAN. THE ALTERNATIVE IS THAT WE ULTIMATELY LEAVE HERE UNABLE TO REACH A DECISION AND WE GIVE YOU ANOTHER DATE TO COME BACK AND HEAR IT AGAIN, IF YOU CANNOT REACH AN AGREEMENT IN THE INTERIM. WE WILL DEFER TO COUNCIL AS TO HOW YOU'D LIKE TO PROCEED. >> I WOULD ADD THIS, GUYS, YOU'VE HEARD EACH ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS OF THEIR THOUGHTS ON THINGS. TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU'LL WANT TO THE EXTENT THAT WE'RE ASKING YOU GUYS TO EITHER COME BACK OR TO DO BRIEFING, I WOULD PROBABLY SUGGEST THAT YOU GUYS ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. ONE BEING THE GULF BETWEEN THE LANGUAGE. OBVIOUSLY, EVERYBODY HAS A DIFFERENT OPINION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A GOLF OR NOT. PERHAPS GOING THROUGH THE ACTUAL VIDEO AND PULLING DIRECT QUOTES TO THE OFFICER HERE OR THE OTHER GENTLEMAN. ALL CAN DO IT THAT WAY, HOWEVER YOU'LL WANT TO DO IT, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE GOT A 2-2 SPLIT HERE AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE. DOESN'T APPEAR. ALTERNATIVELY, YOU ALL COULD COME BACK ARGUE AGAIN. BUT I DON'T SEE THE POINT OF GOING BACK AND FORTH TODAY. >> I AGREE WITH THAT LAST POINT, MR. DARRYL. MR. DARRYL, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IS A THIRD OPTION, [04:35:02] GIVING THEM A FEW MINUTES TO TRY TO REACH A RESOLUTION OR WOULD THAT BE INAPPROPRIATE AT THIS JUNCTURE? >> SOMETHING TELLS ME IF WE KICK THEM OUT OF HERE, THEY'LL FIGURE IT OUT ON THEIR OWN. >> WHAT IS COUNCIL'S PLEASURE? >> WELL, I CAN TELL YOU I'VE BOMBARDED THEM WITH MULTIPLE REASONABLE OFFERS ALREADY, I'M JUST KIDDING. >> I WAS ABOUT TO SAY I CERTAINLY I DON'T WANT TO HEAR A WORD ABOUT WHAT HAS OR HAS NOT BEEN OFFERED. WE DO NOT WANT TO GO INTO THAT THAT IF YOU GUYS WANTED A FEW MINUTES TO TRY TO COME TO SOMETHING, HAPPY TO GIVE IT TO YOU, SO YOU'RE NOT COMING BACK, IF YOU WANT TO BRIEF YOU CAN. IF YOU WANT TO JUST COME BACK AND REHEAR, AGAIN, YOU ARE ENTITLED TO ALL OF THESE THINGS. I'LL DEFER TO YOU AS BEST I CAN ON THAT. >> MR. RAINES, SEE IF YOU'LL REST THIS. RESET IT FOR ARGUMENT AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING, AND WITHIN I DON'T KNOW, 10 DAYS FROM TODAY, WE CAN DECIDE IF WE WANT TO FILE SOMETHING. I JUST THINK TODAY IS A BAD DAY. WE'VE BEEN BEATING THIS HORSE TO DEATH. NO OFFENSE, MR. ROBSON. I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT ANYMORE. I DOUBT THE OTHER SIDE DOES. POSSIBLY MAYBE WE CAN COME TO SOME RESOLUTION BEFORE WE HAVE TO DECIDE IF WE NEED TO START WRITING THINGS IN THIS. >> SHE'S REALLY TO SAY SOMETHING. >> I'LL DEFER TO YOU AS TO WHETHER YOUR CLIENT GETS TO SPEAK. >> HE CAN TALK IF HE WANTS TO TALK. GO AHEAD AND THEN I'LL SAY WHAT I WANT TO SAY. >> THE ONLY THING I WAS GOING TO SAY IS AND I'VE HEARD EVERYTHING THAT Y'ALL HAD TO SAY, WHEN WE JUST SAY Y'ALL KNOW WHERE MY HEAD'S AT BECAUSE IN CASE I HAVE TO BE FOR YOU ALL BE ABLE TO GET IN MY MIND. FIVE DAYS DOESN'T JUST COME OUT OF THIN AIR. I LOOK AT OTHER OFFICERS, AS YOU MENTIONED, THEY HAVE OTHER OFFICERS WHO HAVE GIVEN DISCIPLINE TO YOU FOR CONDUCT UNBECOMING COMMAND OF TEMPER, SIMILAR THINGS, AND THEY'VE GOTTEN THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME OR SOME OF THEM EVEN MORE. IT DON'T JUST COME OUT OF THIN AIR. THERE'S A LOT OFF THOUGHT THAT GOES INTO A LOT OF COMPARISON TO OTHER OFFICERS AND THEN JUST THE MESSAGING THAT I'M NOT THAT HEY, THIS IS THE BEHAVIOR. IS THAT BEHAVIOR ACCEPTABLE OR NOT AND DISCOURAGING TO OTHER OFFICERS. IF I DO THIS, THIS IS GOING TO BE MY DISCIPLINE. IF THAT IS THE THOUGHTS THAT GO BEHIND IT. HOW SERIOUSLY WE TAKE IT TO THE COMMUNITY, YOU CAN ONLY TWO DAYS SUSPENSION FOR DOING THAT. OTHER OFFICERS JUST AS A PREVENTIVE THING. JUST SO YOU ALL CAN GET IN MY HEAD SINCE I MIGHT BE HERE IN THE FUTURE TOO, YOU'LL KNOW HOW I THINK. >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU, CHIEF. MR. RAINES. >> I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY SET A DATE FOR BRIEFING, BUT 10 DAYS ISN'T GOING TO BE ENOUGH BECAUSE I'VE GOT TRIAL NEXT WEEK. >> NO, I'LL SAY MAYBE WE HAVE 10 DAYS TO CONTACT MR. DARRYL TO INDICATE IF WE DO WANT TO. THAT WAY IT GIVES A DAY OR TWO GET AWAY FROM THIS AND THEN MAYBE TRY TO START TALKING BEFORE WE HAVE. >> YOU HAVE SEEN ME MAKE A VERY DIFFERENT FACE IF I THOUGHT YOU WERE BEING ASKED TO HAVE BRIEF SIT IN THE NEXT 10 DAYS. [OVERLAPPING] MY UNDERSTANDING WAS EVERYONE TO REGROUPS. THEY GIVE IT SOME THOUGHT. YOU GUYS TALK, YOU FIGURE OUT HOW EXACTLY YOU WANT TO MOVE FORWARD, WHETHER YOU THINK YOU CAN COME TO AN AGREEMENT OR NOT, AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO BRIEF THE ISSUE, IF SO, THEN WE GIVE YOU BUT WE SET YOU FOR OUR NEXT DAY. >> I THINK WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS JUST SET IT FOR THE NEXT MEETING. WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU GUYS A SCHEDULING ORDER LIKE NORMAL. THEN IF Y'ALL DECIDE TO FILE SOMETHING, THAT IT'S COMPLETELY UP TO YOU ALL. YOU DON'T HAVE TO BOTHER US ANYMORE WITH IT. IT'S COMPLETELY UP TO YOU GUYS IF YOU WANT TO FILE SOMETHING. I THINK WE NEED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU GUYS TO PRESENT NEXT TIME. IT'S PURELY ON THE ISSUE OF COMMENSURATE WITH THE OFFENSE. BOARD, DO YOU GUYS WANT TO TAKE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE? >> ON MY PERSONAL OPINION, AND THEN I WILL DEFER TO THE BOARD CHIEF, IF IT IS NOT TOO BURDENSOME. BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU COULD PROBABLY DUMP A SPREADSHEET, BUT IT WOULD LIKELY NEED TO BE REDACTED. PERSONALLY, MR. DARRYL IF IT'S APPROPRIATE, I WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO SEE IF THERE IS A HISTORY OF SIMILAR, BECAUSE AS WE STAND HERE TODAY, OUR ENTIRE UNIVERSE WAS THREE PEOPLE. ONE PERSON WHO WASN'T SUSTAINED, ONE PERSON WHO GOT A LETTER OF REPRIMAND, ONE PERSON WHO GOT FIVE DAYS. I ASSUME THE UNIVERSE IS MUCH LARGER THAN THAT. I ALSO APPRECIATE THAT IT MAY BE INCREDIBLY BURDENSOME TO COME UP WITH THAT OR MAYBE NOT. I GENUINELY DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. I CAN SAY PERSONALLY, I WOULD FIND THAT HELPFUL. I DON'T KNOW IF OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD WOULD FIND THAT HELPFUL, BUT I BELIEVE I WOULD. >> I WOULD PROBABLY HESITATE ON PRODUCE. I THINK YOU'RE ASKING FOR OTHER DISCIPLINES. >> YES. >> UNLESS IT'S THE EXACT SAME CIRCUMSTANCE, [04:40:03] I'D PROBABLY HESITATE OR WE'RE JUST GOING TO END UP DOING THE SAME DAY. I'D PROBABLY HESITATE ON INVITING OTHER DISCIPLINES, UNLESS IT'S NARROWLY TAILORED TO AN HOUR LONG CHAOTIC EVENT. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REALLY. >> AGAIN, I WILL I WILL DEFER TO THE CHIEF. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT MORE EVIDENCE IS AT LEAST IN THEORY APPROPRIATE, CHIEF, IF YOU HAD CASES THAT YOU THOUGHT WOULD BE GOOD MATCHES? I WOULD CERTAINLY BE INCLINED TO SEE THEM. IF THEY DON'T EXIST, THAT'S OKAY TOO. I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO INVENT ANYTHING THAT DOESN'T EXIST, BUT IF IT DOES, I WOULD FIND THAT PERSUASIVE. I DON'T KNOW IF OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD WOULD, I WOULD FIND IT PERSUASIVE. IS THERE ANY OTHER INFORMATION OR EVIDENCE THAT THE BOARD BECAUSE WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT A GIANT UNIVERSE. IS THERE ANY OTHER EVIDENCE THAT YOU GUYS WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SEEING OR HAVE YOU SEEN WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE? THEN I BELIEVE THAT IF THERE IS ANY NEW AND IF YOU ARE SENDING IT TO US, OBVIOUSLY, PLEASE SEND IT TO MR. AARON BECAUSE I'M SURE HE WOULD WANT TO GO THROUGH IT WITH A FINE TOOTH COAT. >> MR. CHAIRMAN MAY ALSO I ASK THAT IN FAIRNESS, IF THERE ARE FAVORABLE CASES FOR OUR SIDE THAT WE BE ALLOWED TO HAVE THOSE SUBPOENAED AND BROUGHT FORTH. >> I'M A LITTLE BIT HESITANT BECAUSE MY CONCERN IS THIS IS NOT ANYTHING THAT WENT INTO, WE DIDN'T REVIEW ALL OF THAT AT THE PREVIOUS HEARING. >> THAT'S FAIR. >> I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. >> WELL, LOOK AND IF YOU GUYS DON'T WANT, IT'S OKAY IF YOU DON'T WANT. >> I DON'T KNOW. I GOT TO THINK ABOUT IT. I DON'T WANT TO STEP INTO SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE JUST A EASY APPEAL. >> ULTIMATELY, I BELIEVE THE PROBLEM WE FIND OURSELVES IN IS BECAUSE WE ARE CURRENTLY DOWN, ONE MEMBER OF THE BOARD. IF WE HAD FIVE PEOPLE. I DON'T KNOW WHICH WAY IT WOULD HAVE GONE BUT FEELING, WE WOULDN'T HAVE HAD A COMPLETELY THIRD MOTION. I FEEL LIKE WE'D HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FIND SOME WAY TO MOVE FORWARD. WE SIMPLY ARE STUCK WITH FOUR PEOPLE. UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE WE WOULD BE PICKING UP A NEW PERSON, AT WHICH POINT WE'RE HAVING THE WHOLE HEARING AGAIN, I IMAGINE FOR THEIR SAKE, WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE THE WHOLE HEARING AGAIN. I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THEY WOULD BE CONTENT TO MAKE A DECISION BASED ON JUST BRIEFING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. YES. >> TWO THINGS ON THAT. I'M NOT LOOKING TO TRY OTHER CASES, MUCH LESS THIS CASE AGAIN. BUT I DISAGREE. ONE OF THE STATED PURPOSES AT THE PREVIOUS FOR THE FOR MEMBERS OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS BEING IN THERE IS TO ADVISE THE CHIEF OF SIMILAR DISCIPLINES GIVEN IN OTHER SIMILAR CASES AS POSSIBLE. THIS IDEA THAT AT LEAST THE STATED PURPOSE OF WHY INTERNAL AFFAIRS REPRESENTATIVES ARE IN THERE, THAT'S NOT COMPLETELY ACCURATE, I DON'T THINK. THE PURPOSE OF BEING THERE IS FOR THEM TO TELL THE CHIEF, THIS IS WHAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS DONE IN THE PAST FOR TYPICAL OFFENSES OF SIMILAR NATURE. >> LET'S DO THIS. THE SCHEDULING ORDER HAS A SUBPOENA DATE. YOU'LL DO THE SUBPOENAS, HOWEVER YOU'LL WANT. YOU ALL OBJECT TO THE SUBPOENAS, AND THEN WE'LL MAKE SOME DECISIONS. >> WELL, COULD WE DO THIS WITH IT? COULD WE HAVE A SUBPOENA DATE TO PRODUCE BEFORE THE HEARING TO EACH SIDE? WELL, I GUESS THEY WOULDN'T BE SUBPOENA ANYTHING FOR ME, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING BEFORE. >> SAYS THE MAN WHO DOESN'T HAVE TO PRODUCE ANYTHING. >> ABSOLUTELY. [LAUGHTER] I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING BEFORE I INTENDED TO USE IT RATHER THAN FILE A BUNCH OF PUBLIC RECORD REQUESTS. >> I THINK THAT THE PRECISE ANSWER WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE PARTY BEING SUBPOENAED, SUBPOENA, TRIAL HEARING, DEPOSITION SO NOT ONE OF THOSE THREE PEOPLE OR THREE EVENTS. IF THEY WANT TO PRODUCE EARLIER. >> WELL THEN I THINK THAT IS GOING TO BE. >> WE'LL GET YOU GUYS THE SCHEDULING ORDER, YOU GUYS HANDLE IT HOW YOU FEEL. WE'LL DO IT. I GUESS WHAT IS THE DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING? OCTOBER. >> DO WE ANTICIPATE HAVING OUR NEXT BOARD MEMBERS SWORN IN? >> YES. >> OCTOBER 27TH, GENTLEMEN, ARE YOU GUYS AVAILABLE? >> I DON'T SEE WHY. >> NO. ACTUALLY. [LAUGHTER] I'VE GOT A HEARING THAT DAY. >> IF YOU'RE STARTING AT NORMAL TIME, I'VE GOT AN ARGUMENT ON 19TH. >> WELL, MR. NEW AND MR. DARRYL, UNFORTUNATELY, IT FACED A VERY SIMILAR SITUATION LIKE THIS WHERE A CASE HAD GONE UP ON APPEAL AND ENDED UP BEING REMANDED BACK TO THE BOARD FOR RECONSIDERATION WHETHER THE PUNISHMENT WAS COMMENSURATE. [04:45:03] WE HAD 1 OR 2 NEW BOARD MEMBERS WHO PITCHED A FIT ABOUT I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT I'M ASKING. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. I DON'T KNOW. >> I REALLY DON'T WANT TO TRY THIS CASE AGAIN. >> I DO. I THINK I SPEAK FOR THE BOARD AND THAT WHILE YOU'RE ALL LOVELY, WE DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO HEAR IT AGAIN, BUT CORPORAL IS ENTITLED TO THAT. IF WE CAN'T COME TO A DECISION, WHICH AS WE SIT HERE, WE CANNOT. IF YOU GUYS CANNOT COME TO AN AGREEMENT, WHICH UP TO THIS POINT YOU HAVEN'T DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T IN THE FUTURE, SHE IS ENTITLED TO US HEARING IT FRANKLY OVER AND OVER AGAIN UNTIL WE CAN HAVE THREE VOTES. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S THE WAY THE STATUTE IS WRITTEN. THERE YOU GO. WHAT DATE WE STATED. >> DEMY, YOU WERE STARTING TO SAY THAT YOU HAVE A HEARING THAT MORNING? >> I HAVE A HEARING THAT MORNING, CORRECT? >> IF WE STARTED AT 1:00, WOULD THAT BE BETTER? >> CASE IT DEPENDS ON THE DOCKET OF THE COURT. >> WHICH COURT ARE YOU IN? >> CARROL SMITH CIVIL DOCKET. >> JUST DEPENDS ON THE DAY. >> YEAH. I KNOW. >> WITHOUT GOING INTO DETAIL, HOW INTENSIVE IS THAT HEARINGS, DO YOU BELIEVE IT WOULD BE REASONABLE FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE CASE? >> THIS ONE COULD GET BUMPED >> VERY GOOD LAWYER. YOU CAN HANDLE IT. >> AS SOMEONE WHO WAS A PUBLIC DEFENDER FOR ALMOST A DECADE, I AM SENSITIVE TO THE IDEA OF JUST HAVING TO DO ONE THING AFTER THE OTHER. [LAUGHTER] MR. RAINES, WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE? >> IF YOU WANT TO BUMP US TO A LATER IN THE DOCKET HERE, I'LL SEE WHAT I CAN WORK OUT ON THE OTHER SIDE. I'LL SEE WHAT I CAN DO BETWEEN NOW AND THEN. >> WE'LL BE HERE REGARDLESS. SO IF YOU WRAP UP EARLY. >> DO YOU HAVE A HEARING ON THAT DAY ALREADY? >> I HAVE NO IDEA. >> ARE YOU JUST TALKING ABOUT SETTING THE BOARD MEETING LATER THAN THE DAY? >> YES. >> IS THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? WE CAN DO THAT. >> START AT 1:00 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> MS. HARRIS, ANY ISSUE WITH THAT TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE? >> NO. >> BECAUSE I KNOW WE GENERALLY HAVE OUR DATES THAT FOR THE YEAR, DO WE NEED TO MODIFY. >> WE'LL SEND A NOTE. >> DO WE NEED A MOTION TODAY OR NO? NO MOMENT TO ME. >> YEAH WE CAN DO A MOTION TOO. >> THAT WAS OCTOBER, WHAT DATE? OCTOBER 27TH? >> YES. >> DO WE NEED TO MODIFY THE AGENDA? >> THE AGENDA? NO. THIS IS ALL PART OF IT. >> THEN AS THE CHAIR, I WILL MOVE TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING OF OUR OCTOBER 27TH BOARD MEETING TO BEGIN AT 1:00 PM. DO I HAVE A SECOND. SECOND BY MR. BARROW. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE? MOTION CARRIES. OCTOBER 27TH, AT 1:00 PM. >> I WAS JUST OPEN TO WHENEVER. >> I MOVE TO LEAVE THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF JANNEL ROBINSON WOODARD, OPEN TO RESET THE CONTINUATION TO THAT OCTOBER 27TH DATE AT 1:00 PM, AND LESS COUNCIL COMES BACK TO US AND TELLS US THAT WE DON'T NEED THAT DATE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> I SECOND. >> SECOND BY MR. LIMING. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES? CONFIRM THE DATE? >> YES. >> DO WE NEED TO WAIT FOR THAT? >> NO. >> IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD THIS AFTERNOON? HEARING NONE, CHAIR MOVES TO ADJOURN. >> I SECOND. >> SECOND BY MR. LEMMY, I CAN NEVER REMEMBER WHETHER WE NEED A SECOND FOR THAT. AN OPPOSED? HEARING NONE BEYOND MR. RICK'S SARCASM, WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU, EVERYONE. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.