Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
PFC to rule on officer's dismissal
By Rasmieyh Abdelnabi
Daily News staff writer
A veteran Beloit police officer faces termination for allegedly taking long unauthorized breaks instead of being on assignment, officials say.
A two-day hearing ended Wednesday night and the Beloit Police and Fire Commission will decide if Vincent Brown gets to keep his job or is fired, as requested by Chief Sam Lathrop.
The Beloit Police Department filed charges against Brown, a Beloit officer of 12 years, after an internal investigation concluded he was at a restaurant on Fourth Street instead of at his designated school zone conducting traffic enforcement. He was charged with insubordination, lack of attentiveness on duty, leaving his duty post, unsatisfactory performance, not being truthful, failing to use radio communications and violating the code of ethics.
The internal investigation, headed by two captains, includes global positioning system data and computer-aided device data, along with two interviews with Brown. One interview was with the captains heading the investigation and one was with Lathrop.
“I would not have brought these charges until I knew there was a significant amount of evidence,” the chief said.
The decision to terminate Brown was made in part because of his lengthy discipline history, Lathrop testified Wednesday night. It was also due to the severity of the violations. Brown was hired in 1994. He was disciplined for the first time in 1996 with a three-day suspension without pay for accepting gifts and gratuities. He was disciplined 13 times during his tenure in Beloit. On Jan. 26, 2006, Brown was suspended for 10 days without pay for unbecoming conduct and lack of attentiveness while on duty.
Lathrop said after the 10-day suspension, he warned Brown verbally and in writing that any future disciplinary actions could lead to termination.
“The point of discipline is to change behavior,” Lathrop said. “I don't believe I was successful in doing that. My message apparently hadn't gotten through to Officer Brown.”
Brown's attorney, Andrew D. Schauer, argued that Lathrop did not administer the same severity of punishment when dealing with another officer caught gathering with other officers for long periods of time. Five officers were suspended in February for meeting up with each other instead of patrolling. The last officer, Officer E, as he was referred to during the hearing, had a lengthy disciplinary history. A month before his three-day suspension, Officer E received a four-day suspension for similar charges. He was also the subject of another internal investigation in January, but was given the option of resigning and took it.
Lathrop admits he didn't look into the history of Officer E when administering his punishment. However, he wanted to give the five officers the same punishment because they committed the same offense.
“I should have considered his past, but I was remiss in that,” the chief said.
The internal investigation looking into Brown's misconduct points to seven particular days on which violations were committed: Dec. 14, Dec. 9, Dec. 8, Nov. 14, Nov. 15, Nov. 13 and Nov. 28. Each incident describes a situation in which Brown was supposed to be in a school zone around 7:30 a.m., but instead he was at a restaurant in the 900 block of Fourth Street. Records indicate he spent, on average, about 30 minutes at the restaurant on each occasion.
Lathrop said Brown was given an order by his sergeant to be at his school zone for traffic enforcement from 7:30 a.m. to 8 a.m. Brown maintains he did go to his school zone but not for the entire time, sometimes only for a few minutes. He also said that he entered his school zone as his first assignment in the computer system in his squad car before he left the police station in the morning and stopped at the restaurant while en route to the school. It wasn't his intention to cover up anything or to lie about his whereabouts.
“I didn't get there on time all the time,” Brown said. “My interpretation of going to my school zone is showing up.”
Lathrop said this was ineffective and insubordinate. He explained this situation is about following orders and doing what is required. The police department is a paramilitary organization, which uses a chain of command. Therefore it's essential for members of the department to follow orders.
Officers are allowed two 15-minute breaks and a 30-minute lunch during their 8-hour shift, Lathrop said. These breaks are paid. He said this case is not about taking breaks.
“I don't care if police officers take breaks,” he said. “I expect police officers to take breaks.”
In his closing statement, Schauer asked the commission not to fire Brown and instead suspend him without pay. His actions do not warrant termination because he was simply late to his assignments in the morning.
“Policing was my chosen profession,” Brown said. “I made some mistakes, but I didn't think it justifies being terminated.”
The commission will meet at 5 p.m. today to deliberate during closed session on the future of Vincent Brown. A decision will be made and filed by Tuesday.
A two-day hearing ended Wednesday night and the Beloit Police and Fire Commission will decide if Vincent Brown gets to keep his job or is fired, as requested by Chief Sam Lathrop.
The Beloit Police Department filed charges against Brown, a Beloit officer of 12 years, after an internal investigation concluded he was at a restaurant on Fourth Street instead of at his designated school zone conducting traffic enforcement. He was charged with insubordination, lack of attentiveness on duty, leaving his duty post, unsatisfactory performance, not being truthful, failing to use radio communications and violating the code of ethics.
The internal investigation, headed by two captains, includes global positioning system data and computer-aided device data, along with two interviews with Brown. One interview was with the captains heading the investigation and one was with Lathrop.
“I would not have brought these charges until I knew there was a significant amount of evidence,” the chief said.
The decision to terminate Brown was made in part because of his lengthy discipline history, Lathrop testified Wednesday night. It was also due to the severity of the violations. Brown was hired in 1994. He was disciplined for the first time in 1996 with a three-day suspension without pay for accepting gifts and gratuities. He was disciplined 13 times during his tenure in Beloit. On Jan. 26, 2006, Brown was suspended for 10 days without pay for unbecoming conduct and lack of attentiveness while on duty.
Lathrop said after the 10-day suspension, he warned Brown verbally and in writing that any future disciplinary actions could lead to termination.
“The point of discipline is to change behavior,” Lathrop said. “I don't believe I was successful in doing that. My message apparently hadn't gotten through to Officer Brown.”
Brown's attorney, Andrew D. Schauer, argued that Lathrop did not administer the same severity of punishment when dealing with another officer caught gathering with other officers for long periods of time. Five officers were suspended in February for meeting up with each other instead of patrolling. The last officer, Officer E, as he was referred to during the hearing, had a lengthy disciplinary history. A month before his three-day suspension, Officer E received a four-day suspension for similar charges. He was also the subject of another internal investigation in January, but was given the option of resigning and took it.
Lathrop admits he didn't look into the history of Officer E when administering his punishment. However, he wanted to give the five officers the same punishment because they committed the same offense.
“I should have considered his past, but I was remiss in that,” the chief said.
The internal investigation looking into Brown's misconduct points to seven particular days on which violations were committed: Dec. 14, Dec. 9, Dec. 8, Nov. 14, Nov. 15, Nov. 13 and Nov. 28. Each incident describes a situation in which Brown was supposed to be in a school zone around 7:30 a.m., but instead he was at a restaurant in the 900 block of Fourth Street. Records indicate he spent, on average, about 30 minutes at the restaurant on each occasion.
Lathrop said Brown was given an order by his sergeant to be at his school zone for traffic enforcement from 7:30 a.m. to 8 a.m. Brown maintains he did go to his school zone but not for the entire time, sometimes only for a few minutes. He also said that he entered his school zone as his first assignment in the computer system in his squad car before he left the police station in the morning and stopped at the restaurant while en route to the school. It wasn't his intention to cover up anything or to lie about his whereabouts.
“I didn't get there on time all the time,” Brown said. “My interpretation of going to my school zone is showing up.”
Lathrop said this was ineffective and insubordinate. He explained this situation is about following orders and doing what is required. The police department is a paramilitary organization, which uses a chain of command. Therefore it's essential for members of the department to follow orders.
Officers are allowed two 15-minute breaks and a 30-minute lunch during their 8-hour shift, Lathrop said. These breaks are paid. He said this case is not about taking breaks.
“I don't care if police officers take breaks,” he said. “I expect police officers to take breaks.”
In his closing statement, Schauer asked the commission not to fire Brown and instead suspend him without pay. His actions do not warrant termination because he was simply late to his assignments in the morning.
“Policing was my chosen profession,” Brown said. “I made some mistakes, but I didn't think it justifies being terminated.”
The commission will meet at 5 p.m. today to deliberate during closed session on the future of Vincent Brown. A decision will be made and filed by Tuesday.
 |
 |
|
| Health care facility expands | Kerry will close warehouse, lay off workers |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of beloitdailynews.com.
Submit a Comment
Login below to post your comment. |
Not yet a member? Use the form below to register. |
Nancy Hoard, Beloit wrote on Mar 16, 2007 2:42 AM: