Questions about integrity and equal treatment within the GPD

I'm working on a cover story for YES! Weekly about concerns raised by local students, clergy and civil rights leaders about alleged corruption and double standards within the Greensboro Police Department.

North Carolina NAACP President William J. Barber II raised the profile of the allegations with his visit to Greensboro yesterday; a letter to NC Attorney General Roy Cooper, Sen. Kay Hagan and Rep. Mel Watt calling for state and federal interventions; and a pledge to discuss the matter at the NAACP National Board meeting in Florida this week.

Some council members have cited the students and pastors' disrespect as a reason why city leadership should not respond to almost 100 questions submitted to Chief Tim Bellamy by the Pulpit Forum. But students with Spirit of the Sit-In Movement Initiative have attended four meetings in a row in which they articulated concerns during the speakers from the floor segment, and received no response before they decided to get arrested.

Barber's job yesterday was to step up the pressure on city leadership to respond.

"There should be no reason why, with the serious nature of these questions that have been raised, they should not be answered," Barber said. "These are public people in the community, clergy, students, civic leaders, civil rights organizations, taxpayers who are legitimately raising questions with their government about how those appointed to engage in public safety are or are not carrying out their jobs."

Barber and Greensboro NAACP President Cardes Brown are pushing back against efforts [1, 2] within the political establishment to portray the protesters as troublemakers, insisting to the contrary that they hold an honorable place in the community and exemplify the best traditions of justice.

"There should be a unified engagement of the political forces in this city, not to stalemate what they're doing, not to push away from what they're doing, not to try to dismiss them as rabble rousers, but to honor these as legitimate clergy and civil rights leaders, students bringing legitimate concerns," Barber said. "And there ought to be a unified effort to address this culture of corruption. No one should want this kind of pale and gray over a police department. And it can be cleared up. But it can't be cleared up if they continue to stall, stymie and seek to turn back the efforts and the legitimate questions and concerns that are being raised by students, clergy, civil rights leaders and members of this community. That does not get us to a culture of community; it gets us to a culture of suspicion."

Barber framed his crusade in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was adopted after the Civil War and forms the legal basis of the NAACP's century-long history of legal advocacy.

"The Constitution of these United States provides us with something that has been a fundamental foundation upon which the NAACP has fought for years, and that is these words: 'Equal protection of the law,'" Barber said. "And anything that violates that or where there are assertions or where there are concerns, it must be investigated because every citizen in these United States, in this state, in this county, in this city, are afforded by our Constitution equal protection under the law."

The protesters' concerns center on Officer AJ Blake, who is currently consigned to a desk job in the department and facing the loss of his law enforcement license for five years when he goes before the NC Criminal Justice Education and Training Standards Commission for a series of hearings in Apex at the end of this month. The raft of allegations spiral out to include a pending federal discrimination lawsuit filed by 39 black officers and the gang enforcement unit's treatment of the Almighty Latin King and Queen Nation.

Barber said his intent is to "lend my voice to the need for state and national intervention and investigation in what clergy and civil rights leaders have reported to the North Carolina NAACP as a long pattern of corruption and double standards in the Greensboro Police Department. We have not come to this decision lightly. We've consulted with these clergy and civil rights leaders, as well as studied a number of reports and documents that give credence to the allegations contending that the Greensboro Police Department is deeply embroiled in a culture of corruption and a pattern of unequal application of the laws. These members of the community, in Greensboro, believe that the Greensboro Police Department is out of control."

During a press conference yesterday, Chief Bellamy responded to a questions about whether there is corruption and racism within the police department with a flat "no." Bellamy said he had told the pastors that he would not be able to address some questions (those related to personnel issues), but would be able to respond to others (those not related to personnel issues). He said the city's legal department is reviewing the letter to determine which questions can be answered, and he was noncommittal about when the pastors' might receive a written response. Considering that the chief plans to retire this summer, the Rev. Brown said the pastors are despairing of ever receiving a response.

City Manager Rashad Young said, "The Greensboro Police Department is staffed with well-trained professionals operating at every level in the organization," that "there is the potential for improper acts," and that "where problems are found they will be addressed immediately and with fervor."

At least one significant change has been made in administrative policy where it concerns employee discipline: All disciplinary actions will be reviewed by the human resources department to ensure consistency across all departments in the city organization, under the oversight of Assistant City Manager Michael Speedling.

Despite widespread concerns among council members during the period in which former City Manager Mitch Johnson ran the city, Mayor Bill Knight and other members of the current council are now expressing stalwart confidence in the police department, in reaction to the onslaught of community concern. Mayor Knight did not attend yesterday's press conference, but issued a formal statement today, saying, "There is no corruption within the Greensboro Police Department. Good policing, adherence to professional standards and quality training are benchmarks to which the department strives to reach every day." When I called him immediately after receiving the statement, Knight responded, "That's all I'll have to say."

I have expressed to City Manager Young and Chief Bellamy that I hope to address the allegations of corruption and double standards more substantively. I didn't hear back from them today, but I'm not giving up hope on them.

Much of what the pastors allege can be cross referenced in my own contemporaneous reporting. I invite readers to scrutinize both sets of accounts for accuracy, even-handedness and context, and to consider whether the reported facts merit official investigation and possible redress.

"A Latino officer, AJ Blake, has gone through more than a year of horrendous experience for what boils down to being a whistle-blower concerning anti-Latino discrimination and prejudices," said Barber, drawing on information provided to him by the local pastors. "The situation has reached a volatile point. This lack of faith in the integrity of the system has deteriorated the social conditions that promote effective law enforcement and the partnerships that encourage public safety."

To look at my reporting on Blake's history and personal experience as a police officer, click here and here.

Let's look at a sampling of the statements and questions included in the pastors' Jan. 21 letter to Chief Bellamy.

Pastors' statement: "During the assault trial of Officer AJ Blake during the summer and spring of 2009, the lead detective in the assault case, Detective Schwochow [spelling corrected], stated that he brought charges against Officer AJ Blake because he was ordered to do so by his commanding officer. The detective's comments were made in open court and reported in the news media.

I reported.

The pastors ask the chief:

• "Were you aware that Detective Schwochow [spelling corrected] was ordered to file charges that he felt he did not have adequate evidence to support? If you were not aware of this, then why not?
• "Given that the lead detective did not feel that he had sufficient evidence or probable cause to charge Officer Blake, why was the detective compelled by his commander to bring charges?
• "If you were aware that Detective Schwochow [spelling corrected] was ordered to bring charges against his best judgment, could you have intervened to prevent the charges from being filed?
• "Does the act of ordering a detective, trained in gathering evidence (who presumably has more information than anyone else), to file charges against anyone, when that detective feels there is insufficient basis for criminal charges, raise any ethical or legal issues for you?"

Pastors' statement: "Our information is that the professional standards division reports directly to you as chief. It has come to our attention that certain administrative investigations were improperly altered, without adequate evidence to substantiate the recording of different conclusions."

I reported.

The pastors ask:

• "Are you aware of the allegations of altering administrative reports without documented new evidence to support any new findings?
• "Do you (or did you) concur with this approach?
• "If you do not concur with this method, have you investigated these allegations and, if so, what were your findings?"

Pastors' statement: "Officer AJ Blake was accused of assault and was in the process of preparing for a jury trial in superior court in the late summer of 2009. Ten days prior to the officer's case being heard in superior court, you conducted Officer Blake's internal administrative hearing, which was primarily based upon those same criminal charges. The administrative hearing, convened under your direct leadership, resulted in the termination of Officer Blake. Yet several days later a jury of six men and six women found Officer Blake not guilty."

I reported.

The pastors ask:

• "What were the compelling, legitimate reasons for holding the administrative hearing before the Superior Court trial, where it was possible, and indeed likely, that more information bearing on his case would be made available?
• "What damage could have been done to the GPD or to a fair administrative hearing for Officer Blake by waiting ten days for the completion of the trial?"

Pastors' statement: "Before AJ Blake's case in 2009, there were at least two other officers that were indicted on felony charges, Officer Fox and Officer Sanders. You allowed both of their criminal processes in superior court to be completed before conducting their administrative hearings.

My colleague, Quentin L. Richardson, and I reported.

The pastors ask:

• "Why did you wait until their two trials in superior court were completed before holding their administrative hearings?
• "Were there compelling, legitimate reasons in the cases of Officer Fox and Officer Sanders to wait until after their superior court trials were completed before holding their administrative hearings? If so, what were the reasons, and what made the circumstances different from AJ Blake's case?
• "Are you concerned about double standards within the GPD? Is it not reasonable, in your opinion, for officers of the GPD to be concerned about double standards?"

The pastors ask Bellamy: "Have you investigated the December 2009 case of Wesley Williams that involved gang unit member Watkins visiting Williams' work site and falsely informing his employer that Williams was banned from working on city property?"

I reported.

The pastors ask:

• "If the investigation is completed already, what actions have you taken based on the investigation?
• "Are you aware that Officer Watkins, who visited Williams' work site and shared false information, is the object of many claims of unjust treatment by members of the ALKQN?
• "Officer Watkins is recorded on tape saying in substance that it does not matter how many complaints are made against him that it will have no effect? Would you like to have a copy of the tape?
• "Does the city's core value of honesty (the other core values are integrity, stewardship and respect) apply to the gang unit?
• "If not, is it clearly spelled out when it is permissible for members of the gang unit to lie or deliberately promote falsehoods?
• "Are you aware that the gang unit visited both the homes and jobs of family and/or friends associated with the ALKQN as far back as 2008, inquiring about charges that did not exist?
• "Do you consider such visits to jobs, causing people to be dismissed and leaving them without an income for their livelihood, to be the legitimate work of the gang unit?
• "Have you considered that this kind of activity might push the members of ALKQN and others toward criminal activity?"

This is neither the extent of the pastors' inquiry nor my independent reporting. I welcome readers' input about whether these allegations, confirmed or not, rise to the level of possible violation of the right to equal protection under the law. Have the pastors' allegations and my series of reports demonstrated consistency in examining whether police officers and citizens have been treated fairly under the law? Are there egregious examples of unfair treatment of officers and citizens that have been left out of this bill of particulars? Can we as a city attain a system of public safety that more perfectly reflects the constitutional right of equal protection under the law?