31 - Renton Police Department Public Records

STATEMENT OF DEPUTY CHIEF ^mW
because I feel bad, I'm sitting on this other table being accused of, of doing those videos and I know how it feels, so that's all I know. MILOSEVICH: Anything else, anything of you? No. MILOSEVICH: That concludes the interview at 11:10.
(SS/H:PDADMIN:SHERRY:Complaints/CO-03-l:
25
Transcript of recording, June 16,2011

Kent Curry (KC): This is the Disciplinary Review Board of the Renton Police
Department. The date is June 16, 2011 and the time is approximately 12:53. This hearing is being digitally recorded and I am going to ask all the members in the room to acknowledge that they understand that it's going to be recorded and to give their name and to spell their last name and I will start with myself, Commander Curry C-u-r-r-y and of course I understand that this is being recorded.
Clark Wilcox:
Clark Wilcox W-i-l-c-o-x and I understand this is being recorded
and I am aware this is being recorded
Nancy Carlson: recorded
Nancy Carlson C-a-r-l-s-o-n and I am aware this is being
Chad Karlewicz: being recorded
And Chad Karlewicz K-a-r-l-e-w-i-c-z and I am aware this is
KC:
The members sitting at the table have been identified, I have been
appointed by the Chief of Police to be the Department representative at this Disciplinary Review Board hearing. Commander Clark Wilcox was also selected by the Chief of Police, Commander Chad Karlewicz was selected by Deputy Chief | H H Deputy Chief B H H
i n
accordance with General Orders 26.1.6 is the
appellant and then Director Carlson is here observing. The ground rules and process of the Disciplinary Review Board are established in General Orders 26.1.6 and as such myself and Deputy Chief are the only two that have the right
to cross examine the witness testimony. Myself has the sole authority to rule on admissibility of all evidence and testimony, and now we'll get into the procedure.
Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 2
Before we do I'm going to give back to Deputy Chief B U I
copies of his
evaluations since being promoted to Deputy Chief, for him to enter in at a later point in the process -
CM:
Sure
KC:
- for material evidence. So at this point in time I have a placeholder to call
any witnesses that you may have scheduled to come and testify.
CM:
Well, actually before we get started I have a question, since this is being
digitally recorded, it's a two-part question, the first one is, is this going to be transcribed and if so am I entitled to get a copy of that when it's completed?
KC:
My intent is not to have it transcribed, but if we need to have it transcribed
for reference information at a later point, then we'll request that it be transcribed. You can make a request to have a copy of it and that request will be determined by somebody other than myself.
Nancy Carlson (NC): May I interject for just a moment?
KC:
Go ahead
NC:
We can, we can provide you with a, a CD.
CM:
That would be fine. That was actually my second question.
NC:
We can provide you with a CD.
CM:
OK
KC:
OK? All right. Witness testimony.
CM:
Unless you count me as a witness, I didn't bring anybody
KC:
OK, I-
CM:
I mean, basically what I have is just a statement that I'm going to reacf, and
that's, that's all I have.
KC:
OK.
The Board has, has option not to call any witnesses and so we can
move on in the framework of the General Order as outlined and that would be the summation part of this. As the appellant you have the authority to provide a summation on your behalf, and as the Department representative I have the ability also to provide a summation, so we'll start with your summation.
CM:
Well first of all I'd like to admit the evals you gave me back, which are
evaluations for my tenure as a Deputy Chief, I think you'll find they're reflective of the service that's -
KC:
I had built into the framework and the process, a time to have those -
CM:
OK
KC:
- admitted and a process to have those admitted.
CM:
OK, I didn't get that memo, so I didn't know when my time was coming.
KC:
OK
CM:
And the only reason it's so many pages 'cause, it's big type so I don't want
to squint any more than I have to
KC:
OK
CM:
Let me start out by saying that I am not proud of my involvement in this
issue. Certainly I regret, regret that we have to be here today to discuss this and I know that I am responsible for my actions. I am assuming that you've all had a chance to read the Internal Investigation. Other than a few inaccuracies, when I was quoted, and a few misrepresentations of what I said or meant, Til let that document stand on its own.
I want to first share with you what state I was in when I originally saw the Penny Tale video and later failed to tell ^
n o t t 0 s e n
i t ^Kf- H
t o
me the raw -
the link to the raw version of the video, which was hosted on ExtraNormal.com. Not YouTube. At that time I believed that I knew he had the i n - I -1 don't believe I had the intention knowing he was going to send it out. It was more of a - check this out kind of thing, I didn't know it was going to be released at that time. I saw the humor in it and shared with
Commander^((J|and
attempted to share it on
with C o m m a n d e r j m . I believe it was after that while speaking with | the phone, I learned he wanted to send it
tofmHMF He mentioned that he
didn't want it traced back to him and I flippantly said something to the effect of, why don't you just use the library like everyone else does? It was in a sarcastic tone, sarcastic tone, it was flippant, it was meant to be humorous as in a comparison to, well what the (inaudible) do to hide what they do. It was never
meant to give him advice, to, to be secretive about it, it was just a comment. At that point I didn't believe I was counseling him on how to accomplish any, any objective that he had. I didn't believe we were conspiring, nor do I believe there was any intent on, on my part to conspire, or his, I - we just said it, I just made the flippant remark. You can tell by my testimony during the interview that expressed that I was greatly frustrated with what I perceived was inaction in dealing with this serious matter.
One thing that it did not have in the Internal statement is that the Chief later admitted to me, that he let me down on not doing something about the complaint that's referenced in there, that I , that I made. That conversation took place at In-N-Out Burger in Santa Ana, California in November. A combination of
that and other issues going on in Command staff had me temporarily in a noncaring state. I didn't approve the video for release, I didn't encourage that the video be distributed, and I wasn't thinking about trying to slight the GO in any way, At that time, I was just tired and didn't use the best judgment in that moment. As you know, for a long time my email tagline has been "leadership never takes a day off." I'm embarrassed that I didn't live with my own tag line and embarrassed that I missed an opportunity. I encourage each of you to study the video and see what it actually says. Other than that, other people have christened it as being derogatory to SCORE, which I believe it's not truly, if you watch and listen carefully I believe you will see the video was a parody of issues and frustrations with the then defunct, non-existent Renton jail. The references to SCORE are actually positive, indicating a positive change it had with new organization. I agree that if I had been running the jail for the past few years, having those frustrations aired would not have, would have made me angry as well. However, the original video that I saw on the ExtraNormal site did not have SCORE in the title. Whoever posted the video under the title "SCORE parody" is the one who solidified any opinion that it was intended to be negative to SCORE. Yet despite...(inaudible) to find out who that was, no attempt has been made or
will be attempted to find that out. In the solicited comments about the impact of the video, I think the authors may have been more angry than embarrassed. I agree that having to explain some of the items in the video may have been uncomfortable, but other than having to explain, I didn't see any real concrete examples of it having an effect on business other than peoples' feelings. There is no indication that anybody dropped out or threatened to drop out of SCORE. Only the questions were asked about the issues in the video. Again the biggest impact appears to have been from the title of the new video.
For not telling B
not to release the video, I apologize and accept responsibility
for dropping my guard. I didn't know he was going to release it when he did, and I immediately called him and told him to take it down when I got to work and saw it was released. Contrary to the portrayal in the Internal, this is not because it wasn't going over well. In fact, by some people's standards it was great, so great
Transcript of June 16, 2011 p. 6
that they ran around all morning sharing it with others. The only one that I was aware of that took exception to the video was Commander McClincy, and the phone call I had made was before any discussion at staff, before anybody else had shared any dislike.
Moving on to the issue of my not coming forward to disclose, my lack of judgment, I know it's not easy for people to sit in this room and judge, saying they would have come forward in similar circumstances, but I know of only one member of Command staff who has. In an email from the Chief dated January 4 , he indicates that he believes that this is probably a freedom of speech issue, which was also shared at Command staff that day. Unless it was done on company time. And the concern then was that if it was done on company time and with company equipment, it was, it was that, it could be considered theft of time or theft of City services. To my knowledge, both at the time of the email and today, neither department resources or time were used by S e r g e a n t ^ J while making this video. Based upon that perspective, I did not believe there was an investigation to come forward on.
th
Furthermore, I don't know if anyone remembers when the most recent videos came out and we were in staff on Tuesday the day after, the Chief shared that he had a conversation with Nancy Carlson about the new videos and she wasn't exactly sure if they were a violation. I believed that it would blow over and both B and I had learned a lesson. While I remembered the discussion in staff, I
believed, again I believed the main topic revolved around the use of department equipment and time, being theft. And of course the first Amendment issue. As far as I knew B had done this entire thing off site on his own time and probably with
his, with his own computer. That indicates, that shows, I truly was not involved in this, I had no clue where he did it. I recall, going back assuming you've all read, you've all read the Internal, there is a memo there from C o m m a n d e i ^ M H B B | which I asked him about. I don't recall the look that C o m m a n d e r ^ P J J J t o l d me that he gave me in staff that day, or how I would have interpreted that as him teHing me to disclose my knowledge or how he would have understood that I
understood and agreed. I think it is a copout for not coming forward himself and avoiding any responsibility. Which seems to have worked. There was no investigation into the matter, so I continued to believe it would all just die out, despite the fact that C o m m a n d e r J ( B B P c a m e forward in January or February, 'cause I'm not really clear on that reading everything, the issue did die out, at least until the most recent videos were released. The Chief had information that I was involved, yet he never asked or pursued the information. If this incident was so severe as it's been portrayed, that the discipline recommendation would be a demotion to sergeant, I believe there would have, should have, been an Internal started or at least a simple question asked. Neither occurred. The portrayal of the effects of this video don't match the actions taken. I intend to point to the same belief on the part of others, that this would pass.
Going back to Commande
[memorandum, it is inaccurate in many
places. In my opinion, it is intended to shield himself for not coming forward. The actual discussion on the day that he came into my office was that he was actually, that he was losing sleep because he remembered me showing him the video before its release. I told him, I knew I had shown him the video and I did not expect him to lie or cover it up. He then said something to the effect of, Good because I wasn't, I wasn't going to lie to keep it a secret. I told him that I would contact the Chief and let him know. C o m m a n d e r ^ j p j J ^ d i d n ' t threaten me or in any way have to talk me into coming forward. While I may not remember the exact words, I do know that I moved forward out of friendship, not out of fear.
I would like to begin to speak about the Chiefs intended discipline and its impacts. While I was... while I will be sharing personal financial information, I realize that my predisciplinary financial position is not anyone else's but my own. My current wage as Deputy Chief is roughly 130 thousand, 132 thousand dollars. Demotion to sergeant would drop me to roughly 102 thousand dollars after adding longevity, education and the five and a quarter premium that they get for working extra hours. I currently have one daughter that attends University, a son who will be in high school, a senior in high school next year and a
14 year old daughter. All my current salary right now, there is little wiggle room at the end of the month after monthly expenses. A demotion, even a demotion to Commander will be impossible for me to meet all the financial obligations that I have. Given the choice of my daughter completing college and paying other monthly expenses or staying in my house, I will have to let my house go to foreclosure and eventually bankruptcy to get relief from the deficit judgment that the bank would levy.
Well, you've probably heard me talk about retirement in the past, with the daughter in college and two more kids want to attend, early retirement is seemingly impossible unless I won the lottery. Prior to the end of this last year, while I dreamt of retirement, I realized that I have at least four more years of work ahead of me. While I have been frustrated and disillusioned with issues at work, I came to work every day and tried to make a difference to improve the Department.
I would like to address the specific reasons the Chief has given for my demotion to sergeant. The Chief indicated that I approved the content of the video. It wasn't a case of approval, disapproval, advice or anything else like that. I viewed the video, I thought it was a humorous look at past issues and didn't really see it as an attack on SCORE. And I know at least one member of command staff, not me, who to this day continues to believe that it's funny and on point. The Chief indicated that I have viewed several versions of the video prior to its release. I'm not really sure where that part came from. I only saw the first version on the ExtraNormal site prior to the video being released on YouTube. I first saw the YouTube version when Sergea n t ^ j j j ^ h o w e d it to me the morning of its release. I did notice that there was a difference, that the speech and, and - it was more coherent, it had been smoothed out. So I saw only the one time, the one copy, I didn't see any other revisions prior to its release. The Chief, he had indicated that I attempted to conceal the source of the video by advising Sergeant H i
t o u s e
library.
Again, the remark I made was flippant and more in the tune of sarcasm, not a clandestine conspiracy discussion, and had I really intended to advise Sergeant
I B
i n
that
w a
Y/
would have been a little more creative. The Chief indicated
that SergeantHH that I had Sergeant^B remove the video when I was aware of the damage. To be honest, it wasn't because of the damage, it was because Sergeant J j p j v v a s running around showing everybody. It wasn't...that it wasn't going over well, that it was getting out of hand, and that's why I had him remove it. The Chief indicated that the video was directed both at the Renton Jail and SCORE, and while I agree that the parody addresses - addresses issues in the thendefunct jail, I believe that there was nothing negative actually said about SCORE. Again, if you watch the video and look at the text, the comments that reference SCORE show greater accountability and service.
The Chief indicated that I failed to come forward on numerous occasions and admit that I was involved. Guilty - however, the Chief knew for just as long that I was involved in some way.
Commander ^m âme forward shortly after the
video was released, yet there was no investigation or even a hint of question. I think we both equally dropped the ball on that one. The Chief indicated that I came forward after Commande ^m ^|told me he would be required to disclose the information. I'm not goingto beat a dead horse but that's not the way the conversation took place. I think it's a mischaracterization for whatever reason you want to tab it. In
a d d r e s s i n g j ^ f B ^ J ^ d e s i r e for me not to
represent the Department at any SCORE meetings, I respect that and would like to point out in the preceding three years, Deputy Chief Troxel has never attended those Executive Board meetings. I did because responsibilities assigned to the Support Operations Bureau, which Deputy Chief Troxel now oversees, so it would be his responsibility at least for the next three years, not mine. desire will not impact my ability to be the Field Operations Deputy Chief. In the Chief's intent letter, he indicates he cannot have me as a member of the Command Staff with the expectations to act as the Chief in his absence. This intent letter is dated June 1 , 2011. On May 20, 2011, just 11 days before the Intent to Discipline letter, the Chief sent an email leaving me in charge in his absence. The investigation was already completed, he knew all the facts, yet he trusted me enough or didn't have enough concern and he left me in charge. I
st
would submit that the actions don't support the words or lack of trust indicated in the Intent to Discipline letter. In addition to leaving me in charge, he has asked me to continue doing my job. Despite all the stress of, despite all the stress of going through the investigation, I believe that I have continued to perform at a high level. On the day that I received my Intent letter, indicating that I would be working for those who I currently supervise, the Chief once again told me to continue doing my job. Although a little curious, I think this also conflicts with the perception of lack of trust and my ability to continue to do my job. Past instances where people have been looking at demotion or, or significant discipline, people have been re-assigned to special projects, they've been removed and put off to the side, or placed on admin leave. In over 31 years of law enforcement, I have never been in trouble or disciplined with the exception of backing into a police car in the early '90s at Valley Medical Center. I have provided, well, at some point I guess I'll get to provide you with copies of my evaluation which show how well I have done for the Department.
I have contributed greatly to this department and Command Staff, sacrificing long hours without additional pay. Just like you guys. I took on the re-branding project which was a, a project to help us move forward, I worked on the Strategic Plan, I developed the Employee Recognition program, revamped that as far as medals, I have been the driving force behind the family oriented activities with the Department trying to increase the esprit d'corps, and as Deputy Chief Troxel dubbed it, the spiritual leadership of the department. I have had a stellar career and I can honestly say that this is the one time that I have lost sight of the ball. I realize that I have relationships to work on which is to be expected in any discipline.
I ask that the Board consider the information that I have provided and reduce the discipline. It is my opinion that the Intent to Discipline letter indicates an excessive punishment based on the offense. Thirty thousand dollars a year for four years just doesn't feel right. Considering the violation at hand, and other recent discipline decisions including people of my own rank. I realize that the
Chief is in a tough spot and I am sorry for that. I had hoped that we-you will do what is right and not base your decision solely on political reasons. I would like to offer what I think - feels like reasonable discipline. And that would be three days suspension without pay which is the equivalent of one thousand, five hundred and twenty five dollars plus or minus depending upon which month the check is issued, and a six month action plan designed by the Chief to help me rebuild our relationship and trust. While I can appreciate that some people may have been affected by the video, I doubt that any of them have lost as much sleep or weight as I have during this process. The stress of this process on my body and my family has already been greater than that experienced by anyone who felt they were the target of the video or had to answer questions about past issues. If I had produced the video, if I contributed to its content or even truly expired, er, conspired to release the video anonymously, I could understand. The fact is I didn't do any of those things. It is my understanding that Sergeant^JJPLand Acting S e r g e a n t J K J a r e supposedly intended to receive letters as discipline for their involvement in this. My involvement is the same and while I realize that my position in the department may mean a larger punishment, I think the difference between the two punishment levels is incredibly excessive. We all know that when it comes to making discipline recommendations they aren't made blindly at the lowest level. There are often extensive conversations throughout the chain on where the final Intent will most likely land. I am confident that such a conversation took place between the Chief and Commander Liebman, reference S e r g e a n t ^ H a n d Acting Sergeant (H ^discipline. So I can only offer that to further illustrate that the impact of this video is not as large as it's been portrayed.
Many times things are not what they seem to be. While the written communication portrays something evil in design, all of the inconsistencies show that that's not really the truth, you know. For Sergea n t p p ^ J t o go unscathed for spreading the video maliciously throughout the department, and which, which should be classified as a larger lack of judgment, yet he was never considered any suspect, as a suspect in this incident. For C o m m a n d e r t f H H f c t o go unscathed
for failing to come forward like CommanderpPJppdid, not be interviewed as a suspect and then become part of the Investigative team is a travesty. For nobody to care enough to follow up on the leads of who may have reposted it, to be allowing it to be seen for months until the original is taken down, is another inconsistency. It must not be that big of a deal. For inconsistencies between the Chiefs Letter of Intent, what it says and his actions, it just appears that this is more about politics, more about politics than the impact that the video truly had. It appears about making an example out of me for the sake of appeasing outside people, rather than about someone who has 31 years of great service who made a mistake. So the question is, do you take a good employee who made a mistake and ruin him, or do you take the same employee, dust him off and work on the issues that created the mistake. Again, I appreciate your time, I know this puts you in a difficult position, and I am putting my trust in you guys to do what's right.
KC:
Okay. As outlined in General Order 26.6, as the Department representative
I am provided the opportunity to give a department summation which I will do now.
On December 1, 2007, Deputy Chief
promoted to Police Deputy
Chief with the following essential representative duties:
Plan, organize, coordinate, and manage the operations of the Department; Evaluate and determine training needs of the Department and assure Police standards and certifications are maintained; Coordinate the assignment of subordinate personnel, delegate work for appropriate and efficient use of resources; Supervise the training and discipline of subordinates; coordinate activities within the Department; Assist in preparation of the administration of the Department budget;
Establish and maintain effective working relationships with staff, other agencies, news media, elected officials, administrators, and the general public; Respond to, evaluate, and resolve internal and citizen complaints and personnel problems; Review reports of subordinates to assure continuity and content; Evaluate methods and procedures and recommend changes for increased efficiency of the Department; Assume command of the overall operation of the Police Department in the absence of the Chief, or as designated; Attend meetings and represent the Department and/or the Chief as requested.
According to the information presented in Internal CO-0311 sometime in December, 2010, Deputy Chief B I | ^ H
w a s
privileged to a cartoon style video
that ridiculed and demeaned members of both the Renton Jail and the SCORE Jail (A Penny Tale). Deputy Chief B H had knowledge of the Department
member that created the video and knowledge that the same member posted the video on YouTube on January 4, 2011.
Deputy Chief ^ ^ ^ 1
present at several and various leadership meetings
where the video was a topic of discussion while collaborative, I'm sorry, while collaboration was given in attempts to determine who made and posted the video. Deputy Chief B H H
o n
'Y
forward after being confronted by a
direct-report subordinate giving him the ultimatum to inform the Chief of his knowledge or the direct-report subordinate was going to report it to the Chief himself. This was nearly four months of concealing his knowledge before being compelled to reveal to the Chief his knowledge of who created the video and his active participation in assisting the department member in the process of posting it on YouTube in a manner that couldn't be easily tracked - thus supporting the Department member's desire to remain anonymous.
An Internal investigation was conducted and it was determined that Deputy Chief H failed to act in the role as Deputy Chief on numerous occasions. The
internal investigation was reviewed by a neighboring Police Chief and found to be complete.
The Chief found that Deputy Chief Department policies:
conduct violated the following
Violation of General Orders 26.1.1.11.B - Unbecoming Conduct Members of the Police department shall conduct themselves at all times, both on and off duty, in such a manner as to reflect most favorably on the Department. Unbecoming conduct shall include that which brings the Department into disrepute or reflects discredit upon the individual as a member of the Department, or that which impairs the operation or efficiency of the Department or the individual.
Violation of General Orders 26.1.1.11.K - Unsatisfactory Performance Commissioned members of the Police Department shall maintain sufficient competency to properly perform their duties, and to assume the responsibilities of their positions. Members shall perform their duties in a manner which will maintain the highest standard of efficiency in carrying out the function and objectives of the Department. Unsatisfactory performance may be demonstrated by a lack of knowledge of the application of laws required to be enforced, an unwillingness or inability to perform assigned tasks, the failure to conform to work standards established for the officer's rank, grade, and position, the failure to take appropriate action on the occasion of a crime, disorder, or other condition deserving police attention, or absence without leave. In addition to other indicators of unsatisfactory performance, the following will be considered prima facie evidence of unsatisfactory performance: repeated poor evaluations, or a written record of
repeated infractions of rules, regulations, directives, or orders of the Department
Both of the above allegations were sustained for the following reasons as outlined in the Chiefs Intent memorandum dated on June 1 , 2011 for the following reasons:
st
Deputy Chief admittedly approved the content of the video, despite its demeaning, disrespectful and unprofessional portrayal of the Renton Jail and SCORE staff.
Deputy Chief Sergeant fl|
reviewed several iterations of the video created by and had several opportunities to advise him that it was
inappropriate, and failed to do so.
Deputy Chiefs actions purported to authorize and allow members of the Police Department to publically humiliate and demean other divisions of the Police Department.
Deputy Chief advisingBHHH
attempted to conceal the source of the video by
Sergeant î
i n
how he could post this video on
YouTube by using an anonymous location. You then agreed with Sergeant H I that they would not disclose the source of the video unless specifically asked.
Deputy Chief | B I H
a w a
r e of the damage caused by the video, or to
once aware of the damage caused by the video, directed Sergeant H remove the video from YouTube. Deputy Chief admitted during the
investigation, that he could have avoided this damage by performing his job duties in the first place by directing Sergeant circulate this inappropriate material. fl| not to create and
The video was directed at both the Renton Jail and the newly formed SCORE Jail of which the City of Renton is an owner agency. Deputy Chief B I H H failure to exercise his leadership responsibilities, and advise Sergeant fl| not to post or circulate the video has caused damage to
both entities, harmed the Police Department's relationship with SCORE and the City's relationship with other owner agencies.
Deputy Chief
concealed his participation in the creation and
posting of the video and failed to come forward on numerous occasions \o admit his involvement in the video and who created and posted it. As such, specifically, Deputy Chief fa 'led to provide this relevant
information once the Chief made it clear the video was inappropriate during our first meeting on the issue on January 4, 2011.
Again on January 4, 2011, when he knew that the Chief had asked Information Services to review City email to determine if this video was posted via department computer.
Again on January 5 , when he was notified that IS did not have the capability to track the information, and offered that he had the same problem in another investigation that he was performing or had performed.
th
Again on January 6 , 2011, after the Chief discussed at the monthly leadership meeting that the video was inappropriate, he still did not come forward with this information.
th
After he knew that someone else had used the same technology to create numerous other vicious videos about other department members several months later. These additional videos were homophobic, anti-female, based on rumors, and described previous internal investigations both sustained and not sustained. He was aware of these additional videos and yet still did not come forward with information regarding his knowledge of
the source of the original video. In fact, he was adamant in his discussion with Commander Leibman that these videos should not be investigated because he believed they were similar to the original video.
And again after Commander McClincy and Deputy Chief entered into the Chiefs office to voice an opinion of who may have created the additional videos. It was nearly five months after the video had been posted, and only after C o m m a n d e r ^ J J | | a d v i s e d that he would be required to disclose the involvement, or Deputy Chief ^ H H I involvement in and knowledge of the creator of the original video if he himself did not voluntarily do so. Only at that point did he come forward and bring attention to the Chief.
The Chief has advised that his intent is to demote you to the rank of Sergeant. Provided in his explanation of reasons is you either failed to perform several of the essential functions listed in the City of Renton Class Specification Bulletin; or indicated an inability to perform those essential functions by your actions of reviewing and effectively authorizing a video that ridiculed and demeaned the entire division, an entire division of the Police Department. The essential functions of the position of Deputy Chief determined by the Chief of Police that you failed to perform or demonstrated an inability to perform are:
Plan, organize, coordinate, and manage the operations of the Department. Supervise the training and discipline of subordinates; coordinate activities within the Department. Establish and maintain effective working relationships with staff, other agencies, news media, elected officials, administrators, and the general public. Assume command of the overall operations of the Police Department in the absence of the Chief, or as designated.
Attend meetings and represent the Department and /or the Chief as requested.
The Chief further states that the video:
By title referenced the newly created SCORE Jail; Demeaned the SCORE organization; Was the topic of discussion of the SCORE Operations Board; Was the topic of discussion of the Administrative Board consisting of the elected officials of the seven owner agencies; And created distrust between SCORE employees and the employees of the Renton Police Department.
The Chief further states that:
As Deputy Chief you failed to understand the negative impact the video would have on both organizations (the Police Department and SCORE); As Deputy Chief you failed to take appropriate action to prevent such harm to the organization; As Deputy Chief you failed to promptly disclose relevant information, essentially hindering the investigation.
The investigation reveals that your intentional failure to act has significantly harmed the relationship between SCORE and the Police Department. The Director of SCORE has requested that you never sit in representation of the Police Department at the monthly SCORE Operations Board's meetings. The request was made based upon the contempt you conveyed towards the SCORE organization.
The Chief does recognize the significance of the discipline and given the information above, and the following revelations:
As Deputy Chief he expected that you would have loyalty to both the organization and to his office. The investigation clearly violates that loyalty. The Chief finds that you purposely chose sides by aligning yourself with Sergeant m over the organization as a whole.
As Deputy Chief he expected you to proactively respond to issues within the Department without being required to ask specific details on information that is obviously relevant. The Chief states that the investigation portrays a Deputy Chief with displaced loyalty who is willing to demean another department workgroup and agency, and who is willing, willingly withholds relevant information unless specifically asked so as to conceal the poor judgment he exercised.
As such, the Chief has informed you that he cannot have you as a member of his command staff with the exception, or with the expectation to act as the Chief in his absence.
In that letter of Intent you were advised of your rights, your appeal rights as outlined by the Department's General Orders and you notified Sherry Smith on June 8 that you wanted to access the Disciplinary Review Board process as part of your rights.
That same day the Chief advised via email the members of the Board, appointing Commander Curry as the Department Representative. And that Deputy Chief B I H I that Deputy Chief H ^ ^ H purpose of the hearing will be to argue the discipline recommendation. He also advised that Administrator Carlson, HR Administrator Carlson will be attending the hearing.
Both Commander Wilcox and Commander Karlewicz have documented that they have read and are familiar with the investigation, with the Internal Investigation.
On June 13, 2011, you were given notification of the date, time and location of the Disciplinary Review Board along with the direction to provide material evidence you wish to be considered for admissibility, a list of witnesses with a brief summary of testimony, and the name and contact information of your representation.
On June 13, 2011, you were advised of the hearing location change to the Council Conference Room.
On June 14, 2011, in response to the above memorandum, you provided me three copies of performance evaluations dating back to your promotion date to Deputy Chief. I signed for those copies.
This Disciplinary Review Board hearing has been convened at your request.
The procedure forthe Disciplinary Review Board is outlined in General Order 26.1.6 and is being followed.
At the conclusion of this part of the hearing the Board will convene in executive session following the guidelines outlined in the General Order stated above. Within five days the Board will make notification to both you and Chief as to our actions.
That is the conclusion of my summation.
Now there is a call for evidence and so if there is any evidence you would like to submit, to be...
CM:
Give you the evals back..
KC:
Let the record reflect that the first item of material evidence is a City of
Renton Performance Evaluation Supervisory Group, evaluation forthe rating period of 12/1/09 - 1 1 / 3 0 of 10. Let the record reflect that I'm goingto mark this Exhibit DRB/Appellant Exhibit A-A. And initial. And could I have you initial.
Let the record reflect that the second document is a City of Renton Performance Evaluation, Supervisory Group, rating period 12/1/08 through 11/30/09.1 will mark this exhibit DRB/Appellant Exhibit A-B. And initial. And I'll have Deputy Chief initial the same document.
Let the record reflect that the next document submitted for written evidentiary admissibility is the City of Renton Performance Evaluation for Probationary Employees, dated September first, or for the period of review from September 1 , 2008 through November 30, 2008. And let the record reflect that this will be marked as DRB/Appellant Exhibit A-C. I will initial. And have Deputy Chief initial. Let the record reflect that the next document submitted for evidentiary admissibility, City of Renton Performance Evaluation for Probationary Employees, Period of Review June 1 , 2008 through August 31 , 2008. All of these records that have been submitted are performance evaluations for Deputy Chief Let the record reflect that this exhibit will be marked
st st st
DRB/Appellant Exhibit A-D as in David.
I will initial. And have Deputy Chief
initial.
Let the record reflect that the next document is a City of Renton performance Evaluation Probationary Employee Evaluation for Deputy Chief of review March 1 , 2007 through May 31 , 2008.
st st
^m%%Wl period
Let the record reflect that this Exhibit will be marked DRB / Appellant Exhibit A-E as in Edward. Initialed by myself and by Deputy Chief Wk^KkW
CM:
I'm glad I didn't bring 19 years worth of evals.
KC:
Let the record reflect that another Performance Evaluation for has
b e e n
Probationary Employee, evaluation for Deputy Chief ^ H l
submitted
st
for evidentiary review and admissibility. Period of review dated December 1 , 2007 through February 29 , 2008. Let the record reflect that this will be marked, exhibit will be marked DRB / Appellant Exhibit A - F as in Frank. Initialed by myself and submitted to Deputy Chief ^ I H I f his initials. Is that all the evidence you have submitted for admissibility?
r th
CM:
That's all I have.
KC:
All right. Now the City has evidence to submit for admissibility. The first
exhibit is memorandum dated June 8, 2011, to Deputy Chief, I'm sorry, to Chief of Police Kevin Milosevich from Deputy Chief H H B H I requesting to appeal
the intended discipline through the Disciplinary Review Board. Copy received by Sherry Smith. This will be marked as DRB dash or slash DR Exhibit A, initialed by myself, given to Deputy Chief | H ^ B f his review.
r
CM:
And initials
KC:
Initials.
CM:
OK
KC:
Do you have any objections?
CM:
No, I'm good.
KC:
Next document is an email from Chief of Police Kevin Milosevich to myself,
Commander Clark Wilcox, Commander Chad Karlewicz, cc to Nancy Carlson,
essentially convening the Disciplinary Review Board. This exhibit is marked DRB / DR Exhibit B. Initialed by myself. Provided to Deputy Chief m for his review.
CM:
At what point will I get copies of these?
KC:
Upon request after the Disciplinary Review Board has finalized their
recommendation to you.
CM:
Okay
KC:
If you don't already have a copy.
CM:
I don't have a copy of that.
KC:
OK. Next item is a copy of the Renton Police Department General Orders,
26.1.6, Discipline Appeal Procedure, being marked as DRB/DR Exhibit C, initialed by myself, provided to Deputy Chief-
CM:
Is this copied out of, what source is this document from?
KC:
It is copied off o f - t h e computer, what's that icon that we use, Enterprise
Applications and compared to the latest General Orders that was
CM:
So that's Folio View, right?
KC:
What?
CM:
Folio View
KC:
Yes.
KC:
Do you have any objections?
CM:
No.
KC:
Okay.
KC:
Next item is the copied documentation of the Internal Investigation itself
that's marked DRB/DR Exhibit D David. As provided to me in pdf. format and then copied off.
CM: of?
So for clarification purposes, this is a copy of everything that I have a copy
KC:
Yes
CM:
There's nothing in here that I didn't receive?
KC:
That's correct. Do you object?
CM:
No
KC:
Next item is memorandum to Deputy Chief | H H I f
r o m
Chief of Police
Kevin Milosevich, it's a memorandum Intent to Discipline on CO-03-11, Exhibit being marked as DRB/DR Exhibit E. Initialed by myself, given to Deputy Chief B CM: l
a n
V objections to that being admitted?
If it's what you say it is, no.
KC:
Next document is a Police Deputy Chief City of Renton Class Specification
bulletin, being marked Exhibit F under DRB/DR, initialed by myself, given to Deputy Chief CM: No for his review, and initials. Do you have any objections?
KC:
The next document is the Police Sergeant City of Renton Class Specification
bulletin being marked as Exhibit DRB/DR Exhibit G as in George, initialed by myself, given to Deputy Chief ^ B H f CM: No
f o r
review. Do you have any objection?
KC:
Next item is a memorandum dated June 13 , 2011 to Deputy Chief from myself, regarding the scheduling of this Disciplinary Review Board
th
marked DRB/DR Exhibit H like Henry, signed by myself, provided to Deputy Chief ^ ^ ^ ^ for review, do you object?
CM:
No
KC:
Next item, memorandum dated June 14 , to myself from Deputy Chief
th
^ ^ ^ m subject line is submission of material for Review Board, exhibit marked DRB DR Exhibit I , initialed by me, provided to Deputy Chief review. Do you object? for his
CM:
{inaudible)
KC:
Next document is an email from Commander Karlewicz to myself indicating
that he has received and read the entire Internal Investigation and the Intent to Discipline Letter, exhibit marked DRB / DR Exhibit J. Initialed by me, provided to Deputy Chief for his review. Do you object?
CM:
No
KC:
Next document is an email from Clark Wilcox to myself, indicating that he
has received the, or has reviewed, received the Internal Investigation and Intent to Discipline, and read General Orders 26.1.6 and following. Exhibit is marked
DRB/DR Exhibit K. Initialed by myself and provided to Deputy Chief H H B his review.
f o r
CM:
No
KC:
Do you object?
CM:
No
KC:
And the next document is a memorandum to the Disciplinary Review Board
from myself and is the actual document, the summation from which I read from to present on record. It is marked DRB/DR Exhibit L Signed by me, given to Deputy Chief | ^ B H I f review. Do you object?
r
CM:
No
KC:
That concludes this part of the Disciplinary Review Board process. Now the
- Commander Karlewicz and myself and Commander Wilcox will convene into executive session.
CM:
Before we go any further I want to clarify that we have nothing else to
enter into evidence.
KC:
There will be nothing else entered into evidence.
CM:
So anything that's not here you can't discuss?
KC:
That's correct.
CM:
Will this executive session include just the three of you?
KC:
Yes.
CM:
OK.
NC:
You want to go off record?
KC:
We'll go back on record, or we're still on record, and back into the
procedure for entering material evidence. The written documentation for the Internal has been submitted. The oversight was the submission of the actual video and the follow-up videos. So at this point in time, I will move to submit those.
KC:
The digital video marked "SCORE Parody" one of two zero one one is being
submitted as Exhibit DRB/DR Exhibit M, marked by myself, the disk is being slip given to Deputy Chief H ^ ^ ^ for his initials.
CM:
I'm going to object to that.
KC:
OK, and the reasons for your objection?
CM:
I have no idea what's on that disk, I don't know what the source is, I don't
know if this was one taken off the internet at the time that it was actually up there, if it's video, I'm not really sure exactly what that, what's on that disk.
Do you know, do you know when that was copied or what the source is on that?
KC:
I do not.
Go ahead and initial that.
CM:
You want me to initial the envelope, not the disk?
KC:
Yes the envelope, the exhibit sticker. I have heard your objections to the
video, I have viewed the video and find it to be consistent with what I believe was the original video, posted and documented in the investigation, and will rule it is admissible.
CM:
OK
KC:
Next digital disk, being marked as an exhibit or as documentation of the
videos that were posted after the original and mentioned in the Internal, and being marked as DRB/DR Exhibit N Nora. Again I will refer that to Deputy Chief
IBHi f
CM:
his initial.
Again I object, I have no clue what's on the disks, the source, who copied
them or any chain of evidence. But I will initial.
KC:
OK, I have heard your objections, I understand that the rules of evidence as
known by the court shall not be followed in this Disciplinary Review Board hearing as outlined by General Order 26.1.6,1 have viewed these videos and find them to be consistent with the videos that were posted at a later date and referred to in the investigation, and will admit them into the record.
CM:
OK
KC:
That concludes this part of this hearing. And the time is, one-fifty pm.
POLICE DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: June 1, 2011 I ^ ^ B ^ I Deputy
Kevin M i l o s e v i c h , Chief of Police intent to Discipline CO-0311
This m e m o r a n d u m sets forth m y preliminary intent t o d e m o t e you t o the rank of Sergeant. This preliminary intent is based upon the following: S o m e t i m e in the middle of D e c e m b e r , 2010 Sergeant J ^ H I created a video that was directed at members o f the City o f Renton Jail. This video was in a cartoon style, and ridiculed and demeaned t h e m e m b e r s of both the Renton Jail and the SCORE Jail. During this same time period, you w e r e aware of the creation o f this video and had previously reviewed the video. Effective o n January 1, 2011, the Renton Jail became t h e SCORE North Jail operated primarily by jailers previously e m p l o y e d by the City of Renton. On January 4, 2011 t h e Department was made aware that this video was posted on YouTube, and was emailed t o certain m e m b e r s of the Department. This video was a topic of discussions at various leadership meetings, and attempts w e r e made t o determine w h o posted and circulated the video. Four months after the video was p o s t e d , you eventually c a m e forward at the direction of a subordinate t o admit y o u r prior knowledge o f the creation and posting of this video. A n internal investigation was c o n d u c t e d where it was d e t e r m i n e d that you failed t o act in y o u r role as a Deputy Chief o n numerous occasions. Specifically, your conduct violated the following D e p a r t m e n t policies: Violation of General Orders 26.1.1.II.B - Unbecoming Conduct Members of the Police department shall conduct themselves at all times, both on and on the Department into disrepute or or that individual.
off duty, in such a manner as to reflect most favorably Unbecoming reflects discredit upon the individual which impairs the operation Finding: Sustained
conduct shall include that which brings the Department or efficiency of the Department or the
as a member of the Police Department,
Violation of General Orders 26.1.1.II.K - Unsatisfactory Performance Commissioned competency positions. Department. knowledge inability members of the Police Department shall maintain sufficient of their the of the or
to properly perform Members shall perform Unsatisfactory of the application
their duties, and assume the responsibility and objectives
their duties in a manner which will maintain may be demonstrated to conform to work by a lack of standards
highest standards
of efficiency in carrying out the function performance of laws required
to be enforced, an unwillingness thefaiiure to take deserving of
to perform
assigned tasks, thefaiiure
established for the officer's rank, grade, or position, attention, or absence without the following leave. In addition
appropriate police unsatisfactory unsatisfactory infractions
action on the occasion of a crime, disorder, or other condition performance, performance:
to other indicators
will be considered prima facie evidence of or a written record of repeated or orders of the Department.
repeated poor evaluations, directives,
of rules, regulations, Finding:
Sustained
The above findings of misconduct are based upon the following: You admittedly approved of the content of the video, despite its d e m e a n i n g , disrespectful and unprofessional portrayal of t h e Renton and SCORE staff. You reviewed several iterations o f the video created by S g t m and had several opportunities to advise him that it was inappropriate. Y o u failed t o do so. Your actions purported t o authorize and allow m e m b e r s o f the Department to publically humiliate and d e m e a n another division of the Police Department. You attempted t o conceal the source of the video by advising S g t ^ in h o w he could post this video on YouTube by using an anonymous location. You then agreed with Sgt. i|^H| that you w o u l d not disclose the source o f the video unless specifically asked. Once y o u w e r e aware of t h e damage caused by the video, you directed
SgtlHI
t o r e m o v e t h e video from YouTube. As you admitted during the investigation, you could have avoided this damage by performing y o u r job duties in the first place b y directing Sgt. H i material. This video was directed at both t h e Renton Jail and the newly f o r m e d SCORE Jail of w h i c h the City of Renton is an o w n e r agency. Your failure t o exercise your leadership responsibilities, and advise Sgt, ^ 1
n o t t o n o t t 0
create and circulate this inappropriate
o s t
r circulate t h e video
has caused damage t o both entities, harmed the Department's relationship with SCORE and t h e City's relationship w i t h the other o w n e r agencies. You concealed your participation in t h e creation and posting of the video and failed t o c o m e forward on numerous occasions t o admit that you w e r e involved
in the video and knew who created and posted it. Specifically, you failed to provide this relevant information: o o Once I made it clear the video was inappropriate during our first m e e t i n g on this issue on January 4, 2011. On January 4, 2011, when you knew that I had asked Information Services (IS) to review City email to determine if this video was posted via department computero On January 5, w h e n you w e r e notified that IS did not have the capability to track this information, and offered that you had the same problem in another investigation you w e r e performing. o o On January 6, 2011, after we discussed at the monthly leadership meeting that the video was inappropriate. A f t e r you knew that s o m e o n e else used the same technology t o create n u m e r o u s other viscous videos about other department members several months later. These additional videos w e r e h o m o p h o b i c , anti-female, based on rumors, and described previous internal investigations both sustained and not-sustained. You w e r e aware of these additional videos and yet still did not c o m e forward with information regarding these videos or your knowledge of the source of the original video. In fact, you w e r e adamant in your discussion w i t h
Commander J^Jpthat
these
videos should not be investigated (potentially disclosing your involvement) because you believed they w e r e similar to the original video. o A f t e r C o m m a n d e r McClincy and you entered my office to voice an opinion of w h o may have created the additional videos. It was nearly five months after the video had been posted, and only after C o m m a n d e r J H ^ a d v i s e d you that he w o u l d be required to disclose your involvement in and knowledge of the creator of t h e original video if you did not voluntarily do so that you finally brought this information to m y attention. Discipline Recommendation: Demotion to the rank of Sergeant The essential functions of the position of Deputy Chief include: Plan, organize, coordinate, and manage the operations of the Department. Supervise t h e training and discipline of subordinates; coordinate activities w i t h i n the Department. Establish and maintain effective working relationships w i t h staff, other agencies, news m e d i a , elected officials, administrators, and the general public. A s s u m e c o m m a n d of the overall operations of the Police Department in the absence of t h e Chief, or as designated, A t t e n d meetings and represent the Department and / o r t h e Chief as requested.
You failed to perform these essential functions and indicated an inability to do so by reviewing and effectively authorizing a video that ridiculed and d e m e a n e d an entire division of the Police Department. This video by title referenced the newly created SCORE organization. The video demeaned this organization and was t h e topic of discussion of the SCORE Operations Board, and the Administrative Board consisting of the elected officials of t h e seven owner agencies. This video created distrust between SCORE e m p l o y e e s and the employees of the Renton Police D e p a r t m e n t As a Deputy Chief, you failed to understand the negative impact that this video w o u l d have on both t h e Department and SCORE, failed to take appropriate action t o prevent such harm, and t h e n failed t o promptly disclose relevant information, thus impairing the investigation. Such conduct clearly violates General Orders 26.1.1.11, B and K, and is grounds for d e m o t i o n under Civil Service Rules 16.01(b).
dsked
As part of this investigation, I that this video had on her o r g a n i z a t i o r T J ^ ^ S s t a t e d : "As a startup
fl |H[||B[|||H|
^ ^ ^
m
discuss t h e impact
agency, we are trying to provide excellent customer service to our It is difficult to try to make thing
member (this) by
cities and establish a culture of cooperation. members of the very agency that we serve."
happen in a positive arena when SCORE staff feels that they are subject to sabotage
U p o n notification o f this i n v e s t i g a t i o n s ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ requested that you never represent the Police Department at the monthly SCORE Operations Board. This is based on the c o n t e m p t of her organization you have displayed. Your actions have significantly harmed our relationship with SCORE. As a Deputy Chief, I expect loyalty to both the organization and t o m e . This investigation has clearly violated that loyalty. You purposely chose sides by aligning yourself with S g t | 0
i n
d e m e a n i n g the m e m b e r s of the City/SCORE Jail staff o v e r the
organization as a w h o l e . As part of this investigation, y o u have stated that you did not lie but stated that if I had only asked the right question that you w o u l d have told me. As t h e police chief, I do not have the time to ensure that I ask the exact question in o r d e r to receive information that is obviously relevant. I expect that the deputy chief will proactively respond t o issues within the department without being specifically asked. This discipline r e c o m m e n d a t i o n is significant. However, the information describes a Deputy Chief with displaced loyalty; one w h o will willingly d e m e a n another department w o r k g r o u p / a g e n c y ; and w h o will withhold relevant information unless specifically asked so as to conceal the poor judgment he exercised.
I cannot have you as a m e m b e r of my c o m m a n d staff with the expectations t o act as the Chief in my absence. The Department's General Orders outlines your appeal rights. Please notify Sherry Smith within five (5) days of receiving this m e m o if you wish t o discuss this discipline r e c o m m e n d a t i o n or request t o exercise y o u r appeal options. If y o u choose a traditional Loudermill hearing, this will be held by Jay Covington, t h e City's Chief Administrative Officer. This decision was based on your email dated April 2 5 , 2 0 1 1 w h e r e y o u requested an outside and independent investigator. A f t e r notification, I will schedule t h e appropriate meeting or review board. Y o u will t h e n be notified of the final decision. I have received a copy of t h e intent to discipline m e m o r a n d u m .
Deputy Chief
Date
POLICE DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: TO: June 21, 2011 Kevin Milosevich, Chief of Police
I I H i f l H I i H Deputy Chief of Police

FROM: SUBJECT: Discipline Review Board CO-0311
On June 08, 2011, Administrative Secretary Sherry Smith received on your behalf a memorandum from Deputy Chief H H H requesting to appeal the intended discipline through the Disciplinary Review Board process as outlined in General Order 26.1.6. On June 08,2011 at 1018 hours, Chief Milosevich sent an email to Commanders Wilcox, Karlewicz and Curry (with a copy to Administrator Nancy Carlson) advising the addressees that Deputy Chief H ^ ^ l had selected the Discipline Review Board for purposes of his pre-discipline hearing. In that email Chief Milosevich advised that the board.would consist of Commanders Wilcox, Karlewicz and Curry with the latter being designated as the Chair. The Chief further advised that the board needed to be convened within 15 days of the notice request and that HR Administrator Carlson would be attending the hearing. On June 12, 2011 at 1301 hours, The Discipline Review Board (DRB) Chair, Commander Curry sent an email to Commanders Wilcox and Karlewicz with a copy to Administrator Carlson. In that email Commanders Wilcox and Karlewicz were directed to review and investigate reports, statements and material concerning the original allegation of misconduct. They were to respond in writing to Commander Curry when that review had been completed as outlined by General Orders. On June 12, 2011 at 1556 hours, Commander Karlewicz sent Commander Curry an email advising that he had received and read the entire internal investigation including the intent to discipline memorandum. On June 13, 2011 at 1309 hours, Commander Wilcox sent Commander Curry an email advising that he had received the internal investigation, intent to discipline letter and read General Order 26.1.6.3,1. On June 13, 2011 Commander Curry advised Deputy Chief |BIHI scheduled DRB hearing set for June 16, 2011 at 1300 hours. At that time Commander Curry
t h e
of
B H H H
Kevh^lilosevieJi, Chief of Police Deputy Chief of Police Page 2 of 7 June 20,2011 Provide the following information before 1700 on
requested that Deputy Chief June 14,2011:
A copy of all material Evidence he wished to be considered for admissibility in the hearing. A list of all witnesses with a brief summary of testimony that he wished to call and be heard in the matter.
The name and contact information of the person he would have present for representation. This letter was signed by both Deputy Chief m | and Commander Curry. On June 14,2011, Deputy Chief provided Commander Curry a memorandum with three (3) copies of all of his performance evaluations, dating back to his promotion date t o Deputy Chief. Commander Curry signed for acceptance of the evaluations. On June 14,2011, Commander Curry reviewed the evaluations provided by Deputy Chief relevancy and admissibility considerations.
for
On June 16, 2011 at approximately 1250, hours the DRB convened and the hearing was digitally recorded. Those in attendance were: Appellant - Deputy Chief
IJJ|^H
Appointed DRB Department Representative Commander C u r r y - S e l e c t e d by the Chief of Police Appointed DRB member Commander Wilcox - Selected by the Chief of Police Appointed DRB member Commander Karlewicz - Selected by the Appellant HR Administrator Nancy Carlson - sat in observation of the process DRB Department Representative Commander Curry advised that the process for the DRB hearing was outlined in General Orders. According to the framework set out by the General Orders only Deputy Chief Department Representative have the authority to cross examine witness testimony and only the Department Representative had the authority to rule on admissibility of all evidence and testimony. At this time Commander Curry returned one (1) copy of the evaluations provided by Deputy Chief and advised that there would be an opportunity in the process to submit them into evidence.
a n d t h e
The DRB gave a call for witness testimony. No witnesses were called on behalf of either the Appellant or the DRB. The DRB gave a call for summations. Deputy C h i e f ^ ^ l provided a summation that was read into the record. DRB Department Representative Curry provided a summation which was read into record.
Kevin Milosevich, Chief of Police Deputy Chief of Police Page 3 of7 June 20,2011
The DRB gave a call for material evidence that was to be considered for admissibility. The following exhibits were presented for admissibility. Submitted by Deputy Chief City of Renton, Performance Evaluation, Supervisory Group, Rating Period: 12/1/09-11/30/10 o Marked a s - C O - 0 3 1 1 , DRD/APPELLANT, EXHIBIT A-A City of Renton, Performance Evaluation, Supervisory Group, Rating Period: 12/01/08-11/30/09 o Marked as - CO-0311, DRD/APPELLANT, EXHIBIT A-B City of Renton, Performance Evaluation, Probationary Employees, Period of Review: September 1, 2008 thru November 20, 2008 o Marked as - CO-0311, DRD/APPELLANT, EXHIBIT A-C City of Renton, Performance Evaluation, Probationary Employees, Period of Review: June 1, 2008 thru August 31, 2008 o Marked as - CO-0311, DRD/APPELLANT, EXHIBIT A-D City of Renton, Performance Evaluation, Probationary Employees, Period of Review: March 1, 2007 thru May 31, 2008 o Marked as - CO-0311, DRD/APPELLANT, EXHIBIT A-E City of Renton, Performance Evaluation, Probationary Employees, Period of Review: December 1, 2007 thru February 29,2008 o Marked as - CO-0311, DRD/APELLANT, EXHIBIT A-F
The above items were initialed by both Deputy Chief ^ ^ ^ ^ and Commander Curry. Commander Curry admitted the above documents in as material evidence, Submitted by DRB Department Representative Commander Curry: Memorandum dated June 8,2011, advising of Deputy Chief B l ^ ^ l request to appeal the intended discipline through the DRB o Marked as - CO0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT A, Initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief B H i f signature and review. Deputy Chief B U B did not object to the document being entered as material evidence.
r
Email from the Chief of Police, dated June 08, 2011, at 1018 hours advising that the DRB was to convene and appointing members of the Board, designating a Department Representative o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT B, Initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief f signature and review. Deputy
r
Chief IBHB object to the document being entered as material evidence. General Order 26,1.6 Discipline-Appeal Procedure
d i c l n o t
BB1BBI Deputy Chief of Police

.Page 4 of 7 June 20,2011 o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT C, initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief B 1 H I f signature and review. Deputy Chief B U B l s t i o n e d the origin of the copy. Commander Curry advised that it was printed from the copy available on Enterprise Apps and compared to the latest copy of the General Orders for accuracy. Deputy Chief B H H did not object to the document being entered as material evidence.
r ue
Kevin Milosevich, Chief of Police
Copy of Internal Investigation CO-0311 o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT D, initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief B H B signature and review. Deputy Chief m i k l If ' * same copy of the information he received from the Chief of Police. Commander Curry advised that it was. Deputy Chief B ^ H did not object to the document being entered as material evidence,
f o r a s e c w a s
Copy of the Intent to Discipline CO-0311 authored by the Chief of Police dated June 1,2011 o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT E, initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief B H H f signature and review. Deputy Chief B H H did not object to the document being entered as material evidence.
r
Copy of the City of Renton - Class Specification Bulletin for Police Deputy Chief o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT F, initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief B H H f signature and review. Deputy Chief did not object to the document being entered as material evidence.
r
Copy of the City of Renton - Class Specification Bulletin for Police Sergeant o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT G, initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief f signature and review. Deputy Chief | B H I did not object to the document being entered as material evidence,
IJJ^BH
Memorandum dated June 13, 2011, authored by Commander Curry addressed to Deputy Chief | H H advising of the date, time and location of the DRB hearing. o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT H, initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief B I B signature and review. Deputy Chief B I ^ B did not object to the document being entered as material evidence.
f o r
Memorandum dated June 14, 2011, authored by Deputy Chief | ^ B B addressed to Commander Kent Curry documenting acceptance of material evidence that was being provided for admissibility consideration at the hearing. o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT I , initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief B ^ H f signature and review. Deputy
r
IJ^BBIHB
KevinMlosevi^, Chief of Police Deputy Chief of Police Page 5 of7 June 20,2011 Chief H evidence. did not object to the document being entered as material
Copy of email sent by Commander Karlewicz advising that he had read the entire internal investigation and Intent to discipline letter o Marked a s - C O - 0 3 1 1 , DRB/DR, EXHIBIT J, initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief H H B signature and review. Deputy d i c l Chief H H I object to the document being entered as material evidence.
f o r n o t
Copy of email sent by Commander Wilcox advising that he received the internal investigation, intent to discipline and read GO 26.1.6.3.1 o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT K, initialed by Commander Curry f o r provided to Deputy Chief H H I signature and review. Deputy dld Chief HIHI object to the document being entered as material evidence.
n o t
Copy of the Department Representative Summation used as the framework to read testimony into record o Marked as ~ CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT L, initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief signature and review. Deputy
f o r
ChiefijJHHI evidence,
dld n
object t o the document being entered as material
After a brief discussion the following two items were presented by Commander Curry as the Department Representative to be considered for admissibility into evidence DVD+R disc, marked SCORE Parody, 1/2011 o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT M , initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief signature. Deputy Chief H I H objected to the disc being entered on grounds of chain of evidence considerations, that he didn't know how the video was obtained and placed on the disc and that he hadn't seen the material on the disc. Commander Curry advised that the video on the disc had been reviewed and was consistent with the video referenced in Internal CO-0311. Commander Curry ruled that the disc be admitted into evidence.
f o r
CD-R disc, contained in protective cover marked New SCORE Videos o Marked as - CO-0311, DRB/DR, EXHIBIT M , initialed by Commander Curry provided to Deputy Chief | H H i signature. Deputy Chief H H I again objected to the disc being admitted onto record for similar reasons given above. Commander Curry advised that according to the General Orders strict rules of evidence ''shall" not be applied (General Orders Manual, 26.1.6.II.C, The Board shall sit as an informal Review Board, and as such, strict rules of evidence shall not apply.) Commander Curry advised that the videos were consistent with the ones referenced in
for
I^HIiiHHI Deputy Chief of Police

Page 6 of7 June 20,2011 Internal CO-0311. Commander Curry ruled that the disc be admitted into evidence. The DRB hearing concluded at approximately 1340 hours and a short break was taken by the DRB members prior to entering into executive session. The DRB members entered into executive session at approximately 1410 hours for the purpose outlined in General Order 26.1.6.III.C. Ground rules were agreed upon and consisted of the following: Strict confidentiality of discussion during the session Session was not to be recorded Board would only report out on actions taken by Board members
Board Actions Action 1 The Board decided by a majority vote that disciplinary action is appropriate in this Instance. In accomplishing this objective, the Board only considered that information and material presented to the Board in the presence of both Deputy Chjef U ^ ^ ^ and the Department Representative. The two discs containing the video materials were not viewed during this process.
In deciding what disciplinary action shall be recommended to the Chief of Police the Board members took the following actions: Action 2 The Board decided by a majority vote that the recommended discipline needs to be greater than that recommended by Deputy Chief H H H Action 3 The Board decided by a majority vote that the recommended discipline requires demotion from the position of Police Deputy Chief. Action 4 The Board decided by a majority vote that the recommended discipline requires demotion below the level of Police Commander. Action 5 The Board decided by a majority vote that the recommended discipline does not require demotion below the level of Sergeant.
d u r i n
h i s
summation.
II^^HHH ^Puty Chief of Police

Page 7 of 7 June 20,2011
Specific Recommendation
The Board has decided by a majority vote that the specific recommendation as to disciplinary action shall be demotion from the rank of Police Deputy Chief to the rank of Police Sergeant
Signed
Clark Wilcox, Commander
POLICE DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: July 6, 2011 Sergeant Kevin Milosevich, Chief of Police Notification of Civil Service appeal date requirements
This m e m o serves as an a d d e n d u m t o the discipline m e m o that you received yesterday. Rule 16.02 of the Civil Service Rules state: A regular employee without particular allowed writing, may be discharged from city service or demoted, or suspended in writing
pay, or deprived of vacation or other privileges facts upon which the disciplinary ten(10) business days from
only after notification
of the reasons for such action. Such notice shall state the specific grounds and the action is based, and the employee shall be Such notice of disciplinary action the date of service of the notice In which to reply in
and request a hearing before the Commission.
shall state the time allowed for answer and for requesting a hearing before the Commission. A copy of the notice and a copy of the reply, if any, must be filed in duplicate with the Commission. The appointing authority/chief shall submit evidence mail, addressed to to the disciplinary action, either personally or by certified or registered
his/her last known address and the date of such service. I w o u l d consider that the 10 day period w o u l d begin on the date n o t e d below.
I have received a copy of the m e m o r a n d u m .
POLICE DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: August 1 1 , 2 0 1 1 ^ H ^ B Sergeant Kevin Milosevich, Chief Discipline CO-0311
I have reviewed t h e information in CO-0311. This includes t h e information you provided. in the interview conducted by Commander Leibman. I have also reviewed the findings and discipline recommendations provided by C o m m a n d e r Leibman and Commander Curry. Based upon all o f the information provided, I issued m y preliminary intent to demote y o u to t h e position of officer. This preliminary intent was based upon t h e following information. The investigation revealed that: Sometime in t h e middle of December 2010, you created an 8:42 minute cartoon style video about t h e interactions between t h e Jail and Patrol. In your statement, you created this video as a " s p o o f / ' ' During that same month you notified Deputy Chief | a n d ^ P ^ m ^ t h a t you were creating a video. You had a conversation with regarding t h e posting of this video on YouTube before it was actually posted. You w a n t e d to remain anonymous. suggested that you to go to t h e library if y o u w a n t e d to keep it a secret. . You went through significant efforts to conceal y o u r involvement by creating an anonymous email account from a location that w o u l d be difficult to trace back to its origins. You eventually posted the video on YouTube. You were reluctant during your interview.to indicate t h e medium that was used to post the video by stating in your interview: "...but, I think from an offsite email address." You sent a link of t h e video to your department email account and to Sergeant
JHHHflBV department email account.

an
Yoiônspired ^ V involvement and their knowledge about the creation and posting o f the video a secret. You removed t h e video from YouTube when advised t o by | In your interview y o u stated:
|ÎHflHV ttBV^
0
e e p o u r
Kevin Milosevich Page 2 of7 August 8,2011 o o o o o That the content of the video gives t h e perception t o others that there are problems with SCORE, That the video could impact the Department's relationship with the Jail, That the video could impact the Department's relationship with SCORE, The clown in the video represents t h e Jail as an entity, That you left open the possibility of a second video.
You stated that you would 'fess up' to t h e video if you were confronted directly. That w h e n others asked you if you had something to do with the video, you avoided answering honestly and directly. You agreed that your actions are not consistent with your role as a sergeant. You agreed that your actions fall under the definition of U n b e c o m i n g C o n d u c t The video was the topic of discussion at a monthly SCORE Operations Board meeting, given its disparaging and demeaning representation of t h e Jail. Public Officials in other cities viewed this video and inquired as to t h e creation and issues surrounding the video.
Your conduct violated the following General Orders: General Orders 26.1.1.I1.B - Unbecoming Conduct Members of the Police Department shall conduct themselves at all times, both on on the Department into Department and off duty, in such a manner as to reflect most favorably Unbecoming disrepute or the Finding: Department, or reflects discredit upon the individual or that which impairs the operation
conduct shall include that which brings the Department or efficiency of the
as a member of the Police
individual. Sustained
General Orders 26.1.1.II.K- Unsatisfactory Performance Commissioned competency maintain their positions. members of the Police Department Members shall perform shall maintain sufficient of will and to properly perform their duties, and assume the responsibility their duties in a manner which performance may be of efficiency in carrying out the functions Unsatisfactory
the highest standards
objectives of the Department. by a lack of knowledge unwillingness work standards take appropriate indicators or inability
demonstrated
of the application to perform
of laws required to be enforced, an to conform to thefaiiure condition prima or a to
assigned tasks, thefaiiure
estabiishedforthe
officer's rank, grade, or position,
action on the occasion of a crime, disorder or other or absence without leave. In addition performance, the following performance:
deserving police attention, of unsatisfactory
to other
will be considered
facie evidence of unsatisfactory of the Department
repeated poor evaluations,
written record of repeated infractions
of rules, regulations,
directives, or orders .
Kevin Milosevich Page 3 of7 August 8,2011
Finding:
Sustained
General Orders 26.1.1II.FF- Public Statements Members of the Police Department Department, expression is defamatory, falsity and undermines maintenance publication, presenting public gatherings, of discipline. shall not publicly criticize or ridicule the its policies, or other members, where such speech, writing, or other obscene oris made with reckless disregard for truth or of the Department or interferes for while without only with the Members of the Police Department shall not address release or the effectiveness
appear on radio or television, prepare any articles to a newspaper or a periodical, the Department information
act as correspondents
divulge investigative proper authority.
or any other matters of the Department in such matters ^
themselves as representing
Members may lecture on police, or other related subject,
with prior approval of the Chief. Finding: Sustained
The creation and dissemination of this original "Penny-tale" video has clearly impaired your ability to perform the duties that is expected of a sergeant. S o m e of these supervisory duties include: Supervise, evaluate, and motivate subordinates. Establish and maintain cooperative and effective interpersonal relationships. Assign, instruct, and review the work of subordinates in an effective working relationship. Supervise and evaluate t h e performance of subordinates and interpret evaluation for correcting deficiencies in a positive manner. Enforce laws with firmness and t a c t Deal effectively w i t h violations o f rules, policies, and procedures on an impartial basis. Learn specific duties and responsibilities of individual assignments and apply and carry out as required. In addition, your disrespectful behavior toward another divjsion o f the Department as well as SCORE and its administration has substantially impeded your ability to perform your essential functions as a supervisor of this organization, created discord amongst the agencies and significantly impaired the proper functioning o f the Department. These findings are based on t h e following: You created, shared and posted a video that was demeaning, demoralizing and ridiculed members of the department and other King County agencies.
Kevin Milosevich Page 4 of7 August 8,2011 . The video reflected poorly o n o u r agency and its good reputation, y o u r coworkers, supervisors and t h e relationship between t h e organizations. Y o u stated that t h e result of this video may have a negative impact o n your career and conspired to keep your identity and involvement a secret. It was only after H | came forward that you admitted to your involvement. The video deliberately distorted and exaggerated the jail's operations to cause the viewer to conclude that the jail operations and jail personnel w e r e incompetent, ignorant and less valued than commissioned members of the police department. The speech was defamatory and made with reckless disregard for the truth clearly undermining the effectiveness of the organization. You publically demeaned and ridiculed certain department staff causing harm to those relationships between organizations. The video impacted the relationship with the Renton Jail and with SCORE.
Specifically *
fr j^0HHHi
The original SCORE Parody video is sarcastic, demeaning to SCORE as an agency, t o Correctional Officers, and to her personally. It has caused a spirit of distrust between SCORE and members of the Renton Police Department. She has been contacted by numerous officials from outside agencies inquiring about the video. Several members of SCORE were offended by t h e video. They felt it was derogatory towards SCORE and t h e m personally. Deputy Director Kelly advises that the jail staff in general were frustrated, offended and embarrassed.
Specifically f r o m | There h a s b e e n a negative impact on SCORE and its operations. The depiction of a SCORE employee as a lazy clown by a member of an owner agency has created a lack of distrust between SCORE staff and t h e Renton Police Department. The video could have negative impact on potential correctional officer recruits during a time of increased hiring activity. Documented receiving an email from a SCORE employee that read:. "I did not like being emulated as a Clown. buffoon. like I do not believe they were intending
0
The definition
of a
clown is a rude ill-bred person, a fool and one who plays the to show us as a comedian who entertains fools. people. It was meant to make us look
Loudermill hearing with Commander Curry This meeting was held in conference r o o m 519 on June 20 at 1400 hours. During this
meeting several defenses were raised by Guild Attorney Hilary McClure on your behalf.
Kevin Milosevich Page 5 of 7 * August 8,2011 That this video is protected under the 1 A m e n d m e n t . That the investigation and potential discipline is a result of your position in the Guild. That the intent of this investigation is to punish someone for the second set of videos. I disagree with all three issues that were raised in this meeting with C o m m a n d e r Curry. You have never indicated how this self-described "satire" implicates First Amendment protection. Your " p a r o d y " of the jail and ridicule of it did not raise a matter of public concern. Rather, as you stated during your interview, this was a.joke to y o u . Even if it did s o m e h o w implicate First A m e n d m e n t protection, the Department's interest in maintaining the efficiency of its operations, interagency relationship with SCORE, and respect and trust amongst officers clearly outweighs any interest you may have in ridiculing your colleagues. Your "satire" was detrimental to the mission and functions of this Department and SCORE, and brought the City, the Auxiliary Services Division (Jail) and its current and former officers into disrepute. Nor is there any evidence that the recommended discipline is in any way related to your union activities. Finally, there is no evidence that your r e c o m m e n d e d discipline relates t o the other eight videos. Rather, it is based upon your admitted decision to ridicule and demean another Department, conceal the fact you w e r e the creator of the video, and then your repeated efforts to avoid responsibility for your involvement until directly asked. It was your disrespectful and insubordinate conduct-nothing else that has precipitated my preliminary decision to demote you.
s t
Prior to issuing my preliminary notice of intent, I also took into consideration your recent suspension of forty-eight (48) hours for Neglect of Duty and Unsatisfactory Performance. This investigation is another example of a pattern of sub-standard behavior, policy violation and on-going overall unwillingness or inability to perform as a supervisor. Following issuance o f the preliminary notice of intent to discipline, w e held your Loudermill hearing on August 4, 2011. During this meeting, you were represented by Guild Attorney McClure; also present in the room with us was A / D e p u t y Chief Curry. During this meeting your attorney stated: That this form of speech is protected under the 1 A m e n d m e n t . That there are several cases that have supported the freedom of speech in the work place, and specifically named the " G a r c e t t i " case as an example, That this video that was produced falls under political satire on the inefficiencies of government.
st
Kevin Milosevich Page 6 of7 August 8,2011 That law enforcement employees do not give up constitutional rights when they become employed. That this discipline's intent is to stifle discussions o f union leadership. That the real intent of this discipline is to hold you accountable f o r t h e second series of videos that w e r e displayed on YouTube. That the police department does not require self-reporting. That this incident does not meet the "Just Cause" definition regarding fairness. That this was a parody, a joke, and that it would be unfortunate to work in an environment w h e r e humor Was not allowed. That you did not cross the line, your intent was not to be hurtful of others. Arbiters look at the long-term financial impacts o f promotions, and that they use a higher threshold of clear and convincing evidence in these cases. I asked you a f e w questions, and your attorney responded: 1. I asked w h y didn't you email me the video in the first place if your intent was t o give notice o f government efficiency? Your attorney replied that the process that you used was similar to an anonymous letter to the editor. 2. In regards to your concept of protected speech, I asked whether you ever considered getting legal advice prior to posting the video? Your attorney thought that was an inappropriate question. 3. I asked how this discipline is associated with your duties as a Guild Vice President? Y o u r attorney stated that the timing of this investigation is close t o ' t h e recently completed collective bargaining agreement. It is my understanding that the last scheduled meeting regarding the contract negotiations was December 9, 2010 and the contract was signed on February 1, 2011. 4. A n d last, I asked what you thought was the appropriate discipline in this matter? Your attorney stated - no discipline. Based upon all of the information provided, including the information provided by you at the Loudermill hearing, my decision is as follows: Discipline Decision: Demotion to the position of Officer and reassignment to Shift IB South effective immediately. A rotation schedule will be developed. You are eligible to participate in future promotional exams provided you meet the eligibility requirements. The decision as to whether to promote you to the rank of sergeant in the future will be based on both your performance during your.career with the city and ranking on an eligibility list.
Kevin Milosevich Page 7 of 7 August 8,2011 V I discussed with you the difference between mistakes and misconduct. That in this case, you had designed a plan to develop a video that was disrespectful and demeaning of - * another division / government entity. You obtained a pre-paid credit card, created an anonymous email account, posted this information f r o m a local anonymous "IP" address all while knowing that your conduct was unbecoming an officer ~ let alone a supervisor and could lead to discipline. In your position as a Sergeant, you are formally one of the Department's leaders. This leadership role which you desired comes with a series of expectations, some formal and s o m e informal. As a department leader, you have the responsibility and obligation to look out for the best interests of the police department, t h e City of Renton, and the citizens that w e serve. As a department leader, you are expected to establish and maintain cooperative and effective interpersonal relationships. Clearly the creation o f this video harms our relationships with not only the former Renton City Jail, b u t t h e . o t h e r six cities who are m e m b e r s of SCORE. This investigation has demonstrated on numerous occasions Where you have failed as a leader. The issues that were raised in our Loudermill meeting w e r e very similar to those that w e r e raised in y o u r meeting with A / D e p u t y Chief Curry, which I addressed above. I concur with the recommendations for demotion.
The Department's General Orders and the collective bargaining agreement outline your appeal rights.
I have received a copy of the discipline m e m o r a n d u m .
POLICE DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Discipline CO-0311
I have reviewed t h e investigation and the discipline recommendations of both C o m m a n d e r Leibman and C o m m a n d e r Curry. The investigation revealed that: Sometime in D e c e m b e r of 2010, S e r g e a n t f ^ J created a cartoon style video, ridiculing m e m b e r s of our agency w o r k i n g in t h e jail.
u
SgtHH told y

that he was g o i n g t o make t h e video.

a n d
That y o u had knowledge that H i told Deputy Chief Sergeant the creation o f the video.
Acting
^P|about
H | told you that he put the video on YouTube. You stated in your interview that - "Absolutely nothing w r o n g with this video and the contents." You agreed to keep t h e video secret and not divulge S e r g e a n t ^ H involvement in t h e creation and posting o f the video. During your interview, y o u were aware t h a t ^ ^ w a n t e d to keep the creator of the video a secret to avoid fallout over s o m e b o d y ' s feelings getting hurt. You were present at a staff meeting dn January 6 w h e r e I explained t h e negative impact of t h e video.
t h
Your conduct violated t h e following Department General Orders: General Orders 26.1.1.11.K - Unsatisfactory Performance Commissioned members of the Police Department competency maintain their positions. shall maintain sufficient of to properly perform their duties, and assume the responsibility Members shall perform their duties in a manner which will and Unsatisfactory performance may be demonstrated
the highest standards of efficiency in carrying out the functions of the application
objectives of the Department by a lack of knowledge unwillingness or inability
of laws required to be enforced, an to conform to to
to perform assigned tasks, thefaiiure
work standards established for the officer's rank, grade, or position, thefaiiure
Kevin Milosevich, Chief of Police Page 2 of4 August 5, 2011 take appropriate indicators written of the Finding: action on the occasion of a crime, disorder or other or absence without performance, infractions performance: leave. In addition the following condition prima or a
deserving police attention, of unsatisfactory
to other
will be considered directives,
facie evidence of unsatisfactory record of repeated Department Sustained
repeated poor evaluations,
of rules, regulations,
or orders
Loudermill hearing with Commander Curry According to C o m m a n d e r Curry's m e m o r a n d u m , you presented the following information: During your tenure with the department that y o u have handled many sensitive issues. As such you have been privy to many "secrets" that you have chosen to keep to yourself. That you do not believe that you have violated a policy. That the Renton Police Department does not have a specific policy regarding self-disclosure. That the video was a " p a r o d y " that "frankly got out of h a n d " . That you believe that the second set of video's was the impetus for the investigation on the first video. That you recognize that the second sets of videos are much more offensive in nature. That you have never had a sustained internal during your e m p l o y m e n t with the department. Letter of Reprimand
Discipline Recommendation:
By your actions, you have sought the leadership track with the D e p a r t m e n t You have been selected as a Field Training Officer, an Acting Sergeant, and have participated in the sergeant examination process. As a result of your desire to b e c o m e a sergeant and your ranking on the previous sergeant's e x a m , you were p r o m o t e d to sergeant. In your capacity as a Sergeant, y o u are formally one of the Departments leaders. This leadership role which you desire comes with a series of expectations. As a Department leader, if y o u were to observe conduct by an officer that is not consistent with Department policy or may jeopardize the safety of an officer there is an expectation that you will intervene.
Kevin Milosevich, Chief of Police Page 3 of4 August 5,2011 It is expected that as a supervisor your responsibilities include documenting incidents where the city m a y incur liability. These t w o examples are what I define as t h e caretaking role o f Department leaders. In this caretaking capacity, you have t h e obligation to look o u t f o r t h e best interests of the Department and t h e City. As a Department leader it is unacceptable: To have knowledge that others were developing a video that was demeaning of another w o r k group within t h e department without notifying your supervisor. To not bring t o the attention o f your supervisor of the creator of this video knowing that t h e "administration" was not pleased with its creation. Your actions are mitigated in that this incident involved t w o other sergeants and a deputy chief. August 4,2011 Loudermill Hearing During this brief meeting, you w e r e represented by Guild A t t o r n e y McClure. During this meeting your attorney stated: She believed that the decision to discipline is about information that is not included in this investigation. That the facts o f the case and t h e policy violation do not reach the conclusion of a violation. That there is no department requirement to self-disclose. That t h e circumstances in this investigation w e r e not an issue, until t h e second series of videos were posted on YouTube. A n d that t h e department's policies are not clear as t o the responsibilities of a sergeant. That I should take into consideration your history with the department, and your lack o f discipline. In discussing this with y o u , I raised t h e issue of blurring the lines o f responsibility of a sergeant and your past Guild responsibilities. In this discussion, y o u stated that you did not believe that y o u violated department policy. Discipline Decision: Letter of Reprimand
Kevin Milosevich, Chief of Police Page 4 of 4 August 5,2011 In our discussion, I did not feel that information that was provided w o u l d change my r e c o m m e n d a t i o n that was listed in my Intent to Discipline m e m o r a n d u m .
The Department's General Orders and t h e collective bargaining agreement outline your appeal rights.
I have received a copy of the discipline m e m o r a n d u m .
Sergean
Date
POLICE DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: JwiehSQ, 2011 Chief Kevin Milosevich De p tfty-C h ief m i H H
Request for Review Board Hearing Transcript and related items entered into evidence by Commander Curry
I am formally requesting both the typed transcript and a copy of the digital recording of the Review Board Hearing. I am also requesting copies of all evidence entered o n behalf of the Department, including documents and videos. I was told that once the process was c o m p l e t e that I w o u l d be provided copies upon request.
J U L _ From: Sent: Subject: YouTube Service [service@youtube.com] Monday, January 03, 2011 3:06 P M I S ^ S n o v i e s sent you a video: "A Penny Tale
brought to you by S C O R E "
0
Urjdcommovies has shared a video with you on YouTube:
help center | e-mail options | report spam
0
A Penny Tale brought to vou by SCORE Two employees come to grips with life before and after the score project
2011 YouTube, L L C 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno. C A 94066
r e
From: Sent: To: Subject:
YouTube Service [service@youtube.com] mary 03. 2011 3:16 P M nicommovieênt you a video: A Penny Tale
M
help center [ e-mail options [ report spam Unicoriunovies has shared a video with you on YouTube: thought you would think was fiimiy
01
A Penny Tale brought to vou bv S C O R E Two employees conrie to grips with life before and after the score project
O 2011 YouTube.. L L C 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno. C A 94066
Katie McClincy
j^^m^g^n,
04, 2011 6:36 A l ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

K a t i e McG inc
mHHHs ' yiiHMIi|HB FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny I aie
FW: Unicornmovies sent you a viaeoT^PennyTale
Is this supposed to be funny, or condescending?
This came to my city email
From: YouTube Service fmailto:semce@youtube.com] Sentâfljijj ^jijjL ^ry 03, 2011 15:16 SubjectRMcomrr^ sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
Yourself^ Unicornniovies has shared a video with you on YouTube: thought you would think was funny
s A Penny Tale brought to you bv S C O R E Two employees come to grips with life before and after the score project
W I
1 liCHN
A \ Y
JiftM
H!U!)i>
f 'A
yi()()f>
From: "Chris Edwards" <jrrpd@comcast.net> To: "Dave" <linedoctor@gmail.com>; "Young Yoon" <yyoon@Rentonwa,gov> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:46 A M Subject: A Penny Tale brought to you by S C O R E This is outstanding!!!! Check out this video on YouTube: http://www.vou1nbexom/watch?v=MzliXK9LbE&feato gdata player
iPhone
Pagel of 1
From: "Chris Edwards" <jrrpd@comcast.net> To: "Corey B Jacobs" <CJacobs@Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:27 A M Subject: A Penny Tale brought to you by S C O R E Check out this video on YouTube: htto://www.voutubexoT^ gdata player
iPhone
08/15/2011
From: "Chris Edwards" <jrrpd@comcast.net> To: "Corey B Jacobs" <CJacobs@Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 11:26 A M Subject: Re: A Penny Tale brought to you by S C O R E They musfve taken it down iPhone On Jan 4, 2011, at 10:23 A M , Corey B Jacobs <CJacobs@Rentonwa.gov> wrote: > This is what I get
>
> This video has been removed by the user. > Sorry about that.
>
> Original Message > From: Chris Edwards rmailto:irrpd(q)comcast.netl > Sent: Tuesday, January 04,2011 09:27 > To: Corey B Jacobs > Subject: A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE
/
>
> Check out this video on YouTube:
>
> http://www.youmbexonVwatch^ gdata player
> >
> iPhone
m
From: Sent:
,
Katie McClincy Tuesday. January 04, 2011 11:27 A M KeôuurBen/ideo
Subject:
Of course!
From:
f|HHHp
To: K a t l ^ M r S i n r ^ ^ Sent: Tue Jan 04 11:25:02 2011 Subject: RE: Youtube Video Oh good! You can give me the biow by blow. I have to go to the site now for a dental meeting so no lunch. Can I look you up when I get back?
To: flHRIB
1
From: Katie McClincy [mailto:Kmcclincy@Rentonwa.gov] S e n t y ^ ^ ^ ^ t a n u a r y 04, 2011 11:20 AM
Subject: '^: f o u h i b e Video Lunch? And, don't know if it had been pulled prior to your getting the link, but I was able to watch it before it went away.
From:| Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:22 To: Katie McClincy Subject: FW: Youtube Video FYI - kinda disappointing, but somehow I'm not surprised... From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:01 AM To: Cc:| Subject: hw: Youtube Video Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE. It was called "A Penny Tale". It made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks From:j Sent: mesday^Tahuary 04, 2011 08:54 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video The link is no longer active. I'm guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
Kevin IWilosevfch
From: Sent: Kevin Milosevich J t a g g H ^ W r y 04, 2011 8:25 AM
HHHHI
Subject: Youtube Video I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http://www.voutube.com/watch?v=NlzliXK9LbE
Subject: Youtube Video I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http://www.voutube.com/watch7v-NlzliXK9LbE
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] S e n t y ^ ^ ^ ^ b n u a r y 04, 2011 8:25 AM Subject^Sitube Video I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http://www.voutube.com/watch?v=NlzliXK9LbE
! !
JS
..,
...
Christine Mathews Tuesday, January 04, 2011 11:03 A M Ralph G Hyett I I I FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale
Did you see this.Jt's hilarious!
From: Paul D Summers Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 07:09 To: Christine Mathews; Craig W Sjolin Subject: FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
From:l Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 06:20 To: Paul D Summers Subject: FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
To:
From: YouTube Service [service@youtube.com] S e n t ^ o n d j ^ j n y a r y 03, 2011 3:16 PM
SubjectTOnicornmw
!
flHHHp
sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE" help center | e-mail options | report spam
0
thought you would think was funny
Unicornmovies has shared a video with you on YouTube:
A Penny Tale brought to vou bv S C O R E Two employees come to grips with life before and after the score project
Paul D Summers Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:16 A M Tracy L Wilkinson FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale
From: t^ HayHar u j a r y C 04, 2011 06:20 Sent:! T I UB&Jay, January To: Paul D Summers Subject: FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
From: YouTube Service [service@youtube.com] Sen ^^QDdj ^^^jary 03, 2011 3:16 PM SulJeSSTjffiorrffiovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
help center | e-mail options | report spam Unicoiiimovies has shared a video with you on YouTube: thought you would think was funny
Si
A Penny Tale brought to vou bv SCORE Two employees come to grips with life before and after the score project
2 0 1 1 YouTube. L L C 00 J Cherry Ave. San Bruno, C A 94066
MB
Paul D Summers Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:18 A M Paul Cline FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale
From:] Sent: itiesday, January 04, 2011 06:20 To: Paul D Summers Subject: FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
From: YouTube Service [service@youtube.com] S e i | ^ ^ | ^ ^ ^ ^ r y 03, 2011 3:16 PM Sub^ct^nicorrS sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
0
Unicornmovies has shared a video with you on YouTube: thought you would think was funny
Si
.'2011 YouTube. L L C 901 Cherry Ave. San Bruno, C A 94066
J ^ y a | g | ^ l ^ ' u a r y 04, 2011 8:50 A M jHH^comcast.net RA/^Jmcornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale
From: YouTube Service [mailto:service@youtube.com] S e n t ^ M o n r i | ^ | ^ 03, 2011 15:16 S u b ^ ^ ^ O T i c o m m o v i e s sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
'2011 YouTube. L L C 901 Cherry Ave. San Bruno. C A 94066
ML
,, ,
Paul D Summers Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:09 A M Christine Mathews; Craig W Sjolin FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Taie
From: | Sent: Tuesday/ January 04, 2011 06:20 To: Paul D Summers Subject: FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
From: YouTube Service [service@youtube.com] S e n t ^ o n ^ ^ ^ i | g r y 03, 2011 3:16 PM SuBjeSWnicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
0
0i
C-2011 YouTube, L L C 901 Cherry A v e . San Bruno, C A 94066
JUL From: Sent: To: Subject:
T g d ^ g L g r ^ 04, 2011 6:53 AM

FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by S C O R E "
Too funny
nice job..
To:
From: YouTube Service [mailto:service@youtube.com] Senj^^m^^m^ry 03, 2011 15:16
Subject^nicommw
SRHP
sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
help center | e-mail options | report spam Unicomniovies has shared a video with you on YouTube: thought you would think was funny
E3I
A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE Two employees come to grips with life before and after the score project
C'2011 Yo^Tiibc. F.LC ;:ry .-.ve. 5: an :uno. C A 04066
Sent: To: Subject:
uesday, January 04, 2011 6:36 A M Michael D Luther; Katie McClincy; Floyd L Eldridge FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale
This came to my city email
Is this supposed to be funny, or condescending?
From: YouTube Service [mailto:service@youtube.com] S e n t ^ t o ^ ^ ^ U ^ r y 03, 2011 15:16 SubjecfcKJnicr^^ sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
s
si
A Penny Tale brought to you bv S C O R E Two employees come to grips with life before and after the score project
:C'2011 YouTube. L L C 901 Cherry Ave. San Bruno. C A 94066
m
Paul D Summers Tuesday, January 04, 2011 6:31 A M Russell R Radke; James D Gould; Tracie Jarratt; Scott K Phipps; Shawn Tierney; Christopher DeSmet; Fredrick R Yohann; Mark Coleman; Steven D. Morris FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by S C O R E "
From: | Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 06:20 To: Paul D Summers Subject: FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
To:
From: YouTube Service [service@youtube.com] Sei&^tojdaânuar/ 03, 2011 3:16 PM
SubJectTOmcorT^^
vHHHB
sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE" help center | e-mail options | report spam
O 2 0 ! i YouTube. L L C 901 Cherry Ave. San Bruno. C A 94066
MMFrom: Sent: To: Subject: ^____ I uesday, January"04, 2011 6:20 AM Paul D Summers FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale
ra
From: YouTube Service [service@youtube.com] S e n l ^ Q f l d j ^ a n u a r y 03, 2011 3:16 PM To: Subject: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE"
0
S i
A Penny Tale brought to vou bv SCORE Two employees come to grips with life before and after the score project
c.'21)11 YoxiTuba i.f.C 901 Cherry Ave. Si-m Bruno. C A 94066
Katie McClincy
From: Sent: To: Subject: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 11:25 A M Katie McClincy RE: Youtube Video
Oh good! You can give me the blow by blow. I have to go to the site now for a dental meeting so no lunch. Can I look you up when I get back?
From: Katie McClincy rmailto:Kmcclincv<g)Rentonwa.qovl S e i ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ y ^ u a r y 04, 2011 11:20 AM S u b ^ C T ^ E T O S u b e Video Lunch? And, don't know if it had been pulled prior to your getting the link, but I was able to watch it before it went away. From! Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:22 To: Katie McClincy Subject: FW: Youtube Video FYI - kinda disappointing, but somehow I'm not surprised... From: Kevin Milosevich rmailto:Kmilosevich(g)Rentonwa.aov1 Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:01 AM To: Ccj Subject: hw: Youtube Video Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE. It was called "A Penny Tale". It made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks From^ Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 08:54 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video The link is no longer active. I'm guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
To
From: Kevin Milosevich rmailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.qov1 Sentyjjjjdjjylinuary 04, 2011 8:25 AM Suprect ôutLmeVideo
fliBHI
I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlzliXK9LbE
Kevin Milosevich
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Kevin Milosevich Tuesday, January 04,2011 9:01 AM Youtube Video
Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE. It was called "A Penny Tale". It made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 201108:54 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video The link is no longer active. I'm guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.qov] LUary 04, 2011 8:25 AM levideo ( I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http://www. voutube.com/watch ?v=NlzliXK9LbE
Katie McClincy
from: 'Sent: To: Subject:
c
l@sprint.blackberry.net Tllesday, January 04, 2011 2:45 P M Katie McClincy Re: hey
Ok, I'll let you know when I leave here. I don't need to see it. Probably won't make me very happy anyway. Sent on the Sprint N o w Network from my BlackBerry
From: Katie M c C l i n c y <Kmcclincy@Rentonwa.gov> D a t e ^ u ^ 4 Jan 2011 14:42:42-0800 ^ ^ To:lj^^B" jiiml ll ii I I" ii 'i in I ' j B B H B L |innl I dackberry.net> S u b j l c t ^ E : hey ^
1 1
Well, I think a DC or Chief is going to want it - might be considering an internal investigation. Was hoping you might beat them back to the stn. F r o m : ^ ^ B p b s p r i n t . b l a c k b e r r y . n e t rmailtoJ ^^M @sprint.blackberry.netl Sent: TuesaayTjanuary 04, 2011 14:43 ^ To: Katie McClincy Subject: Re: hey
Probably a bit. Can you put it on my desk? Sent on the Sprint N o w Network from my BlackBerry
From: Katie M c C l i n c y <Kmcclincy(5) Rentonwa.gov> D a t e ^ [ u ^ J a n 2 0 1 1 14:21:50 - 0 8 0 0 ^ ^ ^ I "" I I " I JB^fc I < I'lackbeiTy.net> S u b j S t n i E : hey ^
/
To:Bjj^BP
Eta?
1 1
11
11
H p P ' blackberry.net rmailtc^^^^McTjsprint.blackberry.net] Sent: TuesdayTJanuary 04, 2011 14:22 ^ To: Katie McClincy Subject: Re: hey
Thanks. Sent on the Sprint N o w Network from my BlackBerry
From: Katie M c C l i n c y <Kmcclincy(g) Rentonwa gov>

/ t
To: l ^ ^ j B ^ B B j ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ f e ) sco re i ci i 1. o r q>

SubJectHiey l
I have a copy on flash drive that was made prior to it being pulled. Commander Katie McClincy (425) 430-7566 Renton Police Department 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057
Katie McClincy From: Sent: To: Subject: fl^^B@sprint. blackberry.net ^ l i l a S y , January 04, 2011 5:41 P M Katie McClincy Re: Video
I'm heading out. Maybe we can catch up tomorrow. Sent on the Sprint N o w Network from my BlackBerry
From: Katie M c C l i n c y <Kmcclincy@Rentonwa.gov> D a t e ^ j u ^ J a n 2 0 1 1 15:49:34 - 0 8 0 0 ^ ^ ^ ^ ToBJHp@spiint.blackbeiTy.net Subject: Video On your desk on a flash drive. Need it back, as it able to find it on a hard drive and make the copy. Commander Katie McClincy (425)430-7566 Renton Police Department 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057
'^j|j|j^
a n d
a s t h e c h i e f 1t h i n k
wants to retain a copy.
^jj^was
Kevin Milosevich
From: Sent: To: Subject: Kevin Milosevich Wednesday. January 05, 2011 7:18 AM f H H H H H Timothy L Troxel FW: Youtube Video
FYI From: Mehdi Sadri Sent: Tuesday, January 04,2011 18:09 To: Kevin Miincpvjch Cc:S Subject: RE: Youtube Video Hi Chief There are ways to track who accesses which web site and what did they do but based on my initial inquiry we do not track internet use to this detail level, i need to check further and at least turn on this feature for future instances. Mehdi
From: Kevin Milosevich Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:01 AM To: Mghdâdri Subject ^wTOutube Video Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE. It was called "A Penny Tale". It made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks From: Sent: Tuesday, January 04,2011 08:54 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video The link is no longer active. I'm guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmllosevlch@Rentonwa.qovl S e n J j ^ ^ ^ y ^ i i a r y 04, 2011 8:25 AM Subject: Youtube Video I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http://www.voutube.com/watch?v=NIzliXK9LbE
Kevin Milosevich
Sent: To: Subject: wiffnesaayij^ 05,2011 7:36 AM Kevin Milosevich; Timothy L Troxel Re: Youtube Video
This was the same problem with t h a f U investigation. They stopped tracking a few years ago, presumably over storage room and concern for public disclosure requests. I would have been surprised if they had switched back. I complained to Jorge at the time.
From: Kevin Milosevich To: f M H f e H H Timothy L Troxel Sent: Wed Jan Ob 07:18:23 2011 Subject: FW: Youtube Video FYi From: Mehdi Sadri Sent: Tuesday, January 04,2011 18:09 To: Kevh^^jj^gvlch C c : p H B Subject: RE: Youtube Video Hi Chief There are ways to track who accesses which web site and what did they do but based on my initial inquiry we do not track internet use to this detail level. I need to check further and at least turn on this feature for future instances, Mehdi
From: Kevin Milosevich Sent: Tuesday, January 04,2011 9:01 AM To: Mehdi Sadri Cc: Subject: FW; Youtube Video Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE. It was called "A Penny Tale", it made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech Issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks From:| Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 08:54 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video The link is no longer active. Km guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
From: Kevin Milosevich rmailto:Kmilosevlch@Rentonwa.aovl Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 8:25 AM
Katie McClincy
From: Sent: To: Subject: i/edne&day, January 05, 2011 8:42 A M Katie McClincy Drive
It is back on my desk in the same envelope. Didn't bother to watch it, but thank you for getting it Not worth wasting my time.
1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Tel: (425) 430-7j^Fax: (425) 430-7508 ^JpaSCOREiail.com *Note new email address
JSBL^
Kevin Milosevich SCORE
Hey Kevin, A few people told me about some video on You Tube about SCORE. If you investigate go to your IT depaiiment and get your Internet Proxy data to look for the first instances when that video was looked for. That is where you can start to see how that person became aware of the information. It is common that the person who put it up would have gone there to look for it or whoever they first told about it went there. Should be a short trail backward.
From: Sent: Subject:
Kevin Miiosevich T J u i g d a y ^ n u a r y 06, 2011 2:16 P M r ^ v ^ S W B e Video
FYI From: | Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 07:36 To: Kevin Milosevich; Timothy L Troxel Subject: Re: Youtube Video
This was the same problem with the, . investigation. They stopped tracking a few years ago, presumably over storage room and concern for public disclosure requests. I would have been surprised if they had switched back. I complained to Jorge at the time.
From: Kevin Milosevich To: B H H H H Timothy L Troxel Sent: Wed Jan 05 07:18:23 2011 Subject: FW: Youtube Video FYI From: Mehdi Sadri Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 18:09 To : J ^ L i ^ M i | n g p w ; h S u b 3 e c t n < E ^ o u t u b e Video Hi Chief There are ways to track who accesses which web site and what did they do but based on my initial inquiry we do not track internet use to this detail level. I need to check further and at least turn on this feature for future instances. Mehdi
From: Kevin Milosevich Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:01 AM To:^y^H>gdri
Cc:
S u b j e c t ^ J T O u t u b e Video Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE. It was called "A Penny Tale". It made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks From: Sent: Tuesciay;ianuary 04, 2011 08:54
^HHH
To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video The link is no longer active. I'm guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] S e n t J Q j | s d a v ^ a n u a r y 04, 2011 8:25 AM To: SubjecCTouun^ldeo I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http.7/www.voutube.com/watch?v=NizliXK9LbE
m
From: Sent: To: Subject: Kevin Milosevich RE: Youtube Video
Looks like someone took it down. Unless you have a direct link I can't find it
To:
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] S e r * ^ u r g H j ^ l a n u a r y 06, 2011 2:09 PM
S u b j e c t ^ W ^ o u t u b e Video I am still waiting I am not anticipating that this will be successful.
^HHHB
From: Mehdi Sadri Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 18:09 To: K e v i f ^ r ^ ^ ^ c h Cc Subject: RE: Youtube Video Hi Chief There are ways to track who accesses which web site and what did they do but based on my initial inquiry we do not track internet use to this detail level. I need to check further and at least turn on this feature for future instances. Mehdi
From: Kevin Milosevich Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:01 AM To: M e h d ^ | r l j L ^
Cc:
S u b j e c t m A / ^ u t u b e Video Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE. It was called "A Penny Tale". It made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks From^ Sent: Tueisday, January 04, 2011 08:54 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video
_
IHHHk
The link is no longer active. I'm guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] S e n t ^ u e ^ ^ ^ i n u a r y 04, 2011 8:25 AM S u l ^ H W u H r l r e Video
I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http://www.voutube.com/watch?v=NizliXK9LbE
MSL
From: Sent: To: Subject: Thursday, January 06, 201 Kevin Milosevich RE: Youtube Video
Sorry, didn't scroll far enough down to see the link. It has been removed so the metadata is not available.
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov]
I am still waiting.
I am not anticipating that this will be successful.
Subject: RE: Youtube Video Hi Chief There are ways to track who accesses which web site and what did they do but based on my initial inquiry we do not track internet use to this detail level. I need to check further and at least turn on this feature for future instances. Mehdi
From: Kevin Milosevich Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:01 AM To: Cc: Subject: FW: Youtube Video Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE, it was called "A Penny Tale", it made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks
FROM:
^^BBBBBB
Sent: Tuesday,' January 04, 2011 08:54 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video The link is no longer active. I'm guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
T o : >
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] S e n t ^ i J ^ ^ ^ ^ n u a r y 04, 2011 8:25 AM
Subject: Youtube Video
MB
I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http://www.voutube,com/watch?v=NizliXK9LbE
Sent: To: Subject:
Thursday, January 06, 2011 2:23 P M Kevin Milosevich R E : Youtube Video
Storage being pennies on the dollar now doesn't make business sense but that is for you all to figure out. Buncha baloney whoever posted that I say.
To:
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] SentnTiursdav^January 06, 2011 2:15 PM
S u b j e c t ^ E ^ o u t u b e Video They say it is a storage issue yeah I know
VHHP
From: ^ Sent: Thursday, January 06, 201114:13 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video This is a serious shortcoming of their systems Kevin to aid in investigations and proper internet/computer usage. Let me know if I can be of any peer support for having done many similar investigations. The video may have metadata associated. I'll keep looking.
To: pHHB
I am still waiting
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] SentJOaui îji^January 06, 2011 2:09 PM
Subject: FW: Youtube Video i am not anticipating that this will be successful.
From: Mehdi Sadri Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 18:09 To: Kevii Cc: Subject , k b : Youtube Video Hi Chief There are ways to track who accesses which web site and what did they do but based on my initial inquiry we do not track internet use to this detail level. I need to check further and at least turn on this feature for future instances. Mehdi
1
From: Kevin Milosevich Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:01 AM Cc:< Subject: FW: Youtube Video
;
Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE, ft was called "A Penny Tale". It made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks From Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 08:54 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video The link is no longer active. I'm guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] S e r t ^ r u g d a y j ^ u a r y 04, 2011 8:25 AM SubjectôL^reVideo I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http://www.voutube.com/watch ?v-NlzliXK9LbE
Kevin Miiosevich Re: Youtube Video
Kevin, The video is back up. Search You Tube for " S C O R E Parody" and scroll down a few videos to find it. They apparently strip away metadata, but the last upload time is 1616 and the key search words are interesting as this idiot doesn't know how to spell penitentiary using the term "pennytentury". Interesting terms used in the video as well. Maybe MDC records and car cell records could help. In the end the reality is perception is what is being discussed but it has to be someone who has been with R P D for quite some time. Sent using BlackBerry
F r o m U ^ v j r ^ ^ s e v i c h <Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov> S e n t W ! H H S 4 : 0 8 : 4 1 2011 Subject: FW: Youtube Video I am still waiting I am not anticipating that this will be successful.
From: Mehdi Sadri Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 18:09 To: Kevlr^jloseyich C c : | B M f e S u b j e c t ^ t ^ l W f u b e Video
]
Hi Chief There are ways to track who accesses which web site and what did they do but based on my initial inquiry we do not track internet use to this detail level. I need to check further and at least turn on this feature for future instances. Mehdi
From: Kevin Milosevich. Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:01 AM To: Cc:| Subject: FW: Youtube Video Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE. It was called "A Penny Tale". It made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks
From q Sent: " I uesday, January 04, 2011 08:54 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video The link is no longer active. Km guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] S e n t ^ Q j | s d a y ^ a n u a r y 04, 2011 8:25 AM SupjectôutuD I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=NlzliXK9LbE
m
From: Sent: Subject:
:
Kevin Milosevich "n^nr^^^^^^^^^ôm-j J-OQ p|\/|
r^^Bffi^^^^^^^
Thanks for the info, I am not too confident in the abilities of our IS. I discussed it at our staff supes meeting that lasted from 1500-1700.
From: To: Kevin Milosevich Sent: Thu Jan 06 18:46:41 2011 Subject: Re: Youtube Video Kevin, The video is back up. Search You Tube for " S C O R E Parody" and scroll down a few videos to find it. They apparently strip away metadata, but the last upload time is 1616 and the key search words are interesting as this idiot doesn't know how to spell penitentiary using the term "pennytentury". Interesting terms used in the video as well. Maybe MDC records and car cell records could help. In the end the reality is perception is what is being discussed but it has to be someone who has been with R P D for quite some time. Sent using BlackBerry
FromHCgvlrÛDsevich <Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov> S e n t ^ f f l f f i ^ T O 14:08:41 2011 Subject: FW: Youtube Video I am still waiting I am not anticipating that this will be successful.
From: Mehdi Sadri Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 18:09 T o ! Kevin Milrrgpyirh S u b ^ H W f c ^ o u t u b e Video Hi Chief There are ways to track who accesses which web site and what did they do but based on my initial inquiry we do not track internet use to this detail level. I need to check further and at least turn on this feature for future instances. Mehdi
From: Kevin Milosevich Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:01 AM To: Mehdi Sadri
Cc
Wmmm%wWmW&
Subject: FW: Youtube Video Someone uploaded a cartoon video to Youtube that was critical of our jail and SCORE. It was called "A Penny Tale". It made its rounds around the Department and now it has been removed. This is probably a freedom of speech issue unless it was done on company time. Is there any way to see if this video was uploaded or removed via a department computer? Thanks From:! Sent: Tuesday/January 04, 2011 08:54 To: Kevin Milosevich Subject: RE: Youtube Video The link is no longer active. I'm guessing the video wouldn't fall in the category of "supportive."
From: Kevin Milosevich [mailto:Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov] S e n f c j ^ ^ ^ ^ n u a r y 04, 2011 8:25 AM SubH^rM^Video I was just made aware of this video. I am guessing it was developed by an officer. An anonymous email with the website was sent to an officer. We will do a little digging. http://www.voutube.com/watch?v=NlzliXK9LbE
DEPARTMENT LEADERSHIP MEETING January 6, 2011 Council Chambers 1500-1630

Purpose; Division Reports: Chiefs Report: SCORE New Collective Bargaining Agreement - Review T A S E R r w e a k hand carry Patrol Operations Patrol Services Special Operations Investigations Administrative Services Staff Services
Training Topic: February - General Order 26.1,9 - Officer Involved Domestic Violence Response Please bring a copy Roundtable: Taskings/ Follow up:
MSL
From: Sent: Subject: Kevin Milosevich ^ g ^ y j m i a r y 07, 2011 10:02 P M R e ^ T o n e o f f t o u t sent you a video: " S C O R E Parody"
Thanks, we'll see if Mehdi gets back to me by Monday morning. Fror
To: Kevin Milosevich

Sent: Fri Jan 07 21:51:01 2011
Subject: Re: Fwd: leofftout sent you a video: "SCORE Parody" Sure, and checkout www.xtranormal.com. which appears to be the site where this video was made or program used to make the video. If the web/proxy filter log is intact go back to look for who has been to this site. Sent via BlackBerry by A T & T From: K e v i n Milosevich <Kmilosevich@Rentonwa.gov> Datejfr^^n2011 2 1 : 4 3 : 2 ^ 8 0 ^ ^
^ ^(HBP @
Thanks
o :
comcas
t- t j m | ^ c o m c a s t . n e t >
ne f
Subject: Re: Fwd: leofftout sent you a video: " S C O R E Parody"
From:| To: Kevin Milosevfch Sent: Fri Jan 07 21:37:04 2011 Subject: Fwd: leofftout sent you a video: "SCORE Parody"
Kevin, It only took me an hour to set this account up. A s you can see it identifies me by my YouTube handle "leofftout". The point of this test however is to check ^fHBf e-mail to see what is there. Even if he deleted the e-mail chances are it still may reside on t h ^ x c n a n g e server for Outlook for a few days but you need to jumrj on this before that data is gone. Basically you want the host and exchange server PST files for Aside from that check to see if either incoming or outgoing e-mail traffic is logged separately by who it is going to or coming from, and the Subject line information. That way you can look for incoming from "service@voutube.com" and look for the handle of the person who sent it. If we can get that name we can looHoj^ther posts possibly made to tell us more about this person. You could also look to see who 'flH ^may have sent the e-mail link to which may help rule out people if it is believedj knew w h ^ n i ^ a m e from.
Forwarded Message F r o m ^ Y o i ^ i b e Service" <service@youtube.com> Toflf|||||@comcast.net S e n t ^ n d a y ; January 7, 2011 9:21:15 P M Subject: leofftout sent you a video: " S C O R E Parody"
help center | e-mail options | report spam l
leofftout has shared a video with you on YouTube: whatever
f l } ~
S C O R E Parody What everybody knows,, but nobody is allowed to talk about. It wouldn't be so funny i f it wasn't so true.
" 20!! YouTube, L L C 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, C A 94066
MM.
From: Sent: To: Subject: Mehdi Sadri Friday, January 07, 2011 11:18 P M Kevin Milosevich Re: Fwd: leofftout sent you a video: " S C O R E Parody"
Yes we have email records and may be able to get more information through reverse look up. Letr me know when works best for you on monday Mehdi From: Kevin Milosevich To: Mehdi Sadri Sent: Fri Jan 07 21:47:15 2011 S u b j e c t ^ ^ y ^ L : leofftout sent you a video: "SCORE Parody" is a former officer who works for Boeing and has done similar investigations. Is there a way to search i email for this type of data?
Mehd ^||^JPJ|
From: ( To: Kevin Milosevich Sent: Fri Jan 07 21:37:04 2011 Subject: Fwd: leofftout sent you a video: "SCORE Parody"
Kevin, It only took me an hour to set this account up. As you can see it identifies me by my YouTube handle "leofftout". The point of this test however is to check i f f | e - m a i l to see what is there. Even if he deleted the e-mail chances are it still may reside on the exchange server for Outlook for a few days but you need to jump on this before that data is gone. Basically you want the host and exchange server PST files for| Aside from that check to see if either incoming or outgoing e-mail traffic is logged separately by who it is going to or coming from, and the Subject line information. That way you can look for incoming from "service(5)voutube.com" and look for the handle of the person who sent it. If we can get that name we can lool^^ther posts possibly made to tell us more about this person. You could also look to see who ^P |PPnay have sent the e-mail link to which may help rule out people if it is believed^"" knew whdlhis came from.
Forwarded Message F r o m ^ Y o ^ j b e Service" <service@youtube.com> To: flMffcgcomcast.net SentrFriday, January 7, 2011 9:21:15 P M Subject: leofftout sent you a video: " S C O R E Parody"
j j j help center ] e-mail options | report spam
leofftout has shared a video with you on YouTube: whatever
i S C O R E Parody What everybody knows, but nobody is allowed to talk about. It wouldn't be so funny i f it wasn't so true.
C* 2011 YouTube, L L C 901 Chen v Ave, San Bruno, C A 94066
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments:
Kevin Miiosevich Friday, January 07, 2011 4:26 P M Zanetta Fontes RE: You Tube image001.jpg
Yes, it was up, then down, now back up. I asked IS to see if they could tell if it was uploaded or removed by a Department computer and they said that they do not have the capabilities to determine it. I discussed it with all Department supervisors yesterday. F r o m : Zanetta Fontes Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 15:34 T o : Kevin Milosevich Subject: You Tube I just had called to my attention a You Tube posting of a cartoon parody regarding SCORE. It was posted 2 days ago by someone named EmperorNaked. I watched it. Seems pretty childish and cowardly to me. Have you seen this thing? Zanetta
Zanetta > $ante$

Senior Assistant City Attorney
City of Renton P.O. Box 626 Renton, W A 98057 100 South 2nd St. Renton, W A 98055 Phone: (425) 430-6486 | Fax: (425) 255-5474 e-mail: zfontes@rentonwa.qov
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail, including any attachments, is confidential and may include privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe you have received this e-mail in error, please do not copy, print, forward, re-transmit, or otherwise disseminate this email, its contents, or any of its attachments. Please delete this e-mail. Also, please notify the sender that you have received this emaii in error. Thank you. Advisory: Please be advised the City of Renton is required to comply with the Public Disclosure Act Chapter 42,56 RCW. This act establishes a strong state mandate in favor of disclosure of public records. As such, the information you submit to the City via email, including personal information, may ultimately be subject to disclosure as a public record.
ML
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Zanetta Fontes Friday, January 07, 2011 3:34 P M Kevin Milosevich You Tube image001.jpg
I just had called to my attention a You Tube posting of a cartoon parody regarding SCORE. It was posted 2 days ago by someone named EmperorNaked. Zanetta I watched it. Seems pretty childish and cowardly to me. Have you seen this thing?
Zanetta + 3 anted
Senior Assistant City Attorney City of Renton P.O. Box 626 Renton, W A 98057 100 South 2nd St. Renton, W A 98055 Phone: (425) 430-6486 | Fax: (425) 255-5474 e-mail: zfontes@rentonwa.qov
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail, including any attachments, is confidential and may include privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe you have received this e-mail in error, please do not copy, print, forward, re-transmit, or otherwise disseminate this email, its contents, or any of its attachments. Please delete this e-mail. Also, please notify the sender that you have received this email in error. Thank you. Advisory: Please be advised the City of Renton is required to comply with the Public Disclosure Act Chapter 42.56 RCW. This act establishes a strong state mandate in favor of disclosure of public records. As such, the information you submit to the City via email, including personal information, may ultimately be subject to disclosure as a public record.
Kevin Milosevich
/ From: Sent: To: Subject: Kevin Milosevich Tuesday, January 11,2011 11:11 A M Mehdi Sadri Email Searches
This is what I know.,.. I b e l i e v e j p H j H B received an email on or about Jan 4 in regards to the YouTube posting. I interested in who sent the email and a list of who all he shared this information, and also reviewing any emails containing words associated with this investigation. Youtube A Penny Tale (This is what is was originally called on YouTube) SCORE Parody Emperornaked (name of person who posted on Youtube) Xtranormal (website where this video was created) Question,... Does our MacAfee virus protection keep a log of internet searches to ensure it is a safe search? Thanks
th
Kevin Milosevich
From: Sent: To: Subject: Kevin Milosevich Friday, January 07, 2011 8;32 PM Mehdi Sadri Monday morning
Are you available in the morning for a phone call? I a m looking for a way to investigate the youtube video by backtracking various emails and any proxy data on internet searches.
Kevin Milosevich
From: Sent: To: Subject: Kevin Milosevich Friday, January 07,2011 9:43 PM Mehdi Sadri One more thing
I a m hoping to keep m y request of this youtube investigation at a high level until w e know who else m a y be involved.
Terri Vickers Wednesday, January 12, 2011 7:58 A M David W Skelton RE: message on my desk
LMAO!!! From: David W Skelton Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 07:56 To: Terri Vickers Subject: RE: message on my desk Probably the same folks who did the score video From: Terri Vickers Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 07:55 To: Floyd L Eldridge; David W Skelton; Cyndie L Parks Subject: message on my desk Who is the smart arse who left "The Aging Athlete" event information on my desk?!?
JUL
From: Sent: To: Subject: David W Skelton Wednesday, January 12, 2011 7:56 A M Terri Vickers RE: message on my desk
Probably the same folks who did the score video From: Terri Vickers Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 07:55 To: Floyd L Eldridge; David W Skelton; Cyndie L Parks Subject: message on my desk Who is the smart arse who left "The Aging Athlete" event information on my desk?!?
ism
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments:
Mehdi Sadri Tuesday, January 18, 2011 4:56 P M Kevin Milosevich R E : Email Searches imageOOlpng; image002.png; image003.png; image004.png; imageOOS.png; image006.png
Hi Chief, Sorry for taking so long to get back to you on this. Here is what I found out The first two e-mails came on 1/03/11 at 3:06 and 3:15 P M The first recipient w a s ^ ^ ^ | and the second recipient David Skelton The sender's name is "Unicornmovies" and I could not find any other emails to or from this name on City's mailbox
e-mail got distributed to others as such Sender:j^^^BpgtRentonwa:.gov Subj e ct zTw^nicommo vies sent you a video: A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE" Message-Id: <C5792CD5EFA2034B811B9E51BCQP3FAE73 A473PA19@REXCHQlJRenton.local> To: Psummerg@R.entonwa.gov
,f
Sender: Psmimier5ffi.RentQnwa.gov Subj ect: FW: Unicomrnovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you by SCORE" MfissagsJd: <7B22EgAA6702504BA01CDC9854B1292S24229gD959@ÊXCHQlitenton.ioe-al> To: Rra dke@Rentonwa. gov To: JgQuld@Rentonwa.gQv To: TJanatt@Rentonwa.gov To: SpMpps@Rentonwa.gov To: STkmey^-Rentonwa.gov To: CDeSmet@Rentonwa.gov To: BYohann@Rentonwa.gov To: MColeman@Rentonwa.gQv To: Snionis@Rentonwa.gov Senderr^^^MpigtRentonwa .go v Sufeje^t^Pw^nicoiTimovies sent } * o u a video: "A Penny Tale brought to you bv SCORE" Message-Id: <C5792CD5PPA2034BSllB9E51BC0IBFAE73A47CAClQraREXCHQ1 JR.entonlocaI> To: KJutheng>R.entonwa.gov To: K^cclincy(g^.entonwa.gov To: Feldridge/g>Rentonwa .gov
r ,
List of all forwards are shown below One observation, m the first recipient did not forward the e-mail
[0
YouTube Service
Unicornmovfes sent vou a video: "A Penny Tale brought to vou by SCORE
11
mkWBP
FW: Unicarnmovies sent you a video: A Penny Tate brought to you by SCORE"
tt
FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tate brought to vou bv SCORE"
FW: Unicornmovies sent vou a video: A Penny Tate brought to you by SCORE"
Paul D Summers
FW: Unicornmovies sent you a video: "A Penny Tate brought to you by SCORE"
Chri| Edwards
A Penny Tale brouoht to vou bv SCORE
$ Corey B Jacobs
RE: A Penny Tale brought to you bv SCORE
$ Christine Mathews FW: Untcornmovtes sent you a video: "A Penny Tate brought to you by SCORE"
Here are some more forward

31 - Renton Police Department Public Records

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

31 - Renton Police Department Public Records

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

STATEMENT OF DEPUTY CHIEF ^mW

Transcript of recording, June 16,2011

Clark Wilcox W-i-l-c-o-x and I understand this is being recorded

and I am aware this is being recorded

Nancy Carlson: recorded

Nancy Carlson C-a-r-l-s-o-n and I am aware this is being

Chad Karlewicz: being recorded

And Chad Karlewicz K-a-r-l-e-w-i-c-z and I am aware this is

accordance with General Orders 26.1.6 is the

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 2

Before we do I'm going to give back to Deputy Chief B U I

- for material evidence. So at this point in time I have a placeholder to call

My intent is not to have it transcribed, but if we need to have it transcribed

Nancy Carlson (NC): May I interject for just a moment?

We can, we can provide you with a, a CD.

That would be fine. That was actually my second question.

We can provide you with a CD.

OK? All right. Witness testimony.

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 3

Unless you count me as a witness, I didn't bring anybody

that's, that's all I have.

- admitted and a process to have those admitted.

to squint any more than I have to

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 4

Let me start out by saying that I am not proud of my involvement in this

tofmHMF He mentioned that he

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 5

For not telling B

not to release the video, I apologize and accept responsibility

Transcript of June 16, 2011 p. 6

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 7

Going back to Commande

[memorandum, it is inaccurate in many

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 8

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 9

would have been a little more creative. The Chief indicated

Commander ^m ^ame forward shortly after the

Transcript of June 16, 2011 p. 10

Transcript of June 16, 2011 p. 11

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 12

Okay. As outlined in General Order 26.6, as the Department representative

I am provided the opportunity to give a department summation which I will do now.

On December 1, 2007, Deputy Chief

promoted to Police Deputy

Chief with the following essential representative duties:

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 13

privileged to a cartoon style video

present at several and various leadership meetings

forward after being confronted by a

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 14

The Chief found that Deputy Chief Department policies:

conduct violated the following

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 15

repeated infractions of rules, regulations, directives, or orders of the Department

Deputy Chief Sergeant fl|

inappropriate, and failed to do so.

Deputy Chief advisingBHHH

attempted to conceal the source of the video by

how he could post this video on

r e of the damage caused by the video, or to

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 16

concealed his participation in the creation and

Transcript of June 16,2011 p. 17