Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Bernard GIUSTO
Investigation #2
1/16/2008
A.
CASE IN BRIEF..................................................................................................................... 3
1. Allegations of misconduct .................................................................................................. 3
1) Allegation #1................................................................................................................... 3
2) Allegation #2................................................................................................................... 3
2. Investigative Team identified ............................................................................................. 3
B. OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................... 4
1. DPSST Jurisdiction and Scope of Investigation ................................................................. 4
2. Background on Sheriff Bernard GIUSTO .......................................................................... 4
3. Findings Categories ............................................................................................................ 4
4. Preliminary Staff Discussion and Findings......................................................................... 5
C. REGULATORY STATUTES, ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AND LEGAL CRITERIA ... 5
1. Statutes and Administrative Rules ...................................................................................... 5
1) Statutes and Rules establishing minimum standards ...................................................... 5
2) Statutory and regulatory authority to revoke for violation of moral fitness standards ... 5
3) Definition of Moral Fitness............................................................................................. 5
2. Standard of Proof ................................................................................................................ 6
3. Criminal Justice Code of Ethics.......................................................................................... 6
4. Brady Issues ........................................................................................................................ 6
D. MENTIONED PERSONS ...................................................................................................... 7
E. EXHIBIT LIST ....................................................................................................................... 9
F. Allegations Itemized ............................................................................................................. 12
1. Allegation 1: GIUSTO used a county vehicle for personal use on one or more occasions.
12
2. Allegation 2: GIUSTOs statements to the public in 2004, as reported in 2007, that no
one in state police command had ever questioned him about the affair [with Margie
GOLDSCHMIDT], and that his transfer out of Goldschmidts [security] detail was unrelated
[to his affair with Margie GOLDSCHMIDT] are in direct conflict with statements obtained
during the course of the investigation....................................................................................... 13
G. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIVE ACTIONS TAKEN................................................... 16
H. Preliminary Interview Sequence, Questions, Summaries and Validation ............................ 20
1. Interview Sequence........................................................................................................... 20
2. Interviews.......................................................................................................................... 21
1) Dianna COLLINSON Interview Summary .................................................................. 21
2) Bernard GIUSTO Interview Questions......................................................................... 23
3) Bernard GIUSTO Interview Summary ......................................................................... 23
4) Reginald MADSEN Interview Questions..................................................................... 24
5) Reginald MADSEN Interview Summary ..................................................................... 24
6) LeRon HOWLAND Interview Questions..................................................................... 26
7) LeRon HOWLAND Interview Summary ..................................................................... 26
1/16/2008
A. CASE IN BRIEF
1. Allegations of misconduct
1)
Allegation #1
On October 23, 2007, KING received a call from Dianna COLLINSON who asserted that
in 2005 GIUSTO had used a Multnomah County agency vehicle for personal use, to drive
Lee DOSS to Seattle for the weekend. COLLINSON also identified that in 2006, GIUSTO
may have used a Multnomah County agency vehicle for personal use. to drive Lee DOSSs
daughter, Ashby, to Seattle.1 COLLINSON provided a series of emails to KING with
related documentation.2
On October 24, 2007, The Oregonian published an article, Giustos job tangled with his
private life. In this article, reporters Arthur Gregg SULZBERGER and Les ZAITZ
identified that GIUSTO used his Multnomah County agency vehicle for personal use; to
drive Lee DOSS to Seattle for the weekend.3
2)
Allegation #2
In the October 24, 2007 Oregonian article, reporters also stated, In a 2004 interview,
GIUSTO told The Oregonian no one in state police command had ever questioned him
about the affair [with Margie GOLDSCHMIDT]. He also said his transfer out of
GOLDSCHMIDTs detail was unrelated. 4
Subsequent statements obtained during the investigation are in direct conflict with
GIUSTOs statements to the media.
2. Investigative Team identified
Based on the information above, the investigative team opened an investigation into these
allegations of misconduct. The investigative team was comprised of the following: DPSST
Investigators Theresa KING and Shirley PARSONS, DPSST Legal Services Coordinator
Lorraine ANGLEMIER, Esq., and AAG Darin TWEEDT, Oregon Department of Justice,
whose role was to provide the team with legal advice.
The investigative team addressed the allegations to determine whether they are within
DPSSTs jurisdiction; if so, if there is evidence to substantiate them; and if substantiated,
what the appropriate course of action should be.
Ex B.1
Ex B.2 B.4
3
Ex B.9
4
Ex B.9
2
1/16/2008
GIUSTO began his public safety career on October 1, 1974, as a police officer with the
Oregon State Police. On January 1, 1985, GIUSTO was promoted to Sergeant and on
March 1, 1988, was reclassified to Lieutenant. On July 31, 1996, GIUSTO resigned from
the Oregon State Police (OSP).
On August 1, 1996, GIUSTO was hired as the Chief of Police for the Gresham Police
Department and served in this position until December 2, 2002.
GIUSTO was first elected in 2002 as the Sheriff of Multnomah County. On January 1,
2003, he began serving in this position. In May of 2006, GIUSTO was re-elected to the
office of Sheriff.
During GIUSTOs public safety career he has attained Basic, Intermediate, Advanced,
Supervisory, Management and Executive Police certificates. GIUSTO has approximately
1,900 hours of state-reported public safety training. 5
3. Findings Categories
For the purposes of this investigation, the following categories have been used:
Referred:
The conduct is within DPSSTs jurisdiction, and
The conduct may have violated the established standards for Oregon public
safety officers, thereby requiring the matter to be forwarded to the Police
Policy Committee for review.
Referred To Another Agency:
The conduct is not within DPSST jurisdiction; or
Ex B.5
1/16/2008
2)
3)
Definition of Moral Fitness
According to OAR 259-008-0010(6)(a), the phrase lack of good moral fitness means
conduct not restricted to those acts that reflect moral turpitude but rather extending to
acts and conduct which would cause a reasonable person to have substantial doubts about
the individuals honesty, fairness, respect for rights of others, or for the laws of the state
and/or nation.7
6
7
Ex B.8
Ex. B.7
1/16/2008
Regarding the Criminal Justice Code of Ethics, to be eligible for certification OAR 259008-0070, a police officer must subscribe to and swear or affirm to abide by the Code of
Ethics (Form F-11). This Code states in part, Honest in thought and deed in both my
personal and official life, I will be exemplary in obeying the laws of the land and the
regulations of my department.9
4. Brady Issues
Oregon Attorney Generals Administrative Law Manual and Uniform Model Rules of Procedure under the
Administrative Procedures Act, Standard of Proof, p. 142 (2006)
9
Ex. B.6
10
Ex. B.28
Bernard GIUSTO DPSST# 07617
Investigation #2
Page 6 of 30
1/16/2008
Phone
Address
ANGLEMIER, Lorraine
DPSST
lorraine.anglemier@state.or.us
BERSIN, Ron
Director
BUDNICK, NICK
Portland Tribune
Reporter
nickbudnick@portlandtribune.c
om
BUNSEN, Michael
COLLINSON, Ashby
COLLINSON, Dianna
COLLINSON, Scott
DOSS, Lee
MCSO
GABLIKS, Eriks
eriks.gabliks@state.or.us
GIUSTO, Bernard
MCSO Sheriff
3233 NE 32nd Pl
Portland, Oregon 97212
GOLDSCHMIDT, Neil
HOWLAND, LeRon
1/16/2008
DPSST
DPSST Investigator
theresa.king@state.or.us
LORANCE, Marilyn
DPSST
DPSST Supervisor of
Standards and Certification
MADSEN, Reginald
McCAIN, BRUCE
MCSO
MCSO Lieutenant,
Executive Staff
MINNIS, John
DPSST
DPSST Director
john.minnis@state.or.us
NORMAN, Alex
PARSONS, Shirley
DPSST
DPSST Investigator
shirley.parsons@state.or.us
SULZBERGER, Arthur
Gregg
Reporter
TWEEDT, Darin
503-221-8330
arthursulzberger@news.oregoni
an.com
503 378 6347
darin.tweedt@state.or.us
Oregonian
1320 SW Broadway
Portland, OR 97201
Oregon Department of
Justice
610 Hawthorne Avenue SE
Salem, Oregon 97310
ZAITZ, Les
1-503-585-0985
Oregonian
Reporter
(PDX) 503-221-8181
1320 SW Broadway
Portland, OR 97201
1/16/2008
E. EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit Date
Description
B.1
10 23 07
B.2
10 23 07
B.3
10 23 07
B.4
10 23 07
B.5
12 11 07
B.6
B.7
B.8
B.9
10 24 07
The Oregonian news article, Giustos job tangled with his private
life
B.10
10 24 07
B.11.a
10 24 07
B.11.b
10 29 07
B.12.a
10 24 07
B.12.b
10 29 07
B.13
11 01 07
B.14
11 01 07
B.15
11 07 07
B.16
11 07 07
B.17
11 07 07
B.18
11 09 07
B.19
11 08 07
B.20
11 08 07
B.21
11 08 07
B.22
11 12 07
1/16/2008
12 03 07
B.24
12 03 07
B.25
10 06 06
B.26
11 30 07
B.27
12 03 07
B.28
B.29.a
12 04 07
B.29.b
12 05 07
B.30
12 04 07
B.31
12 04 07
B.32
12 04 07
B.33.a
12 14 07
B.33.b
B.33.c
12 18 07
B.34.a
12 14 07
B.34.b
12 14 07
B.34.c
12 14 07
B.34.d
12 14 07
B.34.e
12 14 07
B.34.f
12 14 07
B.34.g
12 14 07
B.34.h
12 14 07
B.34.i
12 14 07
B.35
12 15 07
Oregonian article
B.36
12 18 07
B.37
12 19 07
B.38
01 14 08
1/16/2008
01 14 08
B.40
01 14 08
B.41
01 15 08
1/16/2008
11
1/16/2008
14
Ex. B.9
Ex. B.13
16
Ex b.13, p 4
17
E B.13, p 4
15
1/16/2008
18
Ex. B.14
Ex B.14, p 6
20
Ex. B.29, B.30
21
Ex. B.26
22
Ex B.27, B.28
23
Ex. B29a B32
24
Ex. B.29
25
Ex B.33a B.33c
26
Ex B.34a B.34i
27
Ex B.34.i
28
Ex B.35
19
1/16/2008
29
Ex B.13, p 4, Ex D, Allegation 2
1/16/2008
30
Ex. B.1
Ex. B.2 B.4
32
Ex. B.5 B.8
33
Ex. B.9
34
Ex. B.10
35
Ex. B.11.a
36
Ex. B.12.a
37
Ex. B.18
38
Ex. B.11.b
39
Ex. B.12.b
40
Ex. B.13
41
Ex. B.14
31
1/16/2008
Ex. B.15
Ex. B.16
44
Ex. B.1
45
Ex. B.19
46
Ex. B.20
47
Ex. B.21
48
Ex. B.21
49
Ex. B.22
50
Ex. B.26
43
1/16/2008
Ex. B.27
Ex. B.25
53
Ex. B.23
54
Ex. B.24
55
Ex. B.29.a
56
Ex. B.30 B.32
57
Ex. B.29.b
58
Ex B.34a. B.34.h
59
Ex B.35
60
Ex B.36
52
1/16/2008
1/16/2008
Date
10 23 07
11 01 07
11 01 07
1/16/2008
2. Interviews
1)
61
1/16/2008
66
Ex B.1, p 7
Ex B.1, p 9
68
Ex B.1, p 11
67
1/16/2008
2)
3)
69
70
Ex. B.29
Ex B.35
1/16/2008
4)
5)
71
Ex B.13, p 3
Ex. B.13, p 3
73
Ex B.13, p 4
72
1/16/2008
74
Ex B.13, p 5
Ex B.13. p 6
76
Ex B.13, p 7
77
Ex B.13, p 8
78
Ex B.13, p 9
79
Ex B.13, p 10
75
1/16/2008
6)
7)
80
Ex B.14 p. 3
Ex B.14 p.4
82
Ex B.14 p.5
81
1/16/2008
Ex B.14 p.6
Ex. B13 p 7
85
Ex B13, p 7
86
Ex B.13, p 8
87
Ex B.13. p 9
88
Ex B13, p 10
84
1/16/2008
89
90
Ex B13. p. 11
Ex B13, p 12
1/16/2008
agency vehicle 3
Allegation 1 5, 12
Allegation 2 5, 13
ANGLEMIER 3, 6, 7
Ashby 3
JEDDELOH 10
K
KING 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 26
B
L
Code of Ethics 6
COLLINSON 3, 7, 9, 16
D
DOSS 3, 7
DPSST 4, 7, 8
DPSST Investigator 8
N
Neil GOLDSCHMIDT 7
F
O
F-11 Criminal Justice Code of Ethics 9
G
GABLIKS 3
GIUSTO 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 20, 21, 22,
23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28
GOLDSCHMIDT 3, 13, 14, 15, 24, 25, 26, 27
Government Standards and Practices Commission 12
Gresham Police Department 4
OAR 259-008-0010 5, 6
OAR 259-008-0070 5, 6
Oregon Department of Justice 8
Oregon Department of Justice Criminal Division 5, 12
Oregon State Police 4
ORS 181.630 5
ORS 181.640 5
ORS 181.662 5
OSP 4
P
H
PARSONS 3, 8, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 26, 27
Police Policy Committee 4, 5, 15
preponderance of evidence 6
I
R
Investigation #1 3, 16
Investigative Team 3, 13, 15
Referred 4
Referred To Another Agency 4
1/16/2008
S
Seattle 3
Sheriff 4, 7
Sheriff of Multnomah County 4
standard of proof 6
Standard of Proof 6
SULZBERGER 3, 8
U
untruthfulness 3, 6
ZAITZ 3, 8
1/16/2008