we have a quorum and I would like to read the statement and then we will begin our hearing. The echo is internal so they're not sure they can do anything about the echo it will begin with a call to order. The covid-19 statement and roll call scheduled to begin at 1:00 with eight hours for openings, proof and closings, which will take us to the end of the formal hearing at 9:00 P.M. There will be several breaks for council including a 30 minute dinner break at 6:30 tonight. At 9:00 P.M., the counci will begin its deliberations in executive session. I have distributed a document titled approximate schedule for the 2-18-21 hearing. We will try to stick to the schedule in order to be fair to all parties the council clerk will be the time keeper and alert us when it is time to move on. Council members, this hearing will be held in a trial court format with council members as the jury and I will chair the meeting. Each council member must be present for the entire meeting. And you are advised not to discuss opinions, including through texting, until the council begins its deliberations at 9:00 tonight. You will have opportunities to ask questions during the hearing. You will be required to adopt a resolution of findings of fact, determination of guilt or not guilty on charges, and holding, which is discipline through a resolution that will be walked on to the docket. the hearing will be conducted overzoom format and will be live streamed at the request of officer middleton. In order to comply with covid-19 requirements, the following only will participate on zoom in the council chamber. Council kevin sparks, counsel jarrod bentley and their client officer middleton. Counsel keith horn, counsel roger wright and their client chief lawrence weathers, mayor gorton and outside counsel charlie cole and a zoom set up computer for each witness to testify. Witnesses will be brought into the council chamber one at a time when called. All those in chamber will wear masks at all times except when speaking the public will not be permitted to attend in the chamber. Now we will begin our hearing and we have set aside 30 minutes for opening statements and it's 10 minutes after 1:00 so each side will have 15 minutes. I'm keith horn and I'm here with counsel wright. And with chief weathers. The case before you today is about a police officer who exercised poor judgment and acted counter to the mission and responsibility of the lexington police department during the most significant policing event in lexington in 20 years you will recall there were protests across the united states about racial discrimination and injustice but there did come a point where some protestors were arrested. One of those arrested was one of the self proclaimed leaders of the protest, sarah williams. As part of the investigation of the arrest and charges against Ms. Williams, search warrants were issued for her phone and her facebook account. While reviewing the information retrieved pursuant to the warrant, police found messages between officer jervis middleton and Miss Williams. Based on the nature of the messages, it went to public integrity and a complaint was filed and an investigation. The oafd we present today will show that the messages occurred between late May and mid June. And officer middleton 1: shared information about police operations an activities during% the protest and 2. Provided information about individual officers for Miss Williams to use to verbally confront officers assigned to protect people and property and maintain order during the protests. It will also show during the investigation that officer middleton was dishonest during the interview with the public integrity unit. This resulted in the charges that are subject of this hearing. Officer middleton is charged with violation of krs 15-520, misconduct and police general order 1973-0 2k. There are three counts. The first is operational rule 1.02, misconduct, which states officer shall conduct themselves at all times both on and off duty in such a manner as to reflect most favorably to the department. Misconduct of an officer will include that which tends to bring the department into disrepute reflects discredit upon the officer as an employee of the department or that which tends to impair the operation and efficiency of the department or officer. 2: operational rule 1.15. Dissemination or interest feeshes of written or electronic information which states officers shall treat the official business of the department as confidential. Information regarding official business shall be disseminated only to those it is intended. Officers will only access, use, remove or copy department information and public record reports from a department, facility or electronic device to accomplish a justified law enforcement purpose. And 3: operational rule 1.18 general conduct which states officers shall be truthful in all matters and shall not lie, falsify, conceal, purposefully distort, diminish, embellish or fail to fully disclose facts associated with any law enforcement business. Officer middleton's conduct during a highly anxious, highly stressful and potentially volatile time in the history of ou community, as I said, the most significant policing event in lexington in 20 years, demonstrates he should no longer be a police officer. And at the conclusion of the hearing, we will ask that you uphold the recommendation of the police disciplinary review board and chief weathers and dismiss officer middleton. I do want to make one warning to people. Some of the messages or video clips they see May have some swearing, harsh language in it. So for anyone concerned about that, just be aware. Thank you. >> Mr. Sparks, please proceed with your opening statement on behalf of officer middleton and it is 1:15. You will have 15 minutes. >> you are muted, sir. >> ladies and gentlemen of the council, it is further an honor to be representing officer jervis middleton who I have come to know and are and I hope that you can see officer middleton by the conclusion of this testimony, or the conclusion of the hearing, the way I see him. He grew up here in lexington, went to henry delay high school, attended university of kentucky and u of u of l, object tained a bachelor's degree -- obtained a bachelor's degree in biology and chemistry, associates degree in law enforcement and a masters in justice, policy and leadership. He is married to christie middleton who many of you May know as christie runion, the morning and noon anchor on channel 36 for years in lexington. As you can see, officer middle middleton is also a black man and he has always seen the the world through the lens of the oppression of racism. People like emmett teal, immediate ger fers, the the girls killed in birmingham. Dr. King. Since he has been a police officer, his views about systemic racism were shaped by the likes of trayvon mar tin in 2012, eric garner in 2014, sandra bland in 2015. Philadelphia philando castile in 2020 and amad aubrey killed by retired police acting as vigilantes. Sharp erned even more in February of this year with the killing of breonna taylor at the hands of the louisville police. It is through this lens that he saw this video in May of 2020. >> please. Please! I can't breathe! Pleases, man. Please. >> you get off... >> his nose is bleeding like, come on now. Look at his nose. >> knee in his neck. >> get the knee off his neck, officer. >> I can't breeds. I cannot breathe. >> tough guy. Tough guy, huh. >> there are some technical issues... >> look at him. Get off of him now. >> what is wrong with y'all. >> what the fuck. He got maced. >> maced because you're scared bro', scared of fucking minorities. You are autoy a fucking bum, bro'. Like bro', three minutes. He's not fucking moving. Bro'. He is not even fucking moving. Get off of his fucking neck, bro'. Get off of his neck. Look at that! Are you serious! Bro', are you serious! he's not moving right now. He's not even moving. >> we have to deal with this shit. >> they're not going to help us, bro'. >> they don't care. >> they don't care, bro'. >> you gon' sit there with your knee on his neck. You're a real man, bro'. >> look at him. >> I'm a first responder from minneapolis. The fact that you guys are not checking his pulse or doing compressions... >> you can go ahead and discontinue. Obviously I apologize ladies and gentlemen of the council for the technology issue. I don't think you could see the video but I think (Inaudible) Horrific and as a result, america erupted in what has been called the largest civil rights protest since the 1960s. Millions took to the streets. There were protests throughout the country. Some were peaceful. Others were violent, demonstrations of anger. Americans screamed for police reform. Recognizing the reality of institutional racism and that black and white americans were subject to different treatment by law enforcement. This movement had particular relevance to jervis middleton because he had even racial bias from within the lexington people. He had been told all too often to "turn your black ass around, turn your black ass face around." he complained about that insult to the very lieutenant with is charged with heading the P.I.U. Investigation into him. That lieutenant denies that officer middleton complained to him but said he knew about it from others. As a result of the complaint though, absolutely nothing was done and the officer who hurled the racial insults at officer middleton is now a lieutenant on your force. While representing the lexington police department in an fop event in frankfort, he was called a token boy by fellow lexington police officers. What happened? No punishment, no discipline n. 2018, he had means, at least five memes created against him by fellow officers and those memes were very racially inappropriate. They were based on race and race hate. They portrayed the idea that white women should be afraid of black men and actually had a picture of officer middleton riding a bike and a photograph of a frightened white woman looking back at him. He was sent that meme by one of the officers, the. I.U. Actually called to say they couldn't work with officer middleton anymore because of his speech. In 2019, the fop filed, and to my knowledge, the first time in history that the fop has filed a grievance of this type against this department, alleging that officer middleton had been the subject of racial bias and discrimination in an investigation against him. so it's necessary to believe to understand that background so that you can understand the lens through which he saw george floyd being needlessly murdered in the name of law enforcement. The city wants to focus on acts of speech. But let me tell what you they can't focus on, because it doesn't exist. He did not commit an act of violence. He did not commit damage to property. He did not incite violence. He did not encourage the insightment of violence. He simply called out racism to a community activist who was fighting for law enforcement to recognize that they had problems in their own department that they refused to resolve. He spoke as a matter of public concern as a citizen and how cruel his words were, that's all they were. But his speech was poison to those who believe that racism doesn't exist in the lexington police department, including those in charge of this very investigation, because they only see -- one lieutenant stood before a subcommittee of this in August and said there is no racism in lexington. They believe an officer supporting a cause that they view as antithetical to policing should be purged as a traitor and removed. That's their words and they acted accordingly. How did officer middleton's speech actually impact the department? The evidence on that point is crystal clear. it had zero impact on the L.P.D., no harm of any kind. The only harm you will see is an imagined harm, fiction created to justify firing. The reality is that sarah williams, in many senses should be applauded for leading peaceful protest compared to cities across the country that were ravaged with violence and fires and lexington they had people marched. They had a sit-in. People sat down to show defiance. They called for change, for reform, for accountability. Officer middleton acknowledges parts of that were probably ugly and unpleasant, it was necessary and beautiful. And he is not alone. The media reports were resoundingly positive about the protests. Wkyt in June of 2020 had a lot on their website, lexington police thank protestors for remaining peaceful. June 4, lexington protests remain peaceful outside of one incident which did not officer officer middleton in any way. June 10, the kentucky colonel, lexington protests have been mainly peaceful. Why? The lpd's own facebook on June 1, the very heart of the time period where they say jervis middleton is out inciting riots, it says this weekend's protests in lexington were peaceful and for that we are incredibly thankful. But not to some in the lpd. They had Miss Williams arrested and charged with incitement of a riot. they used that to get a warrant to rummage through her personal cell phone and her facebook messenger account. What happened in lexington was not a riot. It was a protest. And using a warrant to rummage through someone's private conversation under the pretext of investigating a charming of incitement of a riot, well, we believe it was completely unfounded in this instance. And you have to question, if those officers in law enforcement that charged sarah williams was incitement of a riot, what do they think December 6 in washington D.C. Was? And I only say that because it is through different lenses that people view different acts. So focus on the real facts. The complete lack of harm through a clear lens. Ladies and gentlemen of the council, we hope to show you, and we intend to show you the following: 1: the words spoken by officer middleton were constitutionally protected speech. He cannot be punished for words and thoughts that cause no harm. His words were not intended to incite violence nor did they. They all revolved around matters of the public concern. Racism and accountability in the lpd. The allegations that his speech impaired the efficiency of the department -- and that's a key term. Look at the instructions you'll get today "impaired the efficiency of the department" and you are being asked to find and that is a complete fiction. Number 2: the investigation was a sham from the start. It stemmed from a search warrant on a very questionable case inciting a riot. The officers of the P.I.U. Hand picked and misinterpreted information to support a political objective which was to punish an officer that would speak ill of the department. They allowed misinformation about what actually happened to run rampant within the department. That officer middleton was outing undercover agents. That is simply not true. That he was sharing "and it's used throughout the P.I.U. Investigation "sensitive operational information" you will hear what that information was. And then to justify their objective, they called police officers that already had substantial bias against him to say that because of his speech, we could never work with him. We intend and hope to show you that even if you find that officer middleton committed any violation of the rules, the recommendation is teen entirely with precedent and there is no reasonable relationship to the conduct which is sought to be punished. We intended to show you a series of previous disciplines but it has been ruled that that evidence cannot be put forward for you to see. We intend to show you that this was how political speech was treated completely differently when that speech came from sort of the other side of the spectrum; specifically how a white officer was treated when he got on facebook and told people in the middle of a trump parade that they should run all the red lights in lexington. Now that officer was punished, too. He received a letter of council. No formal complaint, no subpoenas issued to find out what he was talking about in his private conversations. Number 4: we have time, we are going show you how officer middleton's due process rights have been trampled in this process. The singular charge that he was facing that he was allowed to -- that he was provided to process rights to was one count of misconduct, one single count. The entire lexington police disciplinary procedure was skipped with respect to steps 2 and 3. I want you to look at that closely. He was denied due process entirely as it relates to counts 2 and 3. And if we have time, and we are limited on our time, we are going to show you that the entire disciplinary order through which he has sought to be punished here today is invalid currently because it's subject to an fop grievance and by law, we argue, he cannot be punished under that policy. Yet that's the policy they charged him with, not the policy previously that we would be good law. When I'm finished, I'm going to ask you to finally put a stop to this for officer middleton and his family. it has gone on much too long already. It has gone on almost six months from the time he was charge and having the hearing. We believe this is an attempted political purge... >> counselor, you are out of time. >> I've got 30 seconds. This is speech that was spoken by someone who witnessed the horrific death of george floyd and wanted to be part of change, to no longer hide things. He engaged in free speech that resulted in no harm and for that he cannot be punished. One of the people that I've always looked up to and respected is the civil rights legend john lewis and representative lewis, most famous quote is never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble. I trust at the end of this, ladies and gentlemen of the council, that you are not going to allow someone to be terminated from a very distinguished career for having the courage to do just that. >> thank you, Mr. Sparks. Now, it is 1:30 so we will begin the next portion of our hearing. And so this portion will go for 90 minutes. And we will now begin with Mr. Horn. Will you please proceed and call your first witness. >> thank you, mayor. The government calls detective Mayor: zach roger -- detective zack ryder. he will enter the chamber now. I would like to ask Ms. Al enour clerk to swear in the witness. >> you will remain under oath until your testimony is completed and you are released as a witness. Please raise your right hand do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> I do, ma'am. thank you. >> good afternoon, could you please state your name for the record. >> zachary ryder. >> ry employed as an officer with the lexington police department. >> yes. >> how long have you been employed. >> just over five years. >> and during the summer of 2020 , were you involved in any investigations involving lexington resident sarah williams? >> I was. >> can you briefly describe what the investigation entailed? >> sure. During the June protests, officers received information through our investigation that several protest organizers were recording arrestable actions in front of police headquarters that ultimately led to the arrest of several of the protest organizers. During that particular incident, investigation, it was found that they were coordinating information through cellular devices which were ultimately seized and search warrants were applied. Those charges that resulted were inciting a riot as well as disorderly conduct and several other charges. >> and just so we are clear for the record, did you personally apply for a search warrant for a cell phone seized from Miss Williams? >> yes, sir, I did. >> and did you apply that warrant to fayette county judge for approval? >> I did. >> was that warrant approved. >> it was approved, yes, sir. >> and with the -- once the warrant was approved, what did you do with phone? >> the phones were sent to our evidence processing division where the evidence was extracted for us to look through what was applied for. >> the actual process of looking at the phone was performed by someone other than yourself? >> initially, yes. >> did you also seek any additional warrants related to your investigation? >> I did. I applied for several warrants for an additional protestor's cellular devices as well as several facebook-related warrants. I believe there were three in total of those. >> did you apply for a warrant related to this sarah williams facebook account? >> I did. >> and were the April yabt on that warrant. >> I was. >> was that warrant approved by a fayette county judge. >> yes, sir, it was. >> did you receive any information from facebook. >> I did. i received several of the facebook returns from each warrant I applied for. >> and can you just briefly describe how that information was reviewed? Were others involved in that? >> yes, sir, the intelligence unit helped process that as well as additional officers. >> thank you, that's all the questions I have. >> thank you very much. Mr. Sparks, do you want to examine this witness? And we agreed ahead of time that when the opposing attorney wishes to question the witness, that time will be counted off of the opposing attorney's time. Did I say that right? Now we have that on the record. Okay. Mr. Sparks. >> thank you. >> officer am ryder, you charged April and sarah williams with incitement of a riot. Is that correct? >> I charged sarah williams with inciting a riot. Several other officers charged April. >> what was the riot she incited. >> there was an incident which occurred in front of headquarters and there was a culmination of events stemming from the end of March -- the end of May into June. There was evidence to show that through our investigation, that these individuals were using cellular devices to coordinate cutting police barricades in front of the lexington police headquarters and ultimately, which led to arrests for the purpose of arrests rather. >> and you understand kentucky law defines riot as a public disturbance by which tumultuous and violent conduct creates the grave danger or damage or jury of property or persons? >> I do. >> you got on sarah williams facebook page, which I believe is stop the violence lex facebook. Is is that right. >> that's a page associated with her, yes. I believe there are several of those. >> and did you look at the phones for any of the information before you sought the warrant? >> I did not. >> and then why would you need the information about her cell phone to show she was insighting an actual riot? >> like I sated previously it was very apparent that Ms. Williams and several others were making facebook posts and live streaming their actions through facebook. There were also several posts made about using a signal application for conducting actions. I believe that's what was stated. >> coordinating with one another. >> coordinating with one another. That's correct. To conduct actions, yes. >> I don't have any further questions of this witness. I don't want to use my time up. thank you very much. All right. Is there any examination at all remaining for this witness? >> government has no additional questions. Mr. Sparks you said you did not have any. >> I don't wish to reserve him. He can leave. If the other side wants to ask, I May have follow-up. May this witness be released? All right. Thank you very much. >> May we have a brief side bar? brief side bar. Sure. Excuse us. For abigail allen, the five minutes we spent in the side bar will not count against anyone's time. Thank you. Now. Mr. Horn,will you please call your next witness or Mr. Wright. >> yes, the governor calls sergeant daniel burnet. sergeant daniel burnet. >> can I ask a format question? we have a format question. >> we have exhibits to hand to the witness. Do you want us to approach them and hand it to them? And is it okay, to we need to mask up when we do that? I think if you are close enough to hand the piece of paper to the witness, you should be masked. welcome. I would like to ask the clerk to swear in the witness, please. >> yes ma'am. You will remain under oath until your testimony is completed and you are released as a witness. Please raise your right hand. do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> yes. >> can you please state your name for the record? >> daniel burnet. >> how are you employed Mr. Burnet. >> police officer in lexington. >> how long have you been employed with lexington? >> just over sa years. >> what is your current assignment? >> I'm a sergeant in special investigations. >> and in your capacity as sergeant in special investigations, do you have any job duties or roles with the intelligence section? >> yes. >> and officer rydner testified about obtaining a warrant for a cell phone for Ms. Sarah williams and facebook account. Did you have a job, role or responsibilities reviewing the information obtained from the intarnts? >> yes. We were asked to assist the officer with going through that material. >> could you briefly explain how , when a cell phone is seized and a warrant is issued for it, specifically with this case, how would you go about examining the contents of that device? >> so you have a couple of different ways. You can examine it manually if it's unlocked. Which is just like would you operate any typical cell phone, go through and look at texts or apps or what not. another way that you examine it is by having a forensic examination done. There are numerous tools. We use one called cell bright. You would submit that device along with the court process, whatever it May be, in this case a search warrant. And the forensic detectives - would conduct that analysis and then generate a report that you can then... >> in this particular case, were you able to do a hand held video of going through the screens on the messages detained on this particular device. >> the yes. The phone was unlocked so we were able to do a preliminary manual review of the contents and then it was also subject to the cell bright examination. >>,000 with respect to -- now with respect to warrants issued to facebook, the officer testified there was a facebook warrant issued in that case. Were you involved at all in the review or receipt of that information? >> yes. >> just briefly describe what your role would have been. >> the same. It was to assist with the review of that document and in this instance, it the final report was a pdf format and that just involves manually looking through it and using various search functions to look at the different contents of that. That particular -- that one is not nearly as easy to navigate as a phone is because it's not organized in the same way. But we assisted with that review. >> in this particular case, were numerous pdf pages obtained from facebook for that particular record? >> yes, several thousand sand. >> and in reviewing or assisting in the review of that information, did the intelligence section or you particularly, notice and review that information messages involving officer jervis middleton? >> yes. And was, to your knowledge, was that information reported to the public integrity unit? >> it was. So as soon as we observed the communications and we recognized that to be with someone from our department and the tone and content of those, we immediately reported that up the chain of command. >> okay. And that information was just discovered in your otherwise review that you conducted in assisting in looking through those phones and facebook accounts, correct? >> just a routine review of all the content. >> I'm going to hand you a couple of exhibits that have been premarked as governments 1 and 2, which have been previously provided to opposing counsel and members of the council and just ask you to review those and see if you can confirm that those are at least -- whether or not exhibit 1 is a screen shot of the hand held video that was taken of Ms. Williams on a particular day and whether exhibit 2 contains excerpts from the facebook records obtained from the warrant. >> yes, sir. These appear to be screen shots of a manual video regarding recording that we did of the actual device itself as we were examining it in the event that that data became unavailable or the phone locked out, just as a backup and then the second set of records here is from the return from facebook. >> even though those pages had some of the information originally on there redacted to limit the information provided to counsel, do those appear to be part of the records given to your section as a result of the warrant? >> these are excerpts from the overall record. >> and can you confirm that that information was provided through your chain of command to the public integrity unit? >> yes, sir. >> thank you. I don't have any other questions. >> as a procedural matter, we haven't gotten your existents yet. I was trying to follow along. >> Mr. Sparks, do you want to examine this witness? >> I do. Good afternoon, sir. >> good afternoon, sir. >> I'm just going to be real quick d. Have you any involvement at all in the investigation of whether officer middleton committed a disciplinary offense, any involvement at all? >> no. The extent of our involvement was reviewing this material, reporting that up the chain of command and providing the documents and the transcripts of what we observed. >> it is fair to say, you were not involved in the investigation of what those actual messages meant and whether or not it was protected speech or otherwise? >> correct there. Was no follow-up done by myself or anyone in my office recording regarding that. >> thank you very much for your time and appreciate your service. thank you, Mr. Sparks. Is there any other examination remaining for this witness? >> government has no additional questions. >> no. so this witness May he be released? All right. Thank you very much sergeant burnet. You are released to go. >> regarding the exhibits? Do I leave these here? that's fine. Okay, and Mr. Horn or Mr. Wright, will you call your next witness, please. >> the government calls lieutenant jeremy tuttle. lieutenant jeremy tuttle. I'd like to request that the clerk swear in the witness, please. >> yes ma'am. >> you will remain under oath until your testimony is completed and you are released as a witness. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> thank you. Mr. Wright. >> thank you, mayor. Cowp state your name for the record. >> jeremy tuttle. >> are you employed by the lexington police department as a sworn officer? >> I am. >> what is your current rank. >> lieutenant. >> and how long have you been a lieutenant? >> since January 2015. >> and in your role as a lieutenant, have you had an occasion to be, I suppose, a second line supervisor for officer middleton? >> I was. >> and I want to hand you what has been premarked as government exhibit 3 and ask you to take a look at this. Do you recognize that documet? >> I do. >> could you tell the council what that is? >> a formal complaint 111 is a formal administrative place that I placed on officer middleton. >> and can you please briefly describe when you placed that charge and the process how you came about engaging in that particular official act? >> yes. It began, I was notified by my commander, commander ann welch that officer middleton would be suspension. I wasn't given the information of what that was about. I had to bring him in and I had to let him know he had been placed on level three suspension due to an investigation. I did not know what it was at that time. A few weeks down the line, I'm not sure how long it was, I was given the results of that investigation. I was given a packet of correspondence that they received off a search warrant, which had him corresponding to, I guess, you would call it the leaders of the local demonstrations this summer. Many of those correspondences were making disparaging remarks about the officers, the department, things of that nature. Based on what I read, I went down to P.I.U. And signed a formal 111 of misconduct against officer middleton. >> all right. I'm now going to hand you what has been premarked at government exhibit 4. Do you review that downpayment and let me know if you recognize what that is? >> I do. >> can you explain for the council what that is? >> it is an email I sent out to my shift on May 3 is, it was asking for any officer or sergeant not working that wanted to come in for overtime May do so. I said there was a potential for protest tonight and we were preparing for it. >> what was the date on that particular email. >> May 31, 2020. 8:53 in the morning. >> to your recollection was that email sent at the time when lexington was experiencing ongoing protest events? >> it was. >> following the death of george floyd? >> it was. >> how long have you been employed by the lexington police department? >> since September, 2003. >> and how long had you been officer middleton's supervisor by that particular time? >> I didn't understand you. >> how long had you been officer middleton's supervisor in that sector around the date that you sent that email? >> how long have I been a supervisor over central -- >> over officer middleton? >> not really sure. Since he became back to patrol. I'm not sure if it was a few months, six months. I'm not sure how long he had been there. >> based on your years of experience at the time that you sent that email as a supervisor over that sector, would you have expected your officers to share that particular email or information with a person of the p un? >> absolutely not. None of my emails are expected to be shared with the public. >> can you expound on that a little bit, as far as why you express that opinion? >> an email like this, we are looking for overtime opportunities and for officers and sergeants to come in due to potential protest. To me that is almost kind of, we are making up a plan, coming up with how we are going to handle the downtown demonstrations. And any type of release to the public would come from the P.I.O.'s office not from individual officers. >> there is another exhibit laying at your table marked exhibit 2. Do you see that? I believe it's in front of the computer. >> no. Okay. Here. >> I'm going to ask you to flip to what is marked page exhibit 2-c which should be about the ---- >> 2-c. Okay. >> when you look at that particular screen shot and look at your email, do you have an opinion whether or not that appears o be the message or the body of the message that you sent out to members of your sector? >> I do. When I first originally got this information to review, I actually saw this email and thought to myself, this looks like one of my emails. I went to my sent folder and found the email sent verbatim what was in this packet. >> did officer middleton ask for your per mission to share that particular message with any members of the public at the time you issued it? >> no, he did not. >> and if he had asked, would you have approved of dissemination of that particular email? >> I would not. >> thank you. I don't have any other questions. >> thank you. thank you very much, Mr. Sparks. Do you want to examine this witness? >> yes. >> you filed form 111 formal complaint in this matter, correct? >> yes, difficult. >> and that documents titled formal complaint with the police department. >> it's titled 111. Full -- >> read it to the council, what does it say from the very top. >> lexington police department formal complaint form 111. >> so you agree with me that you filed a formal complaint against officer middleton? >> yes. >> and in that formal complaint, what disciplinary code violation did you allege he violated? >> misconduct. >> what is the number? 102? Operational rule 102? >> I'm looking to... Yeah, operational rule 1021.02. Did. >> did you file any other formal complaint forms 111 against officer middleton. >> no. >> you charged him with a single count of misconduct, correct? >> yes, sir. >> under 1.02. >> yes. >> nothing else? >> no. >> and this information that you said that you wouldn't have approved to go out, that is basically an email where you are saying hey, on May 31, 2020, during the middle of what is huge ongoing protests, you are going to need officers if they can, to come in and work overtime? >> yes. >> would you consider that sensitive, critical information? >> I would say when you are accepting it to leaders of who are organizing the protest, giving them the tactics of what we are doing, then yes, I would. >> that's not tactics. Asking people to come into work is not a tactic. >> letting them know we are bringing in extra people to staff downtown is a tactic. >> he didn't let them know that. He just said they're calling us in for work for overtime. >> yes. >> >> again, is that critical operational information? Yes or no? >> I goy guess that would be up to an individual to decide. Would I say yes because we are coordinating a planned protest and trying to come up with plans or what we are going to do and we are not expecting what we send out when working those to go to the public who are actually involved in the protest. >> you May not be expecting it but that doesn't change the nature of the information, wouldn't you agree with me? >> yes. >> no further questions. thank you very much. Is there any examination remaining for this witness? >> brief followup. Mr. Write. >> lieutenant tuttle, in the second full paragraph in the brief jiption of allegations in -- description of allegations. Although it highlights the allegation of misconduct, you did include in there that the facts or the allegations you reviewed indicated that officer middleton had released department information, correct? >> yes. >> so was that your purpose to put on notice in there that that was one of the things. >> yes, the email. >> and again, could you highlight again how many years you have been on? >> since September, 2003. 17 and a half. >> and during that timeframe, how long have you been a supervisor, a sergeant or lieutenant? >> I was a sergeant January or February 2012. Roughly nine years. >> and based on your years as an officer, a sergeant, a lieutenant, in your estimation, would any reasonable officer of the lexington police department believe it was all right to release that information at the time? >> no. >> thank you. No further questions. thank you. Mr. Sparks. >> lieutenant tuttle, have you ever told someone at a conversation, at a party, out having a barbecue, hey, I just got called into work for overtime? >> absolutely. >> and every officer has probably done that. >> absolutely, yes. >> and telling sarah williams whether you approve of what she does or not, hey, I just called go the called into over time, you want to treat that was tactical critical information. >> that along with everything else sent. If it was just based upon that one statement, I mean a one email, but there is a whole lot more than that. >> a whole lot more of critical operational information that was provided? >> as far as misconduct also talks about bringing (Inaudible) To the department and officer. >> we are not talking about that. >> that's part of the same charge I used. >> you didn't charge him. The lexington law department has. You dnts charge him with dissemination of information under 1.15 or dishon at this. At that point in August -- you didn't charge him with dissemination of information of operational rule 1.15, did you? >> I did not. >> thank you. >> no further questions. is there any examination remaining for this witness? >> no, mayor. >> thank you. You are dismissed. >> thank you. >> Mr. Horn, will you please call your next witness. >> this time we call commander roger holland. commander roger holland. >> will the clerk swear in this witness. >> you are will remain under oath until your testimony is completed and you are released as a witness. Please raise your right hand. Swear swear intair. >> downstate your name for the record? >> roger holland, Jr. >> I probably referred to you as commander. Are you an assistant chief. >> yes, sir. >> when were you promoted to assistant chief? >> January of thissier. >> prior to in the timeframe that we are or dealing with back in the May-june timeframe 2020, what was your rank. >> commander at that point. >> at that particular time, did you have any job duties or responsibilities with the lexington police department emergency response unit? >> at that time I was the commander of the emergency response unit. >> and could you just briefly describe what your duties are and what the emergency response unit is, just for background information? >> the emergency response unit is the tactical element of the department. It falls under the bureau of special operations, part-time unit so the officers who are assigned to that unit are selected through a process, within the emergency response unit also follows the crisis negotiations unit. So we are called out for any assistance that patrol might need, serve warrants, civil disturbsance, crowd control, anything like that. >> at that particular time, was officer middleton associated or a member of that unit in some respect? >> he was a member of the crisis negotiations unit. >> and could you briefly describe what that entails, being a member of the crisis negotiation unit? >> crisis negotiation is a support el emto the emergency response unit. Primarily their responsibility is to assist with negotiations and investigations when E.R.U. Is called out like a barricaded individual, those type of particular things. So they would handle negotiatios, gathering intel to be able to support the tactical unit during a particular call out that's primarily what their responsibility is. >> so if a callout was issued for -- >> worry trying to get Mr. Wright on the screen there. >> I apologize, mayor. tup. >> if a call out is issued for the emergency response unit are members of the crisis negotiations unit also given access or given a call out as well? >> one standard call out procedure that goes out through an automated system through did is patch. And that includes negotiations E.R.U., and H.D. Notifications so all those members of the units are aware of the situation. >> so just briefly, can you describe that process that they call out goes out to the crisis negotiation unit and emergency response unit, how is that communication sent out? Is it sent by text, email? How does it work. >> sent out through the notification system. Requires a supervisor to evaluate the scene that they're working through out on the streets, to make the decision to call out E.R.U. So when this particular one, it would have been, I believe there was a lieutenant who made that call for the assistance of E.R.U., that goes to the communication supervisor who sends out a notification, which is an automated system that seconds communication to through text and through communications through home call. >> I'm going to ask you if you will look in front of I don't are computer there, there is a stack of exhibits that is marked government exhibit 2. If you can pick that up and look at the second page of that. 2-a. >> I've got it. >> could you review that document. >> 2a ameres to be a screen shot of a text message of a call out and notes this is an E.R.U. Only callout and provides the incident location and says this is reference to a civic disturbance. >> and if you look at the first page, government 2 alpha which appears to be a hyperlink to that to when the message got sent out and showing universal time coordinated which I believe there will be testimony is about four hours ahead of eastern daylight time. It appears that the that message May have been sent out, it appears at 23:46 on on or about May 30. Can you recall an E.R.U. Call out was sent out around that timeframe. >> May 30, just prior to 12:00, approximately 23:45 hours dlshes is when we received that notification. >> so based on your recollection as commander of the E.R.U. Unit, can you testify one way or another is if this appears to be a message that would have come from the lexington police dpartment E.R.U. And crisis negotiation? >> it is consistent with the way that we receive those messages. - >> and as officer officer middleton being a member of the crisis negotiation unit at that time, he would have received that via text message? >> correct. >> as commander of the unit, can you speak to whether or not it would be appropriate to release E.R.U. Call out text to members of the public at or near the time they're actually occurring? >> it would not be. >> can you expound on that, please? Why would it not be appropriate? >> it has the potential to impact the operation that we are being called out to resolve by providing that particular information, specifically this would be in a case provided to someone who was demonstrating that obviously impacts our operational efficiency and being able to manage the particular scene if that information is pass add long. >> did officer middleton approach you at that time and ask you for per mission to release that text message as commander of the unit. >> no. >> if he asked you would you approve the release of that message. >> I would not have approved for that information to be release expwhrd based on the training and experience that members of the E.R.U. Unit and crisis negotiation unit receive, would any reasonable member of those particular sections thought it would have been all right to release that to a member of the public at the time it first went out? >> no. Any release of that particular information would come from the chief's office. >> I would like to shift gears. As a member of the E.R.U. Or as an officer, did you work some of the protest events occurring at or about that time? >> yes, sir. >> was there a specific incident where a member of the public yelled through a megaphone or bull horn directly or called your name out in the crowd? >> I think roughly the demonstrations took place over a period of about 59 days all of which I was there for except for two of those days. And yes, I was directly addressed by the person on the megaphone. >> do you recall -- and I'm not asking you to use the exact language or profanity. Do you remember generally what was said to you? F Commander Holland: they had received some type of messaging regarding that. >> and were was the person who said that standing anywhere near you where they could have seen your name? >> no. >> how far away was the person... >> we were in front of police headquarters. I was in the garage area of the first floor and they were in the street. >> if you had to guess poxly approximately how far away they were (Inaudible). >> probably 50 feet or more. I do account know. It was over a mega phone. It was loud enough that everybody there could hear it. >> does that concern you at all at the time? >> my first concern is I didn't know this particular person so what relationship would cause them to direct that towards me I was a little off put by that. As time continued on, information started to come out that there was a potential officer middleton, maybe reaching out and providing information regarding officers an speaking through the person who was leading the demonstrations. >> do you have I reason to believe why they wanted to single you out? >> I mean he provided the emergency response unit was there that particular night and obviously I was leading that particular unit. So I don't know for what purpose it would lead him to do that, whether it was to try to allow for them to incite what was going organization trying to steer the direction of the police? I don't know. >> but as commander of that unit or a member of the crisis negotiation unit which I understand falls under your leadership as commander of the E.R.U., correct? >> correct. >> did you consider that appropriate conduct under the circumstances? (Inaudible). >> no, it is not appropriate for someone within that team environment to be providing that kind of language or that particular information about members of the team. >> thank you. I don't have any other questions. Mayor: if we could cause a second. We have a technical issue with the clerk. The clerk's internet is down. >> she's back on now, mayor. you are back. Okay, thank you. Our clerk is very important to the process and you were finished with your questioning right now Mr. Sparks do you want to question this witness? >> I do. (Inaudible) You are assistant chief holland. >> correct. >> the E.R.U. Call out, I've heard it referred to as, it's essentially a call out to show up in tactical. That's one of the purposes to show up in tact dal... >> not for everybody because not everybody responds in that capacity. >> I guess for those folks that would respond in that capacity. >> correct. >> and the fact that lexington police were going to show up in riot gear that night, that wasn't a closely held secret, was it? >> I don't think that we disseminated any of that information to anybody. >> but you are not sure. You've seen before where it's been disseminated through (Inaudible). >> I don't have twitter. I don't tweet so I don't know. >> so the fact that the lexington police are going to show up in riot gear, would seem to me, to be something that would be clever to announce ahead of time so possibly suppress violence. And you want to treat this instabs like it as a closely guarded secret. Critical. >> all of our operations are critical in nature in how we May not have responded -- we respond based upon the incident and what we see and we evaluate based on the information we receive. So during this entire thing, we responded differently in operational capacities throughout the entirety of this event. >> and when you show newspaper riot gear, it is no longer a a secret. >> it wasn't a secret at that point because we were there. The people that were there, were clear that we were there. >> right, it wasn't a secret. The fact that you were called out in riot gear wasn't a secret. Correct? >> well for those people who are present and knew there were officers... >> let me ask you this. Just be honest. Have you ever told your spouse or, anybody in your family that hey, I got called out and have I to go in tonight. >> I got to go to work. >> that's what would you say. >> yes. >> and that's okay. So you got to go to work. Get your riot gear on and leave. You conceal yourself when you put on the riot gear. >> I put on the duty uniform required and respond to the call. >> if a member of the public states to you, command holland, member of the public says to you, F.U. Commander holland. You just have to live with that, right? That's not a crime. >> correct. >> and you have been taught to live with that. >> yes. >> what would you do? Just walk down street, somebody's hollering at me. >> part of the discipline of wearing the badge. >> you just move on. >> correct. >> and the realities of officer middleton saying hey, saying F.U., that had no impact on you other than what you just told me. >> it has an img impact on you when you recognize it is coming from a fellow officer that you work for. >> you didn't recognize it at that point. >> at that point, I didn't. You are correct. >> at that point, it did not actually harm any any real way. >> I think I'm disciplined enough to recognize the position that I'm in. >> would you agree with me... >> to control myself and not allow it to impact my decision making based on the position I was in. >> and I applaud you for that and I agree with you. It had no real impact. >> I would say it as impact but I chose to conduct myself appropriately ais we ask everybody to do. >> you mention something interesting to me. You said that you didn't realize at the time it was said that it came from officer middleton, but shortly thereafter, information came to light, right that it May have come from officer middleton. >> that's correct. >> how shortly thereafter. >> days afterwards. >> so within a few days, people in the force were talking about the fact sarah williams May have been fed information by officer middleton, correct? >> there was the mobile -- I don't -- the potential. I think there were likes on facebook. >> you think that had anything to do with the fact that they subsequently went to issue a warrant for sarah wills williams cell phone? >> I don't have anything to do with that investigation. >> thank you. No further questions of this witness. thank you. Is there any examination remaining of this witness? >> very briefly. okay. >> just to clarify one little point that was asked on cross-examination. Other officers that aren't part of E.R.U. May be issued riot gear, correct? You could be a member of a non-special unit and have a shield or a helmet, that type of thing? >> personnel have that specific type of riot or crowd control. >> even if there was a public statement there May be people in riot gear, that wouldn't necessarily indicate to the public that you are a specialized unit that has been activated, correct? >> correct. >> and again, from your experience as the commander of the e. R.U., would it be highly unlikely to have press releases of the E.R.U. Activated for something that hadn't occurred yet? >> not going to be activated, no. >> so normally if there are any reports on E.R.U., it would be if you are responding to a scene or something of that nature but basically there are not press releases ahead of time that they have been activated? >> it would be a notification maybe to the public there was an incident taking place and police were handling and wouldn't be specific to the emergency response unit. >> and I believe you testified E.R.U. Might respond to barricaded suspect situations, are you rolfed in operations where there May be danger in service of warrants. >> dignitary protection, search warrants that are high risk, hostage barricade, managing situations with mentally ill, thosetypes of situations. Extra training takes place with those. >> even dignitary type of protection might be an E.R.U. Position? >> yes. >> and under those circumstances , as far as types of protection given to officials and dignitaries, that wouldn't be toot type of information released to the public, correct? >> we wouldn't disseminate information. >> how important is it for the members of your unit to have the trust and confidence that they can maintain confidential information? >> I think it's critical to what we do. >> and if you have a question about somebody's judgment or ability to maintain confidentiality due to the types of serious nature of the E.R.U., would that be your concern to have someone continue in the unit if they had shown they would release confidential information. >> yes and would I ask for them to be removed from the team. >> no further questions. Roux is there any other questioning for this witness? >> no. >> no. you May be released. Mr. Horn or Mr. Wright. You May call your next witness. >> rick montgomery. rick montgomery. Madam Clerk, will you please swear in the witness? >> yes ma'am. You will remain under oath until your testimony is completed and you are released as a witness. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> thank you. thank you,. >> counsel state your name for the record? >> william montgomery. >> how are you employed Mr. Montgomery. >> employed at e 911. Radio system administrator. >> and could you just briefly describe what your duties are at e 911. >> maintaining and upgrading the radio system for the entire (Inaudible). >> autopsied -- around August of 2020 or thereabouts, did you receive a request to pull some radio logs for officer middleton? >> I did. >> could you briefly describe for the council what information on that request that you retrieved from lexington's 911 system? >> what information I pulled? >> yes. >> so the things it pulled was when the radio was turned on, it was turned off and what was (Inaudible) Associated. >> and just so we understand, I'm getting ready to show you what is marked as government exhibit 5. Could you briefly describe how you pulled that information from the system and how that information is reported in the 191 system? -- in the 91 is system? >> there are multiple ways to do it but this is actually pulled based on the police agency. And after that, I filtered out anybody that was not (Inaudible) >> so based on the way the lexington or 911 system maintains information, based on an officer's name, are you able to identify their assigned portable radio I.D. Number and go back in the system for a given period of time and figure out whether or not that portable radio would be turned on or off. >> that's correct. >> and if it is turned on and they actually monitor or listen to any of the frequencies that are assigned to lexington's radio system, can you tell from the information that the system stores what channel they were on? >> yes, I can. >> now it's my understanding and the information provided by officer middleton's counsel that you pulled that information for approximately a month's timeframe, is that correct? >> from May 20 to July 4, I believe. >> I have handed you government exhibit 5, which I'll relate to you is one of the pages in the excel spread sheet because we are not concerned with the entire month. If I could ask to you look at that. Did us that appear to be a page of the information of the entire month where the radio records were pulled that you performed on officer middleton's radio? >> yes. >> and specifically, with respect to the dates of May 29 and June 1. Can you just go over that document and indicate what that particular information, when the radio was off and when the radio was turned on? >> so I see it's coming from the bottom up. And on May 29, I don't see where it was turned off but I see where it was scanned through multiple different channels. Maybe for a period of three minutes total ending on lpd central. >> and on June 1, approximately 9:22:00 P.M., does it show the radio was turned on? >> yes. >> and it had been off since May 29 prior to that? >> that's correct. >> and when it was turned on, I believe the document reflects it was on for a period of minutes? >> yes. Very short period of time. >> during that time it was turned on, can you tell from that document what channels were accessed? Can you go over that briefly? >> for the 1st. >> starting at 9:22. I believe it was turned off at 9:28 roughly. >> right. It's always hard to tell broken down in minutes, not seconds. You don't know how long they were on the channel but it went from lpd central, went through lpd west, east and abcd secure event, eru event, car a, lpd central, west and then landed on lpd central and turned off. >> and from that document based on your knowledge and experience of the lexington 911 system and how it records officers access to the radio, are you confident from that record that that appears to show that the radio was turned on at 9:22 on June 1. >> yes? And on for approximately until 9:28. >> that's correct. >> if could you look, the documents there in front of you, there is a government exhibit 2 to I stack of documents. I'm going to ask you to look at page 2-d 2 delta. >> okay. >> and approximately on the bottom of the page, approximately the third set of where it says officer jervis mid middleton and approximately ahead of daylight time, it indicates that I'm about to monitor a radio traffic so assuming that it says June 2, 2020, 0122, would that, the way I'm doing my math, would indicate that's around 9:22? >> I would have the same math trouble as well but I believe that is correct. >> so the radio log that were you able to pull and the document that we just went over, does it, in fact, indicate that his radio was turned on at or about that time on June 1? >> that's correct. >> thank you. I don't have any others questions. Mr. Sparks. Do you with issue to question this witness? >> yes ma'am. Good afternoon. >> good afternoon. >> you haven't done -- you said you assumed he was right on his math. You haven't done the actual calculations what time it was on and what time it wasn't on, right? >> I'm not good with the time zones. The hours... (Inaudible). >> what can you safely say is he turned his radio on for a few minutes on June 1. You can safely say that? >> yes. >> and that's all. And what channel? Have you ever been asked in other investigations about the portable radio communication logs? >> I have been asked to pull logs. I have never to the point (Inaudible). >> were you asked to pull the radio communication logs to see if ryan holland was monitoring during the trump parade. >> no, sir. >> no further questions. >> thank you very much. I have a message that the volume on everyone in the chamber is very low. Is there a was I to turn up everybody's volume, please? >> hello mayor, this is chris edwards in the control room. And we are pretty much on a razor's edge with the audio trying to fight the feedback and the reverb. I would tell people that the audio online is clearer than it is on the cable system, because it is all digital online, and we have it up -- you have to raise your volume is allowed as it will go but it is much clearer online than it is on the cable system. there is no way to turn it up? >> we have been experimenting with it down here, mayor f. We turn it up, we get more reverb. We're kind of right on the edge. We are continuing to tweak with it and hopefully make some adjustments during one of the breaks. that would be great, thank you very much. All right. Is there any further examination of the witness? >> no. Mr. Sparks? >> no. all right, thank you, Mr. Montgomery, you are released to go. And Mr. Wright I'll ask to you call your next witness. >> government calls lieutenant david beroshic. (Ph) >> you will remain under oath until your testimony is completed and you are released as a witness. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> cawrm for the record. >> david berosic. >> I'm a lieutenant with the lexington police department. >> where are you currently assigned within the department. >> currently assigned to the public integrity unit. >> how long have you been assigned to the public integrity unit. >> since May of last year. >> in the course of your duties with the public integrity unit were you assigned as the primary investigator of the complaint filed by lieutenant jeremy tuttle. >> yes. >> did you receive copies of cell phone information and information involving officer middleton and sarah. >> I was. >> did you review that information? >> I did. >> as part of your investigation reviewing that information, did you note any areas of concern with respect to any of the content of the messages that you reviewed. >> I did. >> I'm going to ask you to look at what is in front of you and go through that with me. >> yes, sir. >> there has been some testimony, but with respect to an eru call out, but in your review and investigation of this matter, were you able to make a determination from review of the messages whether it appeared that officer middleton had sent sarah williams a copy of the eru call? >> yes, sir. >> just briefly describe what you saw in the documents and before we go any further, there has been some testimony, I want to make sure I'm not getting things wrong, all of the time indicated in here is utc, can you explain from the investigation, did you determine what the time differences are with eastern daylight savings time. >> the facebook conducts there I time on utc time, not sure what it stands for but it is four hours ahead of us during this investigation at that time. >> all right. So all of the time stamps we have on here then would be minus four hours? >> yes, sir, minus four hours, correct. >> so based on your investigations, did it appear, with respect to the eru callout that that was sent probably in the evening of May 30, 2020 some. >> yes, sir. >> now you conducted an interview with officer middleton as part of your investigation, correct? >> yes, sir, that's correct. >> and I believe that interview was taped, correct? >> yes, sir, it was taped the lieutenant and I interviewed. >> lieutenant brotherton and yourself conducted the interview with officer middleton. >> yes, sir. `>> was that, as part of your investigation, did you have the interview transcribeed? >> we did. For the record, the transcribed interview has been marked as government exhibit 8 and I'm going to ask Mr. Horn to hand that to you and ask you if this appears to be a true and accurate copy of what you included in your investigation? >> this appears to be an accurate copy of the interview. >> so with respect to any questions that you asked of officer middleton or lieutenant brotherton and his responses are there, too. Those would be transcribed or recorded did I ask if he sent a screen shot of the callout to sarah will crams? >> I did. >> and what information about officer middleton provide you? >> we asked him if he sent any official documentation or any callouts or information about text or rosters. He immediately said he had not. Did you indicate that you had information that indicated he did. >> we showed him that he did send it after he denied that he had. >> and did you show him specifically the eru callout. >> we did. >> after showing him that document, did he acknowledge that he sent it? >> yes. >> did he give you an explanation why he sent that particular document? >> he gave us an explanation. His reasoning went from, at first, I did not send anything to confusion. I don't know why I would have sent that. At the end, he said he was just letting her know that he had to about into work. We did also note on his response back on the eru callout that he was not going to go in. So that was brought into question. >> at any point during the interview, did he acknowledge or give any concern about whether or not he should have sent that document out? >> no. He just, letting her know that he was supposed to go in. >> thank you. And I believe the next documents , if we go to page 2-b after 2-a. That had the eru callout a few lines down and I'll ask you to avoid if you can, using any proceed fant, but there is a profanity but there is a communication at 0 4:52 utc that says tell them f ru and commander holland, correct? >> correct. And further down, it appears to be a message from Miss Williams back that says I got an f commander holland in and they started lmao. Did you ask officer middleton about that particular exchange? >> we did. >> and can you just generally recite what information you got on that particular matter? >> his response was that it was just him venting, you know, throughout this interview that we had with him that the conversation was just between him and the private individual, that the he was venting and he did not expect her to use it so he did not feel that he had done anything improper. >> did he indicate to you why he would want to single out or recommend using profanity against commander holland while he was out working? >> no, sir. When we questioned him on that. His answer was that he liked commander holland and he had nothing against him and no reason to. >> at the end of the interview or during the course of the interview, he never really provided any rationale as to why he would want something like that said to commander holland? >> we never learned. >> and at the bottom of the page, 2 bravo, it appears to be a link leading into the next paining page and there has been some testimony about this particular document from lieutenant tuttle, but during the course of your investigation whether a veen shot was sent by his sector lieutenant to Miss Williams? >> correct. >> is that what is reflected on page 2 charlie? >> that's correct. >> did you ask officer middleton about that circumstance? >> we asked him and it was the same response. He couldn't give a real reason other than just letting her know that he had to go into work. >> and when you first asked him about it, did he recall the incident? We showed him the screen shot and moving the needle, making some type of difference and he was showing her that email to prove that to her. >> so your recollection was that he was, by showing the preponderance of the evidence had to call in people for overtime or potential overtime. It was showing the protest was being effective and that's why he gave you the rationale why he shared the email. >> he really never gave us a rational explanation as to why he sent it other than he was just venting, just letting her know. >> during your interview with respect to either the eru callout or this particular email, did officer middleton ever indicate to you that he was under some sort of reasoning or belief that it was okay or he was free to share those types of communications general. >> I he did at one point in time. He likened it to when the police department releases information with the U.K. Celebrations that have on you are occurred over at the state university. He likened it to, I'm just releasing information -- he asked, had we released that information, we told him we had not. He, like I say, he likened it to the same as that. I was just doing what we do through the agency during every sell bra I goes. >> how many years have been employed by the lexington police department. >> 20 years. >> have you been a supervisor in other roles or in the past? >> yes, sir, I have. >> based on your knowledge and experience, would a reasonable officer believe that it was okay or that it was generally accepted to share those types of communications? >> excuse us. We have a side bar. We believe rack. We'll be right back. Pu. where were we? >> I'll continue. Let's go back to the exhibits and I believe we were on 2 charlie. My only additional question on that, since lieutenant tuttle has testified at length, did he admit, officer middleton admit that he sent a screen shot of the document however he maintained it was okay. >> yeah, he admitted he sent it. He didn't know why he had. >> and for purposes of all these documents that the we are going through here with the particular messages, did officer middleton admit that he sent all of the messages that were that we are talking about here today to Ms. Williams? >> yes, sir, he did. >> at no time did he indicate that somebody else was using his phone or there was a problem with the records or they didn't accurately reflect his communications? >> correct. The text messages were accurate and he said that. >> it was never, once you asked him that, that wasn't a dispute after that? >> correct. >> let's move on to page 2 delta. 2d. Around the bottom of the page... It indicates that officer middleton said there has been a callout, that the he said no, and I've asked another witness, Mr. Montgomery a question about this, about the monitor radio traffic, correct? >> yes, sir. >> now and we've already introduced the radio log and we counted back roughly four hours to show that officer middleton had, in fact, turned his radio on around that timeframe. >> correct. >> did you ask officer middleton in I questions about whether or not he was monitoring radio traffic? >> we did, yes, sir. We asked if he had monitored the radio at all and his first response was absolutely not. We showed him the printout from when he did, and again it went from I had not done it to confused on why he did it and then really gave us no reason of why he did it. Just, the same as if we were listening to something else. So he admitted to it at the end but didn't know why. >> so initially his answer was absolutely that he had not. >> correct. >> and that he only admitted it -- did you eventually show him the documents? >> yes, sir, we had a screen where we were interviewing and showed a printout of, I believe, what you all have already, a printout that shows where he turned on the radio, what channels he went through, how long he was on each channel. What time he turned it off. >> so with respect to his initial response and his responses in general to that particular line of questioning about whether or not he monitored the radio traffic, do you have any opinion or belief as to whether or not he was being truthful and honest with you? >> I thought he was being deceptive at that time, yes, sir. >> is that because of what you have already related to us? The transcript is in the record. The council can look at the responses correct? >> correct. >> we've admitted the transcripts. They can look at his responses. But again when you ask him whether he had hon tored the radio, his response was absolutely not. And them he only admitted it after being shown the records. >> that's correct. >> thank you. I'd like to have you look at page 2e or 2 echo and look at the conversation and exchange of information. And could you describe for me why you felt that exchange was relevant to your investigation as far as the allegation of misconduct against officer middleton? >> why I thought it was important? >> yes. >> it shows a conversation between officer middleton and Miss Williams. At the bottom you can see that he tells Miss Williams, I'm trying to find something for you to add to say to him and he asked if she was downtown and she said she was in fact there and cussing out truex who was the lieutenant on second shift. >> so the record, when it is referring to truex in the transcript, can you state affirmatively trux is April officer with the lexington police department they're talking about a lexington police officer? >> yes, sir. >> and then you indicated that you thought this document was relevant to your investigation because there is a line from officer middleton that shows 6-4-2020 that said I'm trying to find something for you to add to say to hip. From that what did you interpret that to be. >> he was assisting her in statements that were uncomfortable or coast guarder to in nature -- derogatory in nature to say to truex at that time? >> at the bottom, ask you, it says the next quote it says cut them bleep, tell them they're never mad when magna violate people's rights. And I'm not going to read that particular quote on duty and he makes a at the same time about himself and I'm not going to state for the council to read that. Who is masco. >> an officer also that works with the lexington police department. >> so when he is referring to masco or suggesting something to say, masco is also a police officer? Correct. >> is there any else that you feeling relevant that you have uncovered? >> not that I've uncovered, no. Other than like I said, he is assisting them in giving them statements to make while at the protest. Mass company can you speak closer to your microtone? >> the first exchange that is included in there at June 5, 2020 at 12:0 4. It says I hope you give maynard the business. Is there a maynard that works for the lexington police department. >> yes, sir. Chief maynard is assistant chief over patrol right now. >> the best way to category go arize the interview with rpo, we asked him about all of these concerns that we had and his overwhelming response each time was that he made the statement, he didn't deny that, but it was him venting. He was venting to a friend who, he had said that agreed that whatever he told her, she would not say over the broadcast that they were broadcasting during the protest. So he admitted to everything, but would just say he was venting and we couldn't understand what he was saying or why he was saying it because he looks through a different lens than we do. >> okay. I want to move on to page 2-h. excuse me one moment, please. It is 5 after 3:00. And we had scheduled a council break right now and so I wondered if you have much more for this witness? >> probably another 15 minutes, mayor so it might be a good time for a break. does that suit you, Mr. Sparks? >> yes Madam Mayor. council members, we will go ahead and take our 15-minute break so it will be until 3:20. See you back here then. Tult. That they will be in front of headquarters tonight, give both of them hell to get under so and so's skin, tell them somebody said hi and it refers to breaking up a marriage and not liking black folk. Is that accurate. >> that is accurate. >> and when you interviewed officer middleton, did he acknowledge he made that particular comment to Ms. Williams. >> he did acknowledge that, yes, sir. >> thank you. >> we can move on to page 2-I. As far as information relevant to your investigation on this, I noted that it appears in the middle of the page, 6620, 1700... Utc, it says my next f goes to commander johnson. Were you able to identify through your investigation who that might have been referring to. >> yes, sir. Commander albert johnson. >> we are going to show some videos at the end of this, but with respect to that particular comment, were you able to find any video evidence where a statement was actually made during the protest against commander johnson. >> yes, sir, I was. >> we'll show those here. >> yes, sir. >> at the bottom of the page, the last full entry that was not redacted appears to be officer middleton talking about something that needed to be done about the command staff, a lot of them were out there last night. Assuming at the would be there again tonight I want them to hear it. Did you ask about that particular comment? >> I can't tell you if I asked about that particular comment we did ask him about similar comments throughout. Can I give you an overall general how he responded to the comments but not to this particular exact. >> did he acknowledge that he appeared to have encouraged Ms. Williams to confront the officers? >> again, he labeled it as venting that his explanation was that he knew it was not going to be given out to them or not be said to them. It was just him venting. >> but he says here I want maynard and his crew to hear it. Did you take that to be referring to commander maynard? >> correct. Facebook messaging. On the facebook message, he made that comment to Ms. Williams. His explanation to us was that he was just venting and not exspecting her to say it but he did tell her on the messaging app, tell her to say it. >> and I believe this is another comment about officer mascoe we already talked about and eight peers on 2k there are some communications. I'll ask you to review that. It appears the middle of the page again referring to commander albert johnson requesting he be called a racist. >> correct. And some domestics about mascoe and just the comment about officers and sergeants being blatantly racist. And it appears at the bottom that it talks about definitely talks about brennan. Through your investigation were you able to find out who officer middleton was talking about. >> brena angel, public information officer for the lexington police department. >> so in your view of the text, it appears he made comments or refer encouraged her to make comments about brena angel? >> yes. Let's move on to page 2-l. It appears the entry on 6-12-2020, at 12:51. It says the video where they moved the side of the street on richmond road, lieutenant jackie newman,is that a member of the lerm to your knowledge. >> commander jackie newman. At that time she was a lieutenant in the bureau of special operations. >> it says she a real piece of work on. I have stuff on her, too. Too. Too. Too. Too. Too. Too. Too. Too. Too. Too. Too. Too. Too. T comment? >> we did. I would categorize it with you the being able to read it verbatim is just venting. Just venting that was somebody he didn't particular will I care for and he was venting to Ms. Will that we didn't understand how and why because of the lens he was looking through. >> and let's on to imagination 2-m, the last page and I believe most of these people we talked about at some point. The next to the last entry on june 13 was actually I believe 0:48:42 that was actually made on June 12 because of the four hours. It says it's referring to a brandon merovacic,. >> yes, sir, an officer to works for the agent diswhri the comment essential will I talkses about field sobriety test and identifies -- without going into detail, does that have to do with an investigation that the officer involving a traffic accident. >> that's correct. He was the arresting officer, investigating officer for an accident that occurred (Inaudible). >> it said he is a little short dude. He needs a glove. >> officer middleton explained on this one he liked brandon and that he had been catching a lot of grief for a lot of comments on facebook and other social media accounts and this one incident or one instance, he was wanting Ms. Williams to be nice to him to make him feel better about everything. >> he was highlighting an officer due to his involvement in another official agency investigation. >> correct. >> nothing to do with the protests, correct? >> correct. >> at this time, I'm going to introduce exhibit 6 which are cd clips of videos that were included in your investigation and we will show them in order and I'll ask you why you included them and what they related to with respect to your investigation. >> yes, sir. 3 exhibit 6-1. >> stand by, please. Could you repeated the exhibit number, please? >> government video exhibit 1 >> all right. Somebody... >> oh yeah, absolutely. I think I'm pretty certain it's a clear night as well. >> earlier when I checked, weather in kentucky. Beautiful. Beautiful weather. Thank you, sir. >> for the record, it doesn't appear the video is moving but could you hear the audio. Were you able to explain why you included that particular clip in your investigation? >> yes, sir. After receiving facebook warrant or the return of everything, problems we have with what occurred or evidence of supporting the formal charge by lieutenant tuttle and then after finding these, I went back to body cam videos and video streamed by Ms. Williams. I was able to on this one where officer middleton had told Ms. Williams to yell f commander holland, I was able to go through the body cam video of our officers that were in front of headquarters that tonight, link up right after he told her or sent the message to her on facebook that she came out and said it proving what he teld her to say, she did. >> and inley view of the message and there were many, many paix... (Inaudible) But was there any indication that you saw when officer middleton was providing this information or recommendations to Ms. Williams that he said don't use it or anything of that nature? >> no. >> show government video exhibit 2, please. >> I got a message for y'all. Why y'all never mad when mascoe hassles back people in the community. Why y'all never mad. Y'all get mad but when mascoe hassles black people from the community. But you got white officers sitting through... (Inaudible). >> I know this one officer. >> and the white officers they don't get in trouble but y'all got a black officer who fucked a white woman and you want to do fucked up shit to them. >> what abut the one officer that was running around. >> there is no video showing. >> he's the one running around... I remember... Is there a way to optimize the video? Did they already do that when these were open before, did anyone optimize the video? >> the issue apparently is bandwith issue and they're working on it downstairs if we can be patient for a minute see if we can get the video up and running. >> mayor, the videos are playing on our computer that we are playing them back from, so I'm checking to see if maybe it is a bandwith issue because we are seeing them down here. I do understand they're freezing up for everybody else though so we are working on it. >> thank you. The black people in the community... we are going to try to load that on a different computer. Give us a moment, please. >> why y'all never mad with -- to the black people in the commute. I don't want the media here, I don't want no live stream. But why never mind, y'all get mad, y'all get -- to the black people, multiple black people in the community. But y'all got a white officers sitting -- and they don't get in trouble the. >> and the one officer said this bitch dbt get in trouble and you got a black officer doing some. >> one of the officer -- I remember I told him and shortly after the officers began making a statement. The mother fucker, we got the mother -- fucking, with you realize they piece -- all kinds of mother fucking information. -- not going to be allowed -- . >> are the people in the ambulance cops or ambulance people? >> I don't know. >> who the fuck y'all with. >> y'all cops or ambulance people? >> we know the fire department is going to be here out. >> that is what they did to mariah. >> how can you bitch ass -- . >> come on, bitches, oink oink, come on, bring your ass out here, bitches. >> come here. >> bit-of-motherfucker, she committed a crime for putting officer out there against a white officer that -- mother fucking white ass, -- y'all we -- we don't want this shit. >> we don't give no fuck -- . >> it is an incident where spher midelton told her information where on this date -- excuse me, the witness is not on video. >> when you started the video -- . >> mayor, we see him on the screen. >> yes, he's visible. All right, we're going to get started now. >> on this date from what I recall, the -- were arrested and she came down there, had been arrested, she was very upset and she sent officer middleton a message stating how upset she was. She send a pessage that said -- so at that point in time officer middleton provided other personal information, other statements for her to make. On this scanner, out of pocket camera, the department had changed tactics on what officers were assigned so there was if bodycam available to watch. And we were able to capture them on the live video feed that Ms. Taylor was recording on her facebook live. These comments that she made over the mega phone were the same comments that officer middleton -- I thought that was important in this investigation because throughout the interview, his statements were -- she knew not to make any statements that, we are just friends, you don't understand why I am doing it, I felt this particular capture of the video showed them you had to have known that he was going to go live because he was providing her that information. >> I will refer you back to page 2 --- where he says here. >> yes. >> that is where -- you were able to match up that to where she was asked for information. >> that is correct. I had to go to our intel unit and get the video. >> also you are saying something to the effect of -- in the video where she something to the effect. >> she stated I believe in the comment that you have been outed as a racist to amanda thompson. >> the question on that is -- . >> it appeared -- . >> the facebook message again, facebook was given us to, I did not have the capture of the intelligence document that they gave us. On this message here it talks about how proud he is of Miss Williams as she is running the protest downtown. He drove around trying to identify plain clothes officers that there were, he said he saw the two, I won't say the words. He did see two of the uniform guys. My concern was bringing this up -- May concern was he was talking about identified white police officers. >>. >> that is not audio, audible for us. >> this would have been one of your first. >> it wouldn't be first, it would have been one of the first. >> so it would have been August. >> did you have any involvement in the matter before August 5th -- . >> we have nothing to do, I can only assume you are talking about this -- . Never had a conversation with anybody. I haven't talked to anybody outside other than the beginning documents for the investigation. I have not been a part of the conversation. >> I imagine it is a tough position -- (Low audio). >> it is. >> folks investigating the officers have no -- (Low audio). >> we were good friends. >> in fact he -- that fellow officers had. >> no, he did not. >> the issue is up with of the fellow officers said to him turn your black ass face around. Were you aware of that. >> I was a aware of that but I -- (Low audio). >> who made you aware of it. >> another officer. >> the officer that aid it. >> no. >>. >> I heard about t I was working day shift. I had a friend that was upstairs, they were carrying the conversation on, I could hear he was noticeably upset about something. Didn't say anything to me, I asked the other sergeant what was going on. >> let me ask you this, there was a racial slur insult mut erred. Tell the council if you would what was done to the officer. >> I'm not aware of any investigation. I don't think he complained to any supervisor -- (Low audio). >> so officer middleton would have to file a complaint. `just bringing to your attention is not enough. >> he never brought it to my attention. >> my thinking at that time was I talked to the other supervisor that had the disagreement with and a few days later it was pie understanding that. >> is that consistent with this department's protocol about how to deal with racial slurs and other. >> I've not been involved in it to give you an answer. >> do you know what the protocol is? >> if he had made a complaint to me I would have -- but there was no complaint ever made to me. >> did you have a discussion about it. >> I don't recall a discussion with him, no, sir. >> the officer who made that claim is now a lieutenant; is that correct? >> yes. >> all right, so you were appointed to lead this piu investigation into officer middleton. Who asked you. >> -- back low audio). >> and based upon officer tut he'll -- tuttle investigation he brought -- (Low audio). >> the entire disciplinary process of the police department related to that charge of discipline tear -- (Low audio). >> I don't know. >> you have a very clear process -- . >> correct. >> an officer is accused by someone in the department, what happens what document -- (Low audio). >> aha! Happens when a formal complaint is filed. >> I took the 4300 pages of documents and I started searching those, looking for everything, that I thought would be a problem or thought would be a problem and. >> and an officer that is subject to -- has certain rights as a police officer. What are those rights. He was informed that this is where you intergate. 48 hours. >> yes. >> 48 hours before you intergate the officer middleton, why is he told he is being investigated. >> I don't know what he was told. (Low audio). >> that is what we were investigating, that is what was determined. >> and the nature of the comments that were made by officers throughout this -- (Low audio). >> did you ever ask officer middleton -- . >>. >> how would you generally describe information -- it was -- . >> I don't know what he is thinking. I would say you would have to ask him. >> you read all the -- (Low audio). >> it is based opinion racial -- . >> you were very reflective, would never really tell us why he did it. >> the entire conversation with us in the interview was just as we talk, vebting, you don't understand, it's just -- (Low audioback (So I don't know why. >> one of the allegations was that he had provided copies of -- (Low audio). >> emails and texts that outline staffing, operational -- . >>. >> the document that you were handed, is that a document that you -- I will refer to it -- if you turn to the page -- the first paragraph and read that first par a graph. >> officer middleton tells Ms. Williams -- (Low audio). >> did you see emails or texts -- . >> is that the law enforcement communications about staffing, operational -- . >> there was -- (Low audio). >> it was from an evergreen text that went out to everybody. >> how is that staffing, operational -- . >>. >> so you are saying that employer requests anybody that comes -- overtime pay -- . >> the call out,. >> he said they were, I never said they were. >> the text that dpoas out goes to all members of in the emergency response, along with the drivers -- . >> that basically tells them. >> tells them there is an an emergency -- (Low audio). >> (Low audio). >> you indicate he wasn't -- . >>. >> I don't believe so, ask youd him -- the next par a tbraf on the bottom of page 2, you asked him a question about whether he provided any -- such as rosters, emails. Now -- . >> he wrote it -- (Low audio). >> did you correct him? >> did I correct him, no. He asked the question of rosters >> I didn't know that he had done this other. so we weren't trying to trick him. We were trying to make shawr he had all of the information. >> you gave no concern, didn't respond. >> correct. >> maybe he didn't understand. >> the next incident involved a black officer ryan -- (Low audio). >> I think that someone else, a lady got on a -- a and accused him of certain inappropriate conduct; is that correct. >> that is what I understand. >>. >> did you understand. >> that what occurred but -- (Low audio). >> what occurred is someone else got on -- and accused officer kol -- . >> it goes on and on talking about how hurt he was by the allegations. And the fact that he believed the lie had been done when officer middleton told sarah williams. >> from what I understand -- (Low audio). >> well, did you write this report. >> is that a question. >> it is. >> yeah, I wrote that report. >> and in the report you know specifically that he believed the lie had been done -- Miss Williams -- he also had a hard tame understanding why officer middleton would give sarah williams this -- (Low audio). >> he believed -- is. >> the officer came from someone else. >>. >> (Low audio) So there was an allegation made against officer collins. >> correct. >>. >> correct. >> you are an officer with piu, was that allegation investigated. >> it was not. >> why is that. >> because we don't do investigations. We're not allowed to do investigation unless there is a formal complaint that was filed. >> and there wasn't? >> (Low audio). >> if you know about it and st wrong, you don't have to investigate as long as. >> there was an allegation -- but there was no evidence that -- (Low audio). >> there was in formal dplaint opened that would have allowed us. >>. >> we did not get a formal complaint. >> let May did you this, when you see this,. >> that would be the same misconduct charge that officer williams -- . >> now I also find it interesting that despite this -- (Low audio). >> did you ask officer -- you didn't ask him. >> no. >> were you in the room, did you read that. >> I read it. >> did you find anything about that -- . >> the next complaint is the basis of this new charge. Let me ask you this, the piu is now charging officer middleton -- (Will audio) Count 3. >> in fact no one filed a report. No one filed a report. >> (Low audio). >> and I guess they or someone at piu could have gone back and filed for a formal charge that he lied to you during the piu investigation and he could have been intergated and -- read that statement to see if -- in reading the statement you are accusing him of lying. He didn't Dr. V that. It was skipping the whole process. >> (Low audio). >> there was no reason for us to -- to make it look like we are -- . >> when an officer is charged with misconduct, when an officer is subject to a disciplinary charge, how does that charge -- . >> you charged with a form 111. In this case with respect to count three of the allegation, in the piu, was that began by. >> it was not. >> did he have an opportunity to be interviewed and asked questions about the allegations. >> his sper views were -- (Low audio). >> did he have an opportunity to discuss the allegation that he would be charged with. >> the operation says ---- (Low audio). >> so the actual basis of that charge filed or not is that he -- exactly what he would say. What I want you to do is turn to page -- 7 and I want you to read verbatim what you wrote about this alleged -- . >>. >>. >> during an interview with officer middleton was asked specifically if he ever turned his radio on wile off duty to monitor police activity. His response was an immediate absolutely not. >> I would like to stop you there. He was asked specifically if he ever turned his radio on while he was off duty to monitor. That is what you say you specifically asked him. >> that is what was in the report. >> you wrote that. You wrote that during the interview he was asked. >> if he was -- (Low audio). >> now I what like you to read the question that was asked. -- if you could read what you asked, and that way -- (Low audio) The record is referring to the transcript provided to us by officer middleton's -- low audio) (. >>. >> I want to be very clear in what was asked. (Low audio). >> if you could read the question that was asked by -- . >> did you use your portable radio at all to monitor -- monitor -- while. >> low audio). >> let me read back what you wrote. >> during an interview with officer middleton he was asked specifically if he had ever turned his radio on while he was off duty to monitor police activity. Was that the question that was asked? >> did you use your portable radio -- (Low audio prak (. >> and you wrote what his response was. Tell -- . >>. >> his response was absolutely. >> he was talking at the same time as I recall -- . >> you are saying to me that the transcript provide, the initial transcript that I was provided as part of the piu investigation is wrong and even though it says absolutely you recall that it mebt absolutely not. >> I believe if you go further in the transcript, it was asked you are changing your story because it was absolutely not before and now absolutely. >> I would like council to read that transcript, are you right, you say to him you said absolutely not earlier. He says I don't remember. He's very clear after you do the straighten up conversation, it becomes very clear that he doesn't remember. Do you recall that. >> I recall that -- recall that. But he -- there is a list we show him that his radio was used. That is when he started to get, well, maybe I don't mer officer. -- . >> so you, let May ask you this, at the end of the day he told you that he wasn't sure he turned on his radio -- (Low audio). >> you say he told you that, the transcript that I received, you said he said absolutely. >> I think you are reading too it. >> well, it's funny, I think you are reading into it. >> as it relates to the activity, it is not a policy violation to listen to the radio there st no information that you have at all, from the radiolog radiolog -- did he ever provide anything that -- of all the things that you could come up with respect that that the radio logue was -- . >> (Low odd areio). >> this -- 7 involves a conversation between officer middleton and sarah about officer -- (Low audio (. >> and there was basically, I'm trying to stay away -- there is an allegation there that some one had approached the sergeant 's -- that sarah had approached dns dns. >> repeat the question. >> it is alleged that -- there is text communication between officer middleton and sarah wherein he talks about -- (Low audio). >> and injury jarrod told you that he his wife had informed that he was -- by sarah williams. And I will read you that part. It says quote while he was interviewing sarah williams -- counsel of -- she told him Miss Williams made multiple% statements that mirrored exactly what the -- (Low audio) So basically what sergeant jarrod told you is that yes, I confirmed that she took that officer provided by the officer and used it against -- . >> he thought that his ex-wife, she had said that that is obviously -- because she sent those things, the allegations that are written in the text. (Low audio). >> would you be interested to see that. >> I don't know exactly when it happened, that incident. I just know the officer -- (Low audio). >> suppose you have the entirety of the conversation, and that information was not -- (Low audio). >> I would like to play a video for you, lieutenant, representing the video of the interview of sarah williams -- williams -- (Low audio). >> met forrical -- . >> are you ready. >> uh-huh. >> respond first. >> the lawsuit is allegationing that there were lies told with every breathe of my body and every breathe of my children I know the stated facts and the truth. The ability of people in a white supremacist mindset to tell lies to justify their illusion, in historical and has been going on for centuries. It proves -- no different than the proof you -- it has been going on for centuries an justified with lies for centuries. >> okay, I want you to talk to us specifically about the -- . >> stewart -- as reported, per his former neighbor that used to live next to him heard the cries of his wife being beat, who had his. >> were police called. >> cps report was filed. >> why weren't police called. >> okay, maybe as a white woman you don't understand in calling the police on sphis, just like -- has a formal complaint filed against the conduct backed up with a video of him repeatedly punching a teenager and -- autistic teen I believer to the face which goes against the use of force continueium and does count as misconduct and police brutality and nothing has happened to him. >> did you see officer stewart. >> nobody saw officer stewart's black eyewitnesses you can look on the video, as he finishes beating this child, and see him come up on the person who was hitting on him to push two bystanders out of the way. I worked six years as a nurse. I know how to assess appropriately. He had not one red mark, scratch, bruise or anything else on his face. That is why the news had to change their story. Go back and look up the news article that were published the night the incident happened. Then go back and pull up the news stories published after the video went viral, attempting to say oh, he had injuries that required treatment. And then they had tho change, oh, it was an injury that had to be treated at the scene. No, you can see be o the video, there were no marks to his face. Whatsoever. And we have officer from the open requests found guilty of mks conduct and given disciplinary action as for punching a suspect who was handcuffed just like this child. He was cuffed -- this person, bit the off officer flowers, punched him in his face. They still found him guilt -- guilty of misconduct. Why aren't you -- he repeatedly. >> if they did one time and he was handled the way you agreed to have been handled, what is your problem with this one. And sci that. >> it wasn't handled. >> explain to me how it was handled. >> if you still have a question because they did not complete the investigation. Even though there were formal complaints. >> a video to back it up. It clarily shows him with a closed fist punching this child repeatedly. I have worked six years as a nurse. I worked at good sam where officer come with the paddy wagon to pull up and drop off people who were conducting in vy lent and aggressive ways. I don't care if they bite me, if they spit on me, if they punch me, I do not return any physical harm and continue working as a nurse. Nor keep my nursing license so why do officers get to do this? There is a prb there. He has not been held accountable. He did not get demoted. They a abolished opinion to make it seem like maybe we won because they knew we had a army -- an open record request that show stewart's previous discipline for INSUBrd nation from a normal complaint filed by the resident -- he has a pattern of behavior. >> I will let you have the last word on that. But I want to go back to about the alleged child abuse where there was not a police officer called, not a report that was taken. >> okay, do you realize -- do you realize -- that in previous -- so in previous attempts, of me attempting to deal with lpd to file charges on people in communities, in this community who are guilty of things, ie brandon dunn who showed up at my house and threat inned me with the video to back it up -- no, no, I went to lpd to file charges. I talked to the detective andre cryer who also in the -- just recently received has a history of not treating people correctly or taking them seriously and also changing reports without noting why, for people who come in and attempt to file criminal complaints against people. He tried to tell me one, that I had show can be hit with harassment, which I already had an attorney look at that video and knew there was -- did not strike him, nothing. >> you want to talk about having your -- I can't include all of this, we're talking about the issue at hand. >> and I'm telling yu there was no call to the police. >> you are saying because you are known to them. You told me it was a neighbor or friend of a neighbor who heard these allegations, why didn't that pernlg call. >> there are a lot of people, sitting there making accusations that show we had had an inside officer feeding us information about undercover officers. I don't think lpd, ffop and the racist white people who support them understand how many white people in this community support account ability for lpd. And that -- give that information all the time. We had a larson campaign, multiple white people who worked with him are witness to how racist he is, could not go on record, give us that information. There are plenty of people in this community who cannot go public like I do. I don't have a job with the count -- you filed this lawsuit. The irs can't even collect what the fuck they want. >> language. >> I exist in a position where nobody can come touch me. You can try, watch what happens. It is going to be proven to be lies. >> do you think that is okay, if another person was doing that to your kids, you have six of them, would you be okay with it? >> it has already happened. >> somebody already did. >> well, is anything coming of it. >> it was proved to be false. >> I know this to be true. And if he is going to beat a child like that, ask any psychologist, okay, if he is going to beat a child like that in public with everybody watching, you have to question what he does behind closed doors. >> it is not about her, it's the truth. >> I am talking to you, I have given you the opportunity to talk. >> I mean if you want me -- no, this is the first time I have talked to you. >> no, I talked to. >> okay, that is where y'all problems with the difference between me and her. I'm done. >> okay. >> come on, let's go, daniel is gone, we need to be gone too. >> she wanted to bait mee. >> I know, but daniel is gone and we need. >> all right, so you just saw what appeared to be -- (Low audio). >> did you see anywhere in there that the lan gage -- mirrored the information that sarah williams -- . >> not really but we -- investigating Miss Williams activity or what she said. (Low audio). >> you brought him in to interview, throughout the interview -- you asked questions about how did this affect you? Did he say to you well, my ex-wife told me that all of this stuff came out during an interview. That appears not to be true. Is the rest of it true? The fact that he says you know, I had a good, trusting working officer with officer -- is that true? >> I have no reason to believe -- it is untrue. Our investigation was. >> I with would like you to take a look -- . >> do you know what you are looking at it. >> (No audio prak (. >> no. >> that is a -- that shows officer midelton -- (No low audio). >> someone sent to officer -- did he tell but that? >> no, sir. >> did sergeant jared tell but that. >> I learn that officer middleton posted on facebook -- of inappropriate memes that he posted. >> you are saying that officer -- . >> I knew there were friends and there was an incident where officer middleton posted something. >> and you take everything -- everything the. >> I have seen the meme, the one that officer middleton posted. So I had no reason not to believe -- . >> the last post we tacked about -- well, let me ask you -- you -- (Will audio). >> then he said it strained the relationship they once had. Now can you put that in there to show -- you know, it also shows how it affected our officers ability to work with him. >> did you ever ask officer middleton -- (Low audio (Back. >> the last incident that I want to talk to you about, apparently -- charge (Low audio). >> he said he was riding around watching them protest. He was not riding around as an officer, right, he was riding around as a citizen. In that he said he was trying to see who was there -- (Low audio) Reportedly he never gave any information about -- to anyone -- . >> and plain clothes you are undercover, they May not be a layperson but plain clothes is undercover. >>. >> I was not with them, I know that there were instances where there were peopleout there. He indicated he was driving around and he wanted to see who was there. >> it was a concern to me that he identified officer. >> it concerned pe that he identified two spheres in uniform. >> their -- (Low audio). >> but he gave out those -- made the comment, the concern was he could have identified them. >>. >> (Low yawd -- low audio). >> mayor, I'm sorry to interrupt. On the schedule, the break is scheduled for 5:15. Yes ma'am. (Low audio) Did you want to go ahead and hear five or six more minutes and then break. >> yes right after he makes that statement. He says I should have went ahead and stood out there. Is that correct? So is consider the fact that he wasn't driving around to identify those officers to sarah williams because he didn't. He was maybe wanting to know who was out there because he didn't feel comfortable that he would be judged, if he stood out and supported the protestors. >> what I considered was jervis was very excited about the -- that was occurring and he wanted to be a part of it. I believe that is why he was down there circling and watching, identifying police officers. Like I said, the uniform officers he identified, make sure knew who they were and my concern would be to identify plain clothes but -- . >> and so after the conclusion of your interview, after you had proven the entirety of your investigation, you presented this piu. >> the process is I presented it to my commend -- commander and assistant chief. >>. >> just for counsel's reference, what went through the cliff -- was the single charge. >> it was what was presented to us. >>. >> now let me ask, is there any other -- (Low audio prak (. >> let's go a he had and take a break. Audio) We are -- it has the findings, determination unfolding. So you'll need that with you when we go into closed session. Okay, let's get back to it. And at 6:30, we are going to break for a half hour. So I believe Mr. Sparks, you had finished, correct? All right. Now are there anymore questions for the lieutenant? >> you were asking about officer holland? >> correct. >> there is an officer holland and the council has heard from a different holland. They're not the same people. >> no sir. >> is it your understanding that the question you were asked referred to officer ryan holland as opposed to roger holland (Low audio). >> yes, sir. >> and I want to briefly recover -- I want to recover an issue. As far as the form formal complaint filed, only addressing an misconduct, I showed this earlier to a witness. Pair braf three also indicates that one of the allegations were that officer middleton released department information. My question to you is, the council has the transcript, given a full opportunity during his interview to address the governmental operations including the eru callout in the email? >> yes, he was and we had. >> is it your understanding based on the department that officers understand or perhaps are even informed going into these interviews the importance of being truthful with public integrity unit. >> absolutely. >> until you interviewed somebody and given them the opportunity to give their statement -- (Low audio). >> no. >> as far as truthfulness, with respect to whether or not he turned his radio on and was monitoring radio traffic. The transcript speaks for itself. Did you feel like you gave him a full and fair opportunity to address that issue? >> yes, sir. >> do you feel that yourself and lieutenant brotherton let him know that you didn't believe he was being honest (Low audio)? >> yes. >> and with respect to the radio issues, the interviews later to couple that is in the packet, based on your investigation clear June 1 he was not on duty, correct? >> correct. >> you gave him the opportunity to review that showing he did in fact turn on his radio after in fact denying it. >> we did with the powerpoint slide. You were asked questions about the issues that came up much -- is that, did that come from some other... >> I believe the memes are involving sergeant brian jarrod? You indicated there was a trade of memes or they traded memes? >> from what I understand, yes, sir. >> did you have any information or understanding what the memes supposedly officer middleton... >> at the time of the interview we did not. I have learned from the, since then, after the interview, about the memes from officer middleton to sergeant jarrod several years ago. >> have you had a chance to gain some information what they entailed. >> just by talking to sergeant jarrod. Have I not been able to talk to officer middleton. But sergeant jarrod did explain to me what the memes entailed. >> were you provided with a copy? >> I was provided with a copy last night. Sergeant jarrod emailed me a cop of it and last night I forwarded it to you all. >> can you generally describe what the meme was? >> it was a homeless individual that was in, for lack of a better words, really short shorts, maybe even a type of a speedo with no shirt on and shoes and from what I understand from what sergeant jarrod toll told me as that officer middleton had tran supposed transposed his face on to the meme putting it on facebook tagging sergeant jarrod into the post. The way sergeant jarrod found out about it was assistant chief, I don't know what he would have been at the time, assistant chief maynard called him up, told him to remove the picture from the facebook. He explained that how he found out about it. There was a second meme that was also posted that brian described to me as another homeless individual, I believe, the same one, that was wearing a sexually suggestive t-shirt with an arrow pointing towards his crotch and he once again transposed sergeant jarrod's face on to that. >> photo shopped it. >> yes, sir. >> that's all the redirect I have. >> thank you. >> clarify the position. Let me ask you this. Do you believe in process? >> sure. >> do you believe an officer is entitled to full protections of kentucky police officer bill of rights? >> absolutely. >> and you believe an officer is entitled to the full benefit of the rights vested through him through the lexington P.D. >> yes, sir. That is in fact through collective bargaining. >> sure. >> and those rights include the right to be informed about the reason for the charge before you are being interrogated. Would you agree with that? >> by our policy and by the contract, yerks he was advised... >> I'm not asking you that. I said you are entitled to have what you are being accused of before. >> I answered that, yes, sir. Mr. Horn has asked for a side bar so council will be back in a couple of minutes. Okay, we will resume, Mr. Sparks. >> yes, your honor, and in the interest of nutrition, I'll move along. I'll say I'm finished for now. Would I like to reserve the right to recall him. okay. >> I have no more questions. >> okay. But we cannot dismiss the witness because Mr. Sparks -- (Low audio) Okay. Do you have any other witnesses to call? >> yes, mayor, commander brad ingram. commander brad ingram. it's okay to remove your mask and I'll ask the clerk to go ahead and swear in the witness. >> yes ma'am. You will remain under oath until your testimony is completed and you are released as a witness please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> thank you. thank you. Mr. Wright. >> can you state your full name for the record, please? >> bradley ingram. >> a sworn officer by the lexington police department. >> yes. >> your rank. >> commander. >> whats your current assignment? >> bureau of investigations. >> back in the summer of 2020, were you previously assigned to a different department or division within the department? >> yes, I was still under the bureau of investigation, but my assignment at the time was the police integrity unit. >> during that time during the police integrity unit would you have supervised the lieutenant in the conduct of rom investigation that occurred around August 2020? >> yes. >> and are you familiar with that particular investigation? >> yes, I am. >> in your role as commander, would you have reviewed the investigation prior to it being forwarded out of the police integrity unit? >> yes. >> I'm going to hand you exhibit 7, the current general order for disciplinary matters as well as the charges that have been filed in the particular matter (Low audio). >> yes. all right. We have a quick side bar. We'll be right back. All right, Mr. Wright. I believe you May continue. >> thank you, mayor. >> does that appear to be the full and complete copy of general order I believe is it 1973. >> yes, it does. And what does that general order set forth as far as disciplinary process. >> set forth all the standards of conduct governing officers. >> yes. >> and in this particular matter have you reviewed the charges the formal charges filed before council some this case, exhibit 9, I believe. >> yes. >> and in your review of that, do those track the standard of conduct. Misconduct, dissemination of information and I apologize, I don't have the third one in front of me but has to do with the allegation of whether or not truthful during the interview are those under the current general orders? >> yes, they do. >> how many years have you been employed by the department of police. >> 2 wreers. >> how long was your tenure within the public integrity unit. >> approximately two and a half years. And could you briefly go over the standard for officer misconduct as far as what that particular standard requires? >> yes. >> under the operational rules 1.02 is misconduct and that is defined as officer shall conduct themselves at all times both on and off duty in such a manner to reflect most favorably on the department and to not cast doubt on the officer's integrity, honesty, judgment or character, misconduct of an officer shall include that which tends to bring the department (Low audio) Or reflect discredit on the officer as an employee of the department or that which tends to impair the operation and efficiency of the department or officer. (Low audio) Could you review that standard of dissemination? >> operational 1.15, dissemination of or interference with written or electronic information officer shall treat the official business of the department as confidential. Information regarding confidential business shall be disseminated only to those for whom it is interest intended. Officers will only access, use, remove or copy informaion from the reports from the department facility or strong device to accomplish law enforcement purpose. >> based upon your years at the department, you briefly describe - your understanding as a commander and your role from the public integrity unit and other role as commander, how officers are trained and developed through the course of their careers and what generally is imparted to them as far as the official communications or official information with respect to when and who it should not be disseminated to the public? >> so as part of our training, all of our officers are required to know our general orders. While there are many, they are required to know them. The disciplinary procedures cover all the conduct and the two I specifically read pertain to officer middleton and the charges brought against him. The dissemination of information specific to operational planning or matters that we are sending out to our employees on work, on operations, on what we are doing, should go without saying, should be held confidentially and should only be disseminated amongst ourselves, the other officers. It's been the policy. It's our expectations. It's the expectation of the command staff that you know, we shouldn't have to repeatedly tell our people, you know, what is confidential information and what is law enforcement sensitive information. It should go without saying, but it is in the policy and very specific on how that is defined. >> and just based upon the amount of time that you have had with the department, you believe that something an officer, over time, should well know? >> I would say most certainly. >> thank you. Could you briefly review the standard of conduct for charge 3 and what section that is under the general order? Under the operational rules and again operational rule 1.18, general conduct, officer shall be truthful in all matters and shall not lie, falsify, conceal, purposefully distort, embellish diminish or fail to full fully disclose facts associated with law enforcement business. >> from your experience as the commander of the public integrity unit, an officer is called in to give an interview with the piu, you have an understanding or insight as to whether officers are fully aware that they need to be completely honest with the investigators? >> yeah and I would say as law enforcement officers, our standards and expectations apply. Again, this is in policy talk about being truthful and honest, again, that should go without question and every police officer and their conduct in the profession, to be honest in all matters. >> thank you. I don't have any other questions. thank you, Mr. Sparks. Do you want to question? >> yes. Good evening, sir. >> good evening. You are being called -- you weren't actually a part of the investigation in this case, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> you weren't active in the information. >> that's correct. >> so you are here more or less to testify about what the policies are, is that a fair statement? >> I think that's a fair statement. And the policies that you just read were the basis of the charges that officer middleton is facing. And the second charge... (No audio) We've talked about the first charge, misconduct. You were just informing the council about the second charge, which is the dissemination of information. Is that right? >> yes. And it's defined as what you just read 7 l. Can you tell the jury the first offense of violating dissemination of information order? What is the recommended punishment? >> for the first offense under that is the recommendation of a one-month suspension. And what is the second offense recommendation? If you commit the offense, you are found guilty, of it and then you go and do it again a second time. What is the recommended punishment for that? >> six month suspension. >> and then if you do it a third time, what is the recommendation? >> termination. >> that's all the questions I have for this officer. >> thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness? >> no, mayor, thank you. >> no ma'am. is there any reason to keep him? Can he be released? All right. Commander ingram, you May go. And Mr. Wright, do you want to call your next witness. >> I'm passing the microphone to Mr. Horn and we call chief weathers. chief weathers. >> soily ask the clerk to please swear in the witness. >> yes ma'am. >> you remain under oath until your testimony is completed andy are released as a witness. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> I do. Thank you. >> thank you. Mr. Horn. >> thank you, mayor. >> can you state your full name for the record, please, please. >> lawrence weathers. >> what is your position? >> chief of police. >> how long have you been the chief of police? >> almost three years. >> how many years of experience in policing do you have? >> almost 32. >> and part of those, you retired from the lexington police department. >> yes. >> how many years did you have when you retired? >> 27. >> you obviously know why we are here today. You signed charges against officer middleton,. >> correct. >> can you explain how you came to file charges against officer middleton? >> after the public integrity unit did their investigation, they found that officer middleton was, in fact in violation of policy and procedure. He was referred to the disciplinary review board. The disciplinary review board went over that and they came back with a recommendation of termination and I agreed with that recommendation of termination. >> so you reviewed the the summary that came to you from the piu. >> after the piu investigation, I reviewed the summary and referred it to the disciplinary review board. >> disciplinary review board made a recommendation to you. >> yes. And I accepted their recommendation. >> but under your rules, you didn't have to. Is that correct? >> no, sir, I did not. >> and their recommendation was dismissal and the first charge that has been brought against officer middleton is misconduct. Can you explain to the council why you think he should be dismissed for that? >> >> the allegation made was that he provided informaion that could be used to insult, intimidate and harass our officers while they were at work while they were working a protest. According to the general orders, that was looked at unfavorably as an officer. >> how else did it impact the operation of the (Low audio). >> it made us have to adjust our tactics and what we do and how we assign officers and where we assign them and he had additional supervisors to help monitor the situation that were going on especially as an officer being singled out being attacked verbally. The supervisor would have to go in and remove that officer and find another officer to replace. >> so to make sure that I understand, during the protest when officers were, and I'll say on the line because that's just the way I understand it, you switched to if an officer is called out individually, you remove them from the line. >> and had to fill that with another officer. >> yes. >> and you would probably agree with me that officers are trained very well in maintaining their calm, their composure. >> we gave several talks to our officers about being patient, tolerant and disciplined and we gave instruction to the supervisor out there and ensured it would happen. I can't control how an officer is going to feel emotionally when something out there happens, but putting the extra supervisors out there helps minimize that. >> is it fair for me to, having not engaged in policing, to say that a protest, and officers serving on the protest, that's a high stress high anxiety time? >> it was those protests were very highationite for the officers: there were protests all over the country and some of them did have violence sobered with them. Although we didn't experience physical violence, there was a lot of verbal abuse and those types of things can cause eye anxiety, too, so it was very high pressure situation. >> so when officers were being yelled at through the megaphone or face to face, spit at, we expect our officers to maintain their calm. >> yes, sir. >> with your years of experience in policing, if you are in a situation like that and suddenly singled out, does it frighten -- does it heighten that anxiety and stress? >> it does. It heightens it a great deal, even when I was out there on the line and watching officers being confronted, it was difficult for them to control their emotions but that's what we ask them to do and that's what we expect them to do. >> and as I recall during these protests across the united states there were officers officials being singled out some of them being protested at their homes. Do you remember that? >> yes, sir, I heard some of that, yes, sir. >> and some of them were being -- some of there I families were being threatened. >> yes, sir. >> do you believe it's your experience that your own officers experienced some of those things here? >> I heard some of them I heard some of them get insults and threats made to go to their house, yes, sir. >> chief, the second charge relates to the dissemination of information and I think you are familiar with those charges, specifically relates to a screen shot of an eru callout and email about officers having to (Low audio) Can you explain why you believe that violates the operational rule of dissemination? >> I think the operational rule is clear. It says anything. So regardless of whether you think it's confidential or not, the operational rule is clear. You are not supposed to release it. >> and then the final charge is dishonesty. Did you read the interview that officer middleton gave to piu. >> I read the transcript. >> and do you feel like the charge of dishonesty is warranted against officer middleton? >> I felt like in reading the transcript, he did not give a truthful answer at first and then when the evidence was presented, that he did in fact monitor the radio, and he switched his answer up. >> I'm going to bring what you has been premarked government exhibit 10. (No audio) >> what have you there is marked as a certified copy from the clerk's office of a prior discipline for officer middleton. Is that corrected? ? >> yes, sir. >> and you obviously remember that incident and the discipline? >> yes, sir. >> so at the time of this incident and these charges, officer middleton had already received a demotion... >> yes, sir. >> and that demotion. Is the date of that on the exhibit of when he was demoted? >> the date of the fine? >> yes. >> dated June 24, 2019. >> so if this conduct then occurred in late May, early June, is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> and so that's what, seven or eight months this occurred after he received his demotion. >> yes. So, can you, in this case, in this particular case can you summarize why you are recommending dismissal? >> for me it was simple. given the prior discipline and the nature of that and then the nature of what he was accused of, I felt like the discipline that he received last time should have been a message to him and allow him to come back and become the officer that I know he can be and after this, I just can't see him coming back. For me, it was a violation of trust, a violation of the position that he holds as a police officer, you know, he is entrusted to protect the public but he is also entrusted to protect his fellow officers and if he can't do that, he can't be here. >> is it fair for me to believe that during a protest, the job of the police, and I think we May have said this, is to maintain peace, order, protect the property and protect... >> and it's also our job to allow those people who are protesting to have their say. >> and by attempting to upset another officer, is that contrary to that mission? >> it's contrary because you don't know what is going to happen, you know to me, when you provide information like officer middleton is accused of providing those kinds of words can incite somebody. I equate them to almost like fighting words. Like you give somebody an insult. I've seen fights start and I think we probably all have convenient fights start. They don't start with people punching each other. They start with people calling each other names and while we are trying to maintain all that calm, composure and discipline out on the line and somebody starts calling you nails and hit you with information and you find out that that information and those insults came from another officer that eaks your morale. >> as a credit to your officers, (Low audio). (Inaudible). >> they didn't react physically. Some of them did get emotional and they were removed from the line and to to be placed somewhere else. >> but none of them reacted in a physical manner towards (Low audio). >> no, sir. >> and in fact, lexington, with all the protests across the united states, probably had, I would say, the least incidents ... >> I would have to agree with that. >> but since our officers didn't react, since there was no incident that was caused by any of the information provided or attempted to be provided by officer middleton, do you still think he should be dismissed? >> you know, whether people like to believe this or not, verbal abuse is still violence. And that sticks with you, you know, some of the things that they were saying to some of my officers and some of the things they were saying about the officers families and even my family members. That sticks with you and I know some of the members on this council can appreciate this, you know, you can have somebody not threatening you, you know, directly, but they say things, they call you names and then they say, they know where you live. That shakes you a little bit. And I know some of you all have experienced that and that shook our officers. We are humans. We are not robots. And that's what we all have to remember here, you know, the things that happen out there happened out there. They weren't forced. They were a choice that somebody made. My officers were ordered to be out there, they were ordered to maintain their discipline, to be tolerant, to be respectful and be patient and they did that. And then there were people who tried to upset that. >> did you dismissing officer middleton because he was involved in the protests? >> no. Yo know, I understand why he was involved in the protest and I marched with some people. Some of my officers knelt. Being involved in the protest, for him to be involved seemed natural. He is being dismissed because of how he treated his fellow officers. Andite also, I have to ask you plainly not because of his race. >> of course not. >> of course not. >> and I need to ask you another, what I think is basic and obvious question, but as to dissemination of information, questions have indicated that biel you tell your spouse or somebody in the family so really this is a no harm no foul. Is that a fair comparison of sending screen thoughts and emails? >> of course not. You know, with some of your family members, you have a different bond than with the public. I will say this. If do you tell your family members and they go and tell somebody else and it gets out in the public, you are going to be in trouble you are going to be in violation. >> and again with the charges that were filed against officer middleton, do you feel like when you signed those, those were all legitimate charges and followed the process they should have followed? >> yes, sir, that followed the process we always follow, standard operating procedure. >> that's all I have right now. >> thank you. Council members, it is 6:28. And we did agree that you would have a dinner break at 6:30 to 7:00. Is that still what you would like to do? Or do you want to take the time from Mr. Sparks to question the chief? >> mayor, if it's appropriate, can we ask Mr. Sparks how long he might be? And if it is more than 15 minutes or so, I think we ought to break. >> okay. How long, Mr. Sparks. >> how long total left? Trying to figure out how to answer? We've got a limited amount of time total and we are trying to keep track of it. >> I've got an hour and 40 minutes total just to be fair and honest, 15 to 20 minutes would be my expectation but that is often difficult to answer because sometimes questions lead to others. >> 20 minutes... Go ahead and break. >> yes. >> I would say break. >> so we will break and we'll come back here on the zoom at 7:00. Thank you. >> do you believe in the police accountability movement? >> yes. >> and you agree with me that lexington is and almost every place in the country needs to improve? Always room for improvement? >> I'll agree there is always room for improvement. >> are you aware that there are officers in the department, lieutenants and others, that believe that a police accountability is not an issue in the lexington police department? >> well, seeing as we select our police from the population and there are people in the population who believe that, I would have to say there is probably police officers on the force that believe that. >> are you aware that there are lieutenants in your command staff that do not believe there is any racism in the lexington police department? >> I herd one lieutenant say that. I would probably take issue with that. >> are you talking about when you heard him, that was his testimony before the subcommittee in August? >> I think it was a council meeting, yes, sir. >> do you expect that members of the piu that is charged with investigating officers, would be open to claims of racial bias if they/themes didn't believe that racism was real? >> I don't know. Would you have to question them, you know, about where they get that to belief from. >> were you aware that in this particular matter, that officer middleton had complained to others, he will testify he claimed directly to the lieutenant about being discriminated against in training here at the lpd. Were you aware of that? >> not until -- this is the first time I've heard about the lieutenant (Low audio). >> what I'm asking you is were you aware that someone brought to lieutenant berosic, someone brought that to him, that during a training here at the lpd, officer middleton was told to turn his black ass face around. >> I had heard that. >> do you know if anything was done to investigate that racial discrimination? >> I don't know if I was here at the time. >> last year was a horrible year for many reasons, certainly with covid situation and then with the tragic deaths that we saw. Would you agree with that? >> yes, sir. >> and when breonna taylor was killed in February in louisville , did you have any sessions where you got your officers together and told them, this was going to be a very difficult process for you to sort of deal with the public on these excessive force issues? >> I don't think when she was killed in February, all of the stuff that happened in louisville came to light. We did have discussions about it and we did have discussions that , you know, it was going to affect police departments around the country. >> did you have any discussions or any training or any counseling to officers of color, who May experience this different than a white officer? >> no, I didn't. But I talked with quite a few officers of color and we talk about it and some of them are still at the department and some of them are not. But I have an open door policy and some of them came to talk to me. Nobody asked for counseling. We do have eap and if they need it, we would have suggested it. >> so if someone comes to that open door and complains to you about racial bias and racial discrimination, is that something that you handle seriously? >> oh yeah. >> there is a specific sort of adopted process for a complainant being subjected to racial discrimination? >> what would I like to see, especially if someone came to me, I would refer the matter to either human resources and let them look at it first, which is was we typically do and if they don't want to do thinking, then public integrity unit would look at it. >> you would refer to it human resources or piu? >> yes, sir. >> you are aware, are you, that officer middleton has made a number of complaints about being subjected to racial bias here at the lexington police department? >> I am now. >> when were you first informed about this? >> some of the stuff I didn't know about. He made a claim in a grievance, but it was kind of broad and then the grievance was dropped and then he made claims in his interview that I sent to human resources and had the public integrity unit look at it as well. >> now you say he filed a grievance. Actually the fop, the fraternal order of police filed a grievance on his behalf said he was subjected to racial discrimination. You saw that before? >> yes, sir. >> and that encompassed an entire investigation that in the fop's eyes was done very bias and very discriminatory against him. That was their allegation. >> yeah, that was their allegation. But like I said, a grievance was dropped. >> the grievance was resolved as part of the resolution of those pending charges? >> yes. >> and in that pending charge that you brought up, let me just touch on that real quick. That was the prior discipline and in that prior discipline, it states that the sergeant failed to disclose the purpose of his request and follow departmental policy regarding additional patrol activities. That is what he ult maltly agreed to -- ultimately agreed to? >> yes, sir. >> (Inaudible). >> I think it speaks for itself in exhibit 10 and if the council wants to view the exhibit. >> and the other #eurbs that were reported to you -- or let me ask you, were they? Were you aware that someone had called officer middleton a token boy when he was the representative for the fop? >> I was not aware of that, no. In the last few weeks or days is when I started hearing about some of that stuff. I wish he had come and said soming to me about it. And I'm going to go further and listen to some of the things that I heard here, you know,. I don't know when some of this stuff happened but I'm going to make it clear that when it does happen, if it does happen again, that there is going to be a clear line to follow. I wasn't happy to listening to some of the things. I know people have good relationships with their friends and stuff like that and maybe some things get said during that and some people think well, that's just friendly banter. But in my opinion, right now, you can't do that, especially in light of what has happened in the last year or so. We know better. >> can you see how he would have felt like he is not going to get any help from the department `when they essentially did nothing for his multiple complaints of being discriminated against? Can you see how he felt? >> I can understand that but that's no justification for doing what he did. >> the incident involving the meme that was sent to him last year. Did you ever investigate that? >> no. The meme that was up here was the first time I ever saw that. >> talk about the moment about the protests that occurred here and let me be the first of many to commend you on the great job that lexington police department did in making sure that people were not surety hurt and it was a fair and peaceful protest for the most part, would you agree with that? >> like I said before, I have to look at it when you say peaceful some of them were very peaceful. Some of them were not violent. But not as peaceful because some of them did have -- they were calling officers names and being abusive and some of them... And I understand, but clearly on both sides of that, people could have taken it further and they didn't. >> and you mention that in your testimony earlier, you gave examples of all the very manies that -- all the violence that occurred and the fact that some officers had threats made to them in lexington and officers had to be pulled from the line and replaced because of names they were being called. Were any of those actual events related to jervis middleton? >> I couldn't tell you that for sure. >> well, the council has heard the testimony. So if you are the -- >> you are asking me about specific officers that were pulled away? >> you can't condemn him for actions of other people, so the actions... >> and I'm not. I'm just telling you in general, if they're yelling derogatory stuff at an officer, we have to pull them away. It May not have been his words or what he told somebody, but people were still yelling derogatory things and those were some of the reasons why we would pull officers away. Whether or not they were his or not, he was still part of it. >> I guess the question of whether or not his words produced any actual harm versus just his words producing hypothetical harm that, you're really not sure if he caused any of it. That's my question. Can you give me any examples where his words actually harmed the department versus a could have possibly harmed. >> like I said before, sometimes that perception can be a powerful thing and sometimes when people perceive that that harm might be imminent and it May not be, it can still be just as powerful. >> I suppose you read the entire piu record. >> the summary, yes. >> in making this recommendation for the highest punishment of all: temple nation. You have -- termination. You have read the summary. Have you read the transcripts of the piu interviews? >> yes. >> all of them? >> I've read the interview with officer middleton. >> but the other officers that were interviewed as part and gave testimony that were used to support that piu summary, did you review those? >> no. >> do you think your recommending termination in a case, that it would be relevant that you thoroughly consider the entire file? >> I trust my piu. I truft them in their investigative skills. >> let me ask you about that because we heard your piu officer testify just a moment ago and I gave him a copy of the transcript, and the question that he is asked, did you use portable radio at all to monitor police activity? The transcript says absolutely. And then there is an interruption, while she was... And he says absolutely not. You can read that 10 different ways. The most literal way to read it is, did you use your portable radio to monitor police activity and he said absolutely. But yet your piu interview spins it and says well, we asked him this question very clearly and he answered absolutely not. >> looking at the transcript that you are looking at, like you said, it can be interpreted 10 different ways and I interpreted it as there was a question being asked in the middle, which stopped the absolutely and then after the one word, then he finished, absolutely not. That's the way I took it. >> would you agree with me that there are many ways you can read that? >> yes, sir. >> and don't you think -- well let me ask you this. Under lexington's accepted disciplinary procedures for officers, he could have been called in and asked what did you mean here, officer middleton? Someone is accusing you of lying in your piu interview. How do you respond? Right? >> yes. >> was that done in this case? >> as far as him being brought in and asked if he was lying? >> yes. >> no, not that I'm aware of. >> you took the piu interview and it had concluded something other than what we discussed 10 different ways you could construe it. And you just went with the piu? >> yes, sir, I did. >> you testified in your direct examination that you followed the stand standard operating procedure under lexington's disciplinary procedure of sworn officers, correct? >> I didn't say that. I said I just followed standard operating procedure. >> okay. The standard operating procedure, is it defined by the disciplinary procedure of sworn officers? >> what I mean by standard operating procedure is how we usually do things. That's what I mean. So state the question again. >> it's my understanding that lexington has adopted a set of procedures for you to follow. >> okay. >> general order 197302 k entitled disciplinary procedure of sworn officers, the documet under which officer middleton is charged with here today. >> so I'm assuming you say have you standard operating procedure, those are defined in this document. >> yes, sir. >> this is the document that you are saying you followed. >> yes. >> the reality, am I correct in saying you are not sure if you followed this. You just followed the way you understand it? >> no, I followed it. And yeah, I followed it according to my understanding as well. >> and in this disciplinary procedure for sworn officers, -- do we have a copy? >> I'm going to ask you about your options for discipline. Do you have a copy of that up there, sir? >> >> under that, if you will turn to page three, it defined disciplinary procedures for sworn officers page 3 of 42. >> I'm sorry, go ahead. And tell will council, if you will, please what the disciplinary options are for an officer who is alleged to have committed misconduct under section b. >> written reprimand, demotion, suspension. >> four is termination. >> written reprimand, demotion, suspension and dismiss. >> yes. >> read for the council -- ladies and gentlemen of the council, this is defendant's exhibit 35 that's the marked through version but it's the same version. Read for the council members what it says justifies a suspension under your own disciplinary procedures? >> 3a. >> suspension is a serious disciplinary option involving a reduction in an officer's regularly scheduled compensated hours for a bork work week for misconduct considered to be serious or part of a continuing pattern of behavior involving repeated instances of misconduct. >> it sounds like in order to justify a suspension, it has to be serious, it has to be part of a continuing pattern of behavior involving repeated instances of misconduct, correct? >> yes. >> and it's your testimony that officer middleton would have satisfied each of those components? >> for a suspension? >> yes for a suspension. >> yes, sir. >> so you believe what he did was serious, correct? And was it part of a continuing pattern of behavior? >> yes, sir, it was and did it involve repeated instances? >> yes, sir, it did. >> now you have a progressive disciplinary system here, >> yes, sir. And the last time the first disciplinary -- in fact the first time only time that officer middleton has ever been subject to disciplinary action, he was demoted, is that correct j. >> so he suffered disciplinary level 2, b-2, demotion. >> yes, sir. >> and the next level up on that progressive system is suspension, which you say he satisfied. >> there is nothing to say that we have to go in aline with this. >> flog in this policy that says I have to go. Can I go up depending on the circumstances. >> I'm not going to argue with you on that. Nothing says that you have to. Nothing says that you can't you have that discretion. >> yes, sir. >> involving the totality of the circumstances. >> yes, sir. >> and that involves the fact that officer middleton felt very aggrieved by the lack of action towards his complaints within the lpd. >> like I said before, if he did, to me, it didn't justify the actions that he took. >> you know, you mention that you just found out about some of these complaints,. >> right? >> yes, sir. >> did officer middleton ever reach out to you did he try to talk to you about these matters? >> no, sir. >> did christie middle top, his wife come to you and ask you specifically to take action about her husband being consistently subjected to racial discrimination and bias at the hands of the lexington police department? >> and I asked her, I referred her to piu on that. >> did you follow up with piu? >> I can remember them talking to her but I can't recall. >> you would say he would be entitled to his concerns, his defense fairly considered before you reached this level of recommending termination. >> yes, sir. >> and you feel like you gave him a full and fair review of all the relevant facts and factors before you reached that? >> I think piu looked at it and their summary was fair. >> you heard some things today you say for the first time. You said there were instances in that piu investigation that May, in fact, not be true and accurate. You heard the fak that one of the witnesses relied upon in the piu, there was someone wasn't telling the truth. >> I don't know if anybody wasn't telling the truth. >> and we've talked about this summary conclusion that absolutely must have been absolutely not. >> say that again. >> well, you concluded that despite multiple options existing now that you have examined the matter that piu summarily concluded that he must have meant absolutely not when he said absolutely. >> right. And I agreed with that. >> now are you aware of other instances where officers have been accused of engaging in speech that would be considered offensive by some people but yet perceived much less discipline than he has received? >> side bar, please. council, we have a side bar request. We'll be right back. Mr. Sparks, if will you continue. >> chief weathers, there is an officer on your force that last year, during a trump parade, made a public statement on facebook, wherein he said, and I will be as accurate and truthful as I can. I don't have it right in front of me, but it was run them all. Someone was complaining about having to stop in traffic lights in this trump parade. And it was run them all. Lol, laughing facey moajys. -- face emojiys. The exact words were "just run them" you got an officer who is saying to someone in a very public setting, a live facebook stream, so not just the recipient would see this, but anybody watching this would see it, and he said just run all the red lights. That seems to me like he is engaging in free speech on a matter involving his beliefs, political beliefs. Do you disagree with me on that? >> I'm not going to argue with you on -- I'm going to argue that it was free speech. I don't think an officer should do that. >> right, I guess there is one way you could read that. One way you could read that would be that officer just encouraged everybody in that trump parade, hundreds of cars, to run red lights. That would have created mayhem in lexington, correct? >> it could, yes, sir. >> you are talking about impairing the deficiency of the department. If people had taken him literally and run them, it would have been a hypothetically horrible situation, right? >> right. >> but that harm didn't happen. That was an imagined harm. >> because people didn't take what he said literally and didn't do what he said. >> they didn't take him literally. So who gets to decide whether they take him literally or not. >> I think that was addressed at the bureau level. His bureau assistant chief would probably decide that. >> so this officer faced a disciplinary infraction as well, didn't he? >> I don't think it rose to a disciplinary level. >> well, if you turn to exhibit 27, the defendant's exhibit 27. >> okay. Go ahead. >> he faced a disciplinary infraction for getting on facebook, communicating with someone and telling them to basically break the law which officer middleton is not even accused of telling someone to break the law. He is accused of telling someone to call out racist. >> okay. Nawcial is not discipline. The officer didn't receive discipline. The other thing is equating that with calling officers names and and getting an emotional reaction during a time when emotions are heightened and people are uncertain anyway, I don't think you can compare the two. I saw that and I think there was a laughing faceie e moajy with that. >> I don't think that was made. But at the bureau level they said it was inappropriate and gave him a letter of council. >> he did. >> because that officer's comments were construed, by a group of people, to only be in jest and not to have been really serious and he only receives the lowest level of not even discipline. >> and his comment did not generate the type of response that we got from the other. >> do you know that? Was it even investigated? Did anyone subpoena his cell phone to see what other... >> no officers... And I didn't see any officers upset about it like I saw down at the protests. >> but some of the officers you saw were upset not because of what officer middleton did but because of what other people were doing. >> right. And that was a continuing thing which he joined in on. This was not even anywhere near that level and it's kind of insulting for you to say that it is. Look, he said it. We addressed it. We took care of it. There are things that happen with what the information that he gave to a protest leader to say to our people that he couldn't change. You know, I lost almost 70 officers, some of them retired because they had time. Some of them retired for other reasons. I can't help but wonder if it was because of the protests and because of some of the things that were said. Now... With at that time being said. >> you are saying he started the protest. He didn't start the protest. >> I know that. >> he is a very tiny infinitesimal part of the grievances you are airing as if he caused all of it. >> yes, sir. But you know, I just don't think you can equate that with this. >> let me clarify something I said a minute ago that he was just calling out. He was calling out people that he believed to be racist. I don't know what their beliefs are. But officer middleton had personal experiences with most of these people. He believes some of them to be racist. Did you see that in the text comments? >> that he believes some of those people were racist? Yes, I saw that. >> so let me ask you this. If in the current lpd environment an officer believes other officers are racist and they approach the powers that be in the department, lieutenants, the chief, their families approach lieutenants, the chief, there is a formal complaint that was sent to you compiling the numerous complaints made. I think lieutenant brotherton sent it to you. When all of this stuff comes to you and others in the department and nothing gets done to anyone, can you see how officer middleton could feel I have no choice other than to talk to people in the community about folks that I believe to be racist actors? >> yes. And you know what, he does have that choice. But he made the wrong choice. There are right choices and there are wrong choices. He chose a choice outside of policy. >> outside of policy. >> uh-huh. >> let me ask you quickly, sir, if you could, and this is defendant's exhibit number 1. One-page document. It is a text communication between officer middleton and sarah williams made on June 9 at 4:53, I believe. Would you read that to the members of the council? >> the whole transcript? >> no, just that one text. >> with the star beside it? Okay. I'm tired, sarah. I'm tired of them treating me like shit. I'm tired of my anger. I wish I could understand -- I wish I could stand there with you right now. >> that's all the questions I have of this witness at this time. Mr. Horn, do you have any other questions? >> I have a few questions, mayor, but I do have one issue first. I didn't realize that defense exhibit 35 is labeled a draft general order. And so I have no way to know for certain that it is the final general order; however, government exhibit 7 is the general order so I would request that any reference to the general order reviewed by the council be limited to exhibit number 7 and not defense exhibit 35. >> I don't have any problem with that. I agree with that. Thank you. >> chief, Mr. Sparks referenced a complaint that was sent by your office to H.R. About allegationses by officer middleton. Do you recall that? >> yes, sir. >> do you recall the timing of that? >> I don't know what you mean. >> the allegations were raised during the disciplinary review board. >> yes, sir. >> is that a fair statement? >> yes, sir. >> and that was after all of this conduct had occurred. >> yes, sir. >> do you know what happened with the complaint? >> the one we sent to H.R. Was returned saying that he didn't want to talk or his attorneys advised him not to talk. I can't remember which one. >> so it wouldn't surprise you that officer middleton's attorney sent an email to H.R. Saying that the he didn't want to be interviewed on the allegations while this action is pending. (Inaudible). >> with the ryan holland incident, instead of it perhaps being characterized by someone else, the defense exhibit 27 is the coaching and counseling form for that, and I would just like to read the whole section on the incident. It says and the council can read it themselves on the defense exhibit 27. 10-11-2020 it came to the attention of the lexington police department that officer ryan holland comments on a friend's facebook live stream during the trump rally. Officer holland was off duty at the time and made the comment that he should "just run them" in researches to the red light traffic light. This was followed by several laughing e emojis. While this was in jest, members of the public saw the comment and knowing officer holland's employment brought to attention via their social media page. Offcer holland must remember that social media is out there for everyone to see and though it May seem like a joke to some, is not seen as such to others. And the action plan was for officer holland to be more mindful of his social media posts and how they May be perceived in the community. Supervisors will continue to monitor the social media of all the officers. Just to point out and as you testified, this posting was followed by several laughing emojis indicating that it was a joke. Perhaps not just a simple statement encouraging people to run red lights. Is that fair? >> yes. >> I believe they also referenced a grievance that had been filed on behalf of officer middleton by the union. Do I remember that correctly? >> yes, sir. >> do you remember the grieve ansz? >> I I remember the grievance being filed. >> and it was filed shortly after the previous discipline incident. Is that a fair statement? >> yes, sir. Let me show you what I have marked here, which is not in the government exhibit batch because I didn't know whether we would need it or not so it's a rebuttal exhibit but marked as government exhibit 14 and g-tv 3 -- >> stand by. >> now chief, you May or May not recognize that grievance, but take a look at it and tell me if it is familiar to you. >> yes, sir, I remember this. >> and was I want to direct you to is page 5 of this grievance form which has a narrative on it about the grievance. >> okay. >> and it's a fairly long narrative and I don't know if they can get to it page 5 on the gtv or streaming, but the reference is the union filed a grievance about discrimination concerning officer middleton. Now you can read through all of that and I think you'll agree at that time most of it related to the discipline process. >> is that a fair statement? >> yes. >> and just for reference, do you know or agree that article 15 of the cba specifically removes discipline from the grievance? >> yes, it does. >> I want to direct you to the bottom line of this narrative page. It's actually the third line up from the bottom. And I believe that your one part is highlighted. >> yes. >> and in terms of referencing discrimination, can you read what this grievance says. >> sergeant middleson believes lpd action including the severity of action and contract disciplinary outcome involving other officers were discriminatory and based upon sergeant middleton's race. >> no list of racial ins did -- incidents listed in this grievance. >> no, sir. >> do you remember the prior disciplinary action that resulted in a demotion of officer middleton? >> yes. >> going to bring you one more -- (Inaudible) >> I will ask you if you recognize that document. >> yes, sir. >> and can you tell -- well, let me -- do the council members have this? >> they do not. can we put it on the screen, please? >> again, I'm sorry. I didn't include this in exhibits because there are some things that you just don't know whether you are going to need or not. But when you resolved officer middleton's previous disciplinary action, you also, in addition to the conformity, you, officer middleton and the union signed this discipline resolution agreement. Is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> and it covers various things, but if you go to paragraph 5, everyone agrees that the grievance that remains is resolved or withdrawn. Is that your understanding what happened with the grievance? >> yes, it is. >> since -- are you aware of since the demotion of officer middleton, has he made any allegations to you of racial conduct toward him? >> no, sir. >> that's all I have, mayor. >> thank you. Mr. Sparks, do have you more questions? >> did his wife... Did his wife come to you and make -- tell you that he was being discriminated against. >> she came to me but didn't give me specifics and I referred her to piu. The public integrity unit. >> did you ever follow up with her? >> no. And I don't think it's appropriate to discuss internal matters with people outside the police department. >> you didn't think it was appropriate to discuss it with her. >> yes, sir. >> no further questions of this witness at this time, your honor. I apologize. My attorney was talking to me. Were you finished? No further questions, Mr. Horn? Do you have any other questions? All right. There is any other examination? Examination? Examination? Examination? Examination? Examination? Examination? Examination? Examination? Examination? Examinati released? I mean can he be released as a witness? >> I release him reserving the right to recall him later. >> okay. All right. >> thank you chief weathers. >> Mr. Horn, do you have other witnesses. >> last witness. >> does that complete your case on behalf of chief weathers? >> it does. all right. Now, we will hear the case and do we want to say the time check the time for the defense? 55 minutes remaining for Mr. Sparks and so we'll now hear the case for officer middleton. >> to the extent necessary, I would move for directed verdict on the grounds previously mentioned. That the government has not met its burden. all right, that matter is denied and this will about to the council for deliberation. >> yes ma'am. I'll call officer jervis middleton. all right. I will ask the clerk to swear in the witness. >> you will remain under oath until your testimony is completed and you are released as a witness. Please raise your right hand. Intair do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> officer middleton would you introduce yourself to the council. What is your education? >> his microphone is on mute. apparently you cannot be heard. Are you close to your mic? >> introduce yourself and tell them about your background. >> jervis middleton. I have degrees in biology, chemistry be, associates in law enforcement and master degree in justice policy and leadership. >> what made you want to be a policeman. >> long story. We don't have much time. I was pursued by the fbi at one point and going through that, the chief of police at the time asked me would I be interested in coming, you know, looking to be a lexington police officer. Through a series of events, I did. Interviewed and felt like it was a calling for me and now I'm here. >> walk the council quickly through a list of the achievements that you were able to sort of achieve before this past year and a half. >> sure. I have been in several departments in the agency. i have been in training, L.P.O. Officer. Crisis negotiation unit. Distinguished service award before. Taught in the academy, implicit bias, former judo, former communications class and crisis situations to the academy. >> did you teach implicit bias? >> yes. >> here at lpd. >> yes. I also took over cultural diversity when the chief retired. >> I would like to show you defendant's exhibit 37 and tell the council a little bit about what that said in 2018. >> sure. I received distinguished service award. >> read what it says. >> yes, sir. Sergeant jervis mid middleton has been a dedicated member of the police honor guard since 2013. He has participated in rendering honors at numerous local events, police functions, retiree funerals and line of duty funerals, also helped teach at lexington's annual honor guard school. Sergeant middleton always exists a sincere desire to serve and has been a positive reflection on the agency. Requires a high degree of flexibility, professional itch, composure and sacrifice. He has not only met these attributes but consistently been a leader within the unit. He his qualities have earned him esteemed of fellow employees and appreciation of the other members of the honor guard unit. >> and the recognition itself indicates outside -- outstanding professional performance of extraordinary character that contributed in significant measure to the lexington police department, correct? >> correct. >> when did you receive that honor? >> June 19, 2018. >> so you have been an officer with the lpd for how long? >> 14 years in July. >> and before 2018, had you ever received any disciplinary infractions of any kind? >> no, sir. >> and in 2018 you faced your first ever, correct? >> yes. >> and you were demoted. You accepted that in order to resolve the case is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> and do you believe you were treated fairly in that investigation? >> absolutely. I do not. >> who was involved. Who was one of the primary witnesses in the case against you? >> at the time it was lieutenant% albert johnson. >> that lieutenant is now commander albert johnson. >> yes, sir. >> do you believe in the course of that case he made racially charged, racially offensive statements about you? - >> I hate to have a side bar on this, could we have a side bar? council, we need to take a moment to have a side bar. we'll be right back. Mr. Sparks. >> ultimately at the end of that experience, after you were subjected to whatever you believe to have been an inappropriate treatment at the hands of the lpd, was there any officers that were disciplined other than you? >> as a result of my investigation? No. Not to my knowledge. >> you mawlt ultimately agreed to give up your sergeant stripes. >> I did. >> how did that make you feel? (Inaudible). >> did you understand that you would have an opportunity to talk to the chief about all of the episodes of racial bias that you had been subjected to? >> yes, I did and actually my wife reached out to him first. I was apprehensive. Calling out officers and lieutenants that have made racial statements to you. I did it before and nothing was done. I do believe I have a good relationship with the chief but still, I don't know how it's going to be received and we are here now because of some of that >> did you try to reach out to the chief? >> I did. After my wife met with him and told him what I was going through, the day I agreed to the prior discipline, we were discussing going out and sitting down and having a conversation about some stuff that I had been through and what was on my mind. >> and did you -- I understood that you went, you had lunch with him. >> we went out to lunch and I tried to bring some of it up but the discussion was more so moving forward. I never did really get to -- I mentioned some of the things and echo what my wife had already told him but didn't get much reception out of it. >> let's walk through some of the things we've already touched on. At some point during a training session, an officer said to you, turn your black ass face around is that cite. >> that's correct. >> who did you report that to? >> to two people. Sergeant at the time who is now retired and lieutenant derow -- >> we were up on the fourth floor at the sergeant's detective area and he came up and we talked about it. When I first said something to sergeant berersik. He laughed but then he saw I wasn't joking. I was nervous calling it out. When it happened to me, I was hurt. It was from a friend. We joke, joke in the police department all the time, sometimes off the cuff but racial jokes aren't funny to me. When it happened, and I could have addressed him, but then I think it would have made matters worse. There was enough people around. I also went to his immediate supervisor. >> so lupt testified today that -- the lieutenant who said you never reported that to him, was that accurate. >> that was not accurate. I received a text later on confirming that the through the person who said it, the lieutenant talked to him about it after he heard about the issue from me. >> so you are certain you went to lieutenant berosic. >> he came while I was sitting up there with another sergeant. >> was -- did anything happen? Was there any investigation into that. >> to the best of my knowledge, no. >> and another instance, tell the council about, when you were representing the lexington police department in an fop meeting in frankfort. >> yes. I was with another fop representative from here and we were with the other louisville P.D. Officers while we were there and he said, come on token boy, let's go. >> how did that make you feel? >> I was livid. I can't say the word that I was right now but I was pretty livid. I was hurt and livid. >> did you feel that anything would happen if you reported that? >> I've reported stuff before. I even had an incident at my house where racially charged statements were post-it noted on my garage door and I have a feeling, based on a previous situation that I knew who it was. And I called my immediate lieutenant and told her and the best response I got from that was okay, is there anything else? i'm about to go home for the night. >> have there been other instances, and you don't have to go into all of them. >> there have been several. >> is it fair to say that despite what you believe to have been, you know, the proper remedy, which was taking it to the supervisor, people in charge, that you felt like lpd was not going to be helpful to you in ending those racial, that racial treatment? >> that's correct. Based on my past experiences, I didn't feel comfortable. I didn't get anything done so I didn't think anything would happen and it's taboo in this. I tried it. I tried it again. I had somebody tell the whole city -- to have somebody tell the whole city that there have not been overt racism in this agency. That's hurtful. >> a few months ago. >> it was. >> officer middleton, you transitioned well. The police accountability movement was in full swing last year even before the killing of george floyd. >> it was. >> and did you want to be active in that? >> I didn't necessarily want to be active in protest, but I wanted to see some changes. Changes. Changes. Changes. Changes. Disciplinary process before and I saw some issues that needed, I had some issues happen to me that needed more oversight. >> do you think that, you know, if you had been active in the police accountability movement, active, vocal, out there, do you think that would have been tolerated well by the lpd? >> I walked twice with martin, I walked twice downtown with clergy, congressmen, fraternity brothers and that was frowned upon. I'm not saying anybody said I couldn't March but when I was seen on the video, it comes up in the public integrity unit interview. And it wasn't delightful that I was there. >> talk to the council and try to be as honest and clear as you can how you felt toward law enforcement when you saw george floyd being, essentially, murdered by law enforcement in minneapolis. >> you know, I think anybody in their right mind would say that was awful tragic event that should not have happened. I don't really think anybody would even try to justify that. Personally, it intensified a little bit more because I felt for him I. Was a culmination of everything I had personally been through and listening to other people dismiss some of the other instances that happened amad aubrey,. We don't have enough time to bet - into all the names. I felt the same thing that people in society felt. >> did you feel like you could express those feelings openly in the lpd? >> no. >> how did that make you feel? >> not good. I remember just even commenting one time on actually social media, on my page about the ahmaud aubrey incident and it wasn't anything that would have violated our social media policy. It was just that the video did not look good. I remember getting castigated by fellow officers. >> talk about your relationship with sarah williams. >> zaire -- sarah williams and I met, we served together on some panels. I was sent by the agency and she was sent as a community advocate discussing relationships between the community and the police. One particular one I remember what to do when you are stopped by police so we met there and she certainly made an impression on me. We weren't adversaries. She told me how she did not hate police. But she was for police accountability and she told me, she said a lot of things but not to take them personally because it's not about me. It's about making a change. I didn't. I usually don't take any of that stuff related to police accountability personally. >> so sarah though had been someone that you developed a pretty close friendship with. >> we first met there. We actually became friends after my last incident here with the police department, after I experienced unfair treatment during the disciplinary process. And I knew that, yes, I accepted my discipline. i knew I wasn't perfect. But still some of the stuff that I went through opened my eyes even further to what a lot of the community had been calling for. We needed more oversight. We needed extra eyes outside of the agency to take a look at it and make sure everything was equitable. I say that because I sit here% and listen to someone tell me I lied when you read straight from the transcript exactly what I said. There is really no mistaking it. I know we say things can be taken two different ways but when it's right there in black and right and I say absolutely I monitor my radio off duty, that's a basic question because when we drive our off duty cruisers, we drive our cruisers off duty, our radios have to be on. If I'm off duty in my cruiser with the radio on, I have to monitor it off duty. >> and correct me if I'm wrong, throughout the rest of the discussion, you seem to say, I can't remember if I turned it on that particular day. >> correct. When the protest began, you were communitying with sarah about what was going on. >> back to sat. Sarah and I -- I became better friends with her after the first incident. Sat down, met with her some other folks in the community and went over stuff that I -- because some stuff had been put out in the media that was just off. It has been proven false in court. it was inaccurate. The narrative had been changed and I wanted to get out and tell my side of it so I did meet with her. I wanted to introduce her to my wife and I did because they had some things in exon and they developed a relationship and ultimately, my wife is a good communicator and I knew sarah had a message that she wanted to deliver and she had been delivering it but I thought she and my wife could get together and polish up some things and go forward. During the middle of that, right after that, her son had an issue he had an issue and she had an issue with the police with him. She knew I was police. She reached out to me and said I've got the issue dealt with the police. I'm worried about my son. You being a black officer, you have been through some things, can you come pick him up, meet him, take him out and mentor him. Absolutely. That's was we are here for. We are supposed to go to the people in our community but sometimes it's hard to get along with. It's easy -- >> I'm sorry to interrupt. I'm just trying to be very mindful of our time limitations so you worked at the protest. I know there were a few times were you going to say you weren't going in. >> I played golf and drank a beer. I can't go to work. My rule of thumb, I can't go to work if I drink a beer within 24 hours. >> so there were instances where you worked the protest. >> correct. >> and how -- did you interact positively with members of the community, the lpd made these allegations that you were very negative influence essentially. >> absolutely. I think it was a perfect time for us to interact with the community. We stated in here, the chief testified to it, we had -- I'm not saying the whole thing was before, but we had some opportunities that we could reach out and form bonds between us and the community and. >> I have a video of you interacting with the protestors. What is the date of the video? June 9. I would like you to show it and then tell us a little bit about it. It's exhibit 38. >> stand by. >> 100%, think we need more accountability. I'm just, I'm -- I do think though, and I've done a lot of stuff. (Inaudible) In minnesota and minneapolis because we might not necessarily, I have to be honest, we might not necessarily, in a situation like that, be truly be -- how do I want to put this. We May be mad. So let's say we arrest somebody, they... We would be -- we have to be concered for that person's life. And if one of us was out of hand in that situation, we are worried about getting in trouble if we don't do something. We were definitely, there no doubt in my mind we would pull somebody off of that situation. We definitely have some things here, quite a bit of things that the we need to change systemically. Systemic racism is deep roots. I understand it, I've seen it. I know how it operates and works and how it affects, shoot, me. And there are some stuff we need to change. I mean we only have 40 of us on the agency. Only 40 brown and black people. That's not right. And it's not -- and it's not just about people not wanting to be to join the police department. Sometimes people get weeded out that shouldn't get weeded out and we get judged harsher. I don't care who hears me. I'll tell you straight up. I have been in every area in this agency and I've seen it and I've lobbied for some things. Y with need some changes. Now when you come to, when you start talking about... >> so in that video, you were talking the a couple ladies in lexington about police accountability. >> we were working that protest area, that area of the police department and we were in the back lot of the police department and they walked up and wanted to talk to us. >> and that's how you interact with the public. >> absolutely. >> let's was you can through because I'm trying to be mindful of the time. The instances -- the incidents that you are being -- they're seeking your punishment over. One of the first ins incidents highlighted in the piu summary and powerpoint sent as part of that was a text from to you sarah that said tell them middleton said F.T.P., lol I think is what it says. So you said obviously that was in jest, right. >> correct. >> you wouldn't want her to say middle ton said... >> sarah knows that and she laughed as well. It was two people talking. Private conversation. Friends. I know a lot of stuff she says, it doesn't bother me and sometimes I talk to her in language that we both sometimes use in private. >> this notion that you provided confidential sensitive departmental information. Did you ever do that? >> I sent... That's not confidential department information. >> when you did that, did you think you were doing anythin wrong? >> no. One was saying -- they both were saying there is a chance -- the first one I thought it was asking me to come to work. I wasn't going because again, I played golf, drank beer. The other one is just about overtime. When sarah said they were going to protest or March, she said she had done it before over the statues and during that time, they were threatened with, the white supremacists had made threats saying they were going to come down in the middle of it. I sat here in the chambers, provided security for one of the protestors because we were worried about the same issue and she was a part of that. And so here again when she said she was going to set up protest, she was worried about having enough police officers down there so she wouldn't be injured. >> now another issue that sort of being hurled at you is the fact that you had some conversations with sarah about someone making an allegation that officer ryan holland had sent inappropriate pick the yourself. >> correct. >> first of all, did that come from you? >> it did not. >> and there is I video that shows it came from a female. >> another female. >> yes. >> so do you have any idea why ryan poll land would believe that information came from you? >> I do not. >> so you sold sarah that people were talking about it correct? >> correct. >> you told her that officer holland thought that she was the source. >> yes. >> the next incident and I'm trying to cover those for you. It said -- a statement where you said simply F.U. To commander holland. >> yes. >> now as we heard one of the witnesses earlier testify, there is -- it's offensive but there is nothing wrong with saying F.U. To somebody. is that a fair statement? >> I think -- I don't think it's harmful. Certainly looking at my words, I'm not proud of those words but they're in a private conversation and at the end, she said L.O.L. And I assumed it was the end. >> so in all these messages, and I'm not going to go through them, the council has them, what was your purpose? What was on your mind when you were saying those things? >> when I was interviewed, some of the underlying theements was that I wanted it to be personal about me. I used my personal experiences to talk to sarah and other community members about things that I went through. I don't have any shame of calling out people who made racist comments. I don't have any shame in that. They say say something. Well, I did. Nothing was done. It was a time -- this is the time right now where it's one of the biggest civil rights movements since the 60s and if we don't say something about stuff now, when will we. I talk to black officers in the agency and they have told me about issues they've had. I've told them to come forward. >> do you believe that officers feel free to come forward? >> I've talked to retired officers who have said the same thing I've said. It happened to me, too. My question is when does it end? What when does it end? >> we talked a lot here today about what you did. let's talk about what you didn't do. To your knowledge, did you break the law in any way? >> no. >> did you damage any property? >> no. >> did you go out and incite violence in any way? >> absolutely not. >> did you encourage violence? >> absolutely not. >> did you cause violence or harm to anyone in any way? >> no. >> were you speaking as an officer when you made these statements to sarah or were you speaking as a citizen. >> I was speaking as a citizen. >> and was the context of what you were saying, was that racism and police accountability issue? >> yes. And the overall issue was using my examples to touch on what the community, what this country has been asking for. Police accountability. I've seen it. I've seen where we can improve in places and when I say that, I don't think -- I think we are a good agency but we have areas to improve. I've said that. I say that to citizens. And me speaking out on it, speaking to her, was showing examples of the things that I have been through. >> and just to be clear, you don't -- you are not up here saying that everything sarah williams said was right. >> absolutely not. And I've talked to her about it. >> you tried to encourage her at times to modify the way she May approach the situations? >> yes. >> because you all speak openly. >> correct. >> and would you agree with me that you know, people that know each other and have a history, they can speak to each other and its meaning would be one thing to one person and maybe different to somebody else. >> 100%. I can tell if you you went through some of the texts with fellow officers, you would think what you read here was light and I'm not selling them out in conversations but people are comfortable. >> do you have any regrets? >> I don't have any regrets calling out the things I went through and I believe needs to change. >> you mention that, you know, maybe earlier, I think you mentioned that you would have said some things maybe in a different way that... >> when you loo can at some of the language, first of all, private conversations. Still, looking at it, say some things differently. But I will say that is the was I sometimes two people talk to each other. >> if the council agrees with us that what happened was free speech and they agree to provide you with a different level of discipline, do you believe that you could return to the force and be a good officer? >> absolutely. Absolutely. And even some of the officers who the chief described as upset with me, would I love to sit down with them and have a conversation. i would love to sit in a room with them and talk about things. Let's go have a beer. Let's go talk. You have got to have courageous conversations to get over anything and even when I was teaching implicit bias, people are afraid to talk about it. People are afraid frayed to talk about systemic racism, overt racism. Prejudice. That's the only way we can going to solve some of the issues. Put some of that talk into action. >> what do you believe that the lexington police department could do to improve this accountability and racial sensitivity problem that it seems to have? >> I do understand some of the hurdles and pitfalls we have to go to go it there but I do believe that some of the things that were brought up through the mayor's council, some of the citizens review boards, things such as that, different hiring processes. I think we could change that around a whole lot to attract a different culture. Different diverse or a diverse group of officers here for the agency. >> I have witnesses I have to get to and I'm under a time crunch. Is there anything else -- the recommendation that you are facing here today by chief weathers is to terminate you from employment. There is anything you want to say to the council? >> I would ask you to understand that my speech was private to another party. I didn't incite her to riot, to tear up anything. But I did bring, want to bring light to some of the issues I have been through. And again, it wasn't just about me. If I'm experiencing these things in the agency, a person who has been in the honor guard, crisis determination unit sent all over the country to represent the agency, at one point considered face of the agency, if I'm subjected to that, forget about me think about of the some things that our members of on you are community are telling you all because I know they're telling you. Think about some of those things and realize they're happening somebody somewhere has to say this is the end and I'm not saying our agency is horrible because it's not. It's one of the best in the nation but we... We need to make changes and if we don't do it now, we never will and I wholeheartedly believe I need to be a part of it. There is no question. >> that's all the questions I have at this time. >> Mr. Horn, do you have questions for the witness? >> yes, mayor. How much time do we have? we have the defense has 13 more minutes. >> I'm not going to take that many minutes asking questions. I do want to just, I guess, clarify a couple of things. When you mentioned the comment about turn your black ass face around. >> yes. >> when did that on can you are? -- when did that occur? >> February of 2018. >> so a couple years ago. Three years ago. And the fop token boy, when did that occur? >> not long after that. I gave you a day on that one. >> again... Three years ago. Two and a half years ago. >> in that timeframe, yes, sir. >> and so that was prior to your previous discipline? >> correct. >> and you no when the allegations came up again in the current investigation it was referred to human resources. >> afterwards, yes. >> and when human resources contacts you to have an interview. >> when they called me, I had covid, I had covid for a long time. I wasn't well until November. So I didn't go right away. >> and, in fact, your attorney wrote them and said with this pepping action, it would be unfair for you to interview for that until after this is done. >> I'm not sure what the email said. I didn't get copied on it. >> I happen to have it. >> good deal. And this is government exhibit number 12, which once again is not in the packet because I wasn't sure that we would actually need it. Government tv-3 has it and it's a fairly -- it's not a lengthy email, but if you want to read that, you don't have to read it out loud, and maybe just agree or not that the basics of it is since you have this pending disciplinary matter, it would be unfair for you to go ahead and interview concerning the allegations of discrimination and so you are not going to interview unless they insist you do because they don't want to be charged with insuborder naig. -- insubordination. >> yes. >> you haven't interviewed yet for... >> I have not interviewed with this for this particular time, no. I will add that there are plenty interview -- there are plenty opportunities to interview before then. >> I have a couple of questions about the interview you did with piu. >> okay. >> and government exhibit 8, which the council has, which is actually page 12. Just tell me if you remember this. They ask you about specifically the incident with, I believe it was narajuk and you said give him some love so you were saying, for her to be nice to him. >> yes. >> and you said, my relationship with her is to try to get her to calm down on all of this, to be quite honest, but have to gain rapport with somebody. Do you remember... >> I actually have it right here, yes. And then, I just need to know if it is still accurate that during the interview, -- and this is specifically on page 54 of the transcript, that -- and again, if you remember that you said that your understanding with sarah williams was that she wouldn't repeat whatever you sent her. >> yes. I page 67, they were talking about commander holland and the text you sent. You said you don't have an issue with the commander. He has never done anything. >> correct. >> and then on page 70 -- if you want to go back to the just talking about issues, if I wanted to go down a different road, I would have addressed a situation that happened in frankfort. The token boy comment. >> I think the confusion is over the phrase, give him some love and perhaps the common understanding of that, and your explanation of what you actually meant. >> I will say that sarah will be here. I had the conversation with her privately and she can attest to our conversation. >> and then really the last one from your transcript is from page 77 and again you were talking about at the very top, any of this stuff that you were venting, you had had had conversations and I know I'm being petty it's just like I know I'm being petty. Is that a fair... >> and I said again just different cultures. You can say it's just silly. But I don't know is what that was in relation to. >> that's all that I have. thank you. Mr. Horn. Mr. Sparks, do you have any other questions for this witness? not right now? Okay. And so no more questions by you, Mr. Horn? All right. I trust you will go ahead -- thank you very much. Mr. Sparks, you have 15 minutes. >> we have been on track all day with our timing consistency, but we are off now. I think I've got more than half an hour. I'm not sure that that last side bar wasn't deducted from my time. abigail, have you been keeping track? >> yes ma'am. There is 25 minutes and 29 seconds left. From the defense's side. >> I call sarah williams. sarah williams. >> mayor, this is council member brown. What time is our next scheduled break? >> our next scheduled break will be after closing arguments unless the couple needs to take a break before that. >> yeah, I'm in favor of taking a break. We have been here two straight hours. I think I would take 15 minutes if the rest of the council is fine then I'll tough it out. okay, and then just we could go straight from closing into executive session. Is that what you are thinking? >> all right. Mr. Sparks and Mr. Horn, we have had a request from council to take a break right now. 15-minute break. Do you have any objections to that? >> no ma'am. all right. We'll take a 15-minute break so we will come back at 9:21. Thank you. I think everybody is here. >> one screen doesn't have everybody and one screen does. So choose your screen. All right. Time to get started again and Mr. Sparks, you have 25 minutes left on your time. >> I saul sarah williams. >> welcome. and I'll ask the clerk to swear in the witness? >> yes ma'am. >> mayor, you have been muted. you can't hear me? >> you still can't hear me? So. Sarah williams has been called as Mr. Sparks witness and I've asked the clerk to please swear in the witness. >> yes ma'am. >> you remain under oath until your testimony is completed and you are released as a witness. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? (Inaudible). thank you. It's the my cron phone -- it's the microphone. >> there should be a red button. >> it is still muted. Can you hear me? yes. Thank you very much. >> tbod good to see you again. Can you state your full name for the record, please? To the council for the record? >> sarah faith williams. >> would you describe yourself as an activist? >> yes. >> can you describe your role in the recent police accountability protests in lexington? >> yes. Lead organizer, someone who helps several young people who wanted to take to the streets and protest. To so appropriately and non-violently. >> how long have you been working as an activist and community organizer? >> that began when the ferguson uprising in missouri. I had recently moved back home to lexington and returned to st. Louis to work on the movement which largely taught me what I put into use here. >> you have been involved for a long time cialght do you believe that systemic racism is an issue that needs to be addressed within the lexington police department? >> yes, 100% without question. >> during the accountability protest in May and June of last year, the majority that you were involved with, were they peaceful protest >> they were all non-violent. >> have you members of the fayette county sheriff is department called on you for help with an unruly protestor. >> when dayson morgan killed by a white drunk driver that was released without think charges, and the family protested, kathy wit made a call to a local clergy member in which I was already in a meeting with at a local church with several other clergy members and requested myself and jay to come downtown to help with crowd control. >> to the best of your knowledge do you recall any officer physically assaulted during a protest that you organized? >> there has never been a lexington police department police officer assaulted during any protest or action or community meeting that I have ever organized. >> aside from the conversations that you've had with officer middleton which have been the suct of our subject of our hearing today, did you do any independent research on what you would consider to be bad cops? >> yes, have I done extensive research on the lexington police department for one it has been available on a google drive for all of the open records request that were made by myself and several other community members largely in the beginning it was me and we have actually received to date the entire disciplinary file for formal an informal police officers dating back to, I believe to 2014-2015 up to the middle of 2020. Jesse mascoe was somebody in particular I asked for his permanent file on that has nothing to do with this... >> side bar, please. >> does that mean I'm supposed to stop? >> there has been a request for a side bar with the attorneys. We'll be right back. All right. You May continue. We're going to transition along here. When did you meet officer middleton. We heard a little bit from officer middleton earlier, but can you just expand on that a little bit? >> yes, sir. The very first time officer middleton and I met was at a community event held at st. John's baptist church where there was a community forum put on by the church to engage and educate the community on what your rights are wheny encounter a police officer and what to do when you encounter a police officer so that was the first time we officially met. >> and when you communicated with officer middleton last year, did you do so thinking it was in his capacity as a police officer or as a friend and fellow community leader? >> as a friend. >> as a friend? Okay. And in June of last year, was your phone seized by the lexington police department? >> yes. >> and are you now awrier that officer middleton is facing discipline for his conversations with you? >> yes. >> and what is your reaction to that? >> that we are currently in the process of witnessing what is the equivalent of a modern earn metaphorical (Inaudible). >> as a citizen, what does the discipline of officer middleton do for the progress that has been made regarding police accountability? >> it sets us back, really six years because to see this come forward, at this point some time given the current political climate that we are in, especially after the capitol insurrection on January 6, and the difference in the way protestors were treated and how black lives matter protestors were treated over the summer, it compares to this directly in the sense that as has been discussed we have officers who have used racial slurs against other black officers and, you know, nothing of any significance happened to them. Some of the rofts are still employed on the force and officer middleton simply has been not only a friend to me but also a role model for my oldest son and somebody that my oldest son trusts and confides in. Officer middleton was able to provide -- it was a pivotal moment for my teenage son and got my son out of a mental health crisis that could have ended much differently. So I really do feel like if jervis was not able to be who he has been to my son and continues to be, that my son would not be where he is at right now. >> and as an activist, do you think that this discipline will have a chilling effect on other officers coming forward to share their concerns with community leaders? >> very much so. I have had conversations with other black officers, either on the force or retired off the officers force who shared some of the same concerns and have had some of the same experiences that officer middleton has endured and so you see this as a problem of retaining black officers on the force and it feels that it won't be addressed and I also see it as a problem for further recruitment of black understand brown officers who would be willing to join an environment which has now been on display as being not conducive to a a conducive work environment and somewhat violent. Toward black officers employed within the lpd for what they have had to endure. >> so since last year and since officer middleton and yourself have had this interaction where he has mentored your son, have you guys continued to stay in contact with your phone or >> since all this came about, specific to officer middleton, I have not had direct contact with him. I have maintained contact with his wife because we also have a friendship and relatioship. But to avoid any further possible fallout from what should have been personal communication anyway, I made sure that we didn't add to that. >> if officer middleton is terminated over his conversations with you do you think you will have any continued trust or faith in the lexington police department? >> no. Especially for what has been brought to the forefront is what this community wants when it comes to lpd accountability, and for the community to also be bearing witness to what lpd is currently doing to this black officer within their ranks. I don't know if I can say this but for what I feel is not something that is justified by termination. Termination in this situation is no the justified and I feel like there are a lot of people right now in the community that are watching and feel that they're witnessing what is disproportionate use of discipline against a black officer, especially when several people in the community, who are watching, are also aware what has already been brought up here and what they have bore witness to for what has been is done by white officers. I don't think I can mention names but for what other officers have done and what discipline has been handed out to them. I mean how is it that other officers can make direct threats or drger to statements to other officers or community members and still maintain employment within a job that requires to protect and serve within the community, not just some people but all people. Because I know for what I know of officer middleton and I want to keep saying jervis because I know him is a friend, jervis versus officer middleton assist me with this, what I feel has been involved in the communications of jervis and I is nothing that bears any direct threat to anybody who works within the lexington police department or within the community are. If anything, I trust that jervis' interaction with the community when he is in the capacity of an officer, would show care and concern that I know right now we have several officers on the police department force that we would not get that. And are not guaranteed that. >> I'm going to have to top questioning now and thank you so much for your time Ms. Williams. Thank you for waiting all day for us today. Really appreciate it. No more questions from us. >> Mr. Horn, do you have any questions for the witness? >> I do not. all right. Is there any examination at all remaining for this witness? All right. May she be released? All right. You are released. Thank you. >> we'll call our last witness, I believe, our plan will be to call christie middleton. okay. Christie middleton. Abigail, do you have how much time the defense has left? >> yes ma'am, I have 15:44.% very good. Thank you. I'll ask the clerk to please swear in the witness. >> yes ma'am. You will remain under oath until your testimony is completed and you are released as a witness. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> yes. >> thank you. thank you, Mr. Sparks. >> thank you, Madam Mayor. Mrs. Middleton can you state your full name for the record, please? For. >> christie middle top. >> you are married to jervis middleton? >> we have been married for almost 14 years.. >> so some of the council May recognize you. You have had a history in the media. >> I have been in the seats when there were seats covering a few council meetings myself. >> you have how many kids? >> between boys. >> since you have been married, how long has jervis and I'll call him jervis with you. I called him officer middleton all day. I'll call him jervis for you. How long has he been employed with the lexington P.D. >> employed officially with the department in 2007 when he completed his training, I believe. >> let me ask you this, because jervis has never given me a clear answer with his history of biology and chemistry degrees. What led him to policing? >> that's a really interesting story I have friends who joke that as jervis tried to find his career path, he wanted to be everything but a astronaut. He struggled with various jobs but had a calling to go into lawmaker. He actually was more interested in the federal sector but some folks that he knew, family friends, that had been with the police department said you can make a real difference locally and if you still want to go the federal route, you could. He had a good job with a national insurance company, a little bit to my dismay, the salary for a starting recruit in the police department was a substantial decrease from his job but he felt that strongly about doing it and wanting to be part of this community and making a dishes that he did that. It also allowed us, at the time, I worked a morning news shift from 4:00 A.M. To 2 pp. He worked second shift with the police department from four to 2 to so the boys were with us 99% of the time. That's why it is a blur. Because they were born when he was in the academy. My water broke and I called his training supervisor and he came -- they were preemies we were in the nicu. He was in the academy all day and came every night to see the babies in the hospital and got an award for perseveres for getting through the the academy while having twin babies born. >> have you seen him come home from work and be upset at issues of systemic racism in the lpd. >> unfortunately yes, especially recently. I don't have to tell anybody how difficult the last several years have been in this country. To be a person of color, to be a black man of color, to be a police officer of any race, has been difficult and then combine that with being a black officer and seeing the division that, the dialogue over race has created. He was very frustrated with what he had observed himself, not just with himself but other others within the department and peole's interaction. The community came to him. They came to him when what he knew was happening in the police department and they had concerns about and that weighed on him heavily, especially in the last couple of years. >> was he somewhat involved in community issues? >> oh a lot. I think he would speak at a lot of different forums. I believe that's how him and Ms. Williams met was at a community forum several years ago. He would be involved with local pastors. He marched with some of the pastors. And participated in some of the events. He takes being a police officer seriously. It's part of his community not just when you clock in and out. >> clear the air on that. There has been some talk about, well, let's put it like this in the piu interview it made it look as though officer didn't want to be a police officer. Is that what you see in your house every day? >> officer officer middleton? >> yes. >> absolutely not. He May get mad at me. I was ready for him to leave the department a long time ago. He was not treated fairly in a number of instances and I know you have heard about those all day. It was clear a lot of people in our support circle were saying he would not have been treated the way he was had he been a different race frankly. And people that I would not expect to hear that from came to that conclusion. But it took their toll on him, too. i said is this really what you want to do. They're fighting you. They're putting obstacles against you. They're out to get you is what it felt like to us. And you were seeing things that are disturbing you so much but he felt he could still change them. He felt he could change things. I think he felt a little responsibility, he was in recruitment and training. He recruited people to come to the department with the belief they would do the right thing. He had citizens who didn't want him to be a police officer but he felt he was doing noble work and he was chastised for. >> it does he still feel at that time way? >> that's why we are here. He could have have it quit when this all started and saved us headaches and pain and this public hearing I'm sure no one wanted to spend all day doing. He could have quit. He has five degrees. He has plenty of other things he is qualified to do, but he wants a fair shot, he wants to be able to clear his name for the things he has been falsely accused of and there is a long list. >> and he felt, I think it's fair to say, based on the last charges, he felt like he was treated unfairly in that process? >> absolutely. And it wasn't just him. It was an unfair process and again I think that's something he wants to fight. When you see from the inside that by the time something gets to the chief's desk there is a panel of not his peers, of all white men who are evaluating in his case, some highly racially charged issues. His last case had racial components, too and when he brings up matters of race, it's understandable they see it through a different lens. But when you see as a community member that that process, it can be determined this is how we want it to end so we are only going to submit the evidence that supports that. We witness things that were just misrepresented, in some case completely false. There is dialogue about me that was completely false that could I have easily disproven. Just false information. What is even with held from the chief that he doesn't even get by the time it gets to him. And as a citizen and I talked to the chief about this myself, it's disturbing that essentially if your case goes to the discipline review board and all the people on the review board say well this is what the person who complained says happened. This is what the person who is accused of it said happen but here's what we think happened so that's was we are going to push forward in the narrative and then no one gets a chance to rebut it fairly unless it comes to a hearing like this. >> in jervis' case this time, do you know how many questions the disciplinary board asked him. >> zero. He poured his heart out telling his version of what happened and he was completely deflated that they didn't even ask him a single question. >> and how long after that review board, how long expired -- I think they have maybe 30 days. How long expired between the end of the review board and the chief recommending that the he be terminated? >> I think he texted me like five minutes later. It took him a few minutes to determine, we won't be able to feed our kids and support our family. Five minutes, no questions. As a citizen, I expect better. I expect better of our leadership. I really do. (. maybe this is a good time to ask abigail how much time is left. >> there is 7:38. 7:34. thank you. >> so I've got to be quick. Were you aware of jervis making these complaints -- let me rephrase that. Were you aware of jervis really want wanting to make complaints about what happened with him in the past to the chief. >> he specifically wanted to address things with the chief he talked to a supervisor about one of the incidents and felt the chief never wanted to discuss the matters directly. He wanted to move past them and it was if they never happened. >> what did you do about it. >> I had a meeting with the chief and talked about several things. The most disturbing being that in a written transcript that I got from a prior situation with the department, that a lieutenant at the time said that a black man at your house was terrifying. If it was a man at your -- if it was a black man at your house, it was terrifying. I specifically brought that to the chief's attention because have I two block sons who are not terrifying. They're beautiful boys who are proud of their daddy being a police officer. >> the officer that made the comment, that's one of the recovers he is accused of calling out. >> yes. >> so when you poke to the chief, was it November of 2020 or November 2019. >> I'm sorry it was November 19. It would have been -- >> what did the chief do about it? You are think making a complaint as a citizen, multiple issues of racism within the lpd. >> the memes were one of the things, those were very painful to see. He said he would try to see who had them. There were complaints about things leaked about my husband. I worked in the media. There was nowhere near the level of things that got leaked with other officers. He asked me if I could find out from my former colleagues who had leaked information. I expected the agenciescy to look into that. >> when you are talking about leaking information, correct me if you understand if this is correct. When an officer is charged with a disciplinary infraction, then the department is not supposed to speak about that, is not supposed to be leaked. >> it is my understanding and what I've read, there is a krs statute that says you cannot talk about it until the discipline is final and there were statements from the piu, there were information. It was a domestic case. >> in this case in the case that's currently before the council did you get text as soon as officer officer middleton was placed on administrative suspension, supposedly confidentially. >> absolutely. He got a text and that sent our world, a text from a reporter at a station, a tv station asking about him being forced to resign. I got a text from the same station, different reporter. My colleagues that I work with who didn't even know this was going on were contacted by reporters who had gotten information from police. That was a lot to absorb. >> did you go to the chief of police, chief weathers and complain about that leak? >> I contacted him and piu, yes. >> what were you told? >> again, if I could find out who had done it myself. And I mean reporters don't always reveal their sources. I got enough information to know who was suspected and I could put two and two together. >> but when you made that complaint nothing happened? >> no. >> so let me ask you this. You made a complaint that jervis was being subjected to this department and I understand that, to your knowledge, nothing was done. >> no, and... >> did anyone call you? The chief said he just told to you go to piu about it. >> no, I had reached out to the chief and piu. I reached out to the chief and the chief had piu call me back. >> so who did you speak to at piu. >> commander ingram. >> and was, did you tell him what had gone on. >> yes. >> did he indicate to you that they were going to engage in an investigation. >> they asked me to find out who did it, who the sources were. >> so to your knowledge, was there any investigation? >> not that I'm aware of, no. >> you have seen these text messages that form the basis of the charges against jervis, correct? >> I have. If if I categorize those as private communications between two citizens about a matter of public concern would you say I was wrong about that categorization? no: seeing the interest in police accountability, seeing the interest in racism in any form, especially in our public ent difficults, that is absolutely of more public interest thn my entire lifetime. >> did you see anything in those messages that encouraged violence. >> not at all. >> did you see anything that encouraged anyone to incite a riot or harm anyone in any way? >> no. >> if the council agrees with us, that officer middleton should be reinstated, to be officer middleton again, do you think he would be a good police officer? >> I think he would continue to be a great police officer. He had a perfect record up until recently and seeing what other officers have been allowed to say on the department stay on the department with, he deshes a fair shot as much as they do. Cases where there has been actual injuries, physical harm, physical challenge, you know, knowing that he works with an officer who was disciplined that this council not this exact council but this body sent back to work after using racial slurs in front of other officers, and the officer is still there and that's okay. But when he stands up for people that are speaking against a certain race, racially biased, that are showing discrimination, buying into the whole system of systemic racism that we know there are two sets of justices in this world. There is a set if you look a certain way and there is a different one if you look like us. And when you see that mirrored in the police department, he just couldn't speak up -- he couldn't not speak up. And he still feels like there is an opportunity to say, I can come back to the department and the department and this council honestly can show that we will give him a fair shot like we've given everybody else. >> I believe I'll reserve any time I have remaining. Thank you. thank you, Mr. Horn, do you have any questions? >> only two. Were you present for the disciplinary review board when officer middleton went before it? >> recently? I was not. >> and do you know that the fop rep on that board is an african-american? >> I do but my understanding is that she was there only for that as a representative. She is not a voting member. I'm not sure if that is correct or not but that was my understanding. >> I would suggest that you are mistaken about that. >> okay. >> but I just wanted to be clear that you said there were no peers referring to displace so the fop rep is a voting member of the discipline review board? >> yes. >> that is a change from last time. My apologies. I was incorrect on that. >> that's all. >> I don't have anything else. Thank you. is there any reason that the witness can't be released? >> no. thank you very much. >> thank you, christie. Mr. Sparks, you have two minutes. >> I'll yield those back to the council. okay. Very good. does that complete your case on behalf of officer middleton, Mr. Sparks. >> it does. all right. So the proof has now closed, council members. And prior discipline of officer middleton shall not be considered in the council's deliberations and the termination of guilt or not guilty on counts 1, 2 and 3 of the disciplinary charges. But can be considered for purposes of determining the discipline to be imposed by the council in the event of a finding of guilt on charges 1, 2 and/or 3. Now I'm going to revisit a pending motion, I as hearing officer am not going to rule upon the pending motion to dismiss. The disciplinary charges will not be dismissed but will proceed to the hearing authority, the city council for consideration. With that, we will go to closing arguments and Mr. Sparks will have 15 minutes. Mr. Sparks. >> thank you Madam Mayor. >> you are welcome. >> ladies and gentlemen of the couple, thank you for today. These things are hard. Take solace in the fact that at least you were home sitting there opposed to here. But very little solace to be had for many of us. These things are hard. This is a person's career. It's not just a finding that you make and move on to the next thing. This will stick with you probably, I suspect because it's significant and significant because it doesn't involve just a job. It involves a career, a life. Officer middleton is going to go on one way or the other. It's not the end of his life about I any means. He is going to recover, but forcing him to recover in a career that he is not -- that he should not be expelled from forcing him to engage in a new career, that's just not fair and at the heart of the issue is fundamental fairness. That is what I want you to take as a guide for your decision. You've got a set of instructions there and you can go through them, but at the end of the day, you are going to have to follow -- you are going to have to find what is fair here and finding what is fair will lead to you check the box that says that what happened here, yeah, it isn't pretty. There are things that you read and you wince. I mean I get that. Officer middleton, he gets that. But it is speech and it is speech between two private people and he didn't encourage violence. He didn't harm anyone. You compare that to what is going on in the world today and I'm not trying to make a political statement either way but look at what is going on in D.C. Last month. There was an actual riot. People actually got hurt, people actually got killed. That's real. But yet half the country used that as well, that was a lot of speech issues and there were a few bad actors and only those bad actors should be punishedded and the other people said the people who incited it should be punished but in this case, you've got words that didn't harm anyone. Didn't incite any violence. Didn't create any harm at all. And again I said this to you in the opening and I'll say it again. The only harm was imagined and it's created out of whole cloth to justify this fundamentally unfair result which is to fire an officer who spoke out about racism. He spoke out to sarah williams and read the whole text when I asked chief weathers to read the text that the government didn't share with you and tell you and put in their piu summary. He said I'm just tired. I'm sick of being treated this way. That's what matters. That explains to you the context of what he was feeling an are and within that context that have you to view his words but then when I ask you, okay, just come back to the ultimate question. Is there anything other than imagined harm? You know chief weathers talked about all these horrific things happening all across lexington. People being threatened, officers families being threatened. That's horrible. No one would want that. But the relevant question is did any of that have anything to do with officer middleton's comments? and the answer, he didn't give it but it's absolutely clearly no. They allege officially that he committed misconduct and if you read the definition, that he engages in conduct which tends to impair the efficiency of the department. The government wants to say, well, that means that we can just surmise. We can just high -- hypothesize impairment on the conduct. I read it that it has to result in harm. That's sort of what free speech, in my view is about. But you go it to decide that. Read it and decide. They talk about dissemination of critical information. That's on the charge. Well, confidential. They used critical throughout when they were sort of investigating him in the piu. Critical and sensitive. Those were the words you will see in the piu summary. There is nothing about the eru callout like a movie. Nothing about it really confidential. Those things are shared all the time. It's a call into work. Show up for work. Imagine being out at a restaurant or a bar when we could do those things and someone says, an officer picks up the phone and says I got a call out. Got to go into work and a friend says, hey, you are in eru aren't you? Yep, got to go. They're saying that is giving away confidential critical information and he should be punished. Now if you actually look at the punishment that is recommended for a first offense of that, which this is, it is one-month suspension. But yet they want to treat this because it is so heinous he their own disciplinary recommendation for that offense is a one-month suspension. It's in the information they have before you. You heard the chief testify to it. They want to say well what about this being a progressive disciplinary system because he has a prior incident. Well, the reality of that is even their own definition of the disciplinary steps for suspension involve that you have multiple repeated offenses, multiple instances that you have engaged in, in other words, you got in trouble and getting in trouble again. So suspension, even if it is a serious infraction is all that is called for there. They're like well this is so serious, so bad, we want to terminate him from his career. Folks, again, very different lens because the lens that I look through, I don't see it. And I can assure you that the lens that jervis middleton looked through in May and June of 2020, after watching the horrible things that we all saw, was that I need to act. I need to be a voice. And he did that. He had courage. I started this off by talking about representative john lewis and his famous speech about have courage to cause good trouble. Well what that really means to me is you have to have the courage sometimes to go out, to speak up, even if you know you May get in trouble for it, even if you know that some people will say you've gone too far because you know, being able to go too far sometimes creates change. It creates the kind of change that it's very clear jervis was trying to create. He wasn't out there trying to harm anyone. He was trying to end systemic racism within the lexington police department. That's his crime. That's his crime. He used words to do that and they're attempting to punish him because, in my view, there are ro fs in the piu that think that speech is unacceptable. You don't talk about fellow officers and if you do, we are going to get you. And if you are somebody that stands up against or in favor of these causes that we think are just absolutely antithetical to law enforcement, then we are going to get you. So they engage in this extraordinarily biasone and flawed and unfair investigation, throwing things in the investigation that were half truths, ignoring obvious question marks, completely ignoring when there are statements made that don't make sense in context that other people make, just ignore those and when jervis makes a statement, they twist it and say to you, well, you know, he lied because he said, when asked about whether he had ever monitored radio, he said because I asked him very specifically. He said "absolutely not" that's what he said. Well, you actually, when you quote things, that means you go to actually what was literally said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Said. Answered that the question, absolutely. So again they're allowed to spin and sort of skip steps in the process, you know, not giving him an opportunity to bring him back in and call and talk to him about, look, we think you May have lied when you said you never listen to the radio, which is not a major deal anyway, listening to the ra idiois perfectly allowable because, again, there is no indication he ever provided any of that information at all ever to anyone, including sarah williams. So they take this nothingness and then they spin it and all of a sudden he is facing termination over it. That's why I scream this is unfair, bias, flawed and that matters speaking up is difficult. And he did it. He had the courage to do it. You know, I'm close to ending and let me just say that, the world saw what happened when you suppress people screaming about inequality. How long have we seen protests, but they're small. Protesting about, you know, police brutality and ending police brutality. You had a large number in law enforcement that were saying that itself just a fiction. There is no such thing as brutality and excessive force in law enforcement. You know, it took these horrible things happenin in the spring of 2020 for the world to sort of wake up and go oh wow, those people were right. There is an incredible amount of police brutality and excessive force. Maybe we need to take action. Well, jervis middleton spoke up. He had courage. And he called people out for better or worse. But what he did does not j us phi anything at all. It certainly doesn't justify the highest punishment they can give him, which is termination. We would just ask you to be fair with him, understand that he was extraordinarily hofd in the moment that maybe his words were a little more harsh than he wishes they were now. But that is no basis to punish him at all and if he gets any punishment at all, it should be consistent with the type of punishment that is meeted out to others for this type of similar stuff, which would be a slap on the wrist. And I ask you to exonerate him in fairness based otto talt of the evidence that you saw today. Thank you -- based on the totality of the evidence that you saw today. thank you, Mr. Sparks. Mr. Horn, please present your closing statement on behalf of chief weathers and you will have sa 15 minutes. >> thank you all for your time and your patience. I'm tired. I don't mean because of the hearing because I mean I am tired from the hearing but it's a normal kind of tired. The past four years have exhausted me. I don't know what has happened to personal accountability in our nation. It seems that no one has to accept responsibility for their actions anymore. Blame it on someone else. Explain that past events made me argue that I have a right to do what I did, regardless of the potential harm to others. Say it's fake news and never happened. Alternative facts. Or just lie. Truth to many just doesn't seem to matter. Personal accountability, that's what this hearing is about. I stated at the beginning of the hearing, the case before you today is about a police officer who exercised very poor judgment and acted counter to the mission and responsibility of the lexington police department. During the most significant policing event in lexington in 20 years. This was a tense time for the community, protestors, and the police. Police responsibility during the protest was to work to maintain calm and order, protect people, property and the peace, to deescalate situations. Deescalation is something we talked a lot about over the past year. Officer middleton did the opposite. During this highly tense highly anxious event, officer middleton was singling out individual police officers and accepting information about the officers to a leader of the protest to use against the officer. Instead of trying to de-escalate things, he was providing information to enflame things. Instead of helping officers to remain calm, he was trying toage -- to agitate. Instead of trying to make the situation less dangerous, his conduct made it more dangerous. You will recall that during the protest across the united states last year police officers and others were being singled out by protestors, stalked, threatened, families threatened and attacked when an officer is called out by name when she is on the line during a protest, it heightens anxiety. They naturally worry about what other private information people May have, like where they live. And they worry about their families. It was not officer middleton's job to try to start a fire during the protest. Excuses offered by middle ton as he tried to explain away all of these things. Free speech and political activity, what about tell them middleton said F.T.P. Seems to be a public concern. I hope to give maynard the business. These mother fs are going to make me go off and then I'll be over the paper again. F.T.P. To get under jervis skin, tell him -- said hi. She wasn't supposed to use this information, another thing he indicated in his interview and verified. Sarah williams sent send me more shit to talk to them, please. Jervis mid middleton said call albert johnson a racist. Tell him you have information on him. Time trying to find something for to you add to say to him. The lieutenant jackie newman, I have plenty of junk on her. She deserves some horn time as well. Brandon is out front. He is the one who did the fst test. He is a little short dude. He needs some love and when middleton thought and what did he think of attempting to upset police? Here are some quotes. They are panicking three exclamation points. Lpd is panicking like it's going to be a riot. Lmfao. The idea that this is free speech has long been debunked. We all know that you can't yell fire in a crowded fire. Not going to go through the evidence in detail. You've listened. And you are able to couple to your own conclusions. I do want to ask you to stay focused on the actual issues officer middleton's conduct. As to the absolutely not statement. You can read that for yourself in whole beginning on page 71 of that transcript, which I believe is government exhibit 8. Read through it. And will you come to the same conclusion that the officer is came to. Officer middleton was lying. Also consider that the three videos we presented were instances where sarah williams actually repeated what officer middleton sent to her in the text and facebook message. The messages that the we introduced are exhibit 2 to your packet and you are free to read through all of those messages yourself. Also take a look at that exhibit 1 where he talks about looking for plain clothes officers. And you can look for yourself at the screen shot of the eru notice and the email that he sent out about overtime for the police officers. It will come as no surprise to some of you that I'm an operate optimist and idealist. I harbor a certain romanticism about the police. I have the greatest respect for% our police officers but I also have the greatest expectations. We in lexington are very fortunate to have the police force that we have. It is my honor and privilege to assist, advise and represent them every day. But that doesn't mean I think they're perfect or flawless. It is possible to admire and respect our plarm and support the protest about racial injustice and police reform. They're not mutually exclusively as some would have you believe. Police officers can and did March with protestors, take a knee from protestors, prayed produce protestors and expressed their opinions about reform. Officer middleton's conduct at issue was not good faith honest political activity. Our government is formed by a social contract among the people. We express that contract through our constitution. And we expect the constitution to protect our rights. But we select certain individuals and endow them with the responsibility to protect those rights but also the ability to take some of those rights away. We give police officers great power and so our expectations about their behavior should be the highest. Police officers are what stephen king referred to in one of his books as knights of the badge and gun. To me, knights are the best and noblest. We should expect officers to be the best and noblest of us. The question before you is not about jervis middleton the man but the police officer. You can forgive jervis middleton the man, but I think he has disqualified himself from being a police officer. His conduct was a gross dereliction of duty and a horrible breach of trust. You heard from chief weathers tonight. His recommendation is that officer middleton be dismissed and he explained why. I trust his judgment. I also agree with it. But this decision comes down to you. The police did their job in investigating this matter. We did our job or at least tried to by presenting it to you. It's time now for you to do your job. Do you think the chief's decision in this matter was driven by racism? Or do you trust your chief? If you decide not to dismiss officer middleton, then you tell our community our police officers and chief weathers this type of behavior is acceptable. Thank you. thank you, Mr. Horn. Council members, deliberations on the charges will now occur. You are to consider the testimony and exhibits that have been introduced into the record. So we will go to deliberations and I just need to say, as we are going, we will need to take about a 10-minute break so that gtv can get us set up on closed executive session. With that, I and the city council will go into executive session for purposes of deliberations pursuant to kentucky revise the statute krs 61.810f and j. Do I have a motion to go into executive session for purposes of deliberations pursuant to krs 61.810 f and j. >> so moved. >> second. >> vice mayor kay moves and I believe I heard council member reynolds. Second. Is there any discussion of the motion? All those in favor please raise your hand so we can see it with your face. All those in favor opposed -- all those opposed same sign. The motion passes. We will go into executive session and we will give gtv about 10 minutes. Thank you. Also,. Lol >> second. Council member Mccurn seconds. Any discussion? All those in favor of going back into open session please show your hand. Anyone opposed, same sign. That motion carries. We are now back in open session. This is findings, determination and holding. This matter has come before the city council of the lexington fayette county urban county government for a hearing on February 18, 2021, on a statement of formal charges signed and sworn to by police chief lawrence weathers on December 10, 2021. The disciplinary charges: against police officer jervis middleton, the following findings, determination and holding will be presented to the city council the appointing authority under krs 15 hnt 520 for consideration. Findings. Count 1: based upon the testimony, documents and items admitted into evidence at the hearing, it is hereby found as to count 1 and the sole specification follows: officer middleton is found guilty of violation of operational rule section 1.0 2 as to the sole specification contained in count 1 of the disciplinary charges. I will need a motion to that effect. >> so move. vice mayor kay moved. Do I hear a second? >> second. >> council member ellinger seconds. There is any discussion? All right. I will ask the clerk to please take a roll call vote on this motion. >> mayor, sorry, on the date you said December 10, 2021, I believe you meant December 10, 2020. Is that correct? >> I believe you are right. >> yes ma'am. Sorry about that. >> yes ma'am. I'm so sorry. December 10, 2020. >> thank you. So we via motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you take a roll call vote? >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Plomin. >> yes. >> Ms. Reynolds. >> yes. >> Ms. Sheehan. >> yes. >> Ms. Baxter. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Bledsoe. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Fred brown. >> yes. >> Mr. James brown. >> yes. >> Mr. Ellinger. >> yes ma'am. >> vice mayor kay. >> yes. >> Mr. Kloiber. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Lamb. >> yes, ma'am. >> Ms. Legris. >> yes. >> Mr. Mccurn. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Moloney. >> thank you, mayor. thank you, that motion passes. Count 23 based upon the testimony, documents and items admitted into the evidence at the hearing, it is hereby found as to count 2 and the sole specification as follows. Officer middleton is found guilty of violation of operational rules section 1.115 as to the sole specification contained in count 2 of the disciplinary charges. And I will need a motion to that effect. >> so moved. >> second. >> council memberplomin seconds. Is there any discussion? >> seeing none, I'll ask the clerk to take a roll call vote. >> Ms. Plomin. >> yes. >> Ms. Reynolds. >> yes. >> Ms. Sheehan. >> yes. >> Ms. Baxter. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Bledsoe. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Fred brown. >> yes. >> Mr. James brown. >> yes. >> Mr. Ellinger. >> yes ma'am. >> vice mayor kay. >> yes. >> Mr. Kloiber. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Lamb. >> yes, ma'am. >> Ms. Legris. >> yes. >> Mr. Mccurn. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Moloney. >> yes. that motion passes. Count 3. Based upon the testimony, documents and items admitted into evidence at the hearing, it is hereby found as to count 3 and the sole specification as follows: officer middleton is found not guilty of violation of operational rule section 1.18 as to the sole specification contained in count 3 of the disciplinary charges and I will need a motion to that effect. >> so moved. >> second. >> vice mayor kay moves, council member ellinger seconds. Is there any discussion? Will ask the clerk to take a roll call vote. >> Ms. Plomin. >> yes. >> Ms. Reynolds. >> yes. >> Ms. Sheehan. >> yes. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Baxter. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Bledsoe. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Fred brown. >> yes. >> Mr. James brown. >> yes. >> Mr. Ellinger. >> yes ma'am. >> vice mayor kay. >> yes. >> Mr. Kloiber. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Lamb. >> yes, ma'am. >> Ms. Legris. >> yes. >> Mr. Mccurn. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Moloney. >> yes. >> thank you. That. >> that motion passes. Next is determination. Officer jervis middleton is guilty on one or more of the charges above holding. I need a motion and a second to that effect. >> so moved. thank you. There is a second? >> second. >> council member fred brown seconded. Vice mayor kay moved. Is there any discussion? All right I'll ask the clerk to please take a roll call vote. >> Ms. Plomin. >> yes. >> Ms. Reynolds. >> yes. >> Ms. Sheehan. >> yes. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Baxter. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Bledsoe. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Fred brown. >> yes. >> Mr. James brown. >> yes. >> Mr. Ellinger. >> yes ma'am. >> vice mayor kay. >> yes. >> Mr. Kloiber. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Lamb. >> yes, ma'am. >> Ms. Legris. >> yes. >> Mr. Mccurn. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Moloney. >> yes. >> thank you. That motor vehicle passes. -- that motion passeses. Next is a motion on holding. Officer middleton has been found guilty of violation of operational rules as to one or more of the three sole spes if I cautions contained in counts 1, 2 and/or 3. Of the disciplinary charges. Therefore it is decided and held the discipline to be imposed upon officer middleton is as follows: termination. We need a motion to that effect. >> so moved. >> second. >> vice mayor kay moves and council member ellinger seconds. Is there any discussion? I'll ask the clerk to please take a roll call vote. >> Ms. Plomin. >> yes. >> Ms. Reynolds. >> yes. >> Ms. Sheehan. >> yes. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Baxter. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Bledsoe. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Fred brown. >> yes. >> Mr. James brown. >> yes. >> Mr. Ellinger. >> yes ma'am. >> vice mayor kay. >> yes. >> Mr. Kloiber. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Lamb. >> yes, ma'am. >> Ms. Legris. >> yes. >> Mr. Mccurn. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Moloney. >> yes. >> thank you. that motion passes. I now seek a resolution that a resolution be amended to walk on to the agenda to further adopt these findings, determination and holding. Do I hear a motion to walk on resolution number r 075-2021. >> so moved. >> second. vice mayor kay made the motion, council member plomin seconded the walk on to the docket. There is any discussion? All right. All those in favor of walking on, please raise your hand. Anyone opposed, same sign. That motion passes. Now I would ask the clerk to give first reading to that resolution. >> resolution number 075-2021, a resolution adopting findings, determination and holding concerning formal disciplinary charges filed against officer jervis middleton by chief lawrence weathers dated with the clerk on December 10, 2021 but it should be 2020. yes ma'am. >> thank you. thank you. Do I hear a motion to suspend the rules and give second reading to this resolution? >> so moved. >> second. vice mayor kay suspends the rules and council member ellinger seconds. Is there any discussion? All those in favor of giving second reading please show me your hand. Nip opposed, same sign. That motion passes. If you will please give it second reading when you're ready, Madam Clerk. >> resolution number 075-2021, a resolution adopting findings, determination and holding concerning formal disciplinary charges filed against officer jervis middleton by chief lawrence weathers dated with the clerk on December 10, 2020 but thank you very much. Do I hear a motion to approve? >> so moved. >> second. Council member ellinger seconds. And when you are ready, Madam Clerk, if you please take a roll call vote. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Plomin. >> yes. >> Ms. Reynolds. >> yes. >> Ms. Sheehan. >> yes. >> Ms. Baxter. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Bledsoe. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Fred brown. >> yes. >> Mr. James brown. >> yes. >> Mr. Ellinger. >> yes ma'am. >> vice mayor kay. >> yes. >> Mr. Kloiber. >> yes ma'am. >> Ms. Lamb. >> yes, ma'am. >> Ms. Legris. >> yes. >> Mr. Mccurn. >> yes ma'am. >> Mr. Moloney. >> yes. >> thank you. >> that motion passes. This hearing has now come to a conclusion. So I will call for a motion to adjourn. >> so moved. >> is there a second? >> second. >> council member plomin moves adjournment. Vice mayor kay seconds. Is there any discussion? All those in favor please show your hand. Is anyone opposed? Same sign. All right. That motion passes. Thank you very much. We are adjourned.