Urban County Council Special Meeting - Police Disciplinary Hearing

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Council met on March 15, 2011, at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky, with Mayor Gray presiding. The council addressed two agenda items during the meeting. A motion to approve a time limit for case presentation was approved by the council. A police disciplinary hearing for Sergeant Earl J. Rayford was deferred to a later date. The council took five votes during the meeting and heard no public comments.

Attendance

Present: Lawless, Martin, McChord, Myers, Stinnett, Beard, Blues, Crosbie, Ellinger, Farmer, Ford, Gorton, Henson, Kay

Absent: Lane

Late: None

Votes and Decisions

The meeting included five motions, all of which passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes or abstentions.

Motion to Continue Discussion of Police Disciplinary Issue 1:11 Moved by Beard and seconded by Henson, this motion passed. All 13 members voted in favor: Beard, Henson, Martin, McChord, Myers, Stinnett, Blues, Crosbie, Ellinger, Farmer, Ford, Gorton, and Kay.

Motion to Reschedule Police Disciplinary Hearing 2:19 Moved by Gorton and seconded by Kay, this motion to reschedule the police disciplinary hearing to April 26, 2011 at 5:00 p.m. passed. Thirteen members voted in favor: Gorton, Kay, Beard, Henson, Martin, McChord, Myers, Stinnett, Blues, Crosbie, Ellinger, Farmer, and Ford.

Motion to Deny Motion to Dismiss Charges Against Police Sergeant Earl Rayford 23:16 Moved by Blues and seconded by Myers, this motion passed. Twelve members voted in favor: Blues, Myers, Gorton, Ellinger, Martin, McChord, Stinnett, Crosbie, Farmer, Ford, Henson, and Kay.

Motion to Approve Ninety-Minute Time Limit for Each Side 25:04 Moved by Gorton and seconded by Ellinger, this motion to approve a ninety-minute time limit for each side to present their case passed. Thirteen members voted in favor: Gorton, Ellinger, Martin, McChord, Myers, Stinnett, Beard, Blues, Crosbie, Farmer, Ford, Henson, and Kay.

Motion to Adjourn 26:46 Moved by Gorton and seconded by Crosbie, the motion to adjourn the meeting passed. All 13 members voted in favor: Gorton, Crosbie, Beard, Blues, Ellinger, Farmer, Ford, Henson, Kay, Martin, McChord, Myers, and Stinnett.

Contested Items

Motion to Dismiss Charges Against Sergeant Rayford

A procedural dispute arose regarding a motion to dismiss charges against Sergeant Rayford. [timestamp information not available in source data]

The defense argued that the charges could not proceed because the factual basis presented in the motion to dismiss was internally contradictory. Specifically, the defense contended that the motion's claim—that Rayford caused a change from trafficking to possession—was contradicted by officer testimony establishing that no trafficking charge was ever filed in the first place.

The prosecution countered this argument by asserting that the council's role was to hear evidence and determine its credibility and weight during the hearing process, rather than to dismiss the case based on factual determinations made before the hearing commenced.

The outcome of this procedural dispute is not documented in the available meeting records.

Police Disciplinary Hearing for Sergeant Earl J. Rayford

3:21

The council convened a special meeting to hear a disciplinary case against Police Sergeant Earl J. Rayford. Sergeant Rayford was charged with misconduct for requesting that seized evidence—specifically rent money—be returned to the girlfriend of an arrested suspect. The allegation indicated that Sergeant Rayford made this request due to a personal relationship with the woman.

Key speakers in the hearing included William C. Jacobs and Keith Horn.

During the proceedings, a motion to dismiss the charges against Sergeant Rayford was presented. This motion was denied by the council.

As a result of the hearing, the disciplinary case was not resolved on the scheduled date. The matter was deferred and rescheduled for April 26, 2011, to allow for further proceedings.

Time Limit for Case Presentation

The council discussed and approved a time limit for case presentations during the rescheduled hearing. 24:33

Decision

The council approved a 90-minute time limit for each side to present their case, including both direct and cross-examination.

Key Participants

The discussion involved: - Glenda George - David Enlow - Councilmember Gorton - Councilmember Ellinger

Outcome

The motion was supported by the Department of Law and Councilmember Gorton, with a second by Councilmember Ellinger. The proposal was approved.