 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State ex rel Ohio Patrolmen's Benevolent Association v. City of Mentor8/16/2000
Mandamus to compel city of Mentor et al. to provide respondents access to certain Mentor Police Department internal affairs investigative reports, and city payroll and overtime records - Writ granted in part and denied in part - Relators entitled to award of attorney fees only insofar as their public records claims had merit.
Submitted May 23, 2000
In Mandamus.
This case involves the public records requests of relators, Ohio Patrolmen's Benevolent Association ("OPBA") and Mentor Police Officers Daniel R. Grein and Timothy Baker, for access to certain Mentor Police Department internal affairs investigative reports and city payroll and overtime records. OPBA is the exclusive collective bargaining representative for all police officers employed by respondent city of Mentor.
Internal Affairs Investigative Report: Possible Hazing Incidents
In March 1998, respondent Mentor Police Chief Richard A. Amiott initiated an internal affairs investigation to determine whether Mentor police officers had participated in an arm-burning initiation ritual. In these incidents, which had originated in the early 1980s and continued until 1998, Mentor police officers who had completed their probationary periods engaged in a "tough man" competition, usually with Mentor Police Lieutenant Larry R. Staton. A lit cigar or cigarette was placed between the forearm of the officer who had just completed probation and Staton's forearm and it remained there until one of the officers pulled his or her forearm away. These incidents, which resulted in burns and scarring, occurred in bars or restaurants when the officers were off duty and not in police uniform. The incidents were unstructured, with no one person responsible for organizing them. The officers who participated in the competition with Staton did so voluntarily, and these officers did not receive preferential treatment over those officers who did not. Staton did not solicit officers to participate in these activities, but he also did not refuse to participate when asked.
In April 1998, the police detective who had conducted the internal affairs investigation sent a report to Chief Amiott. The detective concluded that there appeared to be no criminal law violations, including hazing as prohibited by R.C. 2903.31, but he recommended that administrative disciplinary charges be brought against nineteen police officers and one city employee for their respective roles in the incidents. Amiott nevertheless continued the investigation due to the nature of the acts involved, potential civil liability of the city and the police department, and his desire to protect the image of Mentor and its police department.
In April 1999, Amiott received a supplemental investigative report that found the ritual had not occurred since the previous report and that it had evidently been discontinued. Amiott then forwarded the investigatory file to the Lake County Prosecuting Attorney's Office for a determination of whether any criminal charges should be brought against Staton or any other Mentor police officers.
In May and July 1999, Officer Baker requested that Amiott provide him with access to the hazing investigation records. Amiott refused access to these records. Amiott claimed that the requested records were exempt from disclosure because the investigation had not been completed.
On July 25, 1999, the Lake County Prosecuting Attorney's Office informed Amiott that no criminal charges would be brought against any Mentor police officer as a result of the arm-burning incidents. The prosecutor's office decided that it could not prove criminal conduct beyond a reasonable doubt because none of the
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|