Denial of Police Service to a Citizen by Greensboro Chief Ken Miller

8/6/2019 Denial of Police Service to a Citizen by Greensboro Chief Ken Miller

1/7

May 2,2011 M A Y 0 2 2 0 1 1

City Manager Rashad Young300 West Washington StreetGreensboro, N.C., 27401

RE: Complaint of Discrimination, Retaliation, Denial of Equal Protection UnderLaw, which states in part, "[Njor shall any State deprive any person of life, libertyor property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within itsjurisdiction the equal protection ofthe law, !! and Violation of General Conduct

Mr. Young:The City of Greensboro has a policy which mandates that all city employees be competent intheir jobs. The policy is entitled Disciplinary Action andis policy number H-1. Section 4.4specifically addresses incompetence as unacceptable performance or behavior. The GreensboroPolice Department has a directive that mandates competency from all employees. This GPDDirective is number 1.5.11.Recently, I have been able to view a YouTube presentation, that was disturbing to me as acitizen. If you place sgtdjdavis in the search bar, you can access the presentation. In thepresentation, which I have found to be authentic, Sergeant Darrin (DJ.) Davis is in conversationwith a female subordinate employee. Sergeant Davis in the You'Tube audio, amongst otherthings:

Sergeant Darrin (D.l) Davis investigates complaints' made by the subordinate againstSergeant Darrin (D.l) Davis. i. Sergeant Darrin CD.J.) Davis informed the female subordinate that she had "stabbed himin the back," by filing complaints against him.

Sergeant Darrin (D.J.) Davis threatened the female subordinate with discipline if shecontinued to file complaints, and informed her that she could only file complaints throughhim (although some of the complaints were against Sel',geantDarrin (DJ.) Davis).

Sergeant Davis stated that the female subordinate' wrote stuff about their privateconversations and he (Davis) relayed things to her in a way he probably should not have,Sergeant Davis expressed concern because, "Now the Lieutenant knows." Sergeant Davissuggested he was going to cut off his recorder and tell the female subordinate somethingin private.

Sergeant Davis informed the female subordinate that she probably would not get athorough investigation of her complaints or due process. Sergeant Davis harassed her because his name was "on the blog." Sergeant Davis harassed and investigated her for going home sick, but when he could not

find a violation, Sergeant Davis did not commit the investigation to paper. When thefemale subordinate asked for the proper documentation relating to the investigation,Sergeant Davis lied and stated he had not conducted an investigation.


2/7

Sergeant Davis informed the subordinate that if she was going to file harassment on him,it had to go through him.

Sergeant Davis investigated and harassed the employee for filing a complaint, andbecause the subordinate's, city encouraged, Employee Assistance Program (EAP)Counselor, apparently filed a complaint, on the subordinate's behalf.

Upon being asked (by different people, because of my police background) about the sgtdjdavis,YouTube audio, I thought it was a violation of the City of Greensboro policy and the GPDDirectives, which mandate competency. However, I was recently informed that the subordinatewas terminated for filing complaints and behind this audio, authority, Chief of Police Ken Miller.Chief Miller's termination of the female subordinate employee was a co-signing, confirmation asproper, legitimizing and codifying Sergeant Davis' behavior. Itmeant that police officers werenow officially able, at least within the GPD, to investigate themselves.This, what I believe to be the biggest landmark decision since Terry v. Ohio, should becommunicated nationwide, but on an immediate scale, to all City of Greensboro citizens andpolice officers. I sent Chief Miller a cordial e-mail and copied as many pertinent individuals aspossible. In fact, I copied the person that I had earlier informed that Sergeant Davis' actions werein violation of City and GPD competency mandates. Without solicitation, I "corrected" myselfwith the person I had informed that Sergeant Davis' actions violated competency, and apologized(although unwarranted) to Chief Miller. Even though it is obvious that the sgtdjdavis YouTubeaudio expresses some lack of competency and other things, as it relates to Sergeant Davis. I alsovolunteered my future services to Chief Miller.On April 29, 2011, at 8:06pm, Chief of Police Ken Miller Bent me an e-mail response whichstated, "Charles; regrettably, you continue to repeatedly distort facts about processes, statementsand actions, lack clear understanding of the law, and continue to selfishly disparage thereputations of a number of our hard working employees. Your behavior is unacceptable and it isfor these reasons that I will not continue responding to you beyond this e-mail." Mr. Young,Chief Miller's response appears to be discriminatory, retaliatory.. denies me equal protectionunder the law, and is a violation of the GPD General Conduct Directive. Please take note of thefollowing:

Mr. Young, if Chief of Police Ken Miller will not respond to me (a citizen ofGreensboro) beyond the e-mail he wrote to me on April 29, 2011, he has communicatedthis discriminatory, retaliatory act to officers under his command. Chief Miller is denyingme equal protection under the law. '

I have made no disparaging comments towards any officer, and challenge Police ChiefKen Miller to prove that I have done so. Even if I did, he cannot deny me police service,and the same access to every police officer in the city of Greensboro, just as every othercitizen is afforded.

Chief Miller cannot deny any citizen police response because he (Miller) believes thecitizen has made disparaging comments towards an officer. If a citizen is arrested onMonday, and the adjudication process over on Thursday, can the police refuse to respondto the citizen's needs on Tuesday?


3/7

Chief Ken Miller is retaliating against me for filing complaints against him and othermembers of the Greensboro Police Department.

Chief Ken Miller is discriminating against me because I am African American. Earlierthis year, Mr. E.H. Hennis (white male) was in the City Council chambers and madeclearly disparaging comments to Councilwoman Rakestraw, Assistant City Manager Mr.Michael Speedling, and the officer that escorted him out. Chief of Police Ken Miller hasnot sent Mr. Hennis an e-mail stating that he would not respond to Mr. Hennis'concerns/complaints/etc.

Chief Miller referred to me as selfish, which, unless he can support this is a violation ofthe Greensboro Police Department's General Conduct Directive. If I distort facts about processes, statements and actions and lack clear understanding of

the law, why doesn't Chief of Police Ken Miller to the extent legally possible, just correctme? Everything is not a personnel issue. Why can I not be afforded the same communicative channels, to the GPD, as any other

citizen in Greensboro? Chief Ken Miller is a public servant and I am the public.

Mr. Young, Police Chief Ken Miller has approximately eighteen (18) alleged violations rangingfrom conduct to discrimination from over six (6) different people. You have had for five (5)months, a complaint of Chief Miller's orchestration of a police operation to arrest me at theSenior Center on Fairview Street, on November 10, 2011. Chief Ken Miller terminated one (1)employee (female subordinate of Sergeant (DJ.) Davis, months after a complaint against Millerwas submitted to your office, by the employee. It is clear that termination was retaliation.Although police officers are allowed to investigate themselves (listen to sgtdjdavis on YouTube),because of the number of complaints against Chief Miller, and the type,I am requesting that younot allow Chief Miller to investigate himself. Please have all complaints against Chief of PoliceKen Miller, alleged by me and others, properly investigated. Thank you.

Sincerely, ..

i f l f e k l . t r r t r ! f ~ jAttachments:

Attachment #1: April 29, 2011 E-mail from Charles Cherry to Ken Miller and othersAttachment #2: April 29, 2011 E-mail from Ken Miller to Charles Cherry


4/7

1

'" '_) ~

Joe FriersonFrom:Sent:To:Cc:

charles cherry [charlescherry958@gmaiLcom]Friday, April 29, 2011 2:15 PMyvonne,mcgimpsey@greensboro-nc,gov; ken.miller@greensboro-nc,govjlpryor3434@yahoo,com; Joe Frierson; Joyce Johnson; keeney.randall@gmaiLcom;ron, rogers@greensboro-nc,gov; brian .james@greensboro-nc,gov;pamela. [email protected]; pam, [email protected];james.hinson@greensboro-nc,gov; [email protected];jonathan, [email protected]; rashad. you ng@greensboro-nc,gov;denise. [email protected]; michael, speed ling@greensboro-nc,gov;robbie. [email protected]; zack, [email protected];mary.rakestraw@greensboro-nc,gov; gUy.land@greensboro-nc,gov; [email protected];anita. [email protected]; [email protected];mike, richey@greensboro-nc,gov; diane. [email protected];trudy,[email protected]; nancy.vaughn@greensboro-nc,gov;[email protected]; [email protected] Concerns/Possible Future Budget Savingsubject:

Chief Miller,Itwas great seeing you at the last City Council Meeting, you looked very polished and dapper as usual. I alsohad the pleasure of viewing you on a recent local telecast on channel 8. A caller was instructed to bringconcerns to your office, which makes sense, since you are the Chief of Police. I have a couple of concerns that Ineed to bring to your attention, which is not only confusing to me, but to some of your officers. Recently, I wasable to view a YouTube presentation that was very disturbing. If you place sgtdjdavis in the YouTube searchbar you can access the audio. When I first heard it, I didn't think it was authentic, but it apparently is. SergeantDarrin (D.l) Davis is in a conversation with a subordinate female officer. When asked by other viewers whatthey thought, honestly, I stated, 'This wreaks of incompetence, Chief of Police Ken Miller will handle this." Itappeared to me, that the female subordinate was clearly a victim. However, I recently learned that the femalesubordinate was terminated by you, behind the audio, in which she was clearly a victim. I stand corrected on myassumption of incompetence, admitting that I have been out of law enforcement for eight (8) months. Pleaseaccept my most humble apology. Your consigning, confirming as proper, legitimizing and codifying SergeantDavis' behavior, by terminating the victim employee, may be the biggest landmark decision since Terry v Ohio.Some of my and other citizens' concerns are the following:

Sergeant Darrin (D.J.) Davis investigated complaints made against Sergeant Darrin (D.l) Davis. Cancitizens expect a new procedure for filing their complaints, now that officers investigate themselves? The female subordinate requested a thorough, proper and fair investigation of all her complaints. She

also requested due process. Sergeant Davis informed her, two (2) times that she probably won't get it(due process and fair investigation of complaints). That seems to be in conflict with the Constitution, butwhen you get a chance, please show me that very important change to the Constitution. Also, is there acriteria that addresses when a citizen gets due process and when they don't? Ifan officer doesn't get dueprocess and a fail' investigation, what can citizens expect?

Sergeant Davis threatened the subordinate, if she continued to file complaints. Will citizens thatcontinue to file complaints be targeted in any way? To give a random example; a police operation,orchestrated to arrest citizens, at the Senior Center on Fairview Street, on November 10,2010, becausethe citizens were exercising their right of free speech.

Chief, being the excellent public relations guy that you arc, I was hoping that you would have a pressconference to inform all citizens regarding the changes in how the Greensboro Police investigates complaintsand does business.
mailto:ken.miller@greensboro-nc,govmailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:gUy.land@greensboro-nc,gov;mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:trudy,[email protected];mailto:nancy.vaughn@greensboro-nc,gov;mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:nancy.vaughn@greensboro-nc,gov;mailto:trudy,[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:gUy.land@greensboro-nc,gov;mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:[email protected];mailto:ken.miller@greensboro-nc,gov


5/7

2

I also have another concern, that I need to make you aware of. This is in relation to your new disciplinaryprocess. Specifically the hearing portion of the process. I understand that an officer may, in writing, decline tohave a hearing or choose to have a hearing. If an officer chooses to have a hearing, they are in effect,authorizing anyone you choose to be on the board, to be privy to their confidential personnel files. However, ifthey choose in writing not to have a hearing, you can mandate they appear at a hearing, but, the board wouldhave to be comprised of their chain of command. If you send them to an independent board (individuals not inthe officer's chain of command), releasing their confidential personnel files, without the officer's authorization(remember the officer declined a board), appears to be in violation ofNC Personnel Privacy Law.IfI am correct, you can just put a statement in the directive, notifying officers that if they decline a boardhearing, and are still mandated by the Chief of Police to attend a board hearing, the board will be comprised ofthe officer's chain of command, only. Get that out to the officers asap, and let me know if you need me toreview any more of your new policies. I am always willing to help.My last concern is actually a suggestion. I think it would be more transparent and officers as well as citizenswould trust the GPD more if officers were allowed to record administrative investigative interviews/meetings,etc., as long as they notified the other party. I realize the change in City Policy came about when I recorded aHuman Resources Manager being untruthful to me in an interview and informed Assistant City ManagerMichael Speedling. I apologize for all the confusion. I think not allowing officers to record administrativeinterviews does the following:

Places the officer, not adept at administrative rules and regulations, at a disadvantage Permeates distrust of officers in their command staff Doesn't matter, because anything on a recorded will be within guidelines, rules and regulations. Any

mistakes made should be honest and not malicious The officer has a copy of his statements at all times to review Everyone recorded should be willing to be held accountable for anything revealed during a recorded

conversationThis is only a suggestion. I'll request everyone on the e-mail to forward it in preparation for the press release, ifyou think it is warranted and agree to have one. Let me know what you think about my and other citizens'concerns. I think addressing the concerns will save the City of Greensboro a substantial amount of moneyin fees related to lawsuits in the future. I have requested numbers from the City Manager's Office related tolawsuits, etc. and will be able to give you more tangible information on where we (citizens and cityemployees) can save, once I get the information I need. Thank you for what you do for our cityl!!Charles Cherry


6/7

'0g ? : : r0-: o m.n-hg s : :(t==~roIII ....,1 : 1 . -

!S::J0.m(Qr u. . . .Q.(j)

ozrill. . ,(D-(j)

II II(") ("): : r ::Ts : : ~ ~C D m m@ g . g .(Q m mr o ~ ~m (0 (0;:l ()1 ()1(j) co oog@@a (Q (Q133~ ~ ~co o o000< 3 3v v v

ozrill. . . ,ifg .m. .,' 0Q. II~ a. a - li'T1 (J) III:: 3 r3 II

~

. . . . . m O J II:: : : E : . . . . . . 1 1([l o ::J" IIm W ' IIOJ 0 ::J II.

3 3 Q. m 1 10.. ~. v 3 0. 1 1. . . . . . ([l 1 10 0 m 1 1f ~ .0

'< (J) 1 1I:: 0- (J) 1 13 ({I ({I W 1 1c, V :J Q. (J) 1(;;l" d: (i)'- a : ::J C[if) @ Q..Q:0 0({I,It ::!1 (J) ~B ! a - r o~ -; 0.'0~ S 'I 3r o::J.. U i'3

Documents

Denial of Police Service to a Citizen by Greensboro Chief Ken Miller