By Tanya Eiserer
The Dallas Morning News
DALLAS — Dallas Police Chief David Kunkle on Thursday fired four officers. Two of those had been fired and reinstated on appeal, including one who had been fired and reinstated twice.
Police chiefs around the nation have complained for years that officers fired for serious misconduct are frequently returned to the job by civil service boards, administrative law judges or other city officials.
“They’re going to great lengths to do their job, and it gets undercut,” said Sam Walker, a nationally known police accountability expert.
“It’s a huge issue,” he said. “It just undermines the disciplinary system and undermines the morale of the good officers. It sends a message that when push comes to shove, there’s a good chance that you’ll win.”
Fired after private meetings with the chief were:
*Officer Larry Bankston, for working off-duty security jobs at apartment complexes while skipping his police job and falsely collecting workers’ compensation. Bankston, who has been indicted on criminal charges, said he would appeal his firing. He declined to comment further.
*Senior Cpl. Edward Mindieta, for allowing a woman who had been a drug informant access to an apartment he rented at a reduced rate. He could not be reached for comment.
*Officer Fernando Perez, for using a department car to drive to and from work after his private vehicle had been repossessed. He could not be reached for comment.
*Senior Cpl. Anthony Williams, after failing to respond to an emergency call. Investigators found that he ignored the call while he argued with a former girlfriend.
Williams said he didn’t know yet whether he would appeal his firing. “I just have to give myself time for it to sink in,” he said. He declined to comment further.
Kunkle has now fired 62 officers since he became chief in 2004. Twelve were reinstated on appeal by administrative law judges, a civil service trial board or the city manager’s office. Kunkle himself reinstated four. At least five previous firing appeals are still pending.
Reinstated twice
An 18-year veteran, Perez was fired in October 1998 after investigators concluded he unnecessarily roughed up a man outside a club while working an off-duty security job.
An administrative law judge reinstated him, suspending him for 25 days. The judges are not required to state the reasons for their actions.
Police Chief Terrell Bolton fired Perez again in July 2000 after he used a racial epithet in a phone conversation with a friend while he was on duty. He also violated policy by using department computers to see whether the friend had any outstanding arrest warrants.
Officer Perez apologized for using what he called slang language, according to notes from the disciplinary hearing. An administrative law judge reinstated him after determining that the misconduct did not rise to the level of a firing.
He was suspended for 10 days, and administrative law Judge Kimberly Lonergan wrote in a memo that Perez should be told “that if another complaint involving indecent or profane language or other misconduct unbecoming an officer is sustained against him, his employment will be automatically terminated.”
Former Dallas Police Chief Ben Click, now a national police consultant, said too often those reinstating an officer don’t have to deal with the repercussions of their decisions.
“These people are anonymous, and the chief’s going to get the blame for any performance problems,” Click said.
But Bob Baskett, a veteran Dallas attorney who has represented many fired police officers, said the process protects employee rights with important checks and balances.
“Sometimes the chief decides he’s going to fire somebody and it doesn’t matter what the evidence is,” Baskett said. “There’s no burden of proof for the chief to fire somebody. But there is a burden of proof that the city has to meet on appeal.”
He said hearings before administrative law judges and civil service trial boards are similar to jury trials, with evidence presented and witnesses sworn in.
“If you didn’t sit through the whole trial, then you have no right to criticize it,” he said.
Perez’s most recent firing comes after supervisors noticed last year that an unmarked police vehicle was missing. A GPS tracker showed the 2000 green Ford Mustang was being driven back and forth to Perez’s home.
Perez told officials that his personal vehicle had been repossessed and that he only used the car for several days.
Board weighs in
Williams’ most recent firing comes after a 20-year career in which women he met on the job repeatedly accused him of sexual misconduct. Each time he denied wrongdoing, and most of the allegations were not proved.
He was fired in 1997 after investigators found that he’d had sex with a woman while on duty at a motel. A civil service trial board reinstated him, offering no reason for the decision.
“I think it was a travesty,” said Click, who was the chief who had fired him.
Baskett said officers are sometimes reinstated because the investigation was rushed or sloppy. Other times there isn’t enough evidence to back up the allegations. Or evidence may justify the allegation, but it’s determined that termination was too severe a punishment.
“Each case stands on its own,” said Willie M. Crowder, a Dallas administrative law judge for about 11 years and a former Dallas school district associate superintendent for human resource services.
“We weigh the evidence,” she said. “We have to look at the punishment and match it up with the standards that the city has outlined.”
In June 2008, a former girlfriend called police to report that Williams had shown up at her apartment while on duty and blocked her car with his police car. Investigators found that as he argued with her, he failed to respond to a call to investigate a residential burglar alarm.
Investigators also concluded that he didn’t devote full attention to his job, became involved in an on-duty disturbance and failed to immediately notify dispatchers of his location.
Less discretion
In 2005, voters approved a charter change that gave civil service trial boards and administrative law judges less discretion in reversing discipline.
Previously, they had determined whether discipline was “just and equitable.” Now the disciplinary action must be upheld “if a reasonable person could have taken the same disciplinary action against the employee.”
The city manager also now hears first-round appeals of fired officers, rather than assistant city managers.
Kunkle said fewer firings are being overturned.
Baskett agreed, but added: “The chief was tired of somebody grading his paper, so they tried to make it impossible to win.”
Click advocates having retired judges handle appeals hearings, because he believes policing agencies would get a more impartial result.
“It’s a real problem, not just in Dallas,” he said. “You wind up with a whole collection of renegades and people that shouldn’t be there.”
TIMELINE One officer, multiple punishments
One officer’s disciplinary history:
-Nov. 21, 1990: Officer Fernando Perez is hired.
-Sept. 17, 1991: While Perez is on probation as a recent police academy graduate, a field trainer recommends he be fired for performing poorly on the job in areas such as filling out reports and interviewing and interrogating people. Commanders overrule that recommendation.
-In the mid-1990s: Perez is suspended for 10 days for not helping an officer who was being beaten outside a bar by one of Perez’s relatives. He also received a written reprimand for conducting an illegal search of a home. He was also suspended for one day for not reporting damage to a squad car.
-Oct. 5, 1998: Perez is fired after investigators conclude he unnecessarily roughed up a man outside a club. An administrative law judge later reinstates him, reducing his punishment to a 25-day suspension.
-July 14, 2000: Police Chief Terrell Bolton fires Perez after he uses a racial epithet in a phone conversation while he was on duty. He also violates policy by using department computers to see whether a friend had any outstanding arrest warrants. An administrative law judge reinstates him in January 2001, reducing the firing to a 10-day suspension.
-Jan. 10, 2003: Perez receives a one-day suspension for using a cellphone belonging to a neighborhood patrol group, even though he did not work for that group.
-June 3, 2004: Perez receives a one-day suspension after he fires at a fleeing vehicle in violation of department policy.
-April 6, 2007: Perez is suspended for violating the department’s chase policy when his car reaches 114 mph in pursuit of two men who die after hitting a concrete barrier on North Central Expressway. The men were not suspected of a violent felony, making the chase a violation of department policy. That incident has triggered a pending wrongful death lawsuit.
-Thursday: Perez is fired for misuse of city equipment after investigators found he was using one of the city’s unmarked cars to drive back and forth to his home.
Some lesser disciplinary actions are not listed.
Copyright 2009 The Dallas Morning News