TimRyle Robert Chody Roy Fikae Chie Deputy WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF {ASS Chief Deputy: Law Enforcement 508 South Rock Street Ranch Doser Georgetown, Texas 78626 Asst Chief Deputy -Comestions Phone (512) 93-1300 * Fax (512) 943-1444 MEMORANDUM To: Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Open Records Division From: ‘Amy Bass-Domel, Open Records, Williamson County Sheriff's Office Date August 27, 2020 Subject Public Information Act Request 1. Introduction On August 6, 2020, the Williamson County Sherif's Office received a written request for information from Candace Morrissey with Shea Investigations. A copy of the request is attached as Exhibit A, The Williamson County Sheriff's Office asserts that some of the responsive information to this request, which is attached as Exhibit B, is excepted from disclosure under the Public Information Act ("PIA). The Williamson County Sherif’s Office invokes all the exceptions provided by, and exceptions incorporated into, sections $52,101 through 862.160 of the PIA, specifically, sections 552. 101, 552.103, 652.117 and 862.137. Pursuant to section 552.301(a) of the PIA, this brief is submitted to seek a decision whether the exception applies. Please note, portions of the responsive records consist of pages that have been previously released under prior requests. The request was submitted to the Office of the Attorney General, Open Records Division, on August 20, 2020. II. Information Excepted from Required Disclosure Under § 552.101 Section 562.101 excepts from disclosure “information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision.” Section 552.101 excepts information that is confidential under constitutional privacy. Exhibit B consists of a Williamson County Sheriff's Office records related to Office of Professional Standards notice of complaints and findings. Exhibit B contains information revealing identifying factors of a minor and the release of this information would violate the “most intimate aspects of human affairs’. Section 552.101 encompasses the doctrine of constitutional privacy, which protects two kinds of interests. See Whalen V. Roe, 429 U.S. 589, 589-600 (1977), Open Records Decision Nos. 600 at 3-4, 478 at 4 (1987), 455 at 3-7. The first is the interest in independence in making certain important decisions relating to the “zones of privacy" pertaining tomarriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education. Seo Fadjo v. Coon, 633 F.2d 1172 (6° Cir. 1981); see also ORD 465 at 3-7. The second constitutionally protected privacy interest is in freedom from public disclosure of certain personal matters. See Ramig v. City of Hedwig Village, Tex., 765 £.2d 490 (5 Cir. 1986); see also ORD 455 at 6-7. This ‘aspect of constitutional privacy balances the individual's privacy interest against the public's interest in the information. See ORD 455 at 7. The scope of information is narrower than that under the common-law doctrine of privacy; the information must concem the “most intimate aspects of human affairs.” Jd. at 5 (quoting Ramie, 766 F.2d at 492). The Wiliamson County Sheriff's Office asserts that this information contained in Exhibit B is excepted from disclosure. Ill. Information Excepted from Required Disclosure Under § 552,101, Section 852.101 excepts information thats confidential under common law. Common law privacy protects information that contains “highly intimate or embarrassing facts about a person's Private affairs such that ts release would be highly objectionable to @ reasonable person and be of 1o legitimate concem to the public.” Industrial Found. v. Texas Indus. Accident Bd., 640 S.W.2d 688 (Tex. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 931 (1877). Exhibit B consists of a Williamson County Sheriffs Office records related to Office of Professional Standards notice of complaints and findings. Exhibit B contains information that is “highly intimate or embarrassing" and the release of this information would be “highly objectionable to a reasonable person.” The specific types of information the Texas Supreme Court held to be intimate or embarrassing is information relating to sexual assault, pregnancy, mental or physical abuse in the workplace, illegitimate children, psychiatric treatment of mental disorders, attemoted suicide, and injuries to sexual organs. The Office of the Attorney General has also found that some kinds of medical information or information indicating disabilities or specific ilinesses are confidential under common-law privacy. See Open Records Decision Nos. 470 (1987) (illness from severe emotional and job-related stress), 455 (1987) (prescription drugs, illnesses, operations, and physical handicaps. The Wiliamson County Sheriff's Office asserts that this information contained in Exhibit B is excepted from disclosure. 1V. Information E) Required Disclosure Under § 552.104 Section 552.101 excepts "information conskiered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." Section 552.101 encompasses the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (the "ADA"), See 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et. seg. Tile of the ADA provides that information about the medical conditions and medical histories of applicants or employees must be (1) collected and maintained on separate forms, (2) kept in separate medical files, and (3) treated ‘as a confidential medical record. Information obtained in the course of a ‘fitness for duty ‘examination’ conducted to determine whether an employee is still able to perform the essential functions of his or her job is to be treated as a confidential medical record as well. See 29 C.F.R. § 1630.14(c); see also Open Records Decision No. 641 (1996). Furthermore, the fedoral Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "EEOC) has determined that medical information for the purposes of the ADA includes “specific information about an individual's disablity and related functional limitations, as well as general statements that an individual has a disabilty or that an ‘ADA reasonable accommodation has been provided for a particular individual" See Letter from Ellen J. Vargyas, Legal Counsel, EEOC, to Barry Keamey, Associate General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, 3 (Oct. 1, 1997). Federal regulations define “disability for the purposes of the ADA as "(1) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of the individual; (2) a record of such an impairment; or (3) being regarded as having ‘such an impairment.” 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(g). The regulations further provide that physical or mental impairment means: (1) any physiological disorder, or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or ‘anatomical loss affecting one or more of the following body systems: neurological, musculoskeletal,special sense organs, respiratory (including speech organs). cardiovascular, reproductive, digestive, genito-urinary, hemic and lymphatic, skin, and endocrine; or (2) any mental or Psychological disorder, such as mental retardation, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental lines, and specific learning disabilties. See id. § 1630.2(h). Exhibit B consists of a Williamson County Sheriffs Office records related to Office of Professional Standards notice of complaints and findings. Exhibit B contains information protected Under the Americans with Disablities Act. The requestor does not appear to be among the categories of persons that are entitled to have acoess to such information. The Williamson County Sheriff's Office asserts that this information contained in Exhibit B is excepted from disclosure lnder Section $52,101 in conjunction with the ADA. V. Information Excepted from ic Disclosure Under § 55: ‘Texas Gov't Code § 552.103 provides in pertinent part: (2) Information is excepted from the requirements of Section 552.021 if itis information relating to litigation of a civil or criminal nature to which the state or a political subdivision is or may be a party or to which an officer or employee of the state or a political subdivision, as a consequence of the person's office or employment, is or may be a party ‘The governmental body has the burden of providing relevant facts and documents to show that the section 652. 103(a) exception is applicable in a particular situation, The test for meeting this burden is a showing that (1) litigation is pending or reasonably anticipates, and (2) the information at issue Is related to that litigation. University of Texas Law School v_ Texas Legal Found., 958 S.W.2d 479, 481 (Tex. App.—Austin 1997, no pet); Heard v Houston Post Co., 684 S W.2d 210, 212 (Tex. App.Houston [1st Dist ] 1984, writ refd n.re.), Open Records Decision No. 551 at 4 (1990). Exhibit B consists of Williamson County Sheriffs Ortice personnel and internal affairs records pertaining to a former Williamson County Sheriffs Office employee. The Williamson County Sheriff's Office asserts that Exhibit B is related to pending Iitigation. Prior to receipt ofthis PIA. Tequest, the County received notice of an EEOC Charge of Discrimination filed by the former employee (EEOC No. 31C-2020-00622) and a lawsuit filed by a former employee, cause number 20-1243-C368. The Willamson County Sheriff's Orice asserts that Exhibit B is excepted from disclosure under Section §62.103 of the PIA. VI. Informati xd from Required Disclosure Under § 552.117 Texas Gov't Code § 552.117 excepts from required public disclosure: (2) Information that relates to the home address, home telephone number, or social security number of the following person, or that reveals whether the person has family members: (2) 2 peace officer as defined by Article 2.12, Code of Criminal Procedure, cf a security officer commissioned under Section 61.212, Education Code, regardless of whether the officer complies with Section 552.024 or 652.1175, as applicable [] Exhibit B contains home addresses, and family member information of a peace officer employed by the Williamson County Sheriffs Office. A peace officer's home address, hometelephone number, personal cellular phone number, personal pager number, social security umber, and information that reveais whether the peace officer has family members may be withheld. See Open Records Decision Nos. 670 (2001). The Williamson County Sheriff's Office asserts that this information contained in Exhibit B is excepted from disclosure, vu i i id from Required Disclosure Un Texas Govt Code § 652.137 provides in part (a) Except as otherwise provided by this section, an email address of a ‘member of the public that is provided for the purpose of communicating electronically with a governmental body is confidential and not subject to disclosure under this chapter, Exhibit B contains an e-mail address of a members of the public. The Williamson County ‘Sheriff's Office asserts that the e-mail address contained in Exhibit B is excepted from disclosure, Vill. Conclusion ‘The Williamson County Sheriffs Office respectfully requests a decision from the Open Records Division of the Office of the Attorney General regarding the applicability of all the ‘exceptions provided by, and the exceptions incorporated into, sections 552.101, 552.103, 662.117 and 852.137 of the Public Information Act. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or require additional information. Amy Bass-Domel ‘Open Records Williamson County Sheriffs Office Enclosure Exhibits A Exhibits B - C (PROVIDED ONLY TO ATTORNEY GENERAL) cc: Candace Morrissey Shea Investigations 6501 Knollwood Dr ‘McKinney, TX 75072EXHIBIT “A”‘Atry Bape- Dor From: Shea Investigations Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 5:37 PM To: piarequest; WCSO Open Records Subject: IA Complaint and Investigation ORR Wilco/WCSO Attachments: lA2srequestipg Wesley Alexander Jeremy Brinkman Jack Danford Savanna Mount Damon Grant Jeff Pearson = Leonard Stewart = JR Hicks EY Aaron Skinner 5 Terry Ballard Heather Vargas i Donald Foiles g Danny Gremilion 8 Randy Batten 2 Bobby Lewis Julie Hobbs g Tony Carter 2 Brian Johns oS David Nickle z# = Jeremy Stewart ze & Chris Pisa ze Guadalupe Gauna g 5 Michael klier ee Jordan Banks goes Steve Shanks Jason Waldon a ‘The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes. Inthe event that there are fees, | would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfiling ‘my request. | would prefer the request to be answered electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. | look forward to receiving your response to this Fequest within 10 business days, as the statute requires. Eon fSincerely, ‘Candace Morrissey sheainvestigations@amail.cor 240-381-3380Tim Ryle Robert Chody ey Fikae hieF Dap” WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF ‘Ast Cie Deputy Law Enforcement ‘508 South Rock test Ranh Dover Georgetown, Texas T8626 ‘se Chel Deputy - Corns Phone (512) 041300 Fat (1235031383 ‘Open Records Request Form For: Copy of public records that fall under the Opens Records Act, This form isto be filled out by the person requesting the records, OPBD Your Address: 196 Clty: _Medanag Sate Phone #'s: WorkiCdik: AGO - FR] -3580_ Ho DESCRIPTION OF RECORDS REQUESTED: Please be specific and provide as much information as possible to clearly deseribe the records you are ere gels anneal eet eae : Renu nie deren : fot fi \ Tr Tat oadan ‘0 _ Tam requ(stivg only the public portipn of the requested informatjon and do not receive information|deemed confidential or expmpt by the Texes Public Information Act, statutes, or case Taw, If no, then f understand that my request may be forwarded 0 the Attorney Genéral's Office for ‘consideration and may take up to 45 business days to receive a ruling, ‘The Williamson County Sheriff's Otice charges for Public information are based on the charge schedule adopted by the Texas Office of the Attorney General in aeeocdance with the Texas Puble Information Act. Signature: anda QMeneag? 3 elaphrome capes fo For office uie only: (iain hdsvasstannininiat Reveipt Date: Completed by: Manner released Commenrs:Robert Chody Fim Ryle op Fae arta WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF ‘Ast Chie Deply La Ftc one. ‘58 South Rock Svc. me Georgetown, Texas 78626 Raolph Doser one (512) 80561300 * Fax SID SAD Aw Cie Depa = Comets NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION ~~ AMENDED. Employee Name: Terry Ballard Employee #: 10584 Title: Detective Bureau: Law Enforcement A complaint has been filed against you and will be investigated by the Office of Professional Standards (OPS). The following allegation(s) are the basis for the investigation: Allegation 1 tis alleged on or about January 17, 2018, you, Detective Terry Ballard, released sensitive information by allowing ,.0 have knowledge of official Sheriff's Office business involving erin ions. {tis also alleged you allowed your wife to write official case reports on criminal investigations. ‘This allegation, if trve, would coustitute a violation of: General Administrative Orders 5.4, Information and Operational Security, Section VI. Security of Sensitive Information. The policy states: “Deputies will take great care to make sure sensitive information is not processed or discussed in places where it can be overheard or seen by members of the public. Deputies should refrain from discussing sensitive information at meal breaks or with thelr families, acquaintances and spouses. Deputies should not discuss sensitive information over cordless telephones, non-sccure radios or any other means of communication that is not reasonably secure, Smart devices, such as cellphones, with access to Sheriff's Office information systems shall be password protected. In addition, if encryption devices are issued to personnel, they will maintain the security of those devices and be responsible for their replacement if they are lost. ‘The unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of sensitive information is a serious violation of Sheriffs Office policy. Unauthorized release of sensitive information may be grounds for termination and criminal prosecution. Negligent disclosure is ground for disciplinary action. Allegation I Itis alleged on or about January 17, 2018, you, Terry Ballard, were willfully insubordinate and derelict in your duty when discussing official sensitive Sheriff's Office information with This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: GeneralAdministrative Orders 2.1 Rules of Conduct, Section VI. Performance Prohi subsection Al and 2. The policy states, A.As appropriate. disciplinary action may be taken for any of the following reasons: 1. Incompetent or inefficient performance or dereliction of duty. Insubordination, discourteous treatment of the public or a fellow ‘employee. or any act of omission or commission of similar nature that discredits or injures the public. (Insubordination may also consist of direct, tacit, or constructive refusal to do assigned work.) Allegation 1 Its alleged on or about January 31, 2018, you, Detective Terry Ballard, were untruthful during an OPS interview. ‘This allegation, if true. would constitute a violation of: General Administrative Orders 2.1, Attention to Duty, Section F. Truthfulness. The policy states: “Members shall be truthful in all official verbal and written communications and reports. Employees will be truthful in any court related testimony or agency investigations Deputies who are undercover or conducting interviews: or interrogations may find it necessary to provide inaccurate information in order to maintain their cover or determine the truthfulness or veracity of a subject.” You are also reminded! any employee who is the subject of an administrative complaint investigation shall cooperate fully and answer all questions posed to them by investigators during such an investigation. WCSO employees questioned by OPS investigators concerning their knowledge of a complaint will fully cooperate and answer truthfully such questions as outlined in WCSO General Administrative Orders 2.4., Section Il, Subsection E. acknowledge receipt of this notiee, my copy of the complaint, and the fact I am required to cooperate with the investigation and provide complete and accurate information. Copy received at ¥//) 3 g a.m. on this 2nd day of Februat a ee Pe ee ne fe / Printed NameAnd Employee Number file =" RAS Signature of Employee Date/Time —_Signaturéf Investigator Date/Time —Robert Chody Tim Ryle Ros Fae a ' WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF ‘Asal Chiet Deputy: Law Enforcement Net Depry '508 South Rock Steet om Georgetown, Texas 78626 Rendelph Dover Phone (312) 913-1300 * Fae (SZ) 3-44 ‘Ast Chit Opty «Cotetons NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION Employee Name: Terry Ballard Employee #: 10584 Title: Detective Bureau: Law Enforcement A complaint has been filed against you and will be investigated by the Office of Professional Standards (OPS). ‘The following allegation(s) are the basis for the investigation: Allegation Itis alleged on or about January 17, 2018, you, Detective Terry Ballard, released sensitive nformation by allowing, ‘o have knowledge of official Sheriff's Office business involving criminal invesugations. 1t is also alleged you allowed your wife to write official ‘case reports on criminal investigations. ‘This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation oft General Administrative Orders 5.4, Information and Operational Security, Section VI. Security of Sensitive Information, The policy states: Deputies will toke great care to make sure sensitive information is not processed ot discussed in places where it can be overheard or seen b members of the public, Deputies should refrain from discussing sensitive information at meal breaks or with their families, acquaintances and spouses, Deputies should not discuss sensitive information over cordless telephones, non-secure radios or any other means of communication that is not reasonably secure. Smart devices, stich as cellphones, with access to Sherifl’s Office information systems shall be password protected. In addition, if encryption devices are issued to personnel, they will maintain the security of those devices and be responsible for their replacement if they are lost. ‘The unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of sensitive information is a serious violation of Sheriff's Office policy. Unauthorized release of sensitive information may be grounds for termination and criminal prosecution. Negligent disciosure is ground for disciplinary action.” Al u Its alleged on or about January 17, 2018, you, Terry Ballard, were willfully insubordinate and derelict in your duty when discussing official sensitive Sheriff's Office information with | This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: “EXHIBITAdministrative Orders 2.1 Rules of Conduct, Seetion VI. Performance Prohibitions, subsection Al and 2. The policy states. “Employees shall promptly report all crimes, violations, emergencies, incidents, dangers, hazardous situations, and police information that come to their attention. Employees shall not conceal, ignore, or distort the facts of such crimes, violations, emergencies, incidents, and information. You are also reminded any employee who is the subject of an administrative complaint investigation shall cooperate fully and answer all questions posed to them by investigators during such an investigation. WCSO employees questioned by OPS investigators concerning their knowledge of a complaint will fully cooperate and answer truthfully such questions as outlined in WCSO General Administrative Orders 2.4., Section IIL, Subsection E acknowledge receipt of this notice, my copy’of the complaint, and the fact Iam required to cooperate with the investigation and provide complete and accurate information. Copy received at 606 on this 18th day of January, 2018. (Cy bSelfeo rinted’ Name and Employee Number Signanafe of Employee DatWILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY February 13, 2018 To: Sheriff Robert Chody Ly From: Chief Deputy Tim Ryle /” } Re: OPS #18-01-0002 (Detective Terry Ballard) Sir, I have reviewed the case investigation submitted by OPS. I have also participated in the PDR (Pre-Disciplinary Review) meeting with Detective Ballard. This case involves 3 Allegations of misconduct. © Allegation 1. Violation of General Order 5.4 Section VI. Security of Sensitive Information * Allegation 2. Violation of General Order 2.1 Section VI. Performance Prohibitions, subsection Al and A2 (Dereliction of Duty) + Allegation 3. Violation of General Order 2.1 Section F, (Truthfulness) ‘The OPS investigation concluded there was evidence indicating the need to sustain all 3 of the allegations. My review of the case as a whole and the context of the actions and statements of Detective Ballard give rise to the need to consider factors that, in my view, are mitigating.WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY ‘The evidence in this case demonstrates the following: + Detective Ballard’s report writing skills were brought into question by his supervisor. + Detective Ballare took it upon himself to try to improve those reports by involving helping him with structure, syntax, spelling etc + Detective Ballard allowed te see and/or hear portions of reports of crimes he was working, ‘+ Detective Ballard denied allowing his wife to read his reports but admitted to having review his writing as he was compiling his reports, Recommendation: Ibelieve the evidence shows Detective Ballard has deficiencies in his work performance, specifically his skill at writing reports, which are areas where he needs to make improvements in order to meet the standard, I believe that Detective Ballard took steps on his own to make thase imnrovements and at the same time shared portions of those facts with ‘with the intent of improving his performance to meet fhe standard, I believe Detective Ballard, when asked by OPS, answered the questions using his context and not necessarily the context of the interviewer. {believe all of these factors explain the series of events in a different light and mitigate the severity of the allegations in this case. Allegation #1: - Not sustained I recommend Detective Ballard receive counselling on adherence to the policy on operational security in the proper context and explain the importance of clarifying the rules before taking actions that could be interpreted as a violation of those rules regardless of the overlying intent. Allegation #2- Not Sustained as this is a production of Allegation #1 Allegation #3- Not Sustained- no intent to deceiveWILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY Additionally, During the course of the interview, you admitted to working after hours without authorization. It is required by policy that anytime you work outside of normal hours you must first receive authorization. | will warn you to adhere to that policy as well as all others as a part of this outcome.Robert Chody WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF 508 South Rock Su Georgstoven, Tens 78626 Randi Dost IE) * Fay 3) 9-148 Nos Che Depuy- Comets Roy Fae Asst Chit Depats- La Enfincemer NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION Employee Name: Terry Ballard Employee #: 10584 Title: Deputy Bureau: Law Enforcement ‘A complaint has been filed against you and will be investigated by the Office of Professional Standards (OPS). The following allegation(s) are the basis for the investigation: Allegation 1 Itis alleged on or about February 21, 2018, you, Deputy Terry Ballard, failed to follow direct orders to tum in STAR gear. This allegation, if true. would constitute a violation of General Administrative Orders 2.1 Rules of Conduct, Section VII. Obedience to Rules of Conduct, laws, and orders, subsection D, Insubordination. ‘The policy states, ‘mployees shall promptly obey all lawful orders and directions given by supervisors. ‘The failure or deliberate refusal of employees to obey such orders shall be deemed insubordination and is prohibited. Flouting the authority of a supervisor by display obvious disrespect or by disputing his or her orders shall likewise be deemed insubordination.” Allegation I Itis alleged on or about February 15, 2018, you, Deputy Terry Ballard, were untruthful to Chief Roy Fikac. This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: General Administrative Orders 2.1 Rules of Conduct, Section VIII. Attention to Duty, subsection F, Truthfulness. ‘The policy states, ‘Members shall be truthful in all official verbal and written communications and reports. Employees will be truthful in any court related testimony or ageney investigations.”‘You are reminded to refrain from contacting the complainant or witnesses in any way which might be interpreted as an attempt to discourage the complainant or witnesses from cooperating with OPS during the investigation. You may, however, discuss the complaint with your attorney or other legal counsel. You are also reminded any employee who is the subject of an administrative complaint investigation shall cooperate fully and answer all questions posed to them by investigators during such an investigation. WCSO employees questioned by OPS investigators concerning their knowledge of a complaint will fully cooperate and answer truthfully such questions as outlined in WCSO General Administrative Orders 24., Section IIL, Subsection E. T acknowledge receipt of this notice, my copy of the complaint, and the fact I] am required 10 cooperate with the investigation and provide complete and accurate information. Copy received at A/F 446, on this 26th day of February 2018. Print vee Number Z, ee fp apf wr 148 Signatdre of Employee Date/Time Date/TimeWILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY March 8, 2018 To: Terry Ballard 4 : Chief Deputy Ryle Re: OPS # 18-02-0002 After review of the case and allegation included I concur with the findings on both allegations. In Allegation #1- Insubordination, the evidence indicates you did not have the opportunity to comply within the timeline due to computer access restrictions. In Allegation #2: Untruthfulness, It is clear that your response of “God's honest truth’ I didn’t say anything, is not accurate. Additionally, you contradicted your own statement shortly after that by admitting that you were characterizing statements from your attorney about the case in a negative light to others within your work area, This is by definition disparaging regardless of how you qualify the statements, Additionally, during your interview with OPS on the topic of access to your computer accounts, specifically 365, you stated you still did not have access. The tracking records from IT indicate that you not only had access but you had indeed accessed the platform numerous times during that period. — yo Jerre?Robert Chody WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF 508 South Rock Sitest Georgsiown, Texas 78625 Randiph Dover Phone (512) 91-1300 Fan S15) U3 ‘st Chet Dep - Conta, Roy ik Asst Chief Deputy Law Enfwcerent Tim Ryle Cie Dspuy NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION Employee Name: Terry Ballard Employee #: 10584 Title: Deputy Bureau: Corrections A complaint has been filed against you and will be investigated by the Office of Professional Standards (OPS). The following allegation(s) are the basis for the investigation: Allegation I It is alleged on or about March 19, 2018, you, Deputy Terry Ballard, made disparaging remarks about the Williamson County Sheriff's Office. This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: General Ad X Restrictions on Behavior, subsection W, Criticism of the Ageney. The policy states, “Employees shall neither publicly nor at internal official meetings criticize or ridicule the agency or its policies, county officials or other employees by speech, writing, or other expression, where such speech, writing, or other expression is defamatory, obscene, bigoted, or unlawful, or ifit undermines the effectiveness ofthe agency, interferes with the ‘maintenance of discipline, or is made with reckless disregard for truth or fal gation It is alleged on or about March 19, 2018, you, Deputy Terry Ballard, made disparaging remarks about the Williamson County Sheriff's Office. Itis alleged you have been ordered not to make disparaging remarks about the Williamson County Sheriff's Office. This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: General Administrative Orders 2.1 Rules of Conduct, Section VII. Obedience to Rules of Conduct, laws, and orders, subsection D, Insubordination. ‘The policy states, ;ployees shall promptly obey all lawful orders and directions given by supervisors. The failure or deliberate refusal of employees to obey such orders shall be deemed insubordination and is prohibited. Flouting the authority of a supervisor by displaying obvious disrespect or by disputing his or her orders shall likewise be deemed insubordination.”You are reminded to refrain from contacting the complainant or witnesses in any way which might be interpreted as an attempt to discourage the complainant or witnesses from cooperating with OPS during the investigation. You may, however, discuss the complaint with your attorney or other legal counsel. You are also reminded any employee who is the subject of an administrative complaint investigation shall cooperate fully and answer all questions posed to them by investigators during such an investigation, WCSO employees questioned by OPS investigators concerning their knowledge of a complaint will fully cooperate and answer truthfully such questions as outlined in WCSO General Administrative Orders 2.4., Section IIL. Subsection E. Lacknowledge receipt of this notice. my copy of the complaint, and the fact I am required to cooperate with the investigation and provide complete and accurate information. Copy received at 4/C(_am¢Snihis 19th day of March 2018, Printed Name and Employee Number: Zz Ried Des Signaturé of Employee Date/Time y c of Investigator Date/TimeUser: DLOWTHORP WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE 08/04/2020 11:46:56 IA/PSD CASE REPORT LAPsD#: 18030003 System #s 742 The information contained in this report is CONFIDENTIAL. File Class: COMPLAINT Date Occurred: 03/19/2018 Date Reported: 03/19/2018 Comp Type: DEPARTMENTAL Time Oceurr Location: S08 ROCK ST GEORGETOWN TX Date IA/PSD: 03/19/2018 Date to Chain: 03/19/2018 Date to Chief: 03/19/2018 Date Expired: Status: ‘Terminated TE BALLARD, TERRY No summary added ‘Time Reported: Beats GTPD Zone: PCT3 Status Date: 07/23/2018 Assnd To: SHEROUSE, STOREY ASSOCIATED NAMES Race: Action: NONE SUMMARY /NOTES Page LRobert Chody Tim kyle 7 ey Fike il Depaty ‘WILLISMEON. COUNTY SHERIFF ‘sat Chit Dat a nforeent Saar 508 South Rock Street. . Georgetown, Texas 78626 Randolph Boyer Pome (512) 91300 * Fan (512) B14 Ass Chief Dep = Comets NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION Employee Name: Terry Ballard Employee #: 10584 Title: Detective Bureau: Law Enforcement ‘A complaint has been filed against you and will be investigated by the Office of Professional Standards (OPS). The following allegation(s) are the basis for the investigation: Allegation It is alleged on or about November 30, 2017, you, Detective Terry Ballard, disrespectful and discourteous when you used insulting language toward a fellow employee. This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: General Administrative Orders 2.1 Rules of Conduct, Section IX. Cooperation with Fellow Employees and Agencies, subsection A, Respect for Fellow Employees. The policy states, “Employees shall treat other members of the agency with respect. They shall be courteous, civil, and respectful of their superiors, subordinates, and associates, and shall not use threatening or insulting language whether spoken directly to a specific individual, a third party, or a social media, or other electronic format.” You are reminded to refrain from contacting the complainant or witnesses in any way which might be interpreted as an attempt to discourage the complainant or witnesses from cooperating with OPS during the investigation. You may, however, discuss the complaint with your attomey or other legal counsel You are also reminded any employee who is the subject of an administrative complaint investigation shall cooperate fully and answer all questions posed to them by investigators during such an investigation. WCSO employees questioned by OPS investigators concerning their knowledge of a complaint will fully cooperate and answer truthfully sueh questions as outlined in WCSO General Administrative Orders 24.. Section IIL Subsection E. Tacknowledge receipt of this notice, my copy of the complaint, and the fact Iam required to cooperate with the investigation and provide complete and accurate information,Copy received at_[2/-am. on this Sth day of December, 2017. eek vox e and Efployee Number a pals Signature of Employee Date/Time Sig Printed Ni of Investigator Date/Time131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 Allegation I Sustained Allegation 11 Sustained Respectfully submitted, Storey L. Sherouse Sergeant Office of Professional Standards ( GLASSIFICATION® ‘OPS 17-04-0003 Page 4 of 4Robert Chody WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIF 308 South Rock Street Georgetown, Texas 78026 Randi Pome ($12) 983-1300 * Fay (S12) 43-1884 Asst Clot Dept - Correction, Ast Chief Deputy Law Eaforement Tim Ryte ver Depry NOTICE OF COMPLAINT 863 October 25. 2019 SUBJECT: — Jordan Banks Medical Officer, Corrections A complaint has been filed against you and will be investigated by the Office of Professional Standards (OPS). The following allegation(s) are the basis for the investigation: Allegation I Itis alleged on or about October 3. 2019, Jordan Banks, was untruthful in her statements toa supervisor. ‘This al if true, would constitute a violation of: Rules of Conduet; VIII. Attention to Duty; F. Truthfulness The policy states: Members shall be truthful in all official verbal and written communications and reports. Employees will be truthful in any court related testimony or agency investigations. es who are undercover or conducting interviews or interrogations may find it necessary inaccurate information in order to maintain their cover or determine the truthfulness Iris alleged on or about October 17, 2019, Jordan Banks, failed to or deliberately refused to follow an order given by a supervisor. ‘This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: Rules of Conduct; VIL. Obedience to Rules of Conduct, laws, and orders; D. Insubordination HQOS1.988 Rev en 12019‘The policy states: “All employees, regardless of rank or assignment, shall be governed by the following general rules of conduct, Violation of any of these rules by any employees of the agency shall be considered sufficient cause for dismissal, demotion, suspension, or other disciplinary action, “D. Insubordination. Employees shall promptly obey all Jawfut orders and direetions given by supervisors. The failure or deliberate refusal of employees to obey such orders shall be deemed insubordination and is prohibited. Flouting the authority of a supervisor by displaying obvious disrespect or by disputing his or her orders shall likewise be deemed insubordination.” ‘You ave reminded to refrain from contacting the complainant or witnesses in any way whiich might be interpreted as an attempt to discourage the complainant or witnesses from cooperating with OPS during the investigation. You may, however, discuss the complaint with your aitomey or other legal counsel. Employees are permitted to have-an attomey, supervisor, or other representative with them in the room durig any interview regarding aliegations of misconduct; however, the employee's ‘representative is limited to acting as an observer atthe interview. ‘You are also reminded any employee who is the subject of an administrative complaint investigation shall cooperate fully and answer all questions posed to them by investigators during such an investigation, WCSO employees questioned by OPS investigators concerning their knowledge of « complaint will fully cooperate and answer truthfully such questions as outlined in WCSO General Administrative Orders 24., Section IL, Subsection B, 1 acknowledge receipt of this notice of complaint and the fact I am required to cooperate with the investigation and provide complete and accurate information, Copy received at 232 amJ/§Ge onthis BS day of Ochofer , 2019, \ f e 7 Printed Name and Employee Number : Al 2195 Signatiteo? Employee Signature of Investigator : HQISL.1988, Rev e272019Robert Chody WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF 08 South Rock Steet Georgetown, Texas 78626 Poe ($12) 983-1306 * Fax (12) Cet Deputy Asst Chick Deputy: Law Esforcement Asst Chet Depaty - Corsi NOTICE OF COMPLAINT SYSTEM# 884 DATE: March 11, 2020 SUBJECT: Jordan Banks Medical Officer, Corrections #14267 A complaint has been filed against you and will be investigated by the Office of Professional Standards (OPS). ‘The following allegation(s) are the basis for the restigation: Allegation 1 20 It is alleged on or about February 24, 20%9, Medical Officer Jordan Banks, made a statement perceived as insubordination. This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: Rules of Conduct, VIL. Obedience to Rules of Conduct, laws, and orders, D. Insubordination. The policy states: “Employees shall promptly obey all lawful orders and directions given by supervisors. The failure or deliberate refusal of employees to obey such orders shall be deemed insubordination and is prohibited. Flouting the authority of a supervisor by displaying obvious disrespect or by disputing his or her orders shall likewise be deemed insubordination.” All information related to an Office of Professional Standards investigation is confidential. ‘You will not discuss details of this ease with anyone, except 1. Office of Professional Standards investigators 2. Your attomey 3. Other persons specifically designated by the Sheriff or his designee. HQOSL.I9Ss Rev 03102020oO oO A-violation of this order will be considered an act of insubordination and or violation of rules which could result in disciplinary action, to include up to termination from the ‘Williamson County Sheriff's Office. Employees are permitted to have en attomey, supervisor, or other representative with them in the room during any interview regarding allegations of misconduct; however, the employee's representative is limited to acting as an observer at the interview, You are also reminded any employee who is the subject of an administrative complaint investigation shall cooperate fully and answer all questions posed to them by investigators during such an investigation. WCSO employees questioned by OPS investigators concerning their knowiedge of a complaint will fully cooperate and answer truthfully such questions as outlined in WCSO General Administrative Orders. L acknowledge receipt of this notice of complaint and the fact I am required to cooperate with the investigation and provide complete and accurate information. Copy received at_/7¥ I amis? onthis_//Pday of. Morel 2020. yee Printed Name and Employee Number LOA _1 4b 7 i ref LEE oe ‘Employee ‘Signature of Investigator 1Q051.1988 er 2019MEMORANDUM Williamson County Sheriff's Office Corrections Bureau TO: MO Banks. FROM: Bureau Chief Randolph Doyer DATE: January 8, 2020 SUBJECT: OPS Case File: 863 Results The Jail Command Staff reviewed OPS case file 863 and concur with the Investigator's findings in both allegations. I have reviewed the file and concur with the findings of the command staff. This memo is to inform you of the actions being taken due to your behavior in this case. The allegation of insubordination, and untruthfulness are serious policy violations. Due to the ciroumstances and overall facts in this case it is understandable that you may have felt overwhelmed and made mistakes in judgement that may have been out of character for you. I believe this is a contributing factor to what took place and therefore dampens the need for more severe discipline, 1. You will be removed from the sergeant eligibility list for this year. 2. ‘You will receive a written reprimand concerning the two sustained allegations, Please understand that this can be a learning moment for you and I would ask that you demonstrate attitude of positivity and compliance in the future.MEMORANDUM Williamson County Sheriff's Office Corrections Bureau Assistant Chief R. Doyer 2, Commander E. Williams April 14, 2020 Medical Officer Jordan Banks ‘On April 14, 2020 at about 13:00 hours, I was given the Office of Professional Standards file on Medical Officer Jordan Banks. At this time, I was also informed of the decision for the agency to separate from Officer Banks. Attempts were made to contact Officer Banks but could not reach her. ‘On April 15, 2020 at about 09:40 hours, Lt. Doug Wheless brought Officer Banks to my office, With Lt, Wheless as a witness, [ explained to Officer Banks that the Williamson County Sheriff's Office had decided to terminate her employment. Officer Banks asked me to explain why this decision was made. I told her I was not going to get into the reasoning behind the decision to ‘terminate her, but she was aware of the disciplinary case against her. T then advised Ms, Banks to contact Corrections Quartermaster D. White to return all her county issued property. I then gaye Ms. Banks the dircet number for Mrs. White, Ms. Banks was then escorted out of the building.Williamson County Sheriffs Office Division of Internal Affairs Headquarters $508 Rock Street Georgetown, Texas 78626 (512) 943-1300 Initial Complaint Memorandum To: Sergeant Randy Batten, #2545 From: Sergeant James W. Knutson, #10041 Date: July 25, 2016 Re: Notice of complaint and related investigation: This memo is to inform you that an administrative complaint has been lodged against you and will be investigated by Internal Affairs, The Division of Intemal A{fairs is committed to addressing complaints against members of the Sheriff's Office in a fair and judicious manner, A brief factual description of the allegations include date, time, location and type of misconduct, Itis alleged on or about July 14, 2016, you, Sergeant Randy Batten, neglected to care for a Williamson County Sheriff's Office owned K9, Drago, with such care and prudence as would be expected of a reasonable person. You, as a K9 handler and supervisor, are responsible for the ordinary care and cleaning of the animal in your custody and control and are responsible for ‘maintaining it in the best possible condition. The level of care you provided is in contradiction, to the necessary work standards established for your rank, grade, and position. Due to this, your K9 partner Drago had to be removed from the conditions and is now housed with another handler, effectively removing him from service and placing e burden on another member of the K9 Unit, impairing the operation and efficiency of the agency and its personnel, Additionally, this matter reflects unfavorably upon you as a member of the agency. This conduct, if true, is in violation of the following policies: General Orders, #2, Violation of Rules; to wit, Section 600-002 Equipment (Use, Storage, Maintenance of, and Inventory), Subsection I, B and C: B. Negligent or incorrect use of County property is prohibited. For the purpose of this policy, negligence is the frilure to use such care and prudence as would be expected of a reasonable person. C. Employees are responsible for the ordinary care and cleaning of County equipment in their custody and control, and will maintain it in the best possible condition.Williamson County Sheriff's Office Division of Internal Affairs Headquarters 508 Rock Street Georgetown, Texas 78626 (512) 943-1300 General Orders, #5, Unsatisfactory Performance, Subsection B: B. Employees will perform their duties in a manner, which will maintain the highest standard of efficiency in carrying out the functions and objectives of the agency. Unsatisfactory performance may be demonstrated by a lack of knowledge of the application of laws to be enforced; unwillingness or inability to perform assigned tasks; the failure to conform to work standards established for an employee's rank, grade, or position; the neglect of duty; the display of cowardice, absence without leave, or the physical or mental inability to perform the essential functions of the position and required duties. General Orders, #6, Unbecoming Conduct, Subsection B: B. Conduct unbecoming an officer will include that which brings the agency into disrepute, reflects unfavorably upon the officer as a member of the agency, damages or affects the reputation of any member of the agency, or impairs the operation or efficiency of the agency or any of its personnel. understand that the person assigned to this investigation intends to tape record the interview. I acknowledge that I am responsible for complying with Departmental policies, which require that T cooperate with the investigation and provide full and accurate information regarding these allegations. I understand that the allegations listed are conditional until approved for investigation and signed by Chief L.C. “Tony” Marshall ‘You are further ordered not to discuss this internal investigation with anyone, including but not, limited to witnesses or prospective witnesses. A violation of this order will be considered an act of insubordination, which could result in your termination srom the Williamson County SherifP's Office. Copy received at [fT fo) pam. on this 25" day of July, 2016 Cb. ee zal TF) WA at Employed Signature ‘Sighaturé of Investigator DateLe “TONY”, ‘MIKE COWIE ‘ChierDepaty ‘Asst Chis Depuy- Law Enfoeement Goorgstown, Texas 78625 MIKE GLEASON Phone (512) 99-1200 * Pax (512) 43-1404 ‘Ast Chit Deputy -Conestions On October 12, 2016, the Disciplinary Review Board convened regarding IAD Case 16-07-0002, Violation of Rules of Conduct 200-001-2 B and C, Violation of Rules, Section 600-002 Equipment (Use, Storage, Maintenance of, and Inventory), Subsection Il, Care of County Property, 200-001-5B, Unsatisfactory Performance and |200-001-6B, Unbecoming Conduct involving Sgt. Randy Batten. The findings are as follows: Sgt. Batten will be demoted to Patrol Deputy and receive a written reprimand. Sgt. Batten will hajve ten (10) calendar.days to appeal the Board's decision in writing to Sheriff James R. Wilson. D-Lake 38 f Chief Deputy Tony Marshall Date/Time m Mfefe.. Date/Time 1 do not wish to appeal the above listed decision of the DRB and hereby waive my ten (10) day appeal process, ‘Sgt. Randy Batten, Date/TimeEXHIBIT Robert Chody WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF 08 South Rock Steet etn, Texts 78626 Randiph Ds e180)" Fa (3) HIS Act Chit Deputy = Cnet Tim Ryte Chief Deputy Roy Fikac As Chet Deputy Law Enforcement Geo Phone (S13) NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION You have been called to Intemal Aflairs to respond to certain allegations of misconduct ot in reference to a critical incident you were involved in, The following allegation(s) or critical incident is being investigated Policy: General Administration Orders — 2.1 Rules of Conduct Violation: VIL PERFORMANCE PROHIBITIONS A appropriate, disciplinary action may be taken for any of the follow reasons: 1, Incompetent or inefficient performance or dereliction of duty. VII. ATTENTION TO DUTY C. Conduct and Behavior. Employees whether on-duty or off-duty. shall follow the ordinary and reasonable rules of good conduct and behavior and shall not commit any act in an official or private capacity tending to bring reproach, discredit, or embarrassment to their profession or the agency Employees shall follow established procedures in carrying out their duties as peace officers and/or employees of the agency. and shall at all times use sound judgment In accordance with Department policy, you will be provided a copy of the complaint made against you. You will be required to respond to all questions and assist investigators with all questions asked of you in this investigation. In accordance with the United States Supreme Court's decision in Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493(1967); your statement, as well as any information gained through your statement, cannot be used against you in any criminal proceeding (excluding perjury) All information relating to an Office of Professional Standards investigation is confidential. You are directed NOT to discuss this complaint or internal investigation with anyone other than the Office of Professional Standards, your attorney. your peer support team member, or other persons specifically designated by the Sheriff or his designee. You are directedNOT to contact the witnesses or other persous/employees involved in this investigation by any means, ‘The Office of Professional Standards or the assigned investigator intends to record all interviews. The Office of Professional Standards will notify you if an interview is required to further the investigation. A representative of the employee’s choosing or attorney for the employee may be present during the interview to observe only, Failure to adhere to this rule may result inthe removal. of the representative or altomey from the interview room. acknowledge receipt of this notice, my copy of the complaint or critical incident being investigated, and the fact that I am required to cooperate with the investigation and provide full and accurate information. Pavey Remo 8 ffi therh> Printed name / Employee # Date Copel Employee Signature|. WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE | SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY March 09, 2017 | To: Sheriff Chody From: Chief Ryle CZ Re: Deputy Randy Batten Sir, Ihave reviewed the file and recommendations on Deputy Randy Batten. Deputy Batten's Internal Affairs investigation has resulted in sustained complaints for violation of the rules of conduct, “Performance Prohibition” and’ Attention to Duty’. Chain of Command has recommended that he be permanently separated from employment with the Williamson County Sheriff's Office for cause. Itis clear from the evidence in this recommendation from the Chain of Command, that Deputy Batten is either unwilling or unable to perform his job at a level consistent with the minimum expectations of the Sheriff's Office. This behavior by Deputy Batten is in violation of the Sheriff's Office “Rules of Conduct” annotated below. Policy 2.1 Rules of Conduct VI PERFORMANCE PROHIBITIONS A. As appropriate, disciplinary action may be taken for any of the following reasons: 1. Incompetent or inefficient performance or dereliction of duty VIM. Auention to DutyWILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY eae Deputy Batten’s unwillingness or inability to perform in violation of 2.1, VI. A. 1 and VIII, are grounds for discipline The Disciplinary Matrix guide describes these acts of misconduct as: “Neglect of Duty” © Failed to take Appropriate Action ‘Failed to Provide Appropriate Service Policy 2.11 “Disciplinary Matrix” provides a guide for disciplinary penalties and in such cases where multiple violations or a series of behaviors or “extraordinary circumstances” for the implementation of penalties appropriate to address the behavioral deficiencies of the employee. Except in unusual or extraordinary circumstances, the level of discipline should be consistent with the disciplinary matrix when a similar violation can be found in the ‘matrix. In the event an employee is disciplined for more than one act of misconduct. the act with the highest level of disciplinary action will become the minimum level of action that should be administered. In some cases, due to the nature of the conduct in question, it may be appropriate to invoke a higher disciplinary action than the minimum level recommended for single infractions. When aggravating circumstances exist, it is the responsibility of the supervisor administering the discipline to justify the higher level of punishment." The evidence in this ease clearly documents Deputy Batten’s unwillingness or inabili adjust his behavior to meet the expectations under these rules of conduct. The evidence also gives grounds to support the recommendations from Deputy Batten’s Chain of Command to exercise the exceptions in pol 1 “Diseiplinars 10 invoke both the highest level for multiple behavioral failures, but to also invoke a higher level based on multiple infractions of the rules and the nature of the misconduct of the employee. wo Based on my review of the evidence in this case, | concur with the recommendations from Deputy Randy Batten’s Chain of Command that a Permanent Separation from employment with the Sheriff's Office is appropriate action to address Deputy Batten’s behavioral deficiencies.EXHIBIT ff 2 Robert Chody WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF HK South Rock Steet Georstown, Texas 78626 Handaiph Dove Phone ($12) 989-1500* Fas (S12) 983-1484 Aon Ce Depry Casts Tim Ryle cet Depany Ry Fike Asn Chis Ds NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION inkmann Employee Jereme B Employee #: 3475 Title: Sergeant Bureau: Law Enforcement ‘A personnel complaint has been filed against you and will be investigated by the Office of Professional Standards (OPS), The following allegations) are the basis for the investigation: Allegation I. Itis alleged on or about May 9, 2016, you, Sergeant Detective Jereme Brinkmann, failed to properly document, collect, and submit 2 firearms after conducting a search warrant at 1603 Sharon Place, Cedar Park, Texas. This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: Williamson County Sheriff's Office General Administrative Orders, Rules of Conduct 2.1, Section VI. Performance Prohibitions, Subsection A; Section VIII. Attention to Duty, Subscetion Q, Responsibility to Know Laws and Procedures; and Section XII. Maintenance of Property, Subsection E. Responsibility for Private Property You are reminded to refrain from contacting the complainant or witnesses in any way which might be interpreted as an attempt to discourage the complainant or witnesses rom cooperating with OPS during the investigation, You may, however, discuss the complaint with your attorney or other legal counsel You are also reminded any employee who is the subject of an administrative complaint investigation shall cooperate fully and answer all questions posed to them by investigators during such an investigation, WCSO employees questioned by OPS investigators concerning their knowledge of a complaint will fully cooperate and answer truthfully such questions as outlined in WCSO General Administrative Orders 2.4., Section V., Subsection E. L acknowledge receipt of this notice, my copy of the complaint, and the fact I am required to cooperate with the investigation and provide complete and accurate information,EXHIBIT y SS L-L2-PO/Z Date 4-10-21 Sighfture of Investigator making notification DateEee Allegation 1 CUASSIRICATION Sustained Respectfully submitted, Storey L. Sherouse Sergeant Office of Professional Standards ‘OPS 17-04-0003 Page 9 of 9Robert Chody Tim Ryle Roy Fike WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF ecrm pean: Lan nea — ‘508 South Rock Street PLAN LW Ea GGeoegetonn, Texas 78626 Raniph Dover Pn (S12) 941300 a (S12) 9-188 ‘ast Che Deputy» Coeations NOTICE OF COMPLAINT FILE# 19-03-0020 SYSTEM# 818 DATE: March 22, 2019 SUBJECT: Jeremy Brinkmann Commander, LE 3475 A complaint has been filed against you and will be investigated by the Office of Professional Standards (OPS). ‘The following allegation(s) are the basis for the investigation: llegation 1 It is alleged on or about March 21, 2019, Jeremy Brinkmann, engaged in conduct contrary to policy. This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: Policy 2.1 Rules of Conduct, V. GENERAL DUTIES. ‘The policy states: D. All employees shall work proactively to accomplish the goals, objective’s and mission of the sheriff office as defined by the Sheriff.” You are reminded to refrain from contacting the complainant or witnesses in any way which might be interpreted as an attempt to discourage the complainant or witnesses from cooperating with OPS during the investigation. You may, however, discuss the complaint with your attorney or other legal counsel. Employees are permitted to have an attorney, supervisor, or other representative with them in the room during any interview regarding allegations of misconduct; however, the employee's representative is limited to acting as an observer atthe interview. QOS! 1958, ev o211 12018‘You are also remin ~* Jed any employee who is the subject of an administrative complaint investigation shall cooperate fully and enswer all questions posed to them by investigators during such an, investigation, WCSO employees questioned by OPS investigators concerning their knowledge of complaint will fully cooperate and answer truthfully such questions as outlined in WCSO General Administrative Orders 2.4., Section Il, Subsection E. | acknowledge receipt of this notice of complaint and the fact I am required to cooperate ‘with the investigatioh and provide complete and accurate information, Copy received at_ 4/75 Ci@/p.m. on this 2 day of _ March _, 2019, Xberenne, Pris karan F425 : Printed Name and Erhployee Number of Employee ‘Date/Time Signature of Inyesti Date/Titae‘Wileraon County Shas Ole, SDE Souh Raut St, Geargeonh Texas 78 (in) oes MEMORANDUM To: Deputy Jack Danford IAD Control No 12-01-0002 From: Detective Jason Braeutigam-10216 Date: 02-16-2012 Re: INITIAL COMPLAINT The following allegations have been made against you and will be investigated by the Internal Affairs Division. A brief factual description of the allegations include date, time, location, and type of misconduct. An allegation has been made that, on January 15, 2012, you, Deputy Jack Danford, responded to a family disturbance involving a mson County Sheriff's Office employee and failed to document the call or notify your immediate supervisor. An allegation has been made that, on January 1, 2012, you, Deputy Jack Danford had your Field Training Officer status taken away by Sergeant Troy Brogden for your decision making in regards to a family disturbance call. On January 10, 2012, you, Deputy Jack Danford, received a written reprimand by your immediate supervisor, Sergeant Troy Brogden, for failing to document family violence calls after being told to on two separate occasions. Based on the information obtained, and if found to be true, you will have violated Williamson County Sheriff's Office General Orders Rules of Conduct 200-001 #5 Unsatisfactory Performance (subsection A & B), and #4 Insubordination (subsection A). I understand that the person assigned to this investigation intends to tape record the interview. I acknowledge that I am responsible for complying with Departmental policies, which require that I cooperate with the Investigation and provide full and accurate information regarding these allegations. You are further ordered not to discuss this internal investigation with anyone, including but not limited to witnesses or prospective witnesses. A violation of this order will be considered an act of insubordination, which could result in your termination from the Williamson County Sheriff's Office, Employee Signature Witness‘The investigation has determined Deputy Jack Danford violated Williamson County Sheriff's Office Rule of Conduct 200-001 #5 - Unsatisfactory Performance (subsection A é& B). 45 ~ Unsatisfactory Performance states: A) Employees will maintain sufficient competence to properly perform their duties and assume the responsibilities of their position. B) Employees will perform their duties in a manner, which will maintain the highest standard of the efficiency in carrying out the functions and objectives of the agency, Unsatisfactory performance may be demonstrated by a lack of knowledge of the application of the laws to be enforced; unwillingness or inability to perform assigned tasks; the failure to conform to work standards established for an employee’s rank, grade, or position; the neglect of duty; the display of cowardice, absence without leave, or the physical or mental inability to perform the essential functions of the position and required duties. The investigation has determined that on January 15, 2012, at approximately 1942 Hrs, Deputy Jack Danford responded to “fora disturbance that involved Williamson County Sheriffs Office employee, Deputy Peter Parks. Deputy Danford, through his own admission, said he did, in fact, get the call and responded to the call finding there was family violence but failed to make documentation. Deputy Danford, tarough his own admission, said he did not notify his immediate supervisor that the disturbance involved an employee of the Sherifi"s Office, and only made a report after being ordered to do so by his supervisor. Deputy Danford did not perform his duties in a manner which is in the highest keeping of law enforcement profession and showed his unwillingness to perform an assigned task. Deputy Danford also failed to remain attentive while on duty and showed the lack of knowledge of application of laws to be enforced. Deputy Denford failed to conform to work standards established for his position, ‘Therefore, Rule of Conduct # 200-001 #5 Unsatisfactory Performance (Subsection A & B) is Sustained. ‘The investigation has determined Deputy Jack Danford violated Office Rule of Conduct 200-001 #4 - Insubordination, iamson County Sheriff's #4 Insubordination states: A) Employees will promptly obey any lawful order of direction of a supervisor. ‘The investigation has determined that, on January 10, 2012, Deputy Jack Danford received a written reprimand from Sergeant Troy Brogden for failing to document family violence calls and 22utilize his in car video and audio mic. This reprimand ordered that in the future, Deputy Danford will make reports for all reported family violence calls, On January 15, 2012, Deputy Danford responded to” fora disturbance that involved physical violence. Deputy Danford, through his own admission, said he did not document the call and tumed off the audio mic to his in car video recorder knowing that he was in direct violation of a prior direct order from his supervisor. : During the course of this investigation it has been determined that Deputy Danford did not obey a direct order from his immediate supervisor, Sergeant ‘Troy Brogden. Sergeant Brogden gave Deputy Danford a lawful and direct order both orally and in writing directing him to document family violence calls and utilized his in car video recorder, ‘Therefore Rule of Conduct # 200-001 #4 Insubordination - Sustained, ‘This memo is being submitted to you for your approval. Detective Jason Braeutigam ‘Sergeant Storey Sherouse Chief Deputy .C. Tony Marshall Attachments, Initial Complaint Memorandum- Administrative Investigation Warning- Garrity Warning- ‘Transcribed Statement- Paper Evidence-MEMORANDUM Williamson County Sheriff's Office Office of Professional Standards (P-34-0005 TO: Tim Ryle FROM: ‘Storey L. Sherouse DATE: April 18, 2018 OPS has reviewed the officer involved shooting investigation (2017-10-00481) concluded by the Criminal Investigations Division. OPS did not find any policy violations by Deputy Jack Danford related to the vehicle pursuit and response to resistance. Once the officer involved shooting packet is completed by the Criminal Investigations Division and turned over to OPS, a final OPS case number will be produced so the documentation can be logged and closed. rey L. Sherouse, LieutenantEXHIBIT yt Robert Chody WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF 508 South Rock Steet, Georgetown, Tenis T8626 Randolph Doser Pron (S12) 31500 * Fan (512) Tim Ryle Ccier Depaty Roy Fike Employee: Donald Foiles #4649 Sectio inal Investigations Division Special Vietim’s Unit Position: Detective STRATIVE INVESTIGATION ional Standards to respond to certain allegations of misconduet or in reference to a critical incident you were involved in The following allegation(s) or critical incident is being investigated: Policy Violation: Chapter 2.1 Rules of Conduct, VIII. Attention to Duty, Page 6, C. Conduet and Behavior. Employees whether on-duty ot off-duty shall follow the ordinary and reasonable rules of good conduct and behavior and shall not commit any aet in an official or private capacity tending to bring reproach. discredit. or embarrassment to their profession or the agency Employees shall follow established procedures in carrying out their duties as peace offic and/or employees of the agency, and shall at all times use sound judgment, Chapter 2.1 Rules of Conduct, VIII. Attention to Duty, V. Seeking Personal Preferment. Employees shall not solicit petitions or influence, or seek the intervention of any person outside the agency for purposes of personal preferment, advantage, transfer, advancement. promotion, or change of duty for themselves or for any other person. Chapter2.1 Rules of Conduct, VIII. Attention to Duty Page 13, W. Criticism of the Agency Employees shall neither publicly nor at internal official meetings criticize or ridicule the agency or its policies, county officials or other employees by speech, writing, or other expression, where such speech. writing, or other expression is defamatory, obscene. bigoted, or unlawful, or iit undermines the effectiveness of the agency. interferes with the maintenance of discipline, or is made with reckless disregard for truth or falsity. Chapter 2.1 Rules of Conduct, VIII. Attention to Duty, X. Disruptive Activities Asst Chie Deputy: Law Enforce Ast Chet Deputy -CoretonsEXHIBIT 4 2-2 Employees shall not perform any action that tends to disrupt the performance of official duties and obligations of employees of the ageney or which tend to interfere with or subvert the reasonable supervision or proper discipline of employees of the agency. In accordance with Department policy, you will be provided a copy of the complaint made against you. You will be required to respond to all questions and assist investigators with all questions asked of you in this investigation, In accordance with the United States Supreme Counts decision in Garrity v. New Jersey 385 U.S. 493(1967): your statement, as well as any information gained through your statement, cannot be used against you in any criminal proceeding (excluding perjury). All information relating to an Office of Professional Standards investigation is confidential. Youre directed NOT to discuss this complaint or internal investigation with anyone other than the Office of Professional Standards, your attorney. your peer support team member, or other persons specifically designated by the Sheriff or his designee. You are directed NOT to contact the witnesses or other persons/employees involved in this investigation by any means. The Office of Professional Standards or the assigned investigator intends to record all interviews. The Office of Professional Standards will notify you if an interview is required to further the investigation. A representative of the employee's chosing or attorney’ for the employee may be present during the interview to observe only, Pailute toadhere to this rule may result in the removal of the representative oF attorney ftom the interview room, { acknowledge receipt of this notice, my copy of the Complaint or etitical incident being investigated, and the fact that lam required to cooperate with the investigation and provide full and accurate information. Buel! foto Vvbby YO2 2017 Printed name / Employee # DateWILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY ril 5, 2017 To: Sheriff Chody wo From: Chief Ryle (7 Re: OPS Investigation- D. Foiles Sir, I have reviewed the OPS investigation into the allegations made against Detective Foiles for violation of the following rules: Attention to Duty Criticism of the Agency Disruptive Activities Seeking Personal Preferment The investigation revealed the allegations were “not sustained”. I have reviewed the investigation and I concur with the findings in this case. I recommend D, Foiles be reinstated to full duty. fe A jap peVim Ryle Cer Deputy Robert Chody WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF 508 South Rock Steet Georgetown, Texss 78626 Ranph Dayr Phone S12} 95:150 * Fa (S12) 943-444 Asst Chie Deputy = Caretins Roy Fae Asst Chief Deputy Law Eafiweement NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION Employee Name: Donald Foiles Employee #: 4649 Title: Detective Bureau: Law Enforcement ‘A complaint has been filed against you and will be investigated by the Office of Professional Standards (OPS). The following allegation(s) are the basis for the investigation: Allegation 1 It is alleged on or about April 19.2018, you, Detective Donald Foiles, were speaking with the victim of an investigation. It is alleged you were rude and discourteous to said victim. ‘This allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of: General Administrative Orders 2.1 Rules of Conduct, Section VI. Performance Prohibitions. The policy states: A. As appropriate, disciplinary action may be taken for any of the following reasons: 2. Insubordination, discourteous treatment of the public or a fellow employee, or any act of omission or commission of similar nature that discredits or injures the public. (Insubordination may also consist of direct, tacit, or constructive refusal to do assigned work.) Allegation II Itis alleged on or about April 19,2018, you, Detective Donald Foiles, closed case 2018- 04-0344 without conducting a proper constitute a violation of: VI. Performance Prohi westigation. This allegation, if true, would eral Administrative Orders 2.1 Rules of Conduct, Section ions. The policy states: ‘A. As appropriate, disciplinary action may be taken for any of the following reasons: Incompetent or inefficient performance or dereliction of duty. Employees shall follow established procedures in carrying out their duties as peace officers and/or employees of the agency, and shall at all times use sound judgement”‘You are reminded to refrain from contacting the complainant or witnesses in any way which might be interpreted as an attempt to discourage the complainant or witnesses from cooperating with OPS during the investigation. You may, however, discuss the complaint with your attomey or other legal counsel. You are also reminded any employes who is the subject of an administrative complaint investigation shall cooperate fully and answer all questions posed to them by investigators during such an investigation, WCSO employees questioned by OPS investigators concerning their knowledge of a complaint will fully cooperate and answer truthfully such questions as outlined in WCSO General Administrative Orders 2.4., Section III, Subsection E. Tacknowledge receipt of this notice, my copy of the complaint, and the faet I ath required to cooperate with the investigation and provide complete and accurate information. Copy received at am. on this day of 2018, Printed Name and Employee Number Signature of Employee Date/Time Signature of Investigator Date/Time178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 Allegation I Sustained Allegation Not-Sustained Respectfully submitted, Gilbert J. Unger Detective Office of Professional Standards OPS 18-04-0006 Page 5 of 5WILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY August 15, 2019 Notice of Outcome Performance/Misconduct To: Detective Donnie Foiles From: Chief Tim Ryle OPS #849 Allegation #1- Violation of GO 2.1 section III- Unethical Behavior, Itis alleged that you revealed information that was confided to you in our official capacity and you acted officiously and permitted your personal feelings influence your decisions. © We have established you made a comment during that planning session if you had known SWAT was going serve the search warrant you would not have sought one © We have established that you acknowledged the plan which included handing off the execution of the arrest and search warrants to other units within the agency. ° We have established that you made contact with the girlfriend of the suspect after the warrant was handed off to another unit to serve. 1[PageWILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY ‘* We have established you developed a separate plan to coax the suspect to the airport in Killeen for him to be arrested there including discussing flight times etc. ¢ We have established that you acted on your plan through texts and phone conversations with the girlfriend Allegation #2- Violation of GO 2.1 VIIL.F-Attention to Duty- Truthfulness- Itis alleged you failed to be truthful during questioning about the incident involving your communication with the victim in order to set up a trap for the suspect against established plans. © We have established during both the preliminary inquiry into this incident with your chain of command and again during your investigative interview with OPS you first stated you did not inform the girlfriend that her boyfriend was wanted by us and you did not notify her of our intent to arrest him and search the residence for digital evidence. Later in the same conversations and interviews you changed your story and revealed that you discussed using her to lure the boyfriend to the airport in Killeen to be arrested. Z| PageWILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY Allegation #3- Violation of GO 2.1 VIII.U- Assisting Criminal Activity Itis alleged you communicated with the suspect's girlfriend and notified her of his impending arrest. This action either directly or indirectly may delay the arrest, enable persons guilty of criminal acts to escape. ¢ We have established during both the preliminary inquiry into this incident with your chain of command and again during your investigative interview with OPS you first stated you did not inform the girlfriend that her boyfriend was wanted by us and you did not notify her of our intent to arrest him and search the residence for digital evidence. Later in the same conversations and interviews you changed your story and revealed that you discussed using her to lure the boyfriend to the airport in Killeen to be arrested. Allegation #4: Violation of GO 2.1 1X.B.- Interfering with Cases or Operations It is alleged that you took actions outside the agreed upon plan with may have interfered with the case or operation. © We have established you were involved in the briefing and planning for the arrest and search warrants to arrest a wanted Tango Blast gang member and search his residence for digital evidence of an aggravated assault and a previous rape case. 3|PagWILLIAMSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE SHERIFF ROBERT CHODY We established the primary suspect was a gang member and had 22 prior arrests for felonies and misdemeanors. We have established that you planned to have detectives force entry into the home for the search warrant if that became necessary which is outside of the rules, We have established you made a comment during that planning session if you had known SWAT was going serve the search warrant you would not have sought one We have established that you acknowledged the plan which included handing off the execution of the arrest and search warrants to other units within the agency. We have established that you made contact with the girlfriend of the suspect after the warrant was handed off to another unit to serve. We have established you developed a separate plan to coax the suspect to the airport in Killeen for him to be arrested there including discussing flight times etc. We have established that you acted on your plan through texts and phone conversations with the girlfriend We have established you knew the girlfriend claimed to still Love the suspect and wanted to help him. We have established the Mom was not cooperative with your investigation