OXFORD COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 26 Western Avenue + RO. Box 179 + South Paris, ME 04281 (207) 743-6359 + www.oxfordcounty.org David A. Duguay, Chairman + Timothy G. Turner + Steven M. Merrill February 7, 2024 ‘The Honorable Governor Janet T. Mills 1 State House Station Augusta, ME 04333 RE: Complaint Regarding Oxford County Sheriff Christopher Wainwright ‘Dear Governor Mills: This correspondence is being sent to you pursuant to Article 9, Section 10 of the Maine Constitution and Title 30-A, Section 441 of the Maine Revised Statutes. Pursuant to public votes taken on January 16, 2024! and February 7, 2024, the Board of Commissioners of Oxford County (the “Board”) hereby requests that you exercise your statutory and Constitutional authority to remove the Sheriff of Oxford County, Christopher Wainwright (the “Sheriff”) from the Office of Oxford County Sheriff. Please accept this correspondence as the Board’s “complaint” as contemplated by Section 441. |As detailed in this correspondence, the Board has concluded and voted affirmatively that the Sheriff improperly exercised and acted outside of his authority, and that he has failed to faithfully or efficiently perform duties imposed on him by law. The actions of the Sheriff undermine his ability to be the leader of a law enforcement agency, to command the confidence ‘and respect of the department and the public, and to enforce the laws and the policies of Oxford County and his own department with respect to ethical conduct. 1. __ Sheriff Wainwright’s Unethical Efforts to Extract Leniency Regarding a Ticket of a Personal Acquaintance and Failure to Abide by the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics? 1 A copy of the approved minutes of this meeting are attached herein as Exhibit A- 2 Unless otherwise stated, the factual background provided below is from an independent investigation into the facts conducted by Maria Fox, Esq. Attomey Fox's report was commissioned on December 20, 2022, at the request OF the County's attomey James F. Pross, with the approval of the County ‘Administrator, The Sheriff participated willingly in the investigation. The final report is being held confidential under a claim of attorney client and work product privilege. Discussion about the report’s findings herein, is not intended as a waiver of the claim of privilege. However, if the Office of the Governor were to request the final report, the claim of privilege would be waived and the report transmitted. 1A. The Sheriff's Request to Seek Leniency for a Personal Acquaintance ‘On November 4, 2022, Oxford County Deputy Tyler Fournier’ was working at a Dirigo High School football game in Dixfield, and the Sheriff approached him saying he had a case he wanted to talk about involving a ticket that Deputy Fournier had issued to Ms. Audrey Coffin* While there is some dispute about the exact wording used by the Sheriff during this conversation, he asked Deputy Fournier to seek leniency with Ms. Coffin if and when the matter went to Court. Deputy Fournier was taken aback and did not know what to say. He said he felt intimidated and that because the Sheriff was his superior, the Sheriff's question amounted to an expectation that Deputy Fournier dispose of the ticket or reduce the fine. Deputy Fournier was troubled by the Sheriff's request because in his interpretation the Sheriff was asking him to treat a friend or acquaintance differently than other people who are pulled over by the Sheriff's Department. According to the initial reporting, the ticket issued was for operating with an open container in the vehicle driven by Ms. Coffin. However, in the final report, it was determined that on August 20, 2022, the ticket was actually written for consuming alcohol in a motor vehicle on a public way. ‘The Sheriff knows Ms. Coffin because she went to school with his older brother. Sometime during the summer of 2022, the Sheriff donated money to a fundraising effort for Coffin’s sister who was battling cancer. The Sheriff also attended a benefit event for Coffin’s sister. At the event, the Sheriff said he heard Coffin talking about how she had been pulled over by a young deputy. She said she had taken her sister shopping in Dixfield and they stopped at Towle’s Comer Store and bought some Twisted Teas, which they passed around in the car. Deputy Fournier was upset and shaken by the Sheriff's request and discussed it with his partner on the shift he was working, Deputy WS. Deputy W advised that Deputy Fournier should report it up the chain of command if he was concerned about the request from the Sheriff. He further advised that if Deputy Fournier did not report it, he would “go down to the Chief’s Office first thing in the moming [and report it himself].” Deputy Fournier reported the matter to Sergeant Y° and told him that he did not know what to do. Deputy Fournier claimed he felt physically ill over the situation because he knew the Sheriff's request was not right. Deputy W also reported feeling stressed out over it and felt like he had a knot in his stomach. > Unless otherwise specified, all references to law enforcement personnel are references to persons who were employees of the Oxford County Sheriff's Office at the relevant time. “The identities of Deputy Fournier and Ms. Coffin were made public by the Bangor Daily News on May 5, 2023, and subsequently by other news outlets. The Sheriff has denied receiving any financial or other benefit from Ms. Coffin in exchange for his attempt to seek leniency, and there is no evidence that has been uncovered to contradict that. Campaign finance reports for the Sheriff's 2022 election reflect no contributions made by Ms. Coffin. S"The Deputy’s name has been redacted in the Complaint in an effort to protect the Deputy’s privacy but “will be shared with the Office of the Governor upon request or issuance of an Executive Order regarding the submission of confidential and/or private information. © The Sergeant's name has been redacted in the Complaint in an effort to protect the Deputy’s privacy but will be shared with the Office of the Governor upon request or issuance of an Executive Order regarding ‘the submission of confidential and/or private information. 2By November 5, 2022, the union representative for the deputies had communicated with the shop steward and was aware of Deputy Foumier’s report. On November 5, Sgt. Y texted the Chief Deputy, James Urquhart: Hey Chief ... sorry to burden you with this. Late last night, I had a ‘subordinate report to me that the Sheriff approached him and asked him to ‘squash a case / ticket. The subordinate is pretty upset about it, just passing it up the chain... Set. Y was leaving for an extended hunting vacation on Monday, November 7, 2022, and would be unreachable. So, on Sunday night, November 6, 2022, he sent the Chief an email with more details. He wrote in the subject line: “Subordinate complaint on the Sheriff - reported on 11-05~ 22 at about 0001 hours.” In the email, he wrote, in relevant part: Hey Chief... sorry to burden you with this. On Saturday, 11-05-22 at 0001 hours, Deputy Fournier reported to me that the Sheriff approached him on Friday 11-04-22 during the football game security detail (1830-2100) at Dirigo HS in Dixfield and asked him to squash a case / ticket, Deputy Fournier is pretty upset about it, Deputy W also contacted me as he heard some of this too. Deputy W is very upset about the Sheriff's request. I texted your phone this info on 11-05-22 at 1628 hours and have also sent you a Spillman e-mail. I felt that I as a Supervisor have the duty to report this complaint to you as you are in the next step in my chain of command. ‘The Chief Deputy did not respond to any of Sgt. Y's messages reporting this matter. He said he thought it would be best to say nothing because in past cases, some deputies used out of context comments or excerpts from conversations for their benefit. He said he called the Sheriff regarding this matter on the evening of November 6, 2022, and then he forwarded the Sheriff Sgt. Y's email. The date/time stamp on that email is November 7, 2022, at 6:34 a.m. ‘The Chief Deputy reported that he spoke briefly with the Sheriff about the incident. He said the Sheriff told him that he talked to Deputy Fournier at the football game after someone had approached him about a ticket and that Sgt. Y got wind of it. The Chief Deputy reported that he has no authority to investigate the Sheriff, so he took no other action. B. The Sheriff’s Threatening Phone Calls to Deputies Fournier and W Since he had reported it to the Chief Deputy, Sgt. Y anticipated that the Sheriff would contact Deputies Fournier and W by telephone. The shop steward advised both deputies to record ‘any call they receive from the Sheriff. On November 7, 2022, the Sheriff texted Deputy W at 10:40 a.m. requesting a call. They spoke shortly thereafter. Deputy W recorded the call. During the call with Deputy W, the Sheriff read the email that Sgt. Y sent to the Chief Deputy. The Sheriff explained that Deputy Fournier gave Ms, Coffin a ticket. He said she was going shopping with her sister, and they stopped and picked up some Twisted Teas and opened them in their vehicle. He added that Ms. Coffin's sister has stage 4 cancer and was in the hospital and is probably going to die. He said that he told Deputy Fournier, “Hey, when it goes to Court, if there’s anything you ean do, | would appreciate it” Deputy W said the ticket was already in the system. He said he did not tell Deputy Fournier to do it, “ just said ‘if you can.”Deputy W explained to the Sheriff that Deputy Fournier approached him and was “super concerned,” so he told him to address it. He said he told Deputy Fournier that if Deputy Fournier was not going to report it, Deputy W would report it to the Chief the next day. ‘The Sheriff asked if Deputy W considered talking to him directly. The Sheriff then said that he had “spoken to the AG's office on many times, and they said I can take any fucking ticket | want and run it through the shredder, you guys do it at my discretion.” Deputy W replied, “Yeah.” The Sheriff said it was not a big deal and because it was already in the court system, it ‘would be up to the DA’s office anyway. The Sheriff continued, that he did not understand how “what litte I said” was construed this way and that Deputy Fournier and Deputy W think “they're somehow going over my head and making complaints to the sergeant and to the chief deputy. You guys all work for me at my discretion...” He said he did not get it and he was disappointed and hurt. He said that if he wanted to fix a ticket, he would have called the DA’s office and done it himself. ‘The Sheriff said he was “very floored by it I really am, that that’s the way it was taken and that’s the perception, I guess I’m, I'll just - 1 guess I'll keep that in the back of my head when I talk to people, I guess, in the future, “cause it was not, that’s not what the intent was.” When the call ended, Deputy W contacted Deputy Fourier and said that he just got off the phone with the Sheriff and that the Sheriff would be contacting Deputy Fournier. Deputy W said he recommended Deputy Fournier record the call. The Sheriff texted Deputy Fournier at 11:12 am. requesting a call. They spoke shortly thereafter. Deputy Fournier recorded the call. During the call with Fournier, the Sheriff said it was relayed to him that Coffin was out shopping and they were “picking up her sister who’s got stage 4 cancer which I know she’s now in the hospital and she’s probably not going to make it, she’s going to die.” He said that Fournier stopped them at Towle’s, they picked up a six pack of Twisted Tea, they get in the car... and they open up a Twisted Tea or two... and at some point you pulled them over.” He continued, “So, what I said to you unless you heard something differently was, I don’t know when this goes to Court or if it has yet but, if it does, if you ean do anything for her, I'd greatly appreciate it.” Deputy Fournier responded, “Yeah. OK.” The Sheriff said, “Now, I can tell you this, is that, from the Attorney General’s office, I can shred any frickin’ traffic ticket 1 want. You guys work at my discretion.” Deputy Fourier responded, “OK.” The Sheriff said, “So there’s no ‘fixing tickets.’ There’s nothing illegal, there’s nothing wrong with that, and I get that from Brian MacMaster’s mouth.” Deputy Fournier responded, “OK.” The Sheriff went on, “So, I didn’t ask ‘you to do that, its already in the court system with DA’s office. My thing to you was, if you feel like you can do something for her, go ahead, If you can, meaning, it could be a deferred disposition, it could be a lesser fine, it could be whatever.” ‘The Sheriff explained that he would have preferred Deputy Fournier talk with him directly rather than report it to “a sergeant who apparently has his own agenda” because “I feel like now people are just making a big deal out of something...” He said he had a "huge problem” with getting emails that say, “Official Complaint about the Sheriff ...alleging misconduct.” He also told Deputy Fourier that, “I don’t have a boss” and later in the call, “I don’t work for the county commissioners, and I don’t work for the chief deputy, you all work for me. And if I tell you not to write any fucking tickets ever again, you won’t write any tickets ever again, you know ‘what I’m saying?”“The Sheriff reiterated that Deputy Fournier should have spoken with him directly, especially given that Deputy Fournier came to him with all sorts of other matters like cruisers and light bars. Deputy Fournier explained that he was “trying to stay politically out of things” but that he needed to talk to his coworkers as they talk about everything. The Sheriff said that was fine, this was not a secret, but that Deputy Fournier then contacted Sgt. Y upset. Deputy Fournier responded that he called Sgt. Y to tell him what happened because he did not know ‘what to do as he knew it did not feel right. Deputy Fournier explained, “Sheriff, I like you, don’t get me wrong, like I'm not against you by any means, you know, I just want to do my job and do it the best that I can.” The Sheriff responded, “Yeah, but do you fee! like I don’t have the authority to have a conversation like that with you?” Deputy Fournier said, “I have no idea.” The Sheriff responded, “...do you not feel like that you work at the Sheriff's discretion and that 1 dictate policy?” Deputy Fournier replied, “...1 don’t know enough about constitutional law and what the Sheriff can and can’t” and the Sheriff interjected that Fournier should “brush up on it, read our policy and procedure manual and in the future if you have an issue, I feel like you should come to me directly.” Deputy Fournier responded, “OK.” The call ended shortly thereafter. Both Deputy Fournier and Deputy W said the Sheriff could have called them and apologized and retracted the request, and that would have cleared things up for them. But, they explained, the Sheriff made matters worse in his calls with them. The Board agrees entirely, as the audio of the recorded calls is powerful and disappointing. The Sheriff's Misconduct Giving Cause for the Board to Send this Complaint ‘The Board carefully considered the foregoing facts, as well as several potentially mitigating factors that surround the events at hand which might weigh against the Board sending this complaint. The Board does not overlook the fact that the motivation for the Sheriff's request of Deputy Fournier was likely grounded in a benevolent concem for Ms. Coffin’s sister who was battling cancer, a disease that took the life of the Sheriff's brother. Regardless of his motivations, it is incumbent on the chief law enforcement officer of any agency to conduct him or herself within the confines of the Law Enforcement Code of Bthies at all times. Although fair process requires some consideration of potentially mitigating factors, the gravity of the Sheriff's actions implicate the integrity of the Office of Sheriff in Oxford County. The Sheriff's actions impugn the Office, undermine his ability to lead it, and leave Oxford County's citizens questioning their faith in law enforcement. The Sheriff's conduct in requesting leniency for his acquaintance, no matter how well intended, adds fuel to that fire, and brings these issues into Oxford County. The Sheriff's employment of threats and intimidation in the recorded phone ealls with his two deputies shakes our faith as County Commissioners, in his ability to faithfully and effectively administer and manage the Oxford County Sheriff's Office ‘without subjecting it to civil lability. The potentially mitigating factors do not change the Board’s perspective that the Sheriff should be removed from his elected office. ‘The foregoing facts demonstrate that Sheriff Wainwright has failed to faithfully perform his duties imposed by law and improperly exercised and acted outside his lawful authority in several material respects.First, Maria Fox concluded, and the Board agrees, that the Sheriff's actions were possibly criminal violation, as Section 751 of Title 17-A prohibits obstruction of government administration, It provides that, A person is guilty of obstructing government administration if the person intentionally interferes by force, violence or intimidation or by any physical act with a public servant performing or purporting to perform an official function, The investigation determined that Deputy Fournier credibly reported that he felt intimidated due to the Sherif?’s authority over him as junior deputy. The Sheriff intended to cause Deputy Fournier to exercise leniency in the handling of Ms. Coffin’s ticket in Deputy Fourier’s official function if and when the matter went to court. There is implicit coercion implicated simply by the Sheriff making the request of Deputy Fournier because of the power dynamies of their employment relationship. The phone calls to Deputy Fournier and Deputy W were clear attempts to intimidate the Deputies from reporting future misconduct, and was tied to the Sheriff's request for leniency for Ms. Coffin, ‘The Board understands from the final report that the Maine AG’s Office only prosecutes law enforcement personnel under this statute if there is evidence of financial benefit to the officer, and there is no evidence of the Sheriff receiving any financial or other benefits under the ‘known facts of this case. Even if the Sheriff's conduct may not be criminally prosecuted, itis a close question that is implicated by a plain reading of the statute, Second, the Sheriff's conduct violates the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, which the Sheriff must continually affirm and swear to in order to meet the minimum qualifications of the office pursuant to 30-A M.R.S. § 371-B.’ In relevant part, the Code of Ethies provides, “I will never .... permit ... friendships to influence my decisions. ... I will enforce the law ... without fear or favor ...” (Emphasis added.) The Board finds that the Sheriff violated the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics when he attempted to influence Deputy Fournier’s handling of the ticket as a favor to the Sheriff's personal acquaintance, Third, the Board also finds that the Sheriff violated Oxford County’s policy, “Complaints Against Law Enforcement Personnel,” Number 1-10, which says: “The image of the agency depends on the personal integrity and discipline of all agency employees. To a large degree, the public image of this agency is determined by the professional response of the agency to allegations of misconduct against itor its employees.”® Far from responding to the allegations of his alleged misconduct in a professional manner, the Sheriff responding by raising his voice, intimidating, and threatening the Deputies he called on November 7, 2022. Fourth, the audio recordings of the Sheriff's phone calls are powerful and provide direct evidence that the Sheriff improperly exercised, and acted outside of his authority. The substance 7 The Law Enforcement Code of Ethie is also incorporated into the County's Professional Responsibilities Policy # 1.2, which states that, “All law enforcement officers will adhere to and display the degree of integrity required by the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics." * See also, Criminal Conduct by a Law Enforcement Officer, Number 10-13 “The image ofthe ageney depends on the personal integrity of all agency employees. The public image of this agency depends partly on the agency's response to allegations of criminal conduct by a law enforcement officer...” 6of his calls is an affront to the Board and its own authority under Title 30-A, Section 501. Section 501(3) addresses the dismissal of county employees and provides, “An employee may be dismissed by a county officer or department head only for cause and only with prior approval of the county commissioners or personnel board.” 30-A M.R.S. § 501(3)(A) (emphasis added). The Sheriff is well aware of this, as he previously requested that the Board terminate one of his, former employees? Despite knowing that the authority to terminate an employee lies with the Board, the Sheriff repeatedly asserted that Deputy Fournier and Deputy W “work at his discretion.” This ‘was an attempt to intimidate the Deputies into believing that they could lose their job at his will. Moreover, he characterized his authority as being far greater than it actually is with phrases like: « “[J have] spoken to the AG’s office on many times, and they said I can take any fucking ticket I want and run it through the shredder, you guys do it at my discretion;” © “Now, I can tell you this, is that, from the Attorney General’s office, I can shred any frickin’ traffic ticket I want. You guys work at my discretion;” “J don’t have a boss;” and “1 don’t work for the county commissioners, and I don’t work for the chief deputy, you all work for me. And if tell you not to write any fucking tickets ever again, you won't write any tickets ever again, you know what I'm saying?” With these statements and through his November 7 phone calls, the Sheriff demonstrated that he regards his authority as Sheriff to be supreme to the point that not even basic principles of law apply to him. He showed a willingness to intimidate and threaten subordinates with their jobs, even though he lacks that authority, in order to prevent them from reporting his misconduct in the future, and to coerce them into complying with potential future similar requests that he might make. This goes beyond poor judgment. Itis a stain on the Office of the Sheriff and it erodes the public’s faith in law enforcement in Oxford County. II. The Sheriff's Unauthorized and Illegal Trade of Firearms from Oxford County Evidence without Knowledge or Approval of the Board of Commissioners In 2023, the Oxford County Board of Commissioners became aware that Sheriff Wainwright had traded firearms and firearm parts from the County’s evidence room several times in 2021 without the knowledge, oversight or approval of the Commissioners or the County ‘Administrator. With approval of the Board and County Administrator, the County's Attomey, ‘Amy Dieterich, Esq., engaged the services of an independent investigator, Maria Fox, Esq., to investigate the Sheriff's actions and assess the liability resulting therefrom. The Sheriff participated willingly in the investigation and provided documents and information that was duly considered by Attorney Fox. Attomey Fox delivered her report on December 30, 2023 (hereinafter, the Fox Report), which the Board has reviewed carefully. The Board accepts Attorney Fox's findings and ° ‘The County, the Sheriff, and Chief Deputy Urquhart are now all defendants in a federal civil suit involving the ‘Sheriff's efforts to terminate an employee, and the Sheriff is very aware that his termination authority i limite. See, USDC District of Maine, No. 2:22-cv-00339-LEW. 7conclusions in their entirety and incorporates them into this Complaint. A version of the Fox Report that is redacted to exclude confidential and private information is being attached to this ‘Complaint as Exhibit B. An unredacted copy of the Fox Report will be made available to the Governor upon request or issuance of an Executive Order regarding the submission of confidential and/or private information in the context of a hearing on the Board’s Complaint, ‘The findings and conclusions of the Fox Report are serious and alarming. Sheriff ‘Wainwright’s trade of firearms and firearm parts from the County’s evidence room without permission, accurate documentation or following required legal procedures violated several Maine civil laws, a criminal statute, County poliey and put Oxford County at risk. While Sheriff Wainwright had not seen a copy of the Fox Report prior to its inclusion in the instant Complaint, he was aware of the underlying facts, his own actions and inactions, and of the law, prior to the Board’s vote to send a Complaint to the Governor on January 16, 2024, Rather than take responsibility for his actions and failures and apologize to his constituents, the Sheriff has since issued public statements in which he has professed ignorance and showed no remorse for his actions, which have further eroded the Board’s and public’s trust in the Oxford County Sheriff's Department. Further compounding the Board’s disappointment in the Sheriff and cementing the need for the Governor’s intervention, the Board has determined that the Sheriff disposed of additional ‘Oxford County property without approval from the Board of Commissioners or, on information and belief, the then-County Administrator. The Sheriff did so in late 2023 while Attomey Fox was investigating the Sheriff's unauthorized, illegal trade of firearms from the County evidence room, and he did so contrary to a specific instruction from the Board not to dispose of this property. While the property at issue in this subsequent breach was exercise equipment rather than firearms, the Sheriff's willful and knowing violation of County policy and state law while under active investigation for the same behavior is a significant and meaningful indication that the Sheriff has no intention of following the law or County policy going forward. Il. The Sheriff's Failure to Ensure that School Resources Officers (SROs) Are Appropriately Credentialed before Acting as Law Enforcement Officers for Oxford County As has been reported in the media, the Board became aware in the summer of 2023 that several individuals had been assigned by the Sheriff as the Chief Law Enforcement Officer to work as SROs in two school districts within Oxford County without having the required law enforcement credentials. Pursuant to contracts entered into between the school districts, Oxford County and the Sheriff in his official capacity, the Sherriff agreed to provide to the Districts Deputy Sheriffs that ‘were appointed by him in accordance with 30-A M.R.S. §381. Section 381 provides that a sheriff may only appoint deputies if they meet certain prerequisites, one of which is that they complete certain training requirements, here under 25 M.R.S. §2804-B. In accordance with this Jaw, the Maine Criminal Justice Academy set forth certain training and certification requirements for SROs.‘The Board concludes that the Sheriff appointed several individuals as “Deputies” and assigned them to be SROs pursuant to these contracts for a period of years although they were not eligible by law to be appointed as Deputies due to their failure to attain the proper certification. As a result, the Sheriff's appointment of these Deputies, if they were so appointed, ‘was in violation of 30-A M.R.S. §381, in addition to the Sheriff breaching his obligations under the relevant contracts. Further, Title 25, Chapter 341 sets forth certain record keeping and reporting requirements for law enforcement agencies. As the “head” of an agency employing law ‘enforcement and corrections officers, it is the duty of the Sheriff, and the Sheriff alone, to maintain accurate and complete records of employment and training for the law enforcement and corrections officers for Oxford County. Based on the Board’s review of the facts and documents, it is clear that the Sheriff fell short in this respect as well. Employment and training records of the County’s law enforcement officers were not accurately maintained for several years and, as a result, inaccurate, false information was reported to the Maine Criminal Justice ‘Academy in violation of 25 M.R.S. §2805-B. ‘The Board appreciates that the Sheriff does not operate the Oxford County Sheriff's Department alone. Delegating matters to subordinates is an appropriate and necessary exercise of the authority of the head of a department of agency. However, the delegation of duties does not absolve the Sheriff of his legal obligations, and the Sheriff has failed to demonstrate the necessary diligence in supervising his department or respect for his legal obligations as the head of law enforcement for Oxford County. * * * In sum, it is the belief of the Board that Sheriff Wainwright has proven himself unworthy of the Office of Sheriff. Whatever his intentions, there can be no excuse for his repeated lack of diligence and judgment, and violations of law and County policies. There is no room in the ‘Oxford County Sheriff's Office for a sheriff who places himself above the policies that he is charged with administering, above the ethical responsibilities that he swore an oath to uphold, ‘and the laws that he is charged with enforcing. No one is unaccountable. While the people may have elected the Sheriff before the facts giving rise to this ‘Complaint were publicly revealed, the actions of the Sheriff have proven that he is incapable of faithfully or efficiently performing the functions of the Office. The Board believes that Oxford County deserve a Sheriff that embodies the virtues and values of the Maine Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, particularly the following requirement: “Honest in thought and deed in both my personal and official life, I will be exemplary in obeying the laws of the land and the regulations of my department.” Upon this basis and for these reasons, the Board must request that you exercise your Constitutional and statutory authority to have the Sheriff removed and to replace him with an individual who is capable and worthy of the job.Respectfully submitted, The Board of Commissioners for Oxford County 10 Timothy Tumer, Commissioner Shi. 4. Steven Merrill, Commissioner Qed David Duguay, Commissio!OXFORD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS a A MEETING MINUTES 4 January 16, 2024 Meeting Convened ‘At the Court of Oxford County Commissioners begun and held at Paris, Maine within and for the County of Oxford at 12:00 pm on Tuesday, January 16 being a regular session, there were present, David Duguay Chairman Timothy Tumer Commissioner Steven Merrill ‘Commissioner ‘The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Minutes Approval ‘The following action occurred regarding sets of minutes of previous meetings: January 4 approved with amendments ‘Agenda Adopted ‘The agenda was adopted as written. 2023 Spirit of America Ceremony: The Commissioners congratulated this years Spirit of America Winners: ‘Theressa Shaw Bob Coolidge Lura Sawyer Brian & Sherri Otterson Ronald Silvia Tommie Mckenzie Julia MeQueen Alberta Ridlon Frances Head Roland Bousquet Gammon Family Farm Ladies of the Lake Quilters Lorrain Parsons Woodstock Conservation Commission Silver Lake Camp Owners Association, Courtesy Boat Inspection Program Department He: Department heads met with the Commissioners to discuss a variety of topics, some being unique to specific departments and other topies being of concem to several or all departments. ‘Treasurer Beth Calhoun updated department heads of an upcoming change to payroll and bookkeeping due to Berry Talbot Royer no longer being able to fill the County's needs. Sheriff's Report Sheriff Christopher Wainwright updated the Commissioners on departmental matters.‘Treasurer's Report Treasurer Beth Calhoun updated the Commissioners on financial matters. ‘The Commissioners authorized negotiating a contract with Bangor Saving Bank for payroll services. ‘The Commissioners authorized negotiating a contract with Jessica Flanders for payroll and bookkeeping support. Personnel Updates and Actions ‘The Commissioners entered an executive session (1 MR'S.A. § 405-6 E) with Attorney Amy Dieterich and Sheriff Christopher Wainwright. The returned to open session and made the following motion: Sheriff Christopher Wainwright has failed to faithfully and efficiently perform the duties of his Office and improperly exercised and acted outside of his legal authority, and that the Board shall send a complaint to the Governor detailing the facts of his actions and requesting his removal front Office and replacement pursuant to 30-A M.R.S. § 441. Said complaint shall include his actions on November 4th and 7th, 2022; his actions and omissions in 2021 regarding the disposal of firearms violating Title 25, Chapter 401, 30-A M.R.S. § 82(3) and Oxford County policies, as well as potentially 17-A M.R-S. § 353(A); and his deficient performance of contractual obligations with SAD #55 and RSU #10. | The Commissioners authorized the hiring of Jocelynn Whittemore as a full-time Dispatcher with | the following confirmed: | © Effective Date: January 16, 2024 © Wage Rate: $19.19/hr (entry rate) © Special Conditions: contingent upon successful physical at Concentra following confirmed: | * Effective Date: January 17, 2023 | © Wage Rate: $19.19/hr (entry rate) ‘© Special Conditions: contingent upon successful physical at Concentra ‘The Commissioners tabled authorizing a contract with Oxford County Mental Health until update: could be completed. It was determined that the executive session for negotiation updates was not needed. |) Items for The Commi 1, The Commissioners decided to hold off on replacing the Old West Bethel Road bridge for now. 2. The Commissioners signed a resolution on the Hazard Mitigation Plan update. 2 | | ‘The Commissioners authorized the hiring of Garey Tibbetts as a full-time Dispatcher with thedjournment ‘The Commissioners adjoumed at 1:43pm Oud 0 ppg David A. Duguay, Chairman _ oo TimolhyG. Tumer Commissioner — -ven M. Merrill Commissioner Notes: 1) These minutes are intended to be a brief description of meeting actions to provide, ina ‘general sense only, an account of what was discussed. 2) Unless otherwise noted, all votes taken by the Commissioners were unanimous.Privileged and Confidential Communication -- 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation EXHIBIT. To: Amy Dieterich, Esq. Attorney for Oxford County 1 _ From: Maria Fox, Esq. Re: 2021 Trade with JT Reid for Firearms from Evidence Room I. INTRODUCTION Oxford County (“the County”) retained me to conduct an independent investig regarding allegations and personnel matters involving the County’s Sheriff's Department ("Department") and one or more of its employees in connection with the sale of firearms from its evidence room in 2021. Specifically, you asked that I detail the relevant facts, and analyze whether the County bears exposure for liability, and whether Sheriff Christopher Wainwright Wainwright”) improperly exercised or acted outside his authority in connection with the sale of firearms from its evidence room in 2021 in violation of law, policy or procedure. This written report outlines the investigation process, summarizes the evidence that 1 ‘gathered, and provides my findings and conclusions. As set forth below, I find that Wainwright violated Department policy when he traded firearms from evidence with JT Reid. | also find that, he violated Maine state laws regarding disposal of firearms and disposal of unclaimed property seized and retained by law enforcement. Furthermore, I find that he exceeded his authority under Maine state law by trading firearms from evidence with JT Reid without the knowledge or approval of the County Administrator or the Commissioners. In addition, 1 find that Wainwright’s action created legal exposure for himself and the Conny cs, Wainwright also could be subject to a claim for the tort of conversion, and possibly criminal charges for theft. Finally, 1 find that Wainwright's poor documentation regarding the firearms trades could subject the County to liability SENN. if JT Reid illegally sold one of the firearms it received in the trade, and someone was harmed with it. IL INVESTIGATION PROCESS In conducting this investigation, I interviewed the following witnesses: 1. Sheriff Christopher Wainwright (in-person twice, with follow up by phone once and also by email); 2. Donald Durrah, County Administrator (by Zoom videoconference); S 11PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation 6. Chief Deputy James Urquhart (in-person, with follow up once by phone and also by email); Lalso spoke with Quentin Tardiff, the County’s I.T. Director, regarding electronic searches for Department records. Finally, I attempted unsuccessfully to speak with Neil McLean, District Attorney for Prosecutorial District Three (Androscoggin, Frankly & Oxford Counties). 1 also reviewed various documents, including: 1, Bangor Daily News (“BDN”) article dated August 8, 2023, “A Maine Sheriff Secretly Sold Dozens of Guns from Evidence”; 2. Portland Press Herald and Sun Journal articles dated August 9, 2023, “Oxford County Sheriff Faces Questions about Gun Sales”; 3. Inventory of Dixfield Police Department (“DPD”)-issued firearms prepared by IME. dated August 20, 2020, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1; 4, Email to Wainwright from [NNN attaching Dixfield Police Department Evidence Locker Inventory (Firearms) (01/07/20) a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 2; 5. Summary of Discussion (Meeting with Sheriff) regarding an additional handgun located at the DPD (01/08/21), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 6. Supplemental Narrative from [NINN January 2021, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 4; 7. Supplemental Narrative from [NINE June 2, 2021, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 5; 8. Supplemental Narrative from [NNN September 7, 2021, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 6; 9. Receipt from JT Reid dated June 9, 2021, summarizing credit it issued for firearms and parts it received from Department evidence and DPD evidence, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 7; 10. Receipt from JT Reid to D. Durrah, dated December 14, 2022, for items JT Reid traded with the Department in 2020 for Department-issued weapons, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 8; 11. Receipt from JT Reid to D. Durrah, dated December 14, 2022, for credit it issued for sued firearms it received in November 2020, a copy of which is attached as it 9 12, Email to Wainwright from [NINN attaching list of firearms and parts from the DPD evidence room and from the Department's evidence room seized prior to 2016; 13. Initial list of firearms pulled for sale from the Department's evidence room, prepared y=, 2| PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication -- 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation 14, Reports generated from the Department's Spillman electronic records system identifying the firearms that were sold in 2021; 15. Police reports underlying the reason each of the firearms that were traded in 2021 were seized or received by the Department (or the DPD); 16. Various invoices, quotes, checks, forms, communit purchased by the Department; 17. Various invoices, quotes, checks, forms, communications and lists of firearms traded by the Department; 18. Oxford County Sheriff's Office Property/Evidence Control Policy (2/10/19), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 12; 19, Oxford County Sheriff's Office Standard Operating Procedures, Property & Evidence Control (3/27/23), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 13; 20. County of Oxford Purchasing and Bidding Policy (4/20/21), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 14; 21. County of Oxford Purchasi attached as Exhibit 15; 22, Inventory of current Department weapons {or [i 23. Training materials from a course [NNNEM took in 2023 on Property and Evidence Room Management by Dirigo Safety, LLC; 24. Documents provided by Wainwright; 25, Documents provided by [III 26. Campaign Finance Reports for 2018 and 2022, Maine Ethics Commission website, Contributions to Christopher R. Wainwright, Candidate for Sheriff, Oxford County; 27. County Commissioners’ Meeting Minutes from October 5, 2017 and February 20, 2018, regarding forfeitures of property, provided by D. Durrah; and 28. County Commissioners’ Meeting Minutes that were available on-line for 2020 and 2021. ions and lists of firearms and Bidding Policy (5/5/23), a copy of which is | attempted to obtain additional documentation from JT Reid but was unsuccessfl Il. FACTUAL SUMMARY Background Information and Overview In around 2020, the Department absorbed the Dixfield Police Department (“DPD”) ineluding several new deputies and various DPD property and equipment, Around this time, Wainwright decided that the Department's firearms needed to be replaced, SEEN provided Wainwright with a list of the agency-issued equipment, and they ‘went to test various firearms in search of the best deal. Wainwright decided to trade with JT Reid’s Gun Shop (“JT Reid”), and he phased in new Department-issued firearms for the officers cover time in 2020. As detailed below, JT Reid paid Amchar Wholesale, Sig Sauer, and Eagle Point Gun/TJ. Morris & Son for certain firearms and ammunition that were delivered to the Department in 3| PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation 2020. In exchange, in 2020 and 2021, JT Reid received: (1) Department-issued firearms; (2) DPD-issued firearms; (3) firearms and parts from the DPD evidence room; and (4) firearms from the Department's evidence room. JT Reid issued the Department credit for the firearms and parts it received, and paid distributors for firearms and ammunition that were delivered to the Department. Wainwright and JT Reid’s owner, John Reid (“Reid”), said no money was exchanged between JT Reid and the Department. Reid and Wainwright said that since 2021, the Department has had no credit with, or debt owed to JT Reid. Wainwright said the Department's practice of trading weapons from the evidence room predates his becoming the Sheriff in January 2019. For example, he said in the late 1990s, the then Chief Deputy Jim Davis, traded weapons from the old evidence room in the jail for credit with a firearms dealer. Wainwright provided some documents corroborating his statement that that was a past practice at the Department between 2010-2017, and that he was involved. ‘Wainwright explained that the Department has historically used a rule of thumb that, with a few exceptions, if it had a weapon for more than 6 years, it could be sold or traded. The exceptions were that they could dispose of the firearm sooner if they received forfeiture paperwork, if the weapon's serial numbers were removed, or if the firearm had an illegal configuration (e.g,, cut stock off, shortened barrel). Wainwright added that the practice relating to forfeited firearms has been that the District Attomey (“D.A.”) calls and tells them a firearm had been forfeited but no documentation flows from the D.A.’s office to the Department. The Department's Evidence Room Witnesses described that, as of 2019, all firearms that are seized are kept in the evidence room at the Department’s Criminal Investigations Division (“CID”). rs ES Gienicrally, whien officers seize property including firearms, they bring it to the evidence room. Witnesses explained that the Department receives firearms for reasons other than through seizures, which are also placed in the evidence room. For example, residents may relinquish firearms to the Department (e.g., a widow or family living out of state), which are placed in the evidence room. [NINN enters everything going in the evidence room into the Department’s electronic database called Spiliman. He also fields contacts from the public looking for the return of property that the Department seized. [NMI researches the case to determine if the property (including firearms) ccan be released to the person requesting it. Sometimes a firearm cannot be returned if the owner is legally prohibited from possessing it (“a prohibited person”). Where appropriate, the firearm is teleased back to the owner. EEE seid he answers 10 I but reports co a. said he used to oversee the evidence room and was involved in facilitating property returns, but he stopped in 2019. He said he told [gm he no longer wanted to be involved with the evidence room after Wainwright told him not to send notification letters to property owners about the status of their property that the Department has in evidence (as described below on page 6). 4|PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication -- 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation HEE Wainwright has the overall authority over the evidence room. Wainwright, [mm are the only ones authorized to access the evidence room. They must enter a code on a keypad to enter the locked evidence room. The Department uses an honor system to track who accesses it; there is a handwritten log inside the evidence room where the ‘person entering is supposed to write their name, time in and out, and reason for entering. Wainwright explained that the Department has had longstanding space issues with the ‘evidence room, which has moved around over the years to various places and landed in 2019 at the CID. He said he made it a priority when he was elected Sheriff to try to clear out some of the old evidence. Officers in charge of eases are responsible to timely return or dispose of evidence they have brought to the evidence room. IEEE described that the officer handling a case should go through the court to see if the matter has concluded. If so, they should send out a form to the last known address of the owner notifying them of the final disposition and whether they are entitled to the firearm, and that they have 30 days to respond, or the County will dispose of it. NIM said the documentation is placed in the file and then, if there is no response in 30 days, the Department can dispose of the firearm. This often does not happen. TE said they have had to send messages prompting officers to manage their evidence. Despite these efforts, the number of items that remain in the evidence room is large and difficult to manage, and it has been that ‘way for a long time. At the time of his interview for this investigation, IH estimated there were over 100 firearms in the evidence room. He explained there is not enough time or staff to properly dispose of old evidence. [ERE seid that, at some point before the firearms trade with JT Reid in 2021, [NEN attempted to contact a number of owners of property in the evidence room, including owners of firearms. This was an effort to try to clear out some of the mounting property in the evidence room. IEE said he worked with Joan Kelly to prepare letter forms to send to property owners at their last known addresses. But, he said, Wainwright learned about the effort, and he came to CID and told them not to reach out to the owners, especially owners of firearms as it was a source of income for the Department. [NNN said he was present when Wainwright gave this directive, NNN said they were uncomfortable with Wainwright's directive and, as a result, [NNN said he stopped his involvement with the evidence room. IEEE said he told no one about his decision, and he and (NINN said they did not report the matter because they feared retaliation, | 5| PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication -- 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation Wainwright denied instructing NNN not to send out notices to owners regarding firearms. However, he acknowledged that at some point he issued a directive to not contact owners of the DPD evidence or in cases involving suicides. As discussed below, Wainwright made a triage plan to dispose of DPD evidence, which did not involve attempting to contact owners. He also explained that he did not want to the Department to contact families of people who had died by suicide years before about the firearm that killed their relative, because it would be insensitive. Witnesses said they have not seen any documentation regarding forfeiture for firearms at the Department--only for cash and/or drugs. Former County Administrator Donald Durrah (“Durrah”) provided copies of certain ‘County Commissioners Meeting Minutes reflecting approvals of transfers of forfeiture assets involving firearms, though they also included drugs and/or money. See County Commissioners Meeting Minutes (10/5/17) (approving transfer of forfeiture assets of currency and one Taurus 9 mm handgun; currency and one SKS rifle; currency and one 9mm Hi-Point); County Commissioners Meeting Minutes (2/20/18) (approving transfer of forfeiture assets of cash and one firearm acquired through drug conviction). Firearms from the Dixfield Police Department In August 2020, the County took over the DPD.? Wainwright said to effectuate the ‘transition, he worked with the Town Manager, Dustin Starbuck, among others. [NI said he and Wainwright went to the DPD to see what was there. Wainwright instructed [am [EERE (0 inventory the DPD-issued police weapons and equipment. INN prepared the inventory at the DPD, and the firearms were moved to the CID. See Exhibit 1. mmm inventory list reflects 6 pistols and 5 AR-15s (along with other police equipment). Id. In an email dated November 2, 2020, Starbuck wrote there were 6 AR-15s, which he valued at $600 each, and 6 Springfield Armory pistols, which he valued at $400 each. Wainwright said the DPD-issued weapons were traded with JT Reid for credit to the Department, and the County credited the Town of Dixfield (“the Town”) for the value of these firearms (among other assets) in its invoice to the Town for the Department’s law enforcement services. In around January 2021, Wainwright directed IEEE 0 inventory all of the firearms in the DPD’s evidence room. Witnesses described the State of the DPD’s evidence room as unsecure and in disarray. They said it contained items that were very old (some dating back to the 1980s), and a number of them had no evidence tag and were not recorded in DPD’s system. Someone also found an unsecure firearm outside the evidence room, ? County Commissioners Meeting Minutes on August 18, 2020 reflect that the Commissioners signed ‘Memorandum of Understanding with the Town of Dixfeld about absorbing the DPD. 6|PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication -- 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation On January 7, 2021, INN prepared an inventory with [NINE listing the firearms and firearm parts that were in DPD evidence. A copy of the inventory of the firearms, which lists 26 firearms and parts, which were in the DPD evidence room that Huston emailed to Wainwright is attached as Exhibit 2. [NNN then took those firearms to the CID for [INI to enter into the Department’s system. On January 8, 2021, INN spent the day researching the firearms from the DPD ‘evidence room that were transported to the CID. He said most did not have an evidence tag. He attempted to find court cases to which the firearms were connected, but he could only find a few in the system; he believes some were never entered into the system. He said he entered each firearm and firearm part into Spillman, and he assigned each a property number. He said one firearm was logged in DPD’s records as having been returned to the owner but was still in evidence. This was the Walther PP 9mm referenced in the BDN article as one of the firearms that ‘Wainwright improperly sold. I said he called the number listed for the owner but found it ‘was no longer valid. HMMM said that on January 8, 2021, Wainwright said he needed to add another firearm to the inventory list as he found one doing a walk through at the DPD. See Exhibit 3. I said he did not add it to his list because he never handled it, but IH entered it into Spillman on January 11, 2021. See Exhibit 4 Wainwright said he did not want to take over DPD’s evidence room property due to the volume of old evidence the Department already has, but he ultimately agreed, with plan to triage disposal of the items. He explained that the DPD made a first pass to attempt to locate property owners before the Department took over. Then, as a way to triage, he decided to wait a ‘year and, if no one claimed the property, dispose of it all. For firearms, he decided to trade them ‘with JT Reid for credit to help cover the cost of purchasing firearms for the Department in 2020. Wainwright said many of the firearms and firearms parts from the DPD evidence room were junk,” so they did not go through everything case by case. He added that many of these firearms ad evidence tags that said “forfeited” or were owned by a prohibited person. HERES inventory list identified only one of the firearms as forfeited to the DPD and two as belonging to a prohibited person. See Exhibit 2. However, 11 had no tag or associated case number and under “Type of Case,” 14 were listed as “unknown.” Id. Wainwright said he did not direct or expect any efforts to be made to locate owners of the roperty in DPD evidence due to the lack of staff. x 3 3 gePrivileged and Confidential Communication 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation ES See Exhibit 4.° Authorization to Buy New Agency-Issued Firearms and Selection of JT Reid as Dealer In around 2019 or early 2020, Wainwright said he talked with the then-County Administrator Tom Winsor (“Winsor”) and the Commissioners about the fact that the Department firearms were older and would need to be replaced. Commissioners Meeting Minutes dated March 17, 2020 state that the Commissioners “authorized the purchase of 30 ‘weapon units up to $27,000, less trade-ins allowance, from the equipment line with funds being transferred from the drug account to cover the cost.” Wainwright said he understood this authorized him to use County funds towards the purchase of new weapons and that he could purchase additional weapons for the Department through trade-ins. Accordingly, Wainwright [NINN said they began looking at purchasing new weapons, specifically rifles and handguns. They decided to purchase Glock handguns which were cheaper and widely used. They went with Sig Sauer for rifles. Wainwright explained that Glock identified its Maine distributors for the Department to contact, none of which were located in Maine. He said they quoted low amounts for trade-ins. Additionally, he said they required all trade-ins at once, within a window of around 30 days. This ‘would have caused a strain on the Department as they would have to train everyone on the new equipment within a short time frame. Also, as the distributors were out of state, it would have taken time and expense to deliver the weapons, Wainwright said they selected Amchar because they had Glock handguns in stock, but that he made a better deal with JT Reid for the trade-ins. Wainwright said he heard JT Reid gave a good deal to the Auburn Police Department. He also personally knew JT Reid’s owner John Reid (“Reid”), as a member of the law enforcement community, with whom he had occasionally socialized. Campaign finance reports i z i = gE z i ? & z a a Z a z 5 2 g i &Privileged and Confidential Communication - Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation 12/30/2023 reflect that JT Reid contributed $100 to Wainwright’s campaign for Sheriff in September 2018 and John Reid contributed $100 in August 2022 to his reelection campaign. Wainwright said this ‘was insignificant not just due to the low amount of money but because he donated equal or more money to a charity for which JT Reid was fundraising. Wainwright explained that JT Reid agreed to a one-for-one trade on the handguns and rifles: JT Reid would credit the Department $411 per handgun and JT Reid agreed to pay $411 for each of the new Glock handguns. JT Reid agreed to credit the Department $500-600 per rifle and pay for part of the cost of the new rifles (which were more expensive). JT Reid also agreed to pay for the new firearms in advance of receiving all of the used firearms from the Department, which allowed the Department more time for turn around and training. Additionally, Wainwright said JT Reid is local, so they did not have to go out of state, and JT Reid agreed to take weapons that needed to be cleaned as well as firearm parts that had little to no value, which provided the County further savings. Wainwright said he spoke openly with Commissioners and Winsor regarding trading firearms with JT Reid. He pointed to an email from Winsor to Wainwright dated June 13, 2019, subject matter “Distribution of Surplus Property” that says: “I sent out your question to the managers and administrators list serve to give us their experiences and policy. Here is their consensus. .... Experience with auctions, Crag’s [sic] list, etc. is that the money received is not worth the time.” The email does not reference firearms.° MNES said he was aware of the trade of the Department-issued weapons but that he not know Wainwright was disposing of firearms from DPD or Department evidence. Wainwright said he did not keep it a secret that he was trading firearms from the evidence room and that he told. [NIM that JT Reid was coming and that they reset the meeting for various reasons. He agreed that JINN would not have known any of the specifics of the deal. Wainwright prepared a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) dated May 25, 2020, regarding the trade and purchase arrangement with JT Reid for the Glock handguns, which says: On behalf of the Oxford County Sheriff's Office, I am requesting assistance with ‘the Purchase of (36) Glock Model 45 9mm pistols from Glock, Inc. of Smyrna, GA, with a Purchase price of approximately $411 per unit. JT Reid agrees to purchase from the Oxford County Sheriff's Office its inventory ‘of Department owned Sig Sauer Model P-229 pistols with 3 magazines for $411.00. 5 Several witnesses said that they could not recall an auction at the County in recent memory. One witness recalled being involved in an auction in around 2000, and that it included firearms. He said 5-6 federally licensed firearms dealers showed up and placed bids. Wainwright said the County stopped doing auctions because they were too costly. He also said there were no auctions happening during COVID. He recalled ‘one auction in late 1990s or early 2000 where the Commissioners concluded that it cost more to advertise than what the auction brought in, 9|PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation Deputies of the Sheriff's office will be allowed to purchase their weapons for the Same price of $411.00. JT Reid agrees to make payment directly to either Glock, Inc. or Amchar Wholesale Inc. on behalf of the Sheriff's Office along with the understanding that IT Reid is not responsible for collecting any State or Federal excise or sales tax in regards to this purchase. ‘The weapons will be the property of the agency for the use of officers; authorized by law to make arrests and carry firearms in the performance of official duties and are not being acquired for the purpose of resale or ‘transfer. (Emphasis in original.) No similar MOU was located regarding the Department-issued rifles that were traded with JT Reid or concerning the trade of firearms in evidence. Recall of Agency-Issued Firearms and Purchase of New Firearms Witnesses recounted that the Department recalled agency-issued handguns and rifles in 2020, and that everyone was issued new weapons. Records reflect the Department received 10 new Glock handguns in April 2020, 26 new Glock handguns in May 2020, and 30 new Sig Sauer rifles in June 2020. Records also reflect that the Department received four additional Glock handguns in September 2020, one Glock in November 2021, and six shotguns in May 2021.° Wainwright said JT Reid took possession of all DPD-issued weapons and the Department-issued handguns and rifles. He said he gave all employees the option to buy their ‘weapons before JT Reid sold them. He said the employees wrote checks to JT Reid with the gun’s serial number in the memo line. Wainwright, Reid [INN said the officers were supposed to go to JT Reid to fill out the ATF paperwork, but none could recall how that was accomplished. The Department has a list of the officers who purchased their firearms. Several of them said that, after the recall, they simply wrote a check to JT Reid and received their firearm back from the Department; they were not required to go to JT Reid or fill out ATF paperwork.” Wainwright explained that he gave JT Reid the Department-issued weapons, and in exchange, JT Reid logged credit for the Department towards payments JT Reid made to distributors for firearms and ammunition that were delivered directly to the Department. Records © One witness was concemed that the Department also recalled MP-5s from the few officers who had ‘them, because they did not know if these weapons had also been traded with JT Reid, The witness explained that MP-5s cannot be sold to the public. Wainwright INN confirmed these weapons remain in the Department's possession and they are listed by serial number on an inventory of Department firearms provided by am 7 Reid said he had all of the required ATF paperwork, but he would not provide a copy or allow review, 10| PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication — 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation reflect that the Department was indebted to JT Reid in 2020 and early 2021 as a result of JT Reid’s payments to distributors for new weapons and ammunition. Firearms Trade June 2021 HEEB sid that on June 2, 2021, Wainwright asked him to check all the firearms of the closed DPD evidence room to see if they were stolen as he was preparing to sell them. See Exhibit 5, Wainwright also asked [NMI to separate all firearms that the Department had in evidence that were seized on or before 2015, and to verify that none were reported stolen, so he could determine if he could sell them. /d. INH included all firearms and firearm parts meeting ‘Wainwright's criteria, and, on June 8, 2021, he emailed Wainwright the list. Jd. On June 8 and 9, 2021, Wainwright asked [NIM to add the Walther PP 9mm from DPD evidence to his list, along with five other firearms from Department evidence with receipt dates ranging from 2018- 2020, MMMM ran each firearm with the serial numbers through a federal database and he ‘confirmed that none were reported as stolen. Wainwright did not ask fggMMM to attempt to contact any of the owners of the firearms that he traded with JT Reid or check the status of the criminal cases associated with each firearm.* Halacy said Wainwright directed him not to take these steps. Wainwright explained that he was triaging the DPD evidence (giving one year for property owners to come forward as described above). He said he also did not want the Department to contact family members of those who died by suicide to avoid upsetting them. For Department evidence, Wainwright said he made some determinations that firearms could not be returned to the owner because the firearm had no serial number or because he knew the owner was a prohibited person. Witnesses disputed that some of the firearms that Wainwright traded with JT Reid could not be legally retumed to property owners. Witnesses said they were uncomfortable that Wainwright would unilaterally make such a determination without a court order or notice to the property owner. ‘As for the Walther PP 9mm (reported in the August 2023 BDN article), Wainwright said ‘a person from Massachusetts reported it stolen 14 years earlier and then put in an insurance claim for it and received a large sum on money. He said the firearm had a tag on it that said, “insurance fraud.” Additionally, he said the person who reported it stolen could not possess the firearm because Massachusetts law prohibited him from having it due to its magazine capacity. He added that he thought the owner was around 80 years old and likely deceased. HERE inventory of the firearms in DPD’s evidence includes the Walther PP 9mm and there is no reference to “insurance fraud.” Under the “Type of Case” for this firearm, it says only: “Recovered Stolen Firearm,” See Exhibit 2. DPD’s records indicate that [i ERE investigated the incident which involved a reported theft of various firearms on August 31, 2012 and that on August 31, 2013, “The Walther was taken into the Dixfield Police Department Station and placed into the evidence room until it can be returned * itis unclear whether any of the firearms traded from evidence were associated with open criminal cases. ‘The D.A. has not responded to requests for this information. M1] Page12/30/2023 to the owner (N” There is no record of insurance fraud or any suggestion that [i IEEE was prohibited from possessing the firearm. IEEE ssid that on June 9, 2021, JT Reid purchased the firearms that [NM listed and gathered up at Wainwright's direction. See Exhibit 5. [IIa NN said be had printed out three sets of the list he ‘created with the make, model, serial number of each firearm so the dealers could have the information. He said he thought multiple dealers would be coming. Instead, only JT Reid showed ‘up. INN described that Reid and someone from his shop joined him and Wainwright in a conference room where he had spread the listed firearms out on a table. Reid and Wainwright recalled that they went over every firearm, writing down their own notes and figures, negotiating the value of each item, and arriving at a total price for the lot including firearm parts. Wainwright said he kept a folder with all of the documentation about the deal and the running credit the County had with JT Reid. He said he recorded the trades on a form that included the make, model and serial number of each firearm, the amount of credit received and that both he and Reid signed the form. He said they noted the value and that some had negative or no value for “junk trade in.” Wainwright said they were a few hundred dollars apart, so he negotiated further and persuaded Reid to issue additional credit to the Department. ‘Wainwright and Reid said the value for the lot was the amount of credit they agreed the Department would have with JT Reid to be applied towards JT Reid’s previous purchase of ‘weapons for the Department, ME recalled no gun-by-gun negotiation, but a negotiation for the entire lot of firearms and parts. He said there was no discussion of any credit. He said it was a handshake deal with no documentation, He said Wainwright had no folder with paperwork and he did not see him write anything down. ‘Wainwright explained that to value a firearm, he used @ “60% rule,” which means 60% of the Bluebook value for the firearm considering that JT Reid would have to clean and fix some of the guns, dispose of some of the junk, and also have a profit margin. Wainwright said he went into the trade meetings with JT Reid with a good idea of the value of each firearm and then Reid gave his number, and Wainwright “beat him up” to negotiate the best price. One of the reasons ‘Wainwright said he used JT Reid is that they agreed to “take the junk with the cream.” (EEE ssid he did not participate in valuing the firearms except to list an amount in Spillman with his initial inventory. Witnesses agreed that the property value listed in Spillman is not intended to be used as the actual value of an item for sale, but to give an idea of whether the property was in good or bad shape. (mM added that either he or someone else inputting the information into Spillman could add (or change) the number designated as the value. He said nothing on the current Spillman list looked overpriced to him, but some may be underpriced. IT Reid wrote up a receipt that says that on June 9, 2021, it received 18 firearms and assorted parts from Department evidence for which it issued the County $2,300 in credit. See 12| PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication - 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation Exhibit 7. Spillman records reflect that on June 9, 2021, 20 firearms and parts were traded with JT Reid from DPD evidence and 16 from Department evidence. After the trade, Wainwright, Reid [NINH said they loaded everything that was on the table, including firearm parts, into Reid’s vehicle. [NMI said he then recorded the status for each firearm and firearm part in Spillman. He said he marked them as “Sold at Auction” because there was no better choice in Spillman's drop-down menu. [NIMH said he did not view the trade with JT Reid as an auction. Firearms Trade September 2021 ‘Wainwright conducted a second firearms trade for credit with JT Reid on September 7, 2021.9 In a report prepared that day, INH wrote, “Fifteen firearms and two pellet guns that have been in evidence for years, were possessed by prohibited people or were no [sic] wanted back were put out for bid at Sheriff Wainwright’s direction.” Exhibit 6. [NNN said he checked all firearms and verified that none were reported as stolen, Id. [MEE described that this trade was similar to the one on June 9, 2021. Reid and someone from his shop came to the conference room at CID where EM laid out all of the ‘guns he listed according to Wainwright's directions. Following the trade, NIMH updated Spillman to reflect that the firearms were sold to JT Reid. See Exhibit 6. JT Reid wrote a receipt (dated June 9, 2021) saying that on September 7 and 9, 2021, it received 22 firearms and parts from DPD evidence with a credit to the County for $3,000. See Exhibit 7. Spillman records show 16 firearms and parts were traded on September 7, 2021 (8 from DPD evidence and 8 from Department evidence). ‘As with the June 2021 trade, Wainwright said he brought his folder with all of the documentation regarding the trades and credit with IT Reid, and that he and Reid made some notes during their negotiations. I did not recall Wainwright having any folder or writing anything down. Wainwright, Reid [NIN explained that once the deal was done, they loaded everything that was on the table into Reid’s vehicle. * JT Reid provided a record indicating part of the trade occurred on September 9, 2021. See Exhibit 8. Wainwright said there were 2 main trades with JT Reid in 2021 — one in June and one in September, but there could have been one or more additional firearms traded at other times during the 2020-2021 time frame. Halacy attended only 2 trades: one on June 9, 2021 and one on September 7, 2021, both of which he documented at the time and kept it in Spillman, 13 | PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation 12/30/2023 ‘Wainwright said he must have left his folder behind when he went outside to help load the firearms into JT Reid’s vehicle. He said he did not return to the conference room where he believes he left the folder, and he did not realize it had gone missing until this year (2023) when he was looking for records to respond to the BDN reporter’s Freedom of Access Act requests. ‘Summary of Documentation Regarding the Trades with JT Reid ‘The available documentation regarding the amount of credit JT Reid issued the Department and the purchases JT Reid made with the credit for the Department's benefit, is summarized below. A summary chart is also attached as Exhibit 10. An excel spreadsheet summarizing available documents associated with each of the firearms and firearm parts from evidence traded with JT Reid in 2021 is attached as Exhibit 11. An invoice from Amchar dated April 17, 2020, reflects the purchase of 10 Glock handguns at $410.32, for a total of $4,103.20. There is a copy of a check from JT Reid to Amchar reflecting payment of this invoice. An invoice from Glock dated May 29, 2020, in the amount of $10,668.32 for 26 handguns ($410.32 per unit), which Wainwright said JT Reid covered. Reid said JT Reid paid this invoice and provided a hand-written note confirming it. However, JT Reid provided no copy of a check or other documentation reflecting payment for these handguns. An invoice from Sig Sauer, dated June 4, 2020, reflects the purchase of 30 rifles at $882.12 per rifle, in the amount of $26,463.60, less $11,100 (reflected as paid), for a total balance due of $15,363.60. County records reflect it paid Sig Sauer $15,363.60 on August 31, 2020. Wainwright said he saw a bank check from JT Reid to Sig Sauer for $11,100, which he kept in the folder that got lost (as described above). Reid confirmed JT Reid paid $11,100 to Sig Sauer but could not locate a copy of the check, money order, or other documentation. ‘An invoice from Eagle Point Gun/T J Morris & Sons dated July 14, 2020 reflects a payment of $1,385.49 that appears to be for ammunition. Wainwright said JT Reid paid this invoice. There is a handwritten note on the invoice that says it was paid by money order, which Reid confirmed was from JT Reid, but he provided no copy of a check or other supporting documentation. There is a request to purchase four (4) Glock handguns dated September 22, 2020, at $410/unit for a total of $1,641, 28. Wainwright said JT Reid paid this invoice, but could not point to any supporting documentation. There is an invoice from Sig Sauer dated April 13, 2021 for $2,646.36 for three rifles and a copy of a cancelled check from JT Reid for that amount. ‘On May 24, 2021, the Department purchased 6 Mossberg shotguns at $471.96/unit, for a total of $2,831.76. There is a copy of a check showing JT Reid paid this invoice, 14|PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication ~ 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation As noted above, JT Reid created a receipt dated June 9, 2021, saying it received “18 Firearms and assorted parts ftom Oxford County evidence” with a credit to Oxford County of $2,300. It also says that on September 7 and 9, 2021, JT Reid received “22 Firearms and Parts from Dixfield P.D. Evidence” with a $3,000 credit to the County. The receipt says the total credit for firearms and parts from DPD and Department evidence is $5,300. See Exhibit 7. Wainwright said he had not previously seen this receipt. JT Reid provided a receipt dated December 14, 2022, to Durrah, ‘that lists the items JT Reid traded with the Department in 2020. The receipt says JT Reid received 20 AR-15s from the Department totaling $11,100 in credit ($555/rifle) and they paid Sig Sauer $11,100 (towards new rifles for the Department). The receipt also says JT Reid received 34 Sig Sauer handguns from the Department totaling $13,974 in credit ($411/handgun), and that they paid for the following invoices totaling $13,974: Amchar $10,668.32 (26 handguns at $410/unit); Amchar $1,641.29 (4 handguns at $410/unit); and Eagle Point $1,385.49 (ammunition). A copy of JT Reid’s receipt, which Wainwright said he had not previously seen, is attached as Exhibit 8." A handwritten receipt from JT Reid dated November 13, 2020, that does not appear to be final, lists $2,100 for what appeared to Wainwright to be DPD weapons. There are additional notes on a subsequent page listing the DPD weapons, with a total figure of $5,000 (inclusive of the $2,100). There also is an invoice from the County to the Town of Dixfield dated December 14, 2020, listing the DPD weapons for a total of $5,400 that the County deducted from the ‘Town's bill for law enforcement services. However, JT Reid wrote a receipt to Durrah dated December 14, 2022 saying that in November 2020, JT Reid purchased DPD-issued firearms for $6,912 “to be applied as credit towards additional purchase of new firearms.” The record ends with the following sentence: “The following invoices are what we paid as a result of the credit the department had with us.” No invoices were listed as having been paid with this credit. A copy of this receipt, which Wainwright said he had not previously seen, is attached as Exhibit 9. Wainwright provided copies of the types of forms he said the Department has used for these trades. There is a space to list the firearms traded on a particular date, and signature lines for Wainwright and JT Reid. Two of these forms were signed by Reid. One of them was signed by both Reid and Wainwright. Other forms had lists of firearms on them, but were unsigned, and it is unclear whether they were in final form. Wainwright explained that he used and reused templates, so the records on his computer may not be complete (ie., he saved over old templates as he did new deals). None of the forms noted the value of the firearms.'' All of the forms were dated 2020, and so Wainwright said they likely were for Department-issued firearms rather than firearms from evidence. The forms did not provide a complete list of Department-issued ‘weapons that were traded with JT Reid. 1 The reason Exhibits 8 and 9 are dated December 14, 2022 may be because JT Reid created them following a request form Durrah in December 2022. The union says it complained to Durrah around that ‘time regarding the trade of firearms from the evidence room among other issues it had with Wainwright. 1 Wainwright provided documents showing similar forms were used with G-3 between 2010-2017, 15 | Page12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation Reid said he kept paperwork regarding the amount paid for each firearm (though he refused to provide a copy of it). He said he did not recall signing paperwork for the Department with the list of firearms traded, though he acknowledged he must have signed the two forms that the Department has with his signature, ‘Wainwright said he believes there is another invoice or two for weapons or ammunition that JT Reid bought for the Department that would reconcile any discrepancies, but he is confident the Department has no more credit at JT Reid. Reid agreed that JT Reid and the Department are square. Contacts from Community Regarding Firearms Witnesses said the community has lost confidence in the Department as a result of Wainwright's trade of firearms that were kept in evidence as reported in the media last August. For example, one witness said when he was serving a domestic violence suspect, the suspect did ‘not want to surrender his guns as he said he did not want the Department to sell them. The suspect got a friend to take possession of them. INH said he has received 4-5 calls since the August 2023 BDN article asking if the Department still had the person’s firearm and did not sell it, None of these callers’ firearms were part of the 2021 trade with JT Reid. INN said he received a message from someone who wanted their gun back before it disappeared, and that state police were making fun of the Department for selling firearms from the evidence room. Wainwright said Jared Crockett, who is a local attorney and probate judge, contacted him on behalf of a resident whose father died by gun suicide 10 years earlier and who wanted the gun to be destroyed rather than sold to the public. Wainwright said he called the resident and the resident said if the gun had just been traded, he was going to buy it. Wainwright said the resident ‘was not upset and he did not hear from him again, 1V.SUMMARY OF FACTUAL FINDINGS Considering the information that I collected during this investigation and credibility assessments that I have made, where necessary, I make the following findings of fact, using a preponderance of evidence standard: 1. Under Wainwright's direction, the Department traded firearms and firearm parts with JT Reid in 2020 and 2021 2. The firearms trade with JT Reid in 2020 was for agency-issued equipment (from the Department and from the DPD that the County had taken over that year). 3. IT Reid received firearms from the Department and issued the Department credit that JT Reid used to purchase weapons and ammunition for the Department from distributors. 4, JT Reid paid for some weapons and ammunition for the Department in advance of receiving firearms ftom the Department. 16 | PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication -- Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation 12/30/2023 5. Wainwright organized and directed trades of firearms from DPD and Department evidence in June and September 2021. 6. Wainwright elected to deal exclusively with JT Reid for these trades because he was local, he knew him as a family friend, and he heard JT Reid gave a good deal to the Auburn Police Department. 7. Wainwright thought JT Reid provided the best deal for the County in terms of the value of the trade as well as ease (such that the Department could transition to the ‘new weapons over time instead of all at once). 8. The Department had conducted similar trades in the past with G-3 Firearms before ‘Wainwright became Sheriff. 9. Wainwright did not search for other federally licensed gun dealers in Maine before selecting JT Reid for the firearms in evidence trade, though he had discussions with some out of state dealers concerning trading agency-issued weapons. 10. Wainwright did not conduct an auction to sell the firearms in 2021. 1L. Wainwright invited no firearms dealers other than JT Reid to bid on the firearms from evidence. 12, Wainwright directed INN to create two lists of firearms using certain criteria in preparation for his trades with JT Reid in 2021. 13, Wainwright directed [NMI to include in his firearms trade list all firearms and parts from DPD evidence and certain firearms from Department evidence. 14, Wainwright directed MH to check the federal database to ensure none of the weapons that Wainwright planned to trade with JT Reid were reported as stolen, 15, Wainwright did not require a forfeiture order ot consent from the property owner before trading the firearms, 16, Almost none of the firearms traded from evidence with JT Reid had a tag or record in the Department's system indicating they had been forfeited. 17. Wainwright directed MIM not to attempt to contact owners of the firearms prior to trading them with JT Reid or to check the status of any criminal cases that may have been associated with the firearms. 18, Wainwright determined he could triage the firearms and parts in DPD evidence for staffing reasons; he waited a year to see if any owners surfaced after the County took over the DPD before he traded them. 19. Wainwright decided that firearms used in suicides could be traded without first contacting the property owners as he thought it would be insensitive to do so. 20. Wainwright made unilateral determinations that certain firearms could not be returned to property owners because he believed they were legally prohibited from possessing ‘them. 21. Wainwright made unilateral determinations regarding the value of the firearms and parts he traded with JT Reid, using a percentage of the blue book value plus his knowledge and experience with firearms purchases. 2 ro SEE omen 17| Page25. The Department's evidence room contains firearms some of which may have been used as evidence in a criminal case, and others that were not. 2, Aig AITO BOSS ee 27. The County Administrator and the Commissioners knew the Department was trading agency-issued firearms, but they were unaware that Wainwright was trading firearms in evidence. 28. Available records regarding the trades with JT Reid in 2020 and 2021 are woefully deficient. For example: a. 18 | Page ‘The Department has records in Spillman listing the firearms and parts JT Reid received from DPD and Department evidence through the 2021 trade, but it has nothing signed by JT Reid confirming its receipt of those weapons. The Department has a list of Department-issued firearms and DPD-issued firearms that it says it traded with JT Reid for eredit, but there is no complete list signed by JT Reid confirming its receipt of those firearms, The value of the firearms and parts listed in Spillman is not reliable; it was created during inventory and provides only a rough idea of whether the item has any value, ‘The Department has no documentation regarding the value Wainwright or JT Reid attributed to each of the firearms and parts. ‘The Department has no record of the agreed-upon value of the firearms and parts it traded with JT Reid. Documentation provided by JT Reid is not reliable as: some was created more than a year after the fact (at Durrah’s request); . underlying checks or proof of payment by JT Reid is lacking for items it says it paid for with Department credit; iii, it is inconsistent with Spillman records in terms of the number of firearms traded and when they were traded. Spillman records reflect a total of 52 firearms and parts from DPD and Department evidence combined. Of those, 36 firearms and parts were traded with JT Reid in June 2021 (20 from DPD evidence and 16 from Department evidence), and 16 firearms and parts were traded with JT Reid in September 2021 (8 from DPD evidence and 8 from Department evidence). According to Spillman records, of the 52 firearms and parts traded with JT Reid in 2021, a total of 28 were from DPD evidence and 24 were from Department evidence. See Exhibit 11. In contrast, JT Reid’s records show that it received 18 firearms and parts from Department evidence in June 2021 and 22 firearms and parts from DPD evidence September 2021. See Exhibit 7; andPrivileged and Confidential Communication -- 12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation iv. itis inconsistent with JT Reid’s own records in terms of the amount of credit issued for DPD firearms. One document suggests the amount was $5,000, though it may not have been a final number, Another document created two years after the fact suggests the amount was $6,912. Neither number matches the $5,400 credit in the County's invoice to the Town of Dixfield. g. Documentation reflecting payments made by JT Reid for weapons and ammunition in 2020 and 2021 total $34,396.41, whereas documentation reflecting credit JT Reid issued the Department totals $35,374 (applying a $5,000 credit for the DPD-issued firearms) or $37,286 (applying a $6,912 credit for the DPD-issued firearms). This leaves a discrepancy of between $977.59 and $2,889.59 in remaining eredit with JT Reid, though Wainwright and Reid insist no credit remains. 29.1 found no evidence that Wainwright personally benefitted financially from the firearms trade with JT Reid. 30. People with a property interest in some of the firearms traded with JT Reid in 2021 may have been lawfully entitled to possess them. 31. Although the Department has received several contacts regarding firearms sold from evidence since the BDN article last August, so far, there have been no requests for the return of any of the firearms traded in 2021. V. APPLICABLE POLICIES ‘At the time of the 2021 firearms trades with JT Reid, the Department had a Property/Evidence Control policy (effective 2/10/19), that provides, in relevant part: Firearms and ammunition shall be disposed of in a manner described in Title 25 MRSA Section 3503-A. (Appendix C). If the ownership of the weapon is transferred to the agency court order or by the verified owner, the Sheriff or designee shall determine the final disposition of the item(s). Exhibit 12, Section IL(D)(2)(@)."” ‘The County also has a Purchasing and Bidding Policy that was in effect prior to the dates, of the June 2021 gun trade. That policy, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 14, refers to the “Sale and Disposition of Surplus Property and Equipment” and does not speak directly to firearms or property seized as evidence.” " Effective March 27, 2023, the Department adopted new Standard Operating Procedures for Property & Evidence Control, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 13 1 The County updated this policy in May 2023. The current version, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 15, addresses the “Disposal or Trade of Weapons” at page 7, Section (5E\iv). 19 | Page12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation Wainwright said the Department policy IIT(D)(2)(4) gives him the authority to determine the final disposition of the firearm and that he can dispose of it in a manner described in 25 . That statute provides: Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a police department or other law enforcement agency retaining firearms and ammunition covered by this chapter [Chapter 401: Disposal of Unclaimed, Lost or Stolen Personal Property by Law Enforcement Agencies}, Title 15, section 3314 or chapter 517, or Title 17-A, section 1504" may auction the firearms to federally licensed firearms dealers or the public, use the firearms and ammunition for training purposes or destroy the firearms and ammunition 25 MRS. § 3503-A. The term “auction” is not defined, but no one interviewed for this investigation believed that the trades with JT Reid constituted an “auction.” Additionally, the statute does not address when a law enforcement agency may dispose of firearms and whether they need a forfeiture order or owner consent, or if they must provide advanced notice to owners. Several witnesses, including Wainwright, described that Sheriff's auctions had occurred in the past, though not in the last 20+ years. Wainwright said Winsor and the Commissioners did not favor auctions, pointing to a 2019 email from Winsor that addressed unclaimed property but did not reference firearms. Wainwright said due to the COVID-19 pandemic and emergency orders issued by the Governor at the time, they could not have held an auction at the time in any event. Wainwright did not explain why an auction could not wait, other than that he believed the Department needed new weapons and trading the firearms with JT Reid was the most economical way to do it. I find that Wainwright's interpretation of the Department's policy stretches his authority too far. Although the policy could be more clearly worded, the only reasonable interpretation is that the Sheriff or their designee can determine the weapon’s final disposition (cither by auction the firearms to federally licensed firearms dealers or the public, to use for training purposes, or to destroy the firearms and ammunition, as provided in 25 M.R.S. § 3503-A) only if the ownership of the weapon is transferred to the agency by court order or by the verified owner. If Section 3503-A granted the Sheriff or their designee the authority that Wainwright ascribes, it would mean they could auction off any firearm the Department seized no matter how long it had been in evidence and no matter what the circumstances. Furthermore, Wainwright admits he did not dispose of these firearms by any of the three means listed in 25 MR.S. § 3503- ‘A. Under the Department’s policy, these are the means by which firearms “shall be disposed.” Exhibit 12, Section I11(D)(2)(4) (emphasis added). 1 do not find Wainwright’s COVID-19 emergency order argument persuasive as Governor Mills signed an executive order on May 13, 2021, fully lifting indoor gatherings and 4 Title 15, section 3314, chapter 517, Title 17-A, section 1504, pertain to various types of forfeiture. 20| PagePrivileged and Confidential Communication -—- Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation 12/30/2023 in-store customer limits effective May 24, 2021, which was before the first trade with JT Reid for firearms in evidence on June 9, 2021." Even if COVID-19 was a factor, I found little evidence of urgency in conducting these trades, though the Department owed JT Reid for Payment for some of the Department-issued weapons and ammunition. But Wainwright never discussed this or the statute’s auction requirement for firearms disposal with the County ‘Administrator or the Commissioners. 1 find that Wainwright violated the Department’s policy regarding firearms disposal when he traded firearms from evidence in 2021 with JT Reid. VI. APPLICABLE LAWS 1. Maine State Law Regarding Disposal of Firearms Title 25, Chapter 401, which applies to Disposal of Unclaimed, Lost or Stolen Personal Property by Law Enforcement Agencies, says: ‘This chapter applies to all personal property of which possession is transferred to a police department or other law enforcement agency of the State or any political subdivision thereof, under circumstances supporting a reasonable belief that such property was abandoned, lost or stolen, or otherwise illegally possessed, except property seized during search and retained and ultimately retumed, destroyed or otherwise disposed of pursuant to a court order or some other law applicable to specific property or circumstance, This chapter applies to personal property seized during search and retained that is not offered or admitted as evidence and that, after retention by a police department or other law enforcement agency, becomes abandoned. This chapter does not apply to unclaimed personal property that has been confiscated at courthouses by judicial marshals. Such property that remains unclaimed for more than 30 days may be disposed of under the direction of the State Court Administrator. 25MRS. § 3501. ‘This Chapter does not apply to property seized during a search and then disposed of pursuant to a court order or other applicable law. /d. Wainwright says Section 3503-A governs firearms disposals, not the other parts of Title 25, Chapter 401. But because Section 3503-A is silent around process for a law enforcement agency to permanently deprive a property owner of their firearm, I find it must be read together with Section 3501. Section 3503-A does not terminate owners’ rights to a return of their firearms seized by law enforcement; it merely provides acceptable means of firearms disposal. °S See https://www.maine. gov/ governor/mills/sites/maine. gov. governor.mills/files/inline~ files20%2096%2038. pat 21| Page12/30/2023 Investigation Report Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation Title 25, Chapter 401 requires law enforcement agencies to: make reasonable inquiry and efforts to identify and notify the owner or other person entitled to possession of the property and shall return the property after such person provides reasonable and satisfactory proof of that person's ownership or right to possession and reimburses the agency and others authorized to incur expenses by the agency for all reasonable expenses of such custody. If the owner of such property or any other person entitled to possession of the property has not, been identified after at least 30 days from the initial date of custody of such property by a law enforcement agency, the principal official of such agency shall cause to be published, at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which such official has authority or in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the property was taken into custody in the case of a state law enforcement agency, a notice of the law enforcement agency's possession of such property and its inability to ascertain the owner of the property. 25 MRS. §3502. The notice must also contain “a brief description of the property and a statement to the effect that, if the owner of such property or any other person entitled to possession of the property has not claimed such property within 5 months of the date of such published notice,” the agency will dispose of it. Jd. Wainwright took no steps to attempt to contact owners of the firearms that were traded from evidence with JT Reid. He directed [I not to contact owners or research the status of any cases associated with the firearms. I find that Wainwright violated Title 25, Chapter 401. I found no exceptions to these processes that would allow disposal without notice to the property owners as did Wainwright. Absent forfeiture or owner consent, I found no exceptions for the triaging that Wainwright did with the firearms in DPD evidence, or for firearms used in a suicide, or based on his unilateral determination that an owner was a prohibited person. 2. Maine State Law Regarding Purchases Pursuant to 30-A MRS. § 82 (3), the county administrator is “the chief administrative official of the county and is responsible for the administration of all departments and offices controlled by the county commissioners.” The county administrator's role includes acting “as purchasing agent for all departments and offices of the county....” Id Wainwright does not believe he exceeded his authority when he traded the firearms from evidence and purchased new firearms and ammunition for the Department because he did not use County funds to do so. Furthermore, he insists the trade was not done secretly. 22 |Page