complaint against rashad young for not investigating arrest plot orchestrated by chief ken miller

8/6/2019 Complaint Against Rashad Young For Not Investigating Arrest Plot Orchestrated by Chief Ken Miller

1/8

Greensboro City Manager, Rashad Young300 W. Washington StreetGreensboro, North Carolina 27401

m : : c 9 2 0 1 0

December 9, 2010

Reference: Complaint of Discrimination: Mr. Rashad Young's Non Investigation of RacialProfiling by Chief of Police Ken Miller in Addition To Mr. Young's Fabricated, UntruthfulComments to the Yes! Weekly Placing City of Greensboro in a Position of LiabilityDear Mr. Young:On November 15, 2010, your office received a complaint from citizens Charles Cherry andJoseph Pryor alleging a plot of discrimination, racial profiling and other violations, orchestratedby Chief of Police Ken Miller, to arrest Citizens Cherry and Pryor. This complaint included apossible, but not all inclusive, witness list of approximately twenty-one (21) officers and CityEmployees.On November 22, 2010, your office received a complaint from citizens Gian Spells and CarlylePhillips. These two (2) citizens of Greensboro are North Carolina A&T students, and also allegediscrimination, racial profiling and other violations.On or about November 24,2010, Captain Jane Allen of the Professional Standards Division withthe Greensboro Police Department (GPD) sent a memo acknowledging the students' reportedallegations, and confirming assignment of an investigator. On or about December 1, 2010, yousent a memo acknowledging the students' reported allegations, and the fact that the allegationswould be investigated. The December 1, 2010 edition of the Yes! Weekly stated that you, Mr.Young, said that according to official policy the city will investigate the complaint (Mr.Spells and Mr. Phillips),Citizen Cherry and Citizen Pryor have received no acknowledgement of complaint, assignmentof investigator and no follow-up regarding our November 15, 2010, complaint. Mr. Young,please explain the discriminatory, retaliatory treatment received by Citizens Pryor and Cherryand why we are being treated differently than other citizens of Greensboro. The GreensboroPolice Department cannot be any more corrupted than Chief Ken Miller planning the arrests oflaw abiding, peaceful citizens, present at a community meeting, to merely exercise their(citizen's) freedom of speech. Mr. Young, according to official policy, shouldn't the cityinvestigate the complaint (of Citizen Pryor and Citizen Cherry)?We understand that subsequent investigation of our and the other eleven (11) discrimination etc.complaints against Chief Miller would result in sustaining the complaints, and Chief Miller'stermination, and exodus from the Greensboro Police Department. However, we are moreconcerned with the right thing being done, in addition to the fact that you were advised not to

1


2/8

2

employ a new Chief prior to rectifying systemic, identified unfairness and mistreatment in thepolice department, to include discrimination.Mr. Young, in the same December 1, 2010, Yes! Weekly article, you stated, "I don't find areason to deviate from the chief doing the job I hired him for. If you play that reasoning out, anycitizen can say, Department so-and-so can't evaluate an issue. That doesn't work in anorganization of 3,000 employees, 22 departments and 260,000 citizens. I am not a lawenforcement officer. The complaint (Mr. Spells and Mr. Phillips) is about nuances of a trafficstop. I can get the manual and review it, but I'm not really qualified to investigate." Mr.Young, please note the following:

The reason you "play that reasoning out" and the reason you "deviate from the chiefdoing the job you hired him for," is that the Police Administration is proven corruptedand in many cases incompetent. This includes eleven (11) uninvestigated allegations, byfive (5) different individuals, against Chief Ken Miller. Thus, community trust, andrightfully so, has been forfeited.

The students' complaint is about much more than the nuances of a traffic stop. Forinstance, who was untruthful in informing the magistrate that the young men wereintoxicated? What authority did the magistrate have to hold the young men in jail, even ifthey would have been intoxicated? Research what occurs when a citizen is charged withDriving While Impaired. The community will pay close attention as to how thiscomplaint is investigated and resolved.

You state that you are not really qualified to investigate, however, you "investigated"Assistant Chief Holder's violation of North Carolina Law (which you acknowledged in aNovember 2, 2010 memo to me). You investigated three (3) officers being sustained onallegations which led to their terminations, appeals and upheld terminations, etc. Now,you state to the media that you are not qualified to investigate (a traffic stop). Mr. Young,are you being untruthful or are you stating that you lack the competency required to serveas Greensboro's City Manager? You must be qualified to investigate, to effectively,competently serve as a City Manager. How can employees or citizens bring any issue(especially terminations and appeals) to you, if you are not qualified to investigate?

Mr. Young, there are obviously some violations relating to Mr. Phillips' and Mr. Spells'complaints. What if the discipline of the officers ends up on your desk? Will you not bequalified to investigate?

Mr. Young, in the December 1, 2010 article in the Yes! Weekly, you state that thestudents' complaint being filed with your office instead of the Police Department'sProfessional Standards Division is out of the ordinary. Filing this and other complaintswith your office and receiving a stamp of receipt from your office, on all fileddocuments, is ordinary, when citizens do not trust a corrupted Police Administration toinclude the Professional Standards (Internal Affairs) Division. Filing complaints withyour office will ensure that the complaints are funneled to the correct department, inaddition to you being held responsible for the proper handling of all issues. Filingcomplaints with your office generates accountability for all individuals involved.


3/8

3

Mr. Young, on November 23,2010, in the Yes! Weekly blog, you are quoted as stating, "Thatwas not the only interview with (Terrance) Lipscomb. That issue was reinvestigated andreconfirmed. We went out and interviewed him (Lipscomb) again and he confirmed well to[internal affairs'] satisfaction." You (Mr. Young) quoted Lipscomb as saying, "Yep, 6'2. Andthat' s what 1said the first time."Later in the article, you (Mr. Young) state, "The complainant said by description who kicked himin the stomach. The fact that we had two other people who said, 'Istruck the blows" but thecomplainant says, 'It's this person', we can't change the focus of the investigation because ofthat ... That is not even being close to being an appropriate response. It's all well and good thatother officers said, 'This is what he did and this is what 1did.' It turns out the citizen didn't tellthe truth. 1think we would be in a world of hurt if we dismissed allegations on that basis."Mr. Young please review the following as you are caught fabricating lies:

If Mr. Lipscomb stated 6'2", like "the first time," it would be on the recorded interview.Remember, the first interview was recorded. It (physical description) is not on therecorded interview. In fact, in the November 23, 2010 Yes! Weekly Blog, Mr. Young,you stated, "I remember you (Assistant City Manager Michael Speedling) telling me(City Manager Rashad Young): 'It ain't on the tape." Mr. Young, please explain.

When did this "reinvestigation" take place, who was the investigator, and why was the"reinvestigation", recorded interview (relating to the reinvestigation) with Mr. Lipscomband transcription of the recorded interview, not in my (Former Officer Pryor's) case file?Please forward me a copy of the reinvestigation, recorded interview with Mr.Lipscomb, and transcribed interview (with Mr. Lipscomb, relating to thereinvestigation), of which I am entitled.

The re-interview should be recorded. Procedure and protocol would not allow forProfessional Standards to conduct an interview of a complainant alleging an assault,without recording the interview.

You state, "It turns out the citizen didn't tell the truth." Why would an investigator goback and reinvestigate an officer on a complaint, and take the word of a complainant,regarding the same investigation, when you already know the complainant did not tellyou the truth to begin with?

Mr. Young, the fact that two (2) officers and I stated that I did not kick or deliver blowsto Mr. Lipscomb, the officers acknowledge that they did deliver blows and the fact thatProfessional Standards had medical records and confirmation (my injury requiringlight duty for five (5) weeks) that I could not have physically committed the act Mr.Lipscomb alleges, should have changed the focus of the investigation. In the very least,the other officers would have been investigated for the same allegations lodged againstme.

Lieutenant IT. Cranford contacted Mr. Gian Spells in regards to investigating Mr. Spells'complaint. Lieutenant Cranford advised Mr. Spells that he (Lieutenant Cranford) wantedto record the interview.


4/8

Mr. Young, recording complainant's interviews is standard, professional and safepractice. It can greatly reduce liability to the City. I guess you may be telling the truthrelating to your claim of not being qualified to investigate.

Mr. Young, please note the vulnerable liability state you have placed the city in: Should Mr. Terrance Lipscomb secure a lawyer and allege any future allegations, there is

no defense against his allegations. If you re-interviewed Mr. Lipscomb, without recordingMr. Lipscomb, utilized his statements in terminating an officer, and you already knew he(Mr. Lipscomb) was untruthful with you before, how could you defend against any futureallegations?

Should Mr. Lipscomb come forward and make future allegations against the other two (2)officers (that actually struck Mr. Lipscomb), you cannot defend against such allegations.What if Mr. Lipscomb alleges injuries sustained from the blows delivered by the othertwo (2) officers that Professional Standards had knowledge of but knowingly did notproperly investigate?

What if other past complainants come forward with additional allegations, and allege thatinformation was given to investigators in subsequent unrecorded, undocumentedinterviews, etc. What if defense attorneys begin to use this argument, as you have opened"Pandora's Box" by continuing to lie in public and to media outlets.

In the November 23,2010, Yes! Weekly Blog, Assistant City Manager Mr. Michael Speedling isquoted as stating, "If in fact what you're (Former Officer Pryor) saying is true," then that wouldbe discrimination or incompetence. What prompted the remark about discrimination orincompetence was Pryor's statement about the allegedly fabricated description of him (Pryor).Mr. Young, please note as Mr. Speedling is caught fabricating lies:

The July 28-August 3, 2010 edition of the Yes! Weekly states on page eleven (11):Cherry also alleges that during a meeting with an officer who had filed a grievance,Speedling told the officer that the results of an internal investigation were due to"incompetence and discrimination" by Professional Standards. "The investigation isriddled with errors," Cherry wrote. "At this point, Mr. Speedling has a duty andresponsibility to take proper corrective action, to include a re-investigation of allinvestigations completed by the individuals assigned to the professional standardsdivision during the time when Mr. Speedling made his assessment. Instead of thatoccurring, the officer (with the original grievance) is now being investigated fortruthfulness, regarding the same investigation in which professional standards made somany errors [and] the findings were recommended changed (in the officer's favor) byAssistant Chief Crotts." Speedling responded, "My comments having to do with aninvestigation have to do with one investigation, period. I do not make that leap of faiththat Cherry does that if one investigation is investigatively insufficient that the entireprofessional standards division is incapable." Speedling added that he sent theinvestigation in question back to professional standards and ordered them to re-investigate it, and that the errors were corrected.

4


5/8

Please have Mr. Speedling inform citizens regarding what errors needed to be corrected,especially after Assistant Chief Crotts had changed the findings from not sustained tounfounded.

Please have Mr. Speedling inform citizens as to what investigatively insufficient means,and how investigating me (Pryor) for an assault that I could not have physicallycommitted, re-interviewing and taking the word of a complainant that you know has beenuntruthful to you, earlier in the same investigation, not investigating the officers thatinform you they struck the complainant, changing the findings of the investigation fromnot sustained to unfounded, and then terminating me based on information from theinvestigation that you just informed me (unfounded) that I did nothing wrong in, is notincompetence and discrimination. A simple review of the investigation from start tofinish clearly displays discrimination and incompetence.

According to the Yes! Weekly Blog, November 23, 2010, Mr. Speedling states that whatprompted the comment of discrimination or incompetence was if what I (Citizen Pryor)stated relating to the fabricated description of me was true, then it would beincompetence or discrimination. Please review the bulleted points that show you arelying, Mr. Young. Also, I have never been provided with the recorded re-investigation/interview in which Mr. Lipscomb gives the description, fabricated in thedocument by Professional Standards personnel. The only information I have (regardingthe fabricated description) is the recording, acknowledged by you (Mr. Young), whenyou state to Mr. Speed ling, "I remember you (Assistant City Manager MichaelSpeedling) telling me (City Manager Rashad Young): 'It ain't on the tape.'"

On May 7, 2010, when Mr. Speedling stated to me that the results of my investigationwas due to "discrimination or incompetence" on the part of Professional Standards, Iunderstood the magnitude of Mr. Speedling's assessment. On May 12, 2010, Iregurgitated Mr. Speedling's and my conversation in an e-mail constructed and sent (toMr. Speedling) on the night of May 12, 2010. The e-mail, which is public record, wasconstructed, because I envisioned a time in which Mr. Speedling's assessment wouldcome to light. I also envisioned Mr. Speedling lying, relating to his assessment. Mr.Speedling responded to my e-mail.simplystatingthatweshouldn.tdiscuss personnelmatters over the e-mail.

Why did Mr. Speedling not initiate a truthfulness investigation, or correct me, if in fact hedid not make the statement (assessment), it was taken out of context or it was notaccurate? The statement (assessment) has appeared in numerous (approximately forty(40)) documents since Mr. Speedling made it (statement/assessment), on April 7, 2010.Suddenly, on November 23, 2010 (six (6) months later), after my termination, accordingto Mr. Speed ling, the statement/assessment is now false.

The fact that Mr. Speedling is just now understanding the magnitude of his assessment ofProfessional Standards' investigation of me, further confirms allegations of hisincompetence as described in a July 22, 2010 document to you (Mr. Young).

Mr. Young, in the November 23,2010 Yes! Weekly Blog, you state, "Mr. Taylor concluded thatthe Notice of Administrative Investigation form contains your original signature and was notphotocopied, scanned, forged or otherwise improperly placed on the form. Based on the audiorecording of your interview with Cpl. [Jack Steinberg], the relative importance of the Notice of

5


6/8

6

Administrative Investigation form, and most importantly, the conclusions of the forensicdocument examiner, I conclude that you did in fact sign the document in question."Mr. Young, please remember the following:

In the August 3, 2010 edition of the Rhinocerous Times, Chief of Police Ken Millerstated that he had made many trips to Greensboro anticipating the opening of the Chief ofPolice job in Greensboro.

In the Greensboro News and Record, and other venues Chief of Police Ken Miller talkedabout moving forward and that they would have disciplinary issues dealt with by the timeof his arrival on September 1, 2010.

Chief of Police Ken Miller has attempted (unsuccessfully) to remove himself from anyoccurrences (GPD) prior to September 1, 2010. Police Chief Ken Miller fails to acceptthe responsibility of inheriting anything (positive or negative) attributed to theGreensboro Police Department since its inception in 1808. Any successful future leaderof the Greensboro Police Department's organization must be willing to do so.

My research has found, unless I am mistaken, that Forensic Analyst Jeffrey Taylorworked for (within the chain of command) Chief of Police Ken Miller (while Miller wasin Charlotte), during the time (Spring/Summer 2010) that Mr. Taylor was givendocuments from my personnel file to examine.

Chief of Police Ken Miller has eleven (11) uninvestigated discrimination, conduct, etc.complaints against him, which you (Mr. Young) have not had investigated. In fact, youreceived a letter from four (4) citizens on or about December 6, 2010, that clearlysustain the October 28, 2010 complaints against Chief Miller.

Captain Phipps, ascertained documents from my personnel file without my permission. Captain Phipps violated evidence handling when transporting approximately fourteen

(14) original documents to Charlotte Mecklenberg Police Department, for examination. It can never be determined what document (of which all were originals) CaptainPhipps gave to Mr. Taylor for examination. Former Chief Bellamy sent me an e-mail asking me for the original document. Former Chief Bellamy'S investigation spoke about two (2) documents being signed (after

listening to a recording). One (1) was supposedly the notification and the other was arights form.

Corporal Steinberg stated during my recorded hearing that there were two (2) originals(notifications). This would indicate three (3) forms. Two (2) notifications and one (1)rights form.

Corporal Steinberg could not be sure (written in Captain Phipps' investigation) if thedocument presented by Captain Phipps was the original document. Mr. Jeffery Taylor testified, during my hearing, to findings of tests, that he (Taylor) didnot conduct on the document. This is confirmed by a copy of a Charlotte MecklenbergLab Form.

Mr. Young, on November 2, 2010, the Greensboro Police conducted a traffic check point onPhillips Avenue. Of course November 2,2010 was Election Day. This traffic check point was


7/8

Two (2) citizens alleging racial profiling, discrimination etc, orchestrated by the Chief ofPolice Two (2) citizens alleging racial profiling, discrimination, unlawful arrest and detention Numerous Title IV Complaints of Discrimination (This may be why Mr. Speedling has

not received complaints such as a traffic check on Phillips Avenue on Election Day). Eleven (11) discrimination complaints against Chief of Police Ken Miller by five (5)

different individuals. Assistant Chief Holder's violation ofNC Law, which you (Mr. Young) acknowledge Assistant Chief Crotts on YOUTUBE in violation ofNC Law

inquired about by many citizens, to include a citizen at a November 4, 2010, communitymeeting, and the Greensboro News and Record.According to Assistant City Manager Mr. Michael Speedling, the operation was planned well inadvance, and that he wasn't aware of any complaints received. Please inform Mr. Speedling thatbecause no complaints are received does not make something that is clearly the wrong thing todo, into something that is right, or acceptable. The operation appeared to be "voter suppression"and should not be taken lightly 01' discounted, simply because no official complaints werereceived. According to the News and Record, a similar incident occurred during the May primaryand citizens were informed that police wouldn't run a similar operation again on Election Day.Please have Mr. Speed ling find out who citizens spoke with regarding the first incident in May.Then find out why it occurred again in November.Please publish all of your and Chief of Police Ken Miller's future public meetings (you canexclude council meetings) on the City Website. This is an integral part to restoring public trust inthe Greensboro Police Department. Examples of why Chief Miller's public meetings need to bepublicized are;

This (public meeting access) would be extremely helpful to citizens. The transparency,accountability, and opportunity to interact with our City'S Leaders is greatly needed andappreciated. The ability for a citizen, to look on the City Website and see a future opportunity tointeract with the Chief of Police or the City Manager, enhances our growth as a community.Mr. Young, I would be remiss if I didn't inform you that we were somewhat worried about you.In watching the video of you on Dig Triad (interview regarding the one hundred twenty thousand(120,000)) relating to you attempting to give employees raises, the reaction of the Mayor andCouncilman Thompson was somewhat disturbing. For the past approximately seven (7) monthsclear, true allegations and proof of police and City government corruption have plaguedGreensboro. To my knowledge, there was not one (1) interview (by WFMY), story, follow-up,etcetera regarding obviously one of the most important (police corruption), interesting, on-goingconcerns in the community. You (Mr. Young) are clearly involved. No press, and no correctiveactions or responses from the Mayor and City Council. Suddenly, you are "chased" in your ownoffice (by the media) and treated as if you were embezzling funds, because you attempted to giveemployees, on the low end of the pay scale, raises. Councilwoman Rakestraw stated, in a mediapublication, that your idea of proposed raises for City Employees was "outrageous, unfeeling and

7


8/8

T111l~ you for your assistance.

k;ar~~~l~ q~ '~c r ~ f - -Joseph L. Pryor (Citizen)

absolutely insane." Mr. Young, this treatment does not comport with how a City Manager whoseactions or in some cases non-actions are in good standing with the community and his superiors.Earlier this summer, as you continued to compromise yourself, you were warned of impendingchain of events. Both public and professional trust to make decisions for our city, eroding.Mr. Young, we would appreciate prompt investigation and corrective action taken to includeaddressing your transgressions. Investigating yourself is clearly not an option. Please contact theDepartment of Justice to investigate the corrupted City of Greensboro Administration to includeyourself. Please consider that if the Department of Justice responds to the City of Greensboro,without you requesting their assistance, your credibility and trust will be irreparable, as they arealready greatly diminished.

8

complaint against rashad young for not investigating arrest plot orchestrated by chief ken miller

Documents