Marion County prosecutor's list questions honesty, reliability of more than 40 officers

Lists kept by district attorneys across the country track law enforcement officers who prosecutors refuse to call as witnesses because of their history of dishonesty, unreliability and even criminal activity.

In Marion County, nearly four dozen current and former officers are included on the so-called Brady index — officers whose participation prosecutors believe would undermine their cases at trial.

They include Oregon State Police troopers, Marion County deputies and Salem Police officers along with eight civilian employees, such as Department of Human Services caseworkers. 

Justice reform:Oregon Senate passes a series of changes to juvenile sentencing

Some are officers who forged evidence and investigators exposed for botching criminal cases. Some resigned quietly amidst internal investigations. Some are still working in law enforcement.

Many current and former officers say they were unfairly placed on the list and have not been able to appeal their Brady designation, despite essentially being barred from investigating cases and working with inmates.

Marion County prosecutors acknowledged the Brady index provided to the Statesman Journal is not a full list of unreliable witnesses in law enforcement. The names and documents relating to ongoing civil litigation, criminal cases and personnel discipline were redacted or withheld.

The Marion County index — obtained through a public records request by the Statesman Journal — contains the names of 47 former and current troopers, deputies and officers along with eight civilian employees.

Next to most names on the list, in all capital letters, is the phrase, “DO NOT CALL" as a witness. 

Sean Banks, a deputy arrested on theft, tampering and misconduct charges is not on the list. Nor is a former detective investigated for repeated untruthfulness, including during a child abuse investigation.

An investigator's dishonesty and misconduct can have wide-reaching effects. Prosecutors recently confirmed multiple criminal cases were dismissed due to Banks' lack of credibility. 

District attorney officials said they have not completed their formal analysis on Banks and other former officers, which is why they don't appear on the list. 

That doesn't mean prosecutors will use them as witnesses while a decision is pending, officials said. 

Until the formal analysis is complete, prosecutors will evaluate whether to call each potential Brady witness on a case-by-case basis. 

More on Sean Banks:Deputy stole guns from dead man's home while on duty

What does it mean to be a 'Brady cop'?

Lists of so-called "Brady cops" are named after the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Brady v. Maryland, which requires prosecutors to turn over any evidence that might exonerate or be favorable to a defendant.

Such evidence could include knowing whether an officer involved in the case has a history of tampering with evidence, demonstrated incompetence, lying during internal affairs investigations or failing to report crimes.

The district attorney also can disqualify a witness for "lack of confidence," such as having pending criminal cases, criminal convictions, obvious biases or a reputation as a dishonest person. 

Brady lists have different levels, so inclusion on a list does not necessarily prevent an officer from testifying during court proceedings.

Law enforcement agencies notify district attorneys of potential Brady issues. Prosecutors review the information and determine whether the officer needs to be disqualified as a witness. Hiring and firing decisions are made by the agencies themselves, not by prosecutors.

Salem police spokesman Lt. Treven Upkes said the department contacts the city attorney's office if they face an issue where an officer's conduct could have Brady ramifications. The city attorney then notifies the district attorney's office.

From there, prosecutors decide whether an officer can be called as a witness. 

"Depending on the circumstances of the issue and the determination of the DA’s office, an officer could continue with their routine assigned duties, be assigned modified duties in which the officer does not handle evidence, take statements, write reports or take enforcement action or the officer could be terminated after due process," Upkes said. 

Lack of evidence:Harassment complaints against City of Salem workers dismissed

Former Oregon State Police Detective David Steele, who was convicted of forgery and official misconduct while investigating a killing spree by a pair of white supremacists is on Marion County's Brady index.

Former Salem police Officer Sterling Alexander, who was convicted of official misconduct for receiving oral sex while on-duty and sexual abuse for having sex with a 17-year-old girl, also is on the list.

Multiple officers were added after they lied during personnel investigations and criminal investigations. Many resigned during internal investigations or were fired. 

“Our office, and prosecutors around the state, spend a lot of resources tracking, managing, and making sure that we're only using law enforcement witnesses that can withstand the strict scrutiny required for a just criminal conviction," Marion County Deputy District Attorney Brendan Murphy said. "This occurs at every stage of our criminal prosecutions — independent of our 'Brady List' and 'Do Not Call' lists.” 

Woodburn Police Chief Jim Ferraris, one of the law enforcement members involved in a workgroup that crafted the statewide "best practices" for Brady violations, said in most cases, officers already are terminated or have resigned by the time their names are placed on the Brady list.  

He noted many of those on the list are no longer working in law enforcement. 

"They're no longer employed because police agencies have done a good job dealing with the misconduct," Ferraris said.

Having a strong internal affairs process and thorough training on ethics and honesty can prevent officers from ending up on the Brady list in the first place, he said. 

And after misconduct is uncovered, Ferraris said it's important for agency leaders to ask themselves "What could we have done differently to try to instill an environment where that type of misconduct doesn't occur?"

State audit:Oregon still not doing enough to improve graduation rates

Internal investigations, false claims

The Brady index includes 14 current and former Salem police officers, including Omar DeMarco and Abraham Dedek.

DeMarco resigned from the police department in 2018 after he was arrested on DUI and hit-and-run charges. According to court records, an internal investigation was launched into his alleged dishonesty in the DUI criminal investigation. 

DeMarco's girlfriend initially claimed to be the one behind the wheel during the DUI crash. DeMarco, who had worked for Salem police for eight years, later admitted responsibility. 

Dedek, a former high school resource officer, also was determined to be dishonest during a criminal investigation, according to court records.

He was accused in 2017 of having an on-duty sexual relationship with a parent of a student over several months, then lying about it when questioned by investigators

A staff analysis by the Department of Public Safety and Standards and Training found that Dedek potentially violated the board's "minimum moral fitness standards" by using his position as a police officer to form the sexual relationship while a student's parent while on-duty.

Dedek, a 14-year veteran of the Salem Police Department, resigned in October 2017. 

He told the Statesman Journal he was shocked to learn his name was on the list. 

"As there is no objective process to determine who gets placed on this list, I was never questioned or notified regarding the Brady list," Dedek said. "Many false allegations were made about me that complicated the situation."

Support local journalism: Five digital benefits of a Statesman Journal subscription

He said he's since moved on with his life and worked to resolve the year's old allegations. Had he stayed with the department, the designation would have been a huge hurdle to work with. 

"The fact that this situation led to being placed on this list shows how subjective the process is," Dedek said. "I was never untruthful, but no one asked me about it and here we are."

'A pattern of dishonesty'

Eight current and former Marion County deputies are on the Brady list, but former detective Charles Dale Huitt is not among those listed.

Sheriff Jason Myers sent the district attorney's office a Brady disclosure in August after Huitt was found to have violated the agency's standards of conduct and field reporting rules, according to court records.

Huitt was hired as a full-time deputy in 2006, began working with the computer forensics unit in 2017 and worked as a detective in the criminal investigations unit for one year.

He worked on dozens for cases, including child sex abuse investigations and at least two suspected murders. 

He received positive reviews praising his positive attitude and "excellent written reports" and had no history of discipline in his file. In 2014, he was awarded a medal of valor after a wanted fugitive engaged him and another deputy in gunfire. Huitt shot the man in the leg, ending the gunfire battle. 

His reputation began crumbling when an internal investigation was launched in May 2018 regarding an incident where Huitt was "potentially untruthful involving work production."

He was placed on administrative leave during the internal affairs procedure. 

That investigation led to the opening of another inquiry after a detective disclosed she had uncovered inconsistencies in reports when she took over a child sex abuse case from Huitt while he was on administrative leave.

The investigation involved a Salem man accused of taking and sharing nude photos of his young step-daughter.

In one of the reports, Huitt wrote that he contacted a DHS caseworker about the suspected sexual predator being released from jail and possibly contacting his alleged victim. 

He also recounted receiving a text from his fellow detective during their search of the suspect's home stating that she had a found a bed matching the one shown in explicit photos of the step-daughter. 

A review of phone records and an interview with the caseworker proved that both of the statements were, in fact, false. 

The criminal case was later dismissed after the suspect died. 

According to investigating documents, Huitt insisted his reports were well written and well documented other than "a couple points that somebody took issue with that are easily explained." 

Salem police:Former officer given jail, probation for stealing from nonprofit

He said he had a heavy workload and defended his ethics. 

“So why all this is occurring all at once is, uh, it’s got me a little confused," Huitt said during the interview with investigators. “It's something I take very seriously because we live and die on our reputation and credibility.”

Other prosecutors and detectives took issue with Huitt's job performance. A prosecutor recounted being frustrated by Huitt's misleading statements and unwillingness to appear for trial preparation in a murder case. 

“I have some serious concerns regarding Dale's honesty," wrote one detective in a letter to investigators. “I can’t and I won’t rely on him for information for a search warrant. I can’t and won’t say that 'I know this person to be truthful' in an affidavit.” 

District attorney officials said they have not yet completed a formal analysis of whether to place Huitt on the Brady index. 

Huitt declined to comment on the allegations but told the Statesman Journal he is fighting the district attorney's office move toward placing him on the list.

Jefferson schools:Board violates state law, picks superintendent in secret

The impact of untruthfulness

Investigators sustained the allegations that Huitt had violated field reporting procedures and standards of conduct related to untruthfulness.

They found Huitt's report was not factual and his attempts to explain the errors exacerbated the problem and created a "concern that he may have done this on previous investigations."

“This has and will continue to bring the office and his investigations into disrepute," investigators wrote. "The DA’s office will likely have to review many of the cases he was involved in to ensure there are no more accuracies that might affect those case(s) he was primary on or assisted with.”

Investigators detailed the adverse impact Huitt's action could have, citing the importance of law enforcement's relationship with prosecutors and their ability to trust the evidence and testimonies of officers. 

“This policy violation is a serious offense," investigators said. "This was a child sexual assault case. The DA’s office needs factual information in the reports so they can prosecute these cases.”

Huitt retired Aug. 8, 2018, while under investigation.

He told the Statesman Journal there is no appeal process for the Brady list and no burden of proof needed to be placed on it. 

"Basically, if you disagree with a (prosecutor) and they don't like what you have said, they can destroy your career and there is nothing that can be done about it," Huitt said. 

He said he and several law enforcement officers impacted by the district attorney's office intend to take legal action.

A form of retaliation?

At least two deputies have filed lawsuits against the Marion County District Attorney's Office, accusing prosecutors of retaliation and not giving officers due process after putting them on the Brady list. 

The office determined Marion County deputies Cody Lane and Mathieu LaCrosse could not "withstand the strict scrutiny of law enforcement witnesses in criminal prosecutions." 

But Lane and LaCrosse are fighting the designation and are still employed with the sheriff's office. 

LaCrosse, a detective and computer forensic investigator, was placed on the list after butting heads with prosecutors during two homicide investigations, according to a federal court complaint.

A criminal investigation into LaCrosse was launched after prosecutors accused him of perjuring himself during testimony about the timely processing of evidence in the homicide case involving David Bartol. Bartol was convicted of murder and sentenced to death row in November 2016. 

Investigators concluded LaCrosse had not committed a criminal act.

"Despite being cleared of any wrongdoing, (he) was removed from the detective unit and re-assigned to patrol," his attorney Daniel Thenell said in the complaint. 

He accused the district attorney's office of failing to provide LaCrosse with adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard about the Brady listing. 

The listing essentially "blacklisted" the deputy, relegating him to a position with no contact with the public or inmates and removing him from the SWAT team, Thenell said.

Lane was placed on the Brady list after being accused of following his girlfriend car's home from the bar while on-duty to prevent her from being pulled over. 

He was fired for being untruthful, with his termination letter stating he "purposefully meant to deceive or hide the fact" that he was escorting his girlfriend home from the bar. 

Lane filed a grievance through his union. According to court records, an arbitrator, after finding "serious flaws in the investigation" and misrepresentation by the investigator, ordered that Lane be rehired and removed from the Brady list. 

He remains on the list.

The civil cases filed by Lane and LaCrosse are ongoing. 

Lawsuit:Oregon DHS failed to prevent abuse in foster care system

Do not call

The certification of former deputy Matthew Higgins also went under review after he resigned in lieu of termination on July 27, 2018. 

Two separate internal investigations preceded his departure from the Marion County Sheriff's Office after seven years of employment. 

According to a letter from Sheriff Myers, Higgins violated the agency's policies on standards of conduct regarding untruthfulness, use of system resources and informant management during an incident on Feb. 12, 2018. 

Another internal investigation centered around Higgins's actions the night of March 20, 2018.

According to official documents, investigators found evidence that Higgins "arrested the wrong person due to improper police procedure and then attempted to 'explain' why" he believed the arrestee used another man's demographic information during previous contacts. 

"This was shown not to be true during the course of the Professional Standards Investigation," Myers wrote in the letter. 

Investigators found Higgins had violated policies on untruthfulness, constitutional requirements and arrest, unbiased policing and detainee transports. 

Myers denied a Statesman Journal records request for further information about the investigation into Higgins. Officials said there is a significant public interest in having effective internal investigations by utilizing complainants and witnesses.  

"These individuals are more likely to candidly provide information to investigators if the confidentiality of investigation records is maintained," Sheriff's spokesman Lt. Chris Baldridge said. 

In a statement, Myers said he holds employees to the highest standards through the office's policies, procedures and collective bargaining agreements. 

"The community's trust is of the utmost importance to the Marion County Sheriff; without that trust, we cannot be effective in our roles," Myers said. "It is disheartening and disappointing to the Sheriff, our office and the community when an employee violates this trust."

He added that the overwhelming majority of employees perform a very difficult job with honor and integrity as they serve the community.

Following a review, Higgins name was added to the District Attorney's Brady index. 

"Resigned following two separate MCSO internal investigations," the Brady list reads. "DO NOT CALL."

More on Myers:Just re-elected, Marion County Sheriff leaving job at the end of June

For questions, comments and news tips, email reporter Whitney Woodworth at wmwoodwort@statesmanjournal.com, call 503-399-6884 or follow on Twitter @wmwoodworth