Why is Stan Hoover (#3486) Now a Night Lieutenant – A Position That was Eliminated Years Ago?

More nepotism and bullshit coming from the Phoenix PD.

Lieutenant Stan Hoover (#3486) who had an EEO complaint filed against him for the sexual harassment of a female employee in PSB, was just placed as the Lieutenant over Night Detectives.

Never heard of this position? Neither did we because it was eliminated in budget cuts 5+ years ago, but mysteriously reappeared to give Stan a cushy, sweet job where he does nothing all day.

You see, years ago they had an administrative position that oversaw night detectives and quickly surmised it was a waste of time and money. We were paying $120k per year to pay someone to do nothing. If a crime is committed at night, there are many other detectives -sergeants and lieutenants in attendance regardless; so it was a position eliminated in budget cuts years and years ago.

So now in the worst economic recession that Arizona has seen in over 50 years - with pools being closed, the AG's office laying off folks, Steve Soha eliminating free car service for other drunk cops, Joe Knott trying to hide his assets, and Ron Snodgrass downloading all the free porn he can on tube8.com, the position of Lieutenant For Night Detectives was now an open spot. It was filled by Stan "da man" Hoover.

This allows Stan to have a cushy job, with lots of pay. It allows him to not be on the street, not wear a uniform and still collect a decent pay, for very little work.

As citizens you should be outraged and should send emails to City Council and to Alton Washington.

NOTE TO ALL PHOENIX POLICE OFFICERS: If you were ever issued an NOI related to sexual harassment of any City employee, and Lt. Stan Hoover was involved in your case, please, please call Attorney Jess Lorona. You now have a great case against the City if Stan Hoover levied any penalty against you.

UPDATE: Lt. Stan Hoover’s (#3486) EEO Complaint Is The Sexual Harassment of a Fellow Female Employee

You heard it here first and the Phoenix PD would rather have kept this quite – but not with our so called “unaccredited website” around and our reliable sources.

Lieutenant Stan Hoover (#3486) had an EEO complaint filed against him for the sexual harassment of a female employee in his own bureau, PSB.

Our sources are also fairly certain that Stan found out about being fired, by reading this Blog! This would be the sweetest justice if it is true.

Stan was served a double whammy with being called out on his less-then truthful investigation on Steve Soha and now the new Sexual Harassment claim.

It appears that Stan Hoover was going to get the Steve Soha Defense~Interview swept under the rug, until the EEO complaint came through and our sources tell us its the real deal, and not just some angry woman (like Heather) out for revenge - making up emails.

Asst. City Manager Alton Washington said "Enough!" and canned Stan from Professional Standards Bureau. Kind of ironic that Stan Hoover investigates cops for lying and being dishonest; yet Stan himself was dishonest during Steve Soha’s investigation?

Wasn't Stan-the-Man the one who investigated Mike and Heather Polombo's affair and if our recollection is right ...wasn't Stan also involved with Ron Snodgrass and the porn/sexual harassment claim by officer Knowles? Exactly how many sexual harassment claims has Stan been involved in, while he himself is allegedly sexually harassing a fellow employee?



In the words of Ricky Ricardo - "Stan's got some splainin' to do!!!"



NOTE TO ALL CURRENT AND FORMER PHOENIX POLICE OFFICERS:


If you were ever issued an NOI related to sexual harassment, and Lt. Stan Hoover was involved in your case, please, please call Attorney Jess Lorona at 602.277.3000. You now have a great case against the City if Stan Hoover levied any penalty against you or was a witness against you.

Hey Stan we know you read this...Have you ever heard of Karma?

Karma isn't a bitch...Karma is BadPhoenixCops.com

Ron Snodgrass, Jack Harris, Dan Olson, and the AZ POST

Jack Harris sits on the Board of AZ POST (the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board)

We were able to obtain the meeting minutes from their site on their August 20, 2008 meeting. Jack Harris was in attendance at this meeting. On Page 3 of these meeting minutes, there is an entry for “Case # 8 – Stephen Boltz – Scottsdale Police Department.”

Here is a link to the site page with the meeting minutes

http://www.azpost.state.az.us/

Scroll down to August 20, 2008 and read the minutes of the meeting Jack Harris attended.

Why is this important?

It’s clear, Jack Harris attended the meeting on August 20, 2008. Records show this.

What is paramount is Jack Harris’ vote on an 8-month suspension of this Scottsdale Officer (Stephen Boltz ) The AZ POST minutes state “...seconded by Mr. Duarte, motion carried unanimously.” When Jack Harris’ friend and buddy Ron Snodgrass (#2141) was brought up on similar charges and much worse – he was accused of creating a hostile work environment for a female worker and sexually harassing her – all Ron received was a written reprimand from Jack Harris in the PPD. The Board on the PPD that reviewed Ron Snodgrass’ case recommended an 8 hour suspension – but Ron Snodgrass’ friend Jack Harris overruled it by scribing “written reprimand.”

We can only assume that it is the chief’s discretion whether or not to bring such cases to AZ Post meeting. Naturally, Ron Snodgrass was never ever addressed at AZ POST. So the wanna-be -chief-but-really-just-a-citizen-like-the-rest-of-us, Jack Harris will vote for the 8 month suspension of a Scottsdale cop who only viewed and stored porno images on his own, work computer; but when Jack’s friend takes it further by having images on his desk, shows them to woman, and uses innuendo and dirty talk to get a married woman in bed; then all Jack gives his friend Ron, is a written reprimand???

Think something about this is rotten? Then read a little further on Ron Snodgrass.

Ron Snodgrass is a trainer with a company called Preferred Training Solutions, LLC in Glendale, AZ. These folks appear to run Early Warning/Intervention Systems Conferences. While most might commend Ol’ Ron Snodgrass for his entrepreneurial spirit, most of you might be shocked to know that the website lists his former boss Dan Olson (a Lieutenant with the PPD), in PSB as a co-founder. (The website was changed recently to remove Dan's name - but we found it!)

It is also to be rumored that Ron is a founder himself, but we are confirming that with the AZ Corporate Commission records. The AZ records state that the business was formed in the name of Kenneth Johnson (another PPD officer) in January, 2003. He later added another Johnson (most likely his wife) - Laurie Jean, to the LLC in October, 2006.

Here's the Link

http://starpas.azcc.gov/scripts/cgiip.exe/WService=wsbroker1/names-detail.p?name-id=L10604548&type=L.L.C.

(It's nice these public records request can't be lost, misplaced or destroyed by Stan Hoover!)

Now think about this for just a second.

You are working in a side business, where your boss is listed as a co-founder. Do you think for just a minute that your boss might be slightly apprehensive to properly manage you, reprimand you, suspend you or fire you? Now do you think Dan Olson lost his position as "co-founder" on the website, or do you think someone was trying to hide the fact that he (and Ron Snodgrass) is/are affiliated with Preferred Training Solutions, LLC?

Check out the page here:

http://www.preftraining.com/about.htm

God help us all if Ron Snodgrass is instructing officers nationwide as the site states. Is it classes on how to download good porn? The cause and effect of plastic surgery on ugly women? How to use a "C" drive to hide your granny and tranny porn? How to sexually harass employees that are attractive, blonde females and not get caught? How to host a meeting, not invite someone, then reprimand them for not coming?

Sweet Jesus - I can't believe these cops are actually sworn to protect us!

You can bet as soon as this BLOG is posted, these guys will significantly modify their site or shut it down to hide Ron Snodgrass and Dan Olson.

When we talk about FOJ - Friends of Jack - and Jacks inability to reprimand his friends and cover up investigations - this is what we mean.

Guys – there is absolutely something Rotten in Denmark – or at least in the Commander structure of the Phoenix PD. Corruption, nepotism and cronyism are rampant. Until Jack Harris, Phil Gordon and Frank Fairbanks leave, or the DOJ comes in, nothing will change.

Hence this is why we have this site and our BLOG.

A Guest Post from Mark Goudeau's Website

I was asked if I would allow an outsider to create a BLOG post. I agreed. This post comes from the folks at Mark Goudeau's website. I know very little about this case and this is quite controversial. I am well aware that most cops won’t touch this with a 39 ½ foot pole.

I don't live near Baseline and saw so many suspects come and go. I saw so much grand standing from Phil Gordon, Andrew Thomas and Jack “ass” Harris. After reading some of the evidence on Goudeau's site, and combine that with Dave Barnes accusations that the Crime Lab can't follow any SOPs - I do have my doubts that this guy Mark got a fair and impartial trial or wonder whether he was ever involved. From my own experiences the Phoenix PD and the prosecutor’s office will railroad you, if given an opportunity. I experienced this first hand.

Noticed I posted a "fun" picture of Mark and not his incarcerated one.

Here's the post. As Jiminy Cricket would say, “Let you consciences be your guide.” If any of you "experts" out there would like to weigh in on this, then please do.


BadPhoenixCops has permitted us to Blog on their site. We represent a group of people in Phoenix who believe and know Mark Goudeau is innocent of any crime and is not the infamous Baseline Killer. We think he was the "right guy/right time" - he was black, a former felon and now the scapegoat so that this case can close quickly. He was also a tool for grandstanding, "atta boys," and press releases for the personal gain Jack Harris, Phil Gordon and Andrew Thomas.

We believe this to be true. We base this on inaccurate statements of the DNA 'matches' made by the State's DNA technician, Lorraine Heath. I'm sure many of you know by now the issues of DNA - that Mark's DNA was far from a match – he only matched 3 of the 13 genetic markers (loci - literally 1,000s of others in Maricopa County alone will match those same 3 loci.) It is so far off, it is frightening. The DNA is inconclusive and that there never was a CODIS database "hit" as you have heard.

We know it is now too late for law enforcement since they had already sensationalized the arrest in the media. Jack earned his "5th Star" from Phil Gordon. The back-slapping has ended. Now they are doing whatever is necessary to cover their vices and inconsistencies, and ultimately convince the public that Mark Goudeau is evil. The Phoenix PD , the Mayor and Andrew Thomas will stop at nothing to conceal their mistakes and cover their asses. I also want to mention misconduct by the detectives on the task team. They’re the ones that I need information on. What they personally did. In particular Alex Fermenia and Palumbo.

We need your help. We know the lab is befuddled. We know the lab has suffered for years since they civilianized it and bringing in Tracey Montgomery to fix the back-log and clean-up is pointless. The fear the Phoenix PD has with David Barnes whistle blowing is that their house of cards will come tumbling down in an election year. Polombo is dirty and he was the right hand guy of Jack Harris while in PSB.

For those of you that know of the illegal tactics used directly in this case, inaction is unacceptable. Everyone is entitled to a fair and impartial trial – even guys like Mark. He may not have been perfect, but he was doing good things, had a good job and trying to make a decent life after having been previously incarcerated. Keeping silent and not revealing evidence on Mark is unconscionable.

You can may contact us directly at

markgoudeauinnocent@cox.net or reach out to the BadPhoenixCops website and Blog. Hopefully your conscience will guide you to do what is right.

Thanks in advance for your help and assistance and thanks to the folks at BadPhoenixCops for giving us the opportunity to post.

An Open Letter to Andy Anderson - Asst Chief of Phoenix PD

Andy, (is first guy on the left, and Sgt. Snodgrass is all the way to the right, and keeps a picture on his desk of his wife on a stripper pole!)

I take exception to your comments to both Marc Spencer and the Phoenix Police. The comment made by Darrell Ankaro on his radio show on June 26, 2008, about having your head in the sand was off the mark. In fact Mr. Anderson you have your head so far up Jack Harris’ ass, you are going to get colon cancer on your nose.

It is clear to me that you have been trained in the art of corporate communications and public speaking. I am a corporate communications specialist and served as a public relations officer for many companies. My degree is in corporate communications with my concentrations in law, finance and business, so let’s agree that I am on your level – or better yet – you are on mine!

Your canned answers and you calling from an officer’s funeral were a great ploy! I found them to be glib and trite. Were you also holding a dying kitten in your hand? Did you have the poor officer’s widow on your arm? Perhaps you had hungry children in the background to have you appear softer? You are out of touch and clearly are not educated on Unions. You know nothing about the unionization of this country nor understand their purpose. You are incorrect when you state that Marc Spencer was not a representative or spokesmen of the Phoenix Police. As a matter of record, Marc Spencer represents the heart of the Phoenix Police.

While Union membership has been declining for quite some time, the importance of Labor Unions should not be discredited and the fact that your own union president calls you out on an issue should not be undermined. The Unions in the United States represent the worker against obtuse management in many industries. While today most prevalent with teachers and police, the Union is there to protect the common worker and negotiate benefits and working conditions from management. Its underpinnings go back to decades of abuse probably starting with serfs and fiefdoms and the abuse and neglect supposed leaders have placed on the common worker. Those leaders in the Ivory Tower, clearly lose touch with the workers, and start managing P&Ls and conducting damage control, rather than worrying and caring for the common worker. It is so blatantly apparent that you, other assistant chiefs and chief Jack Harris are out of touch. Your first responders need help and you are refusing to give it.

As you so eloquently stated, “You work for Jack Harris” and are part of the management that PLEA and Marc Spencer perpetually fight over, equipment and rights. I might advise you that claiming you work for Jack Harris is not a badge of honor, but a disgrace and you should be ashamed of it! If Marc Spencer is telling you there is a problem, then there is a problem!

You have lost touch with your constituents, and the 4th floor leadership organization is not representing the Phoenix Police Department. Sixty weapons do not adequately help the first responders in the Phoenix Police Department. And your only argument was, “Did Marc submit a request?” As a leader it is your job to provide the equipment resources and tools for your team to do their job – with or without a records request. Falling on the sword of bureaucratic paperwork shows how obtuse you and the rest of the Phoenix Police have become. Your officers are out gunned and you try to hide it by claiming that, “Marc released these emails without the approval of the Phoenix Police.”

Sir, in the words of commander Louie Tovar, you are a "Dickweed" and this is "the nature of the game." You are playing a game with officers' lives! I read and heard about your indiscretion and your road rage incident. I bet your sixteen year daughter is very proud of you and you probably haven’t humiliated her too much at school.

You should be discharged from your position. I would begin the paperwork to do this, but I am sure Jack Harris and Stan Hoover will lose, cover-up and misplace the documents.

Warmest Regards,

Your Citizens Who You Are Sworn to Protect-
BadPhoenixCops Dot Com

If any of you would like to hear the KTAR recording click here.

http://www.azplea.com/content.php?info_id=451

The radio show is well over an hour long. At the time "14:50" Marc Spencer comes on and it ends at about "1:10." It is a good 45 minute cop discussion . I encourage you all to hear Marc Spencer and then Andy Anderson’s reply. Unfortunately, they don't speak directly, but at opposite intervals. The recording may be tough to find, but at the bottom of this page link, it will look like this:

June 26, 2008 [117:29m]: Hide Player Play in Popup Download
You need to click on the above “Audio Mp3” link and drag it to _______.

And if you recall, Andy Anderson was the same cop involved in a road rage situation where he was giving his 16 year old daughter driving lesson and ordered her the follow Steve Mitchem home, who had been tailgating his daughter driving. You can read about it hear.

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2007-03-15/news/ankkkarlo-pride/full#a2

An Open Letter to Jack Harris - Sergeant Ron Snodgrass (#2141)

This one came across my desk today. Another cover up. This came to me from three different cops! Thanks guys & dolls!

It looks like Jack and the 4th Floor are covering up again with Sergeant Ronald Snodgrass and the porno on his computer and the nude pictures on his desk.

First we had dildos on the desk with Martin...now pictures of women on stripper poles on the desk with Snodgrass?

What's next, giving free rides to drunks/DUIs to and from work and to lunch, all at the tax payers' expense?

Nice job Jack Harris! You and your group are showing some great leadership skills and a great deal of respect for women in the Phoenix PD!!

June 16, 2008

Jack F. Harris
Public Safety Manager
Phoenix Police Department
620 West Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85003

In regards to: PSB Investigation #PSB07-0060, and DRB #07-40

Sir:

In a memorandum dated October 24, 2007, Professional Standards Division Assistant Chief James Piña wrote to inform you that PSB investigation number PSB 07-0060 contained two sustained allegations against Sergeant Ronald Snodgrass #2141:

(1) That Sergeant Snodgrass saved, placed, or displayed inappropriate images on the City computer in his Professional Standard’s Bureau office, and

(2) That Sergeant Snodgrass displayed inappropriate images to a subordinate (me) in violation of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) standards.

On March 13, 2008, Disciplinary Review Board number 07-40 decided that Sergeant Snodgrass’ actions warranted an eight hour suspension. In a memorandum dated March 17, 2008, DRB Chairman Assistant Chief Blake McClelland presented the DRB’s recommendation of an eight hour suspension to you. Executive Assistant Chief Lannon endorsed the memorandum with the words “I agree.”

A nearly identical memorandum was generated on March 28, 2008, also from DRB Chairman McClelland, also with the DRB’s recommendation of an eight hour suspension. You endorsed this memorandum with the words “Written reprimand.”

Your unilateral decision to soften the DRB’s recommendation from the mildest suspension possible to an even milder written reprimand is a slap in the face to me and to the other women who serve under your command.

Perhaps I could have accepted your decision had you taken the time to explain it to me. Now I may never know what motivated you to give Sergeant Snodgrass a break. Was it based on your philosophy to mentor, coach, and train rather than to discipline? Was it the fantasy-based rebuttal statement Sergeant Snodgrass attached to his PSB investigation?

I have taken great pride serving our department since starting the Academy in October of 1999. When I took my oath at our graduation I promised to serve and protect and to conduct myself with the utmost integrity. I kept my promise, but it troubles me to know that others have not, and have done so with what appears to be your tacit approval.

With over 3,000 employees to oversee, you may not be familiar with my work ethic and work history. It may not have occurred to you to wonder why, after seven years of documented exemplary service, Sergeant Snodgrass should find my attitude to be problematic. All my previous supervisors declared me to be a hard worker and an asset to our department in both my monthly performance notes and in my annual reviews. I demonstrated my allegiance to management by placing number 37 on the sergeant promotional process; an honor I could not wait to fulfill.

Perhaps you were unaware that, compared to Sergeant Snodgrass’ checkered past, I have never received discipline more serious than a coaching for a minor collision, and a written reprimand for missing court. It chills me to know that you place Sergeant Snodgrass’ egregious behavior on par with missing court.

During his misconduct interview and in the rebuttal he attached to the resultant investigation, Sergeant Snodgrass tries to deflect blame from his shameful actions by casting aspersions on my character. His dodging tactics seem to have worked considering the DRB gave him the shortest possible suspension which his Chief watered down to a written reprimand.

This troubling episode began in July of 2006. I was initially ecstatic to learn that I was chosen to be the Personnel Assessment System (PAS) administrator in the Professional Standards Bureau. I couldn’t think of a better addition to my career resume than to work in PSB, the pinnacle of integrity.

However, I had the misfortune, unbeknownst to me at the time, to be assigned to Sergeant Snodgrass, the consequences of which ended my police career and still plague me today. At first Sergeant Snodgrass treated me as I was used to being treated by our departmental managers. But things quickly soured between us.

Perhaps Sergeant Snodgrass grew disenchanted with my “attitude” when I would not treat him in the unprofessionally familiar way that my predecessor, Toye Nash, had. It is indicative of the cozy relationship they had that Sergeant Snodgrass kept what can only be characterized as an intimate photograph of Ms. Nash and his then-wife Crystal on his desk in full view of PSB management. Perhaps his managers found this photograph rather tame compared to the one Sergeant Snodgrass had posted in his office of Crystal topless and another of her straddling a stripper’s pole.

Sergeant Snodgrass’ blatant display of so prominent an artifact of his inappropriate supervisor-subordinate relationship shows that either PSB management was wholly incapable of controlling Sergeant Snodgrass or that they were wholly ignorant of the relationship he enjoyed with Ms. Nash. In either case, Sergeant Snodgrass may have been emboldened to attempt to force a similar supervisor-subordinate relationship on me and then to retaliate against me with unfavorable performance notes when I would not acquiesce.

I can not expect you to have read Sergeant Snodgrass’ misconduct investigation or to have listened to his interview, but I did. He reveals his lack of integrity and veracity when he claims not to have had pornography on his work computer when in fact he was found to have in excess of 80 pornographic images there. His assertion that he was collecting these images for PowerPoint presentations is specious.

In his PSB interview, Sergeant Snodgrass stated that he tried to “maintain a very professional demeanor as far as a supervisor and her being my subordinate” referring to me. This is absolutely ridiculous since he had no problem showing me photos of Crystal’s breasts as well as other inappropriate images.

It is troubling to me, and should be to you too, that Sergeant Snodgrass’ transparent lies went unchallenged by PSB investigators. For example, during his February 14, 2007 PSB interview, Sergeant Snodgrass states “I have no pornography on my computer” just seconds after describing the eye-ball-in-vagina photo. Sergeant Snodgrass tries to brush off the presence of this photo by saying that he and Ms. Nash were going to use it as part of a “joke” PowerPoint presentation for Lieutenant Dan Olsen because Lieutenant Olsen is “laid back.” He also tries to deflect blame for the photo by telling investigators that Ms. Nash obtained it. But this does not explain how it came to be on his City computer, and the investigators did not pursue this point.

Sergeant Snodgrass skillfully brushes aside a direct question as to whether or not he kept questionable images on his “C” drive with a rambling dialog concerning whether or not I was offended by the images. The investigators never redirect him to the question of whether or not he was secreting questionable images on his “C” drive. It should be noted that storing files on the “C” drive (the computer’s internal hard drive) is one way to circumvent the City’s ability to archive files that are not kept on City servers.

In this same interview Sergeant Snodgrass tries to wiggle out of his responsibilities as a police manger by acting bemused when asked if the nude images he kept on his City computer were a violation of City policy. He gives a “now-that-you-mention-it-maybe” answer that one would not expect from a veteran supervisor. Even when pressed by the investigators as to what other pornographic images Sergeant Snodgrass may have had on his City computer he demurs again and launches into a rambling narrative that never answers the question.

Sergeant Snodgrass appears to successfully deflect blame by maintaining that he was merely the recipient of questionable images sent to him by others, or that any images, even images of eyeballs in vaginas, were somehow not pornographic.

The PSB investigators missed an opportunity to reveal Sergeant Snodgrass’ lack of truthfulness by failing to interview his former subordinate and my predecessor, Toye Nash. Ms. Nash could have debunked his claim that he had only shown me photos of Crystal’s naked breasts after I initiated a conversation about breast augmentation which is absolutely untrue. It could be construed that her compelled statements would have cast her former PSB managers in a bad light.

In fact, Sergeant Snodgrass showed me the nude photographs of Crystal in the front seat of his vehicle in the Professional Standards Bureau parking garage. When questioned about this by PSB investigators he claimed that this could not have happened because he cannot get his wallet out of his pocket while seated in the car which was a complete fabrication.

Sergeant Snodgrass gives several versions of the “truth” in his interview, first admitting that he showed me nude photos of Crystal, then denying that he has nude photos of her. Later in his interview, Sergeant Snodgrass apparently became comfortable enough to drop his pretense when he confides to the investigators that he refers to the nude photos of his then-wife as “Crystal trading cards,” and offers to show them to the investigators. The reason for Sergeant Snodgrass’ easy and confident air during this inquiry was initially confusing to me but became clear after you reduced his punishment.

Sergeant Snodgrass tried to weasel out of his culpability by insinuating to the PSB investigators that I was disgruntled due to his supervision of me. However, during my initial internal investigative interview, I mentioned only Sergeant Snodgrass’ most salient policy violations and choose not to expound on the other things that Sergeant Snodgrass had done to me because I had no way to prove them. His supervision was never an issue per se but his flagrant disregard for supervisor-subordinate protocol was.

Examples of what I did not mention during my PSB interview include allegations that I could not prove because he and I were the only ones present when they occurred. I could not prove that Sergeant Snodgrass asked me to drive him home where he invited me in and showed me his bedroom with nude pictures of his wife with another woman. I could not prove that Sergeant Snodgrass told me how he loved watching his wife swim naked with other women in their pool. I could not prove that while I sat at lunch with Sergeant Snodgrass and Toye Nash they confided that they both loved it when Toye wore her see-through lacy shirt to work so that Sergeant Snodgrass could see her nipples. I could not prove that Sergeant Snodgrass would set me up for failure by holding meetings that I should attend, but not telling me about them, only to denigrate me about my nonattendance in my monthly performance notes. Nor could I prove Sergeant Snodgrass held regular closed door intimidation sessions with me.

Unchecked by his managers, Sergeant Snodgrass exposed me to what can be characterized as grooming behaviors that are commonly used by sexual predators. The PSB investigation documents only a portion of his intrusive actions.

You may ask why I did not report Sergeant Snodgrass’ outrageous behavior sooner. There are four primary reasons: 1) I was fearful and intimidated by him because of his position and standing on the department, 2) I felt that I would be ostracized once I became a “whistle blower,” 3) Sergeant Snodgrass and his supervisor, Lieutenant Dan Olsen, enjoy a close and long term working relationship, and lastly 4) fear that Sergeant Snodgrass would be untruthful.

As the Police Chief, and as a veteran officer, it does not enter into your psyche to be intimidated by Sergeant Snodgrass. But as a junior and female employee it was intimidating to me to know that Sergeant Snodgrass had been on the department for well over thirty years, was a member of management, was a member of the pension board, and had a certain level of influence beyond the positions he held. I was advised I could not return to patrol and leave my position in the Professional Standards Bureau for several months until I trained my replacement.

Faced with the prospect of continuing to suffer in silence I turned to my employee association for help. I told them that my PSB managers couldn’t or wouldn’t do anything about Sergeant Snodgrass that working conditions were unbearable, and that Sergeant Snodgrass put terrible things in my notes that were of a personal nature unsubstantiated by facts.

Thanks to my association’s intervention, Sergeant Snodgrass was moved out of the Professional Standards Bureau (it should be noted that he was moved to another specialty assignment without having to compete in a selection process). Sergeant Snodgrass’ departure, however, did not alleviate the hostile atmosphere of my workplace because his supervisor, Lieutenant Dan Olsen, made it clear to me that he was not pleased with Sergeant Snodgrass’ departure.

For example, Lieutenant Olsen angrily wagged his finger in my face while declaring that calling on my employee association was a “veiled threat.” Lieutenant Olsen smugly sat in my office to announce that the Bureau was throwing a going-away party for Sergeant Snodgrass and added that I was not invited (as if I would have gone). Lastly, Lieutenant Olsen started burying me in “busy work” that had never been required of my position previous to my complaint. Lieutenant Olsen’s intimidating behavior follows a pattern for which he was previously reprimanded and for which the City was forced to pay damages due to his mistreatment of a subordinate employee.

Professional Standards Bureau Commander Kim Humphrey had to intervene to direct Lieutenant Olsen to destroy negative performance notes Sergeant Snodgrass kept on me that were based on his personal opinion rather than on observable facts.

Sergeant Snodgrass was given an opportunity that I was not afforded; the ability to attach a very long memorandum of mitigating factors to his investigation after his initial PSB interview. It should have appeared extremely suspect that Sergeant Snodgrass could remember detailed information about incidents that occurred eleven months after the incident, but denied remembering he had over 80 pornographic images on his City computer a mere four months after the fact when being questioned by the investigators. It should have also appeared suspicious that Sergeant Snodgrass had his City computer replaced just prior to the investigation.

After reading the contents of Sergeant Snodgrass’ “mitigating factors” memorandum, I am both sickened and angered at the utter disregard for truthfulness, complete fabrication, and his disgusting attempt to make me look bad and to minimize his actions into appearing somehow appropriate and invited. Sergeant Snodgrass has a history as a very successful negotiator and has a very persuasive personality. He has used these “talents” to taint, misinform, and downright lie to the Discipline Review Board so as to minimize and deflect his actions.

I find it objectionable that his spurious “mitigating factors” memorandum has gone through the chain of command up to the Police Chief and has been seen by people I have worked with during my career on the department with no counterbalance in the form of a clarification memorandum from me. Sergeant Snodgrass has used his rebuttal memorandum to further humiliate and to embarrass me in a cruel attempt at character assassination. Your choice to reduce his punishment from a suspension to a written reprimand indicates that Sergeant Snodgrass played his cards right. It is a victory for him but a humiliating defeat for me and for the other female police employees under your stewardship.

Therefore I am submitting this letter to you and to all the people who may have been involved in this sordid investigation not only to clear my name but to formally request that Sergeant Snodgrass be investigated for being untruthful during his PSB investigation and for continuing to misuse City computers by querying me (on three different occasions since my resignation) and others in the PAS system long after he was relieved of this duty. This stalking behavior, which continues even after he received a mere written reprimand for his inappropriate treatment of me proves that he thinks of himself as untouchable, a feeling you no doubt helped instilled in him by your failure to follow the recommendation of your policy, of your Discipline Review Board, and of your Executive Assistant Chief.

Respectfully,
Officer Linnea G. Knowles R0950

cc: Members of DRB #07-40:
Assistant Chief Blake McClelland
Commander Emmett Quill
Commander Jeffeory Hynes
Sergeant Douglas Hardin
Sergeant Natalie Simonick
Mr. Phil Scheel
Ms. Karen Broadway