Posted on 07/28/2006 4:52:22 AM PDT by abb
DURHAM -- Raleigh police have charged two Durham Police Department officers in connection with an incident that occurred July 20 outside a Glenwood Avenue sports bar.
The officers, Gary Powell Lee, 38, of 3588 Copper Creek Lane, Franklinton, and Scott Christian Tanner, 33, of 2516 Hiking Trail, Raleigh, both face counts of simple assault. Conviction on the misdemeanor carries with it, for someone with no prior offenses on their record, the possibility of a maximum 30-day jail sentence and a $1,000 fine.
Lee and Tanner are accused of assaulting Rene Dennis Thomas, a cook who works at Blinco's Sports Restaurant and Bar, 6711 Glenwood Ave., Raleigh. The charges stem from a parking-lot altercation that occurred late on July 20 as five current and two former Durham Police Department officers were leaving a going-away party for a departing officer.
A criminal summons issued Thursday alleged that Lee, a member of the department's Special Operations Division, tried to strike Thomas and tackled him, causing the cook to fall to the ground. A second summons alleged that Tanner, a motorcycle officer who works in the department's Traffic Services Unit, kicked Thomas in the head.
Thomas has told television reporters that as many as six men participated in the assault, which began with an exchange of racial slurs. But Raleigh Police Department spokesman Jim Sughrue said detectives in that city don't intend to charge anyone else in connection with the incident, or add later to the charges they've already filed.
"It's been extensively investigated, and we're confident that the responsible individuals have been charged," Sughrue said.
But Lee and Tanner -- and three of their colleagues -- could still face sanctions from the Durham Police Department. An internal investigation is continuing and should conclude in two to three weeks, Police Chief Steve Chalmers said at a news conference Thursday.
The Durham probe is focusing on a wider range of issues that include the alleged use of racial slurs. "The alleged conduct is something that is certainly deplorable to us, and something we don't want to be consistent in the way we operate and conduct ourselves," Chalmers said. "The entire allegation is disturbing."
Lee and Tanner had previously been restricted to administrative duties, and remain so. The other three officers in the case -- Sgt. Mark Gottlieb, Officer Richard Clayton and Officer James Griffin -- had also been restricted but on Thursday were allowed to resume their normal duties.
The decision doesn't mean the three have been cleared, but does indicate that based on "the facts we've already uncovered ... there's no reason we can't put these officers back on full duty," Chalmers said.
Asked later if that meant the three had played only a minor role in the incident, Chalmers said, "At least we can say it wasn't a major role."
All of the officers have the right to a lawyer's help, and two, Gottlieb and Lee, have retained the Durham firm of Clayton Myrick McClanahan & Coulter to represent them as the internal investigation and criminal case unfold.
A lawyer there, Allen Mason, confirmed Thursday that senior partner Jerry Clayton had spoken to Gottlieb and that another of his colleagues, former Assistant District Attorney Freda Black, had spoken to Lee.
One of the two former Durham officers involved in the case, James Kennedy, has also retained Clayton's firm and has talked with Mason. Kennedy is a former motorcycle officer who left the department late last year. The other former Durham officer who was present remains unidentified.
Asked if the lawyers and their clients would speak up to offer their version of what happened, Mason said there's "not a chance in the world" of that happening outside formal channels.
"We're not Duke lacrosse lawyers," Mason said alluding to the year's most highly publicized Durham Police Department case, one that Gottlieb and Richard Clayton, who's no relation to lawyer Jerry Clayton, have both worked on. "We don't practice that way. We don't comment about pending cases, we don't do interviews, we don't make statements."
The Raleigh charges were notable for the fact that they didn't address what Thomas has said was the first act of the confrontation, a move by one of the men involved to poke him in the shoulder with a finger. The charge against Lee addressed an act Thomas alleged was committed immediately afterward by a second man, and the charge against Tanner addressed something that happened after Thomas fell to the ground.
The shoulder poke was likely a criminal act under North Carolina law, given court decisions that have held "the merest unauthorized touching of another [person] is an assault," said Barry Winston, a criminal-defense lawyer in Chapel Hill.
A judge "who strictly interprets the law would, I suspect, hold that North Carolina law requires him to convict someone who walks up to someone and in an antagonistic fashion pokes that person with his finger," although that's "not what the average person thinks of as assault," Winston said.
Raleigh detectives filed Thursday's charges after consulting prosecutors in Wake County District Attorney Colon Willoughby's office, a move Sughrue said is standard in officer-involved cases. The spokesman declined to say why there wasn't a charge addressing the alleged shoulder-poke.
"Based on the investigation of the case, and facts present, it was determined that these two charges were the appropriate charges to bring," Sughrue said.
Thomas was surprised Thursday to hear that the charges involved the officers they did. "Lee and Tanner? Huh. OK. Check that again and call me back," he said before cutting off a brief interview. "I don't think you have the right guys."
The cook did not elaborate, and did not return a call placed to his cell phone late Thursday afternoon.
The Raleigh department's decision to issue a criminal summons for each of the officers, rather than an arrest warrant, saved Lee and Tanner an appearance before a magistrate and possibly the need to post bail to avoid detention. Sughrue said the officers didn't receive any special treatment.
"That is very typically the way a simple assault case is handled," he said. "That's very consistent with the way we'd handle the same case if the suspects had not been law enforcement officers."
Also routine was the Raleigh department's decision to assign detectives from its own internal-affairs unit to work the case. No matter what agency they work for, when police are "suspect in a case in Raleigh, the case is investigated by internal affairs," Sughrue said.
Elected officials said they're watching how the criminal case plays out.
Mayor Bill Bell said the allegations, if true, are unfortunate. "If in fact it did happen, I'd hope they'd be prosecuted to the fullest extent," he said.
City Councilman Eugene Brown agreed. "It's always problematic when you have those hired and paid for enforcing the law breaking the law," he said. "I want to withhold judgment, but so far, this is just embarrassing."
Lee has worked for the department since 1999. Tanner joined the force in 1997, and was recently the beneficiary of a department-organized fundraiser intended to help him and another officer pay for cancer treatments. He suffers from Hodgkin's
That is what I think too.
abb, I certainly could believe the scared out of running if we were talking about an outsider like Monks. But Cheek can not afford to be scared off by anyone there. He lives there. He is an office holder there. He could be bought off, ie the deal, but scared, I doubt it. BTW, a guy scared off from running does not say at his press conference that he still plans to vote for himself.
jennyd, Of course Cheek did not want to run and certainly Occum's razor suggest that ultimately deciding not to run for his own reason is an explannation to consider seriously. That is the reason Occum's razor says to accept just looking at the Cheek press conference. But if you combine the Cheek press conference with the story in the paper about the change in how the case will be handled, then Occum's razor says a deal is at least as likely the explannation as coincidence.
You can be killed or beaten up if you lived in Durham all your life, or not.
You can be killed or beaten up no matter where you have lived. On the other hand, if you are an elected official in a particular place you have learned how to live and prosper there. You are not going to be physically threatened off running for another office.
Your arguments are certainly plausible. But a "threat" could take some other form than physical. He may have skeletons in the closet, etc. Again, merely theories on my part.
As for the deal theory, that is certainly possible - nothing would surprise me. One thing to consider is that a "deal" "could" be construed as obstruction or bribery, and would therefore entail some exposure to new risk for Cheek or Nifong. Of course Nifong may be thinking, in for a penny, in for a pound.
But one thing is for sure. The local DriveBy Media sure ain't asking enough questions...
You just might, especially if you never really wanted to run for that office in a first place.
Don't you know that attorneys are basically exempt from the bribery laws? Certainly attorneys discuss settling difference often including cash changing hands all the time.
You are right, I took the harm to be physical harm, but similarly if a problem about an office holder has gotten out, he knows that it is out of the bag and can not be put back in. If this were the case, Cheek would be finished. He could not run for office again. He would soon be worthless to any clients.
Another aspect of this is this deal being in the works makes Nifong a liar yet again in his press conference. He is saying this case is a Durham problem that needs a Durham solution at the same time he is negotiating to remove the case from a 100% Durham solution.
This is also setting the table for anyone who might be running against him to campaign on Nifong treating the accused lacrosse players differently than other defendants. I think Nifong would make such a move continent on not having opposition that could campaign against him based on this special treatment.
He may not have any choice on the venue change for presiding judge. He can be "gotten to" if enough supreme court/attorney general types mash on him. Don't forget, Cheshire's law credential go back FIVE generations. You don't survive and prosper that long in the legal profession without knowing some connections...
No. 1 sounds by far the most plausible. Cheek wanted to keep Monks off the ballot and help Nifong.
Seems she/he has a personal issue here.
Well, if it seems that way, it seems wrong.
Yep.
Good point. There's way too much that's happened in this case for coincidence...
Unrelated:
http://www.wral.com/news/9598407/detail.html#
Former Deputy Arrested In Cumberland Prostitution Sting
POSTED: 1:52 pm EDT July 30, 2006
//
http://www.stewartforsheriff.com/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.