# Brady List and Pension Forfeiture Internal Affairs 2 Pack



## NEPS (Aug 29, 2006)

Law Enforcement Dimensions & John Peter Hoerr, Esq. present:

Truth, Police, and the Brady List and Misconduct Investigations and Pension Forfeiture

Tuesday, April 26, 2022
8:30 a.m. -- 3:30 PM
Northampton Police Department


Two specialized topics in one day for the internal affairs professional. Explore police department and officer requirements regarding Brady Disclosures, understand the potential effects of placement on the Brady List, and learn if there is a way off the list. Also, understand when, how, and why pensions and post-employment health care may be forfeited because of public employee misconduct. 

Detailed class description and registration here: http://www.ledimensions.com/files/BRADY and PENSION Pack flyer.pdf


----------



## FAPD (Sep 30, 2007)

in this new era of POST and decertification, wouldn't this course have a lot less meaning?


----------



## Kilvinsky (Jan 15, 2007)

NEPS said:


> Two specialized topics in one day for the internal affairs professional. Explore police department and officer requirements regarding Brady Disclosures, understand the potential effects of placement on the Brady List, and learn if there is a way off the list. Also, understand when, how, and why pensions and post-employment health care may be forfeited because of *perceived and fabricated AS WELL AS* legitimate public employee misconduct.
> 
> Detailed class description and registration here: http://www.ledimensions.com/files/BRADY and PENSION Pack flyer.pdf


There are a fair amount of dipshits in our ranks (sad but true) but we all know how many complaints are, exaggerated, unsubstantiated or totally false and yet it just does NOT go the way of the innocent Officer be it because of politics, expediency or a dislike by the administration. I've known too many people, myself included, that was in fear of losing their job due to a bogus or overblown complaint and this Brady list, though at it's core, a well intended thing, can destroy people. It's damn heartbreaking. I would not be surprised if many on that list do NOT deserve to be there and we all just sit and pray we never are. Do your job, be honest to a fault, pray a lot.


----------



## NEPS (Aug 29, 2006)

FAPD said:


> in this new era of POST and decertification, wouldn't this course have a lot less meaning?


POST disciplinary action requires "clear and convincing evidence" of an officer's misconduct involving one of the (many) offenses on the lists in Chapter 6E. Untruthful conduct is one of those offenses.

A placement on the Brady List -- which is a decision by the DA (or AG or USA) exclusively -- occurs on a lower standard of evidence, when there is a "preponderance of the evidence" that the officer engaged in conduct that _might_ undermine his or her credibility. So an officer may be subject to a Brady disclosure where the officer cannot be decertified under Chapter 6E.

Keep in mind also, placement on the Brady List is not always about untruthfulness or offenses requiring decertification. If an officer gets convicted for an off duty OUI, the officer will go on a Brady List, at least for awhile. (While some people may believe an officer should be terminated owing to a run of the mill off duty OUI, most people do not. Remember, we treat substance abusers rather than jail them.)

It is very unlikely that a judge will ever allow information about an OUI arrest to be heard by the jury, because a one time OUI will be completely irrelevant to almost any criminal case... but, the SJC has said that the prosecutor must err on the side of caution in disclosing exculpatory information to the defendant -- just in case.

POST and the Brady List will have some relationship, but we will have to learn about how POST will operate to see what that relationship will be.


----------



## LA Copper (Feb 11, 2005)

Kilv,

It sounds like your concerns could be mitigated by better and more thorough Internal Affairs investigations. If an officer is indeed innocent, it's usually not too difficult to verify... not always but usually.

I've been a supervisor for more than 20 years and besides the usual duties, I've had to handle numerous Internal Affairs investigations so I speak from experience. (The more significant allegations are handled by our actual Internal Affairs Division investigators.) 

It should be the job of every investigator to do everything they can to exonerate an officer... however as you know, sometimes an officer is guilty and that needs to be found out too.


----------



## felony (Oct 24, 2014)

This POST crap has gotten out of hand. It will turn into a runaway train. This latest form is just one example. It will get way worse before it gets better and it won't get better until their are some serious legal victories. 

I came from a POST state, but we also had LEOBOR. POST there stuck with training mandates etc. They didn't care what my Facebook status was or if I was late on my excise tax. Those would if anything, be handled during a background investigation by the hiring department. 
Brady/Gigglio existed there also. However, it had to be proven you lied. Not a simple, well we think you might have but don't have real proof.


----------



## NEPS (Aug 29, 2006)

LED and John Peter Hoerr present Brady List and Pension Forfeitures: Tuesday, April 26 at Northampton PD.

Detailed class description and registration here: http://www.ledimensions.com/files/BRADY and PENSION Pack flyer.pdf


----------



## Kilvinsky (Jan 15, 2007)

LA Copper said:


> Kilv,
> 
> It sounds like your concerns could be mitigated by better and more thorough Internal Affairs investigations. If an officer is indeed innocent, it's usually not too difficult to verify... not always but usually.
> 
> ...


A New Regime has that attitude, unlike the scum who used to run my department. Give the Cop the benefit of the doubt and actually honor the term Innocent Until Proven Guilty. The past Incompetent dictatorship not only didn't believe in that concept (unless the accused was a 'friend') but would try to drag anyone they didn't like into the accusation. To rub salt in the wound, you would never officially be told you were cleared if you were. But if you WERE NOT cleared, you found out right away as they demanded your badge and gun.

They're still alive, I'm sad to say, but at least no longer in power.


----------

