Monday, July 25, 2005

Deputy Kevin Chittick - Appeal - Lapeer SD

Also See:

Deputy Kevin Chittick charged with CSC






































Conviction upheld

PUBLISHED: Wednesday, April 4, 2007
The County Press
by SUSAN YOUNGER
http://www.countypress.com/stories/040407/loc_20070404003.shtml

Convicted former Lapeer County Sheriff's deputy Kevin Chittick will likely serve out his sentence of seven to 15 years behind bars for having sex with underage girls.

Last Thursday, Michigan Court of Appeals Judge David H. Sawyer, Judge E. Thomas Fitzgerald and Judge Pat M. Donofrio unanimously denied Chittick's request for a new trial, said Lapeer County assistant prosecutor Geoffrey Stuart.

In May 2005, Chittick, 38, was found guilty of 19 counts of criminal sexual conduct. The Grand Blanc man was convicted of 14 counts of third-degree CSC. Chittick also was convicted of five counts of fourth-degree CSC and willful neglect of duty for spending time at the girls' homes while on duty.

The charges stemmed from sexual assaults in Lapeer, Genesee and Oscoda counties from the end of 2001 through 2002. Both girls were between the ages of 13-15 at the time. The allegations came to light in January 2004, when one of the girls told her aunt.

Chittick, through his appeals attorney Mark Sawtawa, claimed he hadn't received a fair trial because Lapeer County Prosecutor Byron Konschuh reviewed computer materials that involved attorney-client matters.

"His computer was seized by the Michigan State Police after it was revealed Chittick had an affinity towards child pornography," said Stuart. "Pornography is a standard grooming technique used to make children think their having sex is normal. There were conversations between Chittick and his attorney on the computer. However, there was no information used at trial that was gained from the seizure."

Through his attorney, Chittick also argued he was denied a fair trial because of hearsay testimony made by his wife during cross examination. His wife said her sister was made uncomfortable by Chittick when he made fun of her underwear and put his hand on her belly.

When Chittick was hired — he began in 1998 and later resigned in May 2003 — there was no way to foresee these actions, said Lapeer County Sheriff Ron Kalanquin previously. Chittick had passed a very stringent written test and was working on his bachelor's degree at the University of Michigan-Flint. Prior to coming on with the LCSD, he had been a paramedic in the Navy with dive experience and received a "glowing recommendation" from his shift supervisor at the Portsmouth, Va., Police Department.

It's likely Chittick will spend at least five more years behind bars before he is eligible for parole unless an appeal request is granted by the Michigan Supreme Court.

"But that's not likely," said Stuart.













Court Denies Deputy A New Trial for molestation charges
March 31, 2007
The Flint Journal
http://www.mlive.com/news/fljournal/index.ssf?/base/news

-Police officers, Kalanquin said, must maintain strong personal and professional ethical values. There are 83 people working for the sheriff's department and, Kalanquin said, they are doing an excellent job. The single incident involving Chittick, Kalanquin said, is disappointing, but it doesn't cast a huge shadow on the department.

"The other employees are doing a marvelous job," Kalanquin said. "I think people understand that sometimes these things happen, despite our best efforts."












Court Denies Deputy A New Trial for molestation charges
March 31, 2007
The Flint Journal
http://www.mlive.com/news/fljournal/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1175343736113500.xml&coll=5

LAPEER , MICHIGAN - A former Lapeer County sheriff’s deputy won’t get a new trial on his 2005 sexual assault conviction, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

Kevin Chittick, 40, of Grand Blanc Township was sentenced in July 2005 to 7 years 11 months to 15 years in prison by Lapeer Circuit Judge Nick O. Holowka.

Chittick in his appeal claimed errors by his attorney, the prosecutor and judge necessitated a new trial.

In its March 20 ruling, the appeals court said if there were any errors, they did not prejudice the outcome of the trial.

Chittick is serving his sentence at the Muskegon Correctional Facility.

The former deputy was found guilty by a jury of 14 counts of third-degree criminal sexual conduct, five counts of fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct and one count of neglect of duty.

The charges stemmed from relationships Chittick developed with two underage girls.

Chittick met one girl while he was investigating a missing teen in 2001 and began developing a sexual relationship with her while the girl was 13 and 14 in 2001 and 2002.

Another girl, a friend of the first victim, testified that Chittick sexually assaulted her in her backyard pool.

Chittick, who was married, accompanied the girls to a summer horse camp in Oscoda County, where additional sexual assaults occurred.

The first victim’s parents testified they didn’t initially discourage the friendship because Chittick was a deputy, but they later banned her from seeing him after they became suspicious.

Despite knowing the parents’ wishes, a North Branch middle school teacher allowed Chittick to meet with the girl at the teacher’s home, where another sexual assault occurred.

The teacher received a suspension from the district.
























































Thursday, July 21, 2005

Assist Prosecutor Stephen Allen - Suspended - Huron County

Also See:

Huron County Assistant Prosecutor Stephen Allen arrested for domestic violence



Following his arrest for domestic violence against his wife, Deputy Jamie Allen, Assistant Prosecutor Stephen Allen was suspended from his position at the Huron County Prosecutor's Office.


 

Huron County prosecutor will face charges of domestic violence

Thursday, August 25, 2005
By Tom Gilchrist
The Bay City Times
http://www.mlive.com/news/bctimes/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1124982935103520.xml&coll=4

BAD AXE - Bay County Prosecutor Joseph K. Sheeran plans to charge Huron County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Stephen J. Allen with domestic violence for an alleged attack on Allen's wife on July 21.

Stephen Allen, 57, would face a maximum sentence of 93 days in jail if convicted of the crime. Sheeran claims Allen attacked 50-year-old Jamie R. Allen at the Allens' home near Port Hope, in Huron County.

Jamie Allen said her husband spit on her, stomped on her feet, grabbed the sides of her back "really hard" and kicked her Rottweiler dog in the dispute, according to a police report.

Stephen Allen denies harming his wife, spitting on her or kicking the dog, according to the same report.

The state Attorney General's office appointed Sheeran as a special prosecutor to decide whether Stephen Allen should face a criminal charge. Sheeran said his office filed a complaint against Allen in Huron County District Court on Friday, which starts the process of bringing Allen into court for arraignment on a criminal charge.

"We'll handle it and continue to handle it like it's a routine case," Sheeran said.

Workers at Huron County District Court, however, said no complaint had been filed with their court as of Wednesday afternoon.

Sheeran said Huron County District Judge Karl E. Kraus told him he would decline to serve as judge for Allen's case. Sheeran said he expects the State Court Administrative Office would appoint a visiting judge to handle the case.

Huron County Prosecutor Mark J. Gaertner suspended Allen as chief assistant prosecutor following Allen's arrest on the night of the incident.

Stephen Allen had been served with divorce papers the week before the dispute with his 50-year-old wife, Gaertner said.

Jamie Allen - who works as a deputy for the Oakland County Sheriff's Department - told officers she and her husband had argued about who owned the household's two French bulldogs. Stephen Allen told police he was upset about a $2,800 dog-care bill.

Huron County Sheriff's Department Sgt. Gary Polega and Deputy Brandon Kadar took photographs of apparent injuries to Jamie Allen the night of the dispute at the Allen home in Huron Township.

Jamie Allen told police she just wanted her husband to leave for the night and she didn't want officers to arrest him. Gaertner said Jamie Allen doesn't wish to have criminal charges filed against her husband.





Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Deputy Jamie Allen - OIDV Victim - Oakland SD








ALSO SEE:
HURON COUNTY ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR STEPHEN ALLEN ARRESTED AND CHARGED WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE [07/20/2005]





Huron County prosecutor will face charges of domestic violence
Thursday, August 25, 2005
By Tom Gilchrist
The Bay City Times
http://www.mlive.com/news/bctimes/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1124982935103520.xml&coll=4

BAD AXE - Bay County Prosecutor Joseph K. Sheeran plans to charge Huron County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Stephen J. Allen with domestic violence for an alleged attack on Allen's wife on July 21.

Stephen Allen, 57, would face a maximum sentence of 93 days in jail if convicted of the crime. Sheeran claims Allen attacked 50-year-old Jamie R. Allen at the Allens' home near Port Hope, in Huron County.

Jamie Allen said her husband spit on her, stomped on her feet, grabbed the sides of her back "really hard" and kicked her Rottweiler dog in the dispute, according to a police report.

Stephen Allen denies harming his wife, spitting on her or kicking the dog, according to the same report.

The state Attorney General's office appointed Sheeran as a special prosecutor to decide whether Stephen Allen should face a criminal charge. Sheeran said his office filed a complaint against Allen in Huron County District Court on Friday, which starts the process of bringing Allen into court for arraignment on a criminal charge.

"We'll handle it and continue to handle it like it's a routine case," Sheeran said.

Workers at Huron County District Court, however, said no complaint had been filed with their court as of Wednesday afternoon.

Sheeran said Huron County District Judge Karl E. Kraus told him he would decline to serve as judge for Allen's case. Sheeran said he expects the State Court Administrative Office would appoint a visiting judge to handle the case.

Huron County Prosecutor Mark J. Gaertner suspended Allen as chief assistant prosecutor following Allen's arrest on the night of the incident. Stephen Allen had been served with divorce papers the week before the dispute with his 50-year-old wife, Gaertner said.

Jamie Allen - who works as a deputy for the Oakland County Sheriff's Department - told officers she and her husband had argued about who owned the household's two French bulldogs. Stephen Allen told police he was upset about a $2,800 dog-care bill.

Huron County Sheriff's Department Sgt. Gary Polega and Deputy Brandon Kadar took photographs of apparent injuries to Jamie Allen the night of the dispute at the Allen home in Huron Township.

Jamie Allen told police she just wanted her husband to leave for the night and she didn't want officers to arrest him. Gaertner said Jamie Allen doesn't wish to have criminal charges filed against her husband













Assist Prosecutor Stephen Allen - Huron County





ALSO SEE:
DEPUTY JAMIE ALLEN [OAKLAND SD] ALLEGEDLY ASSAULTED BY EX-HUSBAND / ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR STEPHEN ALLEN.










Charge against chief assistant prosecutor dropped
STACY LANGLEY
The Huron Daily Tribune
03/06/2006
http://www.michigansthumb.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16247144&BRD=2292&PAG=461&dept_id=571474&rfi=6

BAY CITY — During a Friday afternoon hearing in Bay County District Court, a Bay County assistant prosecutor asked the judge to dismiss the domestic violence charge against Huron County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Stephen J. Allen after the case failed to move forward.

Bad Axe Attorney David B. Herrington, representing Allen, said he requested a hearing before Bay County District Court Judge Craig Alston after Bay County Assistant Prosecutor Margaret Leaming filed yet another motion to adjourn the jury trial until sometime in May.

“There was a lack of due diligence on behalf of the (Bay County) prosecutor’s office,” Herrington said. “In order to request an adjournment they had to show good cause as to why they wanted to adjourn the case. They wanted to add another witness, and they hadn’t even served the victim in the case with notice — she was never informed of a trial date. And the judge said he didn’t see where this case was moving forward.”

The trial was scheduled to get under way for the first time on Jan. 13, when it was adjourned the day before. At that time Leaming notified the court a witness would not be available for the trial. The case then was set for trail a second time to be heard on Tuesday when Leaming filed another request for an adjournment.

Herrington said it was Leaming’s motion during Friday’s hearing in Bay City to dismiss the case and, “the judge granted it. This case has been pending for months now — more than seven months.”

Herrington said the dismissal is “good news.” He said all along “we don't believe that a crime was committed — domestic violence did not occur here.”

Allen was arrested at his Port Hope area home after returning home from work on July 20. Allen and his wife, Jami Allen, reportedly had an argument and were quarreling about their dogs when Allen allegedly pushed his wife. She called 9-1-1 requesting a police officer respond to the Port Hope area home. He was arrested by Huron County Sheriff's deputies.

Police reports from the investigation had been turned over to the Michigan Attorney General's Office who assigned Bay County Prosecutor Joe Sheeran’s office to the case.

The Tribune was unable to reach Leaming for comment.











Huron County prosecutor will face charges of domestic violenceThursday, August 25, 2005
By Tom Gilchrist
The Bay City Times
http://www.mlive.com/news/bctimes/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1124982935103520.xml&coll=4

BAD AXE - Bay County Prosecutor Joseph K. Sheeran plans to charge Huron County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Stephen J. Allen with domestic violence for an alleged attack on Allen's wife on July 21.

Stephen Allen, 57, would face a maximum sentence of 93 days in jail if convicted of the crime. Sheeran claims Allen attacked 50-year-old Jamie R. Allen at the Allens' home near Port Hope, in Huron County.

Jamie Allen said her husband spit on her, stomped on her feet, grabbed the sides of her back "really hard" and kicked her Rottweiler dog in the dispute, according to a police report.

Stephen Allen denies harming his wife, spitting on her or kicking the dog, according to the same report.

The state Attorney General's office appointed Sheeran as a special prosecutor to decide whether Stephen Allen should face a criminal charge. Sheeran said his office filed a complaint against Allen in Huron County District Court on Friday, which starts the process of bringing Allen into court for arraignment on a criminal charge.

"We'll handle it and continue to handle it like it's a routine case," Sheeran said.

Workers at Huron County District Court, however, said no complaint had been filed with their court as of Wednesday afternoon.

Sheeran said Huron County District Judge Karl E. Kraus told him he would decline to serve as judge for Allen's case. Sheeran said he expects the State Court Administrative Office would appoint a visiting judge to handle the case.

Huron County Prosecutor Mark J. Gaertner suspended Allen as chief assistant prosecutor following Allen's arrest on the night of the incident. Stephen Allen had been served with divorce papers the week before the dispute with his 50-year-old wife, Gaertner said.

Jamie Allen - who works as a deputy for the Oakland County Sheriff's Department - told officers she and her husband had argued about who owned the household's two French bulldogs. Stephen Allen told police he was upset about a $2,800 dog-care bill.

Huron County Sheriff's Department Sgt. Gary Polega and Deputy Brandon Kadar took photographs of apparent injuries to Jamie Allen the night of the dispute at the Allen home in Huron Township.

Jamie Allen told police she just wanted her husband to leave for the night and she didn't want officers to arrest him. Gaertner said Jamie Allen doesn't wish to have criminal charges filed against her husband.











Police arrest Huron County assistant prosecutorSaturday, July 23, 2005
By Tom Gilchrist
TIMES WRITER
http://www.mlive.com/news/bctimes/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1122113717172890.xml&coll=4

BAD AXE - Police arrested Huron County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Stephen J. Allen for alleged domestic violence on Wednesday night.

Allen, 57, of Port Hope, hasn't been arraigned in court on the charge, which carries a maximum sentence of 93 days in jail.

Allen was released from jail Thursday after posting a standard $250 bond, according to Huron County District Court officials.

As a condition of his bond, Allen must not have any contact with the alleged victim - his wife, Jami Allen.

Huron County Prosecutor Mark J. Gaertner said he has suspended Allen from his duties as chief assistant prosecutor. Gaertner said he'll ask the state attorney general to appoint a special prosecutor to determine if Stephen Allen should be charged with a crime.

If Allen is charged, he would be the second Huron County assistant prosecutor charged with a crime in 18 months. Allen is one of three assistant prosecutors in Huron County.

Last year, Assistant Prosecutor Elizabeth V. Weisenbach pleaded no contest to attempted negligent homicide in connection with the Dec. 13, 2003, death of 87-year-old Vera Bares in Ottawa County.

A judge sentenced Weisenbach to 12 months probation and 250 hours of community service.

Huron County Sheriff Kent D. Tibbits reported that a call alleging domestic violence was received at 6:10 p.m. Wednesday from a residence in the Port Hope area.

While Tibbits didn't name an address, Huron County emergency dispatchers said that call came from an address in Huron County's Huron Township. The dispatchers provided the address to The Times, and Huron County Equalization Department records show Stephen and Jami Allen own the residence there.

Gaertner said Jami Allen doesn't wish to have criminal charges filed against her husband.

The Times could not reach Stephen or Jami Allen for comment on Friday.






Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Officer Wedad Elhage - Detroit PD

SERGEANT WEDAD ELHADGE: CHARGED WITH DISORDERLY CONDUCT. JULY 13, 2005. THIS WAS SERGEANT ELHADGE'S THIRD ALCOHOL RELATED REPRIMAND FROM THE DEPARTMENT.
ALSO SEE:

2010: SERGEANT ELHAGE CHARGED WITH MISUSE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT NETWORK & STALKING.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2010/01/sergeant-wedad-elhage-detroit-pd.html


DECEMBER 2010: SERGEANT ELHAGE CHARGED / ARRESTED FOR AGGRAVATED STALKING
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2010/12/sergeant-wedad-elhage-detroit-pd.html




Sergeant Wedad Elhage


BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS
Minutes of the Regular Board of Police Commissioners Meeting
Thursday, August 18, 2005
The regular meeting of the Detroit Board of Police Commissioners was held on Thursday, August 18, 2005 at 3:00 p.m., at Our Police Headquarters, 1300 Beaubien, Detroit, Michigan 48226.




Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, August 18, 2005 Page 7.
SECRETARY’S REPORT – EXEC. DIR. GOSS
SUSPENSION
On Wednesday, July 13, 2005, the Internal Affairs Section was notified of an allegation of misconduct on the part of Sergeant Wedad Elhage, Badge S-505, assigned to the Eighth Precinct. More specifically, the complaint alleged that Sergeant Elhage did, while off-duty, create a disturbance at the MGM Grand Casino, threatening the well being of persons and property.

As a result, the Internal Affairs Section initiated an investigation, which revealed the following:

On July 13, 2005, at approximately 3:30 p.m. Sergeant Elhage was seated in the MGM Casino (hereinafter the Casino) at a slot machine with dollar bills scattered about the floor in and around where she was seated. This caused other patrons of the Casino to gather around her, thereby causing a security concern. Casino Security approached Sergeant Elhage and requested that she pick up her money from the area surrounding her. Sergeant Elhage refused to comply with the request. Casino Security then escorted Sergeant Elhage from the premises. Upon exiting the Casino, Sergeant Elhage threatened to kill the security personnel. As a result, Casino Security contacted the Detroit Police Department.

Initially, two (2) Detroit Police Sergeants responded to the scene of the incident, Sergeant Price and Sergeant Jenkins. Sergeant Price and Sergeant Jenkins attempted to talk to Sergeant Elhage who, in return, shouted racial obscenities at them; "I will kick both your black asses."

Sergeant Price and Sergeant Jenkins continued to talk to Sergeant Elhage in an attempt to calm her. In return, Sergeant Elhage charged Sergeant Price and attempted to kick him. Sergeant Jenkins then requested additional police personnel respond to the location.

Inspector Quinn then responded to the scene of the incident.

Inspector Quinn tried to calm Sergeant Elhage and was also met with racial obscenities; "I am going to fuck-up all you Negroes."

Inspector Quinn offered Sergeant Elhage an opportunity to sit in his Detroit Police Department vehicle to allow her to calm down. Officer Elhage refused and became combative with two (2) uniform officers, Officer Erikson and Officer Patel. At one point, Sergeant Elhage stated that she was going to kill all of the officers at the scene and that she was going to "fuck up Patel's Mexican ass and all the Negroes as well." Sergeant Elhage also stated that she was going to notify the Arab community and have them all killed including Inspector Quinn's children, who she referred to by name.

Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, August 18, 2005 Page 8

By this point, approximately nine (9) uniform officers responded to the scene of the incident, including one (1) Inspector and one (1) Commander, and a crowd of casino-goers gathered to observe.

Sergeant Elhage eventually complied with the order to sit in a Department vehicle.

Sergeant Elhage then began to bang her head against the right rear window and kick the window in an attempt to break the window out. While doing so, Sergeant Elhage stated that they could then arrest her for a felony. Sergeant Elhage was then let out of the vehicle. Upon doing so, in an aggressive manner, Sergeant Elhage attempted to physically assault Sergeant Price and had to be physically restrained.

Sergeant Elhage was then placed in custody and transported to the Third Precinct for processing where Sergeant Elhage continued to be combative and shout racial epithets, and threatened more officers with physical harm. Sergeant Elhage was eventually conveyed to Detroit Receiving Hospital for evaluation.

Also, on July 13, 2005, Sergeant Elhage was charged with Disorderly Conduct in violation of the Detroit City Code, Section 38-5-1, a misdemeanor punishable by ninety (90) days in jail and/or a fine of five hundred dollars ($500.00).

On July 29, 2005, Officer Elhage was arraigned on the charge of Disorderly Conduct at the State of Michigan Thirty-Sixth District Court. Sergeant Elhage pled not guilty to the charge and the one hundred dollar ($100.00) bond that was previously posted was continued. The case is scheduled for pre-trial on August 10, 2005.

Based on the above circumstances, it is recommended that Sergeant Elhage be charged with, but not limited to the following violation of the Detroit Police Department Rules and Regulations:

CHARGE: CONDUCT UNPROFESSIONAL; CONTRARY TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT CODE OF ETHICS, THIS BEING IN VIOLATION OF THE DETROIT POLICE DEPARTMENT MANUAL, SERIES 100, DIRECTIVE 102.3-5.7, CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER, COMMAND 3.

Due to the seriousness of the conduct, I am requesting your concurrence with the suspension of Sergeant Wedad Elhage without pay, effective August 18, 2005.

Exec. Dir. Goss asked if there is anyone here on Sergeant Elhage’s behalf.

Atty. Fred Walker stated he is from DPLSA on behalf of Sergeant Elhage.I prepared some packages of paperwork that I would like to present. It’s my view of this matter that there is a history and precedence of the Detroit Police Department. Including references the general orders that alcoholism and alcohol abuse should be treated as a “treatable illness”. The first issue is whether her behavior can be caused from the alcohol abuse, which is my position that manifested the behavior in the first place. I...

Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, August 18, 2005 Page 9

Atty. Fred Walker...submit to you that the answer to that is emphatically no. Because the behavior on this occasion is some much at odds with her normal conducts as a human being and as a Sergeant of the Detroit Police Department.

That in of itself of course is insufficient, and I understand that the charge is not of alcohol abuse or being intoxicated. It’s the conduct that’s charged. That’s why I think it is important that the commission view the underlying symptoms as opposed to the result of the alcohol abuse.

The second issue is whether Sgt. Elhage has acknowledged her alcohol abuse, and I submit to you that the answer to that is emphatically yes. That can only be proven. She has taken concrete steps to address her behavior. I notice that when Mr. Goss read it he didn’t read everything and he kept it to a minimal. I appreciate that.

But, I understand the behavior was completely over the top and she acknowledges that as well. So, this has been building for quite some time with her. I submit to you that it is job related and everybody has stress especially police officers, but in her case this how it manifested itself, in alcohol abuse. She has never been intoxicated on the job, never drank before work and never during work. She’s a binge drinker and that’s when it comes up with this bazaar behavior that manifested itself here.

I have some paperwork in there, which shows the steps taken to address her situation. I would like to go over them briefly. She has been attending anger management through personal affairs she completed immediately. These are voluntary steps taken by Sgt. Elhage. She completed a one-week inpatient program for alcohol abuse. By the way she has never previously mentioned that she had a problem. She is continuing with outpatient therapy. There is a daily AA attendance. None of the things she had done before. She is under the care of a medical doctor.

She has made apologies to those whom she has been able to including the Inspector through an intermediary. She has worked with both of his children and knows them and apologizes for what she said.

In court we did appear at a pretrial and she pled no contest to the charges. That matter was taken under advisement for one year, by the judge. I would submit to you that her behavior since that time has be a genuine sincere admission of wrongdoing and an attempt to make things right.

Now you are here to determine whether you are going to suspend her without pay pending the trail board. The trial board is scheduled for September 21st. Even though we cannot take issue with the behavior we feel that we can show a very strong case as to her character as a normal proposition. We have a number of witnesses that we will be calling. I feel strongly that we will have a strong presentation.

This will be a real financial hardship for her. She has been able to line up another job in the event that you do suspend her. With her mortgage and home equity loan that will eat up the entire wages that she earns.

Also, she would lose her insurance, which pays for the outpatient therapy. I submit to you that her alcohol abuse is in fact job related.

I want to point out a few specific things that have occurred during her career. She came to the Department in 1987. In 1992 it was the first time she drank alcohol. She was often teased and harassed at work by her co-workers. A person who was very kind to her was murdered in 1992. In 1995 there were an accident between two scout cars that were involved in a chase and the two officers were killed. One of those officers was her scout car partner and the other officer was her jogging partner. There was the Oklahoma bombing and the thought was that it was Arabic related. She is Arabic, so there was a lot of teasing from that.

Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, August 18, 2005 Page 10

Atty. Fred Walker...She has worked in a variety of departments including homicide where she would take a drink to fall asleep. I think if you look at that and consider her career as an 18 year veteran and at the trail board we will bring in a number of supervisors who we believe will testify favorable to her character and conduct as an officer.

She is an accomplished person that’s motivated and dedicated. Importantly, I think she is a kind-hearted person. I am asking that you give her a reprieve for the time being and support her. I think she is going to come out of this well and return to the department.

Chairperson Ramirez stated one of the forms that you gave does not have a letterhead it’s just written.


Atty. Fred Walker stated right those are the AA meetings.

Chairperson Ramirez stated I don’t see one from them that she has been attending; it’s just a log.

Atty. Fred Walker stated correct, just a phone number.

Atty. Nanowski stated the she just has two points to make before she starts in on her arguments.

One, in respect to the documents that Mr. Walker has provided you with concerning Sgt. Elhage, I am going to enter an objection on the record. One is to relevancy; two, I had no advanced notice that these documents were going to be entered.

I will say on August 10th I faxed to the DPLSA the documentation that I had concerning this case including a copy of the suspension petition that I filed but I did not receive the same consideration.

Second with respect to alcoholism and I wasn’t going to bring this issue up, but I think I have every right to bring this issue up because Mr. Walker has opened the door. This not the first time that we have dealt with an alcohol issue with respect to Sgt. Elhage. It is not the second time, but it’s the third time.

In two prior incidents they are very similar to what have occurred in Detroit on July 13th, only using other police jurisdictions. We have given her every consideration. Having said that we are here today to talk about her duty status. The standard is given the conduct that engaged in, should this Sergeant continue to work as a police officer?

In order to answer that question you need to look at the conduct that was involved. On July 13th Sgt Elhage was at a MGM Casino sitting at a slot machine. Nothing is wrong with that. She got money scattered around the floor and a crowd gathers. Security becomes concerned because they think it is going to cause a problem so they go over a ask her to pick up the money. She refuses and becomes combative and starts yelling racial epithets and they escort her from the casino.

In the parking lot she threatens to kill the two security officers who escorted her out of the building. They contact the Detroit Police Department and two Sergeants arrive on the scene not with the intent to arrest Sgt. Elhage, but to calm her down.

They tried to calm her down and what did she do? She yelled racial epithets and becomes combated and tries to assault one of the Sergeants. At that point an Inspector is called. He tries to calm her down and she assaults him. He wants her to get into his police car where it is nice and cool inside. She threatens him and his two children by...

Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, August 18, 2005 Page 11

Atty. Nanowski...stating that she will kill them.

At that point a commander arrives on the scene. Sgt. Elhage finally goes into a police car and tries to kick the windows out of the car and says “now can arrest me for a felony”.

They still do not arrest her but at this point you have nine DPD uniform officers there and five casino personnel. No one wants to arrest her; everybody just wants her to calm down. But she doesn’t and they end up arresting her for disorderly conduct.I guess the issue before you, does that conduct warrant a reduced status without pay? The department answer is yes.

I’ll make four points, one it’s a violation of the criminal code and a violation of the rules and regulations of this department.

Secondly, you got an issue of trust that is the basis of this department and basis of law enforcement. She is a supervisor we are not talking about a patrol officer.

Thirdly, one of the most important elements that I think you have to look at is the impact it has on the citizens of this community. They think when we send officers out that we are sending out people that we trust.

Fourth, the resources that this department poured into Sgt. Elhage on July 13th for three hours trying to calm her down before they finally arrested her. Based on the four points I would respectful request that you concur with the Chief recommendations and suspend Sgt. Elhage without pay.

Comm. Norris asked how are we doing on my project?

Atty. Nanowski stated on you project we have come up with time lines.

Comm. Norris stated let me tell you why, Mr. Walker I don’t think we had the pleasure of having you here before but we have been having an ongoing discussion.

I have no question in my mind and my fellow commissioners will exercise their own judgments that this conduct warrants a suspension without pay.

One of the things that I am very proud of and I think the Commission can only take half of the credit because I think the other half goes to the Chief and her predecessor is that we raised the bar.

There was a time when this kind of conduct, because there was no felony change would have gone without misconduct. If you take the racial slurs out of it, this conduct the violence alone will warrant a suspension without pay. I think when you add the slurs, it makes it all the more clear that this officer cannot currently carry out her duties effectively.

Having said that regardless of the history I do believe in redemption of a sort. It is clear that this officer is making efforts to turn things around. I am really pleased to hear that there is a trial board in September. That sounds we will get to some resolution on the disciplinary tract. I will support the suspension without pay knowing that before too long the disciplinary procedure will go through.

But I have an ongoing concern about officers that we suspend without pay. The conduct warrants it but then they hang out there for a very long time without the department taking disciplinary action. I think that is really unfair to the officers. I think the officer ought to have a right to have these thing reconsidered after some time has passed.

Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, August 18, 2005 Page 12

Atty. Nanowski stated to Comm. Norris that the Chief does take that very seriously in terms of a suspension of a duty status without pay. And as a result of that now you see these cases are set for trial board.

Chairperson Ramirez asked I did not see does she have prior suspensions?

Atty. Nanowski stated that since the DPOA opened the door I thought I would bring that up but yes.

Exec. Dir. Goss stated that he would like to recognize Lt. Shaper and Harrison Tolliver from the Office of the Chief Investigators.

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

Assist Prosecutor Kevin Floyd - Kent County

On July 19, 2004, Assistant Prosecutor Kevin Floyd pled no-contest to misdemeanor assault and battery for the May 23, 2003 altercation with his ex-wife. The aggravated stalking charge was dismissed.




In October 2004, Assistant Prosecutor Floyd was sentenced to 30 days in jail [with credit for 16 days already served]; court costs and fines; 24 months probation; pay $17,0000 in restitution to his ex-wife; 40 hours of community service; and attend anger management counseling.




At a July 12, 2005 probation violation hearing, Floyd was jailed for 93 days for his failure to: report to probation in November 2004; failure to complete community service; failure to attend anger management counseling; and failure to pay restitution.






ALSO SEE:


Kent County Assistant Prosecutor Kevin Floyd. May 23, 2007: Assault and battery; aggravated stalking charges.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2003/10/october-22-2003-assistant-prosecutor.html


Kent County Assistant Prosecutor Kevin Floyd. October 2003: Jailed for 7 days.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2003/10/assistant-prosecutor-kevin-floyd-kent.html


Kent County Assistant Prosecutor Kevin Floyd. February 27, 2004: Pretrial release revocation hearing for failure to pay electronic tether fees.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2004/02/assistant-prosecutor-kevin-floyd-kent.html


Kent County Assistant Prosecutor Kevin Floyd. December 30, 2005: Criminal contempt in civil case / divorce case.

http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2005/12/assistant-prosecutor-kevin-floyd-kent.html


Kent County Assistant Prosecutor Kevin Floyd. August 21, 2006: 30 day suspension ordered by State of Michigan Attorney Discipline Board for Floyd's assault and battery conviction.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2006/08/assistant-prosecutor-kevin-floyd-kent.html


Kent County Assistant Prosecutor Kevin Floyd. May 31, 2007: Attempted to appeal May 10, 2007, parenting time ruling.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2007/05/assistant-prosecutor-kevin-floyd-kent.html













Monday, July 11, 2005

Deputy Kevin Chittick - Sentenced - Lapeer SD



Also See:

Deputy Kevin Chittick charged with CSC









 
 
 
 
 
 





ORIGINAL CHARGES: FOURTEEN COUNTS OF 1ST DEGREE CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT; FIVE COUNTS OF 2ND DEGREE CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT; AND ONCE COUNT OF WILLFUL NEGLECT OF DUTY.

MDOC NUMBER: 536920
CURRENT STATUS: PRISONER
LOCATION: RYAN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
SECURITY LEVEL: II
EARLIEST RELEASE DATE: 04/09/2013
MAXIMUM DISCHARGE DATE: 05/09/2020

ACTIVE SENTENCES:
SENTENCE 1:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2002
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 2:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2002
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 3:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2002
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 4:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2002
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 5:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2002
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 6:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2002
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 7:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2002
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 8:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2002
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 9:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2002
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 10:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 10/01/2001
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 11:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 10/01/2001
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 12:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 10/01/2001
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 13:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 10/01/2001
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 14:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 3RD DEGREE [PERSON 13 THRU 15]

MCL #: 750.520D1A
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 7 YEARS 11 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 15 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 10/01/2001
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

INACTIVE SENTENCES:

SENTENCE 1:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 4TH DEGREE [PERSON 13-16]

MCL #: 750.520E1AA
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 1 YEAR 4 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 2 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2001
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005
DISCHARGE DATE: 05/09/2007

SENTENCE 2:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 4TH DEGREE [PERSON 13-16]

MCL #: 750.520E1AA
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 1 YEAR 4 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 2 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 07/01/2001
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005
DISCHARGE DATE: 05/09/2007

SENTENCE 3:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 4TH DEGREE [PERSON 13-16]

MCL #: 750.520E1AA
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 1 YEAR 4 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 2 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 10/01/2001
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005
DISCHARGE DATE: 05/09/2007

SENTENCE 4:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 4TH DEGREE [PERSON 13-16]

MCL #: 750.520E1AA
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 1 YEAR 4 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 2 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 10/01/2001
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005

SENTENCE 5:
OFFENSE: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT, 4TH DEGREE [PERSON 13-16]

MCL #: 750.520E1AA
COURT FILE # : 04008257-FC-H
COUNTY: LAPEER
CONVICTION TYPE: JURY
MINIMUM SENTENCE: 1 YEAR 4 MONTHS
MAXIMUM SENTENCE: 2 YEARS 0 MONTHS
DATE OF OFFENSE: 10/01/2001
DATE OF SENTENCE: 07/11/2005
DISCHARGE DATE: 05/09/2007











Prison bound
Ex-deputy gets seven to 15 years
PUBLISHED: Wednesday, July 13, 2005
The County Press
by KIMBERLY DUTKIEWICZ
http://countypress.com/stories/071305/loc_20050713006.shtml

LAPEER—Former Lapeer County sheriff's deputy Kevin Chittick will spend seven to 15 years in prison for having sex with two under-age girls while he was with the department.

In May, Chit-tick, 38, was found guilty of 19 counts of criminal sexual conduct. The Grand Blanc man was convicted of 14 counts of third-degree CSC. He faced eight counts of first-degree CSC and six counts of third-degree CSC.

Jurors found him not guilty on the eight counts of first-degree CSC, instead convicting him on the lesser offense of third-degree CSC. Had Chittick been convicted of first-degree CSC, he would have faced up to life in prison. Chittick also was convicted of five counts of fourth-degree CSC and willful neglect of duty for spending time at the girls' homes while on duty.

According to Prosecutor Byron Konschuh, Circuit Judge Nick Holowka sentenced Chittick to 7 years and 11 months up to 15 years on each of the 14 counts of third-degree CSC. He also gave Chittick 16 months to 2 years on each of the five counts of fourth-degree CSC and 270 days on the willful neglect of duty charge. The sentences run concurrently.

Konschuh said Chittick will be processed through Jackson State Prison. It's not known at this time where he will be placed afterwards. Chittick will do seven years and 11 months before being considered for parole, Konschuh said.

"He has given the law enforcement community a huge black eye," Konschuh said. "I hope citizens understand he is by far the exception, not the rule. I certainly hope citizens trust their police officers because they've earned it, despite the fact that Kevin Chittick has attempted to destroy law enforcement's reputation."

Chittick's attorney, Michael Manley of Flint, said, "We are obviously disappointed by the jury verdict and we will pursue all appeal options."

Before sentencing, one of the victims, Konschuh said, described how she had been hurt by Chittick's lies, his deceit. She feels betrayed. Based on her own testimony during trial, Konschuh said, the girl, now 16, was in a consensual relationship with Chittick. Now, Konschuh said, she realizes why it's illegal for someone under age 16 to have sex—they're not emotionally and socially prepared for such a relationship.

The charges stemmed from sexual assaults in Lapeer, Genesee and Oscoda counties from the end of 2001 through 2002. Both girls were between the ages of 13-15 at the time. The allegations came to light in January 2004, when one of the girls told her aunt.

The 16-year-old girl accused Chittick of sexually assaulting her in his home, during a horse trip to Oscoda County and a vacation to Florida—Chittick and his wife and the girl's family went—in the barn, pasture and pool at the other girl's home, and at a teacher's house. The girl testified Chittick sexually assaulted her in the back of a van as her father drove to Florida. She also said Chittick tried to assault her in the water during an outing to the ocean.

The other girl accused Chittick of grabbing her breasts while the two rode a horse together. She also testified Chittick removed her bathing suit and brushed his hand across her privates while she, the other girl and Chittick swam in her pool.

"Justice has been served," Lapeer County Sheriff Ron Kalanquin said. "A jury of his peers convicted him."

When Chittick was hired—he began in 1998, resigning from the department in May 2003—there was no way to foresee that these actions would have occurred, Kalanquin said.

Chittick had passed a very stringent written test, he was working on his bachelor's degree at the University of Michigan in Flint, he had been a paramedic in the Navy, had dive experience, and, Kalanquin said, he had a "glowing recommendation" from his shift supervisor at the Portsmouth, Va., police department. He also had worked with a federal drug task, which highly recommended him

Chittick passed his oral interview before two Lapeer County sheriff's department sergeants and a lieutenant, Kalanquin said. A background investigation also was done. Detective Sgt. Nancy Stimson had concerns, Kalanquin said, that Chittick might not fit in, that he might not be able to accept how things were done at the department. Still, Kalanquin hired Chittick.

"Looking back, I wouldn't have done it," Kalanquin said. "But at the time, there was no indication in the work that he did that he was drawn toward pedophilia. ... We had absolutely no documentation about this child business."

Kalanquin watched Chittick carefully during his 12-month probationary period, during which time people in the community were pleased with Chittick's performance.

The allegations, Kalanquin said, didn't come out until about seven or eight months after Chittick left the sheriff's department.

Police officers, Kalanquin said, must maintain strong personal and professional ethical values. There are 83 people working for the sheriff's department and, Kalanquin said, they are doing an excellent job. The single incident involving Chittick, Kalanquin said, is disappointing, but it doesn't cast a huge shadow on the department.

"The other employees are doing a marvelous job," Kalanquin said. "I think people understand that sometimes these things happen, despite our best efforts."