Monday, June 28, 2004

06282004 - Deputy Ivan James Morris - Muskegon County SD






On June 28, 2004, Muskegon County Sheriff Deputy Ivan James Morris assaulted his ex-girlfriend. According to reports the 6' 3", 280 pound sheriff deputy threw a drink at the 5' 2", 125 pound woman's head,; grabbed her by the neck; and then pushed her to the ground. Both the victim and an eye witness told the police, that during the attack,  Morris yelled that he was going to kill her.  Deputy Morris was arrested and charged with misdemeanor domestic violence.












The victim was granted a personal protective order immediately following Deputy Morris' release from jail. However, Deputy Morris filed a petition to have the PPO terminated.










During the non-jury trial in November, Deputy Morris claimed that the victim attacked him. Morris testified that he grabbed his ex-girlfriend's arm and "threw her down"...but that he did so to protect himself. "She was going to hit me...To keep a person off me, that what I would do to anyone." 











The Judge obviously did not believe Deputy Morris' claim that he acted in self-defense, as he found Morris guilty of misdemeanor domestic violence.








Muskegon County Sheriff George Jerkas did not dismiss Deputy Morris from the Sheriff Department for: 1] The false testimony he gave during trial regarding a crime he committed; or 2] for the domestic violence assault.








As of 2012, Deputy Ivan James Morris was still employed at the Muskegon County Sheriff Department.













Sheriff's Deputy convicted on domestic violence charge
A Muskegon County jail guard has been convicted of misdemeanordomestic violence.
November 17, 2004
By John S. Hausman
Muskegon Chronicle, MI
http://www.mlive.com/news/muchronicle/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1100708127304840.xml

After a non jury trial Tuesday, Chief 60th District Judge Andrew J. Wierengo III found Sheriff's Deputy Ivan James Morris, 37, of 6389 Evanston guilty as charged of assault and battery/domestic violence, first offense.

Wierengo ordered a domestic violence assessment and scheduled sentencing for Dec. 28. The maximum possible sentence is 93 days in jail.

The case stemmed from a June 28 incident between the off-duty Morris and his 39-year-old ex-girlfriend during Muskegon Summer Celebration in the crowded Mike's Bar, 555 W. Western.

Witness testimony conflicted at Morris' trial, but by all accounts an angry confrontation between the two ended with Morris pushing or throwing the woman to the floor of the bar.

Prosecution witnesses called it an unprovoked assault that started with Morris throwing his drink on the back of the woman's head, then grabbing her by the neck and swinging her onto the floor.

Morris, on the other hand, testified he acted in self-defense. He said his drink spilled accidentally on the woman when his arm was jostled in the crowd while he was carrying it across the room. He said she then threw several drinks she was carrying at him, then started to swing her fist at him. He testified he grabbed her arm and "threw her down" to defend himself, causing her to fall. "She was going to hit me. ... To keep a person off me, that's what I would do to anybody," Morris testified.

No one testified to any visible injuries on the victim.

The judge said that even if he believed most of Morris' account, the deputy still overreacted and of assault. Wierengo noted the difference in size of the two people: Morris told the judge he is approximately 6 feet 3 inches tall and weighs 280 pounds and the woman is 5 feet 3 inches tall and weighs 120 pounds. "It was a force that seemed to me disproportionate to the situation," Wierengo said.

Afterward, Sheriff George Jurkas suspended Morris from his job as a jail guard for five days without pay. "It's unfortunate," Jurkas said of the situation. "Hopefully he'll put it behind him, and it won't happen again."

The sheriff said the discipline would have been more severe had the victim suffered injuries. Jurkas also noted that Morris, unlike road-patrol deputies, does not carry a firearm in the course of his job, meaning a misdemeanor conviction won't render him unable to do his work.was guilty













Sheriff's Deputy Ivan James Morris faces domestic violence charge
Friday, July 09, 2004
By John S. Hausman
CHRONICLE STAFF WRITER
Muskegon Chronicle, MI
http://www.mlive.com/news/muchronicle/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1089386122149320.xml

A Muskegon County jail guard has been charged with domestic violence for allegedly throwing a drink at his ex-girlfriend's head, then grabbing her around the neck and pushing her, in a crowded Western Avenue bar last week during Muskegon Summer Celebration.

Sheriff's Deputy Ivan James Morris, 37, of 6389 Evanston was arraigned June 29 on the 93-day misdemeanor in front of visiting 60th District Judge Richard J. Pasarela, who set a $500 cash or surety bond. According to court records, Morris posted the bond June 30 and was released from the Ottawa County Jail, where he was transported after his arrest early June 29. Under the conditions of his bond, Morris was required to surrender all firearms to the Muskegon Police Department, to avoid contact with the alleged victim, her Burton Street residence and her place of employment, and to avoid alcohol and drugs. A pretrial conference was scheduled for 3 p.m. July 19 before 60th District Magistrate John Wiewiora.

The 39-year-old woman obtained a personal protection order the day of Morris' release, granted by Muskegon County Probate Judge Neil G. Mullally, also requiring Morris to stay away from her. According to court records, Morris filed a motion seeking termination of the order, and a hearing on that motion was scheduled for 11:15 a.m. July 16.

Sheriff George Jurkas said Morris will continue working as a corrections officer pending the outcome of the case. The sheriff said he made that decision on the advice of the county's human resources department. "Any type of disciplinary action will be taken afterthe case has gone through the judicial system," Jurkas said.

Jurkas said any discipline, if Morris is convicted, would have to follow rules spelled out in the county's labor contract with Teamsters Local 214, which represents the jail's corrections officers. Discipline could include suspension or termination, but firing would not be automatic. A misdemeanor conviction, unlike a felony record, does not bar a person from working as a deputy or police officer.

Because Morris is classified as a corrections officer-- not a law-enforcement officer, as road patrol deputies are classified -- his bond restrictions do not prevent him from doing his job, Jurkas said. Corrections deputies do not carry guns as part of their regular jail duties, and Morris will not do prisoner transports outside the jail while the firearmban continues, Jurkas said. The incident happened shortly before 11 p.m. the night of June 28 in Mike's Bar, 555 W. Western. The bar was crowded, with the festival under way across the street. A Muskegon police officer went to the bar after someone anonymously called 911 at 10:59 p.m. reporting a large number of people fighting.

According to a Muskegon police report in Morris' district court file, Morris was no longer in the bar when the Muskegon officer arrived. Four eyewitnesses-- the bar manager, two bartenders and a friend of the alleged victim -- told the officer that they saw the deputy enter the bar and push through a group of people to get at his ex-girlfriend, who was sitting at the bar with her back to him.

The eyewitnesses and the alleged victim said Morris then threw a drink at the back of her head. When she turned toward him, the 6-foot-3-inch, 270-pound deputy allegedly swore and yelled at the 5-foot-3-inch, 125-pound woman, "telling her that he was going to kill her," she told the Muskegon officer. While yelling, Morris allegedly grabbed her around the neck. The woman said she began to kick at him to defend herself, and he then allegedly began to push her backward while continuing to hold her neck. Other people in the bar then jumped on Morris and pulled him off and eventually kicked him out of thebar, several witnesses said.

The woman told police the two had dated for a short time, and that Morris "consistently harasses her by looking in her windows and following her around." She attributed it to his jealousy, claiming he had told her in the past that if he ever caught her with another man he would kill her.

A few minutes after 11 p.m., Morris called 911 from his cell phone, claiming the woman had assaulted him.

In a later interview, Morris told the officer he walked into the bar, saw his ex-girlfriend, walked past her and accidentally bumped arms with her, causing his drink to spill on her. He said she then "came up on me," causing him to grab her and push her away in self-defense. He said he felt threatened by her and that she had slapped him in the past. A friend of Morris' also told the investigating officer that he had seen the woman swinging her fists at Morris. Confronted with the other witnesses' reports of what happened, Morris replied that it was "possible" that he threw his drink at her but that he didn't remember it that way, adding that if that was what the witnesses said, "it must be what happened."

The Muskegon officer then arrested Morris, brought him to the police department's basement and made arrangements with sheriff's department command to book him. At Morris' request, he was given a breath test for alcohol, which showed a blood level of 0.061 percent, below the 0.08 percent level that's considered too intoxicated to drive legally.

The officer then took Morris to the Muskegon County Jail. A command officer told the Muskegon officer that the deputy would be transported to the Ottawa County Jail for lodging.



Saturday, June 26, 2004

06262004 - Officer Christopher Kennedy - Detroit PD






On June 26, 2004, Detroit Police Officer Christopher Kennedy forced his girlfriend into his car during an altercation.












Officer Kennedy drove around Detroit with his victim....and then drove towards the  Metro Airport. While driving, Kennedy repeatedly struck his girlfriend.....













...Officer Kennedy drove at a high rate of speed....was weaving in and out of traffic....and then lost control of his vehicle on Interstate 94.











Officer Christopher Kennedy was not charged with kidnapping. He was only charged with misdemeanor aggravated assaulted. On July 21, 2004, Officer Kennedy pled no-contest to the charge and was sentenced to probation and ordered to have no contact with the victim.












ALSO SEE:
DETROIT POLICE OFFICER CHRISTOPHER KENNEDY: VIOLATION OF PROBATION. AUGUST 12, 2004











BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS
Minutes of the Regular Board of Police Commissioners Meeting
Thursday, August 19, 2004
The regular meeting of the Detroit Board of Police Commissioners was held on Thursday, August 19, 2004, at 3:00 p.m., at Police Headquarters, 1300 Beaubien – Rm. 328-A, Detroit, Michigan 48226


4. SECRETARY’S REPORT – EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOSS
SUSPENSIONS
On August, 19, 2004, Police Officer Christopher Kennedy, badge 3666, assigned to the Sixth Precinct, was suspended without pay by Chief Ella M. Bully-Cummings.

On August 19, 2004, the Professional Accountability Bureau, Internal Affairs Section was notified of an allegation of misconduct on the part of Officer Christopher Kennedy. More specifically, the allegation concerned Officer Kennedy’s sentence to serve 93 days in the Wayne County Jail for violation of probation.

As a result, the Internal Affairs Section initiated an investigation, which revealed the following:
On June 26, 2004, at approximately 8:00 p.m., Officer Kennedy was at his girlfriend’s (hereinafter victim) home, located within the city of Detroit. As that time, a verbal argument ensued. During the course of the verbal argument, Officer Kennedy grabbed the victim by her arms and forced her into his vehicle whereupon he drove in and around the victim’s neighborhood, eventually making his way to the Detroit Metropolitan Airport (hereinafter Metro Airport).

During the course of travel, Officer Kennedy repeatedly struck the victim in the throat area, the leg area, and with his elbow struck the victim under her left eye.

Additionally, upon nearing Metro Airport, Officer Kennedy began driving at a high rate of speed, weaving in and out of traffic, and eventually losing control of the vehicle, which spun around on Interstate 94 and came to rest facing eastbound in the westbound lane of travel.

On June 28, 2004, the incident herein described was reported to the Professional Accountability Bureau, Internal Affairs Section. On June 30, 2004, a warrant request was presented to the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office.

On July 1, 2004, a warrant was issued against Officer Kennedy, charging him with “Aggravated Assault,” contrary to MCL 750.81a. Aggravated Assault is a misdemeanor punishable by one (1) year in jail and/or a fine of $1,000.00.

On July 21, 2004, Officer Kennedy appeared for pre-trail at the Thirty-Sixth District Court, Judge Jimmy Lee Gray, presiding. At that time, Officer Kennedy pled no contest to the aforementioned charge. Accordingly, Judge Gray sentenced Officer Kennedy to one (1) year reporting probation, 26 weeks of battering counseling, fines and costs, and ordered that Officer Kennedy have no contact with the victim.

On August 12, 2004, the victim reported to the Internal Affairs Section to file a complaint against Officer Kennedy. The victim indicated that Officer Kennedy had engaged in repeated and/or continuing contact with her that caused her to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, and/or harassed. The contact included death threats.

On that same date, Thirty-Sixth District Court issued a warrant for the arrest of Officer Kennedy for violation of probation. More specifically, the no contact provision. Bond was set in the amount of $15,000.00, cash/surety or 10%.

Also, on August 12, 2004, Officer Kennedy was arrested and conveyed to the Detroit Police Department, Sixth Precinct for processing. He was released after posting a bond.

On August 19, 2004, Officer Kennedy appeared before Judge Marylin E. Atkins, of Thirty-Sixth District Court, for a probation violation hearing. He was found guilty of violating his probation, and sentenced to serve 93 days in the Wayne County Jail.

Based on the above circumstances, it is recommended that Officer Kennedy 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.
Unless contravened by this Commission, the above suspension without pay will stand.
Exec. Dir. Goss stated oral arguments will waived for two weeks.

Comm. Holley asked is the only thing recommended for the person is without pay? Would this be subject to dismissal or…?

Exec. Dir. Goss stated that is a discipline matter.

Comm. Holley asked is the discipline handled by Internal Affairs?

Exec. Dir. Goss stated no, it is handled by the Disciplinary Administration Section.

Comm. Holley asked is that something that is handled between the police department and the union? Will it come before us?

Exec. Dir. Goss stated no, unless he appeals the dismissals.

Comm. Holley asked is it possible that all we are doing is basically determining whether or not he/she is getting paid while their on suspension?
Comm. Holley asked is that the only jurisdiction we have?

Exec. Dir. Goss stated yes.

Comm. Holley asked is that all jurisdiction we have?

Exec. Dir. Goss stated for right now.

Comm. Holley asked if the outcome is that the person is recommended that they go back on the police department, does that mean as a Commissioner I don’t have any jurisdiction over that?

Exec. Dir. Goss stated no, not that I know of.

Comm. Holley asked so I have jurisdiction if he appeals, but I have no jurisdiction if I disagree with the outcome of the decision?

(Atty. Hooks entered the conference room.)
Exec. Dir. Goss stated that is correct.

Vice-Chairperson Ramirez stated unless otherwise contravened by the Commission, we could either approve it or…. First of all, the arguments have been postponed for two weeks.

Atty. Hooks asked it two weeks or until next week?

Vice-Chairperson Ramirez stated two weeks.

Comm. Holley asked does that include all three suspensions?

Vice-Chairperson Ramirez stated right.

(Chairperson Blackwell entered the conference room.)

Comm. Holley stated I can decide whether the person should be paid or not while they are going through the process of being found guilty or not guilty, in terms of the discipline, as far as the police department is concerned. However, when the decision is made, then a person is put back on the police department after certain charges and so forth. He asked do I have any jurisdiction over that, unless it is only appealed to me when the officer disagrees.

Atty. Hooks asked when you say that the person will continue or not continue on the payroll, are you saying from this point until the time the arguments are made?

Comm. Holley stated I am really beyond the payroll. I am trying to decide whether a person could continue to be paid or not. However, once the disciplinary action is taken between the police department and the union or whatever they work for this police officer. If I disagree with what they work out,
I don’t have any jurisdiction to say that I think that this person should not be a police officer, if they decide that that person should be a police officer after the action.

Atty. Hooks stated it kind of sounds like there may be a mixing of apples and oranges. Because with a suspension, that is not considered a disciplinary action, that is strictly a…. What they look at, is the underlined conduct that led to the recommendation that is being presenting to you by the Chief. So that’s one thing. After the suspension action has come to you, I guess completion, if you want to put it in that way, that the officer will be charged with conduct unbecoming or so forth and that starts a discipline track.

Comm. Holley stated or he may be vindicated.

Atty. Hooks stated exactly, he may be fully exonerated. Either no charges will be brought or after the disciplinary charges are dropped or he can even….

Comm. Holley asked as a Commissioner and on the organization chart, if I disagree with the final action, I have no jurisdiction as a Commissioner to say that I think that…?


Atty. Hooks stated it will come to you to be finalized only if the action has gone, they have changed it now, it used to be from a Chief’s Hearing to a Trial Board and then after that finding by the Trail Board the member had the right to appeal to either the Board of Police Commissioners or to Arbitration. If it went to arbitration that was binding or the Board had no say so, if it came to you then you did have the right to decide whether or not you were going to uphold whatever was meted out at the Trial Board or to alter that in some way.


Comm. Holley stated I am appalled by the fact that I can only intervene or I can only have a part to play in this, if a police officer disagrees with it. If I disagree with the findings, I have no part to play. He asked is that true?


Atty. Hooks stated that is true.

Comm. Holley asked as a Board of Police Commissioner, I have Commission on one hand and no authority on the other. I feel like there are some decisions that I disagree with. He asked if a police officer disagrees and wants to appeal  to me, then who would I appeal to, if I disagree with the decision that they gave to the police officer?

Atty. Hooks stated the only time that you cannot intervene or step in, is if that police officer determines or decides that he wants to go to arbitration, you have no say over that.

Comm. Holley asked that if I, as a person that represents the community, disagrees with the final decision of the disciplinary action on this police officer, he/she goes back on the police force and I disagree with that decision…. That should be looked into because it is not fair to the community.

Atty. Hooks stated that might be an issue that we will have to explore, but as it stands now….

Comm. Holley asked am I making sense?

Vice-Chairperson Ramirez stated I understand what you are saying.

Chairperson Blackwell stated it’s just not part of the authority of the Board of Police Commissioners, but I know what you are saying.

Comm. Holley stated that is how you get police officers, who perhaps should not be on the police force or back on the police force, then why am I here?

Atty. Hooks stated you still play a very important role?

Comm. Holley stated ya’ll keep telling me that.

Atty. Hooks stated sometimes it is good to explore these other areas to see whether or not we need to step in or what we need to look at. But as it stands now, when it goes to binding arbitration, you don’t have that.
There were no contravention’s to the above suspension without pay.




Thursday, June 24, 2004

06242004 - Chief Daniel Black - Lake Angelus PD


In 2004, Chief Daniel Black of the Lake Angelus PD was under investigation for 16 allegations against him. The allegations against Black were never disclosed to the public.





Also See:
CHIEF DANILE BLACK CHARGED WITH FOUR COUNTS OF 1ST DEGREE CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT; TWO COUNTS OF 2ND DEGREE CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT; AND FOUR COUNTS OF 3RD DEGREE CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT. [2007]






Police chief retires
The Oakland Press
Published: Wednesday, October 27, 2004
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2004/10/27/localnews/20041027-archive3.txt

Chief Daniel Black has retired from the Lake Angelus Police Department, just months after a spate of allegations surfaced against him.

The city investigated the allegations - which were never released publicly - and found no substance to any of them. Black had been criticized by residents and even some city officials for improper conduct.

The city revitalized its Law Enforcement Committee to look into allegations, which were made shortly after the termination of several reserve police officers in February.

Black submitted his request for retirement Oct. 11. It will take effect Nov. 5, said city Clerk Rosalie Lake.
"We're in the process of looking for a new chief," she said. "We're accepting resumes."

Black's wife, Sherry, remains employed with the Lake Angelus Police Department, Lake said, where she is a sergeant. Neither Dan nor Sherry Black could be reached for comment.

Earlier this year, city officials gave Black immunity in exchange for his response to the 16 allegations against him. A report was compiled by city attorneys, but it was never released to the public.

The Lake Angelus Police Department was also under investigation by the Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement Standards.
Officials there have said the investigation is administrative, rather than criminal. The commission provides certification for police officers.

Commission officials could not be reached for comment.







Police chief won't lose his job, council says
The Oakland Press
Published: Tuesday, August 17, 2004
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2004/08/17/localnews/20040817-archive5.txt

Indicating there was little substance to a spate of allegations against him, the Lake Angelus City Council said Police Chief Daniel Black will keep his job.

Several residents and police officers spoke out in support of Black at Monday night's meeting - some of whom had been critical of him in the past.

Resident Cheryl Case, long a critic of Black's, publicly apologized to the chief and the City Council for speaking out about the allegations. She also praised the police department.

"I feel a lot safer knowing they are here," she said.
The chief's wife, Sherry Black, also supported her husband. She is a sergeant with the Lake Angelus Police Department.

"I'm Sherry Black, and obviously I'm behind the chief," she said.

Last month, city officials gave Black immunity in exchange for his response to the 16 allegations against him. City attorney Dan Christ investigated the allegations and officials said there was no substance to them.

The allegations lodged against Black have never been publicly disclosed.

"If the allegations were that serious, why were they not brought to our attention earlier?" asked Councilman Gary Parlove. "The most significant thing is this: All the information that came to us came from people who were no longer employed by the police department. It was all secondary evidence."

And even though Black will keep his job, the Lake Angelus Police Department is under investigation by the Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement Standards. Officials there say the investigation is administrative, rather than criminal. MCOLES provides certification for police officers Councilwoman Lee McNew, who said at the July 15 meeting that she had lost confidence in Black, said the report compiled by Christ -which has not been publicly released - showed no reason to fire the chief.

"We feel the status quo is the best routine at this point," McNew said. "There are many changes that need to be made (in the department), and the law enforcement committee can take care of that."

McNew did not elaborate on what changes should be made.

The city's Law Enforcement Committee, which was revitalized this year to look into allegations made shortly after the termination of several reserve police officers in February, is made up of Parlove, resident Jim Cortez and Mayor George Frisch.

Cortez said at Monday's meeting that there was an "organized smear campaign" trying to get Black fired.

"A lot of you have been misled," he said.








Little city, strange problems
Published: Saturday, July 24, 2004
The Oakland Press
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2004/07/24/opinions/20040724-archive.txt

Although it's one of the smallest communities in Oakland County, Lake Angelus has a lot of eyes on it these days.

At the center of the rather confusing and bizarre story is Police Chief Daniel Black, who's under investigation by the Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement.

But that's about all anyone knows, including a number of irate residents who are upset with city officials for refusing to disclose what's going on.

So far, the City Council has done little that makes any sense other than showing its arrogance.
The council voted to give Black immunity in return for responding to the 16 allegations against him. Talk about your sweetheart deals. There was no other way to get some honest answers?

Only after that information is obtained will council members decide whether to release it to the people they work for - Lake Angelus residents.

All of these problems in a community of 326 people, according to the 2000 census - that's down from 328 in 1990. Perhaps they should look into contracting for their police protection with the Sheriff's Department.








City gives police chief immunity
Published: Friday, July 16, 2004
The Oakland Press
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2004/07/16/localnews/20040716-archive1.txt

LAKE ANGELUS - City officials have given Police Chief Daniel Black immunity in exchange for his response to a laundry list of allegations against him.

But, so far, officials have refused to disclose what the 16 allegations are against Black. State officials, however, revealed that there is an investigation into the department.

At a special meeting Thursday night, the City Council voted to grant Black the measure of protection. Under United States v. Garrity, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police officers cannot incriminate themselves when ordered to answer questions.

Under Garrity, city attorney Dan Christ said, Black can't face prosecution for his answers. However, police officers can be fired for failing to answer questions.
Christ said he plans to meet with Black in the coming days and will draft a report for the City Council, which will then decide whether to make the document public.

The Lake Angelus Police Department, which is among the smallest departments in Oakland County, is under investigation by the Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement Standards, said MCOLES Deputy Director Gary Ruffini.

"We're looking into some issues," he said.

Ruffini declined further comment but said the investigation is administrative in nature rather than criminal.

MCOLES provides certification for police officers.

A local law enforcement official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the department may have allowed officers to maintain their certifications by claiming they worked in Lake Angelus as police William Kucyk, Black's attorney, declined to comment on the allegations.

Residents at Thursday's meeting said the community had lost faith in Black. Some called for his dismissal and others expressed frustration at the way the City Council has handled the issue.

"His credibility is impugned to the point that there's no respect in the community," said resident Ed Adler. "You really should consider replacing him."

As an at-will employee, Black can be fired at any time - and for any reason - by the City Council.

"(Black) really ought to be given a chance to respond," said Councilwoman Lee McNew. "But we've lost confidence."

So far, the issue has been under the purview of the Law Enforcement Committee, which was revitalized this year to look into allegations made shortly after the terminations of several reserve police officers in February.

"It was to knock out all the rumors, so to speak, floating about the community," said Councilman Gary Parlove.

Officials said Thursday that they didn't know if an outside agency, such as the Michigan State Police, would ever investigate the matter.

"It's all out in the open now, and it will be addressed," Parlove said.

Meanwhile, state officials are investigating matters of police certification.David King, spokesman for MCOLES, said officers must work as police officers with full police power to maintain their certification.

In an investigation, MCOLES officials look out for obvious fraud - such as paying someone $1 a year simply to keep them on the books, a practice more common when these standards were initiated more than two decades ago, King said.

However, many smaller departments, particularly in northern Michigan, rely on part-time officers, some of whom work for more than one department.

"We look for evidence that there is a regular presence of this person as an employee," King said.

MCOLES requested payroll records from the city's police department dating back to 1999, Parlove said at Monday night's meeting.

Parlove said at Thursday's meeting that the request was caused, in part, by Sherry Black's certification. Sherry Black is the chief's wife and a sergeant with the Lake Angelus Police Department.

MCOLES has no criminal authority, but if fraud is found, the case could then be turned over to the state Attorney General's Office.

Staff writer Stephen Frye contributed to this report.








Chief to meet with city attorney
Published: Tuesday, July 13, 2004
The Oakland Press
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2004/07/13/localnews/20040713-archive1.txt

With some residents calling for his dismissal, Lake Angelus Police Chief Daniel Black will get a chance to refute allegations of misconduct.

Black will meet with a city attorney today to be informed of the 16 allegations - which have not been disclosed - made against him, said City Attorney Lawrence Ternan. He said lawyers are looking into criminal and noncriminal violations because of the allegations.

"At this point we'd really like Dan Black to review what the issues are and respond to them," Ternan said.

Black, who was not at Monday night's City Council meeting, could not be reached for comment.

Many residents who attended the meeting expressed frustration that Black was still chief. They also seemed angry that officials were investigating the allegations internally and had not contacted an outside agency to look into the matter.

Council members said they were looking into the allegations and that investigations of this manner take time. Still, some officials said residents were getting antsy for a resolution to the issue.

"I feel very strongly that we need to act quickly," Councilwoman Lee McNew said. "The longer this drags on is bad for us and it is bad for (Black). It looks like we're not doing anything."

Allegations have swirled around Black for several months. City officials have refused to disclose the allegations against Black. The Michigan Coalition on Law Enforcement Standards requested payroll records from the city's police department dating back to 1999, said Councilman Gary Parlove at Monday night's meeting.

Parlove, a member of the Law Enforcement Committee - formed to look into allegations made against Black - said the city's investigation of the allegations is moving along.

"There's a process that needs to be followed," he said.










Police chief faces allegations
Published: Thursday, June 24, 2004
The Oakland Press
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2004/06/24/policecourt/20040624-archive0.txt

LAKE ANGELUS - Lake Angelus officials are looking into allegations against the city's police chief, but refused to disclose the nature of the alleged offenses.

The Law Enforcement Committee, formed to look into allegations made against Chief Daniel Black, met Monday night. Mayor George Frisch said the City Council will meet in the coming weeks to determine how to proceed in probing the allegations, which he refused to discuss.

The next regular meeting of the City Council is July 12.

"All I can say is we are looking into the matter," he said.
Pierre Beaudet, a councilman, also declined to say what the chief was being accused of, saying only that officials would turn any information over to an outside body if it deemed necessary.

"There's a lot of stuff going on," Beaudet said.

The allegations could stem from the recent firing of a police lieutenant. Beaudet said the lieutenant was fired because of budget woes and he would not say whether the lieutenant was the one making allegations against Black.

"Most of the accusations are unsubstantiated at this point," Beaudet said. "But we have to find out what's what. I think we all recognize something has to be done with the police department."

Beaudet said the firing of the lieutenant was not handled well. He also said in a small town like Lake Angelus - which has about 300 residents - it is important to nip rumors in the bud to avoid damaging reputations.

Jim Cortez, a member of the Law Enforcement Committee, declined to comment on Monday's meeting, which was open to the public. He said the City Council will be informed of the situation and another public meeting will be held soon.

Black did not return calls seeking comment.

Friday, June 18, 2004

06182004 - Firefighter Michael Boyd - Third Offense - Southgate FD

On June 18, 2004 Firefighter Michael Boyd [Southgate FD] was charged with menacing.

Firefighter Michael Boyd [Southgate FD]: Assault charges [June 18, 2004] http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2004/06/firefighter-michael-boyd-southgate-fd.html



06182004 - Firefighter Michael Boyd - Second Offense - Southgate FD




FIREFIGHTER MICHAEL BOYD, SOUTHGATE FD:
JUNE 18, 2004











FIREFIGHTER MICHAEL BOYD, SOUTHGATE FIRE DEPARTMENT. JUNE 18, 2004. CHARGES: FOURTH-DEGREE MISDEMEANOR DISORDERLY PERSON; FIRST-DEGREE MISDEMEANOR ASSAULT; FOURTH-DEGREE MISDEMEANOR MENACING.

PLED GUILTY TO FOURTH-DEGREE MISDEMEANOR DISORDERLY PERSON. SENTENCED TO 30 DAYS IN JAIL, SUSPENDED ON CONDITION NO SIMILAR OFFENSE AND REMAIN LAW ABIDING FOR THE NEXT 1 YEAR. ALL OTHER CHARGES DISMISSED. [AUGUST 30, 2004].






ALSO SEE:
FIREFIGHTER MICHAEL BOYD, SOUTHGATE FD: JULY 01, 2006

Original charge: minor misdemeanor disorderly person.
Sentence: Pled guilty. Fined $32.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2006/07/firefighter-michael-boyd-southgate-fd.html




FIREFIGHTER MICHAEL BOYD, SOUTHGATE FD: JULY 15, 2006
Original charge: fourth-degree misdemeanor disorderly person.
Sentence: Pled guilty. Fined $32.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2006/07/firefighter-michael-boyd-southgate-fd_15.html




FIREFIGHTER MICHAEL BOYD, SOUTHGATE FD: AUGUST 17, 2007
Original charges: first-degree felony aggravated burglary; three counts of first-degree misdemeanor assault; and second-degree misdemeanor resisting arrest.
Sentence: Plea bargain. Pled guilty to one first-degree misdemeanor assault. In exchange, all other charges were dropped. Sentenced to 30 days in jail, suspended on condition no similar offense and remain law abiding for one year. [08/24/2007].
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2007/08/firefighter-michael-boyd-southgate-fire.html




FIREFIGHTER MICHAEL BOYD, SOUTHGATE FD: DECEMBER 03, 2007.
Original charges: Speeding. 50 /35. Violation of the conditions of his August 2007 sentencing: 30 day jail term was suspended on the condition that Boyd remain law abiding for one year.
Sentence: Paid $32 fine.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2007/12/firefighter-michael-boyd-southgate-fire.html




FIREFIGHTER MICHAEL BOYD, SOUTHGATE FD: AUGUST 23, 2008
Original charges: Two counts of first degree misdemeanor assault.
Sentence: Plea agreement. Pled guilty to one count of misdemeanor assault and the other charges was dismissed. Sentenced to 30 days in jail, suspended on the conditions that the law be abided by. [4/08/09]. NOTE: When Boyd accepted this plea [4/08/09] he was also facing charges for a March 30, 2009 drunk driving offense.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2008/08/firefighter-michael-boyd-southgate-fire.html




FIREFIGHTER MICHAEL BOYD, SOUTHGATE FD: MARCH 30, 2009
Original charges: First-degree misdemeanor carrying concealed weapon; first-degree misdemeanor operating vehicle under influence; first-degree misdemeanor driving with suspended / revoked license; no tail lights; and driving without seatbelt.
Sentence: Plea agreement. Pled guilty to first-degree misdemeanor operating vehicle under influence; all other charges dismissed. Sentenced to 10 days in jail, suspended on condition that the law be abided by for one year; driver's license suspended for 180 days; first offender program.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2009/03/firefighter-michael-boyd-southgate-fd.html




FIREFIGHTER MICHAEL BOYD, SOUTHGATE FD: MARCH 01, 2011.
Original charges: First-degree misdemeanor domestic violence.
CASE STILL PENDING.
http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2011/10/firefighter-michael-boyd-southgate-fd.html


















JUNE 18, 2004: CASE # CRB0400688A. FOURTH-DEGREE MISDEMEANOR DISORDERLY PERSON. PLED GUILTY TO. SENTENCED TO 30 DAYS IN JAIL, SUSPENDED ON CONDITION NO SIMILAR OFFENSE AND REMAIN LAW ABIDING FOR THE NEXT ONE YEAR. [08/30/2004].















JUNE 18, 2004: CASE # CRB0400688B. FIRST-DEGREE MISDEMEANOR ASSAULT. CASE DISMISSED AT THE REQUEST OF THE PROSECUTOR. [08/30/2004].














JUNE 18, 2004: CASE # CRB 0400688C. FOURTH-DEGREE MISDEMEANOR MENACING. CASE DISMISSED AT THE REQUEST OF THE PROSECUTOR. [08/30/2004].

06182004 - Firefighter Michael Boyd - First Offense - Southgate FD



Firefighter Michael Boyd, charged with disorderly person: June 18, 2004.

Firefighter Michael Boyd [Southgate FD]: Assault charges [June 18, 2004]

http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2004/06/firefighter-michael-boyd-southgate-fd.html






Monday, June 14, 2004

06142004 - Officer George Hubbard - Sentenced - Muskegon Heights PD

Also See:

Officer George Hubbard charged with domestic violence






Command officer pleads guilty to misdemeanor
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
May 19, 2004 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
A suspended Muskegon Heights Police command officer has pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of domestic violence, saying in court he rammed his girlfriend’s car with his pickup truck while she was in the car.

Sgt. George Hubbard pleaded to the reduced charge Tuesday on the eve of his scheduled trial on felony charges of assault with a dangerous weapon and malicious destruction of personal property causing damage between $1,000 and $20,000. Those charges weredropped.

The domestic violence conviction carries a maximum sentence of 93 days in jail and two years on probation. Muskegon County Circuit Judge James M. Graves Jr. scheduled sentencing for June 14.

The plea came after an unusual series of events surrounding the reluctant victim — including her brief arrest Tuesday morning after she turned herself in on a “material witness” warrant from the Muskegon County Prosecutor’s Office.

The woman recanted her accusations against Hubbard shortly after the Dec. 29, 2002, incident and refused to testify against him. She asserted her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination based on the possibility of being prosecuted on charges ofperjury or filing a false police report.

However, the prosecutor’s office last week granted her immunity from prosecution, in a bid to force her to testify. Prosecutor Tony Tague said she fled out the back door of her workplace after a Muskegon police detective showed up to reinterview her in preparation for the trial, leading to the material-witness arrest warrant.

Even after turning herself in Tuesday, “she was unwilling to talk to prosecutors, but we intended on proceeding (with her) as a hostile witness,” Tague said. “We were convinced that her initial report was accurate, and that it was due to ‘domestic violence syndrome’ that she was refusing to cooperate.

“Despite her lack of cooperation, because Hubbard knew we intended on proceeding, he finally agreed to plead to domestic violence,” Tague said.

The prosecutor said the victim’s lack of cooperation would have made a felony conviction difficult at trial, hence the plea agreement. “He committed domestic violence, and at least his record will now reflect that he in fact did assault her,” Tague said.Hubbard has been on unpaid suspension from his job since shortly after his arrest following the incident, and under the conditions of his bond he has been forbidden to carry a firearm.

His future job prospect was not immediately clear. Unlike a felony conviction, a misdemeanor record does not automatically bar a person from serving as a police officer in Michigan. However, state gun laws prevent Hubbard from carrying a firearm for theduration of whatever sentence Graves imposes, Tague said.

In court Tuesday, Hubbard said he rammed the woman’s car outside her home while she was in the car, knowing that it placed her in fear, Tague said.

Tague said the sergeant should be fired.

“As a Muskegon Heights command officer he should have known better, and we’re hoping that Chief (George) Smith (Jr.) takes definitive action against Hubbard,” Tague said. “This conduct is unbecoming a police officer, and (Hubbard) clearly lacks the judgment to continue carrying a badge.”

“I will decide after the sentence what to do at this end,” Smith said later when told of Tague’s comments.

“However, I do have some concerns over the fact that the victim was arrested prior to this plea being taken,” Smith said. “She, being the mother of (several) children, and employed, was told she would be incarcerated. So all of those things would be taken into consideration (in deciding Hubbard’s future with the police force).”

The prosecution’s case against Hubbard would have been difficult without testimony from the victim.

After initially telling Muskegon police that Hubbard twice rammed her vehicle while she was in it — once outside her home, once in the Muskegon Police Department parking lot after he allegedly followed her there — the woman soon recanted.

She wrote in a February 2003 notarized affidavit, and later testified under oath at Hubbard’s 60th District Court preliminary hearing, that the sergeant did not deliberately ram her car, but accidentally slid into it once on the ice while he was trying to leave her driveway with her car blocking his way.

Until last week, prosecutors appeared to be intending to proceed without her testimony.

However, that prospect got even tougher after Graves ruled April 29 that the woman’s initial statements to police could not be admitted at trial because the defense has never had — and presumably never would have — a chance to cross-examine her. Citing arecent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Graves decided allowing jurors to hear about her statements to police would violate Hubbard’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him.

That ruling left, essentially, only tapes of the woman’s calls to 911, plus photographs and estimates of damage to her car, as evidence against Hubbard, unless prosecutors could find a way to get her to testify at trial.

Hence the series of events that ended in Hubbard’s plea bargain.















Police command officer gets probation
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
June 14, 2004 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
A suspended Muskegon Heights Police command officer has been sentenced to 18 months’ probation for domestic violence, a misdemeanor.

Muskegon County’s 14th Circuit Judge James M. Graves Jr. pronounced the sentence this morning.

The conviction stemmed from a December 2002 incident in which Sgt. George Hubbard, while off duty, bumped his girlfriend’s car with his pickup truck while she was in the car in the driveway outside her home. At the time of his guilty plea last month, Hubbard said to Graves that the bumping was intentional.

The sentence leaves the job future of the 54-year-old Hubbard in doubt. Unlike a felony conviction, a misdemeanor record does not automatically bar a person from serving as a police officer. However, state gun laws prevent Hubbard from carrying a firearmfor the duration of his probation, according to criminal-justice officials.

Hubbard has been on unpaid suspension from his job since shortly after his arrest following the incident. Under the conditions of his bond he has been forbidden to carry a firearm.

Hubbard and his lawyer, Al Swanson, had asked Graves to give Hubbard what many first-time domestic violence offenders get: a sentence to “spousal abuse treatment” under a provision of the law that expunges the conviction if treatment is completed successfully.

But Senior Assistant Muskegon County Prosecutor Joseph Bader asked Graves instead to impose the longest allowable probation, two years. The toughest possible sentence would be 93 days in jail, but first-time offenders almost never get jail time. Hubbardhas no prior criminal record.

The judge came down closer to the prosecutor’s position.

Muskegon Heights Police Chief George Smith Jr. attended Hubbard’s sentencing. Asked outside court afterwards about the possible impact on Hubbard’s job, Smith at first declined to comment but then added: “Just remember what he said when it started — he said they’re trying to lynch him. I think it’s now complete.”

As conditions of Hubbard’s probation, the judge ordered that he spend 30 days under “house arrest” on electronic tether, but with work release allowed if Hubbard is employed; that he pay $570 in fines and costs; that he complete a 24-week domestic violence program through Catholic Social Services; and that he not use or possess alcohol or other intoxicating drugs.

Graves also ordered Hubbard to have no contact with the victim, but only if she wishes none. The judge said she can request that provision be lifted if she wishes.

Finally, the judge ordered Hubbard to pay restitution of $2,711, the amount of damage prosecutors say was done to her car. However, that too may be a moot point: The victim has filed a statement with the state probation office stating that Hubbard has already made good on the damage, and Graves said he would not force Hubbard to pay any money the victim does not want.

The victim has not cooperated with the prosecution and has said in writing that Hubbard did not intentionally ram her vehicle, recanting her initial statements to Muskegon police.

But on the crucial point at issue — invoking the spousal abuse statute or not — the judge disappointed the defense.

Speaking before sentencing, Graves said Hubbard’s status as a police officer did not influence his decision. And the judge said he was not expressing an opinion on Hubbard’s career future. “As far as your job, that’s between you and your employer,” Graves said. “I’m not stopping you (from working as a police officer).

“You certainly were not abusing your police powers. You were not abusing your badge,” Graves said. He also noted Hubbard’s lack of any prior criminal record, the fact the victim was not injured, and the fact the conviction was a misdemeanor as reasons not to send Hubbard to jail.

However, in defense of the straight probation sentence -- which could imperil Hubbard’s job -- Graves said the facts Hubbard admitted in court last month might have supported a felony conviction, and noted that Hubbard violated the conditions of his bondat least once by contacting the victim in early 2003.

Before sentencing, Hubbard asked for leniency. “I am not a violent person,” he said.

“I’ve done everything in my life right. I’ve tried to do the right thing. I’m asking that you give me a second chance in my life and my career.”



















Former police officer sentenced after ramming his girlfriend's car
WOOD TV News
July 14, 2004
http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1939467&nav=0RceNtUZ
A former Muskegon Heights police officer accused of ramming his girlfriend's car is sentenced to18 months probation and fines. George Hubbard was charged with two felonies - assault with a deadly weapon and malicious destruction of property.

In February, he pled guilty to a lesser charge of a misdemeanor count of domestic violence.

Hubbard has been on unpaid suspension since he was charged in December 2002.











**************************************************************************


Heights sergeant jailed in ramming
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
December 30, 2002 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
A Muskegon Heights police officer has been arrested after allegedly ramming his girlfriend’s car with his own vehicle several times Sunday morning.

It is the second arrest of a Muskegon Heights officer for a driving-related incident this month.

Sgt. George Hubbard, a Muskegon Heights Police Department command officer, was lodged in the Ottawa County Jail this morning on un- specified charges. He’s expected to arraigned in Muskegon County’s 60th District Court sometime today.

Authorities could not specify this morning what crime he will be charged with.

It’s not clear why Hubbard is being held in the Ottawa County Jail, since his alleged offense occurred in the city of Muskegon.

Hubbard was allegedly at his girlfriend’s house at 323 W. Forest Sunday morning when she arrived home, according to the Muskegon County Prosecutor’s office. When she left again in her vehicle, Hubbard allegedly followed her and rammed her car twice, on Peck Street near Forest Avenue and again in the parking lot of the Muskegon Police Department at 933 Terrace, the prosecutor’s office said.

The incident was reported to police at 7:28 a.m. Sunday. Authorities would not identify the alleged victim, but said she was not injured in the incident.

Muskegon Heights Police Chief George Smith Jr. said he would speak to Hubbard after he’s released from jail. Smith said Hubbard would likely be suspended from duty until the matter is cleared up.

“It’s a domestic situation, and there are usually two sides to those situations, so we’ll wait and see,” Smith said. “I’ll deal with him when he’s released.”

Hubbard is the second Muskegon Heights police officer to be charged with a driving offense this month.

Officer Neil Siebert is currently charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, a felony, and assault and battery and reckless driving, both misdemeanors, for an alleged “road rage” incident on I-96 on Dec. 7.

Siebert allegedly tailgated another motorist on the highway, bumped his car several times, cut him off at an exit and struck him several times, according to authorities. A preliminary examination has been scheduled for Jan. 8.

Another Muskegon Heights police command officer, Roger Kitchen, was suspended and demoted this year after he was stabbed while on duty.

Kitchen was suspended for two weeks without pay and demoted from sergeant to patrol officer for violating department policy, said Smith.




















Police command officer to be arraigned
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
December 30, 2002 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
Sgt. George Hubbard, a command officer with the Muskegon Heights Police Department, was lodged in the Ottawa County Jail this morning on a vehicle-related charge.

Hubbard allegedly rammed his former girlfriend’s vehicle with his own vehicle over the weekend while she was inside the car, according to Brett Gardner, Muskegon County’s chief assistant prosecutor. It’s not known whether any injuries occurred.

Hubbard is expected to be arraigned today in Muskegon County’s 60th District Court. Officials were not able to specify the nature of the charges this morning. Muskegon Heights officials could not be reached for comment.





















Officer charged in ‘angry’ ramming
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
December 31, 2002 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
A Muskegon woman said her former boyfriend, a Muskegon Heights police officer, appeared to be “intoxicated and angry” Sunday morning when he chased her in his pickup truck and rammed her car twice, once during a circular chase in a police department parking lot.

The officer, Sgt. George Hubbard, denied the story, claiming he only used his truck to push the woman’s car out of the way after she blocked him in an alley near her home.

Hubbard, 52, of Muskegon Heights, was arraigned Monday on single counts of felonious assault and malicious destruction of personal property. A preliminary examination was set for Jan. 13 at 10 a.m. in Muskegon County’s 60th District Court.

He was released from jail late Monday on a $5,000 signature bond on the condition that he have no contact with the alleged victim.

Hubbard’s immediate work status is unclear. Muskegon Heights Police Chief George Smith said Monday that he would probably suspend Hubbard until the situation is resolved, but Smith was not available for comment this morning.

Hubbard was arrested Sunday after his 38-year-old former girlfriend told police he followed her and rammed her car with his pickup truck early Sunday.

The woman claims she was returning home from a store around 6:30 a.m. when she discovered Hubbard sitting on her property in his red Chevrolet truck, according to a Muskegon Police Department report.

She told police she made contact with Hubbard, thought he appeared to be “intoxicated and angry,” and decided to leave in her car. Hubbard later registered a blood alcohol level of .023, which is not considered legally intoxicated in Michigan.

The woman said Hubbard followed her in his truck, managed to block her vehicle on Sanford Street between Forest and Dale, got out of his truck and ran toward her car. The woman said she backed up and drove to Peck Street, where Hubbard rammed her car inthe rear with his truck, the report said.

She said she then called police on a cellular phone and drove toward the Muskegon Police Department on Terrace Street. She said Hubbard followed her to the police department, which was closed at the time, and used his truck to chase her car in repeated circles around the parking lot, the report said.

The woman said Hubbard used his truck to ram the front of her car before leaving the scene.

Muskegon police inspected the wo-man’s car and found the front end “heavily damaged” with a buckled hood and the rear end damaged a-round the trunk area, the police re-port said. They found traces of white paint on the front of Hubbard’s truck.

The woman, who was not injured, said she had been involved in a romantic relationship with Hubbard for the past two years.

When interviewed by police at his home Sunday, Hubbard gave a different version of events.

He said his relationship with the woman recently ended after she complained about his presence at a local restaurant with two other women, according to the police report. Despite that, he said he decided to visit her early Sunday, after spending the prior evening at a local VFW post with friends.

Hubbard said he talked with the woman when she came home Sunday morning, then decided to leave. He said she begged him to stay, then used her car to block his truck in an alley where he was parked, the report said.

He said he could have backed up and left, but decided to push her car out of the way with his truck, according to the police report. He said that was the only contact his truck made with the woman’s vehicle. Hubbard said he followed her to the Muskegon Police Department but decided to leave after she started yelling at him.

















Despite officers’ arrests, leaders support chief  John S. Hausman
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
January 18, 2003
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
Key Muskegon Heights city officials firmly support Police Chief George Smith, despite what the mayor calls a “disturbing” number of felony charges against city police officers.

Three, including two command officers, have been charged with felonies in the last 30 days.

And Muskegon County Prosecutor Tony Tague says he is working with the chief to correct “problems within the department,” while urging city officials to take a hard look at the situation.

Smith and other command officers could not be reached for comment Friday.

Sgt. Phillip E. Coleman, 41, became the most recent officer to be arraigned when he was charged Thursday with criminal sexual conduct and writing non-sufficient funds checks.

On Dec. 31, Sgt. George Hubbard, 52, was charged with assault with a deadly weapon for ramming a woman friend’s car.

On Dec. 17, road patrol officer Neil Siebert, 26, was charged with felony assault in connection with a “road rage” incident.

And several other Muskegon Heights officers and one former command officer have been investigated or prosecuted in a variety of incidents in recent years.

It would take a vote by the city council to have Smith fired, city officials said. But that’s not likely anytime soon, because city leaders are not blaming Smith.

“These are not work-related incidents,” said City Manager Melvin C. Burns II. “These are aberrations. The city’s other employees do their jobs without incident.”

“I don’t think it’s the chief’s fault that those people don’t know how to act when they’re off duty,” said Mayor Pro Tem Willie Burrel.

Burrel said that even though police officers are technically always on duty, the chief cannot be held responsible for the actions of officers not directly under his command.

However, Burns said, “nobody is saying the police department or the city council supports these officers’ actions.”

Mayor Rillastine Wilkins stressed that none of the three officers in the latest incidents has been convicted. But she called the number of allegations “disturbing.”

“They not only reflect badly on the chief, it reflects badly on the city,” Wilkins said.

Wilkins says she expects the chief to give the city council a full report on the recent incidents.

All three officers have been suspended without pay and those suspensions are forcing more overtime duty on the city’s already short-handed force.

City leaders have been struggling with a $1 million budget deficit.

“These suspensions will all put the city in a precarious position,” said Burrel. “We’ll have to have overtime for other folks while these officers are off. It’s not a good situation for us at all.”

Burrel said the city needs to adopt a code of ethics for all its employees.

Tague urged city officials to examine and improve conditions in the police department and repeated that he is working with Smith to make sure the situation improves.

“I can assure the citizens of Muskegon Heights that something is going to be done,” Tague said. “Whatever the problem is, it’s going to get solved, because we as a community can no longer tolerate this type of conduct in a police department.

“I’ve spoken to the chief about problems within the department and have received a commitment that we’ll be working together to ensure that penalties are paid for misconduct and that policies are put in place to prevent any future occurrences,” the prosecutor said.

“At this point I think the city has to take a hard look as to why these incidents occurred, and how they can address issues which led up to persons employed as police officers committing criminal acts,” Tague said.

“Certainly all law enforcement in the county is concerned when there are repeated arrests in a law-enforcement agency,” Tague said. “I’m extremely concerned with these cases because unfortunately it tarnishes the reputation of all the honest, hard-working police officers in our county.”

FAXBOX:
- Sgt. Phillip E. Coleman — charged Thursday with first-degree criminal sexual conduct and writing three nonsufficient funds checks within 10 days.

- Sgt. George Hubbard — charged Dec. 31 with assault with a dangerous weapon and malicious destruction of personal property. Accused of chasing and ramming a woman friend’s vehicle.

- Officer Neil Siebert — charged Dec. 17 with assault with a dangerous weapon, assault and battery and reckless driving in an alleged “road rage” incident. Charged last week in Kent County with assault and reckless driving in another alleged road rage incident.

- Officer Roger Kitchen — suspended and demoted from sergeant last year after he was stabbed during a domestic dispute while on duty. Charges were not filed because neither party wanted to prosecute.

- Officer David Anderson — found innocent by a jury in January 2002 of a job-related assault and battery. The misdemeanor accusation stemmed from a November 2000 incident in which Anderson was accused of punching a handcuffed, seated suspect in the facewithout provocation.

- Former Detective Mel Jason Jordan — the department’s former second-ranking officer was suspended in 1998 after being arrested on a sex charge, stemming from an alleged on-the-job incident with a female police trainee. A jury later acquitted him. Jordandid plead guilty in 1999 to furnishing alcohol to a minor in the same incident and never worked as a police officer again.

Earlier in the 1990s, Jordan was twice prosecuted unsuccessfully for alleged crimes committed while on duty. Extortion and embezzlement charges relating to alleged police corruption in 1997 and 1998 were dismissed last March in exchange for Jordan’s guilty plea to a variety of drug-delivery and fleeing-police offenses committed in early 2000, after he left the force. A jury last March also convicted Jordan of third-degree criminal sexual conduct for a September 2001 incident with a 15-year-old girl. Jordan is now serving a prison sentence of 91⁄2 to 39 years for the drug and sex convictions.















Cop faces trial, but goes back on the job
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
February 25, 2003 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
Muskegon Heights Police Sgt. George Hubbard was restored to his job as a command officer Monday — immediately after he was ordered to stand trial on two felony charges.

Both developments came as a result of orders by 60th District Judge Michael J. Nolan.

First Nolan ordered Hubbard bound over for trial in 14th Circuit Court on charges of assault with a dangerous weap-on, a four-year felony, and malicious destruction of personal property valued at more than $1,000 but less than $20,000, a five-year felony.

Hubbard, 52, of Muskegon is accused of twice deliberately ramming his girlfriend’s car with his pickup truck, although the woman now says that didn’t happen.

Minutes later, the judge granted a defense motion to let Hubbard possess a firearm, previously barred as one of his bond conditions.

That came after Muskegon Heights Police Chief George Smith Jr. told the judge he wanted Hubbard back on the job, which requires Hubbard to carry a weapon. The 20-year police veteran had been suspended without pay since his arrest Dec. 29.

Smith — who sat through the preliminary hearing that led to Hubbard’s bindover Monday — said he believes Hubbard will be acquitted at trial and does not pose a danger.

“The case I’ve heard so far indicates there is a good chance he will return (to work) after trial,” Smith said. “He’s no threat to anyone.”

Senior Assistant Prosecutor Joseph J. Bader responded that additional evidence at trial will likely result in conviction. “He’s not the kind of person who should be working for the police department while his trial is pending,” Bader said.

Based on Smith’s statement, Nolan modified Hubbard’s $5,000 cash bond to let him carry a firearm. That will allow Hubbard to return to work.

Nolan continued the bond’s condition that Hubbard have no contact with the alleged victim — a condition Hubbard already violated once, according to earlier testimony by Muskegon police officers.

“I’ve known Sgt. Hubbard for many, many years myself,” the judge said. “And if the chief of police ... feels he is safe, I think that his presumption of innocence should be honored.”

Nolan added, “God help us both if I’m wrong on that, Chief.”

Later, Prosecutor Tony Tague blasted the police chief.

“I am dismayed by Chief Smith’s actions in attempting to give a gun to a person accused of a violent felony. Giving a gun to a domestic violence offender is like pouring gasoline on a fire,” Tague said.

“Chief Smith should be working with my office to rid his department of any corruption, as opposed to fighting my efforts to safeguard the residents of Muskegon Heights.”

In addition to Hubbard, Officer Neil Siebert is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, reckless driving and assault and battery in an alleged “road rage” incident. And Sgt. Phillip Coleman is charged with first-degree criminal sexual conduct and writing bad checks.

Earlier, based solely on evidence presented at Monday’s hearing, the judge expressed doubt about Hubbard’s guilt. “If it were a trial, I’d find Sgt. Hubbard ‘not guilty’ in a heartbeat,” Nolan said.

However, Nolan noted, the standard at a preliminary hearing is lower — “probable cause” that the defendant committed the crime alleged, not “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” as at trial.

Tague later criticized the judge for those remarks.

“Judge Nolan should be thoroughly aware that the prosecution does not provide all evidence at the preliminary examination,” Tague said. Nolan “chose to editorialize when he is not aware of all the facts of the case.”

Monday’s hearing included testimony by the alleged victim, recanting her original story.

Myrtle Moore-Honore, 38, of Muskegon said Monday that Hubbard struck her car by accident, sliding on the ice outside her home while she was blocking him from leaving after an argument.

“I was mad” when talking to police, she testified.

Moore-Honore ceased testifying after the judge warned her she was in danger of incriminating herself, either by committing perjury — if she was lying on the stand under oath — or by admitting to making a false police report of a felony. She then invokedher Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and left the witness stand.

Countering Moore-Honore’s testimony, Bader played a tape-recording of her three calls to 911 the morning of Dec. 29.

In those calls, Moore-Honore said Hubbard struck her car once from behind while she was driving, then again in the front after she pulled into the Muskegon Police Department parking lot to wait for police to arrive following her first 911 call.

Bader also called three investigating Muskegon police officers as witnesses.

Officer Roger DeYoung, who interviewed Moore-Honore, testified she seemed frightened and told him the same story that morning as in her 911 calls.

Officer Clay Orrison said her cellular telephone rang while he was in her presence, and he could hear a voice he recognized as Hubbard’s on the other end. “He sounded excited,” Orrison testified.

Sgt. Mark Baker testified that he interviewed Hubbard later at Hubbard’s home, and the Muskegon Heights sergeant told him, “Mark, I’m kinda hard-headed. I could have left. I didn’t. I bumped her car and left.”

The police officers also testified Moore-Honore’s white 1993 Hyundai had visible, apparently fresh damage to the front and back bumpers, and Hubbard’s red truck had a white paint line on the front bumper.

Outside the courtroom after his bindover but before the motion to restore his firearm, Hubbard called his prosecution a “lynching.”

“The problem is, I grew up in Mississippi in the ’50s and ’60s, and growing up in the South, I know what a lynching is,” Hubbard told a Chronicle reporter, referring to the hanging murders of black men by white mobs. “The police and prosecutors, they’retrying to (vulgarity) lynch me.”

Hubbard’s lawyer, Al Swanson, said, “the evidence is very weak. He shouldn’t have been bound over.”

Smith declined to comment.

Tague responded to Hubbard’s remarks later. “This case was investigated by numerous members of the city of Muskegon Police Department, and following their investigation they requested that my office issue a warrant against a fellow officer.

“The bottom line is, if you commit a felony in Muskegon County, you will be charged regardless of race or whether you’re a police officer,” Tague said.

Muskegon Police Chief Tony Kleibecker later said he supports his department’s investigation of the case but declined to comment specifically on Hubbard’s remarks or Smith’s actions.




















City manager- Accused cop still suspended
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
February 26, 2003 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
The Muskegon Heights city manager said Tuesday police Sgt. George Hubbard, who faces two felony charges, remains on suspension from his job — contrary to the publicly stated intention of Police Chief George Smith Jr.

City Manager Melvin Burns II said Smith doesn’t have the authority to restore Hubbard to his post as a command officer. That’s a call for the city manager to make, and Burns said he has not changed his mind about Hubbard’s job status.

“He is still suspended,” Burns said.

“In general we don’t comment on personnel matters, but I was kind of disappointed to see (in Tuesday’s Chronicle) a judge, the police chief and the prosecutor having a discussion about personnel. The decision would not have been made by any of those persons,” Burns said.

In a surprise courtroom twist Monday, 60th District Judge Michael J. Nolan agreed to Smith’s recommendation that Hubbard’s right to carry a gun be restored so Hubbard could return to work pending trial.

That order came just minutes after Nolan ordered Hubbard bound over for trial in 14th Circuit Court on charges of assault with a dangerous weapon and malicious destruction of personal property worth between $1,000 and $20,000. Hubbard, 52, of Muskegon isaccused of twice deliberately ramming his pickup truck into his girlfriend’s car the morning of Dec. 29 — something she now says didn’t happen.

Hubbard has been suspended without pay since his arrest the day of the alleged incident.

Hubbard’s lawyer told the judge Monday he was asking for Hubbard’s firearm rights to be restored “so he can return to work,” Al Swanson said in court. “My understanding is the chief will allow him to return to work.”

Nolan then asked Smith about it. Smith confirmed that he supported restoration of Hubbard’s right to carry a gun while the case is pending and said, “The case I’ve heard so far indicates there’s a good chance he will return (to work) after trial. ... He’s no threat to anyone.”

Based on Smith’s statement, Nolan modified Hubbard’s $5,000 cash bond to let him carry a firearm. “If the chief of police ... feels he is safe, I think that his presumption of innocence should be honored,” the judge said in court.

But Hubbard’s job status is not for the chief to decide, the city manager said Tuesday afternoon.

“The same conditions he was suspended for before, still exist,” Burns said. He added that Hubbard is a member of a collective bargaining unit and could file a grievance if he chose.

Hubbard said Tuesday afternoon he accepts the city manager’s decision. “I respect the man, and I respect the city council, and I respect whatever they say. I’m not going to fight them,” Hubbard said.

He said he appreciates his chief’s support, but understands that “he can be overridden.”

However, Hubbard added, “a person’s supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty,” and he saw no reason why he shouldn’t be allowed to work until his trial.






Judge bars evidence against suspended Heights police officer
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
May 12, 2004 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling has led a Muskegon judge to throw out a major part of the prosecution’s evidence against a suspended Muskegon Heights police sergeant charged with ramming his ex-girlfriend’s vehicle.

The Muskegon County Prosecutor’s Office plans to ask 14th Circuit Judge James M. Graves Jr. to reconsider his April 29 order in the case against Sgt. George Hubbard. Hubbard, 54, of Muskegon Heights is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon and malicious destruction of personal property worth at least $1,000 but less than $20,000. Both are felonies.

Graves’ ruling bars the prosecution from using statements the alleged victim made to police the day of the incident, Dec. 29, 2002. In two separate Muskegon police interviews, the woman said Hubbard used his pickup truck to bump her smaller vehicle twicewhile she was in it, once in the front, once in the back.

The woman soon recanted her accusations, saying Hubbard only struck her vehicle once, and only accidentally when he slid on the ice trying to leave her driveway. She later invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, making her unavailable to either side at trial.

Without the woman’s trial testimony against Hubbard, her statements to police were central to the prosecution case.

Graves’ ruling partially granted a motion by defense lawyers Al Swanson and Holly Spillan. The judge rejected another part of the motion that sought to bar tapes of the woman’s three 911 calls while the alleged incident was under way. Those tapes are admissible at trial, Graves ruled.

Swanson praised the portion of Graves’ ruling throwing out the police-interrogation evidence. “I think it was a great ruling, in that he kept out the major statements consistent with the Supreme Court ruling,” Swanson said.

However, Swanson said he will ask the Michigan Court of Appeals to reverse Graves on the 911 issue. Swanson said he also will ask the appeals court to stay Hubbard’s trial — now scheduled to start next Tuesday — pending a decision on his appeal.

The final part of Graves’ ruling is not in dispute. Graves barred use of the woman’s testimony given last year at Hubbard’s 60th District Court preliminary examination. Her testimony, contradicting what she told police the day of the incident, halted after the district judge advised her she had the right not to incriminate herself. She then invoked the Fifth Amendment before Swanson had a chance to cross-examine her.

That continuing inability to cross-examine is the reason for Graves’ ruling. The judge ruled that using the woman’s statements to police would violate the U.S. Constitution’s “confrontation clause” — the Sixth Amendment right of every accused person to confront and question the witnesses against him.

Citing a recent U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the case of Crawford vs. Washington, Graves ruled that the woman’s statements to police constituted “testimony,” thus making her a “witness” against Hubbard at the time she made them. And because the defense has never had a chance to cross-examine her, that means allowing prosecutors to use the statements at trial would violate the constitution, Graves decided.

In the Crawford decision, issued in March, the Supreme Court for the first time defined testimony as including “statements taken by police officers in the course of interrogations.”

Graves ruled differently on the 911 tapes. The judge found that a person calling 911 “is not making statements which the party ‘would reasonably expect to be used prosecutorially,’” in contrast to statements made under police interrogation.

Prosecutor Tony Tague said Tuesday his office will file a motion asking Graves to reconsider his ruling about the alleged victim’s statements to police.

The legal issue for prosecutors is whether the woman’s statements were a result of police “interrogation,” the word the Supreme Court used in its recent ruling. The prosecutor’s office argues that her initial police interviews did not constitute “interrogation” because they occurred in the immediate aftermath of the incident when the main issue allegedly was her safety, not Hubbard’s prosecution.

“This is a completely new area of the law,” Tague said. “We will be filing a motion for reconsideration to allow Judge Graves an opportunity to provide guidance to both prosecutors and defense attorneys as to the implications of the new law.

“We think this is a great opportunity for Muskegon County to define state law by giving a clear definition of what exactly constitutes interrogation by a police officer,” Tague said.

Tague said his office will pursue the case against Hubbard even if Graves rules against the prosecution, although Tague acknowledged the case would be more difficult. “Unfortunately, in this case the victim has become reluctant to cooperate with the prosecution,” he said. “This is a common syndrome in domestic violence cases. We intend on proceeding with the case with any evidence which is available.”

Asked if the case still would be pursued as a felony, or with the charges reduced to misdemeanors, Tague answered, “certainly we’re re-evaluating the case based on the victim’s complete lack of cooperation but will attempt to continue with the prosecution, because we have prior statements that clearly indicate that she was assaulted.”




















Command officer pleads guilty to misdemeanor
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
May 19, 2004 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
A suspended Muskegon Heights Police command officer has pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of domestic violence, saying in court he rammed his girlfriend’s car with his pickup truck while she was in the car.

Sgt. George Hubbard pleaded to the reduced charge Tuesday on the eve of his scheduled trial on felony charges of assault with a dangerous weapon and malicious destruction of personal property causing damage between $1,000 and $20,000. Those charges weredropped.

The domestic violence conviction carries a maximum sentence of 93 days in jail and two years on probation. Muskegon County Circuit Judge James M. Graves Jr. scheduled sentencing for June 14.

The plea came after an unusual series of events surrounding the reluctant victim — including her brief arrest Tuesday morning after she turned herself in on a “material witness” warrant from the Muskegon County Prosecutor’s Office.

The woman recanted her accusations against Hubbard shortly after the Dec. 29, 2002, incident and refused to testify against him. She asserted her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination based on the possibility of being prosecuted on charges ofperjury or filing a false police report.

However, the prosecutor’s office last week granted her immunity from prosecution, in a bid to force her to testify. Prosecutor Tony Tague said she fled out the back door of her workplace after a Muskegon police detective showed up to reinterview her in preparation for the trial, leading to the material-witness arrest warrant.

Even after turning herself in Tuesday, “she was unwilling to talk to prosecutors, but we intended on proceeding (with her) as a hostile witness,” Tague said. “We were convinced that her initial report was accurate, and that it was due to ‘domestic violence syndrome’ that she was refusing to cooperate.

“Despite her lack of cooperation, because Hubbard knew we intended on proceeding, he finally agreed to plead to domestic violence,” Tague said.

The prosecutor said the victim’s lack of cooperation would have made a felony conviction difficult at trial, hence the plea agreement. “He committed domestic violence, and at least his record will now reflect that he in fact did assault her,” Tague said.Hubbard has been on unpaid suspension from his job since shortly after his arrest following the incident, and under the conditions of his bond he has been forbidden to carry a firearm.

His future job prospect was not immediately clear. Unlike a felony conviction, a misdemeanor record does not automatically bar a person from serving as a police officer in Michigan. However, state gun laws prevent Hubbard from carrying a firearm for theduration of whatever sentence Graves imposes, Tague said.

In court Tuesday, Hubbard said he rammed the woman’s car outside her home while she was in the car, knowing that it placed her in fear, Tague said.

Tague said the sergeant should be fired.

“As a Muskegon Heights command officer he should have known better, and we’re hoping that Chief (George) Smith (Jr.) takes definitive action against Hubbard,” Tague said. “This conduct is unbecoming a police officer, and (Hubbard) clearly lacks the judgment to continue carrying a badge.”

“I will decide after the sentence what to do at this end,” Smith said later when told of Tague’s comments.

“However, I do have some concerns over the fact that the victim was arrested prior to this plea being taken,” Smith said. “She, being the mother of (several) children, and employed, was told she would be incarcerated. So all of those things would be taken into consideration (in deciding Hubbard’s future with the police force).”

The prosecution’s case against Hubbard would have been difficult without testimony from the victim.

After initially telling Muskegon police that Hubbard twice rammed her vehicle while she was in it — once outside her home, once in the Muskegon Police Department parking lot after he allegedly followed her there — the woman soon recanted.

She wrote in a February 2003 notarized affidavit, and later testified under oath at Hubbard’s 60th District Court preliminary hearing, that the sergeant did not deliberately ram her car, but accidentally slid into it once on the ice while he was trying to leave her driveway with her car blocking his way.

Until last week, prosecutors appeared to be intending to proceed without her testimony.

However, that prospect got even tougher after Graves ruled April 29 that the woman’s initial statements to police could not be admitted at trial because the defense has never had — and presumably never would have — a chance to cross-examine her. Citing arecent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Graves decided allowing jurors to hear about her statements to police would violate Hubbard’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him.

That ruling left, essentially, only tapes of the woman’s calls to 911, plus photographs and estimates of damage to her car, as evidence against Hubbard, unless prosecutors could find a way to get her to testify at trial.

Hence the series of events that ended in Hubbard’s plea bargain.



















Police command officer gets probation
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
June 14, 2004 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
A suspended Muskegon Heights Police command officer has been sentenced to 18 months’ probation for domestic violence, a misdemeanor.

Muskegon County’s 14th Circuit Judge James M. Graves Jr. pronounced the sentence this morning.

The conviction stemmed from a December 2002 incident in which Sgt. George Hubbard, while off duty, bumped his girlfriend’s car with his pickup truck while she was in the car in the driveway outside her home. At the time of his guilty plea last month, Hubbard said to Graves that the bumping was intentional.

The sentence leaves the job future of the 54-year-old Hubbard in doubt. Unlike a felony conviction, a misdemeanor record does not automatically bar a person from serving as a police officer. However, state gun laws prevent Hubbard from carrying a firearmfor the duration of his probation, according to criminal-justice officials.

Hubbard has been on unpaid suspension from his job since shortly after his arrest following the incident. Under the conditions of his bond he has been forbidden to carry a firearm.

Hubbard and his lawyer, Al Swanson, had asked Graves to give Hubbard what many first-time domestic violence offenders get: a sentence to “spousal abuse treatment” under a provision of the law that expunges the conviction if treatment is completed successfully.

But Senior Assistant Muskegon County Prosecutor Joseph Bader asked Graves instead to impose the longest allowable probation, two years. The toughest possible sentence would be 93 days in jail, but first-time offenders almost never get jail time. Hubbardhas no prior criminal record.

The judge came down closer to the prosecutor’s position.

Muskegon Heights Police Chief George Smith Jr. attended Hubbard’s sentencing. Asked outside court afterwards about the possible impact on Hubbard’s job, Smith at first declined to comment but then added: “Just remember what he said when it started — he said they’re trying to lynch him. I think it’s now complete.”

As conditions of Hubbard’s probation, the judge ordered that he spend 30 days under “house arrest” on electronic tether, but with work release allowed if Hubbard is employed; that he pay $570 in fines and costs; that he complete a 24-week domestic violence program through Catholic Social Services; and that he not use or possess alcohol or other intoxicating drugs.

Graves also ordered Hubbard to have no contact with the victim, but only if she wishes none. The judge said she can request that provision be lifted if she wishes.

Finally, the judge ordered Hubbard to pay restitution of $2,711, the amount of damage prosecutors say was done to her car. However, that too may be a moot point: The victim has filed a statement with the state probation office stating that Hubbard has already made good on the damage, and Graves said he would not force Hubbard to pay any money the victim does not want.

The victim has not cooperated with the prosecution and has said in writing that Hubbard did not intentionally ram her vehicle, recanting her initial statements to Muskegon police.

But on the crucial point at issue — invoking the spousal abuse statute or not — the judge disappointed the defense.

Speaking before sentencing, Graves said Hubbard’s status as a police officer did not influence his decision. And the judge said he was not expressing an opinion on Hubbard’s career future. “As far as your job, that’s between you and your employer,” Graves said. “I’m not stopping you (from working as a police officer).

“You certainly were not abusing your police powers. You were not abusing your badge,” Graves said. He also noted Hubbard’s lack of any prior criminal record, the fact the victim was not injured, and the fact the conviction was a misdemeanor as reasons not to send Hubbard to jail.

However, in defense of the straight probation sentence -- which could imperil Hubbard’s job -- Graves said the facts Hubbard admitted in court last month might have supported a felony conviction, and noted that Hubbard violated the conditions of his bondat least once by contacting the victim in early 2003.

Before sentencing, Hubbard asked for leniency. “I am not a violent person,” he said.

“I’ve done everything in my life right. I’ve tried to do the right thing. I’m asking that you give me a second chance in my life and my career.”



















Former police officer sentenced after ramming his girlfriend's car
WOOD TV News
July 14, 2004
http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1939467&nav=0RceNtUZ
A former Muskegon Heights police officer accused of ramming his girlfriend's car is sentenced to18 months probation and fines. George Hubbard was charged with two felonies - assault with a deadly weapon and malicious destruction of property.

In February, he pled guilty to a lesser charge of a misdemeanor count of domestic violence.

Hubbard has been on unpaid suspension since he was charged in December 2002.




















Nine seeking three city council seats
Muskegon Chronicle, The (MI)
August 12, 2005 
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
There will be one less candidate on the ballot for the Nov. 8 Muskegon Heights City Council election than some city residents had hoped.

An 11th-hour drive to put the Rev. Willie Burrel on the ballot failed when the incumbent mayor pro tem was unable to sign election paperwork by Wednesday’s 5 p.m. filing deadline.

Nine candidates, including fired Muskegon Heights police officer George Hubbard, have filed to run for three available council seats.

Burrel was out of town at a church convention this week and was unable to return in time to sign an identity affidavit that needed to be filed with other election paperwork.

The pastor of Christ Temple Apostolic Church, 412 E. Sherman, was philosophical about the mix-up that torpedoed his last-minute decision to run for re-election.

“I feel God’s will has been done by me being out of town,” Burrel said.

Burrel, a veteran of 20 years on the council, had announced last year that he would not seek re-election.

But, as this year’s election approached, Burrel said a group of citizens persuaded him to change his mind.

However, the filing deadline caught the group unprepared.

“I wasn’t sure of the deadline,” Burrel said. “The city clerk didn’t notify the council members of the deadline until the 11th hour.”

Former Muskegon Heights City Clerk Betty Ivory had notified incumbents of filing deadlines as a courtesy, according to current Clerk Kordelia Buckner.

“It’s the responsibility of the candidates to know the filing deadline,” Buckner said.

Buckner said a notice about Wednesday’s deadline was published in The Chronicle July 27 and 28.

Burrel could still run in November as a write-in candidate, according to Muskegon County Clerk Karen Buie.

The deadline to file as a write-in candidate is Nov. 4, Buie said.

“I more than likely won’t do that,” Burrel said.

However, Burrel said he would serve if elected by a grass-roots write-in campaign.

Under current state election law, Burrel would need to file as a write-in candidate to be elected.

Burrel said, “I’m majorily concerned about who gets elected and why they get elected. Not that I’m running, but I want to be assured that people are running for the right reasons.”

Burrel was first elected to the council in 1984 and has served as mayor pro tem since 1999.

Hubbard, convicted in June 2004 on a misdemeanor charge of domestic violence, is one of nine candidates for the three four-year council terms.

A 20-year veteran of the Muskegon Heights Police Department, Hubbard, 55, was fired following his conviction. Hubbard was sentenced to 18 months probation.

The conviction “has nothing to do with my ability to work as a council person,” Hubbard said. “I’m not a bad person. I’ve done good work for the city over the years.”

Other candidates on the November ballot include incumbent council members Jackie Darnell and Keith Guy.

Darnell, 67, has been on the council since 1999, when he was appointed to fill the seat vacated when Rillastine Wilkins was elected mayor.

A retired military man, Darnell was recently elected president of the local chapter of the NAACP.

Guy, 30, is head basketball coach at Muskegon Heights High and has been on the council since 2000 when he was appointed after Patricia Jones’ resignation.

Also on the ballot is former councilman Don A. Williams.

Williams, 53, is a one-time union official who is currently a substitute teacher for Muskegon Heights Schools.

Williams was elected in March 2002 to fill the seat left vacant after the death of longtime councilman Eugene Fisher in October 2001. Williams’ 2003 bid for re-election failed. The slate also will include three candidates who have previously made unsuccessful bids for the council — Lois Morris, Bonnie McGlothin and Carolan R. Warrick.

Warrick, 50, a 13-year veteran of the U.S. Army and current employee of The Muskegon Chronicle, is making her second bid for the council.

Morris, 52, is a concerned citizen who is making her third try for a council seat.

An accountant for the Muskegon Correctional Facility, McGlothin, 53, is a former member of the Muskegon Heights school board who has served on the city’s planning commission.

The slate also includes first-time candidates Willie Watson, retired head of the city’s public works department, and Dalrecus Stewart.

Watson, 51, retired in July 2003 after a 30-year career with the city.

Stewart, 34, is a local businessman.

FAXBOX:
City council candidates
Nine candidates have filed to run for three Muskegon Heights City Council seats in the Nov. 8 election. Here are the candidates:

- Jackie Darnell, 67, of 541 Hackley.

- Keith Guy, 30, of 2020 Jarman.

- George Hubbard, 55, of 2038 Sixth.

- Bonnie McGlothin, 53, of 2112 Ray.

- Lois E. Morris, 52, of 2524 Sanford.

- Dalrecus Stewart, 34, of 2327 Seventh.

- Carolan R. Warrick, 50, of 3355 Ninth.

- Willie Watson, 51, of 109 E. Cleveland.

- Don A. Williams, 53, of 3196 Fielstra.