04212005 - Officer Romon Johnson - Suspension - Detroit PD

Officer Romon Johnson, Detroit Police Department: Threatened wife; fired shots at wife; and was charged with felony bigamy. 

On April 21, 2005 Officer Romon Johnson was suspended from the Detroit PD.



1. Original charge: Allegations to the Detroit PD that Officer Johnson threatened wife #2

Sentence: ?????

2. Original Charge: Allegations to the Detroit PD that Officer Johnson fired shots at wife #2 [January 31, 2005]

Sentence: ?????
3. Original charge: felony bigamy [warrant issued out of Louisiana in April 2005]


Sentence: ??????

ALSO SEE:

DETROIT POLICE OFFICER ROMON JOHNSON: Felonious assault and felony firearm [April 27, 2007]

http://michiganoidv.blogspot.com/2007/04/officer-romon-johnson-detroit-pd.html

BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS
Minutes of the Regular Board of Police Commissioners Meeting
Thursday, April 21, 2005
The regular meeting of the Detroit Board of Police Commissioners was held on Thursday, April 21, at 3:00 p.m., at Police Headquarters, 1300 Beaubien, Detroit, Michigan 48226.

4. SECRETARY’S REPORT – EXEC. DIR. GOSS
SUSPENSIONS Exec. Dir. Goss read the following:
On April 21, 2005, Police Officer Romon Johnson, Badge 979, assigned to the Tenth Precinct, was suspended without pay by Chief of Police Ella M. Bully-Cummings.
On February 1, 2005, the Internal Affairs Section was notified of an allegation of misconduct on the part of Officer Johnson. More specifically, the complaint alleged that Officer Johnson is currently married to two (2) women and that he has threatened one of the women with physical harm.

As a result, the Internal Affairs Section initiated an investigation, which revealed the following:
On February 15, 2005, the Internal Affairs Section received a certified copy of a State of Louisiana Certificate of Marriage indicating that on October 20, 2004, Officer Johnson married wife number two (2) in the City of Lake

Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, April 21, 2005 Page 8 Charles, County of Calcasieu, Louisiana. A judge performed the marriage ceremony.
On February 16, 2005, the Internal Affairs Section received a certified copy of a State of Ohio Marriage Record indicating that on October 30, 1998, Officer Johnson married wife number one (1) in Lucas County, Ohio. A Reverend performed the marriage ceremony.
The complaint also alleged that wife number two (2) has received numerous threats including an incident that occurred on January 31, 2005, wherein shots were fired at her. On April 7, 2005, the Parish of Calcasieu, Louisiana Prosecutor's Office issued felony warrant #371453, charging Officer Johnson with Bigamy. In Louisiana, Bigamy is punishable as a felony with five (5) years in prison, with or without hard labor, and/or a one thousand dollar ($1,000.00) fine. An arraignment date is currently pending.

Based on the above circumstances, it is recommended that Officer Johnson be charged with, but not limited to the following violation of the Detroit Police Department Rules and Regulations:
CHARGE: 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.
Atty. Goldpaugh stated with this being a felony, I am not going to present arguments at this time.
Comm. Holley asked the conduct is contrary to the law enforcement code of ethics, what did he violate in the Manual? Did he violate the shame piece?

Chairperson Blackwell stated for breaking the law, he was married to two women.
Comm. Holley stated okay, I just want to make sure that is in the code.

Chairperson Blackwell asked do you mean marrying two women or breaking the law?
Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, April 21, 2005 Page 9

Comm. Holley stated marrying two women.

Chairperson Blackwell stated I don’t think that they specifically say that.

Comm. Holley stated there is a thing here about shooting at someone and then also the marriage thing. I am not familiar with all of these series of directives. He asked Exec. Dir. Goss are these charges for both violations? He asked do you understand what I am asking Mr. Chairman?

Chairperson Blackwell stated yes, I do. What you are saying is that you are talking about specific charges that went against the code and the directives of the procedures. The fact that he had been charged with a felony that issue alone is something that generally is an issue that the Chief makes a suspension. Protocol wise, Mr. Goldpaugh has never challenged a felony charge. Anything that breaks the law gets that kind of charge no matter what it is. The only thing is when you say that someone is currently married to two women; I would just ask the police is that possible.

Exec. Dir. Goss stated it is possible.

Comm. Holley stated yes, it is possible.

Atty. Goldpaugh stated it is not possible to be legally married, that’s what creates the crime of bigamy, which is alleged down in Louisiana.

Comm. Holley stated I just want to make sure that the law that we are charging him with is with the bigamy and with the shooting, that’s what I want to make sure that we have in here.

Chairperson Blackwell stated we’re not charging him.
Comm. Holley stated I mean not us charging him, but I am asking the Chief has he been charged.
Atty. Goldpaugh stated he has not been charged with any allegations with respect to the shooting. The only charge against him at this point in time, is a bigamy warrant that was issued out of the state of Louisiana, which he is going down to address.

Comm. Holley stated I am concerned that we charged him with one thing and not two.
Chairperson Blackwell stated we are not charging him; the Chief suspended him based on his conduct.

Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, April 21, 2005 Page 10


the shooting because it is in the complaint.

Atty. Ninowski stated the petition that was submitted by the Department that was just read into the record is based on allegations. The allegations include, the felony charge of bigamy and the conduct related to that, as well as the allegation that wife number two (2) was shot at. The recommended charge of conduct unbecoming an officer, that you are referencing, is the recommendation based on that allegation. When the charges are actually drafted by Discipline, it will incorporate everything into the charges. She asked does that answer your question?

Comm. Holley stated yes, it really does. I just want to make sure that both charges are included because you can only be punished for what you are charged for if you are guilty. So, if you are only being charged for bigamy and not the other…but if you are charged and found guilty of both, then you pay the penalty.

Chairperson Blackwell stated I think that we are saying something different. Most of these cases come up whether you are charged or not. The Chief reserves the right based on conduct unbecoming an officer to suspend without pay, that’s all that is in front of us. Whether or not they are convicted or not is a separate issue.

Comm. Holley asked this suspension is based upon, not just bigamy, but bigamy and the shooting? But, what I am hearing you say is that it is based upon the bigamy only.

Atty. Ninowski stated no, it is based on conduct. The conduct is set forth in that petition.

Atty. Goldpaugh stated it should be noted in the petition that there is no allegation made that Officer Johnson is the one who fired at wife number two (2), only that she claimed or somebody claimed that she was fired upon down in Louisiana.

Chairperson Blackwell stated for example, it could have been by wife number one (1).

Atty. Goldpaugh stated it could have been by her husband number one (1) for all we know, we don’t know who it was. But the only charge against him in Louisiana was the felony.

Atty. Ninowski stated the Department’s petition incorporates all of the conduct and that includes the allegation of shooting and the bigamy charge and the conduct associated with that bigamy charge.

Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, April 21, 2005 Page 11

There were no contraventions to the above suspension without pay.

04122005 - Officer Hodari Lewis - Detroit PD

April 12, 2005: Officer Hodari Lewis, Detroit Police Department. 

BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERSMinutes of the Regular Board of Police Commissioners Meeting
Thursday, May 5, 2005
The regular meeting of the Detroit Board of Police Commissioners was held on Thursday, May 5, at 3:00 p.m., at Police Headquarters, 1300 Beaubien, Detroit, Michigan 48226.
ATTENDANCE
Board Members Present Department Personnel Present
Arthur Blackwell, II DC Ronald Haddad
Erminia Ramirez Comm. Marshall Lyons
Jim Holley Insp. Gail Wilson-Turner
Megan Norris Lt. Terry Herbert
Willie Hampton Lt. Donna Jarvis
Inv. Brian Fountain
PO Leslie Washington
PO Lisa Eldorado
PO Michael Woody
Atty. Nancy Ninowski
Board Staff Present
Dante’ L. Goss, Executive Director
E. Lynise Bryant-Weekes, Personnel Director
Denise R. Hooks, Attorney/Supervising Inv.
Arnold Sheard, Interim Chief Investigator
OTHERS PRESENT
Ron Scott
Ms. Walters
Rick Jones
David Grant, Detroit Free Press
Rev. David Murray and Family
RECORDERS
Jerome Adams
Kellie Williams

4. SECRETARY’S REPORT – EXEC. DIR. GOSS
SUSPENSIONOn May 5, 2005, Police Officer Hodari Lewis, Badge 3123, assigned to the Third Precinct, was suspended without pay by Chief of Police Ella M. Bully-Cummings.

On April 12, 2005, the Internal Affairs Section was notified of an allegation of misconduct on the part of Police Officer Hodari Lewis, Badge 3123, assigned to the Third Precinct. More specifically, the complaint alleged that Officer Lewis did engage in sexual contact with a female under the legal age of consent.

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

On April 12, 2005, at approximately 8:10 p.m., an officer from the Grosse Pointe Farms Police Department was dispatched to Waterloo and Lincoln, in the City of Grosse Pointe Farms, to investigate a complaint concerning a vehicle that was occupied by a couple and the female in the vehicle was

Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, May 5, 2005 Page 3
observed undressing. Upon arrival, the officer observed a female in the passenger seat of the vehicle with her head in the driver's lap performing oral sex. The driver of the vehicle was subsequently identified as Detroit police officer Hodari Lewis. At that time, it was also ascertained that the female was fifteen (15) years of age.

Both Officer Lewis and the female were then taken to the Grosse Pointe Farms Police Department wherein the female indicated that she had met Officer Lewis at "the Mall" approximately one month ago and that they talked on the telephone several times thereafter. And, eventually, the female indicated that they agreed to meet on this date at the above-indicated location. The female also indicated that she told Officer Lewis that she was seventeen (17) years old.

On April 22, 2005, a felony warrant was issued against Officer Lewis charging him with Criminal Sexual Conduct - Third Degree (statutory rape) and Felony Firearm, contrary to MCL 750.520d and MCL 750.227b. Criminal Sexual Conduct - Third Degree (statutory rape) is a felony punishable by not more than fifteen (15) years in prison; and Felony Firearm is a felony punishable by two (2) years in prison.

Criminal Sexual Conduct - Third Degree is a statutory crime defined as unlawful sexual contact with a female under the statutory age of consent. In such cases, the prosecution is not required to prove that the sexual contact was without the consent of the female because she is conclusively presumed to be incapable of consent by reason of her age. Similarly, any misrepresentations made by the female regarding her age are immaterial to the prosecution.

On April 28, 2005, Officer Lewis appeared at the State of Michigan Thirty-Second District Court for arraignment. A plea of not guilty was entered on Officer Lewis' behalf to the aforementioned charges and a personal bond was set in the amount of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00). The Preliminary Examination is scheduled for May 12, 2005.

Based on the above circumstances, it is recommended that Officer Lewis 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.

Minutes of the Regular BPC Meeting Thursday, May 5, 2005 Page 4

Unless contravened by this Commission, the above suspension without pay will stand.
There were no contraventions the above suspension without pay.



Detroit Free PressApril 29, 2007

Hodari Lewis of Detroit was just 20 when he met a teenage girl at Eastland mall late in 2005.
The girl, 15 at the time, testified that she lied twice that day, insisting that she was 17 when the off-duty officer asked her age. When Lewis asked to see identification documenting her birth date, both parties acknowledge she said she’d lost it the previous week.

They agreed to a first date one week later. Lewis, again off-duty, picked the teenager up at a public library after school. Twenty minutes later, a Grosse Pointe Park police officer was startled to find the couple parked on a residential street and engaged in an act that does not typically take place there, at least in broad daylight.

In the awkward confrontation that ensued, the Grosse Pointe Park cop determined that the teenager was still several months shy of the age of consent and arrested Lewis on charges of criminal sexual conduct and carrying a firearm (his service revolver) during the commission of a felony. Soon after, a district court judge bound him over for trial before Judge Deborah Thomas.

The teenager’s admission that she had initiated the sexual act did little to mitigate Lewis’ plight, since she was incapable (as a matter of law) of consenting to any such act.


So Lewis’ lawyer took a different tack. An act of sexual assault may indeed have taken place, attorney Randall Upshaw conceded. But his client had been the victim, not the perpetrator.
Thomas was sympathetic. When prosecutors objected that Lewis had done nothing to resist his consort’s advances, the judge noted that Michigan courts had long held that a woman need not resist to be considered a victim of sexual assault — and that the same standard should be applied to Lewis.

Apples and oranges?

The court of appeals didn’t even address that argument in its unpublished opinion reinstating criminal charges against Lewis. The three-page ruling, which ignored almost all of the points Thomas raised in her order quashing Lewis’ arrest, can be paraphrased in a few words:
Come on. Give us a break.

By “knowingly allowing” the teen to proceed, the appellate panel said, he had engaged in a forbidden sex act.

Thomas, who recused herself from Lewis’ case after the appeals court reversed her, continues to regard the defendant as more sinned against than sinning. She rejects the state’s position that “it is perfectly permissible for complainant to lie, defraud and assault another person so long as she is under the age of 17.”

Prosecutors respond only that the law holds Lewis and the girl to different standards — and that jurors can decide, when the case goes to trial later this year, who victimized whom.