Freedom of Information – Expunged Records – Redmond WA (Part 3)

expunge
The legal definition of EXPUNGE
Expunge

To destroy; blot out; obliterate; erase; efface designedly; strike out wholly. The act of physically destroying information—including criminal records—in files, computers, or other depositories.

expunge verb abrade, annul, black out, blot out, cannel, cause to disappear, censor, cross off, cross out, delere, delete, destroy, dispose of, do away with, edit out, efface, eradicate, erase, excise, extinguish, extirpate, inducere, leave no trace, nullify, obliterate, oblitterare, put an end to, quash, quell, raze, remove, remove all sign of, remove all trace of, render illegible, rub out, scratch out, strike out, take out, wipe away, wipe off, wipe out
Associated concepts: expunge the recordSee also: annul, bowdlerize, cancel, censor, delete, destroy, edit, efface, eliminate, eradicate, excise, expurgate, extinguish, obliterate, redact, remove, revoke

*Note Date reflects incident in 1998 (not current)
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-140716.html

Gregory Patrick, 35, Redmond police officer

Leta Bakke’s phone rang at least nine times in the hour before midnight on May 24, 1998.

When Bakke finally answered, the angry man on the line was her ex-husband, Gregory Patrick.

“Are you sleeping with Paul?” he demanded, according to her statement to police. “If you are I will kill you, and I will kill Paul.”

That night, Bakke told police that Patrick, a Redmond patrolman, threatened to kill her and himself some 30 times during their nine-month separation. At the time of the latest alleged threats, their divorce had been final for a month.

When she first moved out with her 9-month-old daughter, Patrick talked about suicide, she said. Her new relationship sparked death threats.

Renton police arrested Patrick early the next day. Officers seized two handguns and a shotgun from his house.

PRIOR PROBLEMS: During their 2-year marriage, Patrick was prone to violent tantrums, kicking and breaking things, according to court papers.

INVESTIGATION: Patrick was initially charged with felony telephone harassment. The charge was reduced to a misdemeanor when Bakke refused to testify. If he lost his job, she worried he’d stop making $400-a-month child support payments, according to court records.

He was sentenced to probation for a year and ordered to receive anger-management counseling, if recommended. An internal investigation found no proof of wrongdoing.

A federal law prohibiting anyone convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor from possessing a firearm did not apply in Patrick’s case because he pleaded guilty to “making basically an obscene telephone call,” said Redmond City Attorney James Haney.

In response to inquiries by the P-I, the U.S. Attorney’s Office is reviewing the case.

DISCIPLINE: None.

UPDATE: Patrick is currently a patrol officer and member of the department’s SWAT team. He and Bakke declined comment.

© 1998-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/printer2/index.asp?ploc=t&refer=http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/132014_dvprofiles23.html

From: B Woods <brent.a.woods@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:33 AM
Subject: Public Records Request – 3-25-15
To: Michelle Hart <MHART@redmond.gov>, John Marchione <jmarchione@redmond.gov>

Ms. Hart,
I wish to submit a pubic records request as per RCW 42.56

I had submitted a public records request in 2013 and submitted a similar one in 2014 as it relates to officers with a sustained record of dishonesty. On both occasions I received records on one officer. In reviewing records from the City of Redmond I identified another officer or detective, Gregory Patrick.
It is my understanding that the Brady List has everything to do with a history or sustained record of dishonesty, yet that name did not appear two different times and I saw it on an official list as I mentioned.
My request is for the following (all pertaining to Patrick Gregory)

All records that indicate if this individual is still currently employed at the City of Redmond in the Police Department.
All records that indicate this officer’s official title and capacity if still employed.
All records related to any Brady violations.
All internal affairs records on this officer.
All records related to criminal arrest and conviction maintained by Redmond.
All records between the City of Redmond and the US Attorney’s Office as it relates to any criminal arrests or convictions or allegations.
All records between the City of Redmond and the City of Renton as it relates to criminal arrest of this officer.
All records of any death threats or threats of suicide or both.
All records pertaining to domestic violence.
All records that indicate if this officer is on the SWAT team (if currently employed)
All records that indicate this officer is certified to have a gun in official capacity.
All records of any plea bargains related to criminal arrest of this individual.
All records of disciplinary action taken.
All records indicating supervisors involved in disciplinary action and all records of paperwork related to disciplinary action.
All records of disciplinary action of any kind of this officer.
All records pertaining to criminal arrests.
All records of formal complaints or allegations made against this officer.
All records of exculpatory evidence (given this detective is on the Brady List)
All records indicating the date this officer officially made the Brady List with both Redmond and King County and the date the Brady Violation occurred.
All records indicating the officer in charge of public records as it pertains to the public records request I made in 2013 and 2014 and is responsible for not providing this name and all records from those requests.

I am seeking these records in electronic format or by email.

I mean I am still trying to figure out why this name never came up on two different occasions. But I guess I will find out. Your lawyer said this is the first time she saw the name show up herself. I’m still trying to figure out the Brady violation versus the criminal arrest, as Brady laws indicate dishonesty or lying in an official capacity, but because the records were not provided previously on two different occasions, I will need to know exactly what the dishonest acts were. I don’t believe pleading to obscene phone calls would put that on the list and your city not finding any wrongdoing wouldn’t indicate that, but the officer made the Brady List nonetheless, so that will have to be addressed with my public records request.

Let me know if you have any questions. I appreciate your assistance.

brent woods

from: Michelle Hart <MHART@redmond.gov>
to: B Woods <brent.a.woods@gmail.com>,
John Marchione <jmarchione@redmond.gov>
cc: “Angela G. Summerfield” <asummerfield@omwlaw.com>,
“Allison G. Gordon” <agordon@redmond.gov>,
Police Record Requests <PoliceRecordRequests@redmond.gov>
date: Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:56 AM
subject: RE: Public Records Request – 3-25-15
mailed-by: redmond.gov

Brent,

The City of Redmond is in receipt of your request. With a copy of this email, I am sending it to Attorney Summerfield for response. She will track this request and will touch base with you regarding timeline to address your request, and any need for clarification of your request.

Thank you and have a good day.

Michelle Hart

Michelle M. Hart, MMC

City Clerk

425.556.2190 (ph)

425.556.2198 (fx)

mhart@redmond.gov

Visit the City’s website at www.redmond.gov

from: B Woods <brent.a.woods@gmail.com>
to: Michelle Hart <MHART@redmond.gov>
date: Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:44 AM
subject: CORRECTION – PRR 3-25-15
mailed-by: gmail.com

That correct name should be Gregory Patrick.
I put down both Gregory Patrick and Patrick Gregory.
Meant to say Gregory Patrick so as to not confuse.
Sorry.

brent woods

from: Michelle Hart <MHART@redmond.gov>
to: B Woods <brent.a.woods@gmail.com>
cc: Police Record Requests <PoliceRecordRequests@redmond.gov>,
“Angela G. Summerfield” <asummerfield@omwlaw.com>,
“Allison G. Gordon” <agordon@redmond.gov>
date: Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:56 AM
subject: RE: CORRECTION – PRR 3-25-15
mailed-by: redmond.gov

Thank you for this clarification, Brent. Noted for the record.

Michelle

from: Michelle Hart <MHART@redmond.gov>
to: B Woods <brent.a.woods@gmail.com>
cc: “Angela G. Summerfield” <asummerfield@omwlaw.com>
date: Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:29 AM
subject: RE: CORRECTION – PRR 3-25-15
mailed-by: redmond.gov

Brent,

I wanted to let you know that the attorney is currently away from the office and will not return until next week. She will be addressing your request at that time.

Thank you.

Michelle

from: Angela G. Summerfield <asummerfield@omwlaw.com>
to: B Woods <brent.a.woods@gmail.com>
cc: Michelle Hart <MHART@redmond.gov>,
“Allison G. Gordon” <agordon@redmond.gov>,
Police Record Requests <PoliceRecordRequests@redmond.gov>
date: Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 2:57 PM
subject: City of Redmond – Woods PRR March 25, 2015 – follow up response

Hi Brent. I am back in the office after a week away. The purpose of this email is to follow up on our earlier communications relating to “Brady” and to follow up on the email you received from Michelle Hart on March 26, 2015 acknowledging receipt of your new public records request.

First, in your email to me dated March 23, 2015 at 12:36PM, you stated:

I will be needing to know date of arrest. (Brady List – Criminal Charges of Detective)

I will need an explanation how this is not a sustained act of dishonesty.

Or if I don’t hear back I will assume that means I will need to ask for the records as per RCW 42.56.

I have since learned the arrest was in 1998 involving a domestic violence allegation outside the City of Redmond (City of Renton). The criminal complaint was resolved with a plea to a lessor offense which has since been expunged from the record. The City does not possess records of the incident and it is possible the officer is no longer a “Brady” officer.

————————————————————

As for your public records request dated March 25, 2015 relating to Gregory Patrick, I’m pasting your original request below with responses to each, and designated each item with a capital letter for ease of future reference.

A. All records that indicate if this individual is still currently employed at the City of Redmond in the Police Department.

Response: Gregory Patrick is currently employed by the City of Redmond. Many records may imply he is currently an employee but do not actually state he is currently an employee. If the City maintains a list of current employees as of the date of your request, would that satisfy your request or is this response sufficient? Please clarify.

B. All records that indicate this officer’s official title and capacity if still employed.

Response: Gregory Patrick is a detective. He was assigned to that position in May of 2009. I’ve attached the “personnel action notice” reflecting the assignment (page 1 attached), redacting employee social security number, address, telephone numbers and month and year of birth, emergency contact information, and bank account information. (RCW 42.56.250(3) authorizes redaction of residential addresses, telephone numbers and SSNs of employees along with emergency contact information. RCW 42.56.250(8) exempts release of the mo/yr of birth in the personnel files of law enforcement officers. RCW 42.56.230(5) exempts release of bank account numbers.) Very technically, this request could be interpreted to include every single record that includes the words “Detective Gregory Patrick”, including every email sent if an automatic signature is used. Did you intend to request all such records, or is the personnel action notice sufficient to satisfy your request? Please clarify.

C. All records related to any Brady violations.

Response: See attached memorandum (page 2 of attached) regarding IA 98-01, redacting accused officer identity where complaint was unsubstantiated. (RCW 42.56.240(1); Non-disclosure is essential to protect a person’s right of privacy; Bainbridge Island Police Guild v. City of Puyallup, 172 Wn.2d 398 (2011) officer has right to privacy in identity where complaint is unsubstantiated.) See also attached email from Shari Shovlin to Daniel Clark dated November 1, 2013 (page 3 of attached), which was previously provided in connection with your December #24 request.

D. All internal affairs records on this officer.

Response: See response to “C” above. No further responsive records exist.

E. All records related to criminal arrest and conviction maintained by Redmond.

Response: The City interprets this request to mean arrest and conviction of the officer. The City has no responsive records.

F. All records between the City of Redmond and the US Attorney’s Office as it relates to any criminal arrests or convictions or allegations.

Response: The City has no responsive records.

G. All records between the City of Redmond and the City of Renton as it relates to criminal arrest of this officer.

Response: The City has no responsive records.

H. All records of any death threats or threats of suicide or both.

Response: The City has no responsive records.

I. All records pertaining to domestic violence.

Response: See response to (C) above. No further responsive records exist.

J. All records that indicate if this officer is on the SWAT team (if currently employed)

Response: No responsive records exist, as this officer is not on the SWAT team.

K. All records that indicate this officer is certified to have a gun in official capacity.

Response: See three attached letters (pages 4-6 of attached) dated January 16, 2013, March 26, 2006, and April 25, 1999.

L. All records of any plea bargains related to criminal arrest of this individual.

Response: The City has no responsive records.

M. All records of disciplinary action taken.

Response: The City has no responsive records. See response to (C) above for the closest record.

N. All records indicating supervisors involved in disciplinary action and all records of paperwork related to disciplinary action.

Response: The City has no responsive records. See response to (C) above for closest record.

O. All records of disciplinary action of any kind of this officer.

Response: See response to (C) above for the closest record. No further responsive records.

P. All records pertaining to criminal arrests.

Response: The City interprets this request to apply to any arrests made of the officer. The City has no responsive records.

Q. All records of formal complaints or allegations made against this officer.

Response: See attached pages (pages 7-10 of attached) from internal investigation and inquiry logs. These have been redacted to remove the identities of officers where complaints were unsubstantiated or unfounded. See legal basis for redaction in response C above.

R. All records of exculpatory evidence (given this detective is on the Brady List)

Response: The City has no responsive records.

S. All records indicating the date this officer officially made the Brady List with both Redmond and King County and the date the Brady Violation occurred.

Response: The City has no responsive records.

T. All records indicating the officer in charge of public records as it pertains to the public records request I made in 2013 and 2014 and is responsible for not providing this name and all records from those requests.

Response: This request assumes facts that are not accurate as the requests in 2013 and 2014 were for requests for information (rather than public records requests) involving any “Brady” officers and was limited to those with sustained allegations of dishonesty. Detective Patrick does not have a sustained allegation of dishonesty. As such, no responsive record exists.

Please let me know if the responses to A and B above are sufficient. If not, please clarify the records you are seeking. All remaining items have been fully addressed.

Best regards,

Angela G. Summerfield | Attorney

Ogden Murphy Wallace P.L.L.C.
901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3500

Seattle, WA 98164
Phone: 206.447.2250 | Facsimile: 206.447.0215

asummerfield@omwlaw.com | omwlaw.com

 

from: Angela G. Summerfield <asummerfield@omwlaw.com>
to: B Woods <brent.a.woods@gmail.com>
cc: Michelle Hart <MHART@redmond.gov>,
Police Record Requests <PoliceRecordRequests@redmond.gov>
date: Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:36 PM
subject: RE: City of Redmond – Woods PRR March 25, 2015 – conclusion

from: B Woods <brent.a.woods@gmail.com>
to: “Angela G. Summerfield” <asummerfield@omwlaw.com>
date: Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:45 PM
subject: Re: City of Redmond – Woods PRR March 25, 2015 – conclusion
mailed-by: gmail.com

That no responsive record exists and the fact that this officer made the Brady List and yet you say he may not be even be on the Brady List is troubling given the circumstances and the paper trail that exists to this day.

So my question is when did the officer officially make the Brady List? When was the date of incident? And when did the officer get removed from the Brady List? Can you detail that because either no existing records exist, he may or may not have been removed from the Brady List.
I guess my question is also how did the officer make the Brady List as you say this was not a sustained act of dishonesty and yet the Brady List (even if from 1998) relates to dishonesty, so how does one make the list if it is not a sustained act of dishonesty?

brent woods

from: Angela G. Summerfield <asummerfield@omwlaw.com>
to: B Woods <brent.a.woods@gmail.com>
date: Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:55 PM
subject: RE: City of Redmond – Woods PRR March 25, 2015 – conclusion

Brent, I just today received the attached from King County which you may find helpful. At the top of page 3 they address “criminal conviction” in addition to sustained allegations of dishonesty. The City does not have record of the exact date of the incident. I understand it to have taken place in 1998. You can make a request to the City of Renton for the incident report.

Hope this helps.

–Angela

from: B Woods <brent.a.woods@gmail.com>
to: “Angela G. Summerfield” <asummerfield@omwlaw.com>
date: Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:23 PM
subject: Re: City of Redmond – Woods PRR March 25, 2015 – conclusion

Brady evidence regarding recurring government witnesses usually falls into one of

several general categories: misconduct involving dishonesty; evidence tending to show a bias or some motive to lie; and — for expert witnesses — a pattern of confirmed performance errors that could compromise the expert’s conclusions.

That’s right out of that King County bulletin but it discusses dishonesty and lying versus what you are claiming was a criminal conviction. But since the records were expunged or there are no responsive records, this would be one to compare with the standard.

1 comment for “Freedom of Information – Expunged Records – Redmond WA (Part 3)

  1. woodman
    January 17, 2018 at 7:07 am

    I can see they didn’t like the transparency and removed the linkage to the PDF files I had Iframed in. Noted! Regardless, I have the permanent record, and that’s all that matters. Redmond can’t destroy it all and cover it all up for years as seen.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *