Greenwood Police Officer Sam Bowen poses in his uniform in this undated photo. Photo provided by Jay Meisenhelder
A suspended Greenwood police officer has filed a federal lawsuit against the chief of police, alleging retaliation after he criticized the chief on social media.
Greenwood Police Officer Sam Bowen, who is currently suspended, is accusing Police Chief Jim Ison of depriving/conspiring to deprive him of his First Amendment right of Freedom of Speech based on posts made on Facebook before the May Municipal Primary and messages he sent to other officers. He is also suing the city of Greenwood for breach of contract, according to an amended civil complaint filed Aug. 8 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.
News of the lawsuit comes less than a day after reports began to spread that two Greenwood officers were suspended and three others had resigned following alleged violations of department policies. Bowen is one of the suspended officers facing a disciplinary hearing next month.
Ison declined to comment on the lawsuit and the hearing, saying he was not at liberty to speak before the hearing. Assistant City Attorney Drew Foster said that the city does not comment on pending litigation, but said that the lawsuit is “without merit.”
Suspensions, resignations
Two officers are currently suspended without pay, pending a disciplinary hearing before the city’s Police Merit Commission, while three other officers have resigned. All of the officers had been with the department for less than five years.
Officers Bowen and Elijah Allen are facing termination for allegedly violating three of the department’s policies: Information and Technology Use; Mobile Data Center Use; and Standards of Conduct. The three other officers who have resigned are Tyler Kintzele, Zane Hennig and Jacob Hagist.
The policy sections specifically referenced in the disciplinary charges for the Information and Technology Use and Mobile Data Center Use violations have to do with not using technology in a professional manner and sending derogatory, defamatory or inappropriate messages on the mobile data center system, respectively.
In the third disciplinary charge, two sections of the Standards of Conduct policy are cited. The first covers using obscene, indecent, profane or derogatory language while on duty or in uniform, while the second has to do and any other on- or off-duty conduct that is “unbecoming a member of this agency, is contrary to good order, efficiency or morale, or tends to reflect unfavorably upon this agency or its members,” according to GPD.
The disciplinary charges were filed based on electronic communications compiled after Bowen filed the lawsuit against the city in June, and after officials interviewed the five officers in early August. A sixth officer was interviewed during this process because he was part of the conversations that were under investigation, but he has not been charged and is not up for termination.
In response to a public records request by the Daily Journal, the city’s legal department provided copies of the disciplinary charging documents filed against Allen, Bowen and Hagist, who resigned after formal charges were brought.
Police officials have compiled a 5,320-page document containing instant messages sent and received by Bowen from July 14, 2021 to July 14 of this year. Within the document are over 100 exchanges between the officers that contain derogatory language that were sent on department equipment, according to the documents. The messages contained slurs referring to African Americans, Jewish people, the LGBT community, and people with intellectual disabilities.
Ison has recommended both Bowen and Allen be terminated by the merit commission at the hearing, he said. The five-member board will make the final decision regarding their employment during a disciplinary hearing that will take place at 5 p.m. on Sept. 20 in the council chambers at the Greenwood City Center. It will be a public hearing.
After the resignations, Greenwood Police now has 69 active officers, Foster said.
The initial complaint
Bowen, who has been with GPD since 2020, filed a lawsuit against Ison, both personally and in his official capacity, and the city on June 26 alleging First Amendment violations and breach of contract. An amended complaint was later filed on Aug. 8 after Bowen learned some of his instant messages, or IMs, were obtained by the police chief.
In the lawsuit, Bowen’s attorney Jay Meisenhelder says Bowen engaged in a series of exchanges with other Greenwood residents on two Facebook groups: Greenwood Chatter and Greenwood, Indiana Crime Tracker. The exchanges allegedly involved a “perceived lack of transparency” by GPD in reporting criminal activity, and alleged attempts by incumbent Mayor Mark Myers and Ison to downplay the reporting of crime in the city, according to the lawsuit.
Myers, a Republican, was facing a primary challenge from Joe Hubbard, and later won reelection. The exchanges took place before the May primary.
On May 2, the day of the primary election, Bowen says Ison gave him a letter telling him his ability to work in an off-duty law enforcement capacity was revoked until further notice. He also lost the ability to use a take-home police vehicle.
Bowen alleges that Ison did this because he was publicly critical of Myers and Ison. The lawsuit also says that another officer was subjected to the same actions for the same reason.
Bowen says his Facebook posts “touched on matters of public concern,” and that he was speaking as a private citizen, according to the lawsuit. He also says he never identified himself as a Greenwood officer, never appeared in his uniform or other identifiable apparel and was not identified on his own Facebook page as a GPD officer, the lawsuit says.
Bowen and his attorney allege that Ison deprived Bowen of his First Amendment Rights, and illegally retaliated against him for engaging in constitutionally protected speech.
He also alleged that he has repeatedly been given the least desirable assignments following the revocation of privileges, including an assignment he says was usually given to recruits.
The amended complaint
After the initial complaint was filed, Bowen learned that the city’s legal staff had obtained and sent Ison a copy of his instant messaging communications. He alleges he was the only officer whose IMs were obtained.
GPD reportedly interviewed six officers, including Bowen, about their use of IMs on or around Aug. 2. The names of other officers were allegedly obtained from Bowen’s IMs, the lawsuit alleges.
Bowen and his attorney say that the focus of the IMs was the use of certain, allegedly prejudicial terms during the officers’ communications with one another. Later, they say that Ison recommended Bowen and four other officers be fired based on language in the IMs.
Bowen alleges that he continues to suffer damages as a result of the situation and that the city had breached his contract by depriving him of his off-duty employment and take-home vehicle privileges, according to the lawsuit.
At the time he received the letter, Bowen says he was operating a private security service during his time off. He was also attempting to bid on a contract that required him to have police powers, the lawsuit says.
Bowen and his attorney allege that Ison harassed Bowen after the filing of the initial complaint by selectively auditing Bowen’s messages and recommending termination based on their contents.
Attorney criticizes Ison
Meisenhelder, Bowen’s attorney, criticized Ison in a statement for releasing the charging documents against Bowen — saying it was another way for Ison to retaliate against Bowen for suing him and the city.
“It is also an improper and inappropriate to deny Officer Bowen the due process to which he is entitled,” Meisenhelder said in a statement.
Meisenhelder says Bowen would not be commenting specifically on the communications involved, other than to say that the messages between other officers were “all private banter” and that while the language used may have been inappropriate, “it was never intended to be more than private, verbal horseplay.”
Bowen’s remarks, even if they were inappropriate, “never affected his actions or behavior on the job,” Meisenhelder said.
Meisenhelder says the case is more significant than the specific communications mentioned. The fact that only Bowen’s communications were scrutinized by officials is significant, he said.
Bowen’s attorney also says the electronic communication reports are public records, available to any citizen, and said it would be interesting to see what a review of the electronic communications of other GPD officers — including Ison — would show.
Due process requires that the merit commission go into the disciplinary hearing unbiased and with an open mind, Meisenhelder said. He alleges that Ison’s release of information a month before the hearing throws the documents into commission members’ faces.
He also alleges the decision violates GPD’s Personnel Records Policy, which states the department may release the factual basis for a disciplinary action after final action has been taken and resulted in the employee being suspended, demoted or discharged.
“Since the Merit Commission hearing will be the final action, Ison’s release of these documents is a violation of policy,” Meisenhelder said.
However, the documents were released by Foster, an assistant city attorney in the legal department. Foster says the merit board had already been provided the documents before their release to the media. Procedurally, the merit board is given a packet of allegations and the factual allegations before the hearing — and this includes the disciplinary charging documents, he said.
If the commission ultimately decides that Bowen should be terminated, Bowen will deal with the result as required, Meisenhelder said. The lawsuit will still continue.
“… [N]either the Merit Commission’s decision, nor Ison’s improper and malicious actions will have any impact on the lawsuit against Ison and the City,” he said.
DISCIPLINARY CHARGES
Here’s a look at disciplinary charges filed against the two suspended Greenwood Police Officers:
Charge 1: Violation of Greenwood Police Department Policy 321 “Information Technology Use”
Section 321.2 — “It is the policy of the Greenwood Police Department that members shall use information technology resources, including computer, software and systems that are issued or maintained by the Agency in a professional manner and in accordance with this policy.”
Charge 2: Violation of Greenwood Police Department Policy 422 “Mobile Data Center Use”
Section 422.4 “Restricted Access and Use” — “Sending derogatory, defamatory, obscene, disrespectful, sexually suggestive, harassing or any other inappropriate messages on the MDC system is prohibited and may result in discipline.”
Charge 3: Violation of Greenwood Police Department Policy 320 “Standards of Conduct”
Section 320.5.9 (h) — “Use of obscene, indecent, profane or derogatory language while on-duty or in uniform”
Section 320.5.9 (p) — “Any other on- or off-duty conduct which any member knows or reasonably should know is unbecoming a member of this agency, is contrary to good order, efficiency or morale, or tends to reflect unfavorably upon this agency or its members.”
Source: Greenwood Police Department
