(Oct. 27, 2016) The failure of state and local officials to attend a reconciliation meeting after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission determined reasonable cause existed that those officials engaged in unlawful employment practices resulted in an amended complaint by the plaintiffs Kelvin Sewell, Lynell Green and Franklin Savage alleging Title VII violations, which ultimately attracted the attention of the Department of Justice.
Late last week, documents were made public that revealed the DOJ filed a motion to intervene in the case, since the consequences of the litigation could affect the rights of others not party to the case. A judge has not yet ruled on the motion.
Since the EEOC-requested meeting did not occur, according to court documents, lawyers for former police chief Kelvin Sewell, Lynell Green and Franklin Savage have since amended their initial complaint to include Title VII violations, which bars employers from discriminating against employees for many reasons, including ethnicity.
This amended complaint had the side effect of reviving the charges against State’s Attorney Beau Oglesby, which had been dismissed by a judge on the grounds of prosecutorial immunity, pursuant to a Supreme Court ruling 40 years ago. In essence, the court found state prosecutors working within the scope of their duties to be absolutely immune from civil liability.
Oglesby has again filed papers requesting these charges be dismissed.
“Federal law protects against discrimination and retaliation in the workplace,” Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, said in a release last week. “In police departments, that protection is vital not only for individual officials, but also for the communities they serve. The Justice Department is firmly committed to ensuring that our nation’s state and local law enforcement agencies comply with Title VII’s promise of a workplace free from racial discrimination and retaliation.”
Through the case the plaintiffs, and now, potentially, the United States are seeking “all appropriate monetary relief” including back pay and pre-judgment interest to Sewell, Green and Savage, as well as compensatory damages.
In addition, the plaintiffs are seeking to force the defendants to develop and implement policies, procedures and training to prevent similar circumstances from happening again.
The basis of the complaint starts with Franklin Savage, who claims he was subjected to a hostile work environment by the Sheriff’s Office, and by extension, the state, while he was assigned to a joint task force. Savage complained about the environment and alleges he was subject to further retaliation by the Sheriff’s Office and Pocomoke City, up to and including his termination.
Further, two people who supported his claims, Lynell Green and Kelvin Sewell, allege they faced retaliation themselves for supporting Savage. Green eventually resigned from the PCPD, and Sewell was fired by the city, sparking an outcry and protests.
In July, Green and Sewell were indicted by a grand jury on charges of misconduct in office and conspiracy to commit misconduct in office. A jury trial is scheduled in December.
Both Sewell and Green face charges stemming from the same incident in November 2014. According to the indictment, both are alleged to have “knowingly, willfully, and intentionally, under the color of his office, interfering with the legitimate investigation of a motor vehicle accident by subordinate police officers for the personal benefit of an acquaintance, Correctional Officer Captain Douglas E. Matthews…”
The pair is also accused of conspiring with each other in order to perpetrate the alleged misconduct.
There is no record of the accident within the Maryland Judiciary Case Search database, which provides public access to court records online. However, there are exceptions to what information is made publicly available.
These charges were not brought directly by Oglesby, but by the State Prosecutor Emmet Davitt. The office of the State Prosecutor was established 40 years ago specifically to investigate election law violations, public ethics violations, bribery law violations, official misconduct as well as related perjury, extortion or obstruction of justice claims.
The prosecutor investigates these issues under his own initiative, or via request from the governor, attorney general, General Assembly, the state ethics commission, or a State’s Attorney.
Late last week, documents were made public that revealed the DOJ filed a motion to intervene in the case, since the consequences of the litigation could affect the rights of others not party to the case. A judge has not yet ruled on the motion.
Since the EEOC-requested meeting did not occur, according to court documents, lawyers for former police chief Kelvin Sewell, Lynell Green and Franklin Savage have since amended their initial complaint to include Title VII violations, which bars employers from discriminating against employees for many reasons, including ethnicity.
This amended complaint had the side effect of reviving the charges against State’s Attorney Beau Oglesby, which had been dismissed by a judge on the grounds of prosecutorial immunity, pursuant to a Supreme Court ruling 40 years ago. In essence, the court found state prosecutors working within the scope of their duties to be absolutely immune from civil liability.
Oglesby has again filed papers requesting these charges be dismissed.
“Federal law protects against discrimination and retaliation in the workplace,” Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, said in a release last week. “In police departments, that protection is vital not only for individual officials, but also for the communities they serve. The Justice Department is firmly committed to ensuring that our nation’s state and local law enforcement agencies comply with Title VII’s promise of a workplace free from racial discrimination and retaliation.”
Through the case the plaintiffs, and now, potentially, the United States are seeking “all appropriate monetary relief” including back pay and pre-judgment interest to Sewell, Green and Savage, as well as compensatory damages.
In addition, the plaintiffs are seeking to force the defendants to develop and implement policies, procedures and training to prevent similar circumstances from happening again.
The basis of the complaint starts with Franklin Savage, who claims he was subjected to a hostile work environment by the Sheriff’s Office, and by extension, the state, while he was assigned to a joint task force. Savage complained about the environment and alleges he was subject to further retaliation by the Sheriff’s Office and Pocomoke City, up to and including his termination.
Further, two people who supported his claims, Lynell Green and Kelvin Sewell, allege they faced retaliation themselves for supporting Savage. Green eventually resigned from the PCPD, and Sewell was fired by the city, sparking an outcry and protests.
In July, Green and Sewell were indicted by a grand jury on charges of misconduct in office and conspiracy to commit misconduct in office. A jury trial is scheduled in December.
Both Sewell and Green face charges stemming from the same incident in November 2014. According to the indictment, both are alleged to have “knowingly, willfully, and intentionally, under the color of his office, interfering with the legitimate investigation of a motor vehicle accident by subordinate police officers for the personal benefit of an acquaintance, Correctional Officer Captain Douglas E. Matthews…”
The pair is also accused of conspiring with each other in order to perpetrate the alleged misconduct.
There is no record of the accident within the Maryland Judiciary Case Search database, which provides public access to court records online. However, there are exceptions to what information is made publicly available.
These charges were not brought directly by Oglesby, but by the State Prosecutor Emmet Davitt. The office of the State Prosecutor was established 40 years ago specifically to investigate election law violations, public ethics violations, bribery law violations, official misconduct as well as related perjury, extortion or obstruction of justice claims.
The prosecutor investigates these issues under his own initiative, or via request from the governor, attorney general, General Assembly, the state ethics commission, or a State’s Attorney.