Scott Tillis, a St. Louis Metropolitan police officer suspended 19 months without pay for talking back to a commanding officer, was supposed to learn on Tuesday whether or not the police department was going to fire him.
He didn’t. Then again on Wednesday, the Board of Police Commissioners told Tillis’ attorney that he would hear something that day.
Still nothing.
It took 18 months for the board to conclude Tillis’ trial, finding him guilty of insubordination. And yet Tillis’ fate still lingers.
According to the police manual, an insubordination charge, Tillis’ charge, warrants a maximum penalty of 10 days. Even the police officers who stole baseball tickets that were seized by scalpers for the 2006 post-season games only got 14 days suspension.
Tillis believes that the police department retaliated against him for being a whistle blower in the S&H Parking towing scandal and for filing a discrimination of religion complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2007.
Tillis’ problems with the department began soon after he began to investigate towing irregularities at S&H Parking and was threatened with retaliation by its manager, Greg Shepard, according to Tillis.
Shepard, who has since been indicted on multiple counts of fraud in connection with S&H Parking, was a former cop who hosted then Police Chief Mokwa at the tow yard regularly for “coffee,” as Mokwa testified at Tillis’ board trial.
Tillis also claims his bizarre wait for justice is a holdover from a policy switch initiated by Mokwa.
Before Mokwa’s reign, police administrators couldn’t suspend an officer for more than 30 days without a board trial. That’s what the U.S. Constitution would call due process under the 14th Amendment. Tillis was suspended April 17, 2008 and didn’t get into the first phase of the board trial until March 2009.
The police manual in Tillis’ possession published in 1989, under article 7.013, states, “Officers suspended from duty shall have a hearing thirty days from the original date of suspension, unless waived by the suspended officer or postponed for good cause by the Board of Police Commissioners.”
Yet, in the manual published in 2007, when Mokwa was chief, this clause was omitted.
“Clearly if you didn’t agree with Mokwa, then this was his way to say that ‘I’ll either suspend you until you either quit or you come on board with what we’re doing,’” Tillis said.
“That’s been used ever since he was chief of police. It’s been going on ever since.”
When The St. Louis American requested information regarding the modification of this rule to the manual, the police department responded, “All proposed revisions to the Police Manual must be approved by a quorum of the Board of Police Commissioners.”
“If there are no checks and balances to uphold the law, then you can suspend someone indefinitely,” Tillis said. “You can’t survive without pay; you can’t do any security jobs. Any employment in law enforcement is restricted, unless you resign.”
Tillis is suing the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department and the Board of Police Commissioners for violation of due process against the 14th Amendment.
In an interview with The American, current Chief Daniel Isom was asked about the policy change regarding due process. He said, “I know we’re exploring putting some time parameters on now, especially since the Tillis case has taken so long. We’re actually talking about putting some time restrictions on how long the process will take.”
In 19 months, Tillis’ hope that his rights will be upheld has slowly dwindled. In Tillis’ lawsuit of due process, the defense is that the board and department have the authority to justify Tillis’ elongated suspension.
Meanwhile, Tillis sees the disposition of his case as a remaining blemish on the department. Both Isom and current police board chair Todd Epsten – CEO of Major Brands, a liquor distributor – claim the department has cleaned house and squared itself away after a documented period of egregious mismanagement.
Tillis said, “It’s scary when law enforcement agency is supposed to uphold the rights of citizens, but they don’t practice upholding the right to their police officers.”
