After being suspended without pay for 19 months from the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, Police Officer Scott Tillis made his final argument to keep his job at a penalty hearing on Tuesday.
Earlier this year, the Board of Police Commissioners found Tillis guilty of two charges of insubordination: conduct unbecoming of an officer and bringing discredit to department or personnel.
The first offense for insubordination – for Tillis, it was being argumentative when signing a reprimand – only allows for a maximum of 10 days suspension. Yet the second charge, being disrespectful to his supervisors, ranges from suspension to dismissal.
Tillis faces losing his job.
With the hearing completed, Tillis now awaits the decision of the police board. But the board has no deadline, said Scott Millikan, Tillis’ attorney, who was appointed and is being paid by the St. Louis Police Officers Association.
“They hit him with the second charge so they could fire him,” Millikan said. “They’re going to do whatever they want to do.”
Although the odds are against Tillis, he said he is glad he made it to this point.
“I’m happy that I did something that they didn’t want to do – I made them give me a board trial,” Tillis told The American. “They’re amazed that I survived 19 months, but they’re allowed to get away with it.”
Before the reprimands of April 2008, Tillis had filed a discrimination lawsuit against the police board and Police Chief Joe Mokwa because his commanding officers would not allow him to practice his religion.
He also started investigating suspicious towing cases from S&H Parking, whose company manager, Gregory Shepard, was indicted with multiple fraud charges in June 2009. In Tillis’ board trial, Mokwa testified that he had known Shepard for 25 years and regularly visited him at the tow yard for “coffee.”
Tillis believes the discrimination suit and S&H investigation explain why the police force has kept him suspended for so long.
‘A community officer’
The hearing on Tuesday began with testimony from Captain John Hayden, head of Internal Affairs. In his position, he is responsible for making a recommendation for Tillis’ punishment. Originally, he recommended that Tillis only be suspended for 15 days for both charges, based on the police manual.
He also recommended that Tillis be reduced to probationary officer for one year, transferred to a different patrol division and have a mentor assigned for assistance services.
In his opinion, it was the best thing for Tillis at the time, he testified.
Yet, on the stand, he showed a change of heart.
“As you sit here today, if you were the decision-maker on deciding whether Officer Tillis would be removed from the roles, based on what the board found, what would your decision be?” asked Charles Ford, plaintiff attorney.
“Termination,” Hayden said.
When asked why he changed his mind, Hayden said that he spoke to Lieutenant Colonel David Heath, who is also the secretary of the police board.
“Could we actually say what particular orders Officer Tillis would follow based on the information we have?” Hayden said in the testimony. “I could not say what orders he would follow. That would be a particularly dangerous situation if we could not tell.”
However, in the closing arguments, Millikan said that Tillis had an excellent record prior to 2008, when the problems with the department began.
“We do know what Officer Tillis would do,” he said.
“He did it for 10 years in the military and for seven years with the St. Louis Police Department. He is a good officer, and he’s served the country and city with honor and distinction.”
Tillis testified that one of his proudest accomplishments as an officer was his participation in building community in the O’Fallon Place Apartments. “Being an community officer, people could come and talk to me anytime,” he said.
S&H whistleblower
In February 2008, he also began snooping around the tow yard at S&H Parking after receiving complaints about a mass, random towing sweep in the O’Fallon Place Apartments.
Shepard confronted him, saying, “I’m with Joe [Mokwa]” and threatened to contact Internal Affairs regarding Tillis.
Tillis then contacted Internal Affairs himself and was told to drop his investigation into S&H.
Two months later, he was informed that he was getting a written reprimand on the allegation that had been pending, and he needed to sign it. Tillis told the sergeants who approached him that he wanted to exercise his rights and respond to the reprimand before he signed it.
They told him, “No.” Tillis signed it because he didn’t want to be changed with insubordination, but he was charged regardless.
After being approached aggressively by Lieutenant Christopher Smith and Sergeants William Kiphart, William Brush and Brian Hosie, Tillis said that he felt threatened.
“I felt I was targeted,” he said at the hearing. “They were angry at me because I filed a discrimination law suit.”
When asked on the stand what he would have done differently, Tillis said, “Recognizing (Smith’s) anger and how he felt, I could have used verbal judo to calm down the situation.”
Ford said that Tillis was just trying to blame other people for his actions.
“On April 15, 2008, a direct supervisor of Officer Tillis came with another sergeant to meet Tillis with the sole purpose of having him sign a written reprimand. That constitutes an ‘Ay ay, sir.’ That’s not what happened that day,” Ford said.
Hayden testified that he believed consistency in discipline was important. Millikan presented three cases of insubordination with a maximum suspension penalty of 14 days. That included the police officers who in March 27, 2007 stole World Series tickets. Others called their commanding officers profanities and only received up to five days’ suspension.
“The fact that we are sitting here 18 months later after his suspension in a war trial setting, it’s hard to fathom,” Millikan said.
He said it is crucial that the board not punish Tillis for exercising his rights through the processes that are supported by the department.
“If Lieutenant Smith had read the rules and knew what he’s doing before he went to see Officer Tillis in the first place, we wouldn’t be sitting here today,” Millikan said.
“The board has the evidence and testimony. Lieutenant Smith testified that he was not upset when dealing with Tillis, and it’s not credible.”
James Scott, a retired police officer, said in his 21 years, he saw cases of officers who were suspended or pushed out if the force did not want them around.
“You can’t beat them in their own system,” Scott said.
“It’s their rules,” Tillis said. “If it had been a jury trial, we wouldn’t have gotten to this point.”
