In all the twists and turns of the Michael Rodrigues trial over
the past two weeks, it came out during testimony that a former
sheriff’s office colleague sanctioned a private investigation and
surveillance of the suspect while he had been on duty.
In all the twists and turns of the Michael Rodrigues trial over the past two weeks, it came out during testimony that a former sheriff’s office colleague sanctioned a private investigation and surveillance of the suspect while he had been on duty.
Although it shouldn’t divert attention from Rodrigues’ trial and the seriousness of the allegations, the testimony brought to light a problem that Sheriff Curtis Hill must address and clarify as stern office policy.
Reserve sheriff’s deputy John Klauer owns Presidential Security Services and testified about a hotel incident in Laughlin, Nev., in 2004 when he alleged Rodrigues attempted to assault a prostitute.
Klauer in answering questions from the defense attorney acknowledged that a Presidential staff member conducted surveillance on Rodrigues and that it included time while he had been on duty. Klauer was aware of it and authorized the probe.
Klauer testified that it “officially” was not a Presidential investigation but that a staff member at the business did the work on his own time, though Klauer was aware of it.
One law enforcement officer conducting or authorizing an investigation of a superior colleague – for a private outfit – is ludicrous for several reasons. For one, the success of a law enforcement organization hinges on a hierarchal command that makes clear lines of authority. In this case, that line was shattered.
In broad terms, by day, Klauer was a subordinate. By night, he was an adversary. Though it’s possible Rodrigues had been committing improprieties, it permanently poisons the relationship between the supervisor and the employee – reserve or not, guilty or not guilty – and taints the chain of command.
It also begs the question, when it comes to breaking lines of authority, where does it end? Is the sheriff next? Or will a deputy be allowed to dig into the private lives of the undersheriff, lieutenants or other sergeants in his or her off time?
We don’t expect it to necessarily happen, but the Rodrigues case proves it’s a possibility, especially in a county with one primary security company.
The testimony is enough of an alarm bell for Hill to create a unique policy barring such investigative activity among office employees on private time.
