Paramount Theatre
'Chronicle' Sensationalized Chapman Story
RECEIVED Tue., Sept. 9, 2003
I am writing this letter because there appears to be confusion about the process being used to investigate Assistant Police Chief Jimmy Chapman ["More Bad Blood," Sept. 5]. Here are the facts.
On Aug. 22, the police chief initiated an independent administrative investigation of Assistant Chief Jimmy Chapman. This investigation is designed to do one thing: establish the facts of the matter. There are three key elements here. First, the chief chose an independent investigation to ensure a neutral, unbiased investigation of the matter. Second, this investigation will follow the protocol used by the Internal Affairs Division of the Police Department, including taking sworn statements from officers. The chief made this an explicit requirement in the contract with the investigator. This initial inquiry will flesh out the details of the allegation to determine what actually happened. Third, the investigation is beginning administratively to determine if there is sufficient evidence of either a violation of department policies or criminal conduct. The initial information in this case came from a secondary source. Direct information must be obtained before the chief makes any critical decision. The contract with the investigator specifically states that if the investigation produces a reasonable suspicion that criminal conduct may have occurred he is to notify the chief immediately. If the investigation discovers criminal wrongdoing the information will be turned over to the District Attorney’s Office.
Any time an organization has to investigate a high-ranking official for possible wrongdoing, there will be controversy. Assistant Chief Chapman will be afforded the same rights as any citizen in this country – the presumption of innocence. Again, this investigation is designed to establish the facts of the matter. It is unfortunate that last week’s Chronicle sensationalized this issue by printing a picture of Chapman with his children. How does this contribute to a fair and honest approach?
On Aug. 22, the police chief initiated an independent administrative investigation of Assistant Chief Jimmy Chapman. This investigation is designed to do one thing: establish the facts of the matter. There are three key elements here. First, the chief chose an independent investigation to ensure a neutral, unbiased investigation of the matter. Second, this investigation will follow the protocol used by the Internal Affairs Division of the Police Department, including taking sworn statements from officers. The chief made this an explicit requirement in the contract with the investigator. This initial inquiry will flesh out the details of the allegation to determine what actually happened. Third, the investigation is beginning administratively to determine if there is sufficient evidence of either a violation of department policies or criminal conduct. The initial information in this case came from a secondary source. Direct information must be obtained before the chief makes any critical decision. The contract with the investigator specifically states that if the investigation produces a reasonable suspicion that criminal conduct may have occurred he is to notify the chief immediately. If the investigation discovers criminal wrongdoing the information will be turned over to the District Attorney’s Office.
Any time an organization has to investigate a high-ranking official for possible wrongdoing, there will be controversy. Assistant Chief Chapman will be afforded the same rights as any citizen in this country – the presumption of innocence. Again, this investigation is designed to establish the facts of the matter. It is unfortunate that last week’s Chronicle sensationalized this issue by printing a picture of Chapman with his children. How does this contribute to a fair and honest approach?
Laura Huffman
Assistant City Manager
Assistant City Manager
[News editor Michael King replies: The photograph Ms. Huffman objects to is a reproduction of a "Kids and Cops" trading card distributed by the Austin Police Dept. as part of a promotional campaign, and the Chronicle's reproduction intentionally obscured the faces of Officer Chapman's children. If Ms. Huffman (or her boss Toby Futrell) objects to the exploitation of officers' children as marketing tools, her complaint should be directed to APD Chief Stan Knee.]