Brady-Giglio Policy Q&A with Sheriff Jay T. Armbrister

4/22/2022

Douglas County law enforcement leaders including the Lawrence, Eudora, Baldwin City and University of Kansas Police Departments along with the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office have jointly crafted a uniform policy in providing information to prosecutors with regard to the Brady-Giglio ruling to protect citizens’ constitutional rights.  

A Brady-Giglio policy, based on court precedent, requires prosecutors to disclose exculpatory and impeachment evidence when it would be material to determining a defendant’s guilt or potential punishment in a criminal court case. Law enforcement agencies provide any potential information required under Brady-Giglio on individual officers to prosecutors for a decision on disclosure. (Click here to view the policy: https://bit.ly/3EiMsZe)

Sheriff Jay Armbrister discusses more details about the policy, why it’s important and what it means for the Sheriff’s Office.

Q: First off, most people might understand why Brady-Giglio standards as a concept are important in a criminal case, but they might not immediately recognize the name and what it means. Can you explain why this is important from a law enforcement context and why you worked with the police chiefs in the county to develop the policy?

Armbrister: As law enforcement we have always kept records on potential Brady-Giglio issues that could impair officers, deputies or employees from testifying. But it has become clear in the last few years how critical it is for law enforcement agencies to be proactive in having policies that confirm our commitment to protecting those constitutional rights.

Many of the police chiefs are relatively new, and the District Attorney and I took office in 2021. We all have things we inherited from a previous administration and are working to improve the system. From the law enforcement standpoint, this policy helps continue to foster accountability and is uniform among agencies across the county, so we believe this is a big deal. In other words, law enforcement agencies rarely all agree on a uniform policy, such as yet we have all agreed and adopted the same uniform policy.

Q: The legal standard of whether potential Brady-Giglio information should be disclosed to a defendant is whether the evidence is “material” to the decision on guilt or innocence. If there is evidence from an officer or investigators conduct in the past either through an internal investigation or otherwise, how do you as sheriff decide whether evidence is material and should be sent to prosecutors for review and potential disclosure?

Armbrister: I believe the third definition in Black’s Law Dictionary of “material” that “of such a nature that knowledge of the item would affect a person’s decision making” is most germane in this case. I would agree with those who believe the term can be ambiguous and subjective, so I will err on the side of caution when deciding what needs to be disclosed and what does not.

My own personal situation and experience plays deeply into this. A well-publicized allegation was made against me and my truthfulness during a criminal investigation. Based on that allegation, an independent investigation was completed by an outside agency. The findings were clear that I had acted in good faith but in poor practice and violated department policies in that I unintentionally failed to move a recorded interview to the proper server to be preserved as part of an investigation. There was absolutely no information showing I acted maliciously or nefariously, nor with intent. In fact, it showed that I had, at NO POINT, tried to hide my mistakes or obscure them from both the defense and courts. I did not know that the recorded interview had not been uploaded or saved to the system until the case proceeded to trial.

And to that end, I received administrative punishment for the policy violations, and the District Attorney at the time reviewed the investigation and found there was no criminal conduct or intent to obscure information on my part. 

My case is an excellent example: There is an allegation of untruthfulness; however, after the system has looked at it from a Brady-Giglio standard, it remains an allegation and not “material” information “of such a nature that knowledge of the item would affect a person’s decision making.” So, if I had a deputy in my agency with these exact set of facts presented to me, I would retain all information in the personnel file, but I would not state he or she has any material Brady-Giglio findings that should be disclosed as that is the standard the law requires. Honest mistakes and intentional deceit are two entirely different things and will be handled as such.

Q: In the process through an internal investigation an accusation against an officer of untruthfulness becomes sustained, then you would provide that information to the prosecutors and what actions are taken regarding the officer’s employment status and what might occur beyond that with his or her law enforcement career?

Armbrister: That officer would no longer work for us.

Additionally, as Sheriff, I am required to complete a form for KS-CPOST (Kansas Commission on Peace Officers’ Standards and Training) regarding the findings of the internal affairs investigation and provide them any information requested regarding that person’s commission. For an employee separation, the form includes providing a description and answering questions about the reasons for termination or separation, including:

–              Whether there was an internal investigation on the officer in the past six months.

–              If we are aware of an external investigation or law enforcement-related civil action or lawsuit on the officer in the past six months.

–              If we are aware of a criminal investigation or criminal charges against the officer.

In talking about this policy with the community, as Sheriff, I now have an extra layer of accountability in that I have talked about how I intend to handle these situations, and if I stray from my promise, the community will hold me accountable. I want to avoid letting the community down as I’m trying to maintain community trust, rather than tear it down.

You can read a more detailed version of Sheriff Armbrister’s responses in the document below: