News
Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Deputy's conduct a crime?
Prosecutors look into Daniel Brock's handling of DUI arrests.
By COLLEEN JENKINS
Published June 19, 2007
TAMPA - The Hillsborough State Attorney's Office is investigating whether a former sheriff's deputy who made questionable drunken driving arrests should face criminal charges.
Daniel Brock earned praise as an aggressive watchdog during his four years on a Hillsborough Sheriff's Office DUI squad. But his tactics led to his firing May 24 after an internal review found that he arrested 58 people with blood-alcohol content below the level at which state law presumes a driver impaired, often without evidence of suspicious driving behavior, positive urine samples or video to back his claims.
In the fall, after reviewing a case where Brock submitted contradictory reports, a high-ranking prosecutor said his actions met "the element of a crime" but recommended that the matter be handled administratively by the Sheriff's Office.
Sheriff's investigators subsequently conducted an internal audit. Prosecutors learned of its findings in the St. Petersburg Times and decided to take a closer look, Assistant State Attorney Pam Bondi said.
"We have asked them to provide us with a copy of this audit as well as any other additional information they now possess that may implicate Deputy Brock in any crime, " Bondi said Monday.
Attorneys for Brock could not be reached on Monday.
The man whose DUI arrest sparked the internal investigation welcomed news that prosecutors were conducting their own review.
"No matter who you are, if you break the law you should be prosecuted, " Kristopher Amos said. "It's only fair."
The scope of potential wrongdoing and its implications for pending DUI cases is unclear. At least 31 of Brock's cases were unresolved as of Oct. 6 when the State Attorney's Office excused him from responding to court subpoenas issued by that office, according to an internal report.
Prosecutors developed concerns about Brock, 38, at least two years ago.
In July 2005, misdemeanor prosecutor Jill Hamel wrote a memo to her supervisor about inconsistencies in Brock's statements regarding his involvement in a DUI investigation, records from the Sheriff's Office internal investigation show.
On Sept. 6, 2006, then-misdemeanor bureau chief Sandra Spoto told internal affairs Detective Bruce Crumpler that she had known of issues with Brock's handling of cases for as long as a year.
She noted a trend: Brock, she said, tended to arrest "a high number of Hispanics" in eastern Hillsborough County on DUI charges. Far too many of those people, Spoto said, had low amounts of alcohol in their systems, alcohol-free urine tests and descriptions of failed sobriety exercises that did not match the videos of those arrests.
Also on Sept. 6, prosecutors provided Crumpler with information about Amos' case.
Previously, in mid August, Brock contacted Assistant State Attorney Jennifer Palacios and told her that the original report he filed for Amos' July 17 arrest was inaccurate.
"The first two pages showed the defendant being more intoxicated than he truly was, " Brock told Palacios, according to records.
He then hand-delivered the State Attorney's Office an amended report. The second report said that Amos properly performed some of the field sobriety tests that Brock's original report said he failed but gave new examples of exercises Amos couldn't perform.
Crumpler reviewed videotape from the arrest and found errors in Brock's amended report, according to internal affairs records.
As a result of the contradictions, the State Attorney's Office dropped the charges against Amos, Palacios said in a letter to Crumpler. In total, prosecutors dropped charges in 65 of the 313 arrests Brock made from October 2005 to October 2006. In those dropped charges, 25 drivers registered well over the 0.08 percent blood-alcohol benchmark at which state law presumes a driver is impaired.
But prosecutors declined to press criminal charges stemming from Brock's handling of Amos' case.
"The facts in this case meet the element of a crime, however, we feel this matter would be better handled in an administrative manner within the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office, " Chief Assistant Karen L. Stanley wrote in a Nov. 6 memo to a sheriff's internal affairs detective.
Crumpler began an audit of Brock's cases later that month. In one instance, Brock arrested a driver who registered a 0.01 percent test result.
The Sheriff's Office rejected Brock's appeal of his firing. The internal affairs division is auditing his supervisor, Cpl. Mark Clark, in connection with Brock's activities, Chief Sheriff's Deputy Jose Docobo said Friday.
Citing the pending Brock investigation, Bondi would not comment on what charges he may face.
Amos, 26, said any investigation at all is a good start.
"Just cause he is a cop, " Amos said, "doesn't mean he should just get a slap on his wrist."
Colleen Jenkins can be reached at cjenkins@sptimes.com or (813) 226-3337.
[Last modified June 19, 2007, 00:59:08]
Share your thoughts on this story
Comments on this article
|
by vin
|
07/22/07 04:06 PM
|
|
it seems police according to them they must exact the letter of the law this should be aapplied here. The sheriff had to at least purjure himself if he had tetified in any of his bogus dui arrests.
|
|
by Alexis
|
07/16/07 10:17 PM
|
|
Ms. Bondi was in charge of Debra Lefave going to jail.In charge of finding officers not guilty in the beating death of a boy in juevenile camp,Ronda Storms innocent of accepting $50K kickbacks,trying to close MOSI "Body exhibit" for religious reasons
|
|
by Karen
|
06/26/07 01:06 PM
|
|
Thank God this has opened the door. I finally feel validated. I was arrested by the Hillsborough Cty Sheriffs Office in Sept 04 for DUI (.02)! Charges were dropped after costing me thousands of dollars, a job and my reputation. Review all arrests!
|
|
by Judy
|
06/23/07 12:11 AM
|
|
It still amazes me that people just accept news reports. Look behind the sensationalism before it happensto you or someone you know. Everything you read is not true! Funny the news doesn't say "alleged" with him. Is He guilty based on a news report?!
|
|
by Judy
|
06/23/07 12:02 AM
|
|
How does his record compare with records of other deputies?
Report sounds one sided. Makes no sense that he has all the commendations. Makes no sense that he was not required to file reports correctly by supervisors. Bet fellow officers would be same
|
|
by Thomas
|
06/20/07 12:44 PM
|
|
Get at least dui cops breathalyzers to carry with them and test people on the streets. If you fail bring them in for further tests. Leaving the decision to the officer calls for these kind of situations.
|
|
by Todd
|
06/20/07 09:11 AM
|
|
Compare these statements:
"The law takes care of their own, He'll walk"
"Most if not all LE lie to make a case."
to these statements:
"He's Hispanic, he must be drunk"
"Most blacks in nice cars are suspicious"
Can someone tell me the difference?
|
|
by Ron
|
06/19/07 11:49 PM
|
|
I can agree with Scott. It is too easy for Deputies to do this, especially when they know what many DUI arrests can do for advancements in the Dept.I am sure it isn't isolated to H.C. either. Too easy to ruin people's lives 'cause of these bad cops.
|
|
by Brian
|
06/19/07 10:35 PM
|
|
Allison, your comments scare me! It doesn't affect me, I don't drink so I don't care! Even if you do not drink, you should still want for law enforcement to operate within the law! I would encourage you to look at things beyond your own pt of view!
|
|
by Brian
|
06/19/07 10:23 PM
|
|
Scott, you are absolutely right that this IS more widespread than just this one deputy. Hopefully now that this deputy's actions have been brought to light, there will be more oversight not only to DUI deputies/officers but their superiors as well!
|
|
by Jazzy
|
06/19/07 10:03 PM
|
|
I am so pleased that a crooked cop has been taken off the street. More then society reolizes innocent citizens are harassed daily by police and other officials due to racism although it took fifty eight questionable arrests better late the never.
|
|
by V
|
06/19/07 09:35 PM
|
|
Scott, you are correct! Widespead from the point that this is what they are told to do, and he actually did his job well. This case is not unique at all folks.
|
|
by scott
|
06/19/07 08:51 PM
|
|
I just read a blog of H.C. Deputies and they say this is alot more widespread than this story implies. Brock was on the fast track and his supervisors knew what he was doing. He got busted by an honest prosecutor. Wait and see boys and girls.
|
|
by John
|
06/19/07 07:21 PM
|
|
I doubt the Sherriffs Office or state attorneys will file charges in this case or any other involving criminal activity by a deputy. They tend to look after their own, and even in a high publicity case 5 days suspension is the best they can do!
|
|
by Ron
|
06/19/07 04:19 PM
|
|
The only reason this criminal Cop is being investigated more closely now is the Public is aware of him now. The Law takes care of their oen as they tried to push it aside. If they still don't prosecute the racist, rogue cop, then I am speechless!
|
|
by Allison
|
06/19/07 04:16 PM
|
|
I have no sympathy for someone that chooses to drive drunk, you are right up there w/pedophiles in my book. This officer was wrong to trump up charges against people that were not intoxicated b/c he has now affected those cases that were legit.
|
|
by Billy
|
06/19/07 03:18 PM
|
|
This lowlife person calling himself a deputy sheriff should be prosecuted to the fullest. Most if not all law envorcement personell lie to make a case. He and the sheriff's dept. should be forced to pay all monies spent by the innocent victim
|
|
by David
|
06/19/07 03:04 PM
|
|
This is what happens when over zealous groups like MADD force the police to use quota's rather than good judgement!
|
|
by ms
|
06/19/07 01:11 PM
|
|
Yeah, Brock needs to be charged, and the State Attorney's office needs to be shaken up with several people needing to go. I'm glad this is getting a lot of press. It's getting hard to trust the police. St Pete fired several cadets for racial issues.
|
|
by dave
|
06/19/07 11:15 AM
|
|
this is what 1st ammendment and the press are all about. when gov't doesn't do it's job, the press is supposed to expose ans shame them until the public demands justice! resign Bondi!!
|
|
by bill
|
06/19/07 09:48 AM
|
|
Oh yes this guy should be prosecuted and if convicted sentenced to the max. Not only did his actions possibly leave dangerous people on the street, they also give citizens good reason to mistrust the police. He should serve prison time for this.
|
|
by bill
|
06/19/07 09:39 AM
|
|
Oh yes this guy should be prosecuted and if convicted sentenced to the max. Not only did his actions possibly leave dangerous people on the street, they also give citizens good reason to mistrust the police. He should serve prison time for this.
|
|
by Mike
|
06/19/07 09:15 AM
|
|
Most disturbing is the "facts in this case meet the element of a crime" yet Chief Assistant Karen L. Stanley made the spineless decision not to pursue charges. Now that it's public knowledge there's this sudden interest by the department to pursue.
|
|
by Eugene
|
06/19/07 08:37 AM
|
|
Judges rarely if ever believe a civilian over a police officer, they MUST throw the book at Brock and make an example out of him. It's the only way to balance the scales of justice for the publics and enable litigation for those falsly arrested
|
|
by dave
|
06/19/07 07:47 AM
|
|
jaime u r so right. the exact reason ms bondi should be removed from her position. she is expected to be rational in her judgement which she clearly was not with dog situation.
|
|
by John
|
06/19/07 07:20 AM
|
|
I hope the supervisors are also investigated.
|
|
by Lew
|
06/19/07 07:18 AM
|
|
He'll walk!! He will probably be represented by shyster lawyers like Flemings!
|
|
by dave
|
06/19/07 07:16 AM
|
|
maybe ms bondi and mr brock can share the same defense in civil trials for violating the civil rights of others and abuse of power. this sickens me
|
|
by Jaime
|
06/19/07 07:09 AM
|
|
Because he WAS a cop is why he should be prosecuted.If we cant,t trust those we pay to enforce the law we are in sad shape.
|
|
by dave
|
06/19/07 05:48 AM
|
|
i and the other rational folks have the utmost confidence in a assist. st. attorney that used every legal means at her disposal to keep hurricane victims dog from them. I think she would be better off defending aspca critters from death sentences.
|