A hearing officer has reversed the city of Denver’s decision to fire a police officer over allegations of domestic violence, citing the alleged victim’s lack of a “mousy appearance” in his ruling.
The decision by hearing officer John Criswell drew a rebuke from a key advocate for battered women, who said a woman’s appearance has no bearing on whether or not she was abused.
“I’m appalled that in 2007 that attitude is out there,” said Denise Washington, executive director of the Colorado Coalition of Domestic Violence. “What somebody looks like is not a predictor or indicator of whether they could be a potential victim of domestic violence.”
The decision also was a setback for top law enforcement officials who had hoped to set a precedent that would allow an officer accused of a crime – in this case, domestic violence – to be fired even though he was never convicted.
Criswell’s ruling, handed down last month, came in the city’s May 9, 2006, firing of police Officer Steven Sandoval. The city moved to fire Sandoval, a nine-year veteran of the force, after his then-wife, Corina, made two 911 phone calls from their Aurora home Aug. 13, 2005, alleging, “My husband is beating me again.”
Steven Sandoval was never charged with a crime – primarily, the city of Denver contends – because he fled the scene and took his wife with him, frightening her by threatening her with potential arrest by Aurora police.
Past abuse allegations
Independent monitor Richard Rosenthal, who oversees internal-affairs investigation, persuaded city officials to reinvestigate the allegations internally after they originally concluded the case could not be sustained.
“I know they pretty much had told me that traditionally there’s a perceived need for a conviction before any disciplinary action,” Rosenthal said. “People have told me that this was a change in culture and in the thought process.”
Buying into Rosenthal’s thinking were both Police Chief Gerald Whitman and Safety Manager Al LaCabe, the top city official in charge of police officers. Both supported firing Sandoval, who faced five other domestic-assault allegations from July 2002 and August 2004, one in which his wife alleged he tried to run her off the road.
They fired Sandoval because they concluded he violated the law by beating his wife and was untruthful during an investigation into the actions. They also say he engaged in “conduct prejudicial” by fleeing the scene.
None of the earlier domestic- assault allegations was sustained in earlier internal-affairs investigations after Corina Sandoval, who also had obtained two restraining orders against her husband alleging physical abuse, refused to cooperate with investigators.
The city decided to fire Steven Sandoval after it had a domestic- violence expert, Barbara Zeek Shaw, review his history. She concluded he was a batterer and stressed that his wife’s refusal to cooperate with investigators was “consistent with a battered woman trying to protect herself from further negative consequences.”
The city is preparing an appeal of Cris well’s ruling to the Civil Service Commission.
“I think it’s an indication of recognizing the need for the department to hold officers accountable for their actions regardless of the outcome of the criminal- justice system,” Rosenthal said.
Criswell, in his ruling, said the city never proved any domestic assault. He said Sandoval should receive a 30-day suspension for impeding an investigation into his actions by leaving the scene the night of Aug. 13, 2005.
Criswell reversed the city’s decision despite Corina Sandoval’s testimony that her husband pushed her to the ground and kicked her in the stomach that night after he found divorce papers in their kitchen and ripped them up. A neighbor testified that she saw Corina Sandoval several days later with minor bruises on her arm and walking strangely.
“Differing accounts”
Criswell sided with Steven Sandoval, who testified his wife was the aggressor and that he had merely pushed her back.
“Any minor differing accounts between the two upon this point are, I conclude, nothing more than differing perceptions of an admittedly emotional event,” Criswell wrote.
In his ruling, Criswell noted that Sandoval testified that his wife could experience great mood swings and that Sandoval said he was the one who had to defend himself.
“Corina appears to have a reasonably strong, independent personality; she does not present a ‘mousy’ appearance in any senses of that word,” Criswell wrote.
Criswell did not return calls or an e-mail seeking comment.
Sandoval is now moving to get reinstated as a police officer with back pay, said his lawyer, Douglas Jewel.
“Either we live by actual rule of law around here or we determine guilt simply by speaking the name of a charge,” Jewel said. “Steven Sandoval is a highly commended, experienced officer who is anxious to return to work and is in the process of doing so as we speak.”
City officials have clashed before with Criswell, who the Colorado Bar Association’s website says was appointed to the Colorado Court of Appeals in 1986 and is now a senior judge. He has not renewed his contract as a hearing officer on civil-service matters.
In 2005, Criswell reduced a 10-month suspension of Denver police Officer James Turney in the 2003 shooting death of Paul Childs, a disabled 15-year-old.
LaCabe originally imposed the 10-month suspension, but Criswell reduced the punishment to a five-day suspension with a one-day fine. The city appealed, and the Civil Service Commission reinstated LaCabe’s original punishment. Turney has appealed that decision to the Denver District Court.
Staff writer Christopher N. Osher can be reached at 303-954-1747 or cosher@denverpost.com.
