Georgetown police officers won't get relief, court says

The Delaware Supreme Court has found that even though two Georgetown police officers who were reprimanded for complaining to a Town Council member may have had their rights violated under a state law, the issue is moot since they no longer work for the department.

The state's top court issued a 21-page ruling Tuesday upholding a Superior Court decision to not erase the reprimands in the officers' employment files or provide other relief.

The three justices also found that the officers – Shawn Brittingham and Christopher Story – did not prove their rights to free speech were violated.

Tuesday's ruling stems from a meeting on Dec. 23, 2009 between seven off-duty officers and Town Council member Sue Barlow.

At the meeting, the officers warned her about the department's low morale and raised concerns about lagging repairs to police cars, differential treatment of officers, unequally awarded overtime and bulletproof vests kept past replacement dates.

When Capt. Ralph Holm learned of the meeting, he informed the officers they were being investigated for violating Chief William Topping's 2007 order prohibiting officers from speaking about police business directly to the mayor or members of the Town Council without going through him first.

Due to the small size of the Georgetown Police Department and the number of employees involved, an officer from the Dover Police Department was brought in to conduct the internal investigation, the Supreme Court ruling said.

Holm read interview transcripts from the investigation and determined that the officers were insubordinate. The officers were given a written reprimand.

Rather than accept the reprimand, Brittingham and Story requested a hearing before the Criminal Justice Council and then eventually the town's disciplinary action appeals board. They lost both appeals.

In October 2010, Brittingham was suspended for four weeks without pay and received a 14-day reduction in rank. Story was suspended for two weeks without pay and received a seven-day reduction in rank. Both were put on disciplinary probation for a year, the Supreme Court ruling said.

Brittingham and Story filed two actions in Superior Court alleging their First Amendment rights and rights under the Law Enforcement Officer's Bill of Rights were violated. The two asked for a new hearing and restoration of their employment status.

After Superior Court ruled against them, they appealed to the Supreme Court, which reviewed arguments in March.

The Supreme Court found that while most of their claims did not have merit, one claim was "technically correct."

That claim was that the Georgetown Police Department violated the Law Enforcement Officer's Bill of Rights, a statute passed in 1985 to protect the rights of officers under investigation by their own departments, by having an officer from the Dover Police Department conduct the investigation instead of an officer from its own department.

That aspect of the statute was not amended to allow for an appointment outside the department until July 2014.

The Supreme Court noted that the decision to use the Dover Police Department was a way to protect the officers.

However, Tuesday's ruling went on to say the Supreme Court will not take the issue up any further since Brittingham and Story have left for other departments and Topping retired from active duty on Feb. 12.

Attorneys for both sides could not be reached for comment Tuesday evening.

Contact Jessica Masulli Reyes at 302-324-2777, jmreyes@delawareonline.com or Twitter @JessicaMasulli.