Temporary suspension of Officer Paul Stratton

RECEIVED
NOVEMBER 15, 2022
2:35 P.M.
OF
DAY
DEPARTMENT
FOUNDED
1839
MEMORANDUM
Austin Police Department
Office of the Chief of Police
TO:
Joya Hayes, Director of Civil Service
FROM:
Joseph Chacon, Chief of Police
DATE:
November 15, 2022
SUBJECT:
Temporary Suspension of Police Officer Paul Stratton #7561
Internal Affairs Control Number 2022-0440
Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code, Section
143.052, and Rule 10, Rules of Procedure for the Firefighters', Police Officers' and
Emergency Medical Service Personnel's Civil Service Commission, I have temporarily
suspended Police Officer Paul Stratton #7561 from duty as a City of Austin, Texas police
officer for a period of ten (10) days. The temporary suspension is effective beginning on
November 19, 2022 and continuing through November 28, 2022.
I took this action because Ofc. Stratton violated Civil Service Commission Rule 10.03,
which sets forth the grounds for disciplinary suspensions of employees in the classified
service, and states:
No employee of the classified service of the City of Austin shall engage in,
or be involved in, any of the following acts or conduct, and the same shall
constitute cause for suspension of an employee from the classified service
of the City:
L.
Violation of any of the rules and regulations of the Fire
Department or Police Department or of special orders, as
applicable.
1
The following are the specific acts committed by Ofc. Stratton in violation of Rule 10:
On May 25, 2022, Austin Police Department (APD) Ofc. Garritt McGraw and Ofc. Paul
Stratton responded to a physical disturbance call for service around 4:12 p.m. at a motel
located on South Interstate Hwy 35. Ofc. McGraw was first to arrive on scene and was
flagged down by a man (Mr. X) standing in the parking lot with no shirt. As Ofc. McGraw
started to question Mr. X as to what transpired, Mr. X said, "But look," pointing at an injury
on the right side of his exposed torso. Mr. X told Ofc. McGraw the other party involved
was his son's mother, identified as Ms. Z, who was upstairs in the motel room.
Mr. X proceeded to tell Ofc. McGraw that Ms. Z slapped him across the face. He also
suggested that when officers go to speak with Ms. Z, she would say he hit and choked her.
Ofc. Stratton arrived during Ofc. McGraw's conversation with Mr. X. Ofc. Stratton joined
the dialogue, and approached Mr. X, and pointed at the injury on Mr. X's torso and asked
him, "Is this from her?" Mr. X responded, "She bit me." Ofc. Stratton asked Mr. X if it
hurt. Mr. X answered, "No, I don't want to incriminate. This interaction and dialogue
were captured on both officers' Body Worn Cameras (BWC).
Thereafter, both officers walked upstairs to speak with Ms. Z, who was inside the motel
room. The officers knocked on the door. Ms. Z opened the door and exited holding her and
Mr. X's infant son in her arms. Ms. Z told Ofc. McGraw and Ofc. Stratton that she got into
an argument with Mr. X regarding his dog. Ms. Z said it became physical and Mr. X threw
her to the ground, they both started swinging, and Mr. X hit her, and she hit him back. Ms.
Z also told the officers Mr. X choked her. Ofc. McGraw responded by asking Ms. Z if she
was hurt. Ms. Z responded that she was not hurt. Ofc. Stratton then immediately followed
up by asking Ms. Z if she needed EMS. She declined that offer.
Later in the dialogue between the officers and Ms. Z, Ofc. Stratton raised his voice, while
pointing at Ms. Z, and stated, "You're being disrespectful!" He then abruptly ended the
conversation with her by saying, "We 're done." Ofc. McGraw walked back downstairs and
sat in his patrol car, while Ofc. Stratton returned to speak with Mr. X a second time.
After this brief, second conversation with Mr. X, Ofc. Stratton walked back to Ofc.
McGraw and they debated the circumstances around this call. The debate centered around
Ofc. McGraw wanting to title the call Assault by Contact, a Class C misdemeanor and Ofc.
Stratton stating the call should be titled Assault with Injury Family Violence, a Class
A
misdemeanor. Both of the officers seemingly agreed that Ms. Z was the aggressor.
During the debate, Ofc. Stratton told Ofc. McGraw, "I'm not trying to prolong this for the
heck of it, but after seeing this as Ofc Stratton made a circular motion with his hand
around his own torso-in the area where Mr. X had a bite injury. As the debate continued,
Ofc. Stratton asked Ofc. McGraw if he would be titling the report Assault with Injury
Family Violence. Ofc. Stratton then offered to complete the Assault Victim Statement
(AVS) form. After this dialogue, Ofc. McGraw left the scene while Ofc. Stratton remained
on scene to help Mr. X find another place to stay.
2
Shortly after leaving the scene, Ofc. McGraw called Child Protective Services (CPS) for
the welfare of the child. Ofc. Stratton successfully helped Mr. X contact his sister, who
wired Mr. X money. Ofc. Stratton transported Mr. X to pick up the funds, and then assisted
him in getting a motel room for the night.
On May 28, 2022, the APD Internal Affairs (IA) received an Internal Complaint
Memorandum from the officers' Chain-of-Command The complaint submitted by their
Lieutenant alleged:
Officer Stratton and Officer McGraw responded to a Disturbance call. Officer Stratton
and Officer McGraw may have violated policy by not taking the appropriate enforcement
action. Furthermore, there may be some discrepancies in the reporting of this incident.
IA Investigation
IA established the following timeline utilizing the officers BWCs:
IA noted the following from Ofc. McGraw's BWC video:
Time stamp of 1:18, Mr. X said, But look." He looked down and pointed with his
right hand at an injury on his exposed upper torso, and said, "She slapped me in my
face."
Time stamp of 4:29, Ofc. McGraw asked if Ms. Z was going to say anything
different. Mr. X said, "She will say I hit her and choked her."
Time stamp of 4:47, Ofc. Stratton pointed at the injury on Mr. X, and Mr. X said,
"She bit me," and Ofc. Stratton asked if it hurt.
Time stamp of 4:51, Mr. X responded, "I don't want to incriminate."
Time stamp of 8:59, Ms. Z said, "He was choking me."
Time stamp of 15:35, Ofc. Stratton can be seen pointing at Ms. Z saying, "You're
being disrespectful!"
IA noted the following from Ofc. Stratton's BWC video:
Time stamp of 2:34, Ofc. Stratton pointed at the red mark on Mr. X's torso and
asked, "Is this from her?"
Time stamp of 2:36, Mr. X stated, "She bit me," and Ofc. Stratton asked Mr. X,
"Did it hurt?"
Time stamp of 6:46, Ms. Z said, "He was choking me."
Time stamp of 13:24, Ofc. Stratton pointed at Ms. Z saying, "You're being
disrespectful!"
Time stamp of 26:21, Ofc. Stratton said to Ofc. McGraw, "Cause what I'm trying
to do is at least document to make sure we don't get screwed because we missed
something, or something happens later why didn't we do this, why didn't we do
that."
Time stamp of 27:26, Ofc. Stratton was still discussing the call with Ofc. McGraw,
and Ofc. Stratton said, "I'm not trying to prolong this for the heck of it, but after
seeing this " As he was saying this, Ofc. Stratton was making a circular motion
around his own torso in the same area where Mr. X had the apparent bite injury.
3
Time stamp of 27:50, Ofc. Stratton asked Ofc. McGraw, "Are you writing this up
Assault with Injury?"
Time stamp of 27:56, Ofc. Stratton told Ofc. McGraw, "Because we both saw that
and it 's fresh."
Time stamp of 28:17, Ofc. Stratton said to Ofc. McGraw, "I can do the AVS, cause
what if he comes back later and says I do want to press charges."
Time stamp of 28:58, Ofc. Stratton reiterated to Ofc. McGraw, "It's obvious we see
that and those are fresh looking injury and he's making those statements."
Time stamp of 40:44, Ofc. Stratton said to Ofc. McGraw, "I'm not saying she is
going to jail now, for what it is, it's a Class A Misdemeanor."
Ofc. McGraw's phone call to Child Protective Services (CPS):
IA was furnished the audio recording of the intake phone call Ofc. McGraw made to Child
Protective Services (CPS) on May 25, 2022, at 5:18 p.m. The audio phone call was
transcribed. Ofc. McGraw told the intake operator, "Now when I'm looking at the male that
flagged me down, he had a bite mark to his chest." Ofc. McGraw went on to tell the intake
operator, "Um, now the ba- obviously, I've been doing this a little while now. Obviously,
we can kind of tell that the baby's not in a good place. Between those two and this little
argument they were having, - 1 can't imagine this is the first one."
Ofc. Stratton's (July 21, 2022) IA Interview:
Ofc. Stratton initially described his recollection of this call as follows:
"Myself and Officer McGraw, we received a call for a disturbance Once we
arrived, we made contact with a male who at first, was apprehensive to - give very
much information. It prompted us to speak with the other party involved up at the
motel room. After speaking with her, she became agitated with officers and
afterwards talking with the male a little bit further, made a determination that he
was the victim in the incident."
Ofc. Stratton continued stating,
"I made a determination that there was an assault with injury. And I did not make
an arrest at the time, due to seeing that there was a child involved. I was concerned
for the safety of the child, and CPS was called."
IA asked Ofc. Stratton what concerns he had for the safety of the child. Ofc. Stratton stated,
"The suspect had the child in her hands the entire time. I did not wanna create a
use of force incident that would've caused the child to have been harmed."
4
IA had the following exchange with Ofc. Stratton regarding the relationship between Mr.
X and Ms. Z, the injuries observed, the investigation he had started and what information
he exchanged with Ofc. McGraw along with his understanding of APD policy and Law:
IA:
Are they considered members of the same household or family?
STRATTON:
Yes.
IA:
And how so?
STRATTON:
They had a relationship with each other and a child together.
IA:
Did either party, Mr. [X] or Ms. [Z], have visible injuries?
STRATTON:
I did not see visible injuries on Ms. [Z]. I saw a visible injury on Mr.
[X].
IA:
And what injuries did you observe on Mr. [X]?
STRATTON:
The bite mark on his stomach, and later, there was, uh, appeared to be
some scratch marks on his arms.
IA:
And how did those injuries occur?
STRATTON:
They were involved in a disturbance. I can't remember the exact
details of that particular disturbance.
IA:
Had an assault occurred prior to police arrival?
STRATTON:
Yes.
IA:
By APD policy and law, don't you have a duty to make an arrest?
STRATTON:
Yes.
IA:
So please explain why you didn't make an arrest.
STRATTON:
I should have made an arrest, or at the very least, contacted my
supervisor.
IA:
In your opinion, did you conduct a thorough investigation?
STRATTON:
No.
IA:
And why not?
5
STRATTON:
After speaking with both parties, especially after the second party, I
ended up getting frustrated, and my mind was fixated on trying to
figure out where to place them. But I should have conducted a
thorough investigation.
IA:
With the investigation that you did conduct, did you formulate or end
up formulating an opinion about what occurred?
STRATTON:
Yes,
IA:
And - what had occurred between these two folks?
STRATTON:
That there was an assault, that, Mr. [X] was assaulted by Ms. [Z].
IA played Ofc. Stratton's BWC video at the time stamp of 6:46. At this point of the
recording, Ms. Z can be heard telling Ofc. McGraw and Ofc. Stratton, "He was choking
me." IA asked Ofc. Stratton if he heard her make that statement and what actions he took.
Ofc. Stratton replied, "I did hear her make the statement and I asked if she needed EMS,
to which she refused." IA asked Ofc. Stratton if he asked Ms. Z all of the required follow-
up questions and he responded "No." IA also asked Ofc. Stratton if he followed APD
training and policy regarding the proper handling of an allegation of Strangulation. Ofc.
Stratton stated, "No."
IA then asked Ofc. Stratton why he pointed his hand at Ms. Z and told her she was being
disrespectful. Ofc. Stratton stated, "I shouldn't have said it." Ofc. Stratton continued by
stating, "I became frustrated with her, and, um, our le- level of anger, I matched hers
when I should have been more calm." IA then asked Ofc. Stratton how he thought that
made Ms. Z feel. Ofc. Stratton stated, "She became more upset." IA followed by asking
Ofc. Stratton if Ms. Z made him mad. Ofc. Stratton stated, "Yes."
IA concluded this portion of questioning by asking Ofc. Stratton why his interaction with
Ms. Z frustrated him. He stated, "Cause I was tryin' to figure out a solution." Ofc. Stratton
also conceded that it was unprofessional behavior on his part to engage in the
argumentative language that he used when speaking with Ms. Z.
IA then asked Ofc. Stratton about his interaction with Ofc. McGraw towards the end of the
call while Ofc. McGraw was still on-scene, which started on Ofc. Stratton's BWC at 27:26.
Specifically, Ofc. Stratton can be seen making a circular motion around his own torso with
his hand, saying, "because we see this." At that same point, Ofc. Stratton can be heard
asking Ofc, McGraw if he was writing this up as Assault with Injury Family Violence
saying, "Because we both saw that and it fresh." IA asked Ofc. Stratton "just to be clear,
what were you referring to?" Ofc. Stratton replied, "The bite mark on his, uh, on his
stomach." IA then asked Ofc. Stratton if it was clear to him at that time Mr. X had a visible
human bite mark. Ofc. Stratton stated, "Yes."
IA then asked Ofc. Stratton if he could explain why he didn't go upstairs and knock on the
door and arrest Ms. Z after this dialogue with Ofc. McGraw. Ofc. Stratton advised, "/
6
should have, or at least attempted." IA asked Ofc. Stratton to explain his reasoning for not
making an arrest. Ofc. Stratton stated, "My reasoning was, I didn't - I should've made the
arrest, I, um, or at least, attempted to, using those officers, but I don't know, my reasoning
was b- the, uh, ah, the - seeing the child and the way her behavior was. I didn't wanna see
the child in a position where it could potentially get hurt."
On Ofc. Stratton's BWC at a time stamp of 1:35:29 he can also be seen walking back up
to the motel room and knocking on the door to get a shirt for Mr. [X]. During this latest
encounter, Ms. Z can be seen opening the door and she even stepped outside. IA again
asked Ofc. Stratton why he did not arrest her at that time. Ofc. Stratton replied, "I should
have." IA followed up by asking Ofc. Stratton, if he had the authority or officer discretion
not to arrest for Assault with Injury Family Violence. Ofc. Stratton stated, "No."
Towards the end of his interview, IA asked Ofc. Stratton after having time to reflect on this
incident, to explain to IA and his Chain-of-Command, and if he had it to do over again
what, if anything, would he do differently. Ofc. Stratton replied,
"At the time, I believed what I did was the best course of action. In hindsight, I
made a bunch of mistakes. I should've remained calm, I should've contacted my
supervisor to ask for further guidance."
Ofc. Stratton also conceded to IA that he violated multiple portions of APD General Order
(GO) 418.2.1 Arrest Requirements for Assaultive Offenses as well as General Order
418.2.5, Family Violence Involving Strangulation/Suffocation.
Conclusion
In arriving at my disciplinary decision, I took into consideration the seriousness of this
matter, while also giving significant weight to Ofc. Stratton's acceptance of
responsibility. I agree with Ofc. Stratton's Chain-of-Command who recommended to me
that Ofc. Stratton should be sustained for and disciplined for the following GO violations.
301.2
Impartial Attitude and Courtesy
418.2.1(a)1,2&3 Arrest Requirements for Assaultive Offenses
418.2.5 Family Violence Involving Strangulation/Suffocation
Specifically, I concur with his Chain-of-Command who concluded he violated GO 301.2
Impartial Attitude and Courtesy and advised Ofc. Stratton in part his Notice of Sustained
Allegations (NOSA) issued on November 7, 2022, the following:
"On May 25th, 2022, you responded to [a motel] and while investigating a
disturbance you failed to control your temper, you did not exercise patience and
discretion, and engaged in argumentative discussions. Specifically, while talking
with the female on scene you raised your voice and pointed your finger at her while
stating, "You're being disrespectful!" "Do you ever stop talking?' and "We're
7
done!" among other comments, that were inconsistent with your training, this
general order, and the expectations of your chain-of-command."
Moreover, I concur with the Chain-of-Command who advised Ofc. Stratton how he
violated GO 418.2.1(a) 1,2,3 Arrest Requirements for Assaultive Offenses in part for the
following:
"On May 25th, 2022 you responded to [a motel] and while investigating a
disturbance you failed to make an arrest or call a supervisor. Specifically, you
failed to make an arrest or call a supervisor when the suspect was still on scene,
the assault met the definition of "family violence", and you observed bodily injury
in the form of a fresh bite mark on the victim's body which was alleged to have
been caused by the suspect and a reasonable person could have also inferred that
the bite mark would have caused pain.'
Lastly, I concur with the Chain-of-Command who advised Ofc. Stratton how he violated
418.2.5 Family Violence Involving Strangulation/Suffocation in part for the following:
"On May 25th, 2022, you responded to [a motel] and while investigating a disturbance you
were told by a female involved in the family violence situation that she was choked. You
failed to ask all of the necessary follow up questions mandated by policy, and you failed to
call EMS to the scene.
By these actions, Ofc. Stratton violated Rule 10.03(L) of the Civil Service Rules by
violating the following rules and regulations of the Austin Police Department:
Austin Police Department Policy 301.2: Responsibility to Community:
Impartial Attitude and Courtesy
301.2 Impartial Attitude and Courtesy
Employees shall provide equal and fair protection of all rights under local, state,
and federal law for all members of the community. Law enforcement will be
conducted in an impartial and equitable manner.
In an effort to create an organizational culture that is inclusive and
nondiscriminatory, employees shall act professionally, treat all persons fairly and
equally, and strive to interact with the community in a positive manner. Employees
will perform all duties objectively and without regard to personal feelings,
animosities, friendships, financial status, occupation or employment status, sex,
disability status, housing status, mental health or ability, citizenship, language,
national origin, creed, color, race, religion, age, political beliefs, sexual orientation,
gender identity, gender expression, ethnicity, or social or ethnic background.
Employees will endeavor to understand and respect cultural, national, racial,
religious, physical, mental, and other differences.
8
(a)
Employees will not express or otherwise manifest any prejudice
concerning any of the categories or characteristics listed in this
section in a context or manner that would cause a reasonable person
to question the employee's fairness or impartiality related to the
performance of their duties.
1.
Employees will respect the rights of individuals and will not
engage in discrimination, oppression, or favoritism whether
by language, act, or omission.
2.
The use of remarks, slurs, epithets, words or gestures, which
are derogatory or inflammatory in nature to or about any
person or group of persons is strictly prohibited.
(b)
Employees will be tactful in the performance of their duties, control
their tempers, exercise patience and discretion, and shall not engage
in argumentative discussions even in the face of extreme
provocation.
(c)
Employees will treat all persons with dignity, will be courteous and
respectful toward all persons, showing consideration for the welfare
of all persons with whom they interact.
(d)
Employees will not ridicule, mock, taunt, embarrass, humiliate,
belittle, or shame any person, nor do anything that might incite that
person to violence.
(e)
Employees will not use indecent or profane language or gestures
while interacting with, or in the vicinity of, members of the
community. Officers are expected to use professional language at all
times, however, there may be intense circumstances in which the use
of profanity is an excited utterance and not intended to demean or
humiliate. These circumstances will be reviewed on a case by case
basis. Examples may include, but are not limited to, an officer being
injured, assaulted, or is experiencing pain.
(f)
Officers shall not encourage, condone, or ignore any of the
behaviors described in subsections (a)-(e).
Austin Police Department Policy 418.2.1(a)(1)(2)(3): Family Violence: Arrest
Requirement for Assaultive Offenses
418.2.1(a)(1)(2)(3) Arrest Requirement for Assaultive Offenses
(a)
Officers are required to make an arrest for incidents involving
family violence when:
1.
An assault has occurred that resulted in a minimum of bodily
injury or complaint of pain; or where an officer can articulate
facts from which a reasonable person could infer that the
victim would have felt pain due to:
(a) The manner in which the suspect made contact with the
victim, or
9
(b) the nature of observable physical marks on the
suspect's body allegedly caused by the suspect's
contact with the victim, and
2.
The suspect is still on-scene; and
3.
The assault meets the definition of "family violence" or
"dating violence."
Austin Police Department Policy 418.2.5: Family Violence: Family Violence
Involving Strangulation/Suffocation
418.2.5 Family Violence Involving Strangulation/Suffocation
When the suspect impedes the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of the
victim by applying pressure to the victim's throat, neck or by blocking the victim's
nose or mouth, the assault shall be enhanced to a felony of the third degree (Tex.
Penal Code § 22.01(b)(2)(B)).
(a)
While in most cases there is evidence of both external and internal
injury to the neck, many times there are no visible injuries. In those
instances, an internal injury may still have occurred that can result
in death. Victim may not understand the danger of their injuries and
may be reluctant to seek medical attention.
1.
Call EMS to the scene to evaluate the victim even if the
victim doesn't want them.
2.
Advise EMS you suspect strangulation with possible life
threatening injury.
(b)
Proper
documentation
of
an
assault
involving
strangulation/suffocation is critical and should include at least the
following:
1.
Physical Signs - This may include, but is not limited to:
(a) Red marks or bruising around the neck.
(b) Loss of memory in the recollection of the sequence of
events.
(c) Petechial hemorrhaging (burst blood vessels) in the
eye or face area.
(d) Difficulty and/or painful swallowing or hoarseness in
the voice.
2.
Type/Method
(a)
Ligature - Involves the use of a weapon (e.g., belt,
telephone cord, shoe string, rolled up shirt) to impede
breathing or cause air restriction.
(b)
Manual - Involves the use of the suspects' hands to
impede breathing or to cause air restriction.
1.
Describe in detail the position of the suspect in
relation to the victim (e.g., grabbed from the
front or from behind) and what body part was
10
used by the suspect (e.g., one hand, both hands,
arm using choke hold).
3.
Specific Questions
(a) What did you think was going to happen?
(b) What did the suspect say?
(c) How did it stop?
(d) What did you say during the assault?
(e) How did you feel?
4.
Additional Observations
(a)
If the victim has trouble swallowing, breathing or any
pain or tenderness in neck area.
(b) Any changes in the victim's voice during interview
(e.g., hoarseness, raspy, loss of voice).
Ofc. Stratton is advised that this suspension may be considered by the Chief of Police in a
future promotional decision pursuant to General Order 919.
By copy of this memo, Ofc. Stratton is hereby advised of this temporary suspension and
that the suspension may be appealed to the Civil Service Commission by filing with the
Director of Civil Service, within ten (10) days after receipt of a copy of this memo, a proper
notice of appeal in accordance with Section 143.010 of the Texas Local Government Code.
By copy of this memo and as required by Section 143.057 of the Texas Local Government
Code, Ofc. Stratton is hereby advised that such section and the Agreement Between the
City of Austin and the Austin Police Association provide for an appeal to an independent
third-party hearing examiner, in accordance with the provisions of such Agreement. If
appeal is made to a hearing examiner, all rights of appeal to a District Court are waived,
except as provided by Subsection (j) of Section 143.057 of the Texas Local Government
Code. That section states that the State District Court may hear appeals of an award of a
hearing examiner only on the grounds that the arbitration pancl was without jurisdiction or
exceeded its jurisdiction, or that the order was procured by fraud, collusion or other
unlawful means. In order to appeal to a hearing examiner, the original notice of appeal
submitted to the Director of Civil Service must state that appeal is made to a hearing
examiner.
11/15/22
JOSEPH CHACON, Chief of Police
Date
Jeff Greenwalt, Assistant Chiff
11
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I hereby acknowledge receipt of the above and foregoing memorandum of temporary
suspension and 1 have been advised that if I desire to appeal that I have ten (10) calendar
days from the date of this receipt to file written notice of appeal with the Director of Civil
Service in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government
Code.
7561
11/15/22
Police Officer Paul Stratton #7561
Date
12