The Redus administration’s written response to questions from a Pine Bluff alderman sheds no new light on accusations made against the police chief in February by her second in command.
All the questions asked by Alderman Bill Brumett in a Freedom of Information Act request he sent to Mayor Carl A. Redus Jr. on April 3 were unanswered. On each item, City Attorney Althea Hadden-Scott responded in an email Friday that either:
• No records exist;
• Records do exist, but because of their nature are exempt from disclosure under FOI law;
• Or the question was not specific enough to provide a response.
Independent reporting for Pine Bluff & Jefferson County since 1879.
In response Monday, Brumett sent most of the same questions to Redus again — this time not phrasing them as an FOI request, but as an alderman wanting to find out information about city business that he believes is important for the council and the public to know.
“You have more than once told me you would get answers to these questions, even on the record at council meetings,” Brumett wrote in his Monday email. “At the last meeting you told me that I would have to present a formal request. Consider this email as my formal request. I and several council members believe that these need to be cleared up for us to have confidence in you and the chief involving matters of fact presented by either of you. Some feel that your misspeaking at least twice on the record borders on malfeasance on your part.
“In my position as a member of the Public Safety Committee and as an alderman for the city of Pine Bluff, I deserve these answers so I can share with the council and the people I represent,” Brumett wrote in the email.
Assistant Chief Ivan Whitfield alleged in a letter from his lawyer to aldermen and other city officials in February that Davis-Jones fired him in retaliation for his refusal to identify a source who had provided him with information that reflected poorly on the chief’s alleged boyfriend. Whitfield further alleged that Davis-Jones used her power to take care of a situation in which the boyfriend was drinking, was driving her vehicle on a suspended license and was about to be arrested. Whitfield was later reinstated by the council.
Questioned by Brumett as to whether the allegations against the chief were investigated by internal affairs, Redus initially said they had been and that they were found to be false. Brumett attempted to file an FOI request for the investigation file, but was told by police department staff that no such investigation occurred.
Asked about it at the April 2 council meeting, Davis-Jones said the allegations against her were investigated as part of the investigation into Whitfield. She told Brumett she would go to her office during the council meeting and type up a response to the allegations, but then did not do so that day or since. She said during the meeting and has previously told The Commercial that the allegations are false.
Redus said later on April 2 that he “might have misspoken” when he said the investigation was done by internal affairs. He said, however, that the allegations were investigated.
Asked for more information after the council meeting as to what kind of investigation — if not an internal investigation — had occurred, Redus said that he, an attorney with the Arkansas Municipal League and Deputy Chief Kelvin Sergeant discussed the allegations, which he said were found to be unfounded and not worthy of an internal affairs investigation.
Sergeant supervises the Investigations Division, which includes detectives and vice and narcotics, but Whitfield has said Sergeant conducted the internal affairs investigation into Whitfield after one of the assistant chief’s service weapons was found in February on a man who was arrested. Whitfield alleged in his letter to the council that Sergeant witnessed some of the comments Davis-Jones made to Whitfield while she was trying to get him to reveal the source of the information about her alleged boyfriend.
Brumett said Monday that he has been trying to get answers regarding the allegations since February.
“It’s just very frustrating when the mayor won’t answer my questions when he said he would,” Brumett said. “I just want to know what the answers are to all of this, because it is a matter of importance to the public.”
Brumett also asked for a copy of any findings related to Whitfield’s suspension and firing, but Hadden-Scott responded that those records are not subject to FOI because Whitfield was reinstated. That was the same response The Commercial received to an FOI request for the same information.