Attention of Inspector General - John Davis January 30, 2000
PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL
Dear Sir
We are in receipt of your letter dated January 24th 2000. I have to state that the contents of your letter completely fail to address the detailed concerns expressed to both you and Governor Bush.
With regard to your statements concerning the involvement of Tampa Police, the facts are as follows:
At the meeting of November 23rd, Tampa Police, having reviewed the investigative report, offered to assign their very best murder homicide detective, full time, to investigate the circumstances of my Son’s death. The proviso to this offer was that they could undertake no investigation unless specifically requested by F.H.P.
In my conversation with you I stated that this was not an acceptable situation as there were no indications that F.H.P. would avail themselves of this offer. It would appear that my concerns were justified, as I have been informed by F.H.P. that in the eight weeks following the meeting, no requests were made of T.P.D to assist them in any of their ongoing investigations.
Following this eight week period I was advised by T.P.D. that their legal dept. was in the process of responding to correspondence from you and they had concluded with F.H.P. that my Son’s death was nothing more than a traffic accident. This conclusion was based solely on the report of Corporal Jetton compiled in March 1999. I have previously, in great detail, listed the total inadequacy of this report, including the vital witness statements that have been omitted, the failure to pursue credible leads and the willful disregard of information that clearly indicates that my Son was murdered. We are currently having this report reviewed by a foremost expert in law enforcement and will forward his conclusions to you in due course. It is a sad reflection that we are forced to have this done at our own expense when these inadequacies should have already been recognized by yourself and all other persons to whom we have expressed our concerns .
I find the most inexplicable part of your correspondence, Mr Davis, is your statement that F.D.L.E, T.P.D. and F.H.P. have all come to the same conclusion that all leads have been explored and documented.
First and foremost I would remind you that my previous correspondence to you, copies of which were sent to all other interested parties, contained a list of specific areas of this investigation that had not been pursued. I requested all agencies, as well as yourself, to advise me if they considered any of these areas did not warrant investigation. I expect and consider it the duty of all agencies to respond to these specific points. If these areas warrant investigation then it is clearly improper to state that all investigative opportunities have been explored.
With regard to all leads having been documented, kindly explain to me why twelve critical witness statements are missing from the investigative report. These include the statements of informants who state that Lloyd confessed to killing my Son and give a detailed account of events leading up to that point, including identifying the persons involved as well as their addresses and places of occupation. Please explain how, even at this stage, F.H.P cannot even confirm whether all of these statements were recorded or notes taken. Please explain how Lt. Dawson, when interviewing a critical witness, failed to record the interview, failed to take notes of the interview and now cannot even recall what was said. Please explain to me how any agency can competently express an opinion on this investigation when all of these items were withheld from the report and never submitted to them for review. I would ask you, Mr Davis, for your opinion as to whether this constitutes a properly documented investigation.
With further reference to your statement that F.D.L.E. and T.P.D. conclude with F.H.P. I would respectfully ask which conclusion it is that they agree with. Is it the conclusion that Corporal Jetton made at the scene that this was an alcohol-related accident? Is it the conclusion he arrived at in October 1998, when he concluded his investigation by claiming that my Son just stepped back into the highway because he was drunk? Is it the conclusion stated in the investigative report of March 1998 and endorsed by F.D.L.E, stating that my Son caused his own death by wandering out into the traffic attempting to flag down vehicles and that, having seen the oncoming vehicle, he just stepped in front of it?
I expect an explanation, Mr Davis, as to how these conclusions have been arrived at, when the officer in overall control of this investigation, Lt. Mauriello, categorically stated to both myself and my attorney just two weeks ago, and reiterated to me just this week, the following statement:
Furthermore Mr Davis, could you please explain how, at the exact time that Lt. Mauriello was giving us these assurances, our attorney received a call from Mr Chalu of the state attorney’s office, informing him of the following:
That the investigation into our Son’s death was now closed. That F.H.P., F.D.L.E. and T.P.D. had all officially signed off on the investigation, concluding that this was a traffic accident and there would be no further investigation.
Following this call our attorney phoned Lt. Mauriello and was once again given the same assurances that we had been given. We would like an explanation as to how this investigation can have been closed on three separate occasions, without the knowledge of the Supervising Officer, only to be re-opened on each occasion within days of the closure. I would like you to inform me of the Officers names who signed off for the three agencies without consulting Lt. Mauriello. These incidents clearly demonstrate a rush to close this investigation by certain Officers without attempting to investigate the evidence before them. These efforts can only be interpreted as an attempt to hide their incompetence and show a willful intent to ensure that no evidence would be pursued that would expose their actions.
With regard to your statement that T.P.D. consider an interview of Anthony Lloyd to be desirable, I would like to know how this interview would be pursued.
Would he be asked to explain how Kevin came to be in the middle of the highway for up to 15 minutes?
Would he be asked to explain how Kevin appeared to be dazed, concussed, totally disorientated and obviously unaware of his surroundings, as eyewitnesses have described?
Would he be asked to explain the pushing and shoving taking place out in the roadway, completely contradicting the statements of Grubb, Lipp and Shonig, as eyewitnesses described?
Would he be asked to explain the 911 calls describing a big fight, people attacking Kevin in the middle of the highway, as many as four persons out in the highway and these attacks being reported as far as eight minutes apart, obviously demonstrating a long and continued attack against my Son?
Would he be asked to explain the incident observed by an eyewitness, describing up to five persons appearing to be throwing another individual out into the highway?
Would he be asked to explain Michael Lipp’s statement that Kevin was thrown out into the oncoming traffic?
Would he be asked to explain the statements of two informants that say the fight started back at Ybor City outside the club and that Lloyd confessed that he (Lloyd), Shonig and Grubb had followed Kevin and Lipp down the highway, forcing them off the road. That Lloyd had then beaten Kevin to death, physically killing him before he ended up under the wheels of the truck?
If they do intend to ask Lloyd these questions, then please explain to me why these same questions have never been asked of Michael Lipp, Christopher Grubb or Timothy Shonig in their interviews? Or is it their intention to tell Lloyd that they already know this was just an accident, as Mrs Brown claims was stated to her, and merely take a brief unchallenged statement before thanking him and sending him on his way?
Finally Mr Davis, I refer to your statement that you personally have reviewed the report and conclude that this has been a competent investigation. I would ask you to review the following points and respond to me on each one, as to whether you consider these were competent actions.
Corporal Jetton was informed by Officers at the scene that they were responding to 911 calls describing several people fighting in the highway, he was also aware that all persons had fled the scene and that the physical evidence proved that Kevin had been 30 feet into the highway. With that knowledge how could he fail to confront Lipp with these facts when told by Lipp that Kevin just took one step back into the acceleration lane. In spite of the fact that Corp. Jetton states he knew from the physical evidence that this was untrue, he again failed to confront Lipp with these facts when questioning him nine weeks later. Do you consider this competent?
Despite being told the exact location that fighting had taken place on the grass area to the side of the highway, Corporal Jetton failed to find a knife in plain view in this exact location. It was left for us to find six weeks later after valuable forensic evidence had been lost. Do you consider this to be competent?
Having been told that Lloyd had a broken nose and despite being requested to do so by us, Corp. Jetton failed to make inquiries at the local hospitals. Had he done so Lloyd could have been apprehended and questioned that night as the hospital had reported him to Tampa Police as having received a broken nose in a fight at Ybor City. Do you consider this to be competent?
Corp. Jetton failed to advise neighboring Police Agencies with descriptions of the individuals and their vehicle. Had he done so he would have found out about the report to Tampa Police. Do you consider this to be competent?
Corporal Jetton failed to go to the Brown household that Lipp had fled to, although he was told Tabitha Brown had been with Lipp earlier at the club. He continued to ignore our requests to do so until directly ordered to, following our complaints, eight weeks after Kevin’s death. Only then did he find out about Lipp’s statement that Kevin was thrown in front of the oncoming traffic. Do you consider this to be competent?
Corporal Jetton failed to interview any of the eyewitnesses that called in stating they had information. He continued to ignore these witnesses for eight weeks until we were forced to complain to F.H.P. Headquarters in Tallahassee. Do you consider this to be competent?
When they were eventually interviewed the total duration of the interviews of six independent eyewitnesses combined, amounted to just 35 minutes. This is clearly insufficient to determine the full extent of their knowledge. Do you consider this to be competent?
Fact : Of the Nine witness’s, five 911 callers and four eye witnesses, who place Kevin out in the road for eleven to fifteen minutes, six describe fighting of some description , four describe it taking place specifically in the highway, none are referring to the skirmish on the grass area off the highway. Lipp, Grubb and Shonig all deny anyone was ever out in the highway with Kevin. In spite of this none of them have ever been confronted with this evidence or the evidence of the two informants. Do you consider this to be competent?
In October 1998 Corporal Jetton informed Lt. Harold, Head of Traffic Homicide in Tallahassee, that his investigation was complete and he was closing the case.
At that time Michael Lipp's statements had been proven to be false by the physical evidence and eyewitnesses.
At that time Michael Lipp had failed a polygraph test four months previously, yet had never been re-interviewed about the deception revealed in this test. In fact in the investigative report there is not one statement taken from Lipp after he failed that Polygraph test.
At that time informants had recently come forward identifying the van occupants and claiming Anthony Lloyd had stated to them that he beat Kevin to death.
At that time, neither Anthony Lloyd nor Timothy Shoenig had been located or interviewed since fleeing the scene.
At that time Christopher Grubb had been interviewed and his statement of what took place at the scene completely contradicted Lipp’s version of events following the fight.
At that time the tapes of seven 9-1-1 calls had just been discovered which placed Kevin in the highway for 11 minutes and described fighting taking place in the middle of the highway, completely contradicting both Lipp and Grubb.
How can anyone explain Corporal Jetton closing the case given those circumstances. Do you consider this to be competent?
Lipp Grubb and Shonig’s statements are riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions. They contradict each other over who started the fight, who fought with Kevin, how Kevin came to be in the highway, how long he was in the highway, Lipp's involvement in the fighting, where they were when Kevin was in the highway, what was said, who was involved in the fighting back at Ybor and where Kevin was when the first vehicle struck him. Lipp states Kevin took one step back into the acceleration lane. Grubb states Kevin was waving down traffic in the first lane of the highway. Shonig states that Kevin never tried to flag down traffic, he just wandered across the full four lanes of the highway with his hands over his head and mumbling something. Incredibly none of these persons are ever questioned about these inconsistencies and contradictions. In fact when Timothy Shonig was located, his first interview took place over the phone with no records kept. When he was eventually interviewed in person, the entire interview lasted for less time than Kevin was out in the highway.Even more incredible is the fact that Corp. Jetton states in his report that both he and Lt. Dawson agreed that these statements were consistent with each other with the exception of who yelled at whom first. Do you consider this to be competent?
Why in his report does Corporal Jetton dismiss eyewitness David Stone as unreliable on the grounds that his account does not match that of Christopher Grubb. Grubb’s statement is inconsistent with proven facts and the statements of Lipp and Shoenig.
David Stone accurately described the make, model and color of Lipp’s car. He accurately described Grubb’s vehicle as a late 80’s – early 90’s mini van. He accurately described its make ( he stated a Plymouth Voyager, it was in fact a Dodge caravan, the exact same vehicle and manufacturer). He accurately described Kevin’s location in the highway, his clothing, his size, his color hair, his appearance of being dazed, concussed and unresponsive (confirmed by another eyewitness). He even described a thin white band on Kevin’s wrist that was confirmed. He described seeing a female at the scene, this was stated by another eyewitness. He described seeing a group of people at the side of the highway yelling and jeering at Kevin, this was confirmed by other witnesses. How can a witness with such accurate and proven information be described as unreliable because his account does not match that of a person whose own statement is inconsistent and who has an obvious motive to lie. Do you consider this to be competent?
There still remain eyewitnesses who have not been questioned a year after we gave their names to F.H.P. Do you consider this to be competent?
The driver of the UPS Truck has still not been interviewed since the day of Kevin’s death. This is in spite of our providing F.H.P. with information that this witness has evidence that could prove Kevin was down in the highway for several minutes before this vehicle ever struck him. Do you consider this to be competent?
Corp. Jetton refused to provide a Police sketch artist to do composite sketches of the individuals for release to the media in an appeal for witnesses, even though Lipp had agreed to assist with this. We had to undertake this ourselves with the assistance of local off duty police friends. Do you consider this to be competent?
He failed to ever go to the club at Ybor City to investigate any prior conflicts. Had he done so we might now have more evidence of the fight that was broken up by Police outside the Club, that is referred to by the informants, Grubb and Shonig. Do you consider this to be competent?
He failed to send Kevin’s clothing to be analyzed for possible forensic evidence. This was not done until we demanded it at a meeting with Chief Lee 3 months after Kevin’s death. Two years later the full results have still not been received. Do you consider this to be competent?
Despite our requests to check the 911 calls for any possible information or witness names, he continued to state for seven months that there had only been one 911 call. Had he checked the calls he would have found that there were seven 911 calls putting Kevin in the middle of the highway for between 11 to 15 minutes and describing people out in the highway attacking him. Do you consider this to be competent?
In July 1998 two informants came forward in response to one of our media appeals. They stated that Lloyd confessed to killing my Son and give a detailed account of events leading up to that point, including identifying the persons involved, their addresses and places of occupation. This information was proven to be correct and their account of the fight starting at Ybor City and being broken up by Police was consistent with Grubb and Shonig’s statements saying that they were involved in a fight at Ybor that was broken up by Police. It was also consistent with Lloyd’s statement at the hospital that his nose was injured in a fight at Ybor City over a girl.
In spite of this, their interviews again lasted a mere nine minutes. Incredibly they were just dismissed by Corporal Jetton and totally ignored for eighteen months. In his report Corp. Jetton justifies this by stating that their accounts were not consistent with that of Michael Lipp. This is completely incomprehensible, as on the preceding page of his report Corp. Jetton had stated that Michael Lipp’s account was not consistent with the physical evidence or the statements of eyewitnesses. Do you consider this to be competent?
Even though Corporal Jetton dismissed these informants, he hid the content of their statements from us for fifteen months. When we discovered, in July 1999, that these informants had stated that Lloyd confessed to killing our Son, we were told that there had been a meeting where this was discussed and that F.H.P. disagreed with our interpretation that Lloyd had killed Kevin. When we received the transcript of the two informants statements just two weeks ago, it was obvious that Lloyd was admitting categorically that he killed our Son, even stating that Kevin was already dead as he fell back into the path of the truck. When we asked how anyone at the meeting could interpret this any other way, we were informed that after eighteen months, no-one other than Corp. Jetton had ever seen these statements and that they had merely accepted what Corp. Jetton had stated. Considering the history of complaints we had made against Corp. Jetton’s handling of this investigation, this failure to even read these statements represents a total dereliction of duty on the part of his Senior Officers. These informants also gave specific information regarding the fact that Lloyd had a criminal background in New York. For eighteen months F.H.P. vehemently denied that Lloyd had any criminal history in New York and was only guilty of having a suspended driving license. We have now discovered that not only are there warrants out for his arrest as a fugitive but he also has a criminal conviction in New York for Armed Robbery. How can these have been overlooked. Do you consider this to be competent?
These are just a few of the instances that have been raised by us in writing over the past two years. None of them have ever been answered or addressed. It is absolutely unacceptable to brush these issues aside by claiming that two other agencies agree with a report that is outdated, unfactual, overwhelmingly incomplete and has totally failed to address the known evidence. Furthermore a report that does not represent the present opinions of the Officer supervising the investigation.
It is obvious that there needs to be a full scale independent investigation into the handling of this case by F.H.P., F.D.L.E. and the State Attorney’s Office.
For two years we have pleaded and begged for this to be put right, our complaints to be properly addressed and a competent new investigation into our Son’s death to be conducted. We have carefully gone through all the correct procedures to bring this to the attention of those persons whose responsibility it is to rectify this travesty of justice. All of this has been ignored.
All of the persons whose responsibility it is to thoroughly investigate these allegations have by now been fully acquainted with the facts behind those allegations. Those persons include yourself, Mr Davis, Harry Lee Coe - State Attorney, Chief Holder – T.P.D., Mr Sewell – F.D.L.E., Col. Hall – F.H.P. and Governor Jeb Bush. If any of the above consider that they are not in possession of all the facts behind our allegations we will be happy to provide them.
We are only too aware of the various allegations against F.H.P. that are continually appearing in the media. It would not be difficult for us to construe the efforts to close this investigation as being an attempt to prevent further media coverage and concerns about the credibility of F.H.P.; I sincerely hope that this is not the case as it would certainly achieve the opposite result.
I would state that any further failure, on the part of the persons responsible to investigate and address these issues, would force us to hold them personally accountable for what has taken place. This accountability would not only extend to the media and the electorate of Florida but would be vigorously pursued through the judicial Courts of Florida with all the accompanying international attention that would accompany such actions.
I sincerely hope that such actions might still be averted, however this is now up to the officials whose responsibility it is to rectify the wrongs that have been inflicted on my family and more importantly, the rights of our Son, Kevin.
I await your detailed and complete response to this correspondence.
Sincerely,
Hugh McGinley
Addendum
Since compiling this letter Mr Davis we were informed by Marty McDonald, attorney for Governor Bush, that Chief Lee had recently assured him that this remained an ongoing investigation. We have also received a letter from Colonel Charles C. Hall stating the following " Efforts to locate both principals and witnesses to this incident have provided additional information and the investigation is continuing………………We will continue our efforts to follow all reasonable leads in this investigation including exhaustive attempts to locate and interview Anthony Lloyd. It is our intention to give this case the attention it deserves".
Just yesterday ( February 3rd ) I was informed by Lt. Mauriello that he just picked up a subpoena from the state attorney’s office to be served on an uncooperative witness in this investigation, this subpoena is due to be served next week.
This morning Mr McDonald called us from Governor Bush’s Office informing us that he had today ( February 4th ) been informed by the State Attorney, Mr Chalu, that yet again, for the fourth time, this case was closed and F.H.P. had officially signed off on the investigation.
I eagerly await your explanation.
Copies to
Florida Highway Patrol, Col. Hall
Florida Dept of Law Enforcement, James Sewell
State Attorney, Harry Lee Coe
T.P.D., Chief Holder
British Vice Consul, Hugh Hunter
Governor Jeb Bush