2 Seattle Cops At DC Insurrection Should Be Fired: Watchdog

SEATTLE — Two of the six Seattle police officers who attended the Jan. 6 "Stop the Steal" rally in Washington, D.C., violated both law and department policy and should be fired, according to the Seattle Police Office of Accountability. According to the Department of Justice, at least 500 people have been arrested in the wake of the Capitol riot.

The Seattle police watchdog released its findings Thursday after more than six months of investigative work, which included interviewing the officers, visiting the Capitol, analyzing cell phone records and speaking with the FBI and Capitol Police.

OPA Director Andrew Myerberg determined two officers were pictured smiling while standing in a "clearly-prohibited area" as rioters climbed the Capitol walls.

"That they were direct witnesses to people defiling the seat of American democracy and assaulting fellow law enforcement officers — and did nothing — makes this all the more egregious," Myerberg wrote in a statement Thursday.

The OPA does not identify officers in its case reports, and none of the six officers investigated for the roles on Jan. 6 have been named by the Seattle Police Department. The officers successfully fought to delay the release of identifying records to media outlets. In April, the group DivestSPD published six names on social media, identified by comparing information in separate public records requests with other publicly available data. The Seattle Times identified the two officers in question as Alexander Everett and Caitlin Rochelle, 37, a married couple living in Covington.

According to the OPA, the Seattle Police Officers' Guild unsuccessfully attempted to convince the police chief to block watchdog investigators from obtaining records from the officers, including text messages, photos and receipts. One officer refused to comply with the requests, and the OPA opened an additional investigation for insubordination.

Myerberg ultimately sustained three allegations of misconduct against two officers and returned inconclusive findings on a third. He cleared the other three officers, determining they violated no laws or SPD policies.

For the two officers with sustained allegations, OPA investigators interviewed each twice and found neither's account held up to scrutiny, citing a review of video footage, on-site visits, interviews with Capitol law enforcement and photo stills provided by the FBI.

Both officers told investigators they did not realize they were trespassing until reading news reports later and denied witnessing anything illegal or violent.

Myerberg writes:

"OPA’s investigation, and particularly the review of video and interviews of Washington, D.C. law enforcement personnel, indicates that the accounts provided by [the first and second officer] are simply not credible. The video showed that there was an active insurrection ongoing at the same time that [both officers] were in the immediate vicinity of the Capitol Building. This included rioters assaulting law enforcement officers and making forced entries into the building. Moreover, the testimony of the law enforcement officers interviewed by OPA and who were present on that day, belied the officers’ recitation of events. The officers said that anyone in that vicinity would have been aware of the violence and chaos that was ongoing.

Similarly, OPA finds the information provided by the USCP SSA to be instructive. He outlined all of the restrictions that were in place on January 6, from signs to fence lines staffed by clearly marked officers. The SSA also confirmed that anyone in the immediate vicinity of the Capitol Building – where [both officers] indisputably were – was committing a crime. That OPA did not locate evidence placing [the officers] inside of the Capitol Building does not diminish this conclusion."

A disciplinary committee, including Myerberg, employment counsel and the officers' chain of command recommended both officers be fired based on the findings. Ultimately, disciplinary authority rests with interim Seattle Police Chief Adrian Diaz. In January, Diaz wrote that "If any SPD officers were directly involved in the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, I will immediately terminate them."

In a news release Thursday, the Seattle Police Department said Diaz "intends to issue his disciplinary decision within the next 30 days," sharing an operational flow chart, including a customary Loudermill hearing where officers can plead their case before the chief. If they are fired, both officers may also choose to appeal the decision.

For a third officer, Myerberg ruled inconclusively, writing his participation was "the most difficult to assess." The officer told the OPA he had been with the first two officers for part of the rally, before leaving to get some food.

"Based on a review of the officers' accounts and a review of the maps outlining the restricted zones, OPA believes it possible that [the third officer] was technically trespassing," Myerberg wrote. "However, OPA notes that, unlike [the first two officers], there is no conclusive evidence establishing this. As such, it remains plausible that [the third officer] never entered into a prohibited area."

For the three other officers, Myerberg found none broke the law or violated department policy, and their participation was limited to actions enshrined in the first amendment.

He writes:

"Here, there are three officers who attended a political rally in support of a President who was and is still reviled by many in Seattle and that was in furtherance of a theory of election fraud that was, at best, discredited and, at worst, knowingly fabricated in an attempt to unconstitutionally seize and retain power. These officers’ presence at the rally invoked public outrage and calls for their termination. Indeed, the political and factual views espoused at the rally were antithetical to the beliefs of a strong majority of the Seattle community.

However, absent any acts on their part that were illegal, that the officers attended this rally is absolutely protected by the Constitution. These officers were entitled to exercise their freedom of expression and to assemble. That they did so in a manner contrary to the majority view in Seattle does not alter this view. This is the case even if I, as the decider in this matter, disagree vehemently with everything the rally stood for."

In clearing the three officers, Myerberg continues:

"OPA’s evaluation of the evidence indicated that [the fourth, fifth and sixth officers] all left the vicinity of the Capitol prior to the insurrection commencing. All provided evidence establishing, at least in part, their whereabouts. Moreover, OPA’s review of video, receipts, and hotel records, as well as interviews with the bar/restaurant employees, corroborated the accounts provided by [fifth and sixth officers]. OPA found no basis to conclude that [fourth, fifth and sixth officers] accessed restricted areas at any time or engaged in any activities that violated Washington, D.C. laws. To the contrary, all three officers provided consistent and credible accounts of what they did and did not do on January 6."

After the OPA's findings were published Thursday, Seattle's Community Police Commission released a statement calling on SPD to act swiftly to "address extremism within the ranks."

The statement reads in part:

"The concerns raised by the CPC and many other organizations about extremism within the ranks of SPD are serious. Of the 31 police officers from across the nation known to be at the Capitol that day, 6 are Seattle Police officers – more than any other police department in the country. Soon after the attack on the Capitol, the CPC asked Chief Adrian Diaz how SPD plans to investigate and address extremism within the department’s ranks. While the Department of Defense, Houston Police Department, and other law enforcement agencies across the country have publicized plans to address this issue, SPD’s plans remain unclear. The extent of SPD officers’ involvement in the insurrection is a wake-up call. The CPC demands SPD transparently and­ aggressively address extremism within the ranks."

Seattle City Council President and mayoral candidate M. Lorena González addressed the findings in a statement Thursday afternoon, as did Councilmember Lisa Herbold, chair of the Public Safety and Human Services Committee. González called on SPD to immediately fire both officers and impose some disciplinary action on the other four. Herbold pledged to review the investigation and cited SPD's code of ethics in suggesting the other four officers' attendance may also warrant firing.

"If public employees knowingly travelled to a location in support of people whom they knew were intending to attempt an insurrection, even if their participation was as a passive observer, that is a ‘clear connection between conduct and duties or…responsibilities’ and is an offense that merits termination," Herbold wrote. "I will review the OPA investigation with an eye towards whether questions were asked of the four officers without sustained findings, and whether evidence was sought, to determine the advance knowledge they had of the planned violent events at the Capitol insurrection of January 6."