STATE OF WISCONSIN FOND DU LAC COUNTY
CITY OF FOND DU LAC POLICE AND FIRE COMMISSION
CHIEF WILLIAM LAMB
COMES NOW DANIEL KAMINSKY, an attorney practicing and owning property in the City of Fond du Lac, and OFFICER CURT BECK, a police officer with the City of Fond du Lac, pursuant to section 62.13 subsections (3) and (5), with authority under subsection (5)(j), of the Wisconsin Statutes, filing these charges against the Chief of Police, William Lamb, for perjury and misconduct as set forth below.
As of February, 2014, Officer Beck was an officer in good standing with the City of Fond du Lac Police Department, with a record of 7 years of service and no discipline. At such time, Lamb brought a claim of a disciplinary violation against Beck. The sole basis of this claim for discipline was an allegation that Beck denied an affair to a co-worker during a private conversation. Nonetheless, Chief Lamb and Curt Beck entered into a written disciplinary agreement, which has been called a “last chance agreement” (LCA).
The LCA has been held to be illegal in violation of section 62.13(5) and therefore unenforceable, by order and ruling of Circuit Court Judge Karen Siefert in Fond du Lac Case 15CV127. Upon information and belief, Lamb has routinely used such illegal contracts with other officers, and may continue to use such illegal contracts.
Judge Siefert has issued a Writ of Mandamus, ordering Chief Lamb to reinstate Officer Beck for an illegal termination in July 2014 which Chief Lamb purported to effectuate without filing charges with this commission as required by law. As result, Lamb put Beck back on the payroll but then immediately placed him on administrative suspension and has refused to allow him back to work. Lamb has further not effectuated the payment of Beck’s back pay, back benefits compensation, and other payments as required by the Writ.
Instead, Lamb is threatening to file false and exaggerated charges against Beck as detailed below. Some context is required to understand the situation.
In July 2014, using the LCA as justification for his actions, Lamb summarily terminated Beck under a false and pre-textual claim that he was not honest during an internal investigation.
That investigation involved the fact that Beck was diagnosed with strep throat and informed by a medical doctor that he was contagious. He was told he could try to return to work the next day if he felt up to it. Beck called his supervisor, Captain Goldstein, and informed him of the issue. Goldstein told Beck he was going to simply place him on sick leave for both days so that he didn’t run into a problem getting a sick leave call last minute.
Chief Lamb then initiated an internal investigation when he found that Beck attended an evening softball game between the two subject sick days. Even though the chief was informed of the valid medical excuse and circumstances, he kept the internal investigation artificially pressing to find some grounds to claim Beck was dishonest and he could therefore terminate him under the so called last chance agreement.
During both that investigation and prior investigations, Lamb insist that officers, under threat of termination, answer questions about their private and personal lives which are not narrowly tailored towards their job duties and alleged policy violations.
Ultimately Lamb concluded that Beck was not forthcoming because during an interview, Beck was asked if he did recalled communications with another officer, Erik Foster, to which Beck stated he believed he disclosed everything he could remember. Beck was then reminded of one of several hundred text messages he had received over the ensuing three weeks and then said, oh yes, I recall that exchange and went on to disclose everything he could remember about the text messaging. None of this had anything to do with Beck’s job duties, work policies, or any alleged misconduct.
Notwithstanding that is was purely opinion as to whether Beck should have recalled any particular message, Lamb insisted that Beck simply could not have forgotten this message and artificially assigned some significance to this text message to claim Beck should have remembered the same when asked moments earlier. Lamb therefore concluded Beck was dishonest and in violation of the LCA. (It should be noted that during an unemployment hearing, also under oath, Assistant Chief Thiry testified and confirmed the sole basis for the claim that Beck was dishonest as described above. That testimony was recorded and has been reviewed by the undersigned. During that hearing the Administrative Law Judge ruled that Beck was not dishonest.)
Lamb then convened a Laudermill hearing on July 21, 2014. In attendance were also Assistant City Attorney Chad Wade, Detective William Ledger as the local union representative, and Gary Wisbrocker as the WSPPA representative.
At such time Chief Lamb unequivocally told Beck that he was “terminated immediately.” Notes taken by Ledger and/or Wisbrocker are attached hereto which clearly document Lamb’s immediate termination of Beck. True and correct copies of said notes are attached hereto as Exhibit A. As can be seen the Chief told Beck he was terminated immediately and Beck was further told by Assistant City Attorney Chad Wade that he was to turn in his equipment.
Upon investigation, both Ledger and Wisbrocker confirm that Lamb made those statements. According to those witnesses, there is no doubt what the Chief said at that hearing.
Beck was then forced to commence litigation to protect his rights. The City of Fond du Lac took the position that Beck was never terminated, but in fact had voluntarily resigned, a position which they lost as mentioned above.
However, during such litigation, and with the specific intent to further that legal theory that Beck was not fired, Lamb testified at a deposition called by the City of Fond du Lac’s attorney. During such deposition, and while sworn to tell the truth under oath, Lamb lied. He denied over and over having ever told Beck that he was terminated. He was asked numerous times and given numerous opportunities to explain, by two different attorneys, but maintained the false and manufactured claim that he never told Beck he was terminated. Instead Lamb stuck with the false story that he told Beck that Beck was merely “separated” from employment and gave Beck several options.
True and correct copies of such portion of Lamb’s deposition are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
Lamb intentionally lied under oath about what happened at the Laudermill hearing with the specific intent to gain advantage in the lawsuit with Beck by furthering the City’s claim that Beck was not terminated but voluntarily resigned. This is more than just an innocent mistake or lack of recollection, but a story manufactured with the purpose to perpetrate an injustice and fraud upon the court.
Since losing the civil litigation, the Chief has continued to attempt to apply unfair and unjust pressure in order to leverage a settlement from Beck and avoid reinstating him as ordered by the court.
Lamb has threatened to file charges against Beck, charges which go far beyond what was alleged previously under oath. He has threatened to file charges which misrepresent the February 2014 discipline. He has threatened to file charges which are based on unsupported and fabricated facts such as claiming that Beck took the time off in July to attend a music concert, which allegations are totally false, were never investigated, and have not one shred of substantiation in fact or evidence.
It has become clear that Lamb will not rest until his desire to have Beck terminated is exhausted to substantial cost to the City taxpayers. He is willing to lie and manipulate facts in order to further his agenda. While he claims to hold Beck to an impossible standard of integrity where he must remember every one of hundreds of emails, Lamb himself is willing to lie under oath.
This behavior is unacceptable for any police officer, let alone the Chief of Police who is regularly uttering the virtues of integrity, honor, and honesty, and who is expected to set the example for the entire police force.
It is therefore respectfully requested, and with great regret, that the Chief of Police be suspended and removed from office, pursuant to the authority vested in this Board under sections 62.13(3) and (5).
__________________________________________ Daniel Kaminsky, State Bar No. 1063944 Kaminsky Law, S.C.
531 Fond du Lac Avenue
Fond du Lac, WI 54935 (920) 322-1375
Fax (920) 322-1376