The city of Denver on Thursday ordered an independent investigation into the police department’s second-in-command for his handling of an internal-affairs case and his response to an open-records request, the Department of Safety announced.
The investigation comes after questions were raised by the police union and local media about the actions of Deputy Police Chief Matt Murray, who is in charge of the department’s administration and serves as chief of staff.
In a statement, Stephanie O’Malley, the safety department’s executive director, said: “As Executive Director of Safety, it is my duty to provide civilian oversight to the Denver Police Department. As such, I have decided to initiate an outside, third-party investigation into this matter to ensure transparency and accountability.”
Independent Monitor Nick Mitchell will work with the third-party investigator, who has not been selected, the statement said.
In an e-mail to The Denver Post, Murray said: “(Police Chief Robert White) and I welcome an independent third-party investigation into these allegations. This investigation will disclose the truth of this matter and will put it to rest. We have been very clear and transparent with the facts in this case.”
Murray was criticized in May by then-District Attorney Mitch Morrissey over his handling of an internal-affairs investigation that led to the arrest of an officer and a woman, who was named as his accomplice.
Morrissey sent what he called an unprecedented letter to White explaining his concerns about Murray’s direction of the investigation and subsequent arrest of the woman, who is not a police officer. Morrissey accused Murray of having “a cavalier attitude” when Morrissey later tried to discuss what had happened. The letter was first reported by Denver7 Investigates.
Six months later, the Denver Police Protective Association, the union that represents rank-and-file officers, twice filed an open-records request asking for a copy of Morrissey’s letter.
Both times, the Department of Safety, through its records coordinator, denied the letter existed. At the time, Murray told the records coordinator, “I have no records responsive to this request,” according to e-mails obtained by The Post.
However, the letter surfaced at the police department in late January when two Denver television stations requested it.
Nick Rogers, the police union president, has accused Murray of lying to the records coordinator and to the union.
“I would hope the No. 2 person in this department would have much more integrity than that,” Rogers said. “You’re telling me they’re not going to remember a letter from the district attorney that is so scathing about how poorly that investigation was handled.
“If the DA sent me a letter saying I was a moron, I wouldn’t forget it for the rest of my career.”
But Murray, in an interview before the independent investigation was ordered, told The Post it was an oversight, complicated by the fact that he was the officer in question and had been removed from any involvement in questions related to the original case.
“This is not dishonest,” Murray said. “This was an oversight. That’s what this is. There was no conspiracy. There was no coverup.”
Under Colorado law, a violation of the state open-records act is punishable by a $100 fine and 90 days in the county jail.
All open-records requests to the Police Department are handled by Mary Dulacki, an attorney who serves as records coordinator for the safety department. On Dec. 28, Dulacki received the police association’s request for “all electronic and written communication exchanges” between Morrissey and White about the internal investigation.
Dulacki forwarded it to White, Murray and five other people in the department asking whether anything existed.
Dulacki on Jan. 3 sent the police union a reply saying, “We are unaware of any other electronic or written communications exchanges responsive to your request.”
She offered a similar answer Jan. 4 after the union asked a second time for the letter.
Then, on Jan. 30, Dulacki sent the letter to the police union after television stations began asking for the document. In that letter, she wrote, “It has been brought to my attention that there are additional records responsive to your request.”
Dulacki was not allowed to comment for this story because she now is part of the internal investigation, said Daelene Mix, a safety department spokeswoman.
In an interview earlier this week, Murray said he knew the letter existed but insisted that he did not have it and that he was speaking only for himself when he replied to Dulacki.
On the day the letter was discovered, Murray said he was in White’s office when Dulacki came to ask about it. The chief told her he didn’t have the letter and called in his secretary.
At first, the secretary said she, too, did not have it.
“And then three minutes later, she came back and said, ‘I have the letter,’ ” Murray said.
Asked why White might have said he didn’t have the letter, Murray answered, “He gets lots of letters.”
Murray said the chief typically relies on him to gather material for open-records requests in the office, but in this case, he was recused because he was the officer in question in Morrissey’s letter.
Steve Zansberg, president of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition and an attorney who also represents The Post, said if Murray traditionally spoke on behalf of the department, then his reply to an open-records request would be interpreted that way unless he stated otherwise. He also had a duty to say others might have the letter and suggest whom to ask.
“In light of his prior history of speaking on behalf of the department, he left the impression that he was speaking on behalf of the department and not just himself,” Zansberg said.
